{"citations":{"019de78e-f888-75f9-895e-b3978003a919":{"num":1,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8d1-7ed1-ab0f-ef1756c2917b":{"num":2,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f725-794c-a540-3ddd27130f89":{"num":3,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f797-7f14-9f3f-b73e99f47d01":{"num":4,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f973-71f1-ae83-48884112aa28":{"num":5,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f999-73d7-8970-02f9d05dbdd3":{"num":6,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f9a3-7787-b0cc-c602efac2ceb":{"num":7,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f7d8-7e2d-9c88-eba8d61f1531":{"num":8,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f9b5-78b9-9426-974589aa2116":{"num":9,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f9c8-76fc-bb16-aaf29833e36e":{"num":10,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fa2a-7bfb-991b-7ba4261cfdec":{"num":11,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fa3c-7895-bea7-4cc9f9b77cca":{"num":12,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fb1b-70b8-844e-a08ae156802a":{"num":13,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fa9e-71fe-a8fa-eb5d8e8f71db":{"num":14,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fab5-7277-8d56-64f3fad76b2a":{"num":15,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fad1-77d9-911b-28d7892e43b2":{"num":16,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f85e-7854-a596-0de003dcbda8":{"num":17,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f86f-7bfe-a507-a36817ce74ac":{"num":18,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f880-7fdd-a9d5-809c556e62e6":{"num":19,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fa86-72a4-9e40-2fc2821d13a0":{"num":20,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8c8-7d58-b949-03e188f11448":{"num":21,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8d9-7d24-a3a9-7c3051e38352":{"num":22,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8e2-752f-bd4e-bb3d4e8f5e64":{"num":23,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f951-766b-9b76-5baad411a963":{"num":24,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f912-760e-94f6-9abdc0ee1cff":{"num":25,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f93f-7ba5-a914-298fc8e531d1":{"num":26,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f84e-706b-be6e-175081e95141":{"num":27,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f833-7d44-baf9-7f492b9bdcb4":{"num":28,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8a7-79ec-8069-8300d4358285":{"num":29,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f8bf-7366-8a10-c9ca5749fed4":{"num":30,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fb4f-7235-96e8-3b79e9a74730":{"num":31,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-fb66-7e11-b6b4-525ad50a1078":{"num":32,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f9f7-7172-8ad2-11e53b4d0c15":{"num":33,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"},"019de78e-f7a9-7be4-8794-9a9b9f13785a":{"num":34,"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f"}},"sources":{"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f":{"sourceItemId":"019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f","title":"Annual Town Meeting — 2026-04-29","videoUrl":"https://dkjpoal1tejoa.cloudfront.net/sites/a1000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001/source-items/019de747-8e70-72f5-87c4-bb8278b7c49f/Annual_Town_Meeting_-_April_29_2026.mp4","chunks":[{"id":"019de78e-f725-794c-a540-3ddd27130f89","content":"Speaker 1: \n\nSpeaker 2: Okay, let's settle down. It's 8 0 1 and I'm calling to order town meeting for our second evening. Um, some, some quick announcements up front. Uh, the 2025 annual report is at the back of the room, and if any members did not take a copy on Monday, uh, feel free to take one tonight because, uh, by tomorrow they will be gone. Uh, precinct 11 will be meeting during the break in front of the treasurer's office. Other precincts can meet as well if you want, but there's no requirement. Precinct 17 just has some business to do with the vacancy. Uh, let's see. If you've been following on the town meeting progress tracker, the Vote Quantum on zoning articles, several of them were in inaccurate. They were showing as majority vote. And, uh, those that should be two thirds vote have been updated in case you were wondering about that.\n\n","timeStart":0.085,"timeEnd":71.285,"chunkIndex":0},{"id":"019de78e-f732-7358-b7b7-cfc51ff57cad","content":"Speaker 2: And thank you to Mr. Klein for pointing this out to me. Thank you. Uh, I'm also calling for the, the resolution petitioners. The, the resolutions are the articles starting at 89 in the warrant. Um, uh, most of them are citizens petitions. Uh, some, uh, 89 itself actually comes from a report, but, uh, most of 'em come from citizens petitions. I received, uh, and, and published drafts of the, um, or the final drafts of some of those resolutions, but I have not received all of them from the petitioners. Uh, so if you are a petitioner, uh, of, of, of a resolution that's a citizen's petition, and, uh, or you are a town meeting member working with the petitioner, if they're not a town meeting member themselves, um, please get your drafts into me so I can review them and we can get them published on the website so folks know what business they'll be taking up, uh, at the end of the warrant.\n\n","timeStart":71.425,"timeEnd":123.965,"chunkIndex":1},{"id":"019de78e-f73c-711f-b5fc-e1bf25fdc0da","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, also, uh, like to make a call for any opponents to resolutions I haven't heard from anyone who wishes to, uh, speak in opposition to resolutions. Uh, I'll have more information forthcoming. The rules are essentially the same as, uh, uh, previous past years where there's essentially just two speakers. The speaker in favor, the speaker in opposition, um, and we do allow some limited amendments, uh, on the resolutions. But generally it's, it's just the two speakers up front. Uh, the pro and con speakers. We don't open the speaker queue for the resolution articles. So if you're interested in speaking in opposition to any of the resolutions, uh, uh, from articles 89 to 96, uh, please, uh, contact me. Um, let's see. We also have Article 23. There's a substitute motion, which is a print only copy, but we've actually also published it in the annotated warrant for folks who were checking on the warrant, uh, earlier today.\n\n","timeStart":124.505,"timeEnd":178.485,"chunkIndex":2},{"id":"019de78e-f745-70b4-9334-fb64d42d5df2","content":"Speaker 2: So, uh, in the town meeting guidelines where it refers to print only copies, we're actually doing it a little bit differently this year. And I'll update the guidelines after this town meeting to reflect this. Uh, very small, but I think helpful change in practice that once I've reviewed an article or, or, uh, an amendment or substitute motion for scope, um, even if it's within the, the, um, uh, the deadline that we have in the guidelines, which says 5:00 PM the business day before the meeting at which the article comes up, uh, if I get it within that timeframe, um, we'll take the, the clerk and I will, we will take our a a best effort approach to try to get those published if we can. If I can, if I can get those approved in time, I just can't make any guarantees that I'll have time to review it, uh, or that it, that it'll get published to the annotated warrant.\n\n","timeStart":178.505,"timeEnd":224.365,"chunkIndex":3},{"id":"019de78e-f761-77e0-8769-a1de56734e16","content":"Speaker 2: And we'll be doing that, some of that at the beginning of this meeting. Uh, finally, let's see. The, uh, I just wanna speak a little bit about a DA compliance for any, uh, motions or, um, materials that you submit to me for the annotated warrant to be distributed and to be announced to town meeting members. The, uh, the, the, um, I think it's by the end of this year. Is that right, Ms. Bril? Okay. So, so practice, yeah, we're kind of like in this practice period of trying to, and it's also just good practice and it's helpful for folks if we could make our, um, our online materials, our electronic materials, uh, as accessible as possible. And, uh, the rule of thumb you could use if you're sending a document to, uh, to me and Ms. Brazil, uh, to post to the annotated warrant. This could be a motion or an attachment in the annotated warrant.\n\n","timeStart":278.985,"timeEnd":331.685,"chunkIndex":5},{"id":"019de78e-f76f-7fb5-9117-4dc3c390e35b","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, a good rule of thumb is if you open that, that file on a computer, try to select the text of that document. And if you're unable to select the text, it's, there's a good chance that it's just a, an image which will not be readable by screen readers, which will mean that it's not accessible, uh, to folks using screen readers. Uh, and that, and that's gonna be problematic going forward. And it's also just not helpful for folks who need to use screen readers. So, um, and if you can select the text, like you can select individual words or sentences and you can highlight them with your mouse, then there's a decent chance that it's gonna be, uh, more accessible, uh, to those sorts of devices. So please check on that before you submit materials. Uh, let's see. I said lastly, but there's one more lastly, which is, uh, I just wanted to explain a bit of what happened with Article 16.\n\n","timeStart":332.145,"timeEnd":376.645,"chunkIndex":6},{"id":"019de78e-f77f-7eab-a592-90500c55a7bb","content":"Speaker 2: I'm not gonna go into the excruciating details, uh, but there was a numbering discrepancy. We had a point of order, uh, on that article, and we'll get to that tonight. Um, where there was a discrepancy between what was printed in the select board report. Um, and, and that did match what was in the select board report posted on the town website. But those did not match what was in the annotated warrant for Article 16. And so, uh, uh, uh, some of us on the town side of things and town staff and, uh, and the clerk as well and reviewed what happened there. And there's a, the long story short is that there's a Word document from which the, the select board report is edited within that document. And there was a discrepancy in which a, um, uh, there were two PDFs that were produced from that Word document, essentially.\n\n","timeStart":376.705,"timeEnd":433.005,"chunkIndex":7},{"id":"019de78e-f797-7f14-9f3f-b73e99f47d01","content":"Speaker 2: I might be getting some of the details wrong 'cause I wasn't involved in that process. But, um, the time at which the report was published from the initial PDF, there was one more edit to like, I think it was to add or remove one line, which changed. It only changed the numbering in one of the lists. It didn't actually change any material values, um, uh, that created the discrepancy. 'cause the annotated warrant was created from that document that had been edited one more time, I believe, or one more time, or one less time one way or the other. Um, so it did not have any material impact and will be taking up article Article 16 tonight. So apologies for that, uh, confusion. And we're gonna be looking at putting processes in place to make sure that we don't have discrepancies like that, uh, in the future. Um, and now, uh, it's my pleasure to introduce our first guest performer, uh, of this town meeting. Uh, she's a freshman at Arlington High School, and she hails from East Arlington. Please join me in welcoming Maria OV to perform the national anthem.\n\nSpeaker 5: Oh, say, can you see by the what So proud, the, the who's brought Stripes and bright through the fight for the, we were so night that flag was still there.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Hurt.\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. John, her chair of the Select board. It is moved that if all of the business of the meeting as set forth in the warrant for the annual town meeting is not disposed of at this session. When the meeting adjourns, it adjourns to Monday, May 4th, 2026 at 8:00 PM\n\nSpeaker 4: Second\n\n","timeStart":433.245,"timeEnd":633.615,"chunkIndex":8},{"id":"019de78e-f7a9-7be4-8794-9a9b9f13785a","content":"Speaker 2: In town hall. All those in favor say Yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It, uh, it is unanimous. Okay, we'll, now take a test vote. Let's bring up that vote. Okay. The question is true or false. One for true, two for false. The Black Horse Tavern in Arlington was demolished in 1892. Okay. Let's get our votes in. Okay. Okay. We can close voting and, and the motion fails. 83 in affirmative 90 negative 22 Abstentions. Uh, let's cycle through the votes now,\n\nSpeaker 4: .\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We'll let the record show that Arlington Town Meeting rejects the claim that I found on Reddit earlier tonight. R slash history. Okay. While those votes are cycling through, uh, are there any announcements or resolutions tonight? Yes. Uh, yeah. Uh, Mr. Gucci third row. Okay. Yep. Yep. Go ahead.\n\nSpeaker 7: We got two minutes. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Um, I just wanna take a moment to recognize an Arlington business that just put us on the international map. Uh, last Wednesday, Arlington Brewing Company won gold at the 2026 World Beer Cup. The most prestig, it, it is the most prestigious brewing competition in the world. Um, there are Trafford Ale, which many you may have had, uh, took the top spot in the English milder bitter category, judged against 63 other beers from around the globe, um, across all the 114 categories so they, you know, do categories, uh, in the competition. Massachusetts breweries only took home three of those, and Arlington Brewing was the only gold. Um, and,\n\n","timeStart":634.555,"timeEnd":802.965,"chunkIndex":9},{"id":"019de78e-f7b6-7c3f-9b81-16f23537ed92","content":"Speaker 7: Uh, the Arlington Brewing team pulled this off without even having a permanent tap room. Yet, uh, that is an Arlington business going toe to toe with the global brewing industry and coming home with the gold. So I'd like to say congratulations to the entire Arlington Brewing Company team, and for anyone who wants to celebrate with them. This, this Saturday. Uh, uh, this Saturday Beer Garden starts at the Jason Russell House, uh, in a couple weeks. Uh, uh, it's back on May 16th. So every Saturday over the summer, uh, for more amazing news. And, uh, for more on this amazing news and for the full lineup of events until they get that top room open, um, check out their, uh, very appropriately named website, drink Arlington beer uh, dot com. And, uh, one final thought, if I may bring it back to what the monitor, uh, the moderator reminded us, uh, on Monday in his opening speech.\n\nSpeaker 7: Um, you know, our committees of old voted to ensure to, uh, Mr. Weatherby at the Black Horse Tavern, which we just found was demolished in 1892. Um, just a 15 minute walk down Mass Ave. And so, with any luck, next year's town meeting can vote to adjourn to the now world recognized Arlington Brewing Company Tap Room on Ryer Street following, I, I think it's a bit of a brisk 15 minute walk over there, , uh, to of our town. So, uh, congratulations to Arlington Brewing. I just wanted to share that, uh, awesome news with everyone. So, uh, and appreciate all the folks, uh, who have been supporting, uh, the brewery over the past few years. So thank you.\n\n","timeStart":804.105,"timeEnd":887.645,"chunkIndex":10},{"id":"019de78e-f7c2-70f1-8457-b873f320f6b6","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. Will will Mr. Kurt Russell be present at the, okay. We have announcement in the, uh,\n\nSpeaker 4: I think I know\n\nSpeaker 2: . Okay. See, see what you can pull together, uh, front row. Yes. And then Mr. Fs get after. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 8: Uh, Kristen Anderson Precinct 11. I've got a Kent Ian in the hall, and I wonder if, uh, she would be allowed in to stand with us.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. Uh, can you just like, uh, explain, just briefly describe us, like, like her, her title, her position.\n\nSpeaker 8: Um, she's a steering committee member of Save the Ill Wife Brook. Uh, and her name is, uh, Ann McDonald, and she lives on Columbus Avenue and Mass Avenue in North Cambridge, across from the Brook. She's an Abutter to the Brook.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So, because it's a non-resident of Arlington, we just, uh, take a voice vote on whether, uh, it's a majority vote, whether to approve a non-resident to, uh, to address the meeting. All those in favor of the speaker, uh, addressing the meeting, say Yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous vote. She may speak. Okay. Welcome.\n\n","timeStart":888.135,"timeEnd":963.065,"chunkIndex":11},{"id":"019de78e-f7cb-721c-802b-79719643a490","content":"Speaker 8: Thank you. Um, so I'm Kristen Anderson, uh, precinct 11, David White, precinct 21. Um, Jean Benson, precinct 10, um, and Ann McDonald of North Cambridge. Um, we are some of the founding members of Save the Wife Brook, and we wanna thank everybody who came out to our DCR Earth Day cleanup on Saturday. Along Alewife Brooke. Among the folks who came out were, um, town manager Feeney behind me, um, and, uh, deputy town manager and finance director Julie Wayman. And we saw, um, Jim and Julie hauling two huge bags of trash out of the park. Thank you. Um, thanks also to select board member Diane Mahan, who sprang into action to help us hand out t-shirts. Two Cambridge City counselors, um, were there. Counselor Patty Nolan helped us to get our DCR waivers signed. And counselor Mark McGovern helped clean up trash state reps. Dave Rogers and Sean Garley joined us and helped pick up some particularly gross trash over by the alewife MBTA parking garage.\n\n","timeStart":963.675,"timeEnd":1032.025,"chunkIndex":12},{"id":"019de78e-f7d8-7e2d-9c88-eba8d61f1531","content":"Speaker 8: 213 people signed up, uh, signed in for the event. The support has been absolutely overwhelming, and only because of support from folks like you are we having a huge impact making improvements to the plans to end sewage pollution, not just at Alewife Brook, but also in the Mystic and Charles Rivers. Tomorrow the MWRA will release a thousand page document, including a $340 million plan for Alewife Brook. We have waited four years for this. It is a large amount of money, but the plan is crappy because raw sewage will continue to be dumped into the Brook and at much greater volumes in larger storms because of climate change. And for only 46 more dollars to households in the MWRA system, annually, MWRA can end sewage pollution in all three rivers, the Alewife, mystic, and Charles. Because M BMW's plan fails to end sewage pollution, we have created a community plan, which does, and you can see maps of both plans in the back of the hall during halftime.