Well it's uh 631 February 25th.

And uh I'd like to call to order this uh meeting of the appointments committee.

I I'm Stephen Shore, I'm the co-chair along with uh Phyllis Gardner, co-chair who stepped out of the picture for a moment, but he'll be back in front.

Oh my god.

Meeting with uh an applicant.

Christina, can you call the roll, please?

Yes, I can.

Thank you.

Okay.

Representative Bradford.

I don't see.

Um give me one second.

I just wanna let these I have Walston in Okay.

Representative Camporelli.

Present, Christine.

Okay, thank you.

Co-Chair Gardner.

I see you, but I don't hear you.

Unmute, please.

Christina, yes, I'm here.

Present.

Okay, thank you.

Representative Hill.

I don't see yep, okay.

Representative Hyatt.

Oh, okay.

I see Representative Bradford just joined.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Representative Pavia.

I don't see yet.

Um Co Chair Shore.

Present.

Hi, thank you.

Um, Representative Weathers.

Present.

I see.

Thank you.

Representative Weinberg.

Present.

I see.

Thank you.

Okay, um, so far we're missing um Representative Hill Hyatt and Pavia, but we also have Representative Walston who has joined.

So Representative Parker, I see you down there.

And is there anyone else I've missed?

I just wanna make sure I got any ex-official members.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, Representative Pavia just joined.

I am going to promote him.

Okay, there you go.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Okay.

Let's uh begin with uh item number one, A32.01.

Uh this is uh for the golf commission and uh uh uh Michael Briscoe is uh seeking reappointment for a term that would expire on December 1st, 2028.

Uh welcome.

Thank you.

So uh I I see that uh you you you were playing and and you noticed that the course was uh slipping a little bit uh and uh so you decided to see what you could do to help.

Does that mean you were there before that reconfiguration around the uh I just started an 18th home?

I just started there.

Uh-huh.

And uh the previous um board chairman suggested he's been suggesting for years that we have to make this golf course a little bit more safer because if you know the golf course, I'm sure you do the nine hole used to sale walls in the park lot.

Yeah, it made no sense.

Yeah, it didn't make no sense at all.

Um it's a poor design from from the jump.

So we just flip things around and um upgraded a few holes here and there and changed the back um tools from 17 and 18 to 10 and 11.

So you start over so everybody starts on the same side and uh finishes on the other side, which is yeah, it's more safer and probably more challenging.

Who whose idea was that?

I can't take credit for it as much as I want to.

I hope I hope you like it.

Oh, I love okay, good.

I'm glad.

No, first of all, I said the slice, so I didn't break a single car.

I I I so it wasn't your wallet.

No, no, no, no, it wasn't there from the window.

Um it was something that was in the works back from what I understand back in the 80s, but it never got off the room.

I think there was some resistance to the change from what I heard um over the years.

So finally, um the former board um chair said we gotta make some changes here.

I mean, this is ridiculous.

I mean walls are going to the park line damaging cars, and we're getting um nasty letters from people who own these cars, but we can't do anything because you know it's you can't prove anything.

You know, where it can't from who did it.

You kind of sign a waiver when you exactly you accept that risk as you but nobody wants to hear that.

So um so we just made this a few changes, and I think it's worked out.

The only thing we can't prevent is the is the new 12 hole that runs along Stillwater Avenue.

You guys can golfers there that tend to hit the ball over the net onto a still or avenue, which I haven't heard too many things over there about cars getting hit, or but I'm sure they are at least haven't heard of it.

So uh but that's the only thing.

We have a net that's pretty high and it catches the ball, but some of them get over.

Again, I slice, so I end up on a nine.

Okay.

Yeah, but it's okay.

When I was a kid, I used to tag around with my grandfather.

It that was actually the first hole.

12 was one.

Oh, really?

Back in the back in the day, back in the day.

Okay.

Yeah.

So 12 is one.

So I like where one is now.

I think it's one of the more challenging holes in Fairfield County.

Because you have the the crowd over there watching you over there is it's kind of nerve-wracking to make sure you clear the water and up the hell is stuff that's you know, the peanut squad used to call them.

Yeah, well, absolutely for a steech hitter.

So you have the water and you have the hell and time on reporting.

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

So um any ambitions moving forward for the redesign?

Well, maybe not for a redesign, but just in terms of the course and the management of the course.

The one thing that we're we're discussing a lot, is uh upgrade the uh the irrigation system.

The irrigation system needs it's got patches among those patches, and it's probably not efficient.

Um so we're looking to upgrade that.

So we've got some proposals out there and a little up there, but you know, hopefully that maybe we can resubmit or rebuild out and get a better price, but the price is a little what kind of uh just out of curiosity, what kind of number was throwing out is yeah, 1.6 million dollars.

Really?

Do you think do you think I think you're giving you a skill set you're probably the most qualified to do uh to accurately gauge capital expenditure when it comes to irrigation, I think that as your career.

Um you read it.

Yeah, yeah.

Probably a few people uh how would you use that skill set to make sure that the city can even deal with that?

Well, the one thing you have to make sure of is that it's not just material, it's it's it's knowledge.

You got you have to have the right people doing it because it can really get screwed up if it's not done correctly.

Um obviously it's a big project and it has to be watched carefully.

So and um I would definitely like to be part of that.

Um supervision of not telling what how to do it, but it just has to be watched how it's done.

I know um by talking to some friends in the business, uh it can really um be put in wrong and you're stuck with it, which is something that we don't want to have.

So yes, I would like to oversee some of that um construction when the time comes if we're able to get the project off the ground, which I really hope we don't great.

I mean, it seems like it's spare no expense over at Sterling, so maybe uh a little love at Hubbard.

Exactly.

Uh we're the old well, the other two golf courses we've been around a hundred years.

Um the golf course has a lot of character, not to say that Sterling doesn't.

I mean, I love the store's forums.

I was on that board for 10 years.

Um right over there too uh back in the day.

Uh it's a top-notch golf course.

But you know what?

We're right there with them.

We want to be, you know, 1A to one to their being number one.

So yeah.

I I love the place.

I mean it's got character, it's got challenges.

So I think it's it's my preferred.

I mean, uh I I think objectively Sterling's probably a better course.

It is.

But I can't take that away from them.

They are what they are.

But a place is a place that has some soul and kind of feel like technically restaurants better.

Yeah.

Kind of the democratic administration's uh home uh watering home there's nothing wrong with it.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

Yeah.

So uh I'll have to open it up.

Uh any hands up anywhere.

Representative uh thank you.

And I just uh called your attention to representative as joining.

Oh but I do I do have a question.

I'm curious, what what what courses and and golf authorities do you think we should be studying for best practices in public courses?

Need models?

Yeah, besides that paint black.

Um I really don't know who's an authority and who's the publicly run.

Um I know the country clubs are privately.

That's a good um some of the municipal courses.

I know the one in Child Rilla and Bridgeport.

They have I think they call them an overseer.

Um they oversee day-to-day operations of the golf course.

I don't know if they're run by the authority, they probably are because they have two golf courses and a management company that that runs their data operations, but if we're gonna go compare golf courses, I think ours is in much better shape than support features.

Um because we're disciplinary run.

We have a very, very, very good superintendent that we got really lucky in the other.

He's a fantastic guy.

He's he's those grass, like he didn't grow grass out of sand.

So he's he's very very good at what he does.

That's a good question.

I would have to really look at a question.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Oh uh representative.

Baby, sorry.

Uh you're gonna get it one day.

Thank you for all your service with the uh golf commission.

Um I just ask a simple question or two questions.

Um first of all, for all our new people, can you break down one or two sentences what a golf commissioner does?

Golf commissioner oversees the golf course.

Um make sure that uh the employees and the management have all the tools and the toolbox that they need to make that course as best as it can be.

Um oversee the financial um obligations of the city has uh well, our paying are to make sure our bills are being paid to by the city to uh the vendors.

Um just making sure the day-to-day operations are going as smooth as possible.

Gotcha, gotcha.

Um thank you for that.

Um what would you say uh has been your greatest accomplishment so far on the golf commission?

And where do you see what's your vision moving forward?

Well, one of our I think one of the things I take pride in is is that we that we picked the right superintendent to oversee the golf course, like I was telling the representative before.

The guy is phenomenal.

He came from uh from Tashu and Old Golf Course.

He was the assistant there.

He got laid off from up there, and he was looking for a job, and we were looking for a superintendent.

So kind of like it was like just fell out of the sky right into our lap to get this guy, and he came highly recommended and and um I I enjoy working with him.

I think he's a fantastic guy.

Great.

And uh, where do you see you have a vision for the future or is it is it good right now?

I mean it could be good right now, or that's I think the future is now.

I think golf is that is climbing up the popularity again.

I I think um more kids are getting involved with golf.

Um we have a junior uh program there that uh you can't take any more kids.

I mean, it's turning kids away because the the game is starting to grow again.

We went through a lull and now it's coming back up again.

Yeah, so I think uh one of my uh favorite things to see is the is the young kids or are teenagers, get them off the couch and get them on the golf course.

