Welcome to Night Two of Town Meeting. We made it through the introductory articles and the consent agendas on Monday, a total of 25 articles. We're nearly one-third done! From here on out though, things will be much more deliberative. Members are a little slow logging in tonight, likely due to lag in the system. The same thing happens while trying to register votes. The Moderator has asked us to vote in waves to try and spread out the hits on the server. We will have the odd-numbered precincts go first, followed by the evens. Hopefully that will resolve the issue.
With the attendance vote complete, we proceed to the Star Spangled Banner played by TMM Tenaka. The Moderator apologized for not allowing members to object to the motion to adjourn at our last session. He noted he will likely make other mistakes, and he apologizes in advance. He also gave great credit to all the staff who support the meeting and make it possible. There are a few new members who need to be sworn in, so the oath was administered. Select Board Chair (SBC) Diggins moved for the meeting to continue to Monday, May 2 upon adjournment. The motion is seconded and a member has been noted as objecting. It appears that it is only a technical glitch, so the motion is adopted without opposition. This was followed by a quick video with introductions from all the department heads and principal town staff.
There was a call for announcements or resolutions. TMM Thielman announced that there will be tours of the new AHS building on Saturday, April 30 between 10:00 and 2:00.
TMM Dennis, Chair of the Election Modernization Committee submitted the report of that committee. The Town Clerk reminded the Moderator that Article 3 was still on the table. TMM Foskett moved to take it off the table, seconded by the Town Clerk, and passed without opposition. TMM Dennis resubmitted his report. TMM Foskett, chair of the Finance Committee submitted the Finance Committee report. (At this point, the Moderator realized that having members raise hands for submitting reports and objecting to the receipt of reports was an issue.) TMM Foskett provided remarks and an administrative correction in regards to the Finance Committee report. He noted that this is a time of transition. Many town leaders and Finance Committee members are moving on and new leaders taking their place. The need for an override is still in front of us, but there has been a delay of one year because of the availability of Federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. He encouraged the Town to change the way it budgets to try and limit our growth in spending to our growth in revenue. TMM Maher, Chair of the Permanent Town Building Committee submitted their report, and he presented the report to the meeting. TMM Moore, Vice-chair of the Capital Planning Committee asked that their report be received. TMM Foskett moved that Article 3 be returned to the table.
This brought up the first article for debate, Article 6. This article sought to revise the Town Bylaw regarding Human Rights Commission to simplify their origin statement, clarify how the bylaw applies to all persons, make administrative changes, clarify mission and actions of the commission, amend definitions, clarify duties and procedures, protect members, and allow the Commission to pursue grants. As this was removed from the Consent Agenda, the Moderator asked the member making that request to speak first. TMM Trembley was called upon, and he noted that he was puzzled by many of the provisions. However, he spent a good amount of time today discussing the article with TMM Carney, and many of his questions were addressed. He is concerned about the difference between "equal" and "equitable", believing that one is for outcomes and the other is for the playing field. The Moderator recognized SBC Diggins to help explain the difference. The Moderator also realized that it might have been appropriate to gave the Select Board an opportunity to introduce the article first. (SBC Diggins thought it was fine to proceed as we had.) TMM Foskett raised a Point of Order to note that the article was not before us on Zoom. That was corrected. The Moderator also noted that he had not started a speaker clock. TMM Trembley would take the rest of his questions offline. TMM Mozina asked if both terms, "equitable" and "equal" could be used. The Moderator did not accept that as a proposed amendment from the floor. TMM Heigham moved to terminate debate. This requires a 2/3 vote of the meeting to bring the article to a final vote. TMM Harrelson had a Point of Order that he had not heard the motion seconded. TMM Foskett noted that there were three names on a prior screen as seconding the motion. TMM Bloom raised a Point of Order to ask if we were to be voting in waves. The Moderator thanked her for the reminder, and indicated he would do so. The motion to end debate passed 206-25, so we moved to the main motion. The server connection was really slow, then it appeared to really crash (505 and 503 errors), but in the end, after many more delays, voting was closed, and the article was approved 234-7.
Article 7 sought to create a Young Arlington Collaborative to encourage the youth and young adults to participate in local government and enhance their representation. TMM Franzosa, and Josephine Almond, co-chairs of the study committee made the presentation to the meeting. The study committee had been formed under article 17 at last year's town meeting. They are proposing a standing committee based on the Envision Arlington model with several task groups. Each precinct will choose 2 members, one youth (12-20) and one young adult (21-39). Engage! Educate! Empower! Ms. Almond noted that the town's youth and young adults are concerned about the future, and this will provide a way for them participate and collaborate on many issues. TMM Hamlin spoke in favor of the article with appreciation for those who worked on the article. TMM Kaepplein wants to know why we are codifying ageism by excluding older adults from the Collaborative. If older adults feel young at heart, will they be eligible? Will there be equitable participation? TMM Franzosa indicated that there would be working groups that would include other residents from all age groups. Ms. Almond noted that this increases equity by allowing the youth to participate, rather than being discriminatory. TMM Muldoon from the Election Modernization Committee noted that they were unable to integrate youth into their work. She was glad to see this moving forward, and she wanted clarification about how members would be selected. TMM Franzosa noted that the first round of members would be selected randomly from names put forward from each precinct. The final approval will be confirmed by the Select Board. TMM Preston thinks this will be a good article. She really got on the speaker list to protest that her vote was not recorded on Article 6. The Moderator reviewed how to request support. TMM Fiore asked if CORI checks would be required, and if so, how would they be administered. SBC Diggins noted that the school system can administer the checks, and Town Counsel had reviewed the issue. TMM Tosti moved to terminate debate, and the motion was seconded. TMM Wagner had a Point of Order to ask if a call to end debate should take precedence if there are earlier speakers working through technical issues. The Moderator ruled that we would proceed with the vote to terminate debate, which passed 217-22. This brought up the vote on the main motion, which passed 241-3.
