You you can. Caroline is participating in CF four. You’re going to have to take roll call vote. Uh, she will. Somebody will have to. Um OK. Do you want me to do that? Or is she doing Hey, y’all can To hear. So our contingency plan if something goes horribly

wrong is that I will the zoom component will be Turned off, and, uh, bill will continue leading the meeting in the room, so just heads up in case anything goes wrong. Uh, but with no further ado, I’m happy to call the meeting to order Hamilton Select board meeting of June 17th at 7:04 p.m.

Because. I’m remote, We will take a roll call vote. So if y’all can just go through the room, um, starting with Tom Welcome Oh, Tom Myers here. Rosie Kennedy here, Bill Wilson here and Caroline Bull. You here. Um All right, Uh, let me get to the top of the agenda.

Apologies, Um, a couple of board and committee openings that I will go through just a heads up these keep proliferating, so folks were looking for a way to get officially involved. We’d love for you to take a look at some of these openings Conservation Commission has two Openings Council on aging has two associate openings. The Finance

and Advisory Committee has one associate opening. The Hamilton Development Corporation has one opening for a three year term. The historic District Commission has two openings for three year terms and two opening for two year terms. Uh, and a reminder that one must be a resident of a historic

district and one must be a resident Realtor. UM, and the Human Rights Commission has one at large opening. Uh, Next. We will move on to public comment just a reminder for folks who have public comment. It’s three minutes on a topic not on the agenda if your topic is already on the agenda, we ask that you

please hold your comments until such time as the agenda item comes up. Um, otherwise, if folks have Public comment Now is the time. Jack Davis 57 Lower Street. Just actually a quick, uh, question about, um Town policy concerning the use of patent park by a private group and in particular, uh,

I’m wondering, uh, as a member of a local church here, whether, uh, there’s any bylaw that prohibits, say, having, uh, an Easter Sunrise service at Patton Park looking at audio on online. I don’t know. I can see that Jack is talking. But we can’t hear in my mind.

Sorry. No. You, restate the question or Just a question about Uh, whether there’s any town bylaw that would, uh, prohibit a local church, such as First Congregational Church of Hamilton of having a Sunrise service. At, Uh, Patton Park. We’re looking at April of 2025, and this is not to be sponsored

by the town. But whether it’s Permitted under existing bylaws. Yeah, I think we’ve gotten a couple of questions and comments this week relative to, uh, use of public facilities and it and it will be a topic that will bring up I. I don’t know off the top of my head. Um, I do know that many of the

questions have come around the Patton homestead. Specifically. I think after the the picnic. Uh and that has a very different set of rules because obviously, that space is booked out to private groups for private events, including weddings and birthdays and celebrations of that kind. And so that’s a sort of different

set of rules so we can certainly take a look at what the current Town documented rules and bylaws are, um, for something like that. Um, but again, it would probably be different looking at patent Homestead versus Patton Park just because, uh, the nature of the patent home set is that it

does. Uh, get used for private events for private groups that pay a fee to be there and use it just like the, Um Hamilton, one of Pride picnic did. Right? Yeah this this would be a private event. No food or alcohol. S serve no tickets, whatnot, But thank you.

Yeah, absolutely. OK? I didn’t know if I needed the green light. Um my name is Willa Scudder 25 Park Street, Hamilton. And. If. I, May. I’d like to pass out an article that was sent via email to all public for public comment. Typically. We don’t take presentations at during public comment. OK. It was

emailed, Um So. I strongly oppose the appointment of Natalie Hildreth to any town board seat based on recent behavior at town meetings at a meeting last week. She overtook the microphone and made clear that she had been stalking some members of the room to intimidate myself, who she used by name and another towns.

Person from Wham! Calling US by name name calling other members in the room, threatening other women and their property and horses. Neither one of us have either either seen or met this woman. Um, she refused to Uh, share her name. I had to approach her after the meeting and ask what her name was.

She reluctantly gave it I later learned that she also has appointed herself town moderator on community Facebook pages. Um, that control over or not control but over 4000 members of the community. Her behavior has caused other townspeople enough fear that they have hired a lawyer, which and filed a cease and desist of which has been shared with each

of you. A no trespassing order with both the Hamilton and Wenham police. And. I would like to ask this board if this behavior is not tolerated by citizens of the community. Then. Why would this committee Commit to electing, Um, a member to allow this behavior to be tolerated by a committee member.

Thank you. Me and just a heads up. Well. We did get word today that she’s withdrawn her application for the committee to which she had applied. So, um That that part of it has been taken off the agenda. I believe I. Appreciate that update, Caroline. Thank you.

Good evening, Ellen Wright for Asbury Ave. Um I would like to just, um reiterate, um, what Miss Scudder had mentioned that evening. Uh, last week. It was shocking. I saw Miss Flynn in the parking lot. She looked very distraught going out to her car. I do believe she needed an escort. I. Don’t believe that Natalie Hildreth?

I don’t know her. Uh but again being at the meeting witnessing what had gone down more or less the aftermath in the parking lot. I don’t think that someone who would exhibit this sort of Stalking threatening like behavior should be permitted to serve on any town committee. Um, hopefully this was An isolated

incident and hopefully Miss Hildreth will, uh, follow the ceased and desist order and won’t cause any further. Uh, trouble for any townspeople. Uh, the second issue. I would just like to, uh, bring to the board’s attention is the drag queen situation at the Pride picnic over the weekend. Uh, I don’t think anyone would personally begrudge a pride

picnic, but I don’t think having a drag queen at a family friendly event or some or an event that purports to be family friendly is appropriate. Uh, in any way. I, uh, went online did some research this particular drag queen? Uh, Mr Hart, uh, has very vulgar, pornographic, shocking posts.

Uh, he mentions himself as a fuck, boy. Excuse the cussing. But before we have drag queens at public events, we should do our homework. Uh, the fuck boy of your adult nightmares. Big. Gay bad crawl. There’s lewd pictures of this drag queen gyrating his pelvis where he’s sticking out. Genitals where

someone appears to be giving him a blow job. We have emojis of eggplants. I think we all know what that’s about, Um, highly inappropriate. Not something that our town, uh With. Respectable dignified people should be propagating and advancing. Uh, sponsoring sponsoring. Huh? Well. Enough, said. Did my did money change hands on this, or did we just

lend them the the park? Are? We paid. They paid and we didn’t sponsor it. The they listed as a sponsor. We didn’t ask to be listed as sponsor they listed as a sponsor only because as with most nonprofits that rent the patent homestead, they were given a 10% discount the way all nonprofits do, and that was

the only reason they were. There’s the Community Council. There is the town of Hamilton Town of what the multicultural councils for the discussing blows. That, So. I just think there is sponsor Oh, so, I. I was out of line. I shouldn’t have answered. I apologize.

This is on the agenda because so I do want to talk about it in depth later. Just to be clear the town was a sponsor. OK. So. Maybe someone here should for sound a Freedom of Information Act request and get the accounting for this money that may have changed hands, right? Hm? All right, Well, um

For your own edification. There’s a copy for each of you. This is not emailed. This is somebody who’s about as polite as Nancy. Disgusting. So Should be ashamed of themselves. The amicus brief. My understanding is that that the planning board has a topic on the agenda, so you all need to hold your topic

on the agenda public on this for things that are not on the agenda. Thank you. Hi. I’m Yvonne Mimo I live at 21 Asbury Ave in Hamilton and I have to go pick up someone at the airport. So. If this I don’t know if you can talk about this

or not, but it’s come up. Um, a couple of years ago, I made a comment on a Facebook post that does everyone see what’s going on in this town with the LGBT QLOP flags in the elementary schools. The books. Are. They in our schools, and I think you

know we have Some values family values. I got bullied so bad, but I think it was four women. Bullied Me took my post down after they berated me, and then they banned me from buy nothing for a month. So it was, you know, it’s ridiculous. The there is we do tolerate and the

progressive People are pushing selling, be tolerant, be tolerant and we are tolerant and we tolerated but I think to understand tolerance. You have to understand the line of intolerance. And. That is where Children are concerned. And. Where are the parents. I? Guess they think it’s love is love and all, but there is pornography in our schools and

in our library. There are gay men. Dressing as women. What does that have to do with, you know Any kind of family happy values. It’s sad and, uh so that these are my opinions, my feelings, and I believe a lot of people feel this way but have been also bullied. Can. We come together and find that

line of tolerance again. We’re we’re protecting Children. And. We’re protecting all the minorities. Thank you for hearing me. It. Were there any further public comments in the room or online? No. OK? All, Right. Um, Next. We just have Select board member and town manager. Reports. Um I’m happy

to Go around the room. Tom. Do, you have anything to report to the group? Nothing tonight. Thanks. Rosie. I do? Um I Unfortunately forgot my little notebook, but I when I was very Conscientious about taking notes. And so I’m going to have to just tell you a few things.

Um, by from memory, I. I attended a ZB a meeting. Um, the beginning of the month. Where in the 133 Essex Street, um, safe harbor. Um Claim by the ZB A has been appealed to the state and, um we as of the date of that meeting, Um there has been nothing heard back

from them, so I don’t have anything further, except that it’s still on the agenda for the July meeting and that the and the second thing is that there was an alternate position and to, um people showed up in anticipation of applying for that position, and one is a was a very busy Dad. So.

He respectfully seated the alternate position to Michael Madden who, um is is here tonight and, um, the ZB recommended him unanimously. So. Um, we’ll We’ll have a vote on that coming up. Secondly. I attended the Environmental Impact Committee meeting. Well. They have so much energy. That group um Because I don’t have

all my notes. I cannot remember everything off the top of my head. But, one of the most interesting things is that, um Bob knows came on and gave a presentation about applying for a grant for electric vehicles or one electric vehicle for this for the schools. Um, I don’t know all the details

about it. There was a very complex, grand and complex method of applying for it, but I thought that was an interesting concept. And, uh, Will provide more information next time, So. Um and I’m happy to say my board that my other board my other love the CO, A, Um three members who are up for

reappointment have all decided they want another three year turn and Bravo and, um, will hopefully be able to endorse them tonight as well. That’s all. Caroline. Uh, Bill anything from you? Um, yeah, I guess just to quickly on the schools. Um, most people are probably already aware that

there was a poll survey that went out that all came back. That was reviewed. Uh, at the, uh, the last school committee meeting. Um, after that, Um they did vote. Um, even though the poll in Serbia, Uh, survey came back the the opposite decision. They looked at that as informal only in the school

committee still felt you know that, uh, the consolidation of the schools and building a new And the cut the property, uh, was something they wanted to move forward with, so that was voted on and approved. Uh, they also voted to reconfigure the grade structure with Buker being the the kindergarten, Uh,

school and then one through five, I guess, Um, uh, at the Cutler Consolidated school, so that was voted that doesn’t move now to what’s called the schematic plants where you start to see visuals of what that building will look like, Uh, they’ll fine tune the cost of doing The project. Um and I.

They also said there’d be a lot of discussion through the process of of how how all the buildings are are in need of repair, So I encourage everyone to stay close to the process and and voice your thoughts. But you know, that’s where the school board is. At. This point

I think their next vote, uh, wouldn’t be they’ll work on the schematic design, but probably January, or February is when they would vote to put it on the warrant article for, uh, April vote, uh, to to get You know from the town, so that would happen next April.

I’ll. Add to that I met with John McGrath, uh late last week, and I think one of the key drivers for the decision for the Butler consolidation was tax impact to residents, and I know that that conversation has been a bit obfuscated. So. We’re gonna work to schedule. Um some sort of meeting later in the summer.

That’s just a money talk, um, to to discuss. I mean there’s been a lot of Models distributed. Um around. You know the Turk field tax impact the school tax impact all of the things that we’re sort of looking at on the horizon and what those relative tax impacts are including some models

around if we just renovated things like that, Um, so I think that’ll be a good opportunity for folks if they just want to have the conversation through the lens of tax impact and money, John said he would be happy to to schedule something like that, so we’ll look to do that as

well. Um I think two other things. Uh, we did have a a good Uh, if passionate, uh, meeting last Wednesday night and information session here in Hamilton. Uh, we mostly talked about the school building and the, uh M BT, a three a Uh, zoning stuff. We we had said that we might touch on a couple

of other topics, but those ended up being sort of big and juicy. And I think we had a lot of, uh, good conversation there. There are some follow on items. There’s things on the agenda tonight. Specifically the amicus brief, Uh, request for three A and then as Bill mentioned, ongoing, um Milestones for the school.

Uh, lastly on, uh, the Gordon Conwell. Just a quick update. We’ve we’ve continued to have conversations we’ve received, uh Notes from some of the abutters. We’ve, uh, we’ve met with the developer and they would love to engage with some of the abutters. So if you are an abutter or you you’ve

reached out to us, We may reach back out to ask if you’re comfortable being connected with the developer because they’d like to have direct conversations with abutters as opposed to going through. Uh, the town itself. Uh, we continue to remain optimistic about what they’re trying to do,

and and the benefits to the town and work both with Gordon Conwell and with the developer, uh to, um, try to sort of move. Project forward in the most thoughtful and low impact way that we can, um so more on that as it unfolds, but I, I think right now we’re still waiting.