No, it's a it's a great sport for temperament.

And uh yeah, I I played since I was younger.

I didn't understand how cool it was until later.

Um I have to ask you this, or just put this in your mind uh future.

Um I feel like as a golfer, I feel like golf has become a very um expensive like uh sort of upper class sport.

Um do you see any ways like creatively like with a golf book giveaway or anything like that where we can get more inner city kids or more younger people who don't have um the means to have um memberships and clubs and everything like that?

Yeah, it's it's funny you mentioned that because equipment is probably the most expensive part of the game.

Um baddies and all that other stuff.

I I work for the city because some of you know um and I brought at the the transfer station up at the Duncan, I see bags of golf bags and golf clubs being tossed in the trash.

Like, wait a minute.

Those kids who can't afford equipment but want to learn how to play golf can use that stuff.

It's not the best stuff in the world, you know, it's not gonna be a my bag, but but um to learn the game to learn the game and and participate in the game.

I I I can't see why those clubs should just go to all landfall and just you know, somebody can use them and stay like them, they can probably have them.

So, yes, equipment is definitely a the biggest expense of the game, but um hopefully that you know people will donate, use equipment and whatnot so they can be given a second chance at life.

Can you spearhead something like that?

I was working with the pro up there over the fall, you know, to find some stuff, and he said, Well, whatever you can find.

He says, Bring it in, we'll take a look at it and see if it's usable.

Um apparently they get donations too, so you know it's it's um there's gonna be stuff there to be had.

Right.

Mike, thank you very much.

Um, and thank you so much for the service.

You're very welcome.

Yeah, I um I yield the floor.

Oh, thank you, Representative Babia.

Uh yeah, I I I think garages are filled with clubs that are just gathering cobwebs and corners and sad to say uh people have passed on.

People just throw it off.

Right.

That's sad because I'm sure that the stuff is you know, it's a guy that if somebody was using it, why can't they be brought to someone else to use?

Representative workers.

Yeah, I was just gonna say as as a suggestion, you you guys might want to consider um trying to contact and trying to work with um the country clubs, private private clubs, because they're the ones who probably buying new clubs.

Probably I mean listen, and that might be that might be an additional source.

A donation is a donation.

Except for shoes, I don't think that's a shoes.

Any hands up, any other questions, folks?

Well, thank you, sir.

Everyone appreciate it.

So let's move on to it number two, A32.

Uh zero one two.

Uh Susan Flynn.

Ms.

Blitz.

Uh and um you're a new applicant for a term that expires.

Um will we be voting at the end of the seating?

Yes.

Um so for a term that expires on uh December 1st, 2027.

So welcome.

Thank you.

Uh what inspired you to take this on?

Well, I am a golfer as well.

Um I started golfing when I was a young child in Maine and have carried it over to my adult life, although my handicap would not suggest that.

Uh but I really enjoy it.

I play it uh EGB.

Every week um with the group club when we're around.

Um we're 36 uh members within the group.

My husband's part of it, myself.

Um and we just really enjoy it.

We enjoy the camaraderie, the social aspect of it as well as the course itself.

Um I think it's really important for children to start that young and it's because they don't understand that it's um an amazing life sport as a younger.

I I think we'd end up with more clubs than we need.

Oh, for sure.

Some sort of a drive like that.

I worked at the Boys and Girls Club for 30 years as the chief operating officer in Greenwich.

And one of the things I did was start a collaboration with one of the local private clubs for the kids that were within our uh club to give them access to clubs as well as playing time.

And any of the board members to your point, because they're always transitioning to new clubs all the time.

We had a uh an abundance of clubs for the kids to use.

But I think a collaboration of that sort would work well, particularly here.

Uh Representative Pavia.

You're two.

Don't let me get too big ahead.

Umward you missed.

Um thank you.

Um I I just love what you said.

And I just want to go off what the chair said about um I think that people, if they had knowledge that there is a club giveaway or something like that, people are always trying to clean out their garages.

You know, um and I'm all the things that you mentioned that are that golf is great for.

One one thing I learned that it's also great for is networking.

You know, it's it's good for business and everything like that.

And um I would like to see everybody at a fair advantage, you know, um, when it comes to having uh access to playing this sport, and um I think like a uh a club giveaway or a scholarship program for like three lessons.

I don't know if this is in your purview, but is this something that you can like look at us and say, like, you know, I'm all about that.

I'm gonna commit to that.

I would totally commit to that.

I've I feel like I've done that with my previous role at the Boys and Girls Club.

Right.

I have a lot of strong connections with private courses in um both Connecticut and Westchester.

Um I also think it's something though that it has to be more than what a one-off type thing for particularly for children.

Could you want to engage them and make sure that they have the opportunity um and the the place to play um along with the clubs itself so that there's some consistency with that?

Yeah, I love that.

I I look forward to um to seeing that be done and you know getting a new generation of golfers in.

Sure.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, I yield.

Thanks.

Thank you, representative uh co-chair gardener.

So um, I think we've all seen your CB go fantastic amount of experience.

Um, and especially the torture facilities roles you've had.

Um, how would you if I'm not gonna look forward yet, but if if you are like to have a blue sky idea about how you would uh develop the facilities at the Bretton, what you a vision would be for the future?

I think that one of the aspects of the course that we do need to take a look at are the lock room facilities and the facilities themselves.

I think they're they're they've aged.

Um, and I I'm not sure how efficient they are.

I think that that would be one thing.

I know that we did they did some work with the Pro Shop and combine that with the um where you check in, and that worked out well.

Um, I think the the change in the course direction was well received within the community, it's particularly with the people that I play with weekly.

Um but I just think that that the infrastructure and where people check in and that type of thing would be more welcoming if it were a little more up-to-date.

I've experienced that myself.

Any questions?

Uh any other questions.

Uh Ms.

Flynn, thank you.

Thank you so much.

Uh and appreciate your uh your perspective.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you for your consideration.

Well, what one last question?

Um are the private clubs still traditionally closed on Mondays.

Yes.

And they a lot in the casting.

Can they make it available like the caddies play on Mondays?

They also do tournaments on those days as well.

Right.

They're either Monday or Thursday.

Outings, that sort of thing.

But the pros are always are very amenable to giving back to the community.

They have a lot of uh people that are members of the clubs um that work in the community, and so it's that's one of their purviews is to give back to the community as well.

Excellent.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Okay, so uh item number three, and I I believe we saw Miss White um online.

Uh this is uh item uh A32.013.

Uh this is for the Stanford Golf Authority and uh uh Gina White uh for a uh term that expires on December 1st, 2028.

Um are you somewhere?

Yeah, my flight I was scheduled to come to fly back home this past Sunday, but unfortunately my flight was canceled due to the uh blizzard or bomb site or snow cyclone, whatever it was that we had.

So I the soonest I can get a flight back home is tomorrow night.

So that's why I'm here meeting with you virtually tonight.

And I appreciate the opportunity for the consideration.

Well, there are probably worse states than finding yourself from in Florida for an extra couple of days.

True, not complaining, not complaining.

Yeah.

Um perhaps you can explain to me.

Why the uh management of the golf courses is broken down into two separate authorities.

Why?

I don't know.

But if I had to guess, I would say because both of the facilities and the the mass size of the facilities, Sterling Farm, Sir the courses, Sterling Farm having multiple components to it, like the restaurants, the the tennis courts, the the theater, um, the range, and then and then Brennan's have or Hubbard Heights having you know having it's they have the golf course, they have the restaurant there, although it's it's I understand that that's separate.

It makes sense that there would be two separate, you know, golf authority and a commission, one to to manage or you know, the operations for each of those courses, just because of the scale and scope of management for both courses.

It makes sense that there would be two, but that would be my guess.

And when you made the decision to pursue this uh this commission, um was it by choice?

Well would you if they had said well it's for Brennan, would you go to Brennan?

Or did you were did you express a specific interest in in Sterling?

I did not.

Um how this came to be was uh well, first I'm a um a resident 25 plus years.

Um Sterling Golf uh Sterling Farms is practically my backyard.

Um I belong to the um the women's golf association and both clubs, Hubbard and uh Sterling Farms.

I also belong to um Southern Connecticut Women's Golf Association as well.

Um but Sterling I would consider to be my, although we're blessed to have both, you know, two wonderful courses in in our city.

Sterling Farms is the one that I frequent the most.

I play at the most.

I'll show up and get a tea time and just do a walk on.

Um and I wanted to do, I wanted to give to the community in some way.

Um I was ready to do so.

My my work's uh load and my scheduled um allowed me to uh to consider um volunteering in some way, shape, or form to the city of Stanford.

And then this opportunity just presented itself.

And it was I I thought it was meant to be.

It was right, it was right time.

Uh it was a perfect opportunity, and I'm very passionate about both courses.

Um, but Sterling, if I had to pick one, either is fine.

Um I'd be happy to do either because I play at both, and I love both, and I want to make sure that both course can sustain themselves with the help and support of the city of Stanford.

Um, but when the opportunity arose, I just I said, okay, now it's time to do something.

