Good evening. We're calling to order the media, the Arlington Select Board for October 19th, 2020. As a preliminary matter, this is John Hurd, Select Board Chair. Permit me to confirm that all members and persons anticipated on the agenda are present. You can hear me. Members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Diane Lehan? Here, thank you. Joe Currow? Here. Steve D'Corsi? Here. And Lynn Diggins? Here. Staff, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Adam Chaplain? Here. Doug Hyme? Here. And Board Administrator Ashley Marr is participating remotely. Good evening. This open meeting of the Arlington Select Board is being conducted remotely consistent with Governor Baker's executive order of March 12, 2020 due to the current state of emergency in the Commonwealth, given the outbreak of the novel coronavirus. In order to mitigate the transmission of the virus and reduce the risk of COVID-19 illness, we have been advised and directed by the Commonwealth to suspend public gatherings and as such, the governor's order suspends the requirement of the open meeting law to have all meetings in a publicly accessible physical location. Further, all members of public bodies are allowed and encouraged to participate remotely. The order which you can find posted with the agenda materials for this meeting allows public bodies to meet entirely remotely so long as reasonable public access is afforded so that the public can follow along with the deliberations of the meeting. Ensuring public access does not ensure public participation unless such participation is required by law. This meeting will feature public comments, even if members of the public do not provide comment. Participants are advised that people may be listening who do not provide comment and those persons are not required to identify themselves. For this meeting, the select board is convening by Zoom as posted on the town's website identifying how the public may join. Please note that this meeting has been recorded and that some attendees are participating by video conference. Accordingly, please be aware that other folks may be able to see you and take care not to screen share your computer anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording. Please also take care to adjust your screen or device name if you would like to speak. In order for us to recognize speakers appropriately and develop accurate minutes, it is helpful for participants to see your full first and last name when calling upon your Adlena nickname. All of the materials for this meeting, except any executive session materials are available on the Novus Agenda dashboard. We recommend the members of the public follow along the agenda as posted on Novus unless the chair notes otherwise. We are now turning to the first item on the agenda before we do so. Permit me to cover some ground rules for effective and clear conduct of our business and to ensure accurate meeting minutes. I will introduce each speaker on the agenda after they conclude their remarks. This chair will go down the line of members inviting each by name to provide any comment questions or motions. Please hold until your name is called. Further, please remember to mute your phone or computer when you're not speaking. Please remember to speak clearly in a way that helps generate accurate minutes. For any response, please wait until the chair yields the floor to you and state your name before speaking. If any members wish to engage in colloquy with other members, please do so through the chair, taking care to identify yourself. This meeting will feature opportunities for public comment on certain agenda items. For public comment items, after members have spoken, I as the chair will afford the public opportunities as follows. I will first ask members of the public to wish to speak to identify their names and addresses only. Once the chair has a list of all public commentators, I will call on each by name and afford three minutes for any comments. Please keep in mind that all participants and members of the public must be recognized by the chair before speaking. Finally, each vote taken in this meeting will be conducted by roll call votes. So that takes us to the items on our agenda. Before we do so, I just want to make a couple of announcements. We do have more on article hearings that are coming up later in the night. For anybody that wishes to speak on Article 8 regarding the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and Article 25 about the Black Lives Matter banner on Town Hall, both articles, the proponents of both articles have reached out to us and asked us to table these to the next meeting. They're not ready to present the articles tonight. So if you're here to speak on those two articles, those articles will be posted on our next agenda. And just a minor item. We have number seven on our agenda regarding the Shared Streets Project at Brooks Ave. That item was just meant to be posted as correspondents received, so we won't have a discussion or vote on that item. So that will take us to our consent agenda. We have two items on the consent agenda. We are going to take them individually tonight. So item number two is a request for a contract to drain layer license from New England, Pipe Restoration, Inc. 157 Lincoln Street, Lemister, Massachusetts. And I'll turn to Mrs. Mahon. Move approval, Mr. Chair. Thank you. And Mr. Dacorsi. Second. Mr. Currow, any comments or questions? None. Thank you. And Mr. Diggins, any comments or questions? None. Attorney Hyde. Ms. Mahon. Yes. Mr. Dacorsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Currow. Yes. Mr. Herd. Yes. So none of us vote. Thank you. And that takes us to item number two on our agenda. And for this, I'll first reach out to if any members have any questions or comments prior. Mr. Currow. Yeah. Mr. Chair, I wish to recuse myself from this item due to a conflict of interest. All right. Thank you. And the record will reflect that at this time, Mr. Currow has muted himself and removed his video from the feed. All right. So we have on our regular agenda, the appointment of new election workers, we have Margaret Eskridge, 121 Appleton Street, precinct 16, and Jeffrey Zimmer, 40 Grandview Road, precinct 16. We also had on our emergency addendum that was posted the appointment of additional election workers. We have Sierra Currow, 21 Millet Street, precinct 13, Carol Cohen, 256 Renfrew Street, precinct 12, Charlotte Dowd, 182 Palmer Street, precinct 5, Katherine Geis, 38 Johnson Street, Johnson Road rather, precinct 11. We have Hannah Faith-Kelmhofer, 489 Summer Street, precinct 19. We have Matthew Mays, 126 Warren Street, precinct 10. And we have Julie Powers, 10 Mayflower Road, precinct 12. I will turn to Mr. Diggins. One motion to approve the new election workers. Thank you. And Mr. Dacorsi? Second. And Mrs. Mahon, any comments or questions? Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Attorney Hyde? This is Mahon. Yes. Mr. Dacorsi? Yes. Mr. Diggins? Yes. Mr. Currow? I'm sorry, Mr. Currow is not on this vote. Mr. Hurd? Yes. It's a 4-0 vote and I declared so. Thank you. And we'll wait for Mr. Currow if he can hear us. Thank you. And the record will reflect that Mr. Currow is now back with us. So this takes us to public hearings, item number four on the agenda. We have a kennel license petition at 59 Thesda Street from Alyssa O'Rourke of 65 Thesda Street. We do have materials in here. At this time I'll ask Ms. Chow, manager, if you can promote Captain Flynn, who's done some work on this item. Captain Flynn, can you hear us? I can. Great, thank you. I'll first turn to Attorney Hyde for a little background on this particular item. So for the board's information and the general public's information, the long and short of it is that when folks have a complaint about a kennel and a right to the select board, there's a statutory process that requires a select board to have an initial opening of a discussion about that complaint. And the board basically has two options. It can refer the matter for investigation to the police department and essentially get a report and recommendation back, or the board can attempt to hear the complaint and make a decision that they'll take no action, that they'll modify or suspend a kennel license, or that they'll revoke a license. But those are the basic two courses of action at this initial stage. To my understanding, and I assume that Captain Flynn will speak to this, the police department has done some preliminary investigation and has given some time for compliance. And I'll leave that to Captain Flynn to address. But again, the sort of two options are that the board can refer for further investigation, or the board can decide to try to address the substance this evening based on the information that it has. All right, you know, turn it to Captain Flynn for just some background of the matter and then the current status of the investigation. Good evening. So for the last month or so, I have been overseeing the animal control officer and back in August, on the 19th of August, the animal control officer and representative from the Board of Health had gone out to do an inspection, a kennel inspection out at 59th Thursday. Later that afternoon, so this was a kennel license for eight animals on the property. Later that afternoon, the dogs got loose and they were running kind of in the neighborhood. And there was a report of a potential bite to another dog. It was on the road at that time. So I went out to the location with the animal control officer and met with the owners and I did a walkthrough on the property. So it immediately came to, you know, it was quick to understand that the fencing in the yard was an issue. There was a lot of brush, there was a lot of debris in the backyard. There was also several abandoned vehicles in the backyard. But the fencing had a lot of brush and the dogs had made their way through a couple of the areas in the fence. So I informed the owners, you know, that by this time they had the animals under control and in the house that the fencing in the yard and the gate were really substandard for what they were looking for. I informed them that if they wanted to, if we wanted to go back, go with that kennel license and renew that kennel license that he was going to have to address that and also the degree in the yard to make sure that the animals were safe. That was on the 19th of August. We went back out to visit that home in September. Actually in September on the 23rd we needed to move that appointment. We went back out there on October 9th. So the owners had put a lot of work into the backyard. They had put up a brand new fence. The property abuts the back of McLennan Park. So there was a good existing fence in the back of McLennan Park. But everything else kind of was to make sure. They put in brand new fencing from the corners of the home to the lot lines and ran them all the way out to that fence. And it's a big property. It's a double lot. So they had made a good deal of progress and they had begun the process of cleaning up the yard. We gave them some more guidance and suggested that they continue the work at the house and clean up the debris in the yard. There was still some sharp metal fencing and still a vehicle in the yard, a large tractor, not a small tractor, a full-sized tractor, and some other debris. So the gist of it is is that the property owners and the kennel license holders have done a great deal of work out of that property. Probably not probably, but more so than we've even asked. They put up a fence, but they not only put up a fence, they put up a material at the base of the fence to keep the dogs from digging to go underneath the fence. They also put in a barrier like a slats that would keep the view between the two yards to a minimum. So they've really gone above and beyond what we've asked them to this point. We have one more date, a final date at the end of the month on the 30th that we're going to go out and do a final inspection. Today I went out and did kind of an unannounced visit and saw that they continue to make progress. A lot of the fencing and the material had been cleaned up. The tractor was off the property. They have a landscaper supposedly coming out tomorrow to chip a lot of the brush and whatnot they've removed. They've done really kind of above and beyond where I thought they would be at this point. One more visit at the end of the month should make a determination, I think, of whether really they should continue with that license to the north. There's also been a little bit of back and forth between this neighbor and a neighbor next door, and that's seemed to have come under control as well. Some signage issues putting signs up on their fence line towards each other, and that seems to have subsided. At least that's what I noticed today in my visit. Again, the animal control officer and myself have a visit scheduled on the 30th, and at this point it looks like the owners are doing everything that we're asking to do to adhere to the canal license. Thank you, Captain Flynn. I will turn to the board for any questions of Captain Flynn. Mr. Carroll. Thank you, Captain. Thank you for the the update, and thank you for the report. It looks like this particular situation has occupied a lot of your time, and the ACO, and Officer Dundun Sang in there as well. So I appreciate your persistence on this, and I think that you've answered all of my questions around the current state of the property. So I'm going to sit back, Mr. Chair, and I, you know, once we go through the round of questions for Captain Karn, I'd like to hear from the petitioner, at least one of the petitioners, as well with the nature of the current complaint is for the board. Thank you. Ms. Mann. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and similar to Mr. Carroll's remarks, Captain Flynn and Diane Welch obviously have spent a lot of time on this. In terms of the kennel, as of today, how many dogs are in the kennel, Captain Flynn? Through Mr. Chair. The kennel license is for eight animals, eight. I understand that you spoke about it's a double lot. There's been a lot of yard cleanup. There's been some fencing instructed, but there also was brush debris and a vehicle issue. What is the status of those two issues? So there was a full-size tractor in the backyard, along with a trailer, the full-size tractor, which hadn't been started in probably 10 years, has been removed from the property. There's still a trailer that is in the yard that is scheduled to be moved this week. There's a large area of brush in the center of the yard, and this was really developed because there was a lot of brush along the fence line, and I would imagine the fence company who put in the fence asked that that be removed so that they could put in the fence. So there's a large kind of a brush pile in the middle of the yard. The animal owners of the kennel license holders have a landscaper coming out with a chipper. They tell me tomorrow to take care of that brush pile. And again, there was apparently a dumpster on the property for a while. They removed a lot of old fencing, a lot of old metal that was in the yard at the time, and it's an ongoing process, but they have made significant gains. And thank you, Captain Flynn. Just two other questions. In terms of any biting incidents from the dogs in this kennel, am I correct that there was one, and it was dog-on-dog, or was there something beyond that? There was a reported bite, but the ACO informs me that it actually, she did not believe that was a bite, nor did she ever receive a bite notice. She believes it was maybe one dog taking another dog in the mouth. It was saliva, but she does not believe that there was a bite, nor she received any notice. And if there is an animal brought to a veterinary from the community, the animal control officer is made aware of that, so she has not received any bite notices from that property. Okay, thank you, Captain. My last question would be, and I'm not trying to be trivial, I'm just looking. Captain Flynn and the ACO officer and others have provided us with a lot of information. I know there's been an issue of signs between neighbors abutting each other. I don't know if you could speak to whether that's been resolved, but my reading is it's anybody's right to put whatever sign they want to put out. I don't know if you have any positive news on that. Actually, I do. So there's some video surveillance cameras that are used at the property, and there was some video surveillance signage that was on the fence, but it really wasn't professional signing. It was more kind of smile, you're on camera, that type of signage. So I suggested to the owners to put up some professional signage on the fence and saying, area on video surveillance. When they put up their signs, they put up more signs than recommended, and the next door neighbors then put up some signs facing their home, kind of saying that they were blocking the other signs. I believe it was on a Sunday, last Sunday, the 11th, that I got a call on my cell phone, and I happened to be out and about, and I stopped by, and there was a number of signs on the fences, on both sides of the fences. So I spoke to both of the residents, and it looks like I convinced them to remove the signs. We get one sign up on each side of the property, one basically facing each neighbor, one facing McLennan Park, and one of two in the front house facing the front of the street, just letting people know that there are cameras in the area and they run the surveillance. So again, visit today, unannounced visit today, only one sign really where we asked them to put it. So it seems like that is taking care of itself, and this is an ongoing, it's not just the dogs, I'm trying to help a neighborhood in a way, try so that hopefully these people can get along a little bit better. You know, it's a little bit more enjoyable for the people on the McLennan Park than they walk by to be able to see. And in the end, hopefully the kennel owners will have a clean-up piece of property that they can be proud of too. So it's a little bit more than just this, but again, I think they're moving in the right direction, and I hope that the neighbors can get along there. I don't know whether that would ever really happen, but that is my hope. Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Captain Flynn. I don't mean to be picky and bring up all these issues, but these have been all the issues of the neighbors. But I certainly am grateful that you're working not only with the neighborhood, but for the neighborhood to try to get some peace and some calm and some continuity to work together. So I think this is an issue neighborhood in action that we need to continue on with, and I appreciate all the time and future time that you and others on the APD, including the Animal Control Officer need to put on this. And thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Diggins. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Quick question, so just a little historical context. So this kennel came into existence because the owner had a dog or a couple of dogs and then they had puppies and they kept all the puppies. And so it was a place that wasn't a kennel, but then when they had the puppies decided to keep them, it became a kennel. That's correct, sir. Okay, all right, thanks. And Mr. Corsi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, thank you, Captain Flynn, for the detailed police report and the pictures that you took on October 9th. It really gave us a good context. And I was out at the property on the McClunfield side of it over the weekend. I did notice a big difference from the date that you took the pictures in until this weekend. So I know this has been a difficult situation going back and forth between the neighbors and we appreciate the work that you're doing on that. And just a couple of questions in your report, you cite the October 30th date as a date you'll be returning to the property to see what progress has been made. The budding neighbors aware of that date as well. And I know you spoke with them on October 11th, but I'm just wondering since the 11th, has it been any further need to go out other than your announced visit today? No, not since the 11th. Again, today was just kind of an unannounced visit so that I could have a perspective of the property as of today, knowing that I would be here tonight. So again, that was just to kind of stop in and see where things are at so that there were no changes. I really hadn't heard anything since the 11th from the property. I know there's some other things going on, but related to this, no. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. And thank you, Captain Flynn, for all your work on this. I know this is taking up a good amount of your time and we appreciate the work that you're doing here. Just one question in general. How many of these canal licenses do we have? If you know. I'd be honest. I don't know. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. So, Miss Tomage, if you can promote Mrs. O'Rourke, we'll have her speak on the issue for three minutes, take questions from the board, and then we'll hear from the other party. Hi. So, first off, this is Daniel O'Rourke. So, I'll talk on behalf of my wife if that's okay. How are you? Sure. If you could just say your name, say your property. My name is Daniel O'Rourke, and I live at 65 Thesa Street, which is the property abutting the property here under question. So, we really appreciate everyone's time this evening. And I want to address, obviously, why the petition was created by 25 people in the community, all of whom live in close proximity to this property. So, there's really two major elements to the reason why this was filed. There's really obviously the danger that these dogs present, but also it's also a concept of the breach of the peace issue with the noise that these dogs also present as well. So, we've lived next door to them for about seven years. Over the course of the last seven years, we have asked them on a personal level, and I've asked the police to become involved on many other levels to try to get them to stop the dogs of which, and there are eight of them, to stop their incessant barking every time a human being or dog walks by their property. And the problem is, as someone just pointed out very accurately, the property borders the plant and field.  Every time that happens, the dogs lose their minds. Their dogs were never socialized with other people or with other animals. So, they are not, they think that anything that walks by is a threat. And when this used to go on at 430 in the morning, 445 in the morning for years, the lack of care that the owners of that property show their neighbors, when they allow their dogs to go outside and literally bark their heads off, that anything that walks by is insane. I'm sure there isn't anyone on this phone call who would say they wouldn't be mortified. They have a single dog, let alone eight dogs, who are outside barking ferociously at anyone who moved past them. The reason why we're actually having this entire conversation today is that we have three children. Our youngest is a seven-year-old daughter who goes to Pierce, obviously. We bought her a puppy. When the dogs saw the puppy on our property, they absolutely saw that as a threat. Four of the dogs invaded our property. And my brother-in-law, we had two of his dogs here at the time, were also on the property. And the dogs made every single cell to everything they could to come onto the property. And they finally succeeded. It was like the Marines hitting the beach. One of the owners was actually in the yard and watched it all happen. My brother-in-law would be more than happy to attest to what happened. His dog was attacked.  Their dog pursued that dog up the stairs to our porch. My brother-in-law is a phenomenal athlete. He's a nationally ranked tennis player. He barely got the dog out of the dog's jaws before the tragedy struck. If my daughter had been outside with our puppy by herself when those four dogs invaded our property, it could have been exactly what happened to a spiritual walker, which I'm sure you can go and look that up. A great question was asked a moment ago. Why in God's name does anybody have eight dogs? And by the way, I have to imagine this is the only property in the town that has a commercial, has a license in order to have eight dogs. They don't have them because they're breeders. They don't have them because they're running a process where they're trying to help help dogs. They have them there because of their negligence. They kept every puppy. Like I said, these dogs are extreme. Okay, just coming on three minutes if you can wrap up and then we'll go anywhere for questions. All right, so there's two major things. The nuisance factor and there's no margin for error. If those dogs get out again, they could absolutely go after another child or another dog. The fencing is appropriate and that's very helpful. But the problem is they can get out in many other ways and have done so even after the fence and even after it was reinforced has happened.  The police have done their job. A captain plant is on a phenomenal job. But unfortunately, this is the, as you mentioned, this is how this gets decision is through this body here. So we appreciate your time this evening and have an answer any questions. All right, thank you. All right, we'll turn to the board. Mr. Carl. Thank you very much. So with the barking issues, have you are you saying that the dogs are left out most of the night or because you said it's fairly early in the morning that they don't let the dogs out very early in the morning. But they also leave them out all day. So and obviously we're all trying to work them home these days. So the dogs could be barking, eight dogs to be barking in any moment, pretty much day or night. And obviously the remedy you're looking for is the removal of all of the dogs. Right, the remedy that we're looking for. Well, first off, we don't want any harm to come to these dogs. That is not what we're doing here today. What we're doing here today is to try to find some remedy that exists where a kind of license for eight dogs is not necessary in a densely populated neighborhood surrounded by families with children. There are 25 people who sign this. If you were to interview all of them, they would all tell you they're worried about the danger to their children. And they're worried and really fed up with the noise. No one should have eight dogs in a densely populated neighborhood. So I don't think I've any further questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. O'Rourke. Mrs. Mahan?  Do you see is the petition from the 25 residents they're asking us, has there been a kennel of eight permit issued to this residence? And is that what you're hearing or your interpretation of what they're asking? So my interpretation is that this was a renewal for an ongoing kennel license. And again, there was a visit to the property earlier in the day on August 19th, where the ACO and a member of the Board of Health had gone out and viewed the property. And then that day, later in that day, there was the escape that I believed that Mr. O'Rourke was talking about, which brought my attention to it and really brought my involvement to it. And when I went out, I strictly looked at the two points, some of the two original points that are on the licenses. One is, is it secure and two, is it safe? At that point, I determined that I didn't think it was secure. And that's why we asked the kennel owners to address the fencing issue, or at least make a decision.  This is your decision. But I mean, there was some great expense spent on that fencing. And I was a little shocked that they went that route, but they did. So they repaired the fencing. But then with new fencing came a clear view through both yards, until the owners of the kennel put some slats in it, but still the dogs, you know, they can sense when there's another dog on the other side of the fence, and they can still see out into McLennan Park. So my view on it, what I was attempting to do was make sure that one, the kennel was secure, and two, that the kennel was safe within that. And hopefully by doing that, I might be able to improve maybe the relations, but at least what's going on in the neighborhood. But I understand Mr. O'Rourke's concerns in regards to the barking and the noise and what have you. I don't know how you address that. But as far as we were looking in the kennel license wise, that's what we were trying to do. Okay. And I don't know, it's probably going further in depth than we need to. But but in terms of these eight canines, which I'm concerned about the neighbors and also about the canines, because there seems to be so much issue of them being outside, in terms of whether it is the outside of this kennel that has eight canines set up that that's where they're going to be for the late fall, early winter. I would imagine so, at least during the course of the daytime, the animals are all brought into the home at night. Again, I don't know exactly when they're putting the animals out in the yard in the morning and how late they're staying out at night. I pulled some numbers for the last year of how many calls we've had out in that neighborhood, some animal complaints. But again, my focus was at the time that the dogs were breaking through the fence and escaping and not only getting onto the O'Rourke property, but they were running a muck in the neighborhood. So there were other concerns there. So that's what we immediately addressed that. And if the kennel license were going to be renewed, the yard needed to be made more safe and in essence, basically cleaned up. If you can, in the past three, six, 12 months, how many noise or other complaints have you gotten? Sorry, did my question get through? Should I try again? It kind of broke up, but I think you were going how many, maybe the last six, 12 months, how many noise complaints that we got out in that area? Well, I pulled the numbers for 65 and 59, the neighbors. And 59, there were 14 total calls to that home over the course of the year. Five of them had to do with barking dogs or dogs escaping and then pulled the O'Rourke residents and there were five total. Four of those had to do with either dogs escaping or barking. Okay. Thank you. I'm still sort of struggling, you know, if I were to make a motion right now, it sounds like Captain Flynn and ACO Welch are working with the neighbors, but I don't want to appear as though I'm minimizing the O'Rourke's and other neighbors' concerns in this area. So I guess I'd look to my colleagues in terms of questions they have and what motion comes out of that. Thank you. Mr. Diggins? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So through you, all the questions. How long has dogs been there? To whomever? Can I answer your question? Probably about six years, my guess. Six years. Okay. So when the dogs almost attacked, you know, when your brother-in-law, was that reported? Yes. In fact, we called the animal patrol officer right then and there, learning that she had signed off on the property earlier that day. Okay. We called them immediately because we felt it was such a breach that it was, and we knew that their fence was insufficient, you know, to protect us. We had warned them that we were getting a puppy in advance and had been told that they would try to reinforce it, but it was a chicken wire fence, basically. Right. Gotcha. So I guess maybe this question goes to Mr. Hine. It's like, I'm just trying to understand, I mean, why it is that the town would allow a kennel with that many dogs in that kind of environment because it's kind of predictable, that if you have that many dogs, there's going to be a noise issue made. And so, I mean, I think this problem, this needs to be solved at a different level. But I'm just trying to understand maybe the rationale behind the bylaw or anything that allows such a thing to exist. Mr. Chairman? Yes. So Mr. Diggins, under the town bylaws, a personal kennel license is mandatory for anybody who has more than five dogs, three months old. So I'm not sure what the genesis of the kennel license scheme is, but under our current bylaws, you have the option to get a kennel license if you have four or fewer dogs and for five or more, you have to have a kennel license. So there are obviously some criteria for maintaining a kennel. But at present, we have a license available for folks who have or want to have more than five dogs. Right, right. So you're still to the town council again still. So then if one doesn't get the kennel license, you're limited to the number of dogs you could have. That's correct. So if you're not, if you don't qualify for a personal kennel license, you can't have any dogs. So okay. All right. Thank you very much. That's it. Mr. DeCorsi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of questions for Mr. O'Rourke. Looking at the citizen's petition and I think we've touched on the issues with security and the fencing, we've touched on excessive barking and you reference other conditions that constitute a nuisance. Is there anything else beyond those two that have occurred since 2016? That date referenced in the petition as well? I think the petition covers really the major issues that we wanted to bring up today. Okay. All right. And I just want to clarify. Did you say that since, well, let's go back to the beginning of the month, have the dogs escaped within the last 10 days? Yes, the dogs escaped. In fact, there was a, so after they put on, we're actually looking at the, on 10-3, the dogs escaped again. After the fence was put in and after it was reinforced, the dogs escaped again. When the neighbor, my wife was standing in front of our house, when the neighbor ran by chasing the dogs down the street, he said while he was running by that they just got out through the garage. The garage door opens into the backyard and the garage door even left open. I won't tell you what he then later told the neighbor why they got out, but it was essentially, you know, it could easily be the defamation case easily. It could be defamation case because he blamed my wife for it and involved bolt cutters, which is literally insane. But so, you know, in fact, that's what the one doctor I said, there's no margin for error. If the dogs get out, then they certainly can. The fence is great and I appreciate them doing that. But their negligence could result in them getting out through just simple, simple, not simply not closing, not closing the door. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Carl, did you have an additional question? I actually do. I was actually holding up my fingers to say for my reading of the bylaws. I just wanted to clarify through you with counsel. If we were to revoke the kind of license, my understanding is that the dog owners would still be permitted to maintain four dogs licensed under the usual procedures. A standard dog owner? Yes. That's correct, Mr. Carol. Okay. And a further question. I know that the laws on vicious dog hearings, which we've only had a couple, I think in the time that I've been on here, have changed over the last couple of years where really the only remedies available to us with a vicious dog. And I don't think, I don't know if we're talking about this. This is different. This isn't actually vicious dog hearing. This is a kennel hearing. So under a vicious dog hearing, I know that we are not allowed to demand the transfer of an animal to another individual or out of town. We have to either mandate additional humane constraints or putting down a euthanization. But that is not the requirement under this. Is that correct if we were to lift the kennel license and give a period of time that the dog owners essentially would have a period of time to sell or give away, I guess, four of the dogs in this case down to a total of four. Mr. Chairman Mann? Yes. That's correct, Mr. Currow. So we're here on a kennel hearing. A dangerous dog hearing would require another process. And basically the remedies available are more or less what you've described. And that would have to be specific to an animal. We need to know which dog was allegedly bit or harmed another animal or a person. So yes, in theory, if you revoked this class A2 personal kennel license and they were to limit the number of dogs to four dogs, they could still keep four dogs under the current bylaw, notwithstanding any other concerns like a dangerous dog hearing with respect to one of the four dogs or all the four dogs, something of that nature. So yeah. Okay, thank you. And then my further question then, I guess through you, Mr. Chair, to Mr. O'Rourke, is would a reduction number address the situation? Because if the situation is negligence and keeping open the garage door or whatnot, I mean, it doesn't seem that the number of dogs would make a difference. Reading the report to it looks like two of them are usually off during the day with one of the owners at work. Is that correct? We really don't know. It doesn't seem to have a lot of consistency to that. But like I said, we don't want anything to happen to the dogs. We don't want them harmed in any way, shape, form. We just want our safety assure and the nuisance factor somehow mediated. That's all we're asking for. So the number of dogs, if you took the license away, they would get a smaller number of dogs and that could alleviate it in some respects. But it sounds like the core behaviors are really what have to change. It's not strictly an issue of the number of dogs other than the noise, right? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. My questions have been touched on, but the first one to turn it high. So for a resident or personal kennel license, is there anything in there that talks about a commercial use or as a personal kennel license, just people that specifically want to own more than four dogs for personal use? Does that make sense? So a personal kennel license under the Arlington Bylaws is basically just defined as a pack or a collection of more than five dogs, three months or older, owned and kept under single ownership for private personal purposes. That doesn't exclude folks from breeding dogs under a personal kennel license for the purposes of showing the breed or sporting activity. And I believe they can also sell them, but there are some prohibitions on a personal kennel license that don't exist on a commercial breeder kennel or a commercial boarding or training kennel. So there are different standards for some of these things and they have different sort of operational parameters, I guess, is the best way I can put it in terms of the things that you're allowed to do and not allowed to do based on the type of kennel license you have. And as you mentioned, so under our bylaws we also have separate commercial kennel licenses as well? We have several different types of other kennels ranging from breeders and basically boarding or training kennels that would be oriented towards somebody boarding their dog if they went on out of town or places where folks bring their dog to be trained for a certain number of hours a day. And Captain Flynn, just relative to the noise and putting aside the fact that this is used as a personal kennel, what would be the remedy if a resident had say two or three dogs with a number of excessive noise complaints on that property? Or is there a remedy? I think there may be a few remedies. I think the Animal Control Office might be able to speak to the owners about perhaps retraining, there are devices that you can purchase to help kind of train the dogs in regards to the barking, etc. A little bit on my realm, but I do think there are some avenues that can go. Again, I understand eight dogs is a great deal, but four dogs on the property as well. I think it is a very good chance that the four dogs could make more noise than folks want to hear. Today when I was on the property, there were two at times three dogs in the backyard. Again, when I showed up, I was kind of very quiet and I just observed the property for a little while before and the dogs were very well behaved. Some people had walked by in McLennan Park. They didn't have any animals with them, but some folks were the stroller and what have you. And at the time, your works, they were in their yard and their puppy was in the yard, but eight dogs together could be totally different. So it's hard for me to say, to be honest with you. But again, those are my observations anyways. And any other questions from Mr. O'Rourke from the board? We'll show our hands. Nope. All right. Thank you, Mr. O'Rourke. We're going to promote Mr. Graziano as well now for time being. Thank you. Is Mr. Graziano with us? I'm looking, Mr. O'Rourke, what's the first name? Do you know? Oh, I see it now. Scott or Jay? Okay. I see an SW. I'll go with that person. Mr. Graziano, can you hear us? Can you hear me? Yes, we can. All right. Mr. O'Rourke stated I had eight dogs. I got one that's 13 years old. All right. I have a mother and three boys and three females. All right. And I have a, the English one, the English one that's 13 years old, she's going to be put to sleep. So that's going to be a count to seven. All right. And my dogs are very well-mannered dogs. And when people come by McClellan Park, they have an unleashed law. Mr. O'Rourke's saying my dogs might not officially know. There's some people that had worked for the town come by. There was like some people that were allowing some police officers and everything they came by with this incident. And they were watching my dogs. There's a lady that comes by that makes them all sit. And they're all trained and they give them cookies one by one. And my dogs are very grateful they come in at night and not out at 4.30 in the morning. Mr. O'Rourke is trying to make a remarkable thing to try to save 4.30. They go out at the time that the ordinance is supposed to be for the dogs. I was very well aware of it from Diane when she talked to me. And today I had an episode with Mr. and Mrs. O'Rourke. And we had to go straighten it out. Okay. And if you could just first off just state your name just so we know who we're speaking to. Okay. My name is Scott Graziano. In your address. 59 Thuzda Street. All right. I'll turn to the board for any questions or comments for you. Mr. Carl. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wonder if I could ask Mr. Graziano. Are the dogs spayed and neutered? Yes, they are. They had to. All right. They're all spayed and neutered. You know, try it for the kennel's license. They did not need to be, you know, be mating with other dogs. Okay. My next question is so one of the things that we've heard is that despite the fencing that the dogs have been able to escape through the garage, what kind of measures might you be able to take to prevent that? And we got all new garage doors because we were going through a state battle with my parents when they passed away. And we had to wait until all the stuff was done because we were dealing with a family dispute on a family estate matter. So after that, we told Captain Flynn that we were going to do everything to the property. We were doing everything until the estate matter is over. But my brother and I had taken some money. We'd done the fence. After we'd done the fence, there were damage to our fence because people were cutting it and letting the dogs out prior because they wanted to let the dogs escape, which was wrong. And we had been having an ongoing dispute. And we ended up with a brand new garage doors up and the dogs cannot get out the new garage doors because we bought brand new stainless steel garage doors so that we sealed and we want to be able to have the inside so we can be able to have our vehicles in there or cars and so forth. And you're careful to keep them closed? Yes, we've all keep them closed all the time. We put brand new swinging gates which Mr. Flynn told me it needed new gates. It came down and he liked the way it was designed. I had a buddy of mine bring down some wrap which they used on the, which we used on Thedsda Street. We used on around the kennel so the dogs can't dig holes to get out. And the dogs we had now happened that stuffed down with Mr. Flynn was very like, like the power I told him how I was doing it because I'm a designer, an excellent scape designer. And I did all the talks, what he told me to do. And him and I agreed upon it and I kept my promise with Mr. Flynn and he was very happy when he saw the fence that I spent all that money for. And my understanding is so you have seven dogs and one of them is near end of life? Pardon me? You have seven dogs now and one is near. Yes, he has near to be put to sleep. I hate to but had a sense she was a puppy. Excuse me. But that's difficult to know.  Do you generally, when you let the the dogs out, let all of them at once? We have a door now on the door so that way they're the dog door.  They run outside, use the bathroom, come running and they go in their rooms and they have the rooms where they sleep and they don't harm anything and then when it's raining out, they won't go outside because of the foreign rain. They don't like the inclement weather.  Yes, sir. And was it my understanding that two of the dogs are generally taken with one of you with me in my truck? I take, I take Popo and the mother in the truck with me and when the dogs got out, Mr. Robrox and all eight of them came out. Shelby's too old to be running in their property. So they, with the math that they, they occurred to use, they need, need to regenerate because I, there was, he claims eight and I, Shelby was in the house, I took two. So there was only four that went out, out in their property. That's what I heard from his testimony as well. Yeah. Okay. I think I have, you know, no further questions. I think it's probably clear, Mr. Graziano, about the, the what, why, you know, I used to have German shepherds too. They can cause a lot of fear to, especially with young, young children. So it's, yeah. My dogs are not a rockweiler. My no dogs are not pit bulls. They're husky labs. Yeah. They're lovable. They love to play. They love children, but I wasn't home when this happened. My brother and my girlfriend's son was there and when the incident was occurred, we have cameras. I was out in Pennsylvania when, when we had an episode, two episodes. I, the episode was that Diane Welch came with the episode about the, the dogs went into her property. The second episode, I was accused for a, a neglect in noise allowance. Well, Mrs. O'Rourke bounced the rock off my dog's head and videotaped me and turned me into the MSPCA, which was wrong. And I had a witness to that, which they were watching it on my cameras in my house. Okay. So by intimidating the dogs, videotaping constantly, I think that's intimidating my dogs going out by the fence, jumping up and down because I had went up to her and told her that you just need to stop your harassment. Her and her husband were laughing at me and they took me to court today and tried to get me for a harassment charge. It didn't even get no further than four or five words. They could, they tried to use me as a, my brother, which I was on the road and I had attorney Fahey that helped me and attorney Fahey, they had to restrain an order on me because they were going to use the restrain and order on me to prior of this kennel's license. Okay. Mr. Chair, I have no further questions. This is mine. Excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Graciano, is it you and your spouse who resided in the house or are there other people? It's my girlfriend, Diane. Oh, okay. I apologize. It sounds like both of you work during the day. My question is, to me, I understand it's eight dogs that one, unfortunately, it seemed as though she's closer to the rainbow bridges, they say, for dogs when unfortunately they're anticipated to pass away. Is it your intention where both of you, just the two of you and seven other dogs that you feel you have the time to commit to those dogs or do you have plans to perhaps re-home some of them? I commit to have them because they, I know how we come home. They're very lovable. I take them out for walks. It's not like I'm neglecting them, Mrs. Milan. I take them. I treat them like they're my children. I brought them up when they were puppies. They had never had a problem when they were out here. When the problem was with Mr. O'Rourke, that's their dog. They were using their dog to intimidate my dog, and we had it all on video. Okay. And I guess my other question would be when you and your girlfriend are at work, not home, where are the eight dogs? Are they outside or inside? Two goes with me. It's Coco, my chocolate one, and the mother. And the mother dog is very, very calm and everything. They go in the truck with me. I leave Friday night.  