They’re in their due diligence, period and we’re working with, uh, our attorneys to to work on those draft agreements and MO US so That’s sort of the update on those two things. Um, Joe? Anything. Yeah, I just want to add, um because Rosie referenced it, Uh, week late Friday we got, um uh

Communication from the state from the depart the executive Office of housing and livable communities that the safe harbor invocation has been upheld by the state. Um then we were waiting to hear from attorney Amy Queso with KP law today, so she kind of got back to us late this afternoon with

some What the what The. Next steps would be, uh, for the ZB, a chair and the planning director, Um The applicant still has the opportunity to appeal HL C’s ruling to the housing appeals committee. Um, we don’t know yet whether they’re going to do that or not, so there’s more to come on that,

but as at this moment that the town’s invocation of safe harbor has been upheld, so Um all right. Any additional. Do. You have comments. We have a couple of people at the podium. Sure. I just, um, I. I mentioned it at Wednesday’s meeting. I just thought I could do it again in this forum, uh,

to request Um, if the encouragement of the school committee to come up with an alternate choice for the voters for next April so that they voted for the consolidation for a certain amount of money and being reimbursed by the state. If we could encourage the school committee if they really

care about the kids, so it’s not an all or nothing. A R a, You know, Bring up to code of Cutler option That would be secondary. So if the consolidation doesn’t pass, which I think has a good probability we wouldn’t have to wait 10 years to actually do something for the Children and

I understand the state can’t support two projects. But if we could encourage A, um, exploration of an option without state and they’re in those presentations. And I think certainly we can have further conversations with the school committee. But. I think the thought was If that fails, we know roughly from the math from the state what it would

cost to renovate those buildings, so it would just then be a matter of instead of doing something and getting reimbursement. We would go to the town at the next town meeting and ask for, you know, $40 million or whatever we decide to do to start renovating the schools one by one, so that would be the plan.

It wouldn’t be that we’d have to wait 12 years to. I mean, that’s the way it was presented at the Wednesday meeting. We don’t get reimbursement, right? So If. You’re not getting reimbursement. It’s just a matter of The, the school district, saying We need $40 million for this school and the town bonds it and votes for it.

There’s nothing that goes to the state because they’re not. It’s not a branch pro process or program. We’re just choosing to pay out of pocket for that, OK. It’s just it telegraphs to the community that you’re sort of putting all your eggs in one basket, and I think that it would make sense to have a

another strategy more vetted. I know people that are in the industry that think those, um, estimates for the renovation were really out of whack, which makes sense because doing new is More money and easier to quote, But. Um, I think it would be a great way to make sure that we’re actually

supporting our kids, which we all do so it doesn’t become a false choice. So any support that we can have? That’d be great Look at those numbers and that deck, the the renovation is is infinitely more expensive. Then the new construction I. I have builders that say the

exact engineers that say the exact opposite So I just think that it just needs and I don’t need to argue it like because we’re not neither of us are in that area. But. I do know I have talked to engineers in the industry who say that’s false and they’ve actually stood in these meetings and have said

that, like when the consultants came and spoke in December, he said, That’s just not true. And. He does this for a living. So I. I think that it could be more vetted out and be a more realistic ex, You know, estimate and then we could actually really prove that we are Something for our kids if

it doesn’t pass, But this one does. Then. We can execute that one instead of waiting because we do care about our kids. We want them to be in safe schools, But we You know it. It doesn’t It doesn’t bode well to put all of our eggs in one basket,

knowing that there’s a high probability of it not passing Thank you. No I. I think that’s Caroline, How. Do. You think that’s a smart parallel path. I wasn’t at the meeting. Hopefully Eric and others heard that if you mentioned it, then, um, but I do think, Caroline if we are out talking to the fin

com we should and we have those numbers even using those we should look at outline the capital costs and the tax impact separately versus You Know. What what John offered to do for the consolidated school and again that Whether we agree with the inputs, I think is a separate conversation.

But Those numbers are all in those decks that were presented and I think John was just going to sort of walk through them and and sort of show what those tax impacts are. I mean? I agree with Deb if we wanted to do those things in parallel You

know we can talk. We can talk about that, but I think it’s also just a bandwidth of the group of people that are focused on one You know haven’t been doing the other but happy to walk through those numbers with John at a later time and as the school liaison for this, like what? I will certainly

have the discussion, and I would When. You do that. I assume that you can get ST money for one of the schools And I guess maybe when you’re I didn’t see that in that. I can’t hear. I’m Sorry. Yeah. The question is if you’re doing renovations, um, could you

apply to and get funding from the state? Or? Is it just on new school build, That’s. I don’t know the answer. It was only Renault ad. I believe so if you renovate an ad You can file for money. If. You completely build new You can apply. But if it’s just If.

It’s just renovations that those costs are not covered by reimburse. Well. Well. There’s a major repairs program, which the schools have applied to for the high school roof for for some reimbursements, so they won’t do upgrades, but major repairs to say the heating system and so forth. Yes there

is there Is that possibility. I don’t know where we would be on list, but it certainly is important given the tax impact of Consolidated school. Important to think about that. And. Certainly. This is a very vocal group, and it’s important to make sure that this information gets disseminated to people in your in your groups to attend school

committee meetings and discuss this with them as well. Yep. Uh I. I hadn’t heard that We had those rental numbers outside the MS B A or those publicly available, uh, that we can show the numbers and how he came to those numbers to other building experts. Do. We have those available. Uh, I mean John,

McGrath and those the school Building Committee have those They were in the sort of the The presentation where they showed the final three options. There were multiple tables in there around the costs. Um That are that are publicly available there. I don’t know where they’re keeping all that information. But, if we I’m

happy to reach out to John separately as well, so it should be in the march 18th meeting you and I also heard you also. I’m sorry to interrupt. Those were also just, um, estimates those weren’t actual numbers so so keep keep that in mind as well. It would just be good to have somebody

else. Look at them as well because, like like we alluded earlier, there was building engineers that thought those numbers were exorbitant. So we having a second set of eyes doesn’t hurt. Right. Look. Take a look at how we came out. And again. Those are just architects. Um, estimates is

what I was told at one of the meetings with the Op M owners project manager and that there are not specific numbers yet until they get into it, so I also heard, uh, Caroline allude that you know, she understood one of the reasons they picked

that choice. 3.4 was it was, I think it came down to a cost per child? Uh, tax revenue or whatnot? Um and I and I heard you were implying you’re gonna have an info session with John. Maybe to explain that a little more, but I think one thing we’ve learned through, especially the turf fields is

if the town wants something they’ll pay for it, especially if it’s for the Children. So. They’re saying to you or the school board. Quite clearly they don’t want that 3.4. So we’re spending 10 months on these schematics for something they’ve Pretty. Much know they’re not gonna get passed in town vote so that was you know

why we’re employing LA imploring last week. Please go with the other option, even one of the members on the school board was imploring with the school board. Please go for a different option that has a more viable chance to pass a vote. Um, so you know again. One thing you learned through this town is that they’re

willing to pay for something. If. It’s good for the Children and they want and it’s good for the for the town, And. I think that something not 3.4 would have a better chance, even if it’s outside the MSP, a Yep. Yeah, and I think they all and I I You’re right about a lot of

but I’ll just say the school also positioned it as they can help more students, You know with the one consolidated school and hit all the students in elementary grades versus doing waiting 10 years to do three private elementaries and having kids continue in port. They also deny all the studies that say smaller schools are

better for Children for this great Children, so and I think to do this parallel path, I think in a like they cited Hopkinson to me as a as the much more kids in the school, and it’s ranked In the state and so I. I’m asking these questions, but I encourage everyone. You know I.

I appreciate you coming here to tell us as well. But. You know those Thursday nights are important, too, And, you know They’ll stay on it. Thank you for your comments, Bill. I would also like to bring it to the attention of this committee and the school committee and I will bring this up. Yes.

You’re looking forward. What about all the Children that have gone through those buildings and did not experience a brand new state of the art school. Two out of three of my Children will be those Children. We want to do the right thing for the community? We want to support As. Jeff mentioned financially

the options that make sense for the most amount of Children. Many of us have grown Children or Children that will not benefit. I think the argument about the right now. Is not fiscally responsible if we look at neighboring towns in the way that they’ve done it Thank you.

Hello again. Ellen Wright for Asbury Ave. Well. We’re on the topic of fiscal responsibility. School consolidation developers consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars. Consultants for this consultants for that I came in late to the question to the, um challenges and opportunities for him last week, but I heard from a couple of people.

The Zoom meeting got hacked by some sort of crazed porno guy, and it was just sort of hell on wheels. So tell me, we Thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars for consultants to research projects that really aren’t going to be. Pass a town meeting if we’re being honest,

but you can’t scrape together a measly Some to put a cybertech expert on retainer to make sure the town’s computer services Internet is secure. Fiscal responsibility, like Let’s talk about the fundamentals here. Hello, McFly. I respond to that. Yeah. Yeah? Yeah, because so the issue with the Zoom bombing

last week there’s there’s been no Invasion of our town server systems. We actually have a very good cyber cyber security system. In fact, Above and beyond what our insurer wants us to have. We’re part of a North Shore consortium where we get cyber security measures as part of that group, Zoom has

some tools that are available to help keep that type of thing from happening, but they require you to lock the meeting because it’s a public meeting. I can’t walk the meeting. It’s People get in because they have the password. They get in and then they can do crazy things

this we’re working on it. The police are investigating it. They’re working with zoom to try to identify the person. We have hundreds of meetings over Zoom since nine since 2020. It’s happened twice. It’s It stinks. It’s awful It was gross. We turned it off right away. I feel badly for it. We use zoom

as a convenience for our residents, so that if you can’t get here, and you want to participate, you can I would we start making a comment that if something like that happens in the future, get off the zoom meeting and pick it WW camera. Come on down. Our meetings are in person almost all the time.

And unless there’s a reason to have an a zoom only meeting we generally have in person meetings with the zoom component to provide a convenience service to the residents, But there’s nothing in the zoom that allows me without locking To. Keep somebody from coming in that has the code and then misbehaving. I can remove them

from the meeting. But at that moment in time at that meeting, we felt it was better to just close the meeting because the time it would take to remove the person and would they try to S sneak back in it? It was just a I’m sorry. It was Disappointment, but just to reiterate Joe’s point as

someone in cybersecurity for my day job, it had nothing to do with our network or infrastructure. That was all that was from zoom. So Um, I would also just remind us like we’re gonna go into a couple of, um it was it was the the zoom. The Zoom was made public to everyone to access and so

there’s the security concerns with Zoom when you have a public facing webinar, that people that know what they’re doing with cyber security can hack into that and then gain control of the screen. It has nothing to do with our network and infrastructure. It zoom security features when you have

a public facing meeting, people can get that public link. And, then if they have the skills they can break into it. When Advertise a meeting. We advertise the link, so make it easy for everybody to get to. So. Anybody who’s searching for a meeting to try to get into No.

It’s unfortunate. Uh, maybe I’ll just ask you, Um I’ve not been to one of these meetings before, So. I don’t know what the protocol is of Le Soma 351 Bay Road. Um Two Topics get discussed in order or should I just I wanted to talk about this amicus brief on this 38 items on the agenda. Get talked

in order unless somebody on the board moves. Take it out of that. Yeah, I Did I kind of got out of the path but we we still a public comment. No, I just wanted to talk on the school really quick because we were talking about that That’s just

kind of make a point to get back to 270 Asbury Street. I’m talking on behalf of myself as an individual citizen, I just want to be clear on that my concern about the school is Um We have the school consolidation and I know some people have brought it up.

But. If three A happens in town, and there’s unlimited occupants and unlimited bedrooms. How. Many Children will that be And? Will? We need another $150 Million school, So. I’m bringing that up because If. Every unit had one child. That’s a $15 million increase to our town budget of like 35 Million, So I think

There’s a lot of things swirling around together, and I think it’s important that we keep that in mind as well. So. I feel like they go together with with, um, the school consolidation. So. Thank you services? Yep. I agree. Uh so we will move on I. I do just wanna say like knowing that

there’s a lot of, um Items on the agenda tonight that folks have deep feelings about and given how we started the meeting. Like. I just asked that you know, being antagonistic to the board. Or to each other. Is it not helpful. And you know, we’re we’re all here together to try

to figure this out. So as we move through these items if we have, you know thoughts we want to share. I welcome folks to engage in the conversation. But let’s all sort of be respectful. Uh, when we start getting antagonistic, I think people shut down. Nobody feels good. You know people feel bullied and harassed, So. Let’s just

try to keep it, you know, kind as best that we can Um So moving to the consent agenda. I will certainly, uh, entertain a motion to approve the revised minutes of June 3rd 2024. So moved Uh, I’ll. Just make one note. Um Laurie emailed me today There was a couple of misspellings. Uh, just a couple

of names that were misspelled. So. Um if we could just amend that to approve the minutes um as amended, um, that I’ll send those around as Laura amended. Um there’s just three spelling typos so moved with amendments as mentioned by Tom Myers. Second Any further discussion. Second, Tom Awesome. Oh, sorry, Tom. Um All right. We’ll take a

roll call vote, starting with Tom. Tom Myers. Yes. Rosie Kennedy. I Bill Wilson. Yes. Hey. Caroline Bull you? Yes. All. Right. Um, look at us just running a mere 25 minutes behind. Uh, all right, the first topic on the agenda is approve the application for permanent outdoor seating for

15 walnut disgust and vote. Um, I believe we already approved their temporary outdoor seating, and now there’s been a change. And. They can apply more permanently, and that’s why this is back to us. Is that correct, Joe? Yeah, And, Just so you know if you have questions, Monica hows from, uh,

15 walnut and, uh, serenity Group is here to answer your questions. But. Yes. This is essentially the state passed a law that makes the outdoor seating that was allowed during the covid to be permanent through the local licensing authority in Hamilton. That’s the Select board. Um it doesn’t

need to go through the state or any other hoops. The permanent. The permit is seasonal and Essentially what happens is the number of seats that, uh, 15 walnut puts outside on their patio get removed from the inside, So. There’s no increase in capacity, and they make sure that they do it in a way that

keeps the the public way clear so that people can walk back and forth. Uh, it’s been approved, Uh, every year during Covid, and it’s now been approved again. This, uh by your department heads, they’ve all signed off on it. They have no questions. It’s gonna operate the way it’s been

operating in the last several years. Um, if you approve it And in your packet. You can see there’s there’s been a lot of additional conversation between Russ and the building inspector and everybody else so it feels Including the fire chief. So, uh, that’s all in the packet for review if folks have

additional questions or concerns, so it still would be seasonal, though, and and the building inspector would advise. Why. Is there any structure being built above or around it or It’s just part of the approval process for for liquor licenses, And, but there’s not an intent to there’s no, There’s no permanent structure.