And it it was and it's golf.

So um, and I'm very passionate about this sport.

Sounds like a win-win.

Uh representative.

Does sound like a win-win.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um, Mrs.

White, what's your favorite um hole uh at Hubbard Heights?

Uh at Hubbard Heights?

Yeah.

I would say I would say the first hole at Hubbard Heights.

Yeah.

Yeah, that's because I I've I've I've actually parted.

It's it's and the ninth hole.

Um, I've actually parred both.

So I would have to say that those are those are my favorite.

I love the challenge of the first hole.

It's all it's all a mental thing with the first hole.

Totally, totally.

I love it.

You can't it you I love that you can't see it, so it's that makes it even more challenging.

Right.

I love that answer.

Um Ms.

White, uh, would you explain uh just because we have new members here?

Would you explain what the difference is between um the golf commissioners that we just interviewed and what your job as a Stanford Golf Authority is?

Would can you repeat that?

Can I explain the difference?

Can I explain the difference the difference between um the Stanford Golf Authority, right?

Which is what you're up for right now, and and the golf commissioners that we just interviewed before.

Like what's the difference in your job?

That's a really good question.

I'm not very sure.

I could tell you the difference between the two is uh obvious.

Um to everyone here is that the authority is responsible for the the overseeing and the operations of a Sterling and uh Sterling Farms and the Commission is responsible for Brennan.

But as far as like role or responsibilities, I'm I'm honestly not very sure.

Um that's something that I would have to, you know, I would love to ask more qu spend more time and ask questions about.

Okay, yeah, that's a totally fair answer.

Um do you have uh what's your background in um in this?

Like I you you said that you want to give back to the community is golf because it's something that you uh you you played growing up, sounds like it.

Yeah, I've I've I like I I play for the women's golf lead, the Stanford Women's Golf Association, and I belong to both clubs, uh Sterling and Brennan.

I also belong to the Southern Connecticut Women's Golf Association.

I've been playing for religiously um and involved in both of those, all three of those leagues, um, or two of those leagues rather, for about five years now.

Um I played, started playing many, many years ago.

My stepfather and my sister just loved the sport.

I got into it.

Um I did tournaments here and there, you know.

I I didn't take it as seriously, but I really liked it.

Um, and then once I really started playing is when I was like, okay, now now I'm obsessed.

And then I I joined the the women's league.

Um and it was because of my love of the game and wondering, okay, what is it that I can do to serve the community of Stanford when this opportunity came about, I was like, okay, I think I think this would be a perfect fit for me.

I think it would be a perfect fit for Sterling and for the city of Stanford.

That's awesome.

Um, do you have any I was trying to word this right?

Do you have any um vision for where you want to go with this in the future?

Yeah, a magic wand.

If I had a magic wand, you mean with the the golf authority?

Yeah.

Um I you know that's a really good, great question.

I uh I would love to I would love to get my feet wet first and then see where I fit um with the authority first.

I'll probably have a better answer for you, hopefully, at the next appointment hearing.

Um committee uh session.

And um, I'm not sure.

Uh, but I can tell you that um what I would like to see accomplish is there are a couple of things.

If you if I can get into the what I can suggest for improvements for the course uh for Sterling, that would be uh better access to tea times.

I know that that's something that's an ongoing um matter, and hopefully I and I would love to participate and be part of the problem solving process.

Um, because I know we have thousands of residents and players that uh it's it's where that course is very high in demand.

Um so hopefully we can come up with a solution for that.

I would love to see some improvements with the women's um bathrooms and facilities.

That would be great.

Um, I think the groundskeeper does a lovely job with the uh with the with the course itself.

I know that there's working on some improvements.

Well, we've been there, you know, there's a little bit of hold up now because of of the of the of the weather.

Um, but I know they'll be back on track uh once the weather calms down a little bit.

Um, but where I would see myself with the authority, and that's a really good question.

I I would have to get my feet wet first and see where I fit amongst things, you know, with the group and and find out where where my where I can be better serve uh on the board.

That that's such a great answer.

And uh I I can tell in your like there's passion in you, like just from what you're saying.

Yep, the women's bathroom and and all that.

And also, you know, um, I feel like young women need more access to golfing.

Just like I was saying before, young men to young women.

That'd be great.

Definitely.

More kids, more kids too, the youth.

That would be great to see them as well.

Yeah.

Ms.

White, thank you very much.

Um I wish you the best.

Thank you, Representative.

Sure, I yield.

Uh thank you, Representative Fabia.

Um by the way, I I feel the same way about my role on the board of reps, uh, Ms.

White, that you know, like I I'm trying to find my footing as a new rep and and see where I fit in.

So I I completely uh understand that that perspective of yours.

Uh I have one more question.

What's your least favorite hole at Sterling?

Oh, what's my least favorite hole at Sterling?

I'm gonna write my least favorite hole, my least favorite hole.

It has to be has to be 12.

I would say that would be my least favorite hole.

Uh I actually I I wrote 13, but I meant 12.

Up the hill is terrible.

12.

I hate, I hate that hole, actually.

It's my least favorite for sure.

And any questions from the group of representative.

Oh, thank you.

Uh Gina, thank you for your for your willingness to volunteer and contribute to the city.

Uh question for you.

I uh I'm not familiar with the Stanford uh women's golf association.

Can you tell us a little bit about it and uh what it does to uh you know to promote um uh golf participation in in our city.

Oh my gosh, they do so much.

So the Stanford Women's Golf Association, um, there's the two clubs that are part of the association, one being uh Brennan's and the other uh Sterling.

So we have a um a chair for for the nine-hole league and for the 18 whole.

So there's there's two components to it.

There's the nine-hole league and there's the 18-hole league for each course.

And um we have members, certain members of of the association, they are responsible for um managing all the tea times for every week as a tournament.

So I play twice weekly, one at Brennan's and one at Sterling.

So it's it's a lot of it's a lot of work.

Um they manage all the tournaments.

We also do it.

We're also Sterling and Brennan is involved with um the Southern Connecticut League.

So every year, Sterling and Brennan hosts the tournament for the Southern Connecticut players, which is a really nice event.

Actually, we all do it, and so I should say we all do it.

Um the surrounding towns do it, like Fairfields, Greenwich.

Um, so every leader from that association or for that club will organize and coordinate the the tournaments for that for the upcoming season, which I'm very excited for.

It's like the second third week in April it starts, so it's right around the corner, and it's uh it's until October.

So there's a lot involved as far as organization.

They have an opening, they have a season opener, um breakfast, they have events throughout.

Um they try to do events, uh random events throughout the season for both courses.

Um Michael Zodie does a great job with hosting hosting the women's events at Zodies.

Um, and they're just responsible for for keeping a tight chip and managing both the nine-hole and the 18-hole leagues, and they do a wonderful job doing it.

We there's a great there's a great group of women running that association for the uh for the women's golf league.

Okay, well, thank you very much.

Uh thank you.

Yeah, my mom was a member.

Um, she was um any other questions.

Well, well, thank you so much, and thanks for logging in, and uh we wish you uh safe travels home.

Thank you so much, and I really appreciate the consideration for your time this evening.

Have a have a lovely evening, everyone.

Thank you.

All right, uh item number four is uh 832-014 uh zoning board of appeals.

And this is uh George Dallas, who's uh here for a reappointment to a term that expires uh December 1, 2028.

Um former McCanner.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Um it's it seems if somebody comes to the Board of Appeals, uh there's little that's more personal than that, right?

I mean, they're coming to you to discuss what's most likely the their largest uh investment.

And uh I was wondering if you could speak to that a little bit.

Um yeah, it it's an interesting process because there's no favorite favored nation.

It's it's pretty much cut and dried.

Okay, items that come to the ZBA come because the variances requested are going over the line, and we have to decide whether those variances are legit for lack of a better term.

But it's not as not cut and dried.

For example, uh there are uh lots, okay, where because of the shape, a the determination of what the front of the house is versus okay, the the back of the house can be determined based on that line.

So all of a sudden the variances can shift around, and we have to take that into account.

Um so it's not necessarily cut and dry.

Okay, but uh in case uh nobody had noticed, there's an awful lot of development going on in Stanford, so we need to make sure that variances that are requested are for lack of a better term, legit, okay, that people aren't stepping over the line and hoping that you know they they won't worry about the fact that I've requested a six-foot setback when in fact it should be 15.

Okay, and we do some some pretty significant deep dives on those in terms of okay.

Is was there an alternative?

Okay, are you okay doing this addition on the existing footprint of your property?

And was there some other way that you could do that addition without creating a variance?

Okay, talk to us about that.

Have you talked to your neighbors?

What did they say?

Okay, and um that that's always a big question because it's it's interesting how many people will come and make a great presentation, and then the question is so what do your neighbors think about this?

Well, we we think they'd be okay with it.

Well, no, it doesn't work that way.

We need to have some agreement, okay, because you're in the middle of a neighborhood, and you know you're not messing things up, but okay, people are gonna be upset about it.

Right.

So it's it's an interesting process, and we have um some pretty diverse people on the ZBA, okay.