I'm home Friday. And Saturday and Sunday, I'm home with the dogs. And I take them outside. I give them a good brushing. I maintain them and everything. They're off their shots are all up to date. Everything's perfect. Just that we were having problems with people to intimidate my dogs, which the dogs are lovable by people that come by by McClown's Park. They do have an unleashed law. It's certain now is we have people that come by with their dogs running back and forth the length of my fence, Mrs. Milan. And they no harm in anybody. And then they stop and they, when they stop doing it, they give my dog these and my cookies, they give them cookies and they run up on the stairs and they sleep. Okay, so when, when you're, when you're gone Monday through Friday with Coco and his mom, the other six dogs are outside? They're either go, they're outside, my brother's home, Shelby, we let out, we let out, but she, she goes out and it comes in and lays down. So the other ones, they go out. If my brother's out in the hammock, they'll lay next to my brother in the hammock and their calm is compete, you know, they're not fighters, but they love people and the enjoyment of two people that come by by Trump promises they like to have, they would see their dogs run with my dogs and people next door were very, were very upset about it is because they were like, again, there was some people that like announced to me they were only police officers that came by with dogs. They were watching the situation that was going on with my next door neighbors and there was another woman that was on a friends of other people that I know that knew the dogs because I used to take some of the dogs and to go walking down the bike path together and they never had a problem. Okay, here's my dilemma and I'm assuming Mr. Grassiano that your brother is probably not on the phone with Jay, where are you? Can you come over here, please? Mrs. Milan would like to see you. And what my concern is I have 25 of your neighbors who have a complaint about the kennel that you have because you have these eight dogs and admittedly by what you've testified to Monday through Friday, you take Coco and his mom and the other six dogs are, we're not sure, I can't take from you what it is they're saying that is happening with that and I guess what I'm trying to do is balance the 25 neighbors' concern and perhaps any recommendations from the ACO, Diane Welch or Captain Flynn that might be there, but if you have your brother who lives with you or who stopped by one day, does he live here? Mr. House. All right, I live with my brother. These dogs are with them and they never have an issue with Jay, they love Jay and my brother Jay, believe it or not, when he goes upstairs, the dogs have, they go up there and my brother has things in the floor for the dogs to lay on and there's no problems at all. My brother's right here, you can see him on camera. My brother Jay, his name is Jay Graziano. Can you see him, Mrs. Milan? No, I can see your name, I can't see you, but I can't see him. How can I click on my name? If you click on my video, stop video, correct. I'm sorry. That's okay, I apologize, I probably should have asked that sooner. Yeah, I didn't even know. All right, now you can see me. Okay, is that your brother behind you? Yes, that's my brother Jay, he's my oldest brother. He's the only brother I have left. God bless him. And Jay, you live with Scott, or Scott and Jay live together? Yep, we live for a long time. 57 years for me and how many years for you? How old are you? We were in this neighborhood since 1946 and my dad built the house and this was all farm country. Okay, and so just real quick, Jay, when Scott's away with Coco and Coco's mom, you're home in the house with the rest of the dogs and sort of overseeing their keep? Yes, yes. Okay, I guess I'll, I apologize, I didn't mean to get both of you on at the same time. I didn't know how this works, it's just new to us, we're from Milan, you know. But no, God bless, it is to me too. So I guess I'll wait to hear what the rest of my colleagues have to say as well as any short term or mid term recommendations from Captain Flynn and ACL Welch. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Viggins? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to be popping back and forth between desktops here where my questions are. So to you, Mr. Chair, when you had the intimidation, did you report that, Mr. Graziano? Intimidations on the dogs? Yeah. Yeah, I had told Diane Welch with the intimidations of the dogs, they were being camped, but and I was on the road and my brother Jay was there when the MSPCA came by and her son Alan Gomo. And I had a problem with Mrs. O'Rourke and the dogs were going up, she was stamping in front of the fence and she was videotaping and they hit a rock off of Bridget's head. Bridget was screaming and yelling that Mr. Flynn saw me take the video and had seen me taking them in the house. I should have took it to the vet now, Rian, but you know, it happened so quick. I got the dogs all in the house, they were intimidating the dogs, they were going behind the fence and making their daughter jump in front of my dog which we had on the video and in fact today they tried to get a restraining order on me and and Joyce because of the matter of the stuff that was going on. And I had attorney John Fahy, Joe Fahy, which he was going to try to be on here with me, but he had some others things he had to take care of. He tried to get a restraining order on retaliation and didn't go through. But the intimidation incident was reported to Arlington police? Yes, it was. Okay, so did the puppies have any training? Were they ever trained? When they were puppies, we were having them sit. They were giving them a cookie when they were due orders and they sit down, they lay down and if anybody comes in the house, inside the house, he comes up to the house, they would let us know for like downstairs doing laundry and everything and they would go up to the window. They're no harm or nothing. They're not acts of wolves, they're not things like that where the people are trying to word them. They're lovable dogs.  So we take Coco and stuff. I have their good dogs, sir. They never had an issue, but today it really hurt me when they turn around and use my brother's name in the courthouse to try to say I was the one that was with Diane Welch, which I wasn't and we had that matter resolved today. Do you think the dogs can be trained to be quieter? Yes, they can.  We do not let the dogs stay out after seven because I know there's two neighbors on the street. They let their dogs out after hours. I had gone to go out to the store, a dog that was on a driveway and when I came out I scared him. He was barking and growling at me. I was scared that I was going to get bit. I didn't know whose dog it was, but when my dog started in the house, they were barking and the dog ran. Okay. So just one more question. This is actually on through you, Mr. Chair, to the Council. What's the limit on the number of dogs that someone can have in a kennel? This is just a curiosity question about the bylaw itself. So we know that more than four triggers the kennel, private kennel. What's the maximum people can have? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Diggins, I don't actually see a maximum outlined in the personal kennel bylaw in terms of a cap. There may be one at state law or the time in which they can't adequately house the dogs under the rules and regulations that we have, but I don't actually see an maximum. I hear you. All right. Thank you. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Corsi. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening, Mr. Graziano. Good morning. Good evening, Mr. Steve. Hi, Steve. Yeah, that's fine. Thank you. So just a few questions and I'm going to put aside the issues that you have with the old rocks right now, but as Mrs. Mahan said, there's 23 other neighbors who have signed a petition alleging that there's been excessive barking and what you said earlier this evening is that while your dogs are out, they may not be barking. And this is what we're going to have to grapple with and if we refer this out for further investigation. So I just want to be clear, when the dogs are out and someone walks by, whether it's on Thesda Street or behind the property at McClellan Park, do the bark at them. Your dogs. When they come up, when they come up to the McClellan Park, we have four people that come up every day. They take their dog, they have that leash, they take what's that law. They take the dogs off the leash and let the dogs run. And McClellan Park is certain I was correct. And yeah, am I correct, Steve? Yeah, I don't know what the restrictions are. Yeah, you've been in my backyard, Steve, so you know that's the town fence in the back, right?  All right, they get tired out. They come back inside the house and they sleep and we close the door. So they would retake an app or whatever. I didn't want to have an issue with repel or sleep, whatever. They stay in the house. When I go outside, I take the dogs out with me. They walk around the yard with me. They lay out in the sun, on the ground, don't have an issue. And when people see that a couple of people know my dog's name, they yell for their names, they can run into the fence, they give them cookies. I don't have an issue with that because I don't. But I get kind of wary sometimes. Time is like Diane had said to me, be careful who you let people give cookies to, because you don't know what we're going to be giving to the dog. Okay, so here's my concern. And you've laid out what you see from your dogs when you're at home. And again, we've only heard testimony from Mr. O'Rourke, but we do have the written document. It appears that there's a number of people that say that your dogs are excessively barking. And I'm going to put aside the issue with the fencing, because it seems like you've addressed that. Let me just finish for a second. So if you, and from my perspective, if someone's walking by your home and every time someone walks by, the dogs come up to the fence and are barking, that's excessive barking. And I think you may agree with that. And it's a question maybe whether there is excessive barking. And you installed video cameras. My understanding there's no sound with those video cameras. No, by law, you cannot have sound. Because it's a lot. Right. Okay. All right. So you just have video. How long does your video, does it record video? Or is it just replay every 24 hours? Was it, Jay? Yeah. What's that video of cameras? Is it every hour or every 24 hours? Every 24 hours, Steve, it records. Okay. And where does it record? Where is it? Is it just in your backyard? Or is it in the front of the house, the side of the house, and all four ways? Okay. All right. Well, I mean, depending on what we do here, we may ask to take a look at that. But yeah, I think at this point we've got a difference of, you know, we heard from you, Mr. Graziano, we heard from the O'Rourke's, we have the written petition. It seems to me that we've got to do a little bit more maybe to hear from some of the neighbors to see what their perception is because I got a question. We've got two people coming in and two different views as to what's going on at the properties. I have a question for you, sir. Sure. Why are these petitions? Some of these people are like way over on the other side of town that don't even exist around the area, that don't even hear my thoughts. It's like people down on Forest Street, there's people on Magnolia Street, Upping Street, not even near my neighborhood on this condition. I'm just looking at the list now and I see, well, there's at least 14 people on Thesda Street and then there are other, there's a summer street location, Wright Street is nearby, Westmoreland, Herd and Forest Street. You're right, there are some other streets. Yeah, the Westmoreland, that's the way across town, what they, you know, that's, you know, that's what they're all over by the visible, correct? Mr. Graziano, the bylaw allows that, so at this time it's not really appropriate to talk about, you know, that portion of the bylaw since the bylaw just requires residents. Yeah, that's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Graziano. All right, Mr. Graziano, just one question that Mrs. Mahan had touched on and, sorry if the answer was clear, it wasn't clear to me, but you had said that you're away from Monday to Friday. Is there a time when your dogs are in the backyard when no one is at the house? Uh, with no one's in the, in the bout with you meaning family? No, no one that lives in your house or that takes care of your dogs is, uh, the dogs go in when we go, when we go out. We do not leave the dogs out when we leave the, leave the premises. All the dogs be inside the house. Yes.  My brother would be the one if my brother has to go to the doctor's appointment, John, dogs stay in the house. All right. If no one is in the round, the dogs are in the house. If, say, like my girlfriend and son or it's here, he'd be outside with the dogs, sit on the porch, watch them move, you know, be out on the porch. And then when he comes in, he calls them all in because if he wants to go take off down to his friend's house or the dogs are inside the house, don't leave them out when no one's home, trust me. Your answer was clear. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. So, Mr. Chapp, so Mr. Graziano, thank you for, unless anyone from the board has any further questions by shoulder hands. Thank you for, Mr. Carroll. Okay. Thank you. I just want to clarify that last question, Mr. Chair. Yep.  Yeah, but we locked the door. Locked the door. Okay. We don't leave the door open. We locked the door. Only time we're home, we let the dogs go in and out of their dog door. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Graziano. We're going to put you back down with the rest of the attendees and then we'll have a discussion amongst the board. Okay. All right. So, I'll turn to the board for any question, comments, or motions. Mr. Carroll. I got to be honest. This is one of the most difficult things I've dealt with on eight and a half years on the bullet to cut through. You know, my understanding, if we could clarify through Captain Flynn, was that there were measures that were prescribed to Mr. Graziano to control the situation. Work is underway, but there was actually a deadline of October 30th given to comply. Is that correct? That's correct, Mr. Carroll. And again, those are corrective measures for the property itself and, you know, for the security of the property to make sure the property is secure and that the property is safe. Kind of a whole other issue is the dog barking issue and what have you. Again, I was at the property today. There were three dogs on the property today. It wasn't an issue, but, you know, six or eight dogs is different than three dogs at times. And the removal of a solid fence and the chain link fence being put up, now you've created a little less of a barrier between so the dogs know when there's another dog in the other yard. I think they've done a pretty good job, not only with the fence, but putting up a barrier within the fence, the slats that they put up in the fence. But again, there's going to be time where the dogs know there's something on the other side of the fence and they're going to, you know, that's how they communicate. They're going to bark and do what they do. Now there's training. There are other things that I think could happen, but you're still talking about seven dogs. And even if you pull the license, I think you're talking about four dogs being in a backyard, right smack in the middle of residential neighborhood. No question they care about the dogs and what have you, but I think they could probably take some more measures in regards to keeping the dogs more quiet. It seems like that's really going to be the next obstacle. So I guess I would, through you Mr. Chair, ask Tom Council, I know you went through some of what we could do as actions, but I think I need some reiteration. Are we in a position to order certain conditions for maintaining the kennel license? So Mr. Cairo, at the set forth in the bylaw, at this hearing, the select board quote may cause an investigation of the kennel that is subject of the petition or take such other action as a deems prudent. So I think the board can certainly, you know, take action relative to the license. It can cause further investigation in terms of, you know, the information that you've heard tonight, whether you feel like it would be helpful to understand more about how the situation proceeds. You know, if you want further information from the animal patrol officer, from Captain Flynn, from the health department, anybody that you want, you're entitled to get more information, you don't have to make a decision tonight. If you're inclined to make a decision tonight, that language of or take such other action as a deems prudent is pretty broad. After the hearing and any investigation or further proceedings, you don't have to wrap the hearing up tonight. You could continue it. Again, you can suspend or revoke the license or take other action to quote regulate the kennel that you deem prudent or you can dismiss the petition. So you've got a pretty broad range of options available to you and I know sometimes that makes life harder than easier. Yeah, it sure does. Because where I'm at right now, you know, as far as the physical restraints for the property, it sounds like a lot of action has been taken there. And that it may be worthwhile to, you know, to see how that plays out if those actions have been effective. I mean, clearly there's been investment in the fencing and visible screening and the items underneath. So what that leaves us with is the noise and I couldn't tell you how you can effectively control that beyond what's being represented to us that the dogs aren't left unattended in the backyard. Other than I think Mr. Diggins raised the question as to whether there is any type of training that could be employed. And what I heard in the answer was that it wasn't a formal training program. And so I think my inclination on this is to refer this back to APD and the Animal Control Officer to work with the Grazianos on a plan of humane training or other measures that might be employed to attempt to control the barking. That seems to me to be the next logical step of what we're really trying to do is address the danger of the dogs getting out. Sounds like that's underway and Captain Flynn, it sounds like they're on that. But the noise issue is one that's, I'm not a dog trainer. I just keep my dog inside because it's just back. So it seems like we should be looking to some of the expertise we have on staff with Animal Control Officer Walsh. So that'd be my motion. I know it's a little muddy, but you know my motion would be to refer it back to APD and the Animal Control Officer to work with the Grazianos on a concrete steps that could be taken in the form of training or other humane measures that might control the barking problem. Mr. Chair, if I could second that and very short comment. The petition from the citizen's petition from 25, 26 people speak to the noise complaints and barking issues, an unreasonable event of barking. It doesn't say anything beyond that. So if I'd like to second Mr. Carroll's motion and with Mr. Carroll and Captain Flynn's guidance, whether it should be a three or six month report back, whether it should be January or April in terms of when this is brought before the board again or if Mr. Carroll just wants to leave it open, then that Captain Flynn will let us know when this should come back on the agenda. But I will second Mr. Carroll's motion. Mr. Carroll. Mr. Chair, well I guess my answer to that would be I don't know how long it takes to teach an old dog new tricks. So I'd have to, that's one where I think I might have to defer to the recommendation of the ACO as well. I mean I would hope that within three to six months that this could be resolved. I'm going to assume that as the weather gets colder these dogs won't be out as much. And if I could ask Captain Flynn whether three or six months might be the appropriate time to revisit this. If he feels he can opine on that. Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you. I think that would be fair. Again I would agree with Mr. Carroll though. We're going to run into some colder weather soon. And if what Mr. Graziano is telling us about the dogs not liking to be outside and inclement weather and whatnot, the dogs are going to be inside probably more than they're outside now and they're generally going to be quieter. So I don't know where this will kind of rear its head again in the springtime but I am, I would agree. I think that's a plan. I would have a conversation with the ACO and see what kind of steps can be taken in regards to training and what maybe other communities have done with these kind of problems and try and put some sort of a plan together and then revisit this and whatever you think is fair three to six months is it sounds fair. Mr. Chairman may I? I just want to make sure that I understand the motion by Mr. Currow and Mrs. Maughan. From what I'm hearing it sounds like the determination of this body if the motion were successful would be that the kennel license is conditioned upon basically the finding of the board is that the maintenance of this kennel license is conditioned on satisfactory you know completion of a training program as recommended by the animal control officer or APD rather than referring this for investigation and keeping this hearing process open is that correct? Mr. Currow? Well firstly I think I noted that just it's it's training or rather humane measures to control barking as maybe recommended by the by the animal control officer that that's for starters I guess it probably makes sense for us to get a report back in six months from from the the ACO what be it be it in this format or or a written report I think that that probably makes the most sense to try to close the loop on this. The only piece that I I'm sorry Mr. Chairman yes the only piece that I would just want to be clear on I guess is that the boards again options are to refer this for investigation which would essentially keep this hearing process open until some further date when you would be satisfied or not satisfied by further information. The other option if you're going to basically place a regulation on the license requires a determination to be issued to the license holder so that they have can exercise whatever the rights that they have pursuant to a decision and it's just important to sort of procedurally differentiate between those those two things so that we know and the board office knows how to treat the the license itself. So just so I'm clear through you Mr. Chair so I'm clear if we issue the condition we potentially close this hearing but the condition is now attached the license if the condition is not met then there's a new process to revoke the license. That's right I'm sorry Mr. Chair if I may that's correct that you basically be putting a further regulation on the license um as the decision of this body but if instead what you're saying and I'm not I'm trying not to put words in anybody's mouth I mean instead what you're saying is we feel like we need more information to figure out how we want to handle this particular petition but that's fine I just want to be clear that that's a different posture. If I can just jump in I think what we're trying the tenor of the motion is I think we're trying to look for is that we let the investigation go on ask for a six month investigation we're referring to the APD for a six month investigation during that time the ACO will work with the residents suggest certain measures that could be taken to reduce the noise complaints and then report back at the end of the investigation in three to six months however long that the ACO determines and then we'll make a final determination on this petition. Okay Mr. Chair if I could make a motion to refer for investigation with a preliminary report back at the three month mark and a final report back at the six month mark. With the other conditions that I put on? Yes Mr. Carroll I apologize yes. Okay. Mr. Carroll do you want to withdraw your motion second and respond motion? Absolutely. Okay all right Mr. DeCourse any additional comments? No I can't agree with that I saw Captain Flynn raise his hand I don't know if you wanted to say something Captain Flynn in response to that motion because I just want you to be comfortable with what we're doing. Oh absolutely Mr. Chair yes and I agree and would suggest that we you know we can provide we'll be able to track calls for service in that neighborhood and any complaints that we receive in regards to the dog and we'll be prepared to put something together preliminary in three months and in six months have a final report for the board. Mr. Diggins? Yeah sorry hold on again there we go sorry I had still was muted yeah I like the idea I do have a question for Captain Flynn through to you. Are there dogs in the neighborhood? Yes thank you Mr. Chair yes there are other animals in the neighborhood. Do the animals in our animals just on the other side of the back fence in McClendon Park? Do they bark? The other animals? Yes I would imagine so. Okay all right and my other comment is that I'm a little concerned about the three months and six months time frame because because as mentioned we are going to winter and so I'm afraid we might get like a false positive results mean if we assess in three months mean they'll probably definitely get a false positive and or let me rephrase that misleading we might be misled in the thinking that the situation has been made better and so I would suggest adjusting the time frame and generalizing this issue a little bit more I will just say that if anyone played music like dogs bark people would make noise complaints about it mean we played music at that volume in the times of day that we hear even one dog barking mean there would be complaints issued and people go you know what that's not cool you're making too much noise so I think in general the whole noise thing has got to be dealt with because it does drive people crazy and by that crazy I mean I think it makes them really behave negatively towards their neighbors and small things become big things because people have just been assaulted by the noise for a long time it's a bigger issue but there's one reason I feel that we really need to go with the route of really trying to deal with this noise issue for the 25 people that have complained and maybe for the other people who are not complaining about the people on one dog that's barking at whatever time so that's it thank you thank you and I also will support the motion I just know to captain Flynn just as I thought that the investigation would be both what happens to the noise complaint but as you report back we'd also be interested to hear if there were any basis to some of the allegations from the residents about you know where other neighbors not particularly or orks or any other neighbors that are doing anything that exacerbate the situation with his dogs so just as a point of comment so with that attorney hand we have a motion by mrs mahan seconded by mr curl mrs mahan yes thank you mr de coursey yes mr diggins yes mr curl yes mr hurt yes thank you captain Flynn thank you mr here thank you everyone okay all right that takes us on to traffic rules and order another business we have item number five on agenda request for one space on street overnight parking at 43 thawndyke street by mr matt o'connor and we do have a recommendation here in our file that's been posted from our parking control officer officer roto so is mr o'connor with us he is i just promoted him to panels mr o'connor can hear us yes good evening thank you board members uh for having me name and address and then just tell us a little bit about your petition sure my name is matt o'connor i live at 43 thawndyke street with my wife susie and my son franklin um we moved here in july bought a house in july i came coming back to our linkedin both my parents are from here my dad on peter toughs road and my mom on north union street fred o'connor gene akie so we're super excited to come back um buying a house during a pandemic is uh less than ideal but uh we were excited coming from cambridge from 800 square feet to finally find a single family home uh just across 16 was exciting the house had a driveway uh we have two cars and we figured you know we got to see the house for 15 minute walkthrough uh and online and it was pretty much closed in three days um we figured the driveway would certainly accommodate both our cars my wife and i both work uh full time um upon moving in uh we quickly realized that it couldn't accommodate two cars i've even uh tested it by pulling both cars in during a storm and i had to crawl out the tailgate to my forester and call my wife to come open it for me because the problem is the driveway isn't wide enough it abuts the house and it butts our neighbor's property we were also unaware of the overnight parking ban uh that was something uh i was completely unaware of so when i did get one of my first tickets i was a little surprised and uh i'm pretty proactive and very big into communication so i called the town uh and the police morning of and was letting on how it all works and that thorn dyke is a pretty active street uh due to its proximity to uh l wife um we uh you know we as i mentioned we do need both of our cars for work we have a son who has uh complicated medical history actually has some surgery tomorrow morning um we do park our car in front of our house and um i will say i fully understand how that you know there are other cars on the street that do that as well and i know there is a a ban on overnight parking um and i guess whether it's now or at the end i'd have to ask i've read through the website the town website and i can't find it and maybe i overlooked it why there's an overnight parking ban for residents um and what the reason is um when i've got my tickets i've looked out in the morning there's plenty of cars that i know are residents of my street and they the cars are in the same place 24 hours a day um and either they haven't been ticketed either or they're parked in front of their house um and they have been taken to do there's others that have been taken to their park in front of their