>> The upcoming article had lots of debate which I had to paraphrase on the fly. If I didn't fully portray the nuance of an individual's comments, I sincerely apologize.
After our break, we opened with Article 8, which would establish an Arlington Civilian Police Advisory Commission charged with serving as a civilian resource and forum for increased trust and understanding between citizens and the Arlington Police Department (APD). SBC Diggins expressed the Select Board's deep appreciation for the thoroughness and thoughtfulness of the board in their work. TMM McKinnon introduced an amendment (the McKinnon Amendment) to include additional training for members in equity, cultural humility, implicit bias, and language access. TMM Vakil presented an amendment we jointly prepared (the Klein-Vakil Amendment) to strike changes made by the Select Board and restore the original recommended language of the study committee to preclude former law enforcement officers from consideration as a committee member. TMM Gitelson, Co-Chair of the study committee noted the committee met 17 times over the past year, and conducted interviews and targeted outreach to many groups around town met with the APD leadership and unions. The APD has a well deserved reputation for excellence, citing several examples of ways our police are showing leadership in progressive police operations, policies, and training. However many residents are reluctant or uncertain about how to comment on the department, both negatively and positively. They recommend a civilian commission to work with the department from a civilian perspective. The commission would work to make the operations of the department more transparent to make them more accessible to the residents, including making data about the workings of the APD more visible. TMM Bloom raised a Point of Order asking whether we discuss the amendments first, and then discuss the motion? The Moderator said no, we discuss them all together. TMM Trembley was initially concerned that there was no police on the Board. He sought the Chief's perspective. APD Chief Flaherty thanked the study committee for their work over the past year. She was grateful to their efforts. She thanked Town Counsel Heim and DEI Director Harvey for their essential contributions. Having an advisory committee will increase the quality of the APD's work. However, she thinks having someone with a law enforcement background on the committee would be invaluable. Civilian advisory committees are becoming more common, and having police on the committee is common. Where this is an advisory commission, having someone with a law enforcement background would be helpful.
TMM Ciano had three questions. First, will members be unpaid volunteers - yes. Second, will the commission conduct hearings and render decisions, or just facilitate communication - the later; they are a liason with no say in discipline. Third, how will this be brought to the town's attention - probably on the town website. Lastly, the members will get training; what insurance will cover them if they are injured while serving on the commission? Town Counsel noted the town carries limited insurance, but the town is self insured against most liability. If someone is injured while serving the town, the town would pay. TMM Ciano is in support of the motion. TMM Hamlin noted this is a review focused model. Can we specify what link to law enforcement would be accepted. Town Counsel indicated there is a definition of law enforcement officer (peace officer) under state law. He also noted that there are no proposed reserved seats for any category of member; the proposal only excludes certain groups from being considered. TMM Hamlin asked what does oversight mean in this context? TMM Gitelson noted the commission will report to Town Meeting, but will not conduct investigations. TMM Kerble introduced Bob Radochia, a resident of Arlington. He noted that one of the charges was to gather data on adjacent communities. He presented statistics about the size of the town and the police in relation to nearby communities. Only Cambridge has an oversight board. He said the current process between the Chief and the DEI Director works well, but he acknowledged that it only did so if you are willing to speak up. He thinks the proposed commission will be viewed negatively by the officers. He does not think it is appropriate. TMM Zuckerman agrees with the article and the McKinnon amendment. She emphasized that language access is important. She is an interpreter, and the town website does not offer translation services. (The Moderator made a scope check.) She tied it back to the proposed requirement for language access training. TMM Pretzer thought that there was a risk of residents feeling uncomfortable if there was an officer on the commission. Ms. Harvey, the DEI Director said she was very impressed with work of the study committee. She does not believe former law enforcement officers would be helpful in the establishment of the committee. There would absolutely be a place later on, but at the start, it could interfere with trust building.