Lauren Jacobson and I are the currently the the two permanent members, there are um three alternates.

Um and when they uh come in, you know, we've got an interesting cross-section of opinions on how some of the variances should be handled.

I remember one of my favorite ones was when the um Dunkin' Donuts was um down in the lower part of uh Hope Street down where um uh the restaurant you know where I am.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you.

Um they were arguing that a the previous property, which was a bank, had a drive-through window, so therefore it was okay for them to have a drive-thru window.

We went, no, we had to do a pretty deep dive on what the property definitions were, and whether those definitions would transfer to new owners, and we decided no, they didn't, but you could apply for it.

And my argument was because I spent a lot of time in the advertising business, and one of my big clients was Taco Bell.

My argument was this is no longer a coffee shop.

If you take a look at the menu of a Dunkin' Donuts, it ain't just coffee.

All of a sudden, there's breakfast, there's lunch, and there's dinner, and there's late night, and that's a restaurant, not a coffee shop.

Okay, so that's what sort of drove that not keeping bankers' hours.

Exactly.

Right.

Exactly.

So there's some interesting stuff that comes up that that was the most interesting for me.

I enjoyed that.

Interesting.

Interesting.

By the way, Steve, I think the phrase is not keeping mad men on hours.

Yes.

Exactly.

Well, we both date to that somewhat to that era.

So it's been there and done that livers to proven.

Oh my god, I was like sometimes uh reminiscent of Stalin's uh Russia, those lunches.

Uh so I I I enjoy the ZBA um uh I've been on it now for two years.

This is a reappointment, and uh this is my way of uh giving back to the city.

Okay, um I've had people chase me for the Board of Finance, not sure I want to do that.

Planning board was sure I want to do that.

Okay, then ZBA came up and I said, Okay, I'll I'll do that.

I like the flavor of that.

Representative Weather.

Yeah, thank you.

So first of all, first of all, thank you for your willingness to contribute to the city.

It's we this city to a great extent runs on the efforts of our volunteers.

Really seriously.

Really appreciate that.

Thank you.

So I'm I'm curious about I know you sometimes receive uh variance applications frequently for residential properties, principally single family homes.

We did one back in the late 90s as an example.

It was a harrowing, it was the the walk-up to the to the experience was harrowing.

The actual experience was kind of pleasant.

But you also do you also consider variance applications for commercial establishments like the one you were just describing.

Which of course was a prominent in the new in the newspaper.

And still in the courts.

Do you apply the same um the same sort of analytical approaches, regardless of whether it's residential or commercial?

Do you use the same consistent with the zoning regulations?

Do you use the same standards?

Or the approach is different when it's a commercial versus residential.

No, we we don't see the uh the difference between residential and and commercial.

A variance is a variance.

Okay, a variance is a variance, okay, and that's what has to be considered.

We don't we don't change the rules.

Okay, we had a uh a recent uh application for a um uh church on um on the geek down by by Riley Automotive.

Okay, and so that was interesting because it certainly wasn't residential, but it certainly wasn't commercial, okay.

And so you know, people would have said, well, because it's a religious organization, you gotta give them a break.

Well, that yeah, we understand that, but okay, variances or variances.

We still need to take into account, and you know what the argument was was you know how many parking spaces were there, how many people were attending.

Well, we weren't sure how many people were attending, so we had to sort of guess that number, and there were properties further down the road who were offering parking, okay.

And you know, so it was it was an interesting combination of things, okay.

But a variance is a variance, it just has to be looked at you know pretty much the same way.

So another question, um you know, sometimes in a variance application, um the um the property owner and the neighbors have somewhat competing interests but it yeah, how again how do what are the what what are the analytical tools or the approaches to take to sort of balance those those interests, those competing agents?

It's not so much analytical as it is that if there is an obvious situation where a neighbor was going to be affected by that variance, okay.

Uh remember one argument where there was a second story with a uh a dorm or window that was looking straight into the neighbor's upstairs bedroom, okay, and said, Well, you need to do something about that.

Well, that's not necessarily to say that people are you know building it so they can look in there, okay.

But the responses from the neighbors were what helped us make that decision, and there was a slight architectural change as a result of that.

Interesting.

Okay, so um neighbor input is is very important.

Um the presentation to the ZBA for any particular piece of property is also uh very important because there are owners who make the presentation, and then the owners have their attorney make the presentation, and the attorney will oftentimes bring up things that a normal homeowner wouldn't think of, okay, and there's history to it and whatnot.

So okay, there's a lot of input that that comes in, but neighbor input is especially important.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Okay, representative weathers.

How do I have to speak?

Mass meeting.

Yes.

Okay, thank you for commissioning.

Okay.

Hi, good evening.

Hi, weather is here.

Um, I'm gonna read my question to make sure that thorough.

Okay.

We currently have mixed zones mixed, where they're um they are allowed to combine commercial and residential, and um, this makes residents suffer um in their neighborhoods being surrounded with commercial vehicles, construction material, noise, less parking and debris.

According to the zoning um board's purpose, it is to promote public health, safety, convenience, and the stability of property values by encouraging the most appropriate use of land in accordance with the provisions of the city Stanford Charter.

And one of the goals says, according to this, lessen congestion on streets and protect open spaces.

So I read the purpose and one of the goals that's listed in the document.

Do you think it is fair?

Um if a resident is operating his or her um business from home, and they are using um their property, their driveway and front lawn for construction trucks and vans and things of that nature right on their lawn in a residential neighborhood.

This is one of those ones that's a mixed zone.

Um, do you think that that is fair to do that on their property because they're saying that they're operating their business from home?

So they have all their commercial and in their construction vehicles all around their property.

Good question.

Um trying to recall whether we had uh something like that, but the answer to your question, okay, would be it's important to understand what the volume of that commercial traffic is, okay.

Um the curb cutbacks determine whether there can be parking on the street or not.

Okay, the uh property itself, okay, if it has parking spaces, has already been determined how many parking spaces you're allowed to have.

So you can't just over you know over flood the parking spaces that there are lawns on your front lawn, then that's not a parking space, and if that is if that's that wouldn't be a requested variance, that's what I wanted to know.

Okay, uh I if it was a requested variance, we'd all sort of go, really?

So you mean the lawn doesn't count?

Okay, okay, and that I would say we probably all take a look at that and go I think that's sort of overstepping the bounds, but let's further discuss it.

So if they came to you and said, Well, I'm a business, I'm an entrepreneur, and I have this landscape on this concrete construction company, and this is my residence, and I'm operating my business from the home.

Can I get a variance from you?

Can you approve me to allow me to park my construction vehicles here on my property?

Would that be something that could leave happen?

It'll be a it could, but um one of the most important uh pieces of communication that we ask for before we hear any particular item is what did the planning board say?

What did the zoning board say?

And if the letter came through from planning or zoning that said we would recommend that the ZBA approve this, okay, then we'll take a look at it.

The letter could also come through and go, no, we do not recommend that the ZBA approve this because we're concerned about it.

Chances are if a letter comes through it says that that okay, planning or zoning doesn't recommend it, it'd be pretty hard for it to get to us in the first place.

Okay, okay.

Um, but I mean it's it's a good question because of the you know the the mixed use.

The mixed use that's what I'm yes.

We'd also have to ask the question.

Well, so what do you mean by you're running the business out of your house?

Does that mean that your office is there and you've got actual construction okay, equipment, okay, loading, unloading, okay, maintenance and whatnot, that's sort of a whole different bulk.

Um currently on the west side, we have uh a lot of being um designated as CL zone.

Would you be open to properly um possibly rezoning or restructuring to be um VC zones?

Okay.

C C V A that doesn't restructure zones.

Okay.

Okay, that's up to zoning and planning.

Okay.

Okay.

We just rule on somebody wants to do this, there are variances involved.

We're taking a look at the variances that are being posted.

Okay.

All right, I'm done.

Okay, I yield.

All right.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Thank you, Mr.

Downs.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman.

Oh, uh, yes, uh, majority leader Marson.

Yes.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I just want to say that I I personally known George Dallas for over 20 years.

Um and uh I am thrilled that he's before us for reappointment, and I'll be supporting him.

Good to hear.

Thank you.

Sure.

Mr.

Lex, would you mind just uh taking a seat over there?

Sure.

A little closer to the mic, absolutely.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Mr.

Briscoe, you don't have to say if I want you to.

I was just fascinated by the fictional.

I don't know, you're well, it's okay.

It's okay.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

That's right.

And so is Gina.

She was very well spoken.

So this is uh this is item number five, uh32.015 uh Board of Assessment Appeals.

Uh Daniel Axe, uh due term, which would expire uh December 1st of this year.

Welcome.

Thanks for thanks for waiting.

Thank you.

So perhaps you can explain to this uh neophyte the difference between the board zoning board of appeals and board of assessment appeals.

One word the Board of Assessment Appeals deals with values.

Uh the Board of Appeals deals with uh people arguing the values is the best way I can put it.

Okay.