house so um i mean that's the situation we're going through we've explored i've talked to friends and family and they're like well why can't you just extend the driveway extending the driveway is not an issue extending it the issue is with and again it's unfortunate um and i've tested it just because i wanted to be sure i wanted to you know check everything it's just it's you can't get out of the car in the doors like if my wife is getting a car we back out to get her in uh but if we put both cars in the car at the very end can get in but the other one is basically landlocked um so having that car on the street currently uh sort of enables us to be get to both and do whatever we need to do for work and for our son right mr o'connor at this point i'm going to turn to the board for any questions or comments that they might have uh mr corsie uh thank you mr chairman i good evening mr o'connor i just i didn't realize until you said um during the introduction but your mother and my mother and mrs kripalka were all classmates at allington high school so that's funny you say that i'm sorry by the sun's i know your mother uh amary very well um i haven't seen her a long time and my mother didn't inform me because my original email went to uh miss kripalka and my mother was like oh i went to high school with her so yes um yeah that is correct and i wish your son the best of luck in his in his surgery tomorrow um and you know this is i've only been on the board for a year and a half i've had one other of these hearings these are very difficult hearings because unfortunately we have um very strict standards for for the hardship for for um off-street parking and um you raise a good question as to you know whether we continue with the um overnight parking ban or not and then from time to time we talk about looking looking into that um unfortunately and i'll wait for the other members of the board i i've been by your house i do see the problem that you have with the the width of the driveway as you as you go if you were to go deeper if the driveway extended the house extends so here you can't park a car there um my other colleagues who've been on the board longer um i think we'll point out that where there is a parking spot available on a property usually this is not a hardship waiver given but i want to let them give them the opportunity to speak and um i think it's unfortunate where there's only one car that can fit in but it's our standards that we've applied in the past to make it very difficult for us to grant the waiver but um i want to hear what the others have to say before we take a final vote thank you and mr. Diggins well i haven't been on the board very long but i've watched a lot of these meetings and i know how these um requests go you know especially when you know the reporting officer i mean does not um approve it is this in the case here you know the reason these bands exist is because we have had uh at least a couple of um townwide uh referendum uh and ballots mean and this is passed overwhelmingly that people do not want on street parking um and in the east to me it's pretty dense mean and i'm thinking that if we did allow for it what would we do with the demand mean for that on street parking very soon we'd have been a shortage of it and we'd have to regulate it in some way you know um it i guess my question is to my colleagues too is that me at what level of um health mean or concern about someone's health mean does it warrant an exempt an exemption and i'll make the situation even a little tougher on us is that normally as you know i'm a transit guy you know but given the pandemic mean we realize that people would not mean doing transit as much mean for a variety of reasons mean so we can see people mean maybe gravitating towards their cars more mean one of the solutions which is probably not applicable in your situation right now is smaller cars you know i mean i see these little smart cars that can fit in the um in a bike lane essentially mean if you had a couple of those you could probably put them in your place mean that might be a longer term solution but but i mean i'm not going to close the door now uh because i want to hear what other people say because you know i would like to get to yes but get to yes in a way that is is consistent mean that it can apply to someone other than you and it can apply time-wide and in a way that makes sense mean and you know that's it i'll stop mr mahan and thank you mr chair um i understand the petitioner um and his mom or parents lived here before which anyone who's living in allington in the extended amount of time knows that there is no parking overnight um on our residential streets and that's something that's been put forth to town meeting and the voters at least three times in the past 20 years and it just hasn't gone through so um uh with that um and i understand family circumstances i i certainly have all my colleagues know on the board my personal circumstances which don't play into anything but that um i would make a motion from um the recommendation from our traffic and parking unit that we um move no action on granting a waiver in front of 43 thawndyke street but that we do recommend that either the high school or any other municipal parking lot nearby that the petitioner um look into that for some relief mr curl yeah i'll second the motion and just say these are always difficult i think you ask a great question why do we have the overnight parking band and i think if you ask folks you'll get a lot of different um spin around for so long you'll get a lot of different responses i mean there's some thinking that um that it increases public safety by by removing visible barriers to properties at night um some thinking that it was put in place originally to keep down traffic um or or density of households i've asked this question many times i think a lot of us have gotten different different answers through the years but um you know what mismahan and um and others have said is is right i think that uh shortly after i got on the board eight and a half years ago we we had a thought that we would go to the voters again um because we thought maybe we would be able to do some experimentation with the overnight overnight parking every single precinct voted to uphold um voted to uphold uh the overnight parking band so um we've been very hesitant hesitant to um to um you know break with the uh the will of the voters in in that and it's actually it's not really good public policy for us to be offering um you know one-off exceptions i think we'd rather be able to do that in a more comprehensive way and we would do some of that with um uh for you know it's a drive with a handicap placard or whatnot we have made some exceptions there but um so i've second mismahan's motion i'm sorry i know that it's a it's um it's a big inconvenience but it's uh it's it's uh it's where we are thank you i would just add that we had probably a year two year and a half ago we had a number of discussions around the overnight parking ban and some creative solutions that have been put forth and since the pandemic we kind of sidelined those discussions and i anticipate in the coming years we will resume those discussions but as of right now we do have the parking ban and what we had discussed about a year ago is putting in sort of a checklist system every time we get a request from someone for an overnight parking uh permit and the first item on the parking permit is do you have parking not do you have two three spots it does that you don't have parking and if you check that box then we go no further and we generally in those situations don't that's not an exigent situation where we we um we grant these situations um you know i think the one shining light that you have is it's inconvenient but i had a house with no parking when i first lived in irlington and we parked over the pier school it's a little bit of a walk but you do have a few options nearby that can you know in certain circumstances you can get overnight parking in the municipal lots that will alleviate the situation for you it won't grant you the relief that that you guys are looking for but like i said you know the first question we ask in these situations is is there parking at the property and for you there is one spot available um so thank you mr o'connor um i'm gonna ask does the board does the board have any further questions for mr o'connor all right we're gonna discuss it and take a vote thank you thanks for your time thank you and mr corsey any further discussion on this i had no further discussion mr dickens any further discussion no no it's just yeah no not now mr mahan no thank you mr chair mr carol no thank you mr chair all right attorney hon we have a recommend a vote of no action by mr mahan seconded by mr carol mrs mahan yes mr decorsi yes mr diggins yes mr currow yes mr herd yes sienna's vote thank you all right that takes us to our next item number 600 agenda discussion and approval cdbg cv3 program activities recommended by the cdbg subcommittee mr jeff linds yes thank you mr hurray so last week the cdbg subcommittee met uh arlington fortunate as an entitlement entitlement community has received an additional three hundred and twenty thousand four hundred and eighty five dollars uh and supplemental cdbg monies to help provide relief in these times that we're facing so the committee reviewed recommendations that were made by staff from the planning and community development department gave some feedback and those recommendations were slightly tweaked and brought before the board tonight we had initially envisioned meeting again with the cdbg subcommittee before coming to the board but what we learned through that subcommittee meeting was the faster we can ask for approval from this board the faster we can start the process with the federal government with hud to then be able to put these dollars into the hands of the people that we want to get them to based on their demonstrated need so from these three hundred and twenty thousand dollars we're recommending that we put two hundred thousand towards a further business assistance program and one hundred and twenty thousand four hundred and eighty five dollars towards public services the business assist assistance program as is laid out in the memo envisions potentially giving grants of up to twenty businesses or two twenty businesses in the amounts of ten thousand dollars but we ask that the board also accept there being some flexibility in making grant amounts higher or lower than that ten thousand dollar threshold we want to make sure through feedback from the business community that we're giving grants that can truly keep businesses afloat as we want the program to be as successful as possible in terms of public services these dollars we're asking be equally split between the school department and health and human services so we're asking that just approximately sixty thousand dollars go to the schools to provide for a tutoring services to students that are demonstrating challenges with remote and online learning and that sixty thousand dollars go to health and human services for the creation of a test an onsite testing center at monotony manner for tenants for testing for COVID-19 so we're asking for favorable action from the board tonight which will then start a five day public comment period and then lead to the rest of the process with HUD again hoping to make these dollars available before the end of the calendar year so I'd be happy to answer any questions that the board has but we're looking for a load of approval tonight thank you this is mon thank you mr chair I don't know if you would like to make your remarks before mine because I don't want to take everything away before you do or how do you want to handle everything that mr chaplain said there was discussion about basically the cdbg subcommittee mr herd and I and the rest of the members would like a vote tonight so that these monies would be available in december anything later than that would push the process to january i would inform people that I know when people play a cdbg they they want to get projects and this is two very limited areas that these monies can go to but we will be starting in december opening the quote-unquote regular cdbg application process for what we normally do every year and we also anticipate under the cdbg carers acts cv3 etc that there might be two two two other allocations under this so um I would just echo everything uh that the town manager said as well as um there were two businesses that initially applied to the cdbg carers act that were not allowed did not fit the criteria I would encourage them and anyone else to apply for this so um with that I would um make a motion to approve the cdbg cv3 program activities recommended by our cdbg subcommittee yeah I just added we're all in unanimous agreement as to the recommendations with the subcommittee and I do want to give credit where credit's due because as the meeting was going like many town meetings we were going to table it to the next meeting get a final recommendation make a vote for at another cdbg meet subcommittee meeting but I want to give credit to mrs mahan who stepped up and said hey you know this is our businesses that really need the the money right now and as that we took the we took the recommendations from the planning department made some slight modifications and got this on this agenda which which was quick but really needed so I did want to give miss mahan credit for that and if I could jump in on that um our chair does serve on the um planning and community development uh economic task force I'm not going to say that um miss no more right but um that's part of the reason that kind of spurred me on because um you have been very active on that committee and I've kept myself and the rest of my colleagues abreast in terms of economic economic development and trying to keep our businesses vital so back at you my friend and thank you so much all right mr gorsi yeah thank you mr cherry with mr curl mr diggins and I will have to work on something else together but uh I appreciate the work that you're um that that you both did and I think it makes good sense I'm glad that this is on the agenda tonight because um we you know the sooner we can get the money out that the better off and the more help that we can give business businesses and individuals so thank you um and if I guess that was your motion day I'll say I'll second the motion you miss carol thank you very much I appreciate the work on this as well um my only question is um is there are there any criteria that you anticipate beyond the um number of employees for example I'm thinking of the the ppp loan grant program was specifically directed towards maintaining payroll or meeting utilities or or whatnot do you anticipate criteria like that or or is it strictly um you know our linkedin based businesses that that have a maximum of 20 fts chaplain answer but I think it's just the number of employees is set by HUD but they it's just a general grant but mr chaplain yeah I thank you mr chair uh yeah in general terms mr hurt is correct um there there's a series of eligible costs that go beyond payroll but not all costs uh and planning staff will work with each grant applicant to make sure that what they spend the money on is eligible under HUD oh so there is an account and correct feedback so great thank you very much for your work on this I'm happy to support the motion mr diggins yes well well I actually attended the last Arlington economic recovery um task force um meeting and so I got to see a little bit of this coming and um I have a I mean I do support it you know a lot um I have a couple of questions being one about the money to businesses be uh will they be able to use this money to to get things before um I think what it was one of the other programs I mean they had to like for instance