\n\nSpeaker 8: Um, and also at the back of the hall, we have a petition, um, calling, or I guess an outside the hall. We are asking you to sign a petition calling for an end to raw CSO sewage pollution. Please sign it tonight. Signing the petition sends an email message to MWRA, Cambridge and Somerville, as well as area legislators. It'll also get you on our mailing list. This is how we will let you know when action is needed. This is the year that we need your help more than ever. So please sign that petition. Thank you very much.\n\n","timeStart":1032.525,"timeEnd":1137.525,"chunkIndex":13},{"id":"019de78e-f7e6-7e6f-9a65-7dfc9225313f","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. Oh, can we, uh, Mr. Foskett? Yeah. And I believe we have a slide that he, uh, shared. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Fst. You have the floor.\n\nSpeaker 10: Thank. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Charles Foskett, uh, precinct eight, I'm sorry, precinct 10 got changed. I, I was used to saying Precinct eight for about 30 years, um, precinct 10. So I'm here, uh, representing the Arlington Rotary Club, uh, to remind everyone that very soon we will be displaying our flags for Heroes Display up at Park Circle, where every, uh, resident has the opportunity to honor their personal heroes, whether that's, um, military veteran or, uh, first responders, family members, parents, teachers, uh, any community leaders, people that are heroes to you. And, uh, the process is, we, we donate a flag or dedicate a flag and pay $40 per flag. It's tax deductible. And by the way, if the $40 tax deductible is not a tax deduction is not impressive enough, we urge you to buy more flags. . Um, the, uh, the, the, the funds are used to support scholarships.\n\n","timeStart":1138.455,"timeEnd":1224.745,"chunkIndex":14},{"id":"019de78e-f7f3-7bed-a72d-b23b9031429f","content":"Speaker 10: Uh, each year we do, we give three scholarships of $2,000 each one to an Arlington High School, uh, graduate, one to a Arlington Catholic High School graduate, and one to a Minuteman graduate. This year, we're dedicating the flags for heroes, uh, display to, uh, two women who were, um, trailblazers, leaders in public service in Arlington that passed away, uh, within the last 12 months, uh, Anne Mahan Powers and Kathleen Kylie Diaz, um, Anne Powers began her, uh, public, public service. Well, she worked for the town from, uh, beginning in 1952, but she was the first elected, or first woman elected as a, a town officer, as a sec, as a clerk. In 1959, she served in that position for nine years. She stepped back to raise a family, and then she came back, uh, was a member of the Board of Selectmen for a while, and then was elected again as town clerk.\n\n","timeStart":1225.485,"timeEnd":1287.605,"chunkIndex":15},{"id":"019de78e-f800-79b2-9dad-3c2af32405c7","content":"Speaker 10: So, she was a, a, a fantastic trailblazer, a great leader. And personally, I remember her here at town meeting, uh, for, for many years. Kathleen Es, uh, another, uh, great leader. She was on the school committee for 13 years. She was on the board of Selectmen for, or what's now the select board, what was then the Board of Selectmen, um, for 15 years. And she was also a professional, uh, healthcare, uh, provider, uh, very active in St. Agnes Parish. And overall, a, a leader in, in many, uh, campaigns and many issues in the town. So Rotary is honoring those two, um, uh, great leaders who passed away within the last 12 months, uh, at, at this, uh, plague for Heroes, uh, display. So there's a, there's a, uh, if you can go to the next slide, please. There's a little flyer in the back you can pick up, tells you about it on the back.\n\n","timeStart":1288.185,"timeEnd":1346.325,"chunkIndex":16},{"id":"019de78e-f818-7fad-97b1-1ea7b2326a94","content":"Speaker 12: Al Toti Precinct 17? This seems to be the night. Uh, I'm looking for volunteers and as opposed to one, uh, the volunteers, a couple of, uh, speakers ago. You don't have to pull really yucky stuff out of Oury Brook. In this effort, we have a program that we're putting together to help high school juniors learn about finance, how to balance a checkbook, how to buy property. What,\n\nSpeaker 2: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry to interrupt. Can you step a few inches away from the mic? 'cause it's kind of popping. Okay. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 12: Uh, what it is to make a budget, and this is, uh, it's, it's happened in many other high schools across the, uh, state. Um, it is on June 11th. I think that's a Thursday in the morning. It's the entire junior class. We're setting up booths, some real estate, some booths on budgeting, banking, all kinds like 10 or 15 different booths. Each junior will get a occupation and a salary, and they need to balance the budget and then come back and see if they did it. So, uh, we really need volunteers. We're hoping for people to keep this going year by year. You don't have to be an expert in any one particular areas for high school juniors. Just being an adult is an expert. Um, so if you have any questions, please come and see me. If you want to get more information, give me your name and your email on a piece of paper. Thank you very much.\n\n","timeStart":1505.475,"timeEnd":1591.315,"chunkIndex":19},{"id":"019de78e-f821-78e2-9066-a9cffcad8c5e","content":"Speaker 2: Great, thank you. Any other announcements or resolutions? Seeing none, uh, a now call for reports of committees. Uh, any reports of committees? Uh, Ms. Desler, uh, we have to do our, uh, procedural gym gymnastics to deal with Article three.\n\nSpeaker 13: Christine Desler, chair of the finance committee. I move that Article three be taken from the table.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes,\n\nSpeaker 2: Sir. Okay. We have motion to take Article three from the table and a second. All those in favor say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is at two thirds vote. So Article three is now before us, and, uh, we had a handover here for a report of the committee. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 14: Sue TRO precinct 21 co-chair of the Community Preservation Act Committee. I move that the committee's report be received.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, all those in favor of receiving the, uh, report. Say Yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous and received. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 14: Thank you. So we do have a correction in the report, and I, I won't read it to you because, um, Madam Clerk has a memo on typos and ours is listed. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Any other reports of committees? Yes. Ms. Gruber? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 8: Rebecca Gruber Town meeting member Precinct 10, and member of the library board of trustees On behalf of the Library Board of Trustees and the director of libraries, Anna Litten, I move that the Library Impact report be received as published on the town's website.\n\n","timeStart":1592.205,"timeEnd":1703.405,"chunkIndex":20},{"id":"019de78e-f82a-7748-89bf-c24dfc3a3c59","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. Um, all those in favor? We have a motion and a second to receive, uh, this report. All those in favor say Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous. And receive. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 8: Um, let me just add this first ever library impact report includes stories of the power of our libraries, has shared by both residents and staff. It also includes key library performance indicators. Copies of the report are available on the back table to appropriately borrow and return, or you can keep them. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, any other reports of committees? Seeing none, Ms. Desler,\n\nSpeaker 13: I move that Article three B laid upon the table.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Motion delay Article theory upon the table. We have a second. All those in favor of laying article theory on the table, say, yay, nay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous. Um, that takes us back to the resumption of Article 19. And then following Article 19, uh, we'll take up Article 10, which was postponed, uh, until after this first, uh, partial article. Uh, okay. So Article 19. And do we have the speaker queue up from, from article 19? Is this, I think at least the first speaker seems accurate, right? Good. Oh. Um, seem to have some video connection we're working on. So I can see the speaker queue here. So why don't we, while they're working that out, um, uh, Mr. Wagner is next in the speaker queue. Followed by Mr. Schleman, and hopefully you'll be able to see that speaker. Thank you. Mr. Moderator,\n\nSpeaker 15: Is this a working microphone?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes, I can hear you. Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":1705.075,"timeEnd":1810.795,"chunkIndex":21},{"id":"019de78e-f833-7d44-baf9-7f492b9bdcb4","content":"Speaker 15: Um, Carl Wagner precinct 15. Um, at the time, we didn't close this out at the last session, I thought, uh, you know, it's always good to close the item out, but having thought about this a little more, I urge you to not say yes to this, because it's missing two important things. It's missing some sort of threshold of how much money a person has to owe or a property has to owe, and there's an economic cost to the town filing all these things. And I think that, um, there is a, a question of what do we do to people who live in our town? Do we take punitive measures so easily without some better quantification of how much they have to owe and what damage is done to them? People have said that adding a lien could be almost seen, for example, for immigrants as a crime. And we know what our government in Washington does to people who are immigrants and have committed crimes. So I urge you to send this back to have better, better numbers in it, better ideas about what exactly would be done and when, and how much it would cost. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Um, so the speaker queue I'm seeing now is different from what I was seeing a minute ago. Um, can we restore that list that we had?\n\nSpeaker 16: Wasn't, that was all a bunch of garbage that was left over. You wanted from previous night.\n\n","timeStart":1810.855,"timeEnd":1903.635,"chunkIndex":22},{"id":"019de78e-f83c-7815-a11b-d56929121d18","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, what, whatever we had at the end of Monday night, do we have that? I see like three new requests in from 8 31 and 8 32. So that was, that was just now, um, anyway, if we have to, we'll just have to clear it. Uh, is that what we, we have to do? Okay. Apologies for that. Um, uh, we still have more work to do on saving and restoring cues. Um, so let's clear the queue and are we able to show it yet?\n\nSpeaker 16: ?\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. That's the queue. And it's clear. So you can now, uh, press one to request to speak. Uh, Mr. Jameson, you have the floor followed by Ms. Dre. Again, apologies for the hiccup with the speaker queue.\n\nSpeaker 15: Thank you, Mr. Moderator, Gordon\n\nSpeaker 17: Jamison, precinct 12. Just two quick comments. Um, I think we should pass this. Um, and in fact, um, passing Article 17 the other night makes essentially this a moot point because once we adjourn and it clears the Ag office, um, we have charged our, um, different heads of these different, uh, offices in the town with, uh, setting up these rates. Which brings me to my second point. If you wish to, um, amend the rates in any way, your, your method for that is appear getting on the agenda for these different organiza the different leadership\n\nSpeaker 2: Calls. I'm sorry, Mr. Jameson. Sorry, sorry to interrupt. Uh, are you speaking to article 16?\n\nSpeaker 17: This is the, is this the, this is the, um, the rates, right? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm confused.\n\nSpeaker 2: I think your remarks are in reference to 16.\n\n","timeStart":1904.855,"timeEnd":2010.475,"chunkIndex":23},{"id":"019de78e-f845-7e81-82ee-6b54cd668689","content":"Speaker 17: What are we doing now?\n\nSpeaker 2: 19,\n\nSpeaker 17: Which is,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, bylaw amendment, addition of certain delinquent municipal fees and fines. Okay,\n\nSpeaker 17: Nevermind. I'll, sorry, why don't I just finish that. I won't have to get up here again. Basically,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, no, no, you can re you can resume where you were. You can re uh, okay. Uh, Ms. Dre?\n\nSpeaker 18: Yeah, good evening. Elizabeth DRA, precinct 10 To just, uh, clarify. Currently the only way to, um, follow through on delinquent taxes is a criminal path. Is that true? And does this allow a non-criminal path?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Cunningham, are you able to answer that question?\n\nSpeaker 19: Thank you, Mr. Moderator? Michael Cunningham. Town Council. Um, I don't think many of these are non-criminal proceed taxes and liens that would be applicable. Uh, there are provisions already in the bylaw that allow for the town to set it, you know, establish a tax lien on certain overdue charges and fees. Um, this would just expand upon it.\n\nSpeaker 18: Okay. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And next we have, uh, Mr. Moore. Christopher Moore. Pass. Okay. We have reached the end of the speaker queue, and so, uh, we will now, let's see. And we have no amendments on this. All right. So, and apologies for the jumping around. Uh, I mean, you all did that, you approved these motions, but, um, uh,\n\n","timeStart":2010.985,"timeEnd":2104.075,"chunkIndex":24},{"id":"019de78e-f84e-706b-be6e-175081e95141","content":"Speaker 2: It does make things a little confusing about keeping context. Um, okay. So we're gonna take a vote now on the main motion of Article 19. And while we're bringing that up, I'll just summarize, uh, again, make sure you're looking at Article 19. Uh, this would amend ti uh, title one, article 21 of the town bylaws to expand the types of delinquent municipal fees and fines that could be placed as liens on real estate tax accounts. Okay. Voting is now open. If you're in favor of that change to the town bylaws, press one for Yes. If you're opposed to that change, press two for no, or three to abstain. And this is a majority vote on the main motion. Okay. Voting is now closed and it passes 155 in the affirmative 49 in the negative nine Abstentions. It is an affirmative vote, uh, that now takes us to, uh, article 10. And, let's\n\nSpeaker 4: See.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay, so this article was postponed, uh, until tonight. And this is the first opportunity at which we can take it up without interrupting, uh, another pending article that's underway. And so, let's see. I wanna invite up, uh, there were some back and forth on this, uh, about scope issues. So I wanna invite up, uh, uh, Mr. Carmen, who I believe had a motion to offer, which will make more sense when you hear his motion. Yeah, yeah. You can explain or I can explain.\n\nSpeaker 4: Alright. Quickly. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 20: Am I in the middle? Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Dean Carmen Precinct 20. Um, I move that we, what's majority postponed,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, postpone is majority table is two thirds.\n\n","timeStart":2105.815,"timeEnd":2239.775,"chunkIndex":25},{"id":"019de78e-f856-7dcf-89f9-eb95d226837d","content":"Speaker 20: I move that we postpone the article. So let me, let me explain. So\n\nSpeaker 2: Reading, you have to give it a, a date, a time, or after an article that's certain, as opposed to it's not postponed indefinitely. I'll,\n\nSpeaker 20: We'll just postpone to Monday, right?\n\nSpeaker 2: That's enough time. Yes, that's fine.\n\nSpeaker 20: I moved to postpone until Monday.\n\nSpeaker 2: All right. And do we have a second on that?\n\nSpeaker 20: Yeah. Alright, let me explain. I'm gonna explain what's going\n\nSpeaker 2: On. Wait, we have a point of order. Oh, can we display something that says, oh, um, I think it's Article eight of the bylaws. Is that correct?\n\nSpeaker 4: That's correct.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. It's not, it's not Article eight in the warrant. It's Article eight of whatever title of the bar bylaws, right? Yeah. So I believe that's correct. Uh, yeah. Uh, Mr. Carmen, go ahead.\n\n","timeStart":2239.935,"timeEnd":2281.975,"chunkIndex":26},{"id":"019de78e-f85e-7854-a596-0de003dcbda8","content":"Speaker 20: So, like a lot of you, you, we sort of get to town meeting and we start reading the articles and, you know, under our Rules of town meeting the article that what shows up in the warrant and what shows up in the vote have to resemble each other. You know, you can't have a vote. That's in addition to the scope of the warrant, right? So if you look at the warrant, it addresses three points, fees, fines, and clerical changes. If you look at the vote, I look at, it doesn't matter my opinion, I see the changes as far more substantial than clerical. It adds new rules and responsibilities and powers and processes to the Conservation Commission. I don't see that as clerical. So I wrote a letter to the, um, the person whose opinion does matter. Um, Mr. Christiana. And I said, Hey, I think this is beyond the scope of the article.\n\n","timeStart":2283.275,"timeEnd":2333.205,"chunkIndex":27},{"id":"019de78e-f867-7cf0-89b3-e6c3be2db857","content":"Speaker 20: This, these clerical changes. It's not clerical, it's substantive. And he went back and forth, and I'm not trying to put words in his mouth, but I think he reached the point of saying like, yeah, I think you've probably got something here. There's a lot to it. We've gotta kind of break it down. Of course, I did it last night, which probably wasn't the best time to do it. And so we're at a point now where the article as it stands is probably not, I, I think would be ruled outside the scope. I mean, that's the email exchange back and forth, right? Um, I also talked to Mr. Morgan, the environmental planner. I think his title is very nice guy. I've, I've bumped into him before. And essentially what we talked about over email is he said, look, we, we put the article in. We kept working on it. It is probably true that there are some things outside the article, right? So, okay. But in my opinion, this is why I think you should all vote too. Postpone.\n\n","timeStart":2333.475,"timeEnd":2385.145,"chunkIndex":28},{"id":"019de78e-f86f-7bfe-a507-a36817ce74ac","content":"Speaker 2: I, I, I can, I can summarize that. Um, there are, uh, I've made the decision that there, there are scope issues with this. There wasn't time to kind of announce this. 