OK. He was he was required to sign off on it when it was temporary, too. So Got it. I have no further questions, so I’ll make a motion that we approve the permanent seating at 15 walnut as outlined in our packet. I Um all right. Any further discussion. Yeah I. I just have a couple of questions.

Um, and I think they’ve already been answered. But just to confirm this. The number of outdoor seats will remain the same as it was during Covid. Is that correct? Yup. Monica. Hi. Do. You wanna come and chat with us if we have any questions, OK, So so few receipts. Our occupancy is for

99. And so, um We’re putting. I think it’s 44 tops and two or one or 22 tops outside, So. It’s less than we’ve done in years past. Um, but it’s just something that we do like to offer for. Yeah II. I think that’s a nice idea, and I was on the board. Previously.

When we approved this. I think it was 36 seats that we approve? It was initially Yeah, but that means we have to remove those seats from inside the restaurant. So, just keeping a small patio so that we don’t have to remove as many seats in in from inside. OK. So. You’re planning less OK, that’s that’s

fine and And, um You’ve had no issues from the police with noise or, um, untoward behaviors at all. OK, audio shuts down pretty early. I know. OK great. I just wanted to ask that. That’s great. Thank you. Anything else? No. Did you bring samples? Awesome all right. Uh, if no further discussion, we can take a vote,

starting with Tom. Tom Myers? Yes Rosie Kennedy I. Bill Wilson. Yes, Caroline you yes. The eyes haven’t Thanks, Monica. Um all right. The. Next is appointment of boards and committee members to fill expiring terms and vacancies. Discussion and vote. Uh, if you go into your packet, I believe it’s a page 22. Of the packet.

Is that right? Yeah, In addition to the, uh the the list of reappoints that were on there. Uh, you could. There are two applications for filling vacancies. Um, Michael Madden to the ZB A as an alternate, and, uh, Chris Wolston to the fin com as an alternate Is that correct? No. Is it to to take a

seat in the, uh you you the board could choose to take all of these in one vote if you like. It’s up to you. Yeah, Just the amendment that, uh, we did receive word from Natalie Hildreth that she would like to withdraw her name, so she is in the packet, but she would will no longer be seeking

appointment to the Cultural Council. Sure. I’ll make a motion that we that we approve these reappointments and appointments. Uh, in one vote. As Amanda right with a as amended. That’s correct. Sorry. Second All right. Um, any Well, it is there are there comments and if so, do we wanna go? Uh, appointment by appointment or

do we want? Are there just any in particular that we wanted to discuss. Um, you You’ve typically not done a lot of changes to the reappointment list. You’re changing a little bit where you have two new members, but, uh, they’re both here If. You. Wanna, uh, reference them, but they were supported their their app applications. Applications were

supported by the board chairs with letters that are in your packets, so they’ve been vetted by their boards. Um Yeah. I. I. Just think I’ll. I’ll. Just make a comment. Caroline. If I May that this was something I didn’t know. But at the ZB. Um I was a past member of the Town Hall Building Committee and

prior to my appointment to that committee I discovered at the ZB. A, Um, appointment discussion for Michael Madden that he had previously been on the town Hall Building Committee and as a person who spent a lot of hours, um, working for that committee people who put time To that are

admirable, So. I. Appreciate that and, um so I would certainly endorse somebody who’s willing to work hard for the town. OK? Absolutely. And. I think all of us have worked with these folks in some capacity or another over the last Few years and I mean I think everyone on here I could say With the exception of a

hand feed that I I just don’t know have done a really incredible job so I have no comments any further discussion. I’m good. All, right. I’ll take a roll call vote, but we’ll start with Bill this time to keep things interesting. Bill Wilson? Yes. Rosie Kennedy. I Tom Meyers. Yes. Caroline Bowie

Loop. Yes. Uh, the the yeses have it. It’s unanimous. Um All, right next. Congratulations everybody on your appointments and reappointments. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Thanks, Everybody. Wow. Uh, I just was wondering if anybody came prepared with a speech that we didn’t allow. If. Somebody wants to speak. They’re welcome

to Yeah, I hate that we didn’t give folks that opportunity. Um OK. The. Next is the uh, review of draft agreements related to Gordon Conwell student housing and discuss with attorney Jonathan Whitton. We have John or did have John go? I see, John is on the zoom with us to review Um, the documents that

he has provided to us. John. Do you want to kick us off with anything? Good evening, Madam Chair members of the board. So the the drafts that I prepared are from 1000. Miles high. They’re They’re broad. Uh And. Really, Uh, open the door for the conversation from the

select board as to what other requirements Or conditions to a development agreement would be appropriate for what we know is the proposed project. From the developers perspective. And. What would be the remaining potential development on the Gordon Conwell campus, so the development agreements would be contracts or are contracts that would bind in the first case.

The developer in the second case, the the seminary. Would but would bind their future project and or future projects when it relates to the seminary. So the way it’s drafted, these would be voluntary considerations made by the developer or a seminary, and they would, as drafted, would run with the land and would be

tethered to a subsequent purchaser. So if the seminary were to sell the remaining portion of the of the campus, the Development agreement would apply to that future use and similarly from the developers development agreement if the developer were to try and flip the entire project, the conditions of the development agreement would run with the

land there, so they’re written broadly connected to the property in the respective cases. And again really require the select board to to discuss both the numeric. I deliberately left out the numbers but also issues of impact from particularly the proposed development and concerns were kind of preparing for potential new developments

on the seminary side, so it’s an opportunity to kind of look at the prospect of the 102 acres in a big picture and impose restrictions, constraints that Voluntarily offered by both parties now so that you’re preparing and planning for the future that that’s the approach. And this is specifically I just wanna be Sure. I understand this is

specifically the agreement between us and the developer and not us and Gordon Conwell. Right. There’s two, So. There’s one as between the town and the prospective developer, I see, and then this one with with the seminary. OK so there was a monetary contribution in both

of them. I see? Yes and I was very careful to not put numbers in that the these are political decisions, not legal, so I’ve kind of framed it for the slug boards. Discussion, OK? The. Uh, the one with the Gordon Conwell does actually have a number in it because it was offered by Gordon Car previously discussed

in executive session, so I left that there just for your edification. Um That’s the figure that the seminary has offered to this point, so Yeah. Um And I think Yeah, so just context for folks listening. There are things that Gordon Conwell has has sort of entered

into talks with us. To do sort of in good faith as we sort of go through this process, And. Then there’s the conversation that we’re having directly with the developer. And and those are those are sort of split. There are some things that one impacts the other. So, for

example, the 25% Affordable at 80% AM. We’ve requested 25%, but that could end up sort of sliding one way or the other because the percentage of a AMI or percentage of affordable could affect the sale price. And. So, Um, that’s just something to keep in mind. We everybody knows the 25%. We haven’t gotten a ton of

pushback to date. We feel pretty good about it. Uh, but again Where even though we’re negotiating with the developer itself, it does impact coordinate so it it It sort of all goes round and round. Ma’am chair, the the one kind of outlier that we haven’t discussed in the past. Joe and

I have discussed it briefly, but but it’s now before the select board is in the draft with the seminary. I included, Uh, it’s paragraph B, as in boy, a paragraph, at least in outline form to think about a possible right of first refusal with the seminary for the future, So write. A first

refusal would require the landowner to provide the town with a right to refuse. And offer first. It’s a wonderful thing for the town to have, uh, the town is the beneficiary of rights of first refusals on 61, A and 61 B property, So. It would be that similar approach here and I, I think From the

seminary’s perspective, There’s no harm in it at all. There’s no exposure. Uh, but from the town’s perspective it it really allows you to be there first, as opposed to the private sector. Yeah, that makes sense. Um I mean, Certainly. The board can discuss this further. I.

I think you know we went into this hoping I think the The cash payment from Gordon is certainly part of it. But when it comes to the developer, most of where we’ve centered, our efforts have been on trying to secure the highest amount of affordable that we can as well as assurances that the use of

the building will make remain largely the same use that it is now, which is, you know, apartment rental housing without expansion, You know any current planned expansion to the space. Um, but if there are folks here who come to comment about additional, uh, requirements or things that

they want to see it, Certainly, we can talk about that. But most of our efforts have really been there. So that what we’re saying is this 11 acres That’s being you know, sold to this developer. It’s currently a res. You know it’s a, uh Apartments for lack of a word, and we’re

we’re literally saying no change to the footprint of the building. The. The Renovations are all interior renovations. It will continue to be used. The. Only thing now is that it actually goes on to, you know, online to the market so we will receive some tax revenue again.

This is not a huge victory in terms of we’re getting huge amounts of tax revenue, but we currently get zero and so for the rental we we get Tax revenue, But. Um, I know we received, you know, emails and comments and Facebook comments from folks, uh, who have other expectations of the agreement

and things that we put in there, but I just want to be clear that we we are sort of focused on those two things. Uh, right now. And, ma’am chair. The. Um, so this is the draft agreement with the department developers so paragraph, C and D, as drafted, would have a cap on the number of dwelling units

and then D. As. A suggestion would be a cap on the number of bedrooms, the the number of bedrooms are probably capped by the physical Layout of the structures already, but something to the board to to certainly consider, um I’d also want to add and to to the select board that these drafts

do not presume any permitting hurdles that either the developer or the SE I need to go through, and they need to go through them there. There’s no question about that. Um, there’s a detailed process that has to take place to determine whether or not a The reuse of the dormitories would be

permissible. These development agreements. Drafts just presume that either the developer of the seminary will work those issues out. Yeah. Yeah, There’s no promise from the town to make an allowance that they have to follow the permitting rules period. Do. We know how many current bedrooms there are

across all units, I don’t off hand, but I can find that out. OK. Yeah. I mean, I. Also try to get not only that right last meeting. We wanted to get how many are occupied now because we had some concern that it was also said that some people

would just stay in those units, so those likely wouldn’t go towards that 25%. I mean for me. The 25% is the the the most important thing in this document. Um, but I, I wanna know how many bedrooms and who’s living there now and how many would stay in those 209

units? Yeah. Um I mean in a curiously like they would. My understanding is that even if folks come back or decide to go back in, like during the renovations I don’t know if there would be sort of a displacement period or or how that works, but everybody would have to be newly contracted

through. The, property manager of the developer. Um So they would at that point, I think anything in John Keep me honest. Like If we’ve said it has to be 25%. And. I think we talked about local preference and like the lottery and sort of, you

know, tying all of that in Even if if they decided that 50% of those are going to be occupied by existing residents, that wouldn’t count towards that, unless they went through that process for To, the 25% affordable. Um they could stay in those units. If. That’s the agreement that was made but

They wouldn’t like be grandfathered into the affordable housing they would have to apply, just like everybody else. And 25% of them would still in addition to that be affordable units. That’s correct. That’s a nice way of saying it. The Devil’s in the details in terms of how many units the developer actually proposes, but But that’s

absolutely right if the agreement is 25% to be rented below market than those 25% have to be rented below market that that’s a contractual obligation to the development had I. I should all That in terms of the Um, local preference issue. It’s It’s a very sensitive issue nationwide. In, Massachusetts, local preference is still permissible.

It’s frowned upon. Uh it’s very difficult to get the Commonwealth to approve local preference programs, but I put it in here anyways, because in a lot of jurisdictions that’s really, really important so Let’s Keep it in it. It may not be plausible at the end of the day, but it certainly

contractually permissible whether or not the town can get the state to join in is a different story, but but that is in this draft. Do. You think that local preference I know that we think that it’s a very outside chance that we could get 100% on our SH. I do you think Putting a local

preference. In here hurts our chances. In any way going forward? No. I mean there’s politics here. There’s That’s clear, but no, I. Don’t. I don’t believe so That would be really impermissible for the Commonwealth to disregard Hamilton because we’re trying to negotiate a local prevalence. It’s really apples and oranges. It’s a fair question, but no I.

I don’t think that in and of itself is But. OK, So. I have some questions, John. Good evening first. Hi. It’s nice to see you again. So my first question is when we talk about the agreement with the S Seminary you take you’re saying that this is also, um, an MOU.

This is not part of an actual binding development agreement. Is that correct? Not well, I think it’s semantic. So an MOU, in my opinion is a contract. The Development agreement is a contract. The Or per SE as a contract, so no II. I drafted this with the intent of it

being a contract between the town and and the seminary If. The. Two parties can reach terms so no it it the intent of the frame here. The framework is for it to be contractual seminaries portion of this. Yes, Absolutely. Yes, So. OK, So this is not an MOU with the seminary. It would be some

version of a development agreement, right? That’s correct again. The The. How it’s labeled is not relevant. In my opinion, it’s whether or not it creates a contractual promise. And the way I’ve envisioned these documents would be there would be contractual problems, right? OK, so then it would be more than an MOU. OK. All. Right. So.