Yeah, I mean I it it's it's straight up because the assessed is the assessed value, so people will argue what the value is, so they'll go to the board of appeals, fighting what the uh new generally assessed value may or may not be.

That's it.

The key word there is fighting.

It's a very personal, it's kind of kind of like the zoning board of appeals, just well, obviously, you know, the key word being appeals.

Um people come to you and it's there's some emotion there, right?

And there's obviously some skin in the game there.

Um how does your experience sort of lend itself to uh the anks that one might experience in that kind of a environment?

Sure, that's a great question.

Um when I originally I started uh about a year and a half, two years ago, and actually uh applied to be on the zoning board.

Um, and I spoke to uh Bridget and uh Rachel, and uh then later on I got that you know what we're gonna look to other people, and then recently they said with your background, we we think uh the Board of Appeals might be much better suited for you.

Uh I have been a landlord the best way I put it.

I don't like using the word landlord because if you stop paying the taxes, you're really not landing or lord of the land anymore.

Um so I've been on the opposite side uh many times over the years, so I have a lot of uh experience, not in Stanford though, uh Bridgeport, Milford, Shelton.

I've been purchasing property when I first came here over 20 years ago in that area, and I did a lot of uh construction work.

Uh we would buy, and that was during the housing crisis, if you recall.

So we what properties that were uh and in that those areas, a lot of properties needed a lot.

There's a lot of lead issues, a lot of stuff.

So we're going there, we blow them out and we rehab them.

And one of the things I look at when I'm purchasing, uh looking is why is the taxes here when the other neighbors' taxes are over here?

So over 20 years ago, um, the fight um was um how can I swear that there was more weight, but because over time with uh vision associates and electronics, um the towns know what your houses are, so there's less of a fight nowadays, except when it comes to the revaluation, and that's where people start getting uh very touchy is during the reval.

But no more, you know, you you can't really argue uh, well, there's not really a bathroom here, and you guys are saying I have two bathrooms, because now everything is electronic, so that those arguments have gone.

So many of the fights have gone away except for the revals, and that that's where you're up against uh, especially you know, nowadays.

Do you do you happen to know Phil Kitchma up in uh Bridgeport?

No, no, I didn't know.

Developer, builder.

Okay, no, I don't know.

Yes, representative way of counting.

Thank you.

Good to see you.

You too.

Um so on the board on the Board of Assessment Appeals, you're dealing with comparables all the time.

Basically, that's what it is.

Now that we're not guessing what's a bathroom and what's a bedroom.

Right.

Yeah, uh, you're dealing with comparables.

Um there can be, as I'm sure totally sure you know, there can be a lot of gameplay and identifying comparables.

How do you um how do you distinguish between comparables that are realistic and uh you know and proposed comparables and appeals that all right um that are more fancy?

Sure.

Um say that I've had a real estate license for 20 years, and um I I work with uh a group that we develop uh portfolios.

So we look at over the years, what is the looks value when we're special when we're purchasing a property?

Um so and you're right, and I'll tell you a situation uh up in Bridgeport, I had someone uh call me, and uh you know I said no right away, but he called me, he says I have a problem in his commercial lease it was, it was an ex-use building.

He had a uh I think it was a subways, and it was a new owner, and the new owner was fighting with a market value of what his rent should be, and he said, I him, the owner, I found that comparable, and he was getting $4,000 a month.

The new owner was like, No, no, I'm only gonna pay you $2,500 a month because that's what the comparables are.

And he was in Bridgeport, but the closest comps they can get was Shelton, believe it or not.

I'm talking about the owner who's showing him 2500, and the owner was showing me another comp that he got close by, and I said, just I and he wanted me to bless it.

And I said, There's absolutely no way I can bless it.

Yes, you are right, it is within distance, but it is not even close to this mixed use you have.

You have to go with a mixed use building, and the one in Shelter was a perfect comp because it was just retrofitted.

Uh, he didn't like the answer.

But yeah, I mean, there's sometimes single families are easier.

You go to a closer distance and you look for the comps, and especially this town, old colonials, and especially in north uh the north end that we have up here, you can find comparables like that that are close by and pretty much uh bathrooms, kitchens, and and that's how you look at the map where the local because uh obviously real estate's very local, but when you look at a comparable, you have to go as close to the area as possible.

But you know, owners will say, Oh, yeah, you know, down on Westover, all the way down by where home depot, whatever is yeah, I found the comp up there, and I'm all the way by the Cranchwater or by the uh by pound ridge or whatnot.

And it's like, well, you know, you're in two different neighborhoods.

You can you can't do that, but yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Oh, thank you.

Um Chairgarner, Ms.

Lex, I guess following on from Representative Weinberg's question, this is more for causal interest rather than the interview question, but how do you deal with cut with uh with with people who have an unpublished work on the house, which then influences their valuation, and they use that as a tactic to find you stuff which doesn't care on the wall car or envision yet, which they're using as a leverage for their valuation change?

Sure.

So what you're saying is okay, the city just revalued, and now they have a permit.

Is that what you're saying?

Well, perhaps they don't have permit.

Perhaps they have stuff which is in their house, which is um unknown to the city, right?

They can potentially use in the arguments against the change in valuation or for the change in valuation.

Sure.

Twenty years ago, um the other side of the fence, people who were def or fighting the valuation, let's say the property owners, because the towns didn't have for what a reason uh each city, maybe because of budgets constraints or whatever it is, you didn't have all the information.

And over the last 20 years, the cities have woken up to that and literally have gone into houses over time, uh, vision associates, or whatever you have.

So that argument has now been really narrowed, very diminished nowadays.

Because you you can go to a property, look up at the vision, and then if they ask yourself, okay, so no one's touched this house in 50 years, and you're saying you don't have the bathroom.

That could be an argument.

Um, I was in Milford, I bought a uh I had a pizza shop that had tons of issues, and the guy just never fixed the shop in 40 years, which is why I was able, you know, whatever, to get a discount.

So I literally went to the assessor's office, and I and I spoke to the assessor himself.

I'm like, this is just not working.

Can I bring you to the property?

I literally took him into my car.

We drove to the property, and he just he's like, I'm I'll take care of it.

And it would happen to be 20%, which is very large, but the property was over 50 years old, and but you don't have that much in single families or uh part, especially apartment buildings.

That that is uh again, they the towns know now in the databases that the databases have become much better.

That's why that argument, it's really the revaluations that you start seeing.

Bridgeport just did a reval.

Um I'm curious to see how many people are now gonna go downtown and obviously start arguing that so and there's a lot of emotions.

Um inflation has been a very big indicator over the last few years.

So when you take a property uh and you uh you revalue it right now, Richard doubled their so everyone's looking at what what is the town gonna do with the mill rate?

And people, no matter what, even if the town is right, they are gonna try to fight it because their budget tells them they have to fight it.

So you have to listen to all what everyone says, but um permitting and everything else, pre uh it's in the database pretty much, unless it's a really old property, and then you're dealing with other issues, probably lead and everything else.

Yeah, it's not you know, it's interesting how you describe that encounter because that involved a certain amount of leg work on the part of the assessor.

Uh is do you see that as part of your remit?

I mean, or is this really pretty much kind of drive, go online, do the research, or do you get out of the field?

Oh, I'm always in the field.

I look at properties all the time.

Um, that's me.

Um you don't know a value of a property until you look at it, until you really know what's inside that property.

And I do, and I take and I my first stop is gonna be vision, and I'll see the square footage, how many bass dot what they have on there, and what their appraisal numbers are.

Um, when I first got into Bridgeport, um, I was very successful in arguing uh the taxes were on the properties that I bought, were not within the range of the other properties, per se in the area.

So I was very successful in that way.

Um I I argued in Shelton, but I was not successful in that way.

And it is, you know, it is what it is.

Uh, but yeah, I mean, I personally I look at properties all the time.

That's what I do.

I just go around and I know from my own portfolio.

I'm always looking for uh a needle or a diamond in the somewhere in the rough somewhere.

Sure, yeah.

So is that uh a matter of just the personality of those respective boards and how they did business?

Um that's a great is a culture in every town, absolutely.

So you're right.

Uh so you think my unsuccessfulness being in Shelton?

Yeah, Shelton was a unique deal.

Um, and I'll tell you why I argued it.

So I um there was a house, and I had a I didn't it was not um, he didn't he didn't offer it uh on any MLS or anything like that.

I heard it, I'm going to a lot of property groups, C TAA, I don't know if you heard them, C T P O A.

Okay, so uh my ears to the ground, I made a lot of representative.

So I so anyway, through the work, I found this uh property.

And the property, it's very interesting.

The property was a three-family property on the field card, and I bought it, assuming it was in three family property.

I had uh so then in in the city of Shelton, uh the fire department has a volunteer section um that uh what's the best way I can describe it?

Um that oversees uh landlords and tenants and whatnot.

So I spoke to the inspector, and he says, No, it's a two-family house.

I said, Okay, that's interesting.

So he left, and we we discussed and I told him what my plans were.

So when we went down to get the permit, and you have to go through zoning and all the departments, fire department.

Everyone said everyone to the computer and everyone knows it's a three-filling.