'cause this was kind of a late breaking, uh, development. Um, and that, that Mr. Carmen brought to light. And, uh, so my decision that there are elements of the recommended vote that are out of, that are, that are out of scope, that they do go beyond, uh, clerical changes. Um, they probably don't materially change things in practice, but they're not clerical either. And so, uh, as a result of that, uh, there, uh, the, the main motion is out of scope. Uh, I'm not gonna do like a kind of a line item, you know, check on scope other than to say that there are elements of it that are outta scope that puts the, that puts the main motion out of scope.\n\n","timeStart":2386.305,"timeEnd":2434.705,"chunkIndex":29},{"id":"019de78e-f876-7d55-b72c-be15a1586116","content":"Speaker 2: And, uh, so the options for the meeting are go ahead and vote for essentially no action. Um, 'cause again, I, I, I can't just edit on the floor here tonight, what portions specifically are out of scope. We need more time to figure that out. And so what Mr. Carmen, I believe is offering is a motion to postpone until Monday, I believe he said. Uh, so that there's time for, for me to further assess scope and for folks to come back potentially on Monday with, uh, you could have more time if you want. 'cause we'll be going beyond Monday, I'm sure, uh, to offer a substitute motion that would replace what is effectively a no action main motion. Uh, because, uh, I can't allow the meeting to vote on a motion that's out of scope. So it's, for all intents and purposes, the main motion right now is effectively no action. And so with a postponement, it would offer time for folks anytime meeting members, really to offer a substitute motion that could try to recover some elements of the recommended vote, but try to keep it within scope. So, uh, Mr. Toss, do you have a point of order? So\n\nSpeaker 20: Can I finish\n\nSpeaker 2: Quickly? Do you have a point of order? Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 12: If, if we're trying to give people a chance to redraft this, I think we need to postpone it beyond Monday because to have 48 hours to look at it. And my guess is this stuff isn't gonna get done until Monday. We should postpone it to at least Wednesday would be, uh, my recommendation. Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":2435.245,"timeEnd":2521.045,"chunkIndex":30},{"id":"019de78e-f880-7fdd-a9d5-809c556e62e6","content":"Speaker 2: I, uh, Wednesday I believe is, is budget night? Is that right? Yeah. Wednesday's budget, night following, and I, I believe the following Monday, let's see, is uh, minute man on the 11th, is that a Monday? Um, so it would be the Wednesday at the 13th, I think. Um,\n\nSpeaker 20: Can I change it? The motion?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 20: I move that we postpone till Wednesday the 13th. So let me give the true reason now that we've got the clarity. And I can speak without feeling I'm stepping in the mud. It just, look, there's two reasons I think you should vote to postpone one, right? It's the second night of town meeting. I mean, if this was like the eighth night and we were up here talking about this, you should be like, no, I want to go home. I'm done. Move on. It's the second night. We've got a ton of work still to do. It's not impacting anything except like the five minutes that I'm, I've been up here, okay? And number two, when I was talking to Mr. Morgan,\n\nSpeaker 12: It's a good\n\n","timeStart":2521.085,"timeEnd":2573.245,"chunkIndex":31},{"id":"019de78e-f888-75f9-895e-b3978003a919","content":"Speaker 20: Faith. It was a, it was a, it wasn't a malicious issue, right? I mean, look, I have been in town meeting, I can't believe I'm gonna say this. This is my 20th year in town meeting. So I think I've kind of figured out the rules. 'cause when you hit 20 years, you're not in newbie anymore, but you're not like a grizzled veteran, right? So I think I get the rules, but I think it's an unfair standard to tell a public servant who doesn't deal with all the town meeting stuff that we deal with. Oh, sorry, you didn't paint inside the lines correctly. So now we're gonna take the entire mo the entire article that you and the conservation Commission worked on, and we're gonna tank it, right? And, and personally, I think there are elements of fines and fees that have to go into play. I mean, we can,\n\nSpeaker 2: Well, so the scope right now for your comments, that's it. Yeah, that's, or just like whether or not we should postpone. Yeah,\n\nSpeaker 20: But that's, so that's why I think we should postpone, I think. I don't think it's a big deal. And I think we should, you know, let the Conservation Commission get together and get it right. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. Okay. So we have a motion before us with a second to, uh, postpone article. Um, we're on 10, right? Yes. Article 10, uh, until, let's see, Wednesday. Do I have the date right? Wednesday the 13th? Lemme just double check that. Yes. All those in favor of that postponement of Article 10. Say Yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous. It is postponed until, uh, Wednesday, May 13th.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Postpone to\n\n","timeStart":2573.245,"timeEnd":2665.475,"chunkIndex":32},{"id":"019de78e-f890-7359-95ae-2420151645c8","content":"Speaker 2: 13th. Okay. Now that takes us to, um, and Mr. Benson, you had a, an amendment which has not been offered yet, but we can figure that out after we have a substitute. 'cause it, it'll probably need to be a substitute motion on an amendment to a substitute motion. But we could figure that off offline, uh, in case you'll see that in, in the tracker or the annotated warrant, that there's an amendment on Article 10 that's gonna need, need to be figured out, uh, all over again. Okay. So with 10 postponed that now, uh, we now have, that takes us to Article 21, but we also have Article 16 on the table. And so Ms. Desler, I, I would entertain a motion to remove 16 from the table so we can get back to some semblance of sequential order.\n\nSpeaker 4: .\n\nSpeaker 13: Christine Desler, chair of the finance committee. I move that, uh, article 16 be be removed from the table.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We have a second to remove article 16 from the table. Uh, all those in favor say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is unanimous voted. Article 16 is now before us. Um, let's see.\n\n","timeStart":2668.035,"timeEnd":2738.805,"chunkIndex":33},{"id":"019de78e-f897-769e-8d31-01addf415a8e","content":"Speaker 2: And Article 16 is the one I mentioned in my opening remarks about the, there, there was a, a version inconsistency. Um, and we've discovered that the discrepancy was just in like line, like, and basically like item numberings n Now, uh, I'm told by, uh, Ms. Brazil has been updated now in the annotated warrant. So it now matches the select board report, uh, as it should. Um, and so we had a, uh, article 16 was cut short on Monday night with a, um, uh, from a point of order, essentially that, uh, that laid it on the table. And, uh, there was a motion to terminate debate that was interrupted by that point of order. And so I decided that the fair thing to do is, I don't think we have the speaker queue. Do we have the speaker queue from 16? We do have the speaker queue from 16. Great. Um, so the speaker who, what's that? And there is an amendment. So, um, okay, so\n\n","timeStart":2740.825,"timeEnd":2811.965,"chunkIndex":34},{"id":"019de78e-f89f-7057-b24d-d12fa3805081","content":"Speaker 2: Yeah, this is tricky. So we have a new amendment that came in, but also the speaker who offered the motion to terminate debate that got interrupted by the point of order. So what I'm gonna do is, um, I'm going to take the, the practice that we have in the, in the town meeting guidelines is that when we have motions published in advance, we'll take those first, even when we've kind of interrupted an article and resume it on a different night. And so we'll take the, uh, presentation of the Fisher Amendment first, and then I will take the speaker who offered, uh, Mr. Greenspan, who offered the motion to terminate debate to give him a redo since I basically nullified his speaking time to give him that speaking time back so he can use that to make a motion or to just, uh, recover his speaking time. I think that's the fair thing to do in this case. Uh, this is a very weird corner case, by the way. So, uh, Mr. Fisher, do you wanna come up and introduce your amendment? Uh,\n\nSpeaker 21: Um, I'm, I'm sorry for the confusion.\n\nSpeaker 2: I think we have this Mr. Fisher. Oh, Ezra, yeah. Yep.\n\nSpeaker 4: Fisher.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. Ezra Fisher. So, Fisher\n\n","timeStart":2815.425,"timeEnd":2883.725,"chunkIndex":35},{"id":"019de78e-f8a7-79ec-8069-8300d4358285","content":"Speaker 22: Fisher, uh, Ezra Fisher Precinct four. I move to amend, um, the main motion by replacing marriage in three of the applicable town clerk fees with marriage or domestic partnership. Um, I asked a question about this, um, on Monday, and it does work legally. Now there's reference in the domestic partnership by law that says, Hey, all the fees for domestic partnership are the same as marriage. But I think having it in the main fees helps everyone not feel like they're, you know, in a second class relationship status, um, even when they're paying fees. Thanks.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And we'll now take, uh, Mr. Greenspan to recover his speaking time. Do you have a point of order? Yep. Point of order.\n\nSpeaker 23: Nancy Bloom, precinct 18, I don't know if this is a point of order, but the time that the parks are open disagree in the fee information. And in the article one says 5:00 AM to 9:00 PM one, the other says one is a memo, and that was at 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM\n\nSpeaker 2: These are two different points in the bylaws.\n\nSpeaker 23: That one is a memo to Mr. Feeney from the head of Parks and Rec from the, from yesterday, I think, and the others in the, is in the article. I don't know if\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, that, that would be a, a, a, a question to raise, like during debate, but not really a point of order. 'cause it's not really procedural.\n\nSpeaker 23: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Sorry. Yep. That Okay. Uh, Mr. Greenspon pass pass. Uh, and next in the speaker queue, uh, I, I think I'm looking at the speaker queue from Article 16 Monday night. Uh, Mr. Jameson, I\n\n","timeStart":2883.725,"timeEnd":2984.215,"chunkIndex":36},{"id":"019de78e-f8b0-730d-b33c-8f1cf9e92897","content":"Speaker 4: Can lower that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Oh, yeah. Can we, can we show that on here? Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 4: You want lower the speaker from the other\n\nSpeaker 2: Night? Oh, is is that the one that I'm looking at here, or, uh,\n\nSpeaker 4: Don't think\n\nSpeaker 2: So. Oh, yeah, if you can load that, that'd be great. Um, so Mr. Greenspan passed Mr. Selectman\n\nSpeaker 24: Point of order. Are we debating amendments to a bylaw which will become null and void on the day it arrives at the ags office because 17 will be approved?\n\nSpeaker 2: Um, yes and no. Um, Mr. Cunningham can clarify if we need further clarification, but the, uh, article 17 still has to pass muster with the Massachusetts Attorney General's office. So there's a non-zero, maybe small, but non-zero probability that they rejected on some technical grounds, you know, and so, um, and so there's no guarantee that the fee changes, uh, from Article 16 would be nullified. It may be likely, but it's, you know, yeah. Is, is that fair, Mr. Cunningham? Okay.\n\nSpeaker 16: Law.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. I mean, I, I, I, yeah. Um, yeah. Um, okay. And so we're now looking at the speaker queue from Article 16 from Monday night. Correct. Okay. Uh, Mr. Wagner, you're up again\n\nSpeaker 16: Passed.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, Mr. Schleman,\n\nSpeaker 16: Uh, motion terminate.\n\n","timeStart":2984.215,"timeEnd":3091.325,"chunkIndex":37},{"id":"019de78e-f8bf-7366-8a10-c9ca5749fed4","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, so, okay, so I'll, I'll, I'll save Mr. Schleman the, uh, getting back to the podium again. Uh, um, we have motion to terminate debate on all matters under Article 16. Do we have a second? Second. Second. Okay. All those in favor of terminating debate under Article 16, say, yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. Nay. It is a two thirds vote. So, we'll first take up a, uh, vote on the Fisher Amendment, the Ezra Fisher Amendment, and this would add the language, uh, or domestic partnership after, uh, death, uh, birth, death, or marriage, um, to, to specify domestic partnership explicitly. So let's bring up a vote on the Fisher Amendment. If you're, if you're, uh, if you wish to make that change to the main motion, um, you wish to amend the, let's say the main motion vote won for Yes. Uh, if you don't wanna make that change, uh, to include domestic or domestic partnership, press two for no, or three to abstain. This is a motion to amend the main motion, and this is a majority vote. And the motion passes 191 in the affirmative, uh, 11 negative one abstention. That takes us now to vote on the main motion as amended. Uh, so let's now bring up, uh, open voting for the main motion as amended under Article 16, which, uh, is a motion to amend Title V, article eight of the town bylaws to update wetlands JU protection jurisdiction, uh, exemptions permit processes, hearings. Am I in the wrong one?\n\n","timeStart":3092.255,"timeEnd":3202.915,"chunkIndex":38},{"id":"019de78e-f8c8-7d58-b949-03e188f11448","content":"Speaker 2: Oh, I'm, I'm looking at the wrong one. Sorry about that. 16, 16, 16, this would, okay, let's leave voting open just a second longer. Um, uh, this would amend Title IX Article three of the Town bylaws. Does that sound right? To update existing fee amounts and establish new fees and charges across multiple town departments, if you're in favor of that cha, and also includes the change to include or domestic partnerships. Uh, if you're in favor of making this change to the town bylaws, press one for yes. Uh, two for no, uh, to leave the bylaws, uh, unchanged or three to abstain. Okay. Let's get our votes in.\n\nSpeaker 4: Let's,\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. That's close voting. And the main motion as amended passes 190 in the affirmative 17 and negative. And four abstentions. Uh, okay. So that now takes us, uh, let's see, basically back in order, uh, with Article 21. Uh, so this is, so Mr. Hurd, do you wanna introduce this?\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you, Ms. Moderator. John Hurd, chair of the Select Board. Article 21 was a assistant article by Mr. Hamlin. It came before the board relative to home equity theft. The board voted five zero in favor of new action, no action. As is our understanding that home equity theft in these situations is already illegal.\n\n","timeStart":3205.185,"timeEnd":3302.275,"chunkIndex":39},{"id":"019de78e-f8d1-7ed1-ab0f-ef1756c2917b","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. And so this was, I kept this off of the consent agenda, despite it being a no action recommended vote, uh, because I reached out to all the petitioners of Citizens petitions, uh, and asked if they intended to offer substitute motions. Mr. Hamlin did. He, he did intend to offer a substitute motion. Uh, Mr. Hamlin, do you wanna speak to this and, uh, about whether you have a substitute motion or what the situation is, please?\n\nSpeaker 26: Guillermo Hamlin Precinct 14, the intent was to submit a substitute motion. However, after discussing it with the moderator and after a consideration from town council, the substitute motion that I was gonna present, um, was deemed outta scope due to the nature of it being a bylaw amendment. And the substitute motion was fully within a home rule petition, which is categorically different. So as a result, I am proceeding to ask, uh, if you may grant me the, um, the bandwidth and the privilege to make a motion to postpone, to go back, refine it, punch it up to then properly present to you what my substitute motion would be. Um, I agree with Mr. Herd's, uh, assessment other than the fact that what I was hoping to accomplish with my initial bylaw was to create standards that could be done in practice for the town of Arlington. Flexible payments, uh, proactive communication, working with the Council of Aging to make sure that, um, our senior citizens who are house rich cash poor have an opportunity to know what their options are.\n\nSpeaker 2: So, Mr. Hammett, we don't need to get, uh,\n\nSpeaker 26: Yeah, my, my apologies. Yeah,\n\n","timeStart":3304.145,"timeEnd":3402.725,"chunkIndex":40},{"id":"019de78e-f8d9-7d24-a3a9-7c3051e38352","content":"Speaker 2: Because the scope right now is no action. So it's a question of, uh, if you have a motion to Yes.\n\nSpeaker 26: Postpone or, yeah. Yes. I would like to, um, make a motion to postpone. Um, I'll take what was taken earlier to Wednesday, May 13th to make sure that I've the sufficient time to properly review this and to make sure that when this is posted, my fellow town meeting members have sufficient time to read it, comment on it, and to, uh, learn about it. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We have motion to postpone Article 21 until Wednesday, May 21st. Is that right?\n\nSpeaker 26: Uh, I thought it was May.\n\nSpeaker 2: I'm sorry.\n\nSpeaker 26: May 13th. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: May 13th. 13th. Yeah. And we have a second. Uh, all those in favor of postponing Article 21 to Wednesday, May 13th, um, say yay, nay. All those opposed say nay.\n\nSpeaker 4: Nay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, let's put that to a vote. It would take a, and this is a majority vote because it's to a date certain and May 13th will be forever known now as postponement day. Okay. If you're in favor of postponing article of 21 to Wednesday, May 13th vote one, press one for Yes. If you're opposed to postponement, which would leave it as no action tonight, uh, press two for no, uh, or three to abstain. This, this is a vote on postponement of Article 21 to Wednesday, May 13th. And let's see, the, the quantum is majority and the vote passes 140 in the affirmative 61 and negatives and, uh, six extens. So it is postponed until May 13th.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. That takes us to Article 22, Mr. Hurt.\n\n","timeStart":3402.725,"timeEnd":3523.915,"chunkIndex":41},{"id":"019de78e-f8e2-752f-bd4e-bb3d4e8f5e64","content":"Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Moderat. John Hurt chair of the Select Board. Article 22 is bylaw amendment that was submitted by Ms. Crowder and 10 registered voters. This seeks to increase protection for areas under the jurisdiction of the Park Department. The changes include expansion of the defined, protected areas under the bylaw, and an increase in the range of potential fines. The select board voted favorable action by a vote of five to zero.