My. Next comment is, um so and obviously the agreement with the developer at this phase, you’re introducing the concept of a voluntary MOU, So. I. Just Wanna wanna make clear that we are talking about a non legally binding document with the developer if it is in the form of an MMOU. It certainly

outlines intentions and expectations, but it does not bind the developer legally. Is that correct? Oh re respectfully I. I would argue that the agreement with the the draft with the developer would also be contractually binding. The only part of this draft that would look like it’s a gift, as opposed to a contract would be the the monetary

donation. And the and and the reason for that is the town doesn’t have leverage with the seminary to extract money. That. The money extraction from the seminary or the developer will have to be made voluntarily. It has to be offered by the developer or the seminary because there’s no permit at

least the way we’re drafting this Now there’s no permits. There’s no quid pro quos here. The Town is not providing Anything beyond what it would provide. Any developer or any institution in the town of Hamilton. So I. I would say both are drafted with the intent of of them being binding Kind. OK, so so then they would

be more than Mo US. They would be legally binded. OK and so my next. My Next comment here. Um, and these are just comments for us to further discuss that this developer although he’s local, certainly, Um if one looks into their, um Business plan the the way that they conduct their their business. They buy

multifamily apartments, um, developments and then they’re known to keep them for maybe 5 to 7 years and then resell. So. Um, I. I’m not sure that we could count on this developer as being a long term neighbor. Maybe. We can but looking at their, um, company information,

it’s it’s not their norm. Do that and then the next comment that that I would like to make Is that the Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary Um Has And this was told to me directly by somebody in authority at the seminary. That. They have rented apartments. Um Graduated and certainly we have sympathy

for people who don’t make a lot of money. But. Those students who graduate and then take a full time employment are not students and they’re not employees. Therefore. There is a question of whether the seminary has breached the Dover amendment, and that’s something that we need to look at very

carefully in our negotiations with the seminary. The Seminary, um, not currently, but certainly past um Past administration at the seminary has been, um shall we say less than candid and less than forthcoming with some of their promises that they made to the town and so I want to make

1000% sure that the town is not looking overlooking any opportunity to make sure that a development agreement is as favorable to Hamilton as possible? I appreciate those comments. Rosie I would ask in light of that. What else would you like to see in this agreement that would Meet that

criteria. Well. I Think the seminary. Um May have to think about It’s um it’s Um Receipt. It’s. It’s financial gain from this development for, um, from from the developer that It may need to, uh, rethink how much it’s willing to settle for, um, because the developer if we’re really working hard to get 25% affordable units, which would

help this town immensely, it would put to rest all the fear anxiety cost to town infrastructure. That that we we would we would have certainty that there isn’t going to be something coming down the pike and this would help the town and greatly and it would also help the seminary to, um To for

maybe some of the issues in the past and become a very good neighbor to the town, so I would like to see this issue of whether the Gordon Conwell um Seminary breached its Dover amendment, and how badly did they breach it? And it is it something that can be rectified by, um, renegotiating with the

developer to, um, accept a lower price in exchange for a 25% from the developer so that it would be a very positive experience for the seminary for the developer and for the town of Hamilton, who is such an integral player in the the For decades and decades. So I. I Think, um, just to clarify

currently. The developer is on board so far with 25% and so is Gordon Conwell. So I. I guess, I, I think when Cromwell said that they reached an agreement with the developer to do 10 to 25% so but But our agreement then has they don’t control how much The in developer decides to do the developer does, and

that’s why we’re we have a second agreement in here directly with the developer because the developer actually negotiates with the town, not Gordon. Conwell, Um, now for us to say that we require that Gordon Conwell make it a condition of the sale that it’d be 25%. I mean we we could John,

I would defer to you like we could do that. But If we thwart Gordon Conwell from being able to sell We, then take a developer who’s already told us that they’re willing to work with us at 25%, and we sort of Inadvertently agitate the wholesale, which could make all parties less. You know

convivial about the 25%. So. I just wanna go back to the question about like when we look at these specific two agreements. What language. Are. We asking to be added. Well. There isn’t any agreement from From the other side yet this is our high level. Um, draft of an agreement between the developer

and the town of Hamilton, so we don’t have anything from them, saying that they’re going to provide 25% of these are our draft agreements, and there’s two there’s one between us and Gordon and us between one between us and the developer, and I’m hearing you say that you want us to sort of push

harder, and I’m saying If. This is the mechanism by which which we push harder. What language. Would you like us to add or what conditions would you like us to add to these documents? To me to meet those expectations. Well, I think, Um John just made a statement that to get 25% affordable units.

They, um, developer may ask to pay a lower purchase price and we don’t know if a seminary is going to be willing to do that. So. I think the reality is this is a, um, a three way negotiation, And, so I would like to see the seminary.

Doing it share of accepting, um if if it was necessary if the developer said, Well, we’d have to pay less. If the if we’re going to agree to the towns 25% request on affordable housing. So then Gordon Conwell would have to be on board with that In a sense. Um B voluntarily take her lower amount, knowing

that it would benefit the town of Hamilton who has benefited this. The seminary and its students. Decades and decades. So That would then be in our development agreement with Board in Conwell. We would require that the sale of Residential you anything that’s for residential use would require 25% at 80% AMI. So.

I. Guess, John. You could add that into the development agreement. So that’s paragraph E. The draft with with, uh, the seminary. So. What I did what I did. And And. I’m. I kind of anticipated Rosie’s question because we we had talked about this. Joe and I talked about this way back when We.

Originally, if if I could just kind of digress for a second man chair we originally had talked about an agreement solely with the seminary because the seminary controls the 102 acres. The Planning board was working diligently on an overlay district for 100 and two acres, a lot of time and

energy was spent on that and then the seminary. Kind of shifted gears and said, We’re not interested in conveying the 102 acres or redeveloping it. We’re just interested in the lower residential dormitory piece, unbeknownst to the town, there was a development agreement or a purchase and sale agreement entered into

with the third party. So. We now have an arrangement between the seminary and the third party that the town cannot interfere with. So all we can do all the town can do now is to negotiate with both parties. And the way I drafted. This Development Agreement is kind

of built and suspenders. So the 25% If that’s the number of the select board wants to push for. That requirement is in both development agreements. And so that would that would kind of respond to the concern of W. We’re kind of dealing with an entity we we’re not familiar

with the developer, but we are familiar with the seminary. So. Let’s get that restriction in place. So. So we’ve done that. I don’t think we need to have it in bulk. If. The conversations with those two parties go well, but for now it’s in both drugs. It it just it. Caroline may, uh so Carolyn

and I met with the new owners today over Zoom, Uh, briefly just to introduce the concept of a an agreement with them, and they were open to it. And. They were they were OK with the 25%. So I. I told him that subject to what the select board decides tonight we’d be

presenting them with a draft agreement for them to review and respond to and that 25% was gonna be our request and that and they didn’t flinch at that. So. I cautiously optimistic that both parties we’ve already had the same Was, uh, President sunquist so costly, optimistic that as you’ve requested, Rosie and Bill we Put 25% in the

draft agreement, and that’ll be part of our request when we present that to them. You know if I could just say one more piece. Just thank you, Joe for for raising that, because one of the things municipality never knows, is the future of a proposed transaction. As between the developer and the

seminar, we we have no control of it. You’ll never know it. It’s behind closed doors, so it’s entirely possible. I’m not suggesting anything, But. It’s possible that the agreement between the developer and the seminary won’t be fulfilled. It’ll fall apart in that The benefit of having this restriction in the seminary agreement means the select

board won’t have to revisit this every time there’s a new suitor for the residential unit, So. That’s really the the The approach here. So. I had a couple of things. We’ve been, uh Painfully transparent, I think on both sides that you know, I. I don’t Don’t quote me on these numbers, but I think

there’s what 209 209 units and and to Rosie’s earlier comment like that. Either meats or slightly Less. Maybe. It’s slightly more than fulfills our full SH. I 10% safe harbor number, So. We are very motivated to make sure that you know if this goes through that 25% number, especially if we if

we were able to get all 100% now, obviously, we don’t that puts Whatever the dumb I can’t do the math 40. What. Is it 4050 units or so 251. But we don’t know how many right Because if only 100 if 100 are used already, And there’s only

100 that can go into you know, some type of, uh of the 25%. Now. You cut it in half, right? No? No? No, no, it’s it is based on the number of units in the development and that they can’t guarantee 80%. We are saying that of this entire development 25. That needs to

be if 100 are occupied. They then would have to disproportionately allocate the remaining units to meet that 25% of we have to be 100, right? All of them have to be. We’re basically saying we need 50 affordable units in this building. If there’s 200 units and 100 of them were occupied.

The remaining 150 of them are gonna be You know. Count towards that, Um That number. Well, uh, you when? When it changes hands? Uh, you the issue is 25% of the 209 apartments. So III. I. Don’t think whoever is there living there now or or not living

there is is is relevant to the sale of all the units, you’ll have to reapply to with the new and in order for it to count as, uh, affordable housing units. There is a rules state and federal rules and guidelines. About. How. Those units get filled. There’s uh uh A lottery

process and everything else that they have to find that the developer has to do so. We know that the people that go into the affordable units will have met those requirements because there it’s very strict about how they do that. Yeah. But, according to, UM, President Sunquist when I met with him

last month, Um he felt very, um, secure that he has a lot of diversity in in the residence. And so we would they would hopefully, um, be eligible for the local Preference lottery, So. That’s one way that could help their their residence as well. So anyhow, there there

are a lot of ways to do it, but I just wanted to clarify that if the apartments are sold, it would be en masse. 209 units and 25% of those would be, um we are requesting would be, um, reserved for affordable and then whatever needs to be worked out is between the state and the developer. They would

manage the fair housing So forth. However. They do it. We do know it can be done. And so that’s why I think this is a good opportunity for the seminary. It’s a good opportunity for the town and why not work hard to make it happen? So the only other thing I might add in section E, you

know, based on Rosemary’s comments as if if it changes hands in 5 to 7 years, do we need to protect ourselves on? Uh, the sale of the property? Uh, and that this restriction remains with the property so great, great question. And and that is why in both agreements

I reference 184 sections. 31 and 32, who many folks in the audience are probably familiar and I. I know the Select board is familiar with conservation restrictions. It’s the same statutory section. So in Massachusetts in order to have a restriction be perpetual. The requirement is to impose a conservation or in this case, an affordable housing

restriction. So the the reason for imposition of an affordable housing restriction is the restriction would run with the land perpetually. So if the first developer is developer A and developer a sells to developer B and then to C. The restriction has run with the land perpetually, so by the

time it gets to the developer Z, it’s still in place. And, and that’s really, uh, kind of the holy grail of restrictions. Otherwise they will expire in the Massachusetts. They expire after 30 years if they’re not re-recorded, so this this would be the assurance that the units would remain affordable in perpetuity. That would be great.

OK? So. Uh, I. I. Just Wanna be mindful that you know, we we talk a lot about What we hope and what we wanna do, But this this is the method through which we’re doing Those things and so and I know that some For some folks, this is maybe the

first time we’re seeing it, but, um In a bit of a not a crunch, but like we do need to decide what the terms of these agreements are gonna be. And if there’s anything we’re going to add or adjust, and so I would, but I sort of give it back to

the board to say, like what further process would you all like to go through? To ensure that this represents the needs, Um That that we’ve heard and that we want in here because again, we can talk about how we wanna do XY and Z. But this is

the method through which we do it. It is these two agreements that we’re putting together. To give to you know the the the The Seminary and the developer. Um and so if those things are not represented here, we need to make sure that they become represented here and fairly

short order. So. Could we, um, take these have, um until our next meeting to provide edits, and then we can talk about it again at our next meeting. And, then presented to the respective parties. I? Yeah. I mean, I think that’s fine. I would say, Joe as far as they have a 60 day, due diligence

that we are I think we’re a couple of weeks into it. Maybe three weeks into it. So you’ve got You got about Well. We should we should talk about these and if that’s what we wanna do, Because. There are some I mean and thank you, John for highlighting in yellow, but I think if we hit those

comments, or especially in the developer, um Agreement. I’ll. Call it you know that might be helpful to make sure Next time we come together. We’re prepared to To make a final decision. Um, I think the one with the Gordon seems pretty buttoned up. Maybe just the contribution. You know when

that monetary contribution is paid, you know we could discuss but the one with the developer is wide open. I mean I don’t think it’s You know. Should. We talk as a group about what numbers we should put in there. Yeah. I mean I. Also when I ask about the process question like

I, you know, I hate to delay things 14 or 28 days when we each need 15 to 90 minutes to go through it, Um Uh, you know, I am curious when you say there it’s wide open with the developer. Namely because, I I just don’t know. So. We have we

have a blank for mo monetary contribution to the town for impact of future services? That’s the biggest one, I would say. I. I will say that that one might be, though. I mean Joe. You know how, given that the developer does not have You know a lot of these. These are altruistic things right?

They’re not requirements by any stretch like we haven’t talked about a monetary Um, contribution from developer I think that that will surprise them. I mean not that it. It’s not something to ask for, but II. I would like us to have a perspective on like Well, that’s why I mean are we adding

things to this agreement with the developer? So? I mean developer may come back and say, Look fees for, uh, impact of services. That’s what we’re going to pay taxes for, um, that that’s generally what they’d say if if we were asking the developer to make some kind of, um, mitigation mitigation

if we’re asking the developer to help us make, you know, improve. One of the roads leading to where they’re going to enter and exit or or things like that. We could ask for a financial, um Contribution to make those improvements to to Woodbury and and Essex or Woodbury and bridge or

something. Um John can help outline some of the other things that are typically allowed in a mitigation agreement, and we have to sign a a costume, but for services, police fire schools that’s why they pay taxes. We’re not gonna have any financial research on when we’re requesting what those mitigation is like on like, you know, servicing with

plows, you know, sidewalks, you know, trash, you know schools like the impact on the schools like there’s going to be a cost. The town for the overall service. The trash is likely going to be separate because it’s AAA development and they’re probably not gonna be picked up by the time we don’t

pick up, um in places that have more than two units, so we have. We should probably have that in the we should probably include that they’ll have to do PRI. It’s a private road. It’s. It’s just about their entrance on to the two public ways because I didn’t see that in there.

We should have that in there as well. They’re gonna be on private trash and had to maintain their own roads and all of that, But you know, there is gonna be bedrooms with Children that are going to be entering our school system. Do we have Any sort of. Is there any precedent for what Per

child impact would be, you know financially And then we can start looking at numbers of what that might look like from a again They’re gonna be taxpaying. We try to do this with Gordon Conwell over the years and trying to get it. What do we think the tax what?