buy um inventory we and then get reimbursed for it and so for some of those businesses that was that was difficult because they didn't have the money to buy the inventory me so is that a situation like is is is a situation similar for this grant so mr chair may I respond um I I believe all of these cdbg programs are reimbursement based so I do believe that the expense has to be um expanded and demonstrated before reimbursement can be received right I'm 98 percent sure of that mr diggins I could confirm the planning staff but I'm I'm fairly certain it is reimbursement based okay and the reason I asked that though is because when there was discussion about it and it could be that I'm getting programs confused me there was one the question was hey do we come up with something that will help a few businesses a lot I mean or whether we come up with something that will help a lot of businesses a little and that's even less the weight it was said I think the thought was me let's say we wanted to help businesses we come up with some um better way to use technology in websites for instance I mean then do we come up hire someone that helps a whole bunch of businesses with their websites or with their technology I mean so that's the reason I thought it might have been a little different than a reimbursement program well as I said I mean I think the reimbursement programs are kind of problematic I mean but I'm still going to support this but just put that out there and I certainly like what's going on with the plan for school especially hiring a tutor I mean I really like what's about the plan for the other aspects of it where you help people with food and other humanitarian needs to me so so I'm glad we got the money I'm glad we're pushing forward sooner rather than later so total support thank you thank you all right journey home we have a motion for approval by mrs mahan seconded by mr decorcy this is mahan yes thank you mr decorcy yes mr dinghans yes mr curel yes mr herd yes it's unanimous vote all right thank you and that takes us on two so item number seven um as I mentioned before this was a belief of beyond for a uh more of a motion for receipt we're so moved um we have a motion to receive correspondence second seconded by mr mahan is there any questions mr diggins um I'll save a cleaner thank you all right attorney hon this is mahan yes thank you mr decorcy yes mr diggins yes mr curel yes mr herd yes it's unanimous vote all right that brings us to number eight on our agenda discussion approval reinstatement of parking meters on november 1st mr chaplain thank you mr herd so tonight um I wanted to ask the board we've been talking about this uh all through the summer uh I feel like almost every month we've thought about coming back and asking to turn the meters on but one major thing we wanted to do was get paid by phone up and running before we came back and also have there be more demonstrated uh business occurring or commerce occurring in the center before we turn the meters on um with with traffic uh picking up and with the the good news that I know mr curel will very much appreciate with pay by phone ready to be implemented at the start of november we do want to ask the board tonight to turn the meters back on or to begin enforcing the meters again uh at the start of november on both the street as well as in the russian common lot and the railroad lot uh on the agenda I asked for the board to consider uh initiating this on november 1st it was very wisely pointed out to me that waiting to turn them back on until after election day would make a lot of sense and also in the same motion or same request to request um suspending metering in the lots the the rustle common lot and the railroad lot the last saturday and november and the first three saturdays in december uh which is the norm uh the normal request made by the chamber of commerce to support business through the holiday season so if the board would entertain it I would ask uh for the board to support turning the meters back on and enforcement back on on november 4th and suspending metering in the lots again the rustle common lot and the railroad lot the last saturday uh in november and the first three saturdays in december thank you mr diggins can i say salute on that yes okay thank you mr curl second thank you i'll say thank you and mr corsie no comments thank you yeah and I just say I support this too and you know one of the other items that's happened in the center that I think was a good benchmark here is that we're just about wrapping up the sidewalk replacements which look great I don't think it needs to be part of the the metering I don't know if it would be worthwhile having some sort of one-off ticket you know reversal if people didn't know when they got first got turned on they get the first ticket reversed but um I don't think something we need to be part of the the motion at this time but just a thought as the meters have been off for a while I'm sure we're going to have a lot of people complaining when they get the first ticket thinking not knowing then not everybody watches our meetings I know we have the millions and millions of people at home as mr grill used to say but um we can discuss that further all right attorney heim we have a motion by mr diggan second by mr carl this is mahan yes thank you mr decorcy yes mr diggins yes mr curill yes mr herd yes it's an anonymous vote all right and that takes us to item number eight discussion approval oops sorry item number nine discussion vote extension of the local state of emergency attorney heim thank you mr herd i'll give this brief the state of emergency both on a state level and from a board of health perspective continues i put a draft extension of your prior declarations of emergency both the original declaration and then your continuation of it because your declaration expired in october october of this year so this declaration would essentially extend the board's declaration which as the board may recall is for the primary purposes of making it clear that you know there's a state of emergency in town there are certain measures that we're taking such as closing town hall requiring certain things of town employees requiring certain measures by the town but also for the purposes of reimbursement for state and federal during a state of emergency it's a helpful local declaration to have made so if the board has any questions i'm happy to answer them but it's it's more or less the same thing with blank for a new proposed state to extend the state of emergency within the body of the language and some updated you know numbers on infections both locally and statewide right now turn to the board for questions comments mr chair i could yes i'd like to move approval for an extension of the local state of emergency as outlined by attorney hind right and do we have to add a date attorney hind i'm sorry what's that mr chair do we have to add a date yeah i would i just want a date for when we'll revisit this and your recommendation is you know the last time the board went from june to october i think you know basically a similar period of time would make sense so april is that what you're saying till april i think it would be helpful at the good point this is mohan it'd be helpful for the purposes leading up to town meeting if i could mr chair if i could make a motion to extend the local state of emergency until april of 2021 all right mr carol i'll second it i was actually going to suggest that we you know this is kind of kind of like the um the the moving of the 11 o'clock clock rule which we're i fear we may be flirting with again tonight um and i was tempted to to suggest that we actually say it will remain in effect until the commonwealth of massachusetts state of emergency is lifted we have other language in there with a town manager or we could could lift it earlier but but i'm happy to second your motion unless unless you would like to change it is not um i will be guided by my colleague mr carol and attorney hind whether it's until april um 2021 or in accordance with mr carol's language so attorney hind if you could comment what would work best i certainly think yeah so in the past the board's discussion has been oriented towards well we don't want to extend this for longer than a date certain but it's gone on for so long at this point in time that i don't think that there's any i i don't perceive any legal downside to having it sync up with the commonwealth if you don't want to keep on having to come back and renew it and renew it and renew it as mr cura said you could certainly um basically declare it over before the commonwealth if you wanted to put it on the agenda and affirmatively do so so i guess what i'm saying is is that i certainly think administratively it would be easier to sync it up with the commonwealth's declaration if the board's inclined to do so okay if it's um okay with attorney hind and my colleague mr cura and others that we um both the extension of the local of local state of emergency concurrent with the um state's declaration of force said there too or any better language than that it's a curl that works for your second uh mr question yeah that's fine no no further comment mr viggins i'm going to go with it but i just do want to point out that i would like to revisit this um notion at the end of february because if it does look like we are going to be under state of emergency through april that will help guide us in determining what kind of town meeting we're going to have because it's much easier to push for another virtual town meeting with the state of emergency so i'll just say you know let's keep that in the background minds and maybe at the end of february we come back and think about what things are looking like but i'm going to support this motion as is yeah i support this too i think we might have been wishful thinking when we set it for october that maybe we'd have some movement but that's not the case and who knows when that's going to come so i think as the plan is to keep it in place to be concurrent with the the state of emergency in the commonwealth so i think the language works so attorney hind we have a motion by mr mahan seconded by mr curl mr mahan yes thank you mr decorsi yes mr diggins yes mr caro yes mr herd yes it's unanimous vote thank you all right and that brings us to number 10 this is a discussion that continuing from 12 30 a.m at our last meeting uh so it's discussion vote marijuana establishment host community agreement license applicants one was kalyx peak of massachusetts ink to hampshire street suite 100 b foxboro massachusetts by edward schmaltz second one was the human connection llc 29 forrance avenue arlington mass by jared glansberger so at the time we had heard from both applicants and we moved on to our discussion and vote portion um so i'll open up to the board it wasn't my plan to bring back the applicants since we had already heard their presentations and had the question answer portions completed unless any board members have an inclination to do so so i will start with mr diggins well um i had made my statement the last time is pretty much the same you know i'll repeat it but a little more briefly uh i very much like uh the human connection i like the fact that it is in east arlington uh it's in precinct three right across from precinct four and the other one um other licenses now in precinct one right across from precinct three and those two precincts three and four i voted two to one um for recreational marijuana which i know that there are potential difficulties being um with respect to traffic me but but i think if any two precincts should be um willing to um undertake that it would be those two i also like the notion that they are close to cambridge and summerville and and even though i'm not a vengeful person uh i mean i will take substitution when it falls into my lap and so i think it'd be kind of nice for arlington to have recreational marijuana right across the line from cambridge because they had you know liquor shops meet right across the line from arlington for a while but when arlington was dry so it's an opportunity is for us to um grab some something like income from from cambridge mean also i think the location you know for the human connection is for um superior to um calyx's i mean and the only issue that i think we need to surmount is the um 2000 foot um separation between it and the other shop in um east arlington so um i'll stop there because this my position hasn't really changed thank you all right mr dacorsi uh thank you mr chairman um yes i just took some comments and i thought both presentations were very good last week and and um appreciated to both applicants um staying on so late and providing good good presents lost your sound steve location because the um the buffer is is just um that that property looking property line the property line is 1685 feet um there's no ability under the zoning bylaw to waive that 2000 foot um distance and and i will point out a year ago when calyx peak um applied at what was the nicola pizza site um and i could hide say we're about 1970 feet from apotheca um and if you went door to door which is what the human connection um suggested last week if you went door to door from buzzy's bizarre to to the location on broadway that may be over 2000 feet apotheca's front door to the to the corner door what used to be the entrance to nicola pizzas over 2000 square 2000 linear feet so we've applied a standard in the past of property line the property line seems unfair to me to now change that standard particularly where there's an applicant who um it was applied i think properly um a year ago but they they unfortunately were 30 feet less and and what was a good location and what was a otherwise a good location and a good presentation based on the part of the board members afterwards i understand the issues with with calyx peak but at the end of the presentations last year mr dunn and mr cura spoke specifically about the calyx peak application and i believe it was mr dunn the time encouraged them to look for another site not only then they have found another site the site complies with all the buffer zones and zoning and i realized there are challenges with the neighborhood um that i think are going to have to be addressed to the environmental design review process with the arb but at least as before us for a host community agreement i only see one qualified application so i i'm going to support that the calyx peak application for that reason their motion um yeah i'll i'll move approval of the calyx peak application all right mr mahan um uh i agree with my colleague mr decoracy regarding the human connection the um 2000 foot buffer zone as well as one of the tenants that we have in terms of approving these that there is site control and there was no determinant um exact uh site identification of where um it would appear the the buzzy site uh was put out as a possibility but it wasn't um i'm clad in that so because of those two reasons the 2000 foot buffer and not having site control i agree with my colleague mr decoracy um in terms of the human connection doesn't rise to that um in terms of calyx peak um i'm happy to i second mr decoracy's motion for discussion i don't know if you all can hear me it's saying my connection was unstable but but i would put out okay am i back now you are okay so i i saw my cable was unstable so i tried to slow down i'll definitely second mr decoracy's motion for discussion but um i would say and if attorney hind can either correct me or agree with me in terms of uh just because we have one more um hca to give out we don't necessarily have to do that um and i'd be interested in in hearing from my other colleague so i would ask attorney hind is that correct what i just said uh mr chair man yes miss mohan that's correct uh that we have there's not a cap on the number of hca's there's a