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And this, uh, was a Citizens petition by Ms. Crowder and Ms. Crowder, I believe you have an amendment to offer, is that right? And let's see. Can we show and open the speaker queue while Ms. Crowder speaks?\n\nSpeaker 27: Elaine Crowder Precinct 19? I have a motion to amend the main motion. Um, it is a, uh, adding a section 12 severability clause. Should I read it?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, well, we can present it as well. Um,\n\nSpeaker 27: Okay. Um, so the, uh, the reason I'm doing this is a reading of the park section of Massachusetts General Law. Title seven, chapter 45 suggests that fines for the destruction of property in parks may be capped or preempted in the statute. Um, not completely certain about this, but in the interest of being, um, cautious, I wanted to, uh, add this severability clause that seeks to ensure that other amended language in this, in my amendment, uh, for the bylaw in section two, remains in force should the ags office rule that changes to the fine section in section 11, um, are preempted. And, uh, again, should I read, oh, you have it, you\n\nSpeaker 2: Have it on, on the screen also. And you have a presentation, right? Pardon? You have a presentation as well?\n\n","timeStart":3529.325,"timeEnd":3649.115,"chunkIndex":42},{"id":"019de78e-f8eb-738f-b3d0-ee9f3b196c95","content":"Speaker 27: No, this, this is it. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, so we have a second on Ms. Crowder's amendment. So that is now before us as well. We have the main motion and the amendment to the amend motion. Thank you. Okay. We, uh, in the speaker queue, we'll take, um, when we, when we have like fewer than five speakers in the queue, I'll just take them in order so we don't have to mess with the shuffle button. Um, and so, uh, was there anything else Ms. Crowder? I, I do have\n\nSpeaker 27: A presentation for the main, for my main\n\nSpeaker 2: Motion. Oh, uh, for the main motion. Okay. Uh, we can we get, you can give that, uh, oh, you might as well just give it, you have six minutes left. Do you wanna just give that now? Okay.\n\nSpeaker 27: Um,\n\nSpeaker 2: Could we bring up that presentation?\n\n","timeStart":3649.535,"timeEnd":3689.365,"chunkIndex":43},{"id":"019de78e-f8f4-7a50-8dfa-05ef5402f47a","content":"Speaker 27: Hello, Elaine Crowder Precinct 19. Um, I am here to, uh, talk about article 22, which is to update protection of park section article two of our town bylaws. Um, it's, uh, uh, this includes elements, um, that are typical of city parks, uh, areas for active recreation and naturalized open space habitats, all of which deserve protection. It's not meant to punish or present an exhaustive list, but rather to raise awareness of what's to be respected and to prompt second thoughts about destroying something given a more stringent fine. Next slide. Here are some images of damage to our parks. A slide nailed to a tree, dangerous holes, uh, that, uh, the largest of which is five by five by three at Hills Hill. Next, cars have driven on soccer fields, treasure hunters have dug them up. Next, the users and users have built unauthorized and often dangerous structures.\n\n","timeStart":3692.895,"timeEnd":3764.885,"chunkIndex":44},{"id":"019de78e-f8fc-7676-9d3c-e1dcd19f22e2","content":"Speaker 27: This tall jump is in an unsafe location, as seen in the photo to the right next, the current fine for such things as $20. Next, and next. Next, um, looking at the bylaw language, it's a list of prohibited actions and prohibited res and protected resources. I'm concentrating on the ladder for this amendment. Next, it mentions things like walkways, lawns, signs, benches, trees and shrubs, all elements of the typical city park. Next, notably the list does not mention playing field court or playground services. All expensive to maintain, repair and replace. Next, nor does it mention the naturalized woodlands and habitats, making up two entire parks, Turkey Hill and crusher lot, and a large section, large sections of at least five other of our parks. Next, um, these stunning spaces include woodlands and trails, aquatic habitats next and renewing meadows. Next section two changes, uh, include adding language like trail woodlands seen in red habitat, field court and playground services, and in green an exemption for normal wear and tear associated with intended use.\n\n","timeStart":3765.235,"timeEnd":3862.545,"chunkIndex":45},{"id":"019de78e-f906-7453-841f-844053951b82","content":"Speaker 27: Next, I also added a fourth tier fine of up to a hundred dollars. This situated between, um, a fine at $50 and the top tier at 300, that, uh, this a hundred dollars fine is for section two protection of parks. The other fines are for other portions of the bylaw. Next, the public voiced two main concerns. Enforcement and education enforcement, of course, of this amendment is really no different than for the underlying bylaw and really all of our bylaws are sometimes hard to enforce. We don't always know who has done certain things nor how to remediate. Um, but, um, uh, but this highlights next, this highlights, um, uh, education as a significant tool. Any bylaw exists to guide the public, but if people don't know about our park bylaw, it can have little effect public debate at town. Meeting here is a first step in increasing awareness. Park and rec personnel have initiated fantastic user education. That includes having responsible adults guide hills, hill bikers in maintaining the pump track care for the woodland trails will be equally important. Recreation is also offering a responsible fishing class that could reduce wildlife entanglements and deaths around our ponds. So, in conclusion, our green spaces are supported by our tax dollars, and our intended for use by all enforcement becomes a much simpler proposition when positive public engagement is robust. We all have a role to play. We can do this together. Thank you very much.\n\n","timeStart":3862.855,"timeEnd":3987.475,"chunkIndex":46},{"id":"019de78e-f912-760e-94f6-9abdc0ee1cff","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. Uh, we'll take Mr. Rudick, followed by Mr. Greenspan. Hi, Ben Rudick, precinct five. Uh, where's the Elaine that made the, oh, that, that mic is still cutting out, so maybe try another one. This one? This mic? Yep. Okay. Hi, uh, Ben Rudick Precinct five. Uh, first off, I wanna express, um, the support for the idea and the theory behind the, um, proposed, um, warrant article. I think that our parks deserve enormous respect and protection. Um, I would like to, can we bring up the slide with, with the big hole, uh, for the presentation? Um, can we bring up the slides again? One sec. Yeah. Just for the presentation, if you don't mind. Just give us a sec\n\nSpeaker 2: As we're doing that. Um, so I'm an avid mountain biker. Um, I've got three little kids, uh, all three of which have spent dozens and dozens of hours at the Hills Hill Mountain bike Park. Uh, tremendous thank you to all of you that have helped made that happen. And for a town meeting, for voting for the funds to allow that to be built. Um, I would make the argument that one of these three things is not like the other. Uh, there are clear examples of, uh, dangerous structures here of damage to the park, but where did that hole come from? Um, as any of you may know, that have moved dirt of five by five by three hole is a tremendous amount of dirt and very heavy. Um, and what, where that hole is actually located is in between the trails. And what happened was is in my time at Hills Hill, 99% of the maintenance I've seen performed on that pump track has been middle schoolers.\n\n","timeStart":3988.205,"timeEnd":4104.175,"chunkIndex":47},{"id":"019de78e-f924-7c49-87d6-4e36a5e5437a","content":"Speaker 2: And I would say 99% of that maintenance has been phenomenal. I've seen them spend hours and hours and hours raking rocks out of the pump track. I've seen them helping to reshape jumps that were, as the soil settled, um, a bit too sharp and dangerous. Um, I've seen them doing all sorts of things. And if you go there, you'll see that the maintenance that is being done is largely by children. Um, which is, I would say unique in my experience of any park, anywhere, or actually of middle schoolers. Um, I'm not aware of them spending dozens and tons of hours voluntarily maintaining, um, public, uh, resources like these. So in this case, what they did was they needed soil to reshape some of the jumps and constructively repair parts of the pump track. And they did not have the budget to, um, get a dump truck full of soil.\n\n","timeStart":4104.755,"timeEnd":4155.015,"chunkIndex":48},{"id":"019de78e-f92e-754d-8c4b-36f43176c8ce","content":"Speaker 2: So they slowly dug this hole out and used the soil to, um, very proactively is the nice way to put it. Um, make some changes to the pump track. Now, I have them do, seen them do some very dumb things too. I had to stop them from building a jump directly into a tree, um, uh, which I pointed out would probably not be, be good for, for them or any of the other children using it. Um, which is all to say, you know, I don't actually have a really good solution to this because the culture of, um, mountain bike pump tracks, they're dirt surfaces, they're malleable surfaces, and kids like to mess around, to be frank. Um, and they like to build different features. They like to adjust features. That is just part the culture of dirt pump tracks the world over. Um, and it would hurt me to see these kids that in general are being extremely responsible and very helpful to be sort of fined and to oblivion or, or their parents, I guess in this case, um, so that they no longer are engaged in that way.\n\n","timeStart":4155.115,"timeEnd":4214.335,"chunkIndex":49},{"id":"019de78e-f936-7195-9f97-611475465813","content":"Speaker 2: And so I would just say that, that there are things like this hole that look really bad. Obviously a priority bad that require some particular cultural context to fully understand what is happening here. Um, and so I would just say, um, to whoever is enforcing this or making these decisions about what is intended use or what is appropriate to make sure that there is appropriate dialogue with the people that know what, what this means. Would I prefer there not be a whole here? Yes, I would prefer there not be a hole here, but I would hate to see this, um, beautiful impulse to be involved, to take responsibility, uh, to be extinguished. I've seen those kids kick out, other kids that brought electric bikes in that were damaging it. I've seen them kick out other kids that were bullying people or otherwise being disrespectful at the pump track. So, you know, anyway, this requires some context that may not be immediately obvious. Thank you. Uh, next speaker. Mr. Miller. Um, see, do we have a microphone up there or is it come there's a microphone upstairs in the balcony. On the table. On the table. And then after Mr. Miller would take, uh, Ms. Re's.\n\nSpeaker 28: Yes, thank you, Mr.\n\n","timeStart":4214.595,"timeEnd":4300.015,"chunkIndex":50},{"id":"019de78e-f93f-7ba5-a914-298fc8e531d1","content":"Speaker 28: Um, Matt Muer, precinct 11. So, um, where I grew up, if you commit vandalism, you should be responsible for it. And if we're limiting how responsible you are, is that really benefiting the community? I think that it's very important to remember that if you damage something, you will be held accountable. And I don't think it's fair to say, well, it's only a hundred bucks. You know, I think that it should be a consideration of what the damage was. And I think that the parents should be responsible when damage is committed. Just like if a child or, um, someone who's not 18 commits a crime against another person, they will be held accountable. And so I think it's important to remember that if we just let people off and say, well, it's not really that bad, then you know, who's paying for it? We are. I think we need to remember that. And, um, I have a question for the first speaker. How many people have actually been charged more than a hundred dollars? Can I get a a, a response for that?\n\nSpeaker 2: Actually, does, does, does anyone up here know if anyone's been charged more than a hundred dollars in fines?\n\nSpeaker 4: Good\n\nSpeaker 29: Evening, Jim Feeney, town Manager. I'm not aware of anyone being charged more than a hundred dollars.\n\n","timeStart":4301.355,"timeEnd":4391.265,"chunkIndex":51},{"id":"019de78e-f949-7234-92df-9d03f9bf222c","content":"Speaker 28: Well, I don't understand why we're even voting on this. If, if we're not charging people more than a hundred, why are we setting a precedent to say, if somebody burns down a building that's on a park, that's it. You're only charged a hundred dollars and the parents aren't responsible. So I, I urge people to consider that and to remember that we're paying for everything. And if nobody's paying more than a hundred dollars anyways, why are we telling people it's okay? Um, that's all I got. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Keep the chatter down. Okay. Thank you. Um, uh, Ms. Reaches, am I pronouncing that correctly?\n\nSpeaker 4: Close\n\nSpeaker 2: It up. Okay. And then after that, we'll take Ms. Reynolds. I don't think it's on\n\nSpeaker 30: Think four. Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":4393.295,"timeEnd":4455.425,"chunkIndex":52},{"id":"019de78e-f951-766b-9b76-5baad411a963","content":"Speaker 30: And, um, my concern is that this fine will do very little to curb any kind of damage to the parks. And, um, it's a very low fine. And if a lot of this damage is being done by minors, they're, they're not gonna care about it. Uh, the potential downside is that like many types of, um, fines or regulations that are sporadically enforced, it's going to be unequally applied. It's most often, uh, teens, uh, that are not white, that have the police called on them. Um, and my main concern is that this could be applied to homeless individuals who are living in parks or wetlands. Um, they're going to be the easiest people to target with fines, which would, uh, just compound their existing issues. So without like a clear benefit to these fines and a clear, um, yeah, benefit and outcome, I would support, uh, not support it. Um, unless you can guarantee that this is not going to be used against, uh, people who do not have houses who are just trying to survive. That's all. Thank you. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. I'll take, uh, Ms. Reynolds next, followed by Mr. Jameson.\n\nSpeaker 4: Ms. Reynolds.\n\nSpeaker 2: I thought that might be Ms. Reynolds. It's not. Um, okay. We'll take Mr. Jameson next, followed by, uh, Mr. Griffin. Oh, I see. Some of these are not requests to speak, but some other button had been hit, apparently. Mr. Jameson, you have the floor.\n\n","timeStart":4458.075,"timeEnd":4572.985,"chunkIndex":53},{"id":"019de78e-f95a-7e20-8e32-2b7845a850b0","content":"Speaker 17: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Gordon Jameson, precinct 12. Um, I rise in support of this, uh, article. I think it's important that we, uh, amend it as Ms. Crowder and I thank her for her work in this. Um, I abut Robins Farm Park and the, um, I used to be a member of the friends, but I know the friends worked very hard and raised lots of funds to, uh, help, uh, add different amenities to the playground there. Um, we just spent a huge amount of money, millions of dollars on that playground, and I want to make sure that it does not get damaged. There had been a history, the new slide is more imperial to that of the slide being broken by kids, um, busting the slide, which e necessitated the friends to raise tens of thousands of dollars to replace it and have it not available for long periods of time over the years. So over the 20 years of several rebuilds, um, I'd say they're probably 20% of the time the slide has not have been available due to damage. And so I think we need to send a message that's not, that's not acceptable. Thank you very much, Mr. Moderator.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, I'll take, uh, Mr. Moore, Mr. Steven Moore next, followed by Mr. Tosi.\n\n","timeStart":4573.635,"timeEnd":4648.965,"chunkIndex":54},{"id":"019de78e-f962-7d99-8548-8d9ddb146e77","content":"Speaker 31: Thank you, Mr. Montey. Steve Moore, precinct 18. Um, notwithstanding, I, I appreciate the information that Mr. Rudick provided, uh, relative to, uh, the culture and how the partic in particular the Hills Hill area, is utilized. I was pretty closely involved with the, um, debate that occurred around the establishment of Hills Hill as kind of a multi-use park instead of just a woodland that it was prior to the development of the, uh, mountain bike park. A number of points came up during that discussion to do with maintenance, uh, who is gonna enforce changes or not changes, not change is not occurring to the park once it was, uh, constructed, which it is now. And by the way, it is a beautiful park. I was very impressed with the way it turned out. Um, however, the concerns about maintenance, upkeep, enforcement, uh, were never really adequately addressed by, by the, uh, uh, parks and rec commission who was behind, uh, making all this happen.\n\n","timeStart":4659.445,"timeEnd":4729.195,"chunkIndex":55},{"id":"019de78e-f96b-7ead-ac10-48e5a980d15d","content":"Speaker 31: And again, their effort was, was that the outcome was excellent. However, some of the, uh, implementation of what comes after has been less so, as was evidenced in some of the pictures you see here, part of the problem in Hills Hill was that a mountain bike trail had been sort of ad hoc, popped up, and there was a lot of, uh, damage being done to the various woodland. The concentration of the, the park now in a, in a pump track type area, was a way to allow it to be utilized for the, for that purpose mountain bike, as well as the purpose that other people were using it for, walking their dogs, enjoying nature, enjoying the meadow, all the, all the other uses that are done with that land. Um, however, we still are now having this sort of evolving park and also evolving beyond where the pump track is located into the areas that were supposed to be designed for, uh, uh, separate use.\n\nSpeaker 31: So I think this article will go a little bit of a way to trying to limit the what seems to be natural to the mountain bike culture of modification of a track. Because we are used, this is being used by multiple users. This is not just for the mountain bike folks, this is for all the other people who were using it prior to the mountain bike track being constructed. So I think we need to do this to hopefully encourage the ability for multiple use of the park in a fair and ballast way. Thank you, Mr.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Take Mr. Tosi followed by, uh, Ms. Crowder. Did you need to speak again or are you all set?