What Because that’s all part I like where you’re going. What do we think we’ll get for revenue from taxes on there? It’s probably gonna be lower than than average, for sure on the number of units, so it’s gonna be taxed differently. It’s gonna It’s not gonna be so if it was a house or a condo,

you tax at the Full value of the property. You’re not gonna be able to do that. In. This case You’re taxing one owner for all of the units, So. There’s a different calculus that has to be done by the, uh, board assessors. They’ll look at similar types of developments in neighboring towns because we don’t really

have anything like that. Here in this town. Um the closest thing would be the 18 units on Willow Street. But. That’s not really a good comp for the level of impact, so we have to look at what is you know Beverly Danvers doing with apartment buildings of this size and try to draw that over

as a comp. And apply some, um according to our housing production plan. Uh, a development this size would be, um, a net positive to to a town at least statistically, we would need to look at that. But. There’s a. There’s a good chance that we wouldn’t be losing money, unfortunately, such as we’re doing on, um, the

the Willow Street flats. Um, but we knew that going into it that that wasn’t going to be a money maker. So. So. You’re saying you you I don’t know that we’re this is a net positive, based on the Increase to services, the school systems. Everything just statistically, I. I think looking at our

housing production plan, and and I don’t know if we have enough time to. Really, um Pa. Parse that out. Um, maybe our, um DPW person would be able to provide some members, but but I do think mitigation usually depends on uh um Payments for, um, infrastructure that’s required outside of the development such as roads or a

a sidewalk or water lines or or things like that, right is that I mean that’s that? That’s the way I understand it, and those are, um accessible numbers for us to to. We have to determine if if there is any kind of improvement that public infrastructure that needs to be made to accommodate this reuse

that, But we have talked about That. Um, uh, Woodbury Street intersection, which is, um, fairly treacherous. And. If you’re talking about 405 104 100 people. In in those apartments. That’s a substantial number of cars and so hey, we We need some some medication. Certainly get, uh

get DPW to give us an estimate on what it would take to improve. Not just that intersection. Quite. Frankly. I think the intersection at um Essex and Woodbury is even more fraught. It’s a. It’s A It, uh, the the one at Bridge Street, both of intersections could be improved, Um to Handle. The new

level of traffic and and would benefit our residents because the the intersection in Essex and Woodbury is already kind of dangerous. That’s I’m sorry I misspoke. That’s the one I was reaching so we can I can have. I know Tim’s already got some rough figures for that intersection anyway, so we could extrapolate that out over

both intersections and ask for that, Uh, for for assistance with that. I. I have a question. Maybe. This is for John and his experience, but I mean it. It. Sounds like this is a voluntary donation, So. It’s like we have any sort of leverage here, so I mean we wanna get a maximum

value from the developer, But we also don’t you know, they can tell us to go pound sand. So. What’s the I guess what is the right balance between? You know we don’t want to go too high and have them be like, what are you talking, but we also want to make sure Is there

some sort of threshold that we should be looking at a certain Criteria we should be looking at when we’re going in with a certain number. So. I. If. This were a special permit application or even a comprehensive permit application. And and by the way, one of the restrictions in the

agreement with the seminary is no further. Or no future comprehensive permits as an agreed upon restriction, But if this were a special permit or a comprehensive permit than the zoning board would negotiate additions of approval that were tethered to the development, so the development impacts can be offset by conditions, including monetary conditions of approval

here. We don’t have an adjudicatory process. We don’t have the select board or the CPA or the Planning board, issuing a special permit. What. We Don’t know is what will happen with the apartment developer when they seek a building permit whether or not they will have to obtain A special permit from the board

of Appeals that is entirely possible. If that happens, then that tethering of impact to offset is perfect is perfect. Here the Select board can’t demand anything because there’s no permit being requested from the select board, So. It’s A long winded answer to say Here’s the balance the developer is looking for a profit. The town is looking for

protection for the neighborhood and at least 25% of the units counting on the SH. So that’s kind of the delicate balance if you push too far will the developer simply walk? Probably not. But. Maybe, the developer rescinds kind of oral agreements to include that are included in this draft. So I.

I think it’s There’s a lot of politics here, and I think how You resolve. This is knowing how far the push of the developer before they say None of these terms are acceptable. So we have the 25%. It sounds like they’ve at least temporarily committed to that.

I don’t think they would put up too much noise or make too much noise about the off site road improvements because it benefits their tenants, anything that improves their project. In my experience developers are willing to pay for it because they see them. They see it benefiting themselves. So I. I think

anything that the board considers as a win win for both the developer. In, the town I think are worth pushing for. I think cash is the least likely a developer is going to be willing to make but road improvements, utility improvements, infrastructure improvements We’ve talked in the past about the problem that the seminary and the developer

has with the wastewater treatment plant. That has to be resolved. They. There cannot be multiple owners of a large wastewater treatment plant over 10,000 gallons per day without DEP approval, and I rarely have seen DEP approve that kind of scenario. For obvious reasons the seminary is going to

control the plant. What if they shut off the plant, or what if they failed to maintain the plan? What happens to the 209 units, so that’s a serious infrastructure issue. And the reason I raised that is that is another issue that the developers should be willing to negotiate. The town with the

select board because they really need your assistance to make sure that DEP will approve these reciprocal easements that are gonna be So. I think anything that benefits both the developer Profit and security and the town, which is the SH I Road and utility offset and improvements and access to open

space. Local preference any of those conditions. The developer really in my experience will not object to because they they’re not cost significant and they actually benefit the project. So. I’m not sure I’ve answered your question directly, I. I again. I think it’s It’s a lot of politics here. How.

Far the Select board are willing to push without pushing too far and doing all of this in the public in a public and I think it makes sense, as as Joe was saying, Like, you know, speak to DPW and see what, like, kind of you know, actual improvements could be made if we could Some concrete, You

know examples of like improvements. I think that you know, I like that idea? Yeah, So. Maybe we We Change section B from monetary to improvement of infrastructure and services improvements or something like that. Yeah a again if if the developers benefiting using their own money that is a one

of the few least objectionable conditions. The boards, put in permits and developer seems, seems OK with it because again, they they see themselves paying for their own benefit. The, the other thing kind of important to note here is we only have a draft of an approval not required plan that the seminary

has floated, so we’re not exactly sure, even where the lot lines will be that’s important relative to storm water management, for example, and we’re also not exactly sure what the future rehab of these units Be it. It’s entirely possible that 209 units won’t survive that. In fact there’ll be fewer of them. And again.

That’s the difficulty of trying to negotiate something that isn’t fully formed. We don’t have their proposal as yet, So. We’re doing this a little bit in advance to try and get a negotiation with the two parties before they put everything in stone. Once that happens, it becomes a lot more

difficult for us to negotiate with them. So, um In respect to time. Then, Um I like kind of coming up with some infrastructure service. Maybe something to your point, John, if it if it didn’t. It helps the developer relay that out in here and get his agreement that becomes section B. Keep the

200,000 with, um uh with the seminary, but Is it would. Should. We send this over with a watermark of draft to be all parties, So. We start aligning on where our heads are at and or is that could I could I offer a way forward that might

be easier in the John? Tell me if I’m going in the wrong direction? But We still have to negotiate the these with the the two other parties on the other side. So if in the the negotiating will be myself and Caroline, uh, that’s my contractually required to do that. Um and Caroline is the

chair. So. If. You could send each of you and Bill Olson could send any recommendations. You have to us. We can work with John to update that document. Don’t send it to each other, Send it only to us, we’d send you the updated document with everybody’s and then respond back. Just us.

And. That’s our jumping off point for open up negotiations with each party and then because then you actually have to have a public vote in discussion about what the final document is a after negotiations. Does that sound OK to you, John. Yeah. It does and and in my transmittal note to Jill on

Thursday. I made it clear and I think Joe agrees with me that these documents are a public record. Obviously. We’re in a public setting. So from here on, uh, that back and forth is entirely appropriate. Just watch out for the open meeting law, do everything, As Joe said directly to Joe. Yeah.

That makes good sense. So so you don’t need a meeting to do this? We can we can do it in between. I’m just trying to I’m sensitive to the 60 days that we’re two weeks into, that’s all but and I didn’t know if it would help even to get because, right? We’re working in

isolation. Everyone right now you’ve had some discussions, but it’d be good if they started thinking directionally what we’re thinking, you know, filling a few things in and then I would also just question this board. Do. You think? How much time. Do you think we need to really add something? That’s

material That’s not in here right now. Because. I’m I’m. I think we just talked about the two biggest things. In my opinion. I’ll give you I’ll have it to you by nine. But But. We can do it within the next two weeks and have the expectation that it would be on our agenda for more of a Final

discussion and vote in two weeks. What, do you think? Yeah, I’m happy to do that? I’m just like is it? What? Am? I not thinking about then that I would wanna put into this that we haven’t just if I could go back to what My? My suggestion

was if we if we come to another meeting and you take a vote, And this is what if if we wait for that vote, and then the negotiation changes it then you have to revote and people are gonna be asked why you’re changing your your mind, I.

I think we can try to do A little bit. With the paper trail, um and not violate open meeting law and move it along a little faster, But I mean the process is totally yours, So. I think the reality is if the negotiation is going well, I think parties would waive the 60 Day rule and continue along.

Right, right, John. Yeah I, I Think. Uh, Frankly. I think the developer has a kind of bigger fish to fry than than worrying about this agreement, II? I Really do, uh, this this is a significant project. And the draft that’s before the board now is really not a big ask from the developer E,

especially if if if the board swaps out infrastructure improvements rather than the monetary contribution, Uh, there’s only 200 units on the site. Uh, the site can’t be further expanded. The restriction on Bedrooms is perfectly reasonable. The affordable housing restriction is consistent with the developer has said publicly

about or at least or about the 25%. So there’s really nothing in Agreement that is complicated for the developer. And, So. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to Hear from the select board. Let’s make this as broad as the Select board thinks it can be and should be within the bounds of the law

and then ask for response from the developer. Yeah. I think that makes good sense. OK So I. Think. What I’m hearing is We talked about a couple of changes the infrastructure stuff, Joe, Joe, you’re going to If there’s any specific things we wanna call out the intersection. Things like that we should figure out those are

I think the other thing we talked about was codifying the agreement that we are not owning The, um Uh, facilities and and services for the the building. I mean I think you said that sort of assumed, but I think we talked about putting in there and then any additional comments. I think I

agree. If. We can do those over email. Over the next week, week and a half. We can then Show a draft to them come back to the board at our next meeting with comments from the, um developer themselves. For that part of it. Well. We can do the same for Gordon Conwell. Honestly if we

wanted to, if we get it closer. I agree that I I don’t think it’s worth waiting until our next meeting and then going to the developer because there’s nothing we wouldn’t take a vote on it in that meeting anyway, because we wouldn’t have Shown it to the we would wanna take a

vote on something that we’ve had some agreement with. With the developer correct. Yeah and and I. I think the Select board and and Joe and I we we We collectively need to be really careful here, Which is this is the town’s suggested draft. There is a really formal public process here. We’re entering

into a contract. Potentially So I. I think the Select board should feel confident that you can change this agreement Any time you feel it’s appropriate up until the time the ink is is is dried. So I. I think the board shouldn’t feel pressured about leaving something out or putting something in that you

can’t take out there will be plenty of time to be flexible here, and that schedule is driven by the select board, not not by outside parties. So III. I would urge you not Feel pressure. I understand the developer feels pressure or the seminary feels pressure, but the board should not feel pressure. So, even if the 60

day due diligence period expires and They move forward. We still are not outside of our window to do this. Is that what I’m hearing? Yeah, because again the way the apartment developer agreement is drafted is there’s nothing here and nothing we’ve said tonight that would be a deal breaker for the

developer. Any developer in this is an experienced developer has to know that the town is gonna push for litigation payments or offsets and has to know that there’s infrastructure issues. We’ve raised that for two years now, Uh, I I’ve raised that with Goes with the party. So. There’s no question that they expect something. Um, I don’t I

don’t think the board has a time pressure here. If If. You’re told Otherwise. Then then then I’ll be corrected, but I don’t see any need to to feel right. It. It will be the first time in the history of your life. You’ve been wrong, John. I’ve been wrong before I.

I’ve been wrong before this would be an OK one to be wrong on because if if if there is pressure, then the applicant, the developer in the seminar really should be telling the board and and I have not heard that. Yeah. OK? Um Are. We all aligned to to, so should we?

Yeah. I think I love the approach Should. We consult the schools on what they think the impact would be. Is that on 209, a cost per student number that we use for budgeting purposes, and I think we could probably pull that number and then I

think we’d have to do some sort of Back of the napkin Math on how many? You know families with students based on size of bedroom I. I mean, I think it’s It’s artificial math, but I think we could get to a number using existing data sets. If. We want something referential.

Yeah? No, and I think the school should also just be aware, you know, as they make decisions about Buildings and classrooms and such of potential infusion of, um we could. Yeah it’s a $40 million budget right with 1700 kids. There’s Your math. Yeah, but I would say Over time They’ve been a AAA reasonable consideration for the schools.

As is right. We. We’ve educated a A fair number of Children from families living on the seminary. And so it wouldn’t be a net. Gain relative to what we’ve seen in the past. I think you know When. Those apartments were full. There. Were. There were Children there that went into the schools.

There definitely were, but I think there’ll be more with With this OK? Um In the interest of time. I’m I’m happy to for us to move to the next to the new business section. Um, but I don’t wanna cut anybody off. I think we’re good? I Think by Friday Monday. We should have comments back.