TMM Fischer notes that this is to be a civilian advisory commission and technically, police are civilians too. He is in support of the main motion and both amendments. TMM Culverhouse supports both amendments, especially the McKinnon amendment. It is important for the board to have the cultural competency to support the underserved and marginalized. This commission will build trust between the community and the APD. TMM Harrelson is in favor of the McKinnon amendment as well. He knows from experience that recognizing bias is hard work, but it is essential skill to be able to do the work the commission is tasked to do. TMM Varoglu is in favor of the McKinnon amendment. The other training already in the article is based on police policies and procedures, so this provides good balance. TMM Dray thanked proponents of the amendments. This is not a punishment for the APD. It will strengthen the relationship between the town and APD. She wanted to know about research about whether to allow or disallow retired officers to serve on the commission. TMM Newton, the Clerk of the study committee noted the research looked at other boards and commissions. TMM Ryan-Vollmar indicated the study committee spent considerable time discussing questions about law enforcement participation with other committees in other towns. They all agreed that no current officers should serve, as it is a conflict of interest. However former law enforcement officers, officers who served with distinction can have a future place on the commission. As Ms. Harvey explained, building trust is the first issue to be addressed, and having a former officer could make that more difficult. Ms. Harvey concurred. The Town Clerk interjected that there needs to be an administrative change, that this will be Article 16 in the Town Bylaw, not 15. (Article 15 was appropriated to the previously approved warrant article.) TMM McCabe moved to terminate debate. TMM Weinstein raised a Point of Order that although the motion to terminate debate was seconded, there was no call for it to be seconded. He wanted to bring this to the Moderator's attention as is is important to the process. The Moderator agreed to do so in the future. The vote to end debate passed 205-31 with 3 abstentions.
TMM Baron raised a Point of Order to review what the McKinnon amendment included. The Moderator had it brought to the screen. TMM Gruber raised a Point of Order to clarify that the change proposed in the McKinnon amendment is a change to training not qualifications as stated by the Moderator. TMM Wagner had a pair of Points of Order. First, could the full text page be displayed for visibility. Second, when he cast his vote while waiting on a Point of Order, his place in the queue was changed. The Moderator took note of the issue. The McKinnon amendment passed 202-33 with 5 abstentions.
TMM Bloom raised a point of Order that with so many screens, it can be hard to tell if your vote has been accepted. TMM Mozina had a Point of Order that the Moderator had mentioned the name of the wrong amendment. TMM J_Worden wanted clarification whether the Klein-Vakil amendment would add former police or exclude them. It was explained that the amendment would remove former law enforcement from eligibility. TMM J_Worden asked that the Moderator be clearer on the motions. TMM Baron raised a Point of Order to ask the Moderator to read the text of the amendments. TMM Kaepplein raised a Point of Order on whether the inclusion of additional training in the McKinnon amendment would be out of scope, and he also wanted to know who would pay for the training. The Moderator indicated the writing of the warrant article provided latitude, and he found the amendment to be in scope.
The Moderator called for the vote on the Klein-Vakil amendment. TMM Rosenthal raised a Point of Order to request that the Moderator clarify what a yes vote would do and what a no vote would do to try and address the confusion on this and future articles. The Moderator explained the votes. When voting was closed, the Klein-Vakil amendment passed 156-76 with 5 abstentions. TMM McSweeney Raised a Point of Order and noted that he voted believing that the Klein-Vail amendment did the opposite of what it did. TMM Wagner had a Point of Order that there is confusion because of the way that the amendments were presented. The final vote on the main motion with both amendments passed 214-18 with 3 abstentions. I noticed reconsideration on Article 8. TMM Preston raised a Point of Order that her vote didn't get recorded. However, the Moderator was able to confirm that it was.
TMM Foskett moved to adjourn, which was seconded. We are done for the evening
>> That was an OK night. Only three articles, but they were all consequential. The voting system had a bad night. Votes took a long time, and that led several members to be concerned that their votes were not being counted. I don't know what can be done to improve the reliability of the system, but whatever it is, we need to look into it.
>> On Article 6, the call to end debate came very early, but since the only reason we were discussing the article was that it had been pulled from the consent agenda, and that member had an opportunity to speak, I thought it was appropriate to move on. I voted in favor of the changes to the committee, as they are presented by that body in an effort to better serve the town.
>> TMM Wagner raised an interesting point at the end of the debate on Article 7. There was a member who was high on the speaker list, but technical difficulties prevented her from speaking. If things had gone correctly, she would have spoken before the call to end debate. As it turned out, she was unable to participate. I voted against ending debate, but my side did not prevail. I voted in favor of the main motion, as I think finding a way to include the youth of the town to help plan the future is valuable.
>> I thought the debate on Article 8 was very good. It is a difficult decision. I had proposed the amendment with TMM Vakil to allow the meeting to see the language that the study committee had recommended. The Select Board amended the language, and we sought to revert it to the original language. I had agreed with the DEI Director that at the start, it was important for the commission to be as welcoming as possible. Once trust has been established, then the commission can adjust its focus to include the direct participation of former law enforcement on the commission. I voted in favor of both amendments and for the amended main motion.
>>I realize that my amendment with TMM Vakil raised a tremendous amount of confusion. There were lots of requests to display the text on screen and to read the text. I felt that it really showed that members hadn't read the amendment before the start of the meeting. As Town Meeting Members, it is our obligation to read the materials and be prepared to debate and vote at Town Meeting. All these materials have been in the annotated warrant for at least 48 hours. Please review the materials beforehand. It makes the meeting run much smoother.
No comments:
Post a Comment