\n\n","timeStart":4729.495,"timeEnd":4832.285,"chunkIndex":56},{"id":"019de78e-f973-71f1-ae83-48884112aa28","content":"Speaker 12: Um, Al Tosi Precinct 17. I move the previous question on all, uh, issues involved in this article.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We have a motion to terminate debate under Article 22, uh, and a second. All those in favor of terminating debate on article 22, say, yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay, nay. The yays have it, it's two thirds vote. Debate is terminated. So let's now bring up a vote on the Crowder amendment. And so this would add a severability clause, uh, so that if, uh, uh, any section provision, paragraph, sentence, or clause, uh, of this bylaw is, uh, invalid. It doesn't invalidate other sections, provisions, paragraphs, and so on. So if you're in favor of adding this severability clause to the main motion, press one for yes. If you're opposed to adding the severability clause, press two for no, or three to abstain. Voting is open. Okay. Let's close voting. And the amendment passes 168 in the affirmative 33 in the negative 11 abstentions. Let's take a vote now to on the main motion as amended to include the severability clause. Okay. Voting is now open. If you're in favor of the main motion as amended, press one for Yes. If you're opposed to amending the bylaws, press two for no. And this would amend Title four article one of the bylaws to expand protections for parks areas and, uh, park areas and clarify violation fines.\n\n","timeStart":4832.665,"timeEnd":4953.235,"chunkIndex":57},{"id":"019de78e-f97d-7a6b-aae5-bf0cc455baed","content":"Speaker 2: This is the main motion as amended. Okay. Voting is closed and the motion passes 177 in the affirmative 33 and negative and four abstentions. Uh, it is a majority vote that takes us now to Article 23. Um, actually let's, uh, we're, we're coming up on nine 30, so let's, uh, take it 10 minute recess. Unfortunately, we don't have, uh, a, uh, any snacks tonight in the side here. Um, so, um, sorry about that. Uh, but 10 minutes we will come back. Okay. We're back. And we're taking up Article 23. All right, everyone, let's settle down. Everyone get to your seats, please. Uh, Mr. Herd, do you wanna introduce Article 23? ? Okay, let's quiet down everyone. We need to end our conversations now, please.\n\nSpeaker 4: Thank\n\nSpeaker 6: You, Mr. Moderator. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. Let's go.\n\n","timeStart":4955.825,"timeEnd":5024.985,"chunkIndex":58},{"id":"019de78e-f985-7355-b7ff-cf581e00a3a8","content":"Speaker 6: John Herd chair of the select Board. Article 23 was bylaw amendment. It was a citizen article submitted by Ms. Ro and Ms. Bergman and 10 registered voters. It seeks to amend the tree preservation bylaw to include trees of 10 DBH and higher in the entire property, and not just in the setback area. The select board heard this article and applauded the intent of the article to preserve trees, and which is in line with our Arlington's goal to, to continue to preserve our tree canopy. We thought it was worth further discussion, but not ripe to be passed at this current town meeting as it involves a pretty significant change to the current tree protection bylaw. And we wanted to have input from the tree committee town departments, the tree warden, and have a further discussion to make sure that the changes that are being proposed made sense in, in connection with the tree protection bylaw. So the, the select board voted no action by a vote of five to zero on this one.\n\n","timeStart":5025.815,"timeEnd":5106.705,"chunkIndex":59},{"id":"019de78e-f98e-7f27-a563-4b6ffe17b287","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. And, uh, we did not get a substitute motion approved, uh, in advance, like a, a business day in advance. But, uh, Madam Clerk did we receive 300 printed copies by 7:30 PM Okay. And so there should have been copies that were printed by the proponents, uh, in the back. If you haven't gotten one, uh, well try not to make a lot of noise when you grab one. And, uh, we did post it in the annotated warrant, but it was not announced to the TMM email list because, uh, it came in, uh, uh, it was approved, uh, uh, past the deadline of yesterday. Um, so we do have a mo So right now the main motion is no action, but we do have, uh, the petitioners who are also town meeting members who want to present a substitute motion. Do you wanna come up now to offer that? And we have it in, it's linked from the annotated warrant. So do we have it, can we bring that up as well on display, Ms. Bergman and, uh, ms. Yes, correct.\n\nSpeaker 32: Can I make a point of order?\n\nSpeaker 4: No, don't, no, we won't be able to talk.\n\nSpeaker 32: Go back. Okay. And, sorry, um, point of order, which is, I did get, um, a notification from the town this afternoon that it was on the warrant. Just a notice.\n\nSpeaker 2: I'm sorry, what, what, what is the point order\n\nSpeaker 32: I did get, I thought I did get a notice from the town that it was on the warrant this afternoon.\n\n","timeStart":5107.155,"timeEnd":5189.845,"chunkIndex":60},{"id":"019de78e-f999-73d7-8970-02f9d05dbdd3","content":"Speaker 2: Oh, did it go out this afternoon? Okay. We, we, we get that out on a best effort basis. We, we don't guarantee that we get it out. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 32: Okay. Good evening. Robin Bergman Precinct 12. Thank you for this opportunity to present substitute motion for Article 23. This substitute motion has been endorsed. I have slides. I don't think they're up. Oh,\n\nSpeaker 2: Do could bring the slides up.\n\nSpeaker 32: The substitute motion has been endorsed by mothers out front save Arlington Wildlife and the Trees as a public goods statewide network. Thank you. Slide two. Arlington's Tree bylaw has attained significant results since it was past 10 years ago. But despite these protections, we have still been losing many trees even in the last five years. The threat of a severely warming climate with more severe storms has gotten more dire. And our understanding of what benefits trees provide for climate resilience has increased significantly in these last 10 years. Scientists are telling us that we are running out of time. Slide three. Trees have enormous benefits for the climate and the environment, as you can see from this list. Slide four, we are proposing a modest addition to the current bylaw. Our current bylaw protects trees six inches, DBH, and greater located in the setback area of a property during construction and demolition, we propose to extend this protection to trees 10 inches, DBH, and greater beyond the set back, anywhere else on the lot during construction and demolition. All other details adhere to the existing bylaw. Slide five.\n\n","timeStart":5190.625,"timeEnd":5304.925,"chunkIndex":61},{"id":"019de78e-f9a3-7787-b0cc-c602efac2ceb","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. I'm just gonna pause you right there. Oh, I paused the timer as well. Sorry for the interruption. Um, can we clear the speaker queue please? 'cause we have requests that are before and after, uh, the break, so we'll just clear that out. And if there's a lot of requests, we'll just randomly shuffle them. Um, let's see. Is that being, just wanna let everyone know when it's been cleared, so there's no advantage to clicking in immediately after it opens. And we're gonna clear that. Okay. Speaker queue's clear and we'll shuffle it if there's a lot of requests. Okay. Ms. Bergman, apologies for the interruption. Go ahead.\n\nSpeaker 32: Thank you. Slide five. Cambridge, Newton and Brookline all protect trees at six inches DBH across all property, not just during construction and not just, um, in the set setback. Slide six. Arlington has lost about 7% of the tree canopy from 2018 to 2023. You can see that this area in East Arlington lost an acre of tree canopy in that period. This is especially worrisome in a neighborhood that had only 14.5% canopy coverage eight years ago. Scientists recommend at least a 30 to 40% canopy and even a 60% ca cover For real climate resilience. We know the town's future includes increased construction from the MBTA Communities Act, the anticipated redevelopment of our business districts and a coming affordable housing overlay. Watching lots be systematically clear cut. We must act now to keep the town livable. Protecting as much tree canopy as we can is the best way to achieve this. Slide seven.\n\n","timeStart":5305.715,"timeEnd":5428.215,"chunkIndex":62},{"id":"019de78e-f9ab-7c83-a4c2-6a886fdc5dfb","content":"Speaker 32: This chart shows how many trees are needed to replace a single large tree or a number of medium-sized trees. You cannot replace the climate benefits of a 20-year-old tree with a sapling. We simply don't have that many large trees. In Arlington. Losses of mid-size trees translate to measurable negative outcomes. Slide eight. How much work does one single tree do? This 13 inch DBH Sweet Gum does so much for the neighborhood by considerably reducing heat enough to save energy for both houses, diverting storm water from streets and drains and removing COT CO2 and other pollutants. Loss of one tree affects the heat, air quality, and flooding from multiple properties. This stresses how important it is to protect our mid-size trees. In addition to our largest ones slide nine. Most of our unprotected trees are in the range of 10 to 25 inches. DBH. These trees will become the larger canopy trees of the near future and are already delivering significant benefits today.\n\n","timeStart":5430.505,"timeEnd":5494.435,"chunkIndex":63},{"id":"019de78e-f9b5-78b9-9426-974589aa2116","content":"Speaker 32: Slide 10. Our current protection is effective. Available compiled public records show that within setbacks were, uh, sorry, show that only 14% of the protected trees within setbacks were removed from 2023 to 2025. But beyond setbacks, 80% of the trees were removed. This is where we're losing most of our trees. And our bylaw addition would encourage us to save as many as possible and mitigate for those we can't save. Slide 11. We must find a way to continue to build and protect the tree canopy. It's not either or. Our proposal simply adds protections to additional trees that when removed also require a tree plan and mitigation. This is not to place a burden on responsible development, it's to recognize the trees benefit the whole neighborhood. Trees are a public good. We respectfully ask for your best vote on our substitute motion and to quote our climate champion. Slide 12. Senator Ed Markey, while we invest in new trees, we can't cut down mature trees because mature trees store more carbon and provide relief from the urban heat island effect. We can and must have both trees and housing. Thank you very much.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And Ms. Bergen, before you leave the podium, can you make your motion to make sure we have a second for that? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 32: Um, so I make a motion to change the bylaw in the definition.\n\nSpeaker 2: Actually, it's a substitute. Just\n\nSpeaker 32: Substitute motion. I move my substitute motion for article 23. Great.\n\n","timeStart":5494.845,"timeEnd":5593.525,"chunkIndex":64},{"id":"019de78e-f9bf-7f81-96ae-3aa5461f2d48","content":"Speaker 2: And we have a second. Thank you. Thank you. It is now before us Thank, we have the main motion and of no action. And the substitute. The, uh, ro Bergman substitute motion, uh, on top of that. Um, and, okay. And let's switch over to speaker queue. We have two speakers, uh, two speaking requests. Uh, MS stamps followed by Ms. Papova, and the queue was open several minutes ago. Um,\n\nSpeaker 33: Hi, I'm Susan Stamps Precinct three, um, and a member of the tree committee before it went through reorganization and hopefully\n\nSpeaker 33: A member after, um, adding by doing something that, um, as Robin suggests, is very attractive to the tree committee. Of course, we'd love to save a whole bunch more trees. The problem is that we also, uh, want builders to be able to build the housing we need in Arlington. And right now, the setbacks are the main, um, protectors from one property to another. They're the most important areas. Um, if when you start going into the interior of the property, then what are you doing? Are you, um, minimizing the amount of building that somebody can put there? Is that in the best interest of the town? Um, the, the proposal was not brought, sorry,\n\nSpeaker 2: Ms. Up just a few inches away from the microphone 'cause it's popping a lot.\n\n","timeStart":5593.865,"timeEnd":5701.605,"chunkIndex":65},{"id":"019de78e-f9c8-76fc-bb16-aaf29833e36e","content":"Speaker 33: Okay. Sorry. Um, the, someone came once to the tree committee in January, I think it was, and we, um, said, well, we had a lot of questions about it, and then there wasn't any further discussion. The tree warden, um, is an extremely busy person. He's the only person who looks at the tree plants under the tree bylaw, um, and makes all the decisions and the idea of adding lots and lots more trees for him to evaluate. We're not ready for it. We don't know what the economic impact would be on the developers. We don't wanna make development in Arlington uneconomic. That is not in the, the, the at best interest of the town for many reasons. Um, um, by the way, a lot of new trees do not show up on the lidar, um, until they get pretty big. We do plant 300 trees a year.\n\n","timeStart":5702.785,"timeEnd":5761.025,"chunkIndex":66},{"id":"019de78e-f9d0-78be-bf3d-53a0f2e977cf","content":"Speaker 33: Um, and we know that there are trees in the ground. We know trees in our neighborhoods that are not showing up on the lidar numbers, um, because they're not big enough. So, just so you know, we've been planting a lot of trees. And as Robin pointed out, rightfully very few, we've lost very few, few trees this year, um, because the developers have figured out how to work around the tree bylaw. And this is just a big, huge change that the town is not ready for. Maybe we'll be ready for it next year. We can have a year to figure it out. Um, Somerville and Cambridge and a couple of other have had, um, all the trees protected for several years, but they have urban planners, they have huge tree departments. We have like a tree warden and two or three people to help him. So, um, for all these reasons, even though I, I greatly respect and appreciate the, um, the, um, what's the word I'm looking for? The, the respect for trees and the need for trees in our community, shown by the proponents. The time isn't right. We need to work with the developers to figure out what's gonna work for them. Just like we did when we got the, the tree bylaw passed in, uh, 2019. The select board made us go talk to the developers. And that's what we need to do again, as well as other considerations. So I urge you to vote no on this, sadly. Thank you.\n\n","timeStart":5761.805,"timeEnd":5854.535,"chunkIndex":67},{"id":"019de78e-f9dc-7a6c-b140-61c8550f0593","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. Uh, so Ms. Papova next, followed by Ms. Ro. And while the next speaker is coming up to the podium, this honor, we have a long speaker queue here. We could show that right now. Please. Uh, as long speaker queue. So while you're waiting, if you're in the speaker queue, if you're waiting, when you're waiting your, for your turn to speak, please listen to the, the previous speakers to make sure that you're not repeating points. It is totally honorable and noble to pass your turn if someone's already made those points, uh, going forward. Thank you. Uh, Ms. Pfa, go ahead. Point of order. Yeah. Ms. Dre,\n\nSpeaker 18: Elizabeth Di, Elizabeth Dre, precinct 10. It's on Mr. Moderator, you spoke earlier about doing a shuffle of speakers. I'm wondering if that's going to be shuffled.\n\nSpeaker 2: Oh, so, so I, maybe there's, there must have been a misunderstanding here. 'cause, uh, a great question. The, uh, my intention, which I probably wasn't clear enough about, was that while we're getting speaking requests in, during kind of the initial presentation, like we had with the, with, uh, with the substitute motion that folks can click in and then after that I would shuffle it. But there were like only two or three speakers at that point, and then a bunch of people clicked in. So, um, so I think because of that confusion, I think it is fair at this point to just shuffle the queue because I think that that message didn't really get through. Is that\n\nSpeaker 18: What Whatever you wanna do is fine. I was just looking for clarification. Thank you.\n\n","timeStart":5854.945,"timeEnd":5944.085,"chunkIndex":68},{"id":"019de78e-f9ec-754a-bc07-538f99f17c43","content":"Speaker 2: Yeah. But so going forward when I opened the speaker queue and I kind of did it delayed and apologize for that, the intention is to open the speaker queue before we have like the initial speaker, uh, uh, ahead of the speaker queue for the presentation. And, uh, and folks can click in and then after that presentation, we'll switch over to the speaker queue and then we'll shuffle. But when the first, when the presentation for the substitute motion finished, there are only like two or three speakers in the queue, so it didn't make sense to shuffle. So I didn't, so can we just go ahead, let's go ahead and shuffle right now, and hopefully that's more clear going forward. There's a shuffle button, but there's no repeat\n\nSpeaker 4: By the way.\n\nSpeaker 2: You have point of order Ms. Bergman.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 32: Since you had already, um, mentioned that Rena would be next and Jenny would be after her. Can you honor that and then continue?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. Who did I say was after you, Ms. Papova, do you remember?\n\nSpeaker 34: Uh, I, I believe it was Ms. Ra.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, we can take Ms. Katera next and then we'll follow the, the, the random shuffle. Yeah, go ahead.\n\n","timeStart":5944.115,"timeEnd":6013.845,"chunkIndex":69},{"id":"019de78e-f9f7-7172-8ad2-11e53b4d0c15","content":"Speaker 34: Can I speak? Yeah. Okay. Uh, marina Popova precinct 13. Uh, I speak for myself and note as a member of any committee or organization or group that I might be. Uh, so I just wanted to clarify two points, uh, because I was kind of getting questions and emails. So the point number one is that this change, uh, in the bylaw, it does not affect, uh, private property owners whatsoever. So if you're a private property owner, you know, you are welcome, well, not welcome of course, but you can cut your trees on your, in your backyard as much as you want. I really hope you won't do that, but, you know, but you can. So that bylaw does not affect that. So this bylaw only, uh, gets kicked in, uh, when it is a major redevelopment, uh, just as our main, main bylaw tree bylaw is right now.