OK thank you. It’s reasonable. All right. All, right? Uh, we have a couple of items under new business. Uh, It takes John so much he is John staying for amicus or no. Uh, we wouldn’t be using John for that we’d be using KP. We’re not using you, John. We have to OK. Good night.

Thank you all Thank you, John. Thank you. Thank you so much. So. We have two items of new business to discuss. The First is flag and sponsorship policies, and the second is the filing of an amicus brief with the Supreme Judicial Court. I’m not gonna use the T word.

But. I’m tempted on the The flag and sponsorship policies because Bill is not here, and he wrote the most recent version, I believe Of our flag policy and I I think he, Tom? You and and Bill had worked on that, and he has more history on that.

That said. I know there are people in the room that have come to have this conversation, so I just wanna make sure we’re prepared to have the conversation. The table table means to a different day. OK. It’s So we are We are tabling. No, no, no, no, she was a resident. Asked what the key

word was and we were explaining What’s the T word table table. Uh, Tom. Are you tabling it, are you All right, Awesome. I would also like To For. When we put this on the agenda next. I would like us to have some, maybe additional background on If. We’re looking to revisit or if we’re looking to clarify or

if we’re looking to communicate. I know we do not currently have Room policies. We talked about that we would need to draft something so that could be its own item. But. We have a flag policy. I would just wanna understand. Like. We just redid that policy. I think a year ago,

so just some clarity on what we’re looking to do for those two things would be great. Um, the second new business item is the filing of an amicus brief with I think with that. Sorry, Caroline just so we can make sure with that we want to talk

about sponsorships and you know our brand and our name being on documents and things that happened on in Rome’s on property, even on flag poles. So. I mean I think that I’m. I’m still happy to table it, But. I mean I think that’s the broad discussion I want to have on all three of those? Yep.

Yeah because the flag really wasn’t I think this came about because of the room discussion that we had last meeting you guys had we The Royal. We you guys had, um and, uh and then I just brought up about the picnic and the sponsorships of

it. And then, um, I think I wrote a letter to you guys. Uh, it’s like I. I never hear anything back, but I’m assuming you got it that, you know, thinking about the land use and the, um the sponsorship of the, uh so sponsorship, land use and

rooms. You don’t have to be coupled with a flag. I mean that that is right now, its own specific Issue. I’m happy to welcome that, But II. I wouldn’t want it to be coupled because I think that there’s an overarching policy about how town property should be used and for what purpose and

whether activism on either side or religious activities or things that are not unified for Hamilton. I really would encourage this. We. We’ve waited here through long discussions for these topics. And is it possible that the that the F I was surprised that it was a flag policy because it really And what The intention

was of what I sent And what What was talking about. It was really about the room and about the sponsorship. And land. So. Is it possible that we can decouple the flag because I think that’s getting merged in and then it becomes kind of a topic about the flag, and I think there’s a bigger topic,

which is how our tax dollars which are funding the library, the, um, cultural society. The, um The, the town the patent homestead. These are all our tax dollars are using all of this and And. I think there should be a policy about the way town dollars are used. For things that are not for

everybody without Cultural invasion, which is very divisive and I. I really would encourage the town. We. We need to have a policy and it started with the room am my recommendation was to say, just say no. You know if you say no to the rooms? No to the land No to sponsorships. You can’t use

Hamilton Wenham on things which makes it look like the town is sponsoring it. The fire department should not be advertising for things that are privately run. You know, I. I think that there’s an overarching policy that’s you know, the flag is maybe some component of it, but I know you

have a flag policy that can be addressed, but there’s a bigger issue here at play. So you’re asking us to buy bifurcate the the issues flag and the flag was never part of the discussion the last week or in any of our stuff, and someone put the flag into it because of the topic, and what I’m saying

is, Let’s separate the topic and focus on the process. In the process is neutral. The process is what do we do with our tax dollars? How are they to be funded and allocated? And. Why. Are. We sponsoring things, and and and I know, Joe. You said that there was no money, but it said sponsorship and in

kind donation and what is that in kind donation and how can they be used in the logo? How can a political activist and it’s right on the website. How, can they use our logos? Why is the library and the librarian. I can’t speak about the library. These things I can’t speak about the library. But.

These are tax dollars we pay for the librarian. Me a question. I’m trying to answer it. Can. I answer it. Sure! OK, I can’t answer for the library. The Library is run separately and it’s run through the town of Wenham. So. We, get a bill and we pay our portion of the bill and that’s our contribution to

the library. The library has its own policies and the board of library trustees determines how they use these rooms as far as the other side. There was no money given that we did not tell them that we were endorsing their pro their their event. We did not tell them that we wanted to be sponsors.

In fact we I’ve had a sense since you folks raised it to me. I didn’t even know that they had listed as a sponsor since you folks had raised it to me. We’ve had a conversation with them and told them that we don’t want any of our stuff to be listed as sponsors in the

future because we don’t want to be seen as giving anybody any kind of special treatment we did with them as our patent homestead. Uh, rental agreements due We rented the Rented the property to them for the day. They paid the fee that they’re supposed to pay. They are nonprofit. They’re registered, Uh 501 C three, So.

They got their 10% discount That was all OK, Sorry, but they they got their 10% discount and that was all we did. We didn’t do anything else for them. We didn’t do anything anything else at all. For them was the Hamilton Human Rights Commission involved at all in any aspect and Human Rights

Commission had a tent there, um, which they’ve done every year. In the past. It’s been there for Years. I mean this is a relatively recent event, so that’s why I think it’s important to really establish what the guidelines and rules are on it. So Hamilton won the the Human Rights Commission was

told to participate in things that would help Human rights in the community they’ve partnered with, Um, the when I Human Rights Commission. They both had tables there, but they didn’t do again. There was volunteer hours from the members of the commission, and should a town should a town committee should a town committee? Under your authority

participate. And drag events. I mean is our town or our town policies going to participate in sexualization and grooming of Children. The first question is, Are. We going to bifurcate these issues and table the flag? Yeah. I do think that it’s its own topic about because I have

that same question relative to when we rent property. You know what can we vet up front and say yes or no to maybe we need to know a list of all the vendors and everything that’ll be there because I personally Unless. I’m missing something don’t understand the connection with the with drag makeup 101.

There and some of the stuff that I’m Seeing, you know, is really like Coupled with our names on the on, uh, on a pamphlet and even sponsored by different departments in our town. I mean I, Just where? Where should we be in the middle of that? Because anybody

goes on that side. It looks like there was our event. Basically, the town of Hamilton town of Wenham, the schools the, uh, and the library. I understand? So. I wanna make sure you know, especially sitting in this seat that someone you know, like I would had I known that, like did we

know that when we approved it do should we ask that and make that part of a policy We need to understand everything that’s gonna be in, you know, present of the day of this event and that type of stuff. What, can we do when you know Should? We

is the question that what’s our legal right? Because? I want to be careful that so I think sponsorship, which I think we’ve all said, like we we didn’t knowingly spons. Right, so there’s that. But, then I think the other question Deb is asking is around use of land, and I think I agree with you,

but like that’s a very, very, very complex topic because we’re talking Patent Park Patent Homestead CO, a library, which is a regional group. We, don’t we don’t even have authority over the library in that way. Um, you know town hall when it comes to it, But the patent homestead, As we’ve

said like they host weddings and parties there and And if we’re gonna get in the business of saying you can only host a wedding here if you meet the following criteria like How. I think we need to audit all of when we say town property. What are we talking about? And are there certain this? That and

the other and I I don’t want to lead the charge on that. I’ll be very honest. Because I. I think we get into over sort of legislating or regulating individual uses for these things? Because I don’t think we can just say no because of the unique position that the homestead is in. They make

money off of those events. But. I think the other part of that is It’s It sounds like citizens are asking us to look at what we’re participating in and I’m, and I’m not I’m not been to a pride picnic, but what people are telling me happened?

They’re not happy about it. And, So. I do think that if we decided to separate Types of events, a wedding or, um, A, a graduation is very different than Some of the activities that may have gone on at the pride picnic, and I’m just raising the issue. Can we can we parse out what we as a board

think is, um, acceptable on a broad basis and not choose to participate in particular activities because they can definitely be seen as an activist type of Yeah. I mean? I think that I think the answer is we can do that, but I think there’s a lot of leg work we need to do. Um In order to sort

of figure out what these buckets are that we’re talking about, and and how we write the language so that it’s you know. Done one way one way or the other. I feel like and I feel like we have to have pretty clear criteria of like what those buckets are, and I feel like the the limitations have

to be like around, you know, health and safety or things like that. I mean like, because if we are now the governing board of what events we’re gonna announce sponsor is either we sponsor no events or we sponsor all events with limited criteria of like, excluding ones that are like, you know. You know?

Jeopardizing health and safety or something like that. Where. I mean we shouldn’t be in the business of saying, like, Well, we’re going to favor this one, and we’re not gonna favor this one because then we’re putting our own. You know feelings on you, Uh, an activity which is not our our job. We either Say

no to any sponsored events, or we allow Most everything right? It’s A. It’s a very slippery slope and all of a sudden now there’s a questionable activity that half the town supports. And half the town doesn’t support and we’re in the the business of saying, Do. We allow it or don’t we allow it?

I mean? I? Don’t think we want to be in that position. And in the picture. I mean to to to picnic was a you know, it was a nonmandatory event. There were tons of families there. How. You know it’s it it? It’s just it’s a It’s a really difficult

thing to say that we want to start regulating each of these different things and what we can and can’t do if if a private group paid the fee to the patent homestead to host something there. So. Maybe. What? What we’re saying is we don’t want the town’s logo put

put on to an event that we are not, um Advocating for right. We’re we’re not sanctioning this this event and maybe is, is that maybe what people are saying They don’t want the town’s logo on on events that it was more than that was tax dollars. But we didn’t I mean there was a grant that was

given through the I think it’s the Cultural Council right, which was actually state fun. It was a state grant that I bought it. From. What I understand, went through the Cultural Council, but we A. Taxpayers did not authorize or sponsor or give money directly to The Organization for the picnic, but the discount they

saw as an as a contradiction, but any any nonprofit organization that applies to patent gets 10% off. That’s not we did. The town didn’t do that The Homestead has a policy of a 10% discount for that. That’s a town that’s a town sign board. We we run that for right, but like that, it wasn’t unique to

them. It was if any nonprofit, If a. You know, a breast cancer nonprofit, came to us and said, We want to hold a fundraiser here? On the patent homestead, we would offer 10% off of the rental fee for that marketing board. I so I can’t I. I can’t hear they they’re talking about the electronic sign board on

one A in front of the public safety building. Uh, Councilor? Uh, yeah. They We’ve used that sign to advertise things that are open to the public in the past. Um that van I think has been advertised there A couple of times in the past, In fact. Two years ago, they were advertising the fact that they

were offering rides to people who couldn’t get there. So, Um but and it’s cashing and all the signs of Hamilton went on th picnic. It’s very much and all the logos. It’s very much a town. Sanction that? Yeah I agree with logo with me right to life event or there was a baptism. You wouldn’t be having

Hamilton flat. You just wouldn’t do it right And it’s culturally acceptable in this world that we live in. But. It’s not right because it’s divisive. There’s people who are very offended by that. And and and aren’t aligned with that. But. It’s not even about that one event. It’s like what

What does our town. What is our towns, putting their their fingerprints on their sponsorship up And. I. Just think that’s the part that should be evaluated with some, uh Tosh Blake Sagamore Street. Um, I think some of the issues that come up here and what the town gets involved with, Uh, was happening before with a

flag policy as far as, um again. This all happened very recently. In 2020. There’s a lot of political. Let’s say, uh, not hysteria, but it was. It was pretty heated and people push for certain things. Certain precedents that people didn’t do before. Like we used to just Why the American flag.

Maybe the POW flag, but generally thought of as non-political. Then some people wanted to get political flags flown on town property. There’s a big debate of that that was concurrent with the um Supreme court case. Shirli Shirli, uh versus city of Boston, and the town was like S, but with a lot of those meetings, the town is endlessly

trying to hash out the kind of Ways to get the flag that the current select board wanted those but also eliminate other flags that other people may want that they just simply politically didn’t approve of, and my advice was just fly the American flag. You don’t have the town kind of maybe

endorsing a certain point of view and excluding other points of view, you know it. It’s called viewpoint discrimination and this kind of may come into the venue. Question as well and I point out to the select board at the time that they have a code of conduct and that code of conduct says there’s a

couple sections of it. One of them is You. The select board members are not too take sort of, like put politics into town business, and another one was to represent one point of council represent the whole town. Well. If, you’re only approving through government speech, certain political flags

and obviously could be argued that the pride flag and the Juneteenth flag are very political flags. It’s in violation of the code of conduct, and I. Think a member that was here at the time. He’s, uh, he’s said, well, the code of conduct is non binding. Uh, Mr Dom, its has often spoken of

best practices. I would say best practices would not certainly not be to violate the code of conduct. But the select board at that time, did that, And? Um you get controversies like this? Where W. What is the public use of the town for? I. Think you have a dilemma, whereas anyone wants to use the

town property for a gathering whether it’s nonprofit or not, You could have all kinds of groups. You know, decide to come and use the town property. You could have Communists. You have neo Nazis. You could have pro Hamas pro Israel. Whatever, You know whatever the hottest button topics are town would have to, you know to not engage

in viewpoint discrimination to have a court case allow it all. So. Maybe, the town could say we’re allowing everything, but we’re not gonna promote anything. So if you put certain things on a billboard that the town owns, it looks like promotion. So people here have a point that you know if you

don’t want to look like you’re doing engaging viewpoint discrimination. The Supreme court is you know has come out against that. That was the shirt lift case, then you’re kind of in a bind. So. You have the select board which created the human rights. Committee or commission. Which is, you could

say maybe politically partisan that subcomittee and it’s just a venue for one political side to say, Well. We have official town approval so we can get the towns sort of statement, uh, for supporting this group or that group, and that doesn’t look it looks kind of like A viewpoint discrimination, So I

guess one way to just get out. Get out of the situation is allow all groups whatever they are, or Only allows sort of groups that aren’t necessarily politically identified. But. Um, that’s the That’s the same problem with the The. Uh uh, The code of conduct, which kind of created this problem where we fly fly political flags.