So I it was so I said, Okay, so they gave you a three-family permit.

Um, 85% done.

Now I didn't have any more contact with this inspector, and he came out, he says, I told you it's a two-family, you stopped me, stopped work.

And we were about 90% done.

And I said, I'm not gonna say, Why are you saying it's not what zoning and everyone else signed off on it?

So it happened to be the owner of the and this is very in this.

This is why it's important to have a uh a board of appeals, just for this reason.

The owner uh had uh tenants that were they were section eight on the second, third floor, which is one unit, so you had a first floor unit and second and third floor.

The family got into a fight, so they locked each other out, and they had a bathroom upstairs.

I don't know if he was even legal or not, but there was a bathroom.

So the one of the family members was on the third floor, didn't talk to the family is on the second floor.

So at some point in 2002, um, someone walked in there from the assessor's office and said, if you want to smell like a three-family, you're gonna pay taxes as a three-family.

So since 2002, they've been paying taxes as a three-family house, but it was never zoned to be a three-family house.

However, it just it is what it is.

The ZO uh the ZOE, right?

The Z, whatever you were the enforcement officers.

He was a young kid, and he was new to the job, and he signed off on it.

And that's right.

So when the ZBA found out, that's when there was a halt on everything, and of course, I'm like, you can't do that.

So I actually petitioned to the ZBA and I petitioned to the mayor, and I said, Look, I'm 90% done.

You all gave me permits.

It would it would cost too much to undo the plumbing, the electric.

I already had the four panels, everything, and everything was inspected, everything was passed.

So I'm lucky.

Uh, everyone agreed with my argument, and um, I have to make one of the youths, uh, one of the units um what do you call that?

Um I have to make one of the units uh for section eight, let's put it that way.

That that that is a dedicated unit, and that's why they did.

So, you know, it you give a little you take a little, but that was an interesting situation to get into.

So the mistake at zoning was he he just and it they didn't have the database, and that's the problem over there.

That's why the mistake was happening because he actually had to go back and fund the original card because it was never approved, but that's the experience I have.

It's a pretty good description of the job, yeah.

Which is why I think uh Bridget and Rachel said, Hey, I think you're gonna be great for this job.

This is up your alley.

So uh oh, Representative Adams.

Yes, um, I I guess I heard you talk talking about uh the reval uh of houses and stuff, but um, how do you get a true reval and most of the the revaluation is contract out and most of the uh the evaluation is done like a ride-by?

I mean, they don't really uh reval the house, they just ride by and do an assumption.

I mean, I had property where uh new construction of a two-family house, and they put an ad and they put on my assessment card.

Um look like a third floor.

I mean, how do you correct stuff like that?

I mean, because that evaluation is based on that assumption, but if you look at the blueprint and the permit the way it was pulled and signed off, you know it's not because the peak of the ad is not high enough to have a seven-foot ceiling, and in order for you to have a third floor or whatever, gotta be a seven-foot ceiling.

So how do you get around I guess opinionated reassessment than the actual assessment?

Yeah, that's a great question.

Um, but I want to unpack your question actually and break it up into two parts.

Okay, there's yeah, I appreciate what you're saying.

I I've had a situation also where I had a raised dormer, and uh I instantly saying on the second floor.

That yeah, so what you're saying is two things.

One is a macro, how does the town uh or the company they uh give it to put a number down on the reval, and then the second question is more micro specific on your property.

So, yeah, sure, you on your property, even before the reval, you could have possibly even argued what your current uh assessed value is, as opposed to even waiting for a revalu.

If you're talking about the seven-foot ceilings and all that, that that's more of a micro basis on that property.

But what towns do, obviously, uh the state of Connecticut uh says you have to revalue every five years or within a certain period of time.

Um, and it's interesting, a lot of the towns wait, for example, uh prices in the state of Connecticut, um, prices of housing didn't move.

Uh in fact, we were one of the last states to actually go above the uh 0708 crisis in 2020.

Uh most of the other states in the country, and I'm not gonna talk about the Midland states, but most of the states did rise above in 2017.

We did not until 2020, and then when we had the COVID crisis, which helped Connecticut, because especially in Fairfield County, you had a massive influx of the escape from New York, um, which really helped our state.

Since 2020, we've had an increase in fact, Bridgeport, Connecticut was the number one city in terms of increased value.

I think it was in 22 or 230.

It was a wild, I have to find that article.

It's very and it's true because I'm in Bridgeport, and prices in Bridgeport went from you know, a two-family could have been 250, you know, toward the North End.

Black Rock was different, but 250,000 today, they're five and a quarter.

By the time we have the crisis, the crisis hit 325.

So are we in a crisis?

I don't know, but that's not my point.

My point is when a vision associates goes in, they take a blanket to the town and they do percentages of areas, and they look at uh economics and incomes and all that, and then that's part of uh where they do a blanket.

But what you're saying on the on the specific house, sure, that that could be argued and brought even before the reval is done.

Um the mayor's uh and the representatives, those there are deadlines for reval.

So sometimes things have to be rushed in, and this phone calls I'm sure to which I'm not part of, but um I hope I answered your question.

Um not sort of, but but but uh to my point, another point I like to make is even though you can appeal, I mean you can go in and talk about it, but the city only put out a certain amount of appointments that you can make.

In other words, on all the houses in Stanford, they only review a certain percentage.

So everybody that got problems or concerns or got additional rooms or square footage added to their house, don't get uh um all of their point, not unless they take it to court.

So how do we get to a point that everybody got a question that the city assessment can sit down with them and straighten it out before that new assessment is actual part of their uh revaluation?

That's a great question, representative.

In the statutes of the state of Connecticut, I do believe it's like 12 117 actually addresses that issue that if there is an overwhelming amount of people that the assessment board cannot uh address.

Um it's up to, and I'm I have to I don't remember every detail, it's up to the mayor and or the representatives to delay the reval so they can hear arguments and then go into the next year.

But it isn't it is part of the statutes that if they're if during a reval, there's an overwhelming people arguing that the board and or the mayor can delay reval and address uh over time what the majority of those arguments are.

It's I don't know if it's 1211 uh dash one, but it's in the Connecticut statutes that do address that exact issue.

Okay, well, I gotta take a look.

I never heard that I I know um all before in the past, once they re-state three, so will it be 10% or 12% of the population, whatever it is, um they meet the obligation in the assessment whether wrong or right goes forward, and if you want to appeal it, you gotta go to court and then appeal it in court and spend those fees.

But I was definitely research what you um talking about.

Um thank you.

Yeah, no, thank you, uh representative.

If it's a million, if it's a million dollar property, yeah, uh a lot of times the board would say go to superior court on that.

Uh but usually for property, especially 500,000 and less, um, and there's overwhelming amount of people that are looking to argue that, then again, it it is up to the mayor and/or the board.

I don't remember where what the statute exactly says, but the town is able to delay the reval for a year, and um I guess address as much of those concerns as possible.

But it's definitely in the statutes.

It's it's it's uh 12-117, 116.

It's in that area in that zone.

I'll take a look at it, but thank you, and uh appreciate you with the list.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Reset of Adams.

Uh any other questions.

Thank you, Mr.

Appreciate.

Thank you too much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That was a very informative so uh next item we have is number six, 832 uh 016.

Uh and that is uh Dennis Torres.

This is just George.

The mic's right over there, so we'd appreciate it if you could do that.

Okay.

Well, thank you for joining us, and thank you for uh throwing your hat in the ring one more time.

Sure.

I'm not gonna be nearly as dynamic as that was last guy.

So we'll do okay.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, you know, it takes all kinds to run this city, doesn't it?

So so tell me, uh tell me what inspired you to number one, just to take this responsibility on, but number two come back around a second time.

Is this the second time, or this is the second time?

Well, I um I first came on the board of ethics um at a time it would it was a little controversial, it was sort of the tail end of um a period where the board of ethics was um not given a lot of credit or not trusted.

Um there were something swirling around.

I don't know if you remember the history of the recent history.

So um when I stepped on, I my goal was and it still is that the Board of Ethics is really informational and educational that most people, if not all, want to not be unethical.

No one goes into this work to be unethical.

I you know, sure out there, I suppose they're ethical people.

I don't even know if they realize it themselves.

So I think people come with the with uh an intention and a clean intention that um they want to make sure they're not in violation of the of the code, and sometimes the code isn't so clear.

Um and we work to make it as clear as as possible.

Um you know it'd be if it were easy to go to the code yourself if you were dealing with a situation, you said, oh, this fits here, and that fits perfectly, so I'm good, or you know, I gotta switch up.

Um then you wouldn't need a board of ethics.

So I um people come to to us for opinions, and I I think it's a good opportunity to share how the how the code is applied to every situation, and every situation factually is can be different, and you'd think that there'd be a and there are trends, but there's never a case that I've seen so far that's been exactly the same fact set that um we could get the same opinion twice somehow.

Yeah, this this body, the board of representatives has uh a parliamentarian who calls balls and strikes, and uh uh I consulted with them today uh on a matter, and and uh you know he has Roberts Rules of Orders that he can refer to.