\n\n","timeStart":6016.025,"timeEnd":6070.605,"chunkIndex":70},{"id":"019de78e-fa01-7307-b516-82518532a558","content":"Speaker 34: So that's the point number one. Uh, the point number two is I just want you to give you an example of how that would actually help in the current situation. You probably, many of you're aware of the issue with the 3 0 7 Washington Street, uh, which is mostly avoided lot, uh, and where the Boston Gas wants to, uh, build a new facility, even though they already have one right next to it. So if that, currently, if you look at the plan of that 3 0 7 Washington Street Radio development, the only trees that are even on the plan are the ones that are within the setback. And it's like about 20 or so. I mean, it's still a lot, but, you know, so, and that's the only one that they would actually have to pay the fee for, for cutting. Now, don't make any mistake. It's not that they're not, they're not gonna cut them.\n\n","timeStart":6070.625,"timeEnd":6118.925,"chunkIndex":71},{"id":"019de78e-fa09-7b79-b31d-0c027282abf9","content":"Speaker 34: They will cut them. It's just that for those specific set of tracing the setback, they would have to pay, pay a fee for that. So if that bylaw already was in effect what Robin and Janie are proposing, then they would have to pay for the whole 16,000 square feet of trees on that lot. Now would they do that still? Probably they would, but maybe then it would be a great incentive for them to reconsider and maybe move that main new facility from the middle of the lot, which is where most of the trees are, much closer, maybe to the Washington Street. And instead of cutting 16,000 square feet of trees, maybe, maybe they would cut only 8,000 square feet. So that is, uh, the, the, the whole point that this is not preventing any development, it just prevent, you know, kind of makes an incentive for developers to maybe prioritize trees a little bit more and find alternatives that would cause less damage than what otherwise is just free for them. Right? So that's my point number two. So I really hope that you will support this. Thank you. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. I'll take Ms. Contrera next and then followed by Mr. Benson.\n\nSpeaker 27: Hi, Jenny Ra, uh, precinct 11. Um, I'm the\n\n","timeStart":6118.925,"timeEnd":6206.565,"chunkIndex":72},{"id":"019de78e-fa12-7b8a-9b93-3df5d9b57132","content":"Speaker 27: Co-author of this along with, um, Robin. Um, I also wanted to make one point to clarify that nothing about this proposal would prohibit any builder from removing trees. If necessary, it mitigates for the loss of those trees with fees that then go into a fund to replace trees and do more planting in town to replace that canopy. Um, I am also up here to share with you one of the letters of support that we received. Um, this is from the organization. Mothers out front, I'll begin now. We mothers out front are Arlington are a group of mothers and other caregivers working together to ensure a livable climate for all children today and into the future. Maintaining and expanding our urban tree canopy is a vital investment in our children's health. Therefore, we support Article 23 substitute motion by Robin Bergman and Jennifer Ro to amend article 16. In Arlington's bylaws, trees are critical infrastructure for Arlington's climate resilience. They sink carbon provide increasingly important shade as the planet warms and intercept storm water analysis of town data shows that between 2023 and 25 for 71 properties surveyed, only 14% of trees on protected parts of properties were removed during construction compared to 80% on unprotected parts of properties.\n\n","timeStart":6207.315,"timeEnd":6295.605,"chunkIndex":73},{"id":"019de78e-fa1f-722e-ba74-2d870a1e471f","content":"Speaker 27: This data shows that our town bylaws are effective and we must do much more to preserve more trees and increase our climate resilience. Article 23 substitute motion is one step we can take this year to ensure fewer mature trees are removed as Arlington continues to develop and grow. And mothers out front also wanted to note, and Robin and I agree with this as well, we acknowledge the importance of increasing Arlington's affordable housing, our public transit accessible housing supply. This substitute motion is not meant to halt development. Rather it is meant to encourage more thoughtful planning that prioritizes preserving mature trees or when removal is unavoidable, investing in replacement canopy as an alternative. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. I'll take, uh, Mr. Benson followed by Mr. Jameson.\n\nSpeaker 35: Thank you Mr. Moderator. Eugene Benson, precinct 10. I urge you to vote no on this substitute motion.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. Can, can you align the mic with,\n\n","timeStart":6297.705,"timeEnd":6364.115,"chunkIndex":74},{"id":"019de78e-fa2a-7bfb-991b-7ba4261cfdec","content":"Speaker 35: I I urge you to vote no on this substitute motion. I am a lover of trees and mature trees. I have 12 mature trees on my little lot around my house. Three red maples and nine white oaks. That old tower over the house. And we've done whatever we could over the past 36 years to keep them healthy and to keep them there. However, I oppose this substitute motion for a number of reasons. Number one, it does affect you on your private property. If you're not doing anything with your house, sure you can cut down all the trees on your private property, but if you want to expand your house by 50% or more, this would kick in. Now how much would it cost you, do you think, if you had two trees that were only 10 inch around at height, $3,750 per tree? So you can start adding that up if you get trees that are greater than 10 inches in diameter.\n\n","timeStart":6364.355,"timeEnd":6439.085,"chunkIndex":75},{"id":"019de78e-fa33-7568-a813-9d690aca1ef3","content":"Speaker 35: And more than that, there is an, a lovely long young couple in my neighborhood that bought a house a few years ago and they had it torn down and a really nice new house built in its place. If this were in place, this, they would've had to pay thousands and thousands and thousands, tens of thousands, maybe even a hundred thousand additional in order to get their house built. Uh, I don't think it's our job to say to people that they can't cut down trees that they need to cut down in order to build a house or to build their new house. Lemme give you another example. Accessory dwelling units. If you have a house of a thousand square feet, you can build an accessory dwelling unit, 50% the size that's 500 square feet or, um, not 900 square feet that would kick in this bylaw. If you wanted to build an accessory dwelling unit and you had some trees there, you would be paying for removal of those trees. I also have a question for town council. As we know there are state rules that make it difficult for towns to discourage or prevent accessory dwelling units from getting built because this has the potential to require people to pay more money than they would otherwise. Do you think this might violate the state rules for ADUs?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, the, the question to me, I will defer to Mr. Cunningham.\n\n","timeStart":6439.505,"timeEnd":6542.525,"chunkIndex":76},{"id":"019de78e-fa3c-7895-bea7-4cc9f9b77cca","content":"Speaker 19: Thank you Mr. Moderator. Uh, Michael Cunningham, town Counsel. And thank you Mr. Benson for the question. I think it's untested. Um, obviously the A DU regulations are fairly new at the state level. Um, our tree preservation bylaw sets forth the applicability provisions in section three. And clearly this, uh, may impact some A DU developments in the future, given those three applicability provisions and whether that's going to present a problem, uh, with the state, um, unknown at this time.\n\nSpeaker 35: Thank you, appreciate that information. Um, in, in conclusion, I, I think there's a way to protect more trees. Right now. Trees are protected in the setback. Those wonderful letters we got that said, we need to preserve the trees. We need to understand this isn't preserving those trees. Those trees can still be completely cut down and demolished. The developers just have to pay the cost for each of the trees that goes into the town tree funded. As you heard from MS stamps, currently, the town doesn't really have a process to deal with them in any rational way. I think the select board was correct in saying, let's give this some more time to look at it and let's see if we can come up with something that's really workable under these circumstances. I urge you to vote. No. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Benson. Uh, next we take Mr. Jameson, followed by, uh, Dr. Bree.\n\n","timeStart":6550.975,"timeEnd":6640.085,"chunkIndex":77},{"id":"019de78e-fa50-7205-975f-9ab99bcd0498","content":"Speaker 17: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Gordon Jameson, precinct 12. Um, I want to commend the tree committee and our, um, wonderful tree warden for the work that they do. I was, I was driving around town recently and I saw them, uh, with the backhoe digging, putting in many of the trees that they planted in the spring. And everyone at home should remember to water the new trees, even if they're more than a year old in front of their home to make sure they make it. Um, I'm concerned about growth. I am on the board of assessors and, um, from that oblique angle, um, if we don't have growth, we get what we just passed, we get overrides. You have a choice development or overrides. Those are, that's the, that's the thing there. So, and\n\nSpeaker 2: You're gonna steer this quickly into scope, correct?\n\nSpeaker 17: Yes. Um, well we, that was mentioned earlier by the proponents I think or something, but my, my biggest question here is the proponents state that the chain standardized the text added to match the language of the original bylaw. My question is, is that true? And why was it changed to the current language?\n\nSpeaker 2: Can you restate the question? Why was, what changed? Exactly?\n\nSpeaker 17: The comment line on the, uh, substitute motion, this chain standardizes the text added to match the language of the original bylaw. My question is, is that true? And why was the original text changed?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, I mean, the, the comment I don't consider, uh, uh, relevant to scope. Uh, so, um, is one of the, okay, uh, movers wish to explain what that is and, and we can attempt to fact check that. Ms. Bergman,\n\n","timeStart":6646.695,"timeEnd":6748.815,"chunkIndex":78},{"id":"019de78e-fa5a-74e7-9671-2330ae63c40f","content":"Speaker 32: It was actually two,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, name precinct, please. Oh,\n\nSpeaker 32: Robin Bergman precinct 12. It was actually pertaining to the original motion that we put in. We made a slight change between what we put in and what we submitted now as a substitute motion. So there was a confusion there.\n\nSpeaker 2: So it was or was not in the bylaw, like the, the original is referring to an original draft of the motion or, yes, the, the,\n\nSpeaker 32: By the original draft of the motion, the way it was phrased was not consistent with the bylaw. We corrected that. So it was in keeping with the way that the, by the actual bylaw existing is written.\n\nSpeaker 17: Okay. So this was not in the original bylaw. I will, I, uh, urge a vote against this and we'll come let them come back with more data from the tree committee. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, Dr. Bree followed by, uh, Mr. Hanlin.\n\n","timeStart":6750.475,"timeEnd":6808.265,"chunkIndex":79},{"id":"019de78e-fa63-7fec-a326-87b263c91cd9","content":"Speaker 36: Hi, um, Rebecca Bee Precinct nine. Um, I just have two questions. One is, I think there's some confusion to me about the definition of private land here. Um, 'cause it's not gonna apply to private land, but I think in the language that I saw it sort of explicitly, I dunno, I'm, I'm not, I, I don't understand what is excluded or included. And the other question that I have is just the why, the decision for it to be only construction and demolition. Um, and not any clear cutting on any private or not private property. Um, and could that maybe incentivize people to clear cut before trying to make, before announcing whatever sort of other construction, demolition or any other change? And, um, I dunno, would the trees not be valuable even if there wasn't construction in demolition to follow? So all those are my questions.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, so it's your question about this, like the, the, like, why this is in the bylaws currently. 'cause that doesn't appear to be changed with this, uh, substitute motion, right? Like this, the substitute motion would add the text and any tree with a DBH of 10 inches or greater located anywhere else on the lot. But it doesn't, it doesn't change. So, so to your first question, you wanted to know like about the definition of private property Yeah. That, that this would apply to Mr. Cunningham. Do you wanna answer that? And then we'll get to your second question.\n\nSpeaker 19: Thank you, Mr. Montey. Michael Cunningham Town Counsel, I, if there's any confusion, uh, hopefully there is not, but it, this would apply if passed to private property.\n\n","timeStart":6814.445,"timeEnd":6910.945,"chunkIndex":80},{"id":"019de78e-fa6b-7cbd-bf6e-64aa18956e67","content":"Speaker 36: So any private property this applies to, but it only applies to construction and demolition and not, like if I had three acres and just wanted to cut down all the trees, I could do that. As long as I'm not constructing or demolishing,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Carnegie, did you follow that question?\n\nSpeaker 19: I think so, but I would refer the member to the applicated applicability provisions that are already contained in our tree preservation bylaw, which are in section three. Mm-hmm . So those are the specific circumstances when this particular bylaw would kick in.\n\nSpeaker 36: So the construction demolition is pertinent to the previous bylaw. This doesn't change that, and that's why that's carried through. Okay. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes. I just sounds\n\nSpeaker 2: Moderate question. Did the answer? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 19: Technically I can't speak until the monitor. It tells me I can, um, yes.\n\nSpeaker 36: Sorry. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 19: It, you're correct that the, the applicability provisions have not changed. The proponents, uh, you know, draft motion only changes the earlier section that talks about what trees apply and they're\n\nSpeaker 36: Applying the 10 inch DBH is only\n\nSpeaker 19: Changed. They're changing it to 10 DBH and that would apply property wide as opposed to presently where it's only in the setback area.\n\nSpeaker 2: E even if within, even if, uh, uh, not in the setback.\n\nSpeaker 36: Okay. Alright. Thank you. To answer my question. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. Um, let's see. Mr. Hanlin next, followed by Mr. Boen. Yeah, the, the, the left or center mic seemed to be working fine. Yep.\n\n","timeStart":6911.645,"timeEnd":7006.285,"chunkIndex":81},{"id":"019de78e-fa77-7d37-beb2-53e5729cbf80","content":"Speaker 35: Uh, this is, I'm Pat Hanlin from Precinct five. Um, I had a couple of questions that, uh, that at least for me would make this a little,\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. Can you speak a little closer to the mic, please? Okay.\n\nSpeaker 35: I have a couple of questions that, uh, I, that Mr. Moderator I'd like to, uh, address to you to, uh, give to whoever is the right person to do it. Um, according to the report of the select board, uh, this is not the time to do this because there's much other study and work that needs to be done in order to evaluate exactly what, uh, what to do and what to do, uh, further in order to accommodate a bylaw of this kind. And, uh, Mr. Moderator, I wonder if anyone speaking for the town could explain what it is they have in mind doing over the next year or so? Uh, to prepare the way for, uh, to prepare the way for a point where this would be, uh, mature and ready to, uh, give to time meeting.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Feeney, is there anything that the town is planning to do in this area over the next year? I guess assuming no changes to the by, like if the bylaw like re remains in its current form.\n\nSpeaker 29: Sure. Thank you Mr. Moderator. One thing I could foresee us doing is for, uh, projects for which a tree plan would be applicable in the coming year. We could evaluate not just the trees in the setback, but also look at the trees on the interior of the lot to determine what the impacts would've been had this bylaw been in effect.\n\n","timeStart":7007.585,"timeEnd":7106.805,"chunkIndex":82},{"id":"019de78e-fa7f-7242-a866-559646e3ec0d","content":"Speaker 35: Mr. Moderator, I wonder is, is that the\n\nSpeaker 2: Microphone,\n\nSpeaker 35: Is that the complete list or are there other things that might be done? There were some suggestions that other towns that have done a great deal and this already have, have more staff to do it and and so on. And I was wondering if there's anything other than, uh, anything left to be done that is other than what, uh, Mr. Uh, Mr. Feeney, he, uh, just now mentioned,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, and I believe Mr. Feeney, is there anything add to that plan? Mr. Hurt?\n\n","timeStart":7108.425,"timeEnd":7143.525,"chunkIndex":83},{"id":"019de78e-fa86-72a4-9e40-2fc2821d13a0","content":"Speaker 6: John Hurt chair of the select board? I think what, what we had talked about at the select board is get, whether we incorporate the tree committee, town staff, have discussions with residents, have a more robust discussion about the impact of what this new bylaw change would have and whether it's right for the town. And then if it were to come back at a subsequent town meeting, we would have a little more information. Whereas in this situation, it was a citizen article that came to us for a hearing without really, you know, not that you need months and months, but whatever, you know, the process would be to get all the interested stakeholders involved just to make sure that we're not passing something that becomes, you know, causes issues that were not foreseeable as we sit here today. So it was just the, the general idea of the select board at the, at the hearing that we needed more information and we needed to talk to the tree department, have this vetted by the tree committee in full and whatever discussions need to make, I don't think we can sit here and give an exhausted list of everything that will be done.\n\nSpeaker 6: It just, it was our, our impression that it needed a little more time to, to vet the bylaw change.\n\nSpeaker 35: Mr. Moderator, I wonder what we've been talking about are things that could be done. Microphone.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, microphone please.