Unfortunately in this town in which the the American flag E plebs Unum is supposed to represent everybody. And if you start elevating other groups that are sort of you know there, there’s a special you get into these problems. So I you know, I like to maybe return to be neutral and having the

government sort of have a very neutral But, just like with Harvard University. They have these problems where they take stands And then, Uh oh, there’s some controversy. Now, we have to be neutral. I think our time should go That way. Thank you. That her, um I know, some people have said, like this

could be hard to figure out and I think we need to collectively put our heads together to come up with a solution and not use. It’s hard as an excuse not to try to address it. Um, I have a couple of thoughts and I’m sure I’ll have more thoughts, cause

that’s how my brain works, But, um, you could have in your contract about breaking laws or harming Children putting people at risk. Um, if there is a code of conduct that we have we know that I would think having Hamilton Rights Commission being at an event where Children are potentially being

exposed to an act that might be violating the law would not be appropriate code of conduct so that very much concerns me hearing that they were actually participants in that again, a different thing. The signboard is like showing the logo showing and then the Human Rights Commission from Hamilton

being involved. Also all shows this and then the library and all these other places. Um I think you could separate, maybe public and private events and how you address public events. Clearly, this the Hamilton Wenham Human Rights Commission is advertising. It goes on all the public Facebook and they’re

looking to invite the public in a wedding. I’m not as concerned about because they’re inviting their own guests. So. Those are just some of the things that have popped in my head. I’m sure with people here and people online. We can come up with some good ideas. And then my last concern is are we open

us up to litigation? Because. That would be a concern to me if this is something that somebody could end up suing us over because it is something that potentially a child could be harmed. I personally was sexually abused as a child, so I’m very sensitive to grooming and anything that could in any way, um, harm or Potentially

prepare a child to be harmed. So. I. Just wanna share that? Because? That’s my own journey and it’s something I take very seriously because I see, I see things because of my own experience that you all might not see in advance. And these are some of the things these are like slippery slopes that

were going down that could end up Because none of us in this room. Want to see a child harmed. I mean I think we’re all in agreement on that? Um, and sometimes we don’t see the steps that could be leading into that direction. So thank you for your time. Jeff Austen.

Um, I agree with E, Deb Tosh and, uh, Beth said, Um, it’s not as divisive as just saying. One group know or another. I don’t think you should be in that business. That’s You know there’s the freedom of speech. I was brought up by Joe. Last time We talked about this, but

there’s some basic vetting that bill had brought. It’s a good idea. Let’s build some policies in put them put them in contractual policies like Beth said. Maybe. It depends on what it’s town group or a rentable. Uh uh, option but then put some policies in there and do some

basic vetting. I mean I mean, you you see the paper? Have in front of you. Basic vetting would have said this entertainer is not gonna be on this site right now, especially if it’s under Tom logos. I understand You didn’t know that but basic vetting and some policies. It’s I don’t pretend

it’s easy. It’s a challenge, but we we could do better we could do better. Thank you? I agree? I think the vetting piece up front. I mean when others rent the facility? I mean they need to come to us for a liquor licenses for a day. There’s a lot so we should know.

You know what’s gonna be presented there because it is harmful. Where I. I Still like just this one. Everything would have been fine except for this one. And. Where do you draw the line? What’s there next year, so I think we got, like, mitigate future future activities at something that

was advertised, Um in one way, And. Then there’s things in there that I don’t quite connect with a with a picnic. I think also, a part of that is, um, the town’s logo being used to to promote that. That makes me a little uncomfortable. I mean it wasn’t provided to the they they must have picked it

up. I. All the websites. I mean it’s the town’s logo is public. It wasn’t provided to them. We didn’t so that group took license with the town’s logo. That’s a pretty serious infraction. I would think I mean I don’t know where they got it from, so I sent a letter

to say, Please never do this again. I’ve already we’ve already expressed that we don’t wanna be listed as watchers, and we don’t want our our logos used it. It was also on the town. It was also on the town calendar that Laurie runs as an event on the town website.

Pride picnic. And, So it’s It’s A. It’s an insidious, um thing and and I think that the point is private versus public, right? So if it’s a private event that this 501 C four is hosting, and they’re paying for the land if they actually paid for the land,

and it wasn’t donated in kind as a donation, and it’s their own private event. It therefore should not be a publicly advertised event because it becomes a blurry line. It’s either private Or public, and they make it a public event by how it’s advertised and how it’s positioned. And.

This would be true for anything right? I. I’m not picking on this one event. OK there. There’s. There’s other events that that other people would be very upset about having be advertised by the town I might think are great Tom might think are great, OK, but I think it should just be neutral. So the public private distinction who

I think Beth said that? I think that’s a really important line. So let’s make sure that if it’s a private event, there’s no logo. There’s no advertising. There’s no, nothing. And I think there should be an evaluation of what the commission is doing because you guys are oversight of that commission. They report to you,

So. I think that there’s just important linkages to figure out um, you know, with what events they’re sponsoring and what events other committees are sponsoring that blur those lines. Thank you so much. Hello. Michael Madden Hand straight. Um firstly, I wanted to thank you for your vote of confidence in me tonight, So.

I. Appreciate that, um, I just want to just continue a little bit discussion about what we’ve heard, Um So if I heard correctly They were The group. We were just talking about have used our town logo, right? Without getting permission. Is that correct? Would seem so. I mean I haven’t confirmed with them how they got it, but I

know it wasn’t intentionally provided to them by my office or anybody at town hall so and we never voted, at least since I’ve been on the select board, I. I don’t know what you folks did before I became a member, but they just the the the the Select Board established the policies for rental of the of

the pro property and that’s different than what we talking, But. We didn’t right. I understand? The question I’m asking is, did they get permission to use the town’s logo? Yes or No, Not for me. Not explicit permission, but I would say, you know. When when we are finding the level of scrutiny that we’re applying to

this. I think there were a lot of assumptions made about how things have happened in the past. And So I. I. Just. Wanna be careful pointing fingers that they were being malicious or nor trying office gate because the commissions from both towns were involved. You know our our, uh, human rights

commissions. I’m sure that the assumption and I think what we’re saying here today is like we no longer want that to be an assumption was that these events were, you know if not sponsored by at least endorsed by Hamilton and one of the same way that our pride flag raising, uh, was You know I I Hamilton

town of that So I. I just want I don’t want the conversation to devolve around like nefarious use of our logos and people trying to get the town involved in Children grooming when that was it really Wasn’t the intent like this is the first year that we’ve had this level of scrutiny because

something came up that pushed it into a more divisive place. But again. The agenda was listed the families that took their kids there knew that there was going to be these activities and they were there and they they were celebrated at the time, and I think that’s where we get into AAA space

where we have to. Discuss. Is it Political Or is it humanitarian? You know if we’re saying that it is it is OK for us to have a pride picnic, but it’s not OK. If. That Pride Picnic includes drag performers and that we’re going to do background checks on the band members of anybody that comes

to the park. I mean I really want us to have a conversation about what it is that we’re trying to avoid. And what the checks and balances are to avoid those things. I think So. I think it’s uh, you know, thing that took place. It was the one event which was advertised, which was drag

makeup, which, by the way, the drag makeup. Person did not actually show That was advertised. That was on the agenda that people knew would be there. That seems to be the thing that tipped the scales. And. Now. We’re we’re opening this up. Well, I think there is

now audit all of this and and look at it and decide what that policy will look like. Yeah and III. I. Just I, So. I think it sets a dangerous precedent that we are putting out there that it’s OK to use the town’s logo. Any organization can do that. I know that’s not what you’re

saying, but that’s the impression so I would like to ask the select board if we can find out did we give them approval to do that? Yes or no? If we did not until I’m sorry. That’s what I’m, saying the commission may have given them that that commission because the commission was involved and

does the commission. He did not. They, Don’t they wouldn’t have the right to. Yeah, that’s what I was going to ask. This commission has the right to do that. I. I don’t know. And. This is what I’m saying like now that we apply this scrutiny, you know if the Hamilton Development Corporation goes to

a thing at Patton Park and they’re representing Hamilton, and they said, Yeah Hamilton’s gonna throw this thing I can understand how our logo would end up on something because a committee or commission or board is a part of a thing. So. I think we should find out when we put this level of scrutiny

on on this event we’re going to find where those pockets are. And. I think we need to Audit all of the things that we’re talking about, and and be prepared to have A conversation about what it is. We’re trying to avoid in the future and understand what things that will preclude. In the spaces

that we have. So you know if the girl Scout troops wanna have a meeting? At the library. They can’t do it anymore like is that what we’re saying? Because. It’s not town government. So. The Question I’m asking is in more than a permission to use the town’s

logo. Yes or no. And. You know if we don’t know that answer tonight, Maybe. We could find it for the next meeting. And then following that, I would like to ask the S Select board to consider revoking their charter for this abuse. Because. There’s No way Can. Anyone here in the Select board. Tell me Um,

I believe was a was the lady’s name. She gave you all copies of That drag queens. Um Social media. Can anyone on the select board? Tell me how that relates to human rights. Anybody. I can’t because it doesn’t drag performances, drag makeup drag story hours have have sort of become part of the pantheon of

pride events. I, I didn’t mention I’m not even talking about that. I’m talking about this. Person. Which is in those, um printouts that you’re all giving. Caroline, if you could see what’s in there it is F. It is disgusting. It is horrendous to think that we would invite them onto our property and put

them up in front of our Children. And. It has no relation whatsoever to human rights. I think there’s a lot of work that we have to do to understand. What is the goal of the policy. What is the impact of the policy. What is the properties that we’re talking about. And. What do Don’t we

have Purview over and take a look at those that’s not what’s gonna happen that relates to human rights. It is felt it is disgusting, and it is endangering young Children. It really is, um and this needs to stop it needs to stop. Thank you. You know, I. I do think there are, um Ways that we need

to think about, Um, using our town owned properties. I mean I think I. Also talk was thinking about Girl scouts or dance recital. That’s pretty Politically neutral it. I mean I. I. Don’t think anybody in town would object to those sort of neutral parties using our facilities? And, So. That is

something we need to think about when we when we make our policy, I think that’s Exactly why? I said I was holding off, um, editing that policy because there’s a lot of discretion there and I thought. Well. What. Does that mean discretion for for what their there needs to

be a policy We need to think about what we’re going to allow. And what we’re not going to allow, and I think in terms of the flag policy. Not that we’re discussing that particular issue, but the fact that it was going to be deemed government speech well for us to decide who would use our facilities is

also government speech, and we want to adopt a policy that is acceptable time wide. I would think All right? Well in the interest of everyone’s bedtime. I am going to move to our last agenda item, but I think Joe or Rosie, I think we’re just gonna have to sort of appoint outside

of this, Uh, some subgroup of folks that You wanna sort of take on the first leg of of looking at this and figuring out what a A policy would be, um so I. I, didn’t I didn’t put your packets the letter that we sent to SEC Secretary Keneally

back in. I think it’s 21 or 22 and I did take the liberty of discussing this with, uh, Town Council town Council. Uh KP Law is working with another of their municipal clients to draft an amicus brief for them, And. They said that, uh, they they have been inquiries from a couple of other towns as well

as us. So, um There’d be happy to work with us, if if that’s what the board wishes to do, um, they’d be able to bring in some of what is being used in other ambiguous briefs in by other towns, but then also take specifically the things that we

can identify as reasons that we wanted to enter. So. Um, yeah, I. I think it’s important that we Make a that that we develop a position statement that is peculiar to Hamilton. So that we, um and and not necessarily towns that are twice our size and have different circumstances. So. I agree to a

lot of these things that are listed here are are very strong, but we wanted to to make it as relevant to Hamilton as possible, I think, and the deadline is, uh, I believe it’s in September that we’ve got several months before. Uh, we need to have this ready. So is did the There is plenty of time

to work on it. I. The. Only thing I didn’t see And. I don’t know how this works. You know it’s come up a lot that, um Even in the draft plans. Except when I was working on the you know one other proposed sites for a couple 100 units is like,

you know, 100 yards from the property line of Hamilton. And I. It feels like this brief should in some way. Talk about That part of this that like There’s no visibility in the fact that we are essentially sister towns and we’re not just talking about 750 units here. We’re talking about 1000 units.

Essentially within the same half mile radius. And I. I just think you know as we we think about additional things. That’s one of the things that strikes me the most is that if they put 200 units on the backside of Crosby’s, and we put 300 unit on the front side, that’s five.