Um so those balls and strikes are fairly cut back, strike zone just clearly defined.

Uh how how do you define yours?

Well my approach is um, and I've taught ethics at university level at Southern, at Western, um, and ethics are not morals, so it's not right or wrong.

It really is right versus right or wrong, which is more right and which is more wrong in any situation.

So um I think that's what you're talking about.

There's a lot of gray area here, and it really is weighing exactly how the situation that's put before the board fits into the to the code and how the code applies to those set of facts.

And I think we're getting better at pointing out areas of the code that need further definition from the board of reps because I think it's you all that write them.

And I think it was the I the last update was 22 or 23.

There's certain words in there that require more definition for the board to use to move things forward and to be more helpful to folks that come before us.

Is that just because of the way that language evolves?

That those definitions shift, or is it is it a fluid standard that you have to work from?

No, I think it's it's it's pretty concrete that some things in the code are just not defined.

And is that I don't think it's a matter of evolution of the word or changing.

I really just think sometimes what happens is I think situations come before the board that were not even contemplated when they were writing the code.

So in that in that case, I suppose it's evolutionary, but um, yeah, I I just I just think it's it's challenging to write code of ethics, and I you know give you all a lot of credit for doing that.

Thank you.

Um Dennis, thank you for your enormous contributions to work.

Thank you.

Um as you know, as you just alluded to, a few years ago, the Board of Representatives uh revised uh the code of ethics uh in a way that narrowed the scope considerably of the code of ethics that it is almost exclusively, because I understand it, almost exclusively focused on financial conflict of interest what have been the what have been the benefits of that narrowing of the scope, and what have been the downsides of it in your view?

Um I've never I was never in a position to have to interpret the previous code, so only know what's here now.

Um I think yeah, it's it's it's mostly I I guess you can say it's mostly financial, and you know, it's Stanford is hard, but you people are can you can be have the appearance of a conflict because you know persons that sit around this table may also sit around, they also work at the school or the you know, people that work in this building are on the you know a different board.

So I think that in those areas, and um it's harder to to um to ferret out uh issues, not financial, so more about influence.

Um but and and I do think that's still in the code, and I guess if you're influenced in an outcome, it doesn't necessarily have to be financial.

So I like I said, I don't know what it was like before.

It does seem pretty straightforward.

We seem to always go to the same two or three um code provisions and and cases that are um that come before us and apply it to whatever um I do think that if you are around and you have that what um that I was sharing earlier that there is uh a point where people were stopped coming to the board for advisory um opinions.

Um I feel like it's picking up, and people are I think they're reinvesting their confidence and the folks that are sitting on the table.

I think that's a good point.

Yeah, thank you.

Oh, uh co-chair Gregor, Mr.

Storm, one thing that is why do you think the people are following up on board of ethics more often now than they were previously?

I think it's um a greater sense of trust and and um and the folks that sit around that table.

It's uh I think everyone on the board right now, someone's coming off very soon, we're not around um during a time when there was some dissatisfaction with some of the um work that was done.

So there's that.

I you know, and I think time heals wounds.

Um I think folks are less inclined to go back into the archives and look at the videos, and they're all there.

So um I hope it's because they they respect the opinions of the board and really want the help and the advice and are really struggling with maintaining um an ethical standard and whatever situation they're looking for.

Representative uh Pavia.

Sorry, unmuting.

How are you?

Thank you very much for being here.

Sure.

Um, I I agree that the the Board of Ethics is great for getting opinions.

As an educator, I got a uh opinion my first year on what I couldn't couldn't vote on, and uh along with a colleague of mine who's in the same situation.

So I I appreciate all that stuff that you do, and it is a good body for you.

Um can we go back to where you said before that when you I'm paraphrasing what you said.

Um when you got on the board of ethics, um it was during a like dysfunctional time or a unlike time, whatever you said.

I don't want to put words in your mouth.

It was a tail end of a uh uh what seemed to me a very tumultuous time because there was uh a case back to back cases that seemed to get a lot of press and a lot of um attention.

So is that the board that was dysfunctional or just the situation?

Um I I don't know if I said dysfunctional, but um you might I'm paraphrasing, you could use whatever word you want.

Uh tumultuous, tumultuous, yeah.

I um I just uh I think it got contentious.

I for whatever reason it got contentious, and um I wasn't around.

I can only tell you what I've seen on in the archives.

I so I don't know exactly what fit into that, but you know, I it's quite if you if you if it goes to that level, it's it's a quasi-judicial process.

Um and it's serious, and it's you know, it's not only um ethics, but it's it's people's reputation in a community where most people, especially if you if you're beholden to the ethics, you know, you you're known, and um so I think that's what was going on, yeah.

20 it's Monday morning quarterbacking.

These these aren't trick questions, sir.

I I promise you.

I'm I'm trying to establish that when I got on the board.

Um yeah, I I was told uh, and this was in 2021, summer of 2021.

Um, you know, I was warned about ethics, kangaroo court, you know, these are other words that people were using.

And um I don't does it seem it it doesn't seem like that now.

What do you think's changed?

Not that it ever seemed that way, but I don't hear people saying that anymore.

I um I don't know what's changed because I've watched the old and um the um the former chair Alan Um, yes.

I thought I I mean I thought he ran an excellent meeting.

He was a bit he was brilliant at ethics.

Um I don't so I don't know if I can answer the question.

Changed because I've watched the old and um the um the former chair Alan um yes I thought I I mean I thought he ran an excellent meeting it was a bit he was brilliant at ethics um I don't so I don't know if I can answer the question I you know it's it's the public's mood um yeah yeah um I I love that you said it's people's reputation um it's it's people's livelihood um I love that you take that seriously because it it really is um when we're talking about an ethics complaint um so of course with that goes the like weaponization of of the ethics board um have you well you don't have to tell me if you've seen any of that but have you seen any ways that our foundations are stronger on the ethics board now where that can't happen or that can't just immediately go to uh the judicial process which is like a trial yeah um I've not seen that so I don't yeah but I something could come before us next month that's gonna just go the you know support what you're saying I don't know um I don't know if people have been eager to go before the board of ethics and I think like I said there's this growing trust I think there's a lot of smart people on the board not that there weren't um but I you know it's I think it's what's happening too in different halls of government and the board of reps are upstairs that you know if when it gets contentious um people will do what they can to uh I don't want to say uh you know to sort of lob um not a tax but lobs lob dirt dirt balls at people and um so I hope not I hope that that's not the case I I think the code is written now I think that would be much harder um but it's it's in there and it can happen so it's not it's not it's not like it can't happen and I hope that people would um again try to understand the code before it got to a point where someone would have to file a case against someone that um they felt was in violation yeah I mean hopefully nobody has to file any ethics um violations and that would make your job interesting um sir I I'm I'm sorry could you tell me what year you got on the the board of ethics again um um that's a good question I started the right after uh mayor simmons was uh in her first year I think um so whatever year that was 22 22 23 I started oh okay so recent reason um I'm sorry I was asking you a lot of questions about old boards though uh I didn't know that you were uh that no I remember you from my first appointments committee yeah yeah um final question um when you say go into the archives do you base a lot of your decision not you like does the ethic board base a lot of its decisions on precedent like going back to the archives and seeing like well this case is similar to that one you know that and do you base it off of that yes I think to a certain we we don't follow precedent in the way that um a lawyer would define precedent but we do look at what cases that are similar that have similar flavor and see how it was decided and um apply it to those set of facts so I think we apply it evenly and that way there's precedent but there's um some things are nuanced and um and it may not be so clear at the outset and I hope that we do a good job in clarifying that for folks.

I get that I get that um thank you so much for answering these questions tonight it's good to see you again are you liking it at least I'm back as yes um thank you so much for your service uh Mr.

Chair I yield the floor thank you representative babia um representative adams okay representative adams your hands up it may have been up for me yeah uh representative high I I saw your hand but I don't see you up on our uh uh yes good evening uh Mr.

It may have been up for me for it.

Yeah.

Uh Representative Hyatt, I I saw your hand, but I don't see you up on our uh uh yes, good evening.

Uh Mr.

Pabia kind of answered my said what I wanted to say.

Thank you.

Thanks, Representative.

Uh Representative Walston.

Hi, Mr.

Dallas, good to see you again.

Hi.

Hi.

I have a quick question.

Sorry.

How does it work with I'm I'm like right now, I'm on the hunt for an opinion from a lawyer.

Is it not ethical?

Could I how could I go about getting an opinion from another board?

Is that ethical or not?

Or is it or only certain people are privy to that information on um an opinion?

It's a little vague.

I don't I can't quite okay.

If an attorney had given an opinion to another board, and I know a lot of people say it's just an opinion, but you know, I always look at a lawyer as it's having some kind of expertise.

How and would if the opinion is refused to be given to me, and if I know that as a board member that I should be able to look at that opinion, even if it's from another board, is that something ethical or unethical?

Could I take it to the ethics board?

Like, oh, I'm looking for this opinion and they're refusing to give me this opinion.