\n\n","timeStart":7145.435,"timeEnd":7239.245,"chunkIndex":84},{"id":"019de78e-fa8f-79fc-abfb-e70c65a86693","content":"Speaker 35: We've been talking about things that could be done, and I guess I, the question I have in my mind is, if this one to be turned down by this body today, could you say that, that at least any substantial portion of what you've described would be done?\n\nSpeaker 2: I mean, we're starting to tiptoe, uh, or maybe even walk a little bit outside of scope as far as counterfactuals of what the town may or may not do in reaction to, uh, a negative action under this article. But, um, I think it's still useful for the body to contemplate. I just don't want us to spend time on like, like lots of hypothetical counterfactual scenarios that the town doesn't seem to have a, at least in my hearing, a an explicit detailed plan for, but more of a concept of a plan, uh, for handling this. Ah, yes. Um,\n\nSpeaker 35: Mr. Chairman, I think that you've made\n\nSpeaker 2: A point of order. Can he, Mr. Chairman folks can't hear you. So can can you go to my Mr.\n\nSpeaker 35: Moderator if, if I could, I think I can forstall Mr. Moore's issue on now. I, the one question I had left,\n\nSpeaker 2: Do you need, do you need to make, wanna make your point of order or, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 31: Uh, Mr. Moderator, um,\n\nSpeaker 2: Name\n\n","timeStart":7239.895,"timeEnd":7317.685,"chunkIndex":85},{"id":"019de78e-fa97-77a6-b36b-df4277208746","content":"Speaker 31: Precinct I, I rise, uh, Steve Moore, precinct 18. I rise to make a point of order that, um, the tree committee's been mentioned three times now about, uh, this particular article. Uh, we were all set to speak on it early in the queue until you re wicked it and pushed the people who are gonna speak to the end. So now we don't have the opportunity, we'd like to present, uh, our input to this.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We're not gonna do that from a point of order though. I appreciate that. Uh,\n\nSpeaker 16: Say the speaker, keep messaging up.\n\nSpeaker 35: Okay. Mr. Mr. Chairman, if I could maybe try to unscramble those eggs. The last question I intended to ask is that there have been several mentions of the tree committee before and that it didn't take a position earlier. And I wonder if the tree committee, uh, has any, uh, position now or has any advice to, uh, give to the board.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Moore is, is you're a member of the TREE committee. Does someone want to Yeah, the chair of this, uh, tree committee please. Do you have a, a, a minute under Mr. Hanlon's time?\n\nSpeaker 37: So, uh, the tree, uh, committee was very instrumental in getting the bylaw\n\nSpeaker 2: Name and precinct please.\n\n","timeStart":7317.885,"timeEnd":7386.195,"chunkIndex":86},{"id":"019de78e-fa9e-71fe-a8fa-eb5d8e8f71db","content":"Speaker 37: Keith Sly, precinct five. I'm also co-chair of the Arlington Tree Committee. Um, we we're very instrumental long before I was on the committee in getting the bylaw passed. We have, um, are very careful every year to vet a wide range of options on what we want to do and bring to town meeting. We've amended it three times. We've greatly improved it. A lot of what we've done has contributed to some of the great work that you guys have shown the benefits of this bylaw. We really would like to work closely with you as the select board has suggested to come up with a proposal. You\n\nSpeaker 2: Have 10 seconds\n\nSpeaker 37: For next year's that, um, we can bring all the data together and present to town. I, I, I don't have an exhaustive list for you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And, uh, Mr. Lin, you're, you're outta time. Uh, so usually we don't yield time, uh, from one town and meeting member yielding time to another town meeting member. In this case though, um, it was, uh, in, in your capacity, I believe, as the co-chair of the tree committee. Uh, and so that I would allow, so if anyone has further questions, they can feel free. That was the intention is to do, to do that. Mr.\n\nSpeaker 35: Umn, please speak in the same way that Mr\n\n","timeStart":7386.205,"timeEnd":7453.435,"chunkIndex":87},{"id":"019de78e-faa7-7413-812e-b7e3728e4522","content":"Speaker 2: Did. Okay, great. Thank you. Um, the, let's see. Next we have, uh, Mr. Wan followed by Mr. Holland. And also, like, feel free to, like, you can direct question, questions should be directed to me. Uh, but you can suggest perhaps, uh, the, uh, a member of the tree committee or perhaps someone from a member of some other committee could answer questions. You, you can, you can suggest, uh, recipients of the question. Uh, you just can't ask them directly. Uh, Mr. Boan, go ahead.\n\nSpeaker 38: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Vincent Boan precinct one. I call the previous question\n\nSpeaker 4: Second\n\nSpeaker 2: And presumably all matters before it 'cause we have a main motion, a substitute motion. Yes. Uh, we have a, uh, a motion to terminate debate under Article 23. And we have a second. All those in, uh, terminating debate say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay\n\nSpeaker 4: Yayy,\n\n","timeStart":7454.015,"timeEnd":7506.125,"chunkIndex":88},{"id":"019de78e-fab5-7277-8d56-64f3fad76b2a","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, debate will continue. Okay, let's take a vote. Let's take an electronic vote for the record. Yay and nay to solve none of the problems of yes versus no . Okay, voting is open. If you wish to terminate debate under, uh, article 23, press one for yes. If you wanna continue debate, press two for no or three to abstain. And this is the two thirds vote. Let's try to do this quick. Get your votes in five seconds. We're gonna close voting. And 3, 2, 1. Let's close and debate is terminated, uh, 163 in affirmative 47 and negative one abstention. So we'll first take a vote on the substitute motion. This is a vote whether to substitute the, uh, uh, Bergman substitute motion, uh, to replace the main motion. So let's take a vote. And this is a majority vote. Okay. And voting is now open on the sub. If you wish to substitute the substitute motion to replace the main motion, uh, press one for Yes. If you want to keep the main motion, no action, press two for no or three to abstain.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Let's close voting, or I guess the light is off. Okay. And the motion, the substitute motion fails 67 in the affirmative, uh, 132 to negative two abstentions. So the, the main motion is still no action. Uh, so we'll just take this by voice vote. Um, all those in favor of no action. It doesn't really matter how you vote. Say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. It is a majority no action vote. Um,\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay,\n\n","timeStart":7506.945,"timeEnd":7646.495,"chunkIndex":89},{"id":"019de78e-fabf-729e-9f0c-802b5631b146","content":"Speaker 2: That takes us to Article 24. Uh, Mr. Hurt, please. Oh, and, uh, can we show the speaker queue and open the speaker queue? And so if you, if, if you wanna be in this first batch of speakers, that'll get shuffled. Uh, now is your time while Mr. Herd speaking. Mr. Herd, go ahead.\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Monterey. John Herd chair of the Select Board. Article 24 is a bylaw amendment to create a revolving fund for 17 year Irving Street. This is a town owned property that is now being rented out. So the revolving fund would be used to collect any income from the property and then go back into the property for upkeep and maintenance. The select board voted favorable action for by a vote of five to zero.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And, uh, we have Mr. Foskett, you're the sole entry in the speaker queue. Go ahead. Where's Mr. Fst?\n\nSpeaker 4: There.\n\nSpeaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Mr. Moderator Charles FoST, precinct 10. Um,\n\nSpeaker 10: The Balkans are a land in Southeast Europe that led to a term, uh, popularly referred to as Balkanization because of some political actions that took place in the early 20th century, dividing the territory up into competing silos, if you will, of countries that led to a lot of problems. I refer to this because this article is one of the many cases that we have in our bylaws that balkanize our revenues. I believe it's a serious strategic error by confining the revenues from this building to the uses as described in the article, means that forever, those funds cannot be used for any other pressing need in a town.\n\n","timeStart":7646.685,"timeEnd":7784.785,"chunkIndex":90},{"id":"019de78e-fac8-78f7-a48f-984be8bfc22d","content":"Speaker 10: Suppose we needed more police officers or more EMT drivers or more teachers or needed to improve a school, the funds would not be available. We do this, we have done this in the past. We do it in a number of different cases. Um, I don't know how to undo it, but I don't think we should make the practice worse. So I strongly urge you to turn this down. The funds will still come into the general fund. We have a highly paid management staff that can make decisions about how to use that money. We have a capital planning committee that can plan the capital needs associated with the town's building, uh, in this case, the, uh, par PAO School. But we should not segregate these funds so they can never be used by the town for any other worthy purpose. So I strongly urge that you vote against this article. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Mr. Fsco will take, uh, Mr. Greenspon followed by Ms. Lacot. There's only looks like five speakers in the queue, so we'll just take them in order. Mr. Greenspan followed by Ms. Lacot,\n\nSpeaker 39: Andy Greenspon precinct five. Uh, a couple quick questions to the moderator. Um, do we know what motivated adding this revolving funds now compared to any other prior year? Did something specifically change?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, can you move to another microphone? I think that one's still cutting out. Sorry about that. Um, let's see. I don't know the answer. Mr. Feeney, do you know the answer? Uh, can you use the left microphone? Thanks.\n\n","timeStart":7786.935,"timeEnd":7886.205,"chunkIndex":91},{"id":"019de78e-fad1-77d9-911b-28d7892e43b2","content":"Speaker 29: Uh, Jim Feeney, town Manager. So we did recently execute a long-term 15 year lease with the Arlington Children's Center at the Par school. And there are two particular provisions of that lease, which will be aided by this bylaw. One is such that they will pay for various utilities, but there is no sub-metering in the building. So the town pays the utilities when we get the bill as the customer. And then the, uh, respective share to the tenants in the buildings is apportioned, proportionate to the square footage that each tenant occupies. So we would pay the bill, we submit, uh, an invoice to the tenant, and that money would come back into the revolving fund and be used to pay the utility bill in the next month. And the other is the tenant is required to make a capital contribution paid monthly for capital projects within that building. So this fund would be used to segregate those funds that are intended for capital projects on that building to offset debt service that would otherwise be paid for by the general fund in future years for those capital projects. The rent for the building still goes to the general fund as a local receipt.\n\nSpeaker 39: Um, I guess to the mod, Mr. Moderator also, what would be the implications if we didn't approve this revolving fund? How would the, those monies just described to be distributed or allocated or figured out?\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Feeney, do you have an answer to that question?\n\n","timeStart":7890.025,"timeEnd":7982.085,"chunkIndex":92},{"id":"019de78e-fada-7031-9e53-5d5c82748e4e","content":"Speaker 29: So, as of right now, and it's as is happening today, they would just be deposited into the, uh, general fund and the, you know, the utilities are gonna be getting paid by the, uh, general fund budget of the facilities department. And then the capital contribution is simply, uh, going into the general fund. And we don't, we don't have an accounting mechanism presently to ensure that each dollar that's being deposited there is then being reinvested back into the building.\n\nSpeaker 39: Okay. Thanks. Um, I support this revolving fund then. Um, we should be trying to more specifically maintain our, uh, publicly owned buildings and this will be a way to ensure that occurs. Um, I have another general question. I feel like this comes up every year about revolving funds. Do revolving funds have to be renewed by town meeting, uh, every year? Um, by, by us is,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, yeah. Mr. Cunningham or, or Mr. Feeney, can you answer that question?\n\nSpeaker 29: Jim Feeney, town manager, uh, revolving funds have to be reauthorized each year with an expenditure cap set by this body.\n\nSpeaker 39: Okay. So if, so basically to Mr. Moderator every year we can decide whether this revolving funds or any of them are being used proper being used as we the town would like them to be used.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, that's my understanding, yeah. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 39: Um, so then I think the prior speaker's argument is not particularly valid 'cause we could just choose to let said revolving funds or any revolving funds expire if we feel they're being used improperly. So I support this revolving fund. Thanks.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you, Ms. Lacot. Next, followed by Mr. Jamon,\n\n","timeStart":7983.135,"timeEnd":8081.435,"chunkIndex":93},{"id":"019de78e-fae4-70b3-82ce-cb2b489c982e","content":"Speaker 40: Annie Lort, precinct 13. Mr. Moderator, could we just clarify something that I believe the town manager just said, which is that the monies that will be segregated in this revolving fund are capital contributions and utility payments, but not the rent on the building.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Feeney, can you clarify that? Does it cover the, the rent on the building?\n\nSpeaker 29: That is correct. The general base rent paid monthly will continue to be a local receipt to the general fund,\n\nSpeaker 40: And we have an obligation to the tenants to spend their capital contributions on capital improvements to the building.\n\nSpeaker 2: Was that a question or a statement?\n\nSpeaker 40: A question?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Feeney, do you know the answer to that question? ?\n\nSpeaker 40: Sorry.\n\nSpeaker 29: That is my understanding of the lease. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 40: So if we put those capital contributions into the general fund and we lose track of them in some way, then we run the risk of failing to meet our obligations to our tenants. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Feeney, is that correct?\n\nSpeaker 40: Sorry? I'm sorry, Mr. Feeney, I should have just had you stay there.\n\nSpeaker 29: Uh, perhaps yes.\n\nSpeaker 40: Perhaps yes. Thank you very much. I'll be voting yes. Point\n\nSpeaker 4: Of\n\nSpeaker 2: Order. Point of order.\n\nSpeaker 41: Fat ani Precinct 15. Can we have the speaker's queue all the time on the screen, please?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, we can share that right now. Yeah. Speaker queue please. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, let's see. We'll take, uh, Mr. Jameson followed by Mr. Moore. Christopher Moore.\n\n","timeStart":8091.665,"timeEnd":8185.165,"chunkIndex":94},{"id":"019de78e-faed-7496-aad0-2230373b45cf","content":"Speaker 17: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Gordon Jameson, precinct 12. What I heard the manager said, say with the rentals, we'll go into the general funds, but the capital and utilities will go into the revolving fund. The article states that rentals and lease of the town money will go into this fund. Could we clear up the discrepancy please?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, can, can you repeat the, the discrepancy your\n\nSpeaker 17: Well, right. The, the on column three and the section of 17 Irving. It, it says the, uh, under the column of fees, charges, and other receipts credited to fund, it says rentals and lease of the town owned property located at 17 Irving Street, which I assume also includes the capital cost. Okay, so this\n\nSpeaker 2: Is, this is\n\nSpeaker 17: The, and utilities.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, so just to make sure we're all looking at the same thing. This is, uh, let's see, from the annotated warrant, there's the, the, uh,\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh,\n\nSpeaker 2: Where is it?\n\nSpeaker 17: I'm looking at the printed copy page 50. Am I, is that the right on the right?\n\nSpeaker 2: This is the, the chart that you're looking at?\n\nSpeaker 17: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. And so the bottom row, which would be added by this, uh, motion, this main motion, that bottom row, the third column that says rentals and lease of the town owned property located at 11 Irving Street. And the title of that column is fees, charges or other receipts credited to fund, correct?\n\nSpeaker 17: Yes. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And so can, can you restate the question now?\n\n","timeStart":8193.735,"timeEnd":8289.325,"chunkIndex":95},{"id":"019de78e-faf5-7e61-87fa-c0cb45ae8af3","content":"Speaker 17: Um, the manager stated that only the capital contribution and utilities will be deposited in the fund. The rest would go to the general fund. I think this, the article states exactly the opposite. Everything will go in the revolving fund.\n\nSpeaker 2: So you're not referring, when you say article, you mean the, like the, the the vote language.\n\nSpeaker 17: The vote language, yes. Yeah. Okay. Uh, it says rentals and lease of the town owned property located at 17 Irving Street.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Feeney, uh, do you have comment on the, uh, what Mr. Jameson describes as a discrepancy?\n\nSpeaker 29: Thank you, Mr. Moderat. Jim, town manager. I can see what you're saying, that that language is in that table a bit generic, but is the intention to capture only those two particular, uh, receipts that flow from the lease of that building?\n\nSpeaker 17: Yes. But you stated that only capital and utilities will go in this fund, the rest will go to the general fund . This contradicts that directly by my reading.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, when you, when you say you, that's directed to me. I did not say that, but yes.\n\nSpeaker 17: Yes. Mr. Mr. Moderator,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Mr. Feeney, um, Mr. Feeney is, is there, uh, do you have any clarification on that, Mr. Cunningham?