I mean It’s it does. It doesn’t work. Um So I think we’ll have to look at how they could look at sort of multi community. ASIC Nation of Property. Yeah, but I think in in reality, we have our own separate requirement. And, so I think we do need to address just just Hamilton and this because we

are targeted for 731 units? Um, I think that we’re the only town that I’ve found that the half mile radius from the train station actually covers two towns. I think the worst target is the train station, which Is two towns is important. Yeah, so like if you put a dot and you draw a half mile radius,

half of that is actually in venom. So our half mile radius this way. It’s You could potentially put 1000 units within a half mile like the math just doesn’t work out everybody else that half mile radius is still their town. Well. It’s half mile in each direction because our half mile

goes from our border out and then Wham’s half mile goes from their border out. Yeah, but that that border is 100 yards. Right, but but the but the reality is I. Don’t think we should conflate the two. Maybe. We can mention it, But. We need to really focus on the impact

of of Hamilton and how it will because because we don’t share. Um Our our water plant with wind and we don’t share our fire department. We don’t share share our schools, right? Right, Right, right? But, But. I mean, we want to make this a position statement That’s peculiar to Hamilton. We. Wanna say how

it’s going to affect us negatively, but I think I think what? II! I know where you’re going, But? We I would wanna say that is to reduce the number. I think the number is ludicrous for 112 towns That should be one in reality based on its size and scope, but, uh But it’s not and we don’t We

don’t want to muddy the waters with defending our our position. III. I don’t disagree that we could bring that up as a point, But. I think the vast majority of the argument needs to be the impacts to Hamilton. This is our position statement. We’re fighting for our lives here but that that all starts with 700

units plus right, and that’s because they treated us separately. I think the first the first you know, shot across the byways. There’s too many units. You you, you made your And on one train station that services two communities and you made your separate half mile and in and as a result, I

think we were overstated in the number number one and then you get into all the other impact on why, for a small town rural, you know, community, you know, one size doesn’t fit all and it doesn’t And. It’s ludicrous to think it does, And. That’s like

taking the letter from 2022 is a good start to laying out and I think that I see no harm in in in filing an America’s I? Yeah. Yeah. I know it’s It’s really good and one of the other concepts would be to, um endorse, uh, support Milton’s

reasons. Um, first and foremost and then use you want to keep it all on Hamilton? No? No? No you you want fresh you You wouldn’t endorse Milton as as supporting their stance and then make the bulk of the argument about Hamilton because the reality is there are many communities that are, um Uh, I,

adjacent towns and and th those adjacent towns will have their own arguments. Yeah. I don’t know this. I thought I heard Caroline just a vote First. It’s just a vote of agreement to submit an amicus brief. Yeah. Yes I, I Think? Yeah so all entertain emotion. I, I’m we do

public first. Yeah after we Oh, after you do the motion, we have the motion and then we’ll take comment, and then we’ll vote on it so Uh, somebody. Somebody make a motion. Bill was about to. Yeah I. I move that we submit an amicus brief for the town of Hamilton by the,

uh, September deadline. Okay regarding the Milton We gotta lawsuit. Yeah. The Town of Milton Lawsuit. Yeah. Would we include that in this Is that what it is, It’s just supporting that. Yes. It is and so and so I’ll take that. OK, Yeah. Now we will open it up for comment. Thank you.

Again. I’m here speaking personally, Um, I’m not sure why We were punished as a town and have to have 25% increase because that number is set for rapid transit. And. We are not a rapid transit town 750 if if our two towns were together as one town, our total would be 750 we We like

1100 again. That’s another issue. Caroline what you brought up about the Um half mile radius again half of our half mile radius is outside of our town. I think those are all important things some other important things. I think it was misunderstood what some people were saying about giving up our rights to property in Gloucester. Their Harbor

district is run by the state if you want to change the zoning in the harbor district, you have to go to the state First people are concerned about giving up their rights to the land so Doesn’t matter how many units the units is good, because it ludicrous. Um we have the risk management issue.

Why would we risk potentially one child in every unit at $15 million when we’ve only gotten $28,000. It makes no sense And. I’m asking you guys to be leaders and you don’t even have to wait for a vote because it would be irresponsible financially for our town it could and heaven forbid it’s

four kids per unit. 60 million. So. Um, that’s very concerning. Um, this is why I’m in agreement with writing the amicus brief, Um What else was there? They can change the guidelines at any time. So if you were gonna comply with anything, please do not comply with the guidelines.

Um, because those guidelines you can be in compliance One day They’ve already changed them a zillion times. So. That is a concern because again, you’re just giving up more and more control. Um, and my biggest concern has nothing to do with three. A. My biggest concern is the voters of Milton voted And

if they had voted right, they would be fine and they wouldn’t be getting sued. How is the attorney general of Massachusetts suing a town for their voters votes and if that doesn’t freak, everyone in this room out, I think we need to like, have like civics lessons or something, because it is incredibly disturbing to me.

And. For me. That would be the number one thing that needs to be in the amicus brief. That’s one of the issues. Yes. I believe yes, that’s one of the issues that the SJC has asked specifically for us to comment on and I would be more than

happy to help if there is a committee, I would be more than happy to help. Um over like, Read over what is gonna be submitted. But that issue that you just raised whether the attorney general can enforce guidelines that is indeed one of the issues that will be decided by the SG. And that is

incredibly disturbing and Rocks the whole foundation of our state, if if it’s found to be OK. Yeah. I like to just, uh, you know, agree with what what was just said. And. Um, I think when he, uh when you guys start talking about the units and stuff that is secondary, totally secondary to the

concept of the attack and whole rule home rule that the state is attempting, Um, you know, The zoning. She was paramount and home rule trying to keep home rules Paramount and, uh, You know if if it depends on what the Supreme Court goes, But if we want to submit amicus brief, I assume in favor of

Milton. I don’t know if it’s been explicitly said, but yes, in favor of Milton, But on the concept of, uh, state overreach against our home rule Now, as the law is written, it’s funny. The funny thing is that I kind of was dismayed that not only

Hamilton, but a lot of towns did. This is as the law was written. It came first came out under. I think that you know it came through on the big Char. Charlie Baker was governor. It was simply it was a simple contractual deal where it It’s required and if you don’t do it,

you’ll lose some grants. Well, every town should have been like like I think there’s a familiar phrase around here that they used go pound sand? Well. You don’t have to be rude about it. It’s like, OK, well, we’re not going to send you anything. Unfortunately, our

town and other towns and maybe I don’t know some people in the planning board planning director. Whatever decided to play ball with the state and started attempting to horse trade units. But the whole concept was wrong and people in I I, you know in in public positions should Said no notice

that and said Look, we’re gonna pump the brakes Go right to our our town the people and then see what they think first. Otherwise, I’ll. See you in court Mr Doms had mentioned he you know, he brought up that he What? The term. Um your job was

to comply. I disagree with that In a sense that yes, Normally. Your job is to comply with the regulations. But if either a town official or an outside entity, it’s been a hostel outside entity is telling you to do something and it’s wrong and it could harm the town on its face of it. Any entity

calling for us to give up any home. Or sovereignty is a hostile, uh, situation you know, legally from, I think a lot of our opinion So. Yes. I think our main You know thrust as you have an A brief is really just the whole concept of the the

state how it did the law As far as units. I think that’s a distraction. Then. They’ve got you. You. Now. You’re You’re just agreeing how much they’re gonna do to you, but the thing is consent is what we wanna have. We wanna have control as much as possible. Depending on the Supreme Court what they say

we may not, you know they might uphold the law. I don’t know the law looks weak, so I have a feeling they’re going to either. Have it make it be amended or something like that or have to go back to the Legislature. But yeah, like you. I think we’re

aware of That’s the main part of the brief is the whole concept of the law and how it takes away home rule. And. You know, they have to have a real Uh, encoded in the in the lots of written penalties, otherwise right as it stands, you can just say we’re not doing anything because the A G is

just making up penalties as she goes along. Uh, incredible. But anyway, that’s thank you for listening to me, and that’s all I have to say about that. Really quick, um, on the amicus brief. It is a cheap way for us to protect our town. It’s a. It doesn’t cost us very much, and

I want to encourage that because And. I would also say if the town wants to lead like I asked you to do as a select board and say We’re not gonna comply at all. Or. Maybe you want to wait until later to say that so we don’t come under the

scrutiny right now, but I encourage you to do that, because 15 million a year versus one lawsuit against the state that might cost us a couple 100,000. I don’t wanna hear we might have to go to litigation the risk on this to the town finances is huge. And it’s It’s freaky to me and I.

I don’t understand why we would say Oh. We might have to go to you know what to court like Milton is going to court. Let’s be brave and be willing to go to court and spend some money if we’re going to save the town millions of dollars. It was good to hear you say that you’re you’re willing to

consider the Amex brief I? I question why we wait till September sound like I said. Well. We have time. Yeah. That was that was it? I was gonna ask? He just gave the date It was a deadline or I don’t know with the numbers and and some of the things you just heard.

It seems like it’s a fairly a no brainer. I mean why? Why? Wait, Let’s just get it out there. Well I. I think that’s what we’re saying that the deadline is September, but we’re going to start working on it. In fact it looks like we already have. Thank you I wasn’t suggesting that we wait

till the last minute. I was just saying that the board had time they’re going to miss a deadline. If there’s yeah. And Yeah. Mhm. So did we vote? We have not taken a vote. But I think, um To to put a finer point on it. It sounds like you know, I think what Tosh says.

Is it Good. Um, that’s a the framing of the current, uh, response letter that we have Does focus on the particulars, and I think we would want to work with Our attorneys to make sure that they support in the brief itself is specific to Um Home rule but also then talk about. I think the supporting

points are really and if this was to be taken away here, the impacts that we would see, I think maybe framing it. More that way. Um Helps get away from You know, making it to use the phrase horse trading around numbers of units, So? Maybe we and I’m actually wondering if other towns who have filed

these briefs are using some sort of boilerplate. Around the home rule. Um, I mean it would be nice if we were sort of co ordinated in our approach to how we talk about it. And if there’s case law that folks are already using, we could probably do that as well. So The motion before us is

approval to move forward. Of with an amicus brief on in support of Milton’s lawsuit. I feel like we’ve had. Is there any further discussion here or do we vote? Deb? Did you have something I just wanted to give a heads up. Uh, like a PS a thing that there’s a There’s, um, a 501 C four that the

governor and lieutenant governor created called one Commonwealth Inc, and it’s a, um You know it’s it’s an activist entity to work with consultants to get towns to agree to three a So. Just. Be Really careful as we decide who we’re gonna work with. We don’t want to be working with people

who wrote the rules and who are going to just be like putting blinders on us and getting us to agree. I have concerns with UTL for that reason, because I think they’re They’re pretty in bed with the three a stuff and I think that there’s some nuance about three A and it is contracted to us.

They represent us in our That’s great. I’m just saying that that’s where the relationship will work or a private contractor they’ve been hired in other towns to do certain things they’ve done what they were hired to do in those towns. I expect that they will do what we have hired them to do so.

Right? And and I guess the clarity of what we’ve hired them to do. I. I thought it was just to focus on development of the downtown, but I understand the RFP was really how can you execute three? A? How can three a be executed? And so I think there’s just that’s just the subtle language, So. I’m just

trying to raise awareness because there are consultants out there. They’re on YouTube. They’re all being funded by a 501 C four that we can’t see who’s funding it and just to be careful that if the citizens and you guys as our leaders and So grateful for you sitting

there truly thank you for allowing us to talk. I really do appreciate it. Um, We. Just. Wanna make sure we don’t get deceived or we don’t align ourselves with entities that are actually being paid by the governor ultimately to get her law passed just to FY, I think.

Yeah. I mean? I appreciate that Deb and I, I think you know. I’ve got a question recently. Somebody said. Well, I really surprised that you guys would entertain an amicus brief when you’re also doing this other thing, and I think we’re trying to be as balanced as we can possibly be right. Like Were acknowledging The problems were

acknowledging you know what Milton has gone through where we’re gonna go through this. We’re also working with the consultant. A because we we really do need a plan for downtown. But if in fact the Supreme court comes back and instead of siding with Milton, they say that this moves forward, but it has higher

regulation. We want to still be in the process of being proactive about how we think through this? But again as we said the town can decide in April on no uncertain terms that even if the the consultant comes up with a plan that felt right for some people, I trust that there is enough vocal

opposition to this that folks will know that you know you don’t have to vote for it. You can say no. And. Then you know we’ll go to the town and say No, um But I. I hope that folks see that we’re trying to be as balanced and open as we can, through this process to sort of.

I mean candidly hedge to see where it ends up in October with Milton, uh, where we get to in October with our consultants where the town is, you know, come come to spring, but you know, it could be that this this gets struck down in the fall, in which case, UTL can focus their efforts purely

on form based code for development of downtown and then you know, frees up more of their For that, but we don’t know. So many unknown Um, I don’t know about y’all. But. This tiny hotel room in Raleigh, North Carolina. You need to vote need to you need to vote.

We need to. Yeah, So, can we Can? We take a vote. I’ll do roll call, starting with Tom. Uh, Tom Myers. I’m Just Gonna abstain. Uh, I generally support the filing the brief but given my day job with the Commonwealth, there could be a potential conflict, so I wanna

file the necessary disclosures before I rule on any sort of issue around this as I just reading the conflict of interest real quick. I just want to make sure I file all the necessary disclosure, but I’m going to say this until I can get that in. That’s a good point. Rosie Kennedy I.

Bill Wilson. Yes, Caroline you yes. Um all right, Joe. You will work with KP is that the plan work with KP and show everything to you. So, yes. Cool. Um If. There is no further Think. Oh, I had one more thing, sir. Sorry. I wanna go to, um There was some

conversation about canceling the July 1st meeting. We Do not currently have, um, an agenda for that meeting, and there is a high risk that we will not have quorum because of the vacation week. Um so I just wanted to proactively check in, uh, to see if how felt folks felt about canceling that July

1st meeting and picking up I think it’s July 14th is the next meeting after that, July 15th 15th sorry. I would be OK with that. OK? I’m OK with either one but The two of them. Yeah. Um do I do we need to take a vote on that? No,

technically, you can as the chair, you can cancel the meeting without a vote. So That. Uh, yeah, OK, So we will. We will likely cancel that meeting. Uh, to be totally confirmed because I I also want Don’t wanna lose momentum on some of the things that we would have

reviewed, so as long as we’re we stick to our Timelines on some of those other things. I think it’s fine to cancel. All right? Um, everyone’s favorite motion. Motion to adjourn. I can Alright, uh, roll call Tom. Tom Myers? Yes Rosie Kennedy I Bill Wilson. Yes. Carline boy.

You? Yes. Thanks everybody have a great night for coming. What,