cap on the total number of special permits or licenses that can be granted for retail amer marijuana establishments so there's already two hca's for retail marijuana in arlington existing today and one of them is in the license application process before the arlington redevelopment board the other one already has their special permit in this open so what in theory um there's not a cap on the hca's but if you have but but i would say that realistically speaking there's only room for one more um hca or you'd be giving out more hca's than there are licenses from the arb you don't have to give an hca to anybody um the sort of general guidepost is that we shouldn't be artificially suppressing the number of licenses available um if you don't think an applicant or a site is attractive or appropriate you don't have to give one um so it's ultimately within the board's discretion okay so i i definitely second mr decorcy's motion for discussion and right now i'm leaning towards no but i'd like to hear from um my remaining colleagues and thank you mr chair and mr decorcy mr girl um thank you thank you very much mr chair so i'll tell you that um i greatly respect the the retail experience of calix peak um i felt like for the town of arlington the proposal was put together by the human connection what was a superior uh proposal i thought that they spoke to a lot of the the the local issues and having local ownership which is a priority uh for us um and if that were as far as it went um i would be supporting or putting forward a motion to to um to support uh a host community agreement with the human connection but the the zoning issue is is just a um it's a it's a it's a roadblock i think to doing so um i don't feel comfortable with the uh calix peak location it does strictly speaking it meets the the requirements of the application but on qualitative grounds uh i think a lot of us know that intersection um it worked okay as a gas station with some difficulties it's gotten even it's actually has a more uh complicated um configuration now since since some of the housing went in um school routes it's close by areas of um uh youth congregation and all that goes goes with that um at hills hill and nor brown park um and i recognized that according to zoning that that's not a no start of it qualitatively for me it's an issue for me um as far as i'm concerned we had a proposal that was to my mind superior for the needs of of uh of the town of arlington met one of the prior priority categories isn't meeting the the zoning categories but also has stated um a desire to continue looking for a a um a a site that would um fit so i don't see any harm in in holding off on on granting of a third hca at this point you know i knew our first dispensary just opened uh less than a month ago and the second one is not even quite approved yet so uh i am not inclined at this time to um support either of the two um applications thank you all right and so i also was very impressed by the human connections presentation as well as you know i love the idea of having a locally owned shop um but i think with these applications um really the location is an integral part of the application so to say you know we'd like the the agreement but we're going to work with the town to find a new location i just i don't think that's grounds to grant the hca to human connection based on that and i think you know there's been some discussion back and forth but yeah it's pretty clear that the the site that they're looking at right now just is not a viable site within the zoning bylaws i spoke to another business owner in that site who wasn't even aware that there was any you know potential for a marijuana shop to go into that complex so i don't know the viability of working that complex to find a suitable location and so with that i don't think that that's but i don't think we can approve an hca for the human connection i do you know i mr crow has got more experience with this locate the location on summer street than me but i think it's a workable location like i said before you know we've when we first looked at the applications way back when for the original hca's we were anticipating these swaths of people coming in in large lines large traffic queueings and i've seen the apothecas i've observed apotheca number of times i haven't seen any sort of queuing like that so i i think it's more of a steady flow of people um so i'm inclined to support the calyx peak application for that site and i would just say you know i think these applicants have known for a while that we're going to eventually put this hca back out for bid and we are very limited with the way that the bylaws written that we're very limited as to the locations where we can put one of these shops and i think if an alternate suitable location existed then one of the applicants would have located it so i don't know if it's we have a good applicant here in calyx peak who's very impressive in both presentations that we both when the originally presented to us in the presentation that they made to us the last meeting that i think you know again it's not they don't have some of the draws that the human connection had for us for a locally owned shop but you know i do think it's a good it was a good presentation and i think they'll do well in the location that they propose do we have any further discussion or comments so attorney hind we have a motion from mr decorcy second by mrs mohan to approve the hca agreement for calyx peak mrs mohan no mr decorcy yes mr diggins no no mr uh curill no mr herd yes it's a two three vote the motion does not carry do we have any alternate motions all right with that this will close this agenda item all right we are now at nine forty seven and about to start the warrant article hearing portion of this so are we going to say mr chair could we take a break i'm in a break by show of of nods how long mr chair ten minutes okay mr chair i'm sorry we should take it by roll call i apologize i i know it's silly a ten minute break oh okay if there's a motion unless you're just declaring it as the chair so i was going to declare it i think that's a reason so it will be consistent all right thank you so people can be mad at me if they all right so we'll take a ten minute break it's now nine forty eight we'll come back at ten o'clock okay thank you all right so that takes us to item number eleven on our agenda warrant article hearings and votes so as many people know that this is a unique set of warrant article hearings remember these warrant articles were proposed for our spring annual spring uh town meeting for 2020 and due to a global pandemic we pushed these off for the safety of our town meeting members only handled the financial articles that we needed to keep our town running in the spring town meeting that happened in june so there's been a little bit of confusion both online and with some of the correspondence that we've received i know we've all received regarding the hearing process so we do have we have five articles that were either are either new articles or have been substantially changed since they were originally proposed to us for the spring town meeting those five articles will have new warrant article hearings i'll let attorney heim get a little more in depth here but the remaining articles we have on for final final votes and comments all articles which would be article 347 9 11 12 13 and 15 we had warrant article hearings for all of those articles back in january february into march of last year we did have public input on all those articles and all those articles are the same as they were or substantially the same as they were proposed at that time and they're just being resubmitted as they were pushed off due to the pandemic in the spring so i just do want to address some miscommunications and misinformation that's been put out there some of which was is by residents who were participated in those those hearings back in january and february that all of these articles have had public input they've all had public hearings and just now we're taking them up for final votes and comments to put them forth to the special town meeting and as mr. dagons was present but not voting in the during those hearings so attorney heim if you have anything at to add to the introduction please do so thank you mr. herd i'll try not to go over the same territory but again as a reminder uh for members of the board and the public the focus of the special town meeting on november 16th is to take up business which was essentially tabled during the truncated 2020 annual town meeting due to cova 19 pandemic so in that vein the board has two sets of warrant article actions that should probably have been broken out into two separate agenda items in the first bucket you have warrant article hearings on articles five six eight 10 and 25 um my understanding is that at least two of those items are likely to be tabled at the request of the proponents until the next meeting but these items were slated for hearings because uh they were either articles which weren't on the 2020 annual town meeting warrant uh article 10 and article 25 they weren't previously voted upon by the board prior to the annual town meeting or they were voted upon positively negatively but the proponents of those articles requested changes to the substance of the warrant articles which materially affects the board's prior posture each of those items is discussed individually for the purposes of a board vote and development of a record for the comments the second bucket articles three four seven nine 11 12 13 14 15 you have your final votes draft final votes and comments and these are matters in which the board both held hearings and voted on a recommendation to town meeting and the purpose of discussing the articles now is to ensure that the draft votes and comments reflect the board's uh vote and intentions in terms of their recommendations to town meeting final votes and comments are taken up by the board collectively with the board members noting instances where there are specific edits to votes or comments that they'd like to be changed or elaborated upon if the board and the public are willing to indulge me for a moment i'd like to make a special note in article 15 because i've heard from both board members and members of the public on the draft vote and comment before you the vote as drafted in the board's materials has two ingredients that are meant to prevent inappropriate candidates from being appointed as these retired detail officers and i think we all understand uh some you know serious concerns that some folks have about this in our current sort of uh context the first is that the language of the special acts make it very clear that appointment is purely discretionary and it requires the recommendation of the police chief and that means that an appointment can be denied for any non-discriminatory reason and neither candidates nor appointees have civil service or collectively bargain rights to the appointment or to maintain the appointment indeed the manager uh can essentially terminate anybody from detailed work with or without costs this is the most important ingredient because this is what we're oftentimes sort of circling around when it comes to employee discipline and the nature of collectively bargain rights second uh based on the comments from both the public and the board officers aren't eligible if they were involuntary separated involuntarily separated from employment or have any active administrative or disciplinary matters open against them upon voluntary separation so the idea there is that someone who was terminated can't be then hired back as a retired officer for detail or similarly someone can't quit voluntarily for the purpose of trying to avoid some sort of disciplinary matter that might be uh stand on the record to allay any further anxiety without creating an unworkable standard so that if somebody was disciplined for insubordination or being late um and therefore isn't eligible to be serve on a detail in retirement um I have drafted some language that I think addresses the public's concerns if the board would like to add a third ingredient and the proposed language that I would add is in addition to language about outstanding administrative discipline or disciplinary charges levied against them at the time of retirement that they would not be eligible if they had been subject to quote duty restrictions or assignment modifications as a result of a disciplinary action for misconduct within the last however many years five to ten years prior to their retirement so what that means what that means to capture is that if there's a discipline that's needed out that results in a modification of what someone assignment is for their duty such that they can't be uh occupying some role in the police department because of a disciplinary matter taken against them that's significant enough to trigger that this isn't somebody that we want um to be working on a detail so uh in retirement so I hope that that allays uh some folks concerns if the board's inclined to add that and I'm only bringing that up now because I understand that folks are very concerned about this but we've got a lot of warranted article hearings that we would uh that we're going to individually take up and then final votes and comments which as I said are taken up by the board in mass and sort of discussed among the board not not as public here so Mr. Hurd unless there's any questions from the board um I hope that summary is helpful both to you and to the public does thank you and I guess this is just a new chair question for you since it's not posted separately can I take can we vote on the final votes and comments section before we take on the warrant article hearings we have a you can take up business in whatever order you like Mr. Hurd so if you want to take on final votes and comments before you take on the warrant article hearings you may do so yep I think logistically that is probably the easiest way to do this um so in as in years past what I'll do is I'm just going to we have a separate group of articles here for final votes and comments with attorney hyans comments on it our previous um in our previous votes so I just want to go through each article I'll name them off and take it to the board for a raise of hands if anyone has any questions comments revisions that they want to make to that particular article so the first one that we have here is article three by law amendment regulation of outdoor lighting up lighting are there any additional comments or revisions regarding that that one all right article four by law amendment minimum bikeway hours do we have any additional comments revisions for that one and of course Mr. Diggins if you have any questions or comments just let me know all right article seven vote by law amendment envision arlington updated language any questions revisions comments article nine vote election modernization committee any revisions to that article article 11 home rule legislation justin brown my only comment to this one is once I when I went back through these for final votes and comments that I felt bad I feel like that's one that we should have pulled out for mr brown to vote in the june town meeting but glad we're taking up here article 12 excuse me mr chairman yes just a question on article 11 and and when we had discussed that back in the spring there was a period of time that we were going to put into the into the recommended vote and I still see that that time is there but have we had any time to account for the additional six months or is it's the same timetable because I just want to give him the opportunity to get on a list and take an exam attorney hi thank you mr chair mr uh of course that's a very good point I can add six months to the December 31st 2020 deadline okay great thank you and and mr chair yes well we we have a notation there