\n\n","timeStart":8289.985,"timeEnd":8404.605,"chunkIndex":96},{"id":"019de78e-fafd-7fc0-8a8c-23bd57fb8944","content":"Speaker 19: Uh, thank you, Mr. Moderator, Michael Cunningham, town Counsel, in response to Mr. Jameson's question. I, I, I appreciate the, the language and how it looks there. I think that the manager with his answer to your last question, uh, clarified, in least in my mind, that it was gonna be for specific purposes. And the rental is obviously a significant amount of money. And this, this is the creation, this bylaw seeks to create the revolving fund. It would still be subject to the expenditure cap we talked about earlier. So certainly that could be a way for town, meaning to restrict how much is gonna be available and that, that would eliminate the use of the rental, which is the, the bulk of the, the earned income from that property.\n\nSpeaker 17: And speaking of, um, that Mr. Moderator, um, what is the, um, expenditure cap for this, um, revolving fund, which is not stated in the table?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Mr. Feeney or Mr. Cunningham, do you have the answer to that question? What is the cap, if any, on the revolving fund?\n\nSpeaker 17: We usually, um, with all difference to the, um, comment from the, um, Mr. Toskey, we usually specify what the, what the, um, expenditures would might be.\n\nSpeaker 29: So we would do that next year once the revolving fund is established, and then we would set the expenditure cap. I would imagine it would be, I think the capital contribution amounts to roughly $40,000 annually. And I have to imagine the utilities may be, I don't have that number specifically off the top of my head, but I would envision it to be at or under a hundred thousand dollars annually once established.\n\n","timeStart":8415.025,"timeEnd":8524.965,"chunkIndex":97},{"id":"019de78e-fb08-7571-8ebb-5b4183f42b7f","content":"Speaker 17: Okay. And one, one last question, um, Mr. Moderator quickly, um, is it the general practice that these, um, funds not get rental fees directly, uh, deposited in them for, or is that not the case,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Cunningham or Mr. Feeney? Do you have an answer? In\n\nSpeaker 17: Other words, the question is, do rental fees generally go to the general fund or do they go into, um, revolving funds? So listed above\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Feeney,\n\nSpeaker 29: It is generally the case that rents paid under a lease for long term or general fund receipts.\n\nSpeaker 17: Thank you very much, Mr. Feeney. Thank you very much, Mr. Moderator.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And, uh, Mr. Cunningham, did you, did you have a clarification to make? Okay.\n\nSpeaker 19: Thank you. Mr. Moderator Michael Cunningham Town College. Just a, a clarification, the response to the second to last question you asked Mr. Jameson, you know why there is no expenditure cap in this particular article? I think the manager answered it, but in this is the creation of the, of the revolving fund or the, that's what Tommy me considering Article 36 deals annually with our revolving funds, all of them. So this would be part of a annual revolving fund warn article if passed next year. That's why there's no cap there Now. Thank\n\nSpeaker 17: You for the clarification Mr. Cunningham. Thank you, Mr. Moderator.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, Mr. Moore.\n\n","timeStart":8525.275,"timeEnd":8606.005,"chunkIndex":98},{"id":"019de78e-fb1b-70b8-844e-a08ae156802a","content":"Speaker 42: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Christopher Moore, uh, precinct 14 and also chair of the Capital Planning Committee. Um, just to make clear why it's important that the capital contributions be captured in this way. If they go to the general fund, then town expenditures can go up a little bit and the capital budget is set at 5% of town expenditures. So we get a nickel on the dollar, and the rest of the capital work would have to be done by shorting some other capital work elsewhere in the tap. So capturing the capital contribution in a fund like this means that we don't have to, uh, spend money that could have gone to other capital projects. We can spend that money directly on this project, and then other projects are ineffective. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Take, um, uh, Ms. Macaluso followed by Ms. Sadat.\n\nSpeaker 43: Uh, Remy Macaluso precinct three. I call the question.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, that was a satellite room. Um, it wasn't a voice from the heavens. Um,\n\n","timeStart":8609.855,"timeEnd":8669.345,"chunkIndex":99},{"id":"019de78e-fb24-7d15-8d59-4e72da6ac366","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. We have a motion to terminate debate under Article 24, and we have a second. All those in favor of terminating debate, say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. Uh, it is unanimous. It sounds like. Um, uh, it's a two thirds vote. And so we will proceed now to vote on the main motion of Article 24. This would amend Title one, article 22, section five of the town bylaws to establish a revolving fund. We haven't open voting yet, you're just entering the speaker queue. Um, green light isn't on yet. Uh, establish a revolving fund for the maintenance of 17 Irving Street, uh, using its rental receipts. Okay, uh, voting is now open. If you're, uh, in support of this change to the bylaws, press one for Yes. Uh, if you're opposed to this bylaw change, press two for no, or three to abstain as a majority vote. Okay. Let's close. Well, let's just give a, a few more seconds and still votes coming in. Okay. Let's close voting now. Uh, and the vote passes 169, the affirmative 24 in the negative. And two abstentions. That is a majority vote. Uh, it takes it to Article 25, Mr. Herd.\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Moderator. John Herd chair of the Select Board. Article 25 is bylaw amendment similar to the last one to create a revolving fund. This one's relative to the community center that's been recently renovated at 27 Maple Street. There's been more activity there and it's been, with a recent renovation, it's more attractive for groups to rent out the space. So we're seeking to also create a revolving fund for that space.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And, and, um, was there anything else?\n\n","timeStart":8670.975,"timeEnd":8790.065,"chunkIndex":100},{"id":"019de78e-fb2d-7d0e-bbd8-9cc404534297","content":"Speaker 6: The select board voted five zero Fable Action. I don't think I said that on the last one.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Um, can we switch over to speaker queue? Sorry, I didn't open that or clear it earlier. Let's go to Speaker Q and just clear it. And Speaker Q is now open for Article 25. If you wish to speak on Article 25, now's your chance.\n\nSpeaker 2: Seeing none, we are going to proceed to a vote on the main motion of Article 25, which spring up a voting screen. This would seek to amend Title one, article 22, section five of the town bylaws, uh, to create a revolving fund for community center upkeep. Uh, okay, you're currently answering the speaker queue if you're hitting any buttons. Um, just wait for the green light to come on and for the voting slide to appear. Okay. Voting is now open. If you're in favor of this change to the town bylaws to create a revolving fund for the, uh, for community center upkeep, uh, press one for yes. If you're opposed to this change to the bylaws, press two for no, or three to abstain. Okay. Let's close voting. And the motion passes 174 in the affirmative 11 negative four abstentions. It is the majority vote. That takes us to Article 26, Mr. Hurt. And while Mr. Hurt gets up, let's clear the speaker queue.\n\n","timeStart":8790.245,"timeEnd":8881.485,"chunkIndex":101},{"id":"019de78e-fb35-7c34-8938-858ef60e0f7b","content":"Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Monterey. John Hurt chair of the select Board. Article 26 is a bylaw amendment also involving revolving funds, but just updating our existing recycling revolving fund to meet current conditions, specifically relative to the recent change in the way we in our containerized pickup system. Um, so, and the select board voted five zero favorable action.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great, thank you. Um, speaker queue is open. I don't see any speaker, speaker requests. Uh, so we are gonna proceed to a vote on the main motion under Article 26. This is a majority vote. Uh, bring up the vote screen. Uh, it seeks to, the motion is to amend Title one, article 22, section five of the town bylaws to update, uh, recycling fees revolving fund. Um, okay. Voting is now open. If you wish to, uh, amend the bylaws for the recycling fees revolving fund, press one for yes. If you do not wanna make that change to the bylaws, press two for no and three to abstain. And this is a majority vote. Okay. Voting is closed and the motion passes 184 in the affirmative seven and negative one abstention. That takes us to article. Uh, uh, 28 27 was on the consent agenda. Article 28. Now, uh, Mr. Herd? Yep. Yep, you're up.\n\nSpeaker 6: This is going too quick, too quick. I can't keep up. Thank you. Mr. Moderator. John Hurd, chair of the Select Board Article 28 seeks to create home rule legislation to authorize a ballot question to increase the number of all alcohol on premises licenses. So these would be all alcohol restaurants from currently, it sits at 20, that would allow us to go to 30. The select board.\n\n","timeStart":8885.255,"timeEnd":9020.465,"chunkIndex":102},{"id":"019de78e-fb3e-700b-bf42-90ce60072515","content":"Speaker 2: I'm sorry. Just gonna interrupt and pause your speaking time for a second. Apologies. Can we just open, uh, clear the speaker queue, please. Okay. Speaker queue is open. Mr. Heard, continue, sorry.\n\nSpeaker 6: The select board voted four zero for favorable action with Mr. And Mr. Helman recused himself from the vote.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Okay. Speaker Q is open and there are no requests to speak. So we will proceed to vote on the main motion. Still no requests. Okay. It says the majority vote. Let's bring up a vote screen for the main motion under article 28 of a point of order. Oh, I did, did not see it come up. Uh, can we show the speaker queue? Can you try pressing one again? I see. Okay, I see it now. Okay. Uh, were there. Raise your hand if there are other requests to speak during that time. Okay. So you might need to get that handset checked out. Um, so I have two requests here of, uh, Ms. Doctor,\n\nSpeaker 4: Dr. Pass,\n\nSpeaker 2: Pass, uh, and Mr. Boen, I apologize.\n\nSpeaker 4: Pass.\n\nSpeaker 2: You will pass. Okay. Um, but might need to get your handset checked out. Um, yeah. Okay. Okay. So seeing no more speaker requests, we'll proceed to a main, a vote on the main motion of Article 28. This is a majority vote, uh, to authorize, uh, filing of home rule legislation seeking, uh, uh, 10 additional all, is that right? 10 additional all alcohol licenses. Let's see.\n\nSpeaker 4: .\n\n","timeStart":9020.765,"timeEnd":9122.785,"chunkIndex":103},{"id":"019de78e-fb46-7451-a839-b1d8e9a5082f","content":"Speaker 2: Yeah, green light's not on. You're just entering the speaker queue. Remember, it's one to enter the speaker queue zero to exit. Um, okay. Voting is now open. It says a vote on the main motion of article, uh, 28 to authorize filing of home rule legislation, um, to authorize the select board to file a home or legislation that would grant the town additional licenses for sale of alcohol. Okay, voting is now closed and the motion passes 173 in the affirmative sixth and negative four abstentions. That now takes us to Article 30. Um, can we clear the speaker queue now? Oh, um, I'm sorry. Did I skip 29? Yes. Uh, sorry. Article 29. My apologies. Mr. Herd. And let's, the speaker queue is clear. If you want to enter it now. Mr. Herd, please stop touching the microphone.\n\nSpeaker 4: .\n\nSpeaker 6: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Moderator. John Hart, chair of the Select Board. Article 29 is Home Seeks to submit Home Rule Legislation to revise the process for calling and conducting recall elections. The select board voted favorable action four zero, Mr. Helmuth recused himself, and I'll invite our town clerk to further elaborate.\n\nSpeaker 2: Madam Clerk\n\nSpeaker 27: Julie Brazil, town Clerk. Um, is that better? Is that good? Okay. So, uh, presentation,\n\nSpeaker 2: Remember, you can enter the speaker queue now if you wish to.\n\n","timeStart":9125.775,"timeEnd":9238.945,"chunkIndex":104},{"id":"019de78e-fb4f-7235-96e8-3b79e9a74730","content":"Speaker 27: So this started, um, over the summer when, uh, a fellow town clerk asked a question about, you know, surrounding towns and how their recall provisions worked. So I went and I read our recall provisions and realized that they were decades out of date and would be just an absolute nightmare to administer an election. So I thought, let's fix that. So I talked to the legal department, and then Deputy Town Council, Jacqueline Munson did some research and found out that the town of Conway had recently filed home rule legislation to get, um, their recall election provisions, um, passed as a special act. And so we thought we would start with the Conway model because it was, uh, recent and it was obviously going to comply with all the current election law. And so then it was really just a question of, um, tweaking it to be specific to the, as many of the details in our current Arlington provisions as possible.\n\n","timeStart":9239.325,"timeEnd":9298.445,"chunkIndex":105},{"id":"019de78e-fb57-7406-8cc8-2abad2ab08ca","content":"Speaker 27: So the goal was to modernize it so that it's in compliance with, you know, current election practice. And I think it's, um, it's more readable. Um, it has more steps elucidated, it's a clear walkthrough of the entire process captured, um, in the proposed language, um, that would amend the town manager act. So next slide. Uh, a lot stays the same. I looked at it, a lot of sentences get rewarded, but really they're conveying exactly the same details. So the process is, uh, 50 voters file a petition with the town clerk. Uh, we certify those signatures. If those 50 signatures are certified, then we prepare forms for the petitioners to do the large scale signature collection that is necessary. And they collect signatures from 20% of registered voters in 20 days. And then if we certify those have met the standard, the select board calls the election and there's other steps in there, but it's late.\n\n","timeStart":9298.905,"timeEnd":9364.525,"chunkIndex":106},{"id":"019de78e-fb5f-75ff-803a-fcc815b13491","content":"Speaker 27: So trust me. Um, uh, so that's all the same. None of that has changed at all. So next slide. Not a lot of, of true substance has changed. One change I thought was really helpful. The current provision says that the forms the clerk prepares for the petitioners to collect the signatures should contain the names of all 50 of the original petitioners. And I thought that was excessive. And so the Conway language said it would be the first 10 registered voters on the initial petition, who would be named and who would be the sort of point of contact for the clerk's office. Um, I don't really think it would be feasible to coordinate with 50 people. 10, 10 is enough. So those are really the one major change. And the next slide is the last major change. The current language says that the select board should, uh, schedule the election on a Tuesday, not less, uh, than 25 days or more than 35 days out.\n\n","timeStart":9364.585,"timeEnd":9431.365,"chunkIndex":107},{"id":"019de78e-fb66-7e11-b6b4-525ad50a1078","content":"Speaker 27: Well, that's just not enough time to hold an election. I throw very nice parties and I need time to plan. So, um, but I mean, honestly, you need the, i the entire process involves the, the ballot will have the question, yes or no. Do you want to recall this person from this office? And then also the names of, uh, the candidates to fill the office if the recall passes. So it's one election that answers the question. Um, and of course, if the recall itself fails, then you don't bother with, um, you know, finalizing the votes for the candidates because, um, you don't need to in a small town, the language says you don't even bother to count the votes for the candidates, which isn't an option for us with our, our scanners. But really, um, the, the major changes that we need more time so that we can announce the election candidates can pull papers and have it at least two weeks to collect signatures, which isn't a ton of time, but, you know, would be feasible.\n\n","timeStart":9431.365,"timeEnd":9497.165,"chunkIndex":108},{"id":"019de78e-fb6e-7e95-bc5b-d02cda316a92","content":"Speaker 27: Um, and then we certify those and so on and so on to be, to make one last point. I can't under the law even put the order for the ballots in until 33 days before an election. So there's a lot of steps and they're all very specific dates calculated from the date of the election. So I couldn't, I just couldn't. So 60 days as a minimum makes is very sensible. And I thought we should give the select board the flexibility, um, to pick a date, um, that makes sense based on the time of year and what else is going on and, and holidays coming up. So those are, those are the major changes and I'm obviously happy to answer questions. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. We have, uh, I'll show the speaker queue. Um, we have one person, so we'll shuffle it and it'll still be Mr. Kearney .\n\n","timeStart":9497.625,"timeEnd":9550.485,"chunkIndex":109},{"id":"019de78e-fb80-7da6-a216-987be0567948","content":"Speaker 2: Mr. Kearney. Uh, actually the intent is blank, which probably means it was not the, the one button. So it looks like we have no speakers, uh, under this article. Last chance. Okay. Seeing none, we're gonna proceed to a vote on the main motion of Article 29. Um, this is a majority vote. It would authorize filing, uh, uh, home rule legislation to amend the Town Manager Act, revising and updating the process for recall elections. So if you're in favor of authorizing a select board to file home rule legislation, press well when, when the green light goes on, there's a lot of folks in the speaker queue. Okay. Voting is now open. If you're in favor of authorizing a select board to file homer legislation, uh, to revise an updated process for recall election, press one for yes. Uh, if you wish to not authorize the select board to do that, then press two for no or three to abstain. Okay. Get your votes in. Okay. Let's close voting. And the motion passes 180 in affirmative, one in the negative. That takes us now to Article 30. Motion aur. Second. Okay, we have motion adjourn. We have a second. All those in favor of adjourning say yay. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Nay. We are adjourned.","timeStart":9555.025,"timeEnd":9638.645,"chunkIndex":110}]}}}