Could I I don't know if that's an ethical consideration?

It's certainly some sort of operational.

Um if you think they're holding back for reasons related to um influence, or they're somehow they're profiting from not providing that to you.

Oh then it would come to the board, but I you know, beyond that, I don't I know I don't know how to answer it.

Okay.

Well, I know that um I thank you.

Good to still see you there.

I know that I've gone to ethics like maybe two times, two or three times with questions, and you guys have come through, and uh you made me feel at ease.

I wasn't nervous or anything, and uh, you know, I liked your judgment.

So continue the good work.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You too.

Yeah.

Thank you, Representative Walson.

Do we have any uh other questions?

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

That's too long.

I don't see now who do we have who who are we uh oh there we go.

Oh uh we're on to item number seven, A32-017, and this is a reappointment to the zoning board.

Uh Roseanne McManus uh to a term that will expire December 1, 2027.

Uh thank you for joining us.

Hello, sorry.

That's that's quite all right.

I found myself groping for the unmute button uh too many occasions.

Can she come on camera?

Yeah, can can we see you?

Yep, I'm in the car, but I'll turn the camera on.

As soon as I can find the button.

Um I don't think you can see me because I'm in the car, but I'll be home in about 10 minutes.

So can you turn a light on in the car, honey?

What if we lose the order?

I guess do a uh do we have to uh think there's a rules?

Yeah, yeah.

Uh well I I don't think you guys have actually taken up any official actions, have you, right?

Because otherwise we'd still be discussing many, many actions.

In that case, I don't know that you have to say I would agree.

Uh okay, okay.

So uh so uh Ms.

McManus, why don't we give you a few minutes to uh get home and we'll just uh we'll move on to the next item and come back to you.

Okay, fine.

Sure.

Uh wasn't sure what time I was gonna be on.

Well that's that's that's that's quite all right.

So we'll see you in a couple of minutes.

All right, thanks.

Uh Mr.

Stunt Thanks.

Uh thanks for joining us, and and and and and and thanks for coming around another time and continuing your service.

Sure.

Sure, thank you for uh taking the time to interview me.

Well, we appreciate you coming down here.

Uh I you know, I um I spent some time recently uh with someone who recently retired from the uh zoning board at Bridgeport, and uh this was during the summer, and uh I was uh neophyte uh candidate to the board, and there was all this controversy going on regarding the comprehensive plan.

And uh so we we were chatting, and and he said, Well, you know, coming off of the zoning board, he'd been on the zoning board and bridge board for a long time, over 10 years.

He said, you know, the interesting thing about zoning is uh most people just don't understand it, and that makes it a very easy subject to demagogue.

And uh and it in the context of the controversy surrounding the the comprehensive plan, it's sure that comment sure made a lot of sense to me.

But I was wondering if you might speak to that.

The lack of understanding of um zoning, yeah, yeah.

I think that's true.

It's um it's we're guided by a set of regulations that we refer to constantly to see whether something is permitted or not, and the extent of a the size of a project and what amenities have to be provided.

Um but I think what's what's not understood by a lot of people is that if a developer comes in and meets our regulations that we really have to approve it because if we don't, they'll sue the city and they'll city will lose.

So um, you know, people there are times when people don't like a project and they object to it.

Um, but it those times are our hands are not exactly tied, but we're limited in what we can do.

Um we can't just deny a project because there are a lot of people who don't like it.

Um so I think that's the primary um area where it's misunderstood.

And I I would add to that, I see our job as in those situations as getting comments from the public and then trying to um see how we can make changes to the project so that the effects on the people who live nearby will be minimized.

How do we reduce the negatives?

Um, and we do have some some leeway in that and things that we can do.

So um, but I think that's the primary thing that's not understood by the public.

Yeah, I mean, well, it's it also that it it's nuanced, and it and and you know it's it's one way on one block and it's another way on another block, and true, depending upon where the lines are drawn for the the different zones, right?

But you just reminded me of um remember when Trump wanted to build his buildings on the west side and they had all those protests because people complain that his buildings were gonna block their view of the Hudson.

Do you remember that?

Sure.

Oh yeah, sure.

And they were rallying and they were going to go.

Okay.

And but they had to approve it because at the end of the day, he's not breaking anything.

It does fall in compliance with the zoning and with the rules, and whether the people wanted it or liked it or not, he still had the right to build them there.

Right.

There's no right to have a view.

Right to have the view, right?

Of the Hudson, right?

Yeah, we've had it in Stanford with some buildings along the water.

I think on Fairfield Avenue that some people were complaining that their new building would block the view of the current one.

Right.

And actually in the end they they moved the new building back a little bit so that it wouldn't do quite as much harm to the view but they didn't have to they didn't have to Mrs.

You're on the Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board, I believe yes I'm the designee from the zoning board.

Oh okay so that comes with your role as the zoning board right well the city board has a number which is on that by default.

Okay that makes more sense but you do you find there are uh uh additional challenges you have balancing those two roles and uh and do you find that the the need for affordable housing in Stanford and the the sort of the your power you have in the in the way it's only gets set do you find those two roles work nicely together um they do work nicely together let me just give you a bit of history um before the affordable housing trust fund was established um I guess by the board of reps um it used to be that when a developer um uh was approved to do a fee in lieu to pay funds into um an account um it was up to the zoning board to determine who would get that money so um and often the developer would come in with someone so they might come in with uh charter oak communities and say hey charter rope needs this two million dollars and uh we'd rather give them two million than to build 20 units uh within our project um it but it it became clear that this was really not our expertise to um analyze a project you know see that where the developer wanted to give the money to see if that was a good place for it to go and was it being used properly and it was clear it had been done that way for for many years and so um I um encourage staff and I think staff was already feeling this way that this really should be done by a separate board and that they should be the ones who who um grant funds to um generally nonprofit developers so that's where the uh affordable housing trust fund came from and now they do that and um it has a staff that can analyze a project much better and um see you know whether these funds are being used they look at the the cost per unit for example of of it and see whether these funds are being used for a good project if the cost per unit is excessive then we might say hey this this doesn't make sense but the two the two go to two roles for the two bodies the zoning board and the affordable housing trust fund um both are involved in creating affordable housing um as you know we have what's called inclusionary zoning which is the requirement that some percentage of the units be um uh affordable uh for workforce housing 50 percent of area median income and um the um and the majority of these are built on site um they are not the developer doesn't pay the money into the affordable housing trust fund um and um so we're also in the business of creating affordable housing and in fact in the last year we increased the requirement so in the densest areas of the city uh it was 10 percent was pretty much 10 percent in most areas of the city 10 percent of the units had to be affordable and we raised it in um south end and around the train station area uh to 12 and 14 percent depending upon which area so it it went up either 20 or 40 percent uh the requirement and um so i i think the zoning board has been and one of my goals is to create as much affordable housing as we can and i think we've been doing a good job of it as well thank you how how is area medium uh income defined or well the the number comes from HUD so they give it to us and they look at um you know they look at I believe now they're looking at census tracts and they determine what the you know from census data what the uh um median income is but the you know if you're the area is the area of Stanford I think it's broader than Stanford but I can't tell you for sure what what's covered by it but it's currently it's around I think about a hundred and sixty five thousand dollars for a family of four seed area median income so most of the affordable units are for people at 50% of that so that's uh

Um but it's currently it's around I think about a hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars for a family of four C area median income.

So most of the affordable units are for people at 50% of that, so that's um you know, firemen we're talking about 75,000, 80, 90,000 in that range.

So it's um teachers, uh other city employees, um, you know, it's uh this is really workforce housing, and um one of my goals or one of the issues I've always had is I think people who work in Stanford should be able to live here, and it's getting harder and harder now for that to happen.

So um uh I think that's one of the one of the reasons why we need more affordable housing in town, and um it's growing, but it it's too slow.

Uh representative weather.

Do you find it difficult when you have a prospective new developer coming with these negotiations of how many units or what percentage they should give for affordable?

Like could we maybe push the envelope to 20 or 25 percent?

Would that scare them away from actually doing their project here in Stanford?

Well, first the the percentages in our regulations.

So when a new developer comes, they just look at the regulations and they see what percentage they have to provide.

We don't have to negotiate with them on it.

Um but it's so currently we have it in set in like 12 or 14 percent.

It it depends.

There's certain areas of the city where it's lower, um, and certain types of um, for example, we want to encourage developers to take old office buildings and convert them to housing.

Um so that's uh seven percent, it's a lower percentage because we want to uh make it more financially uh feasible for them to do that.

Um there are um certain sections um where it's 10 percent, and in the most dense it's now 12 or 14 percent.

Could you and if your question increased um I well we just increased it, so um I would I want to wait a little while, you know.

Every time we increase it, is it's fun you asked.

Every time we increase it, we're told we're gonna kill off development in Stanford.

That's what I was asking.

I was developing all want to come here, and I think I I don't believe it.

I think that we are a um a town that developers want to come to that people want to live in.

I mean, that's part of the problem is we've got so many people who want to live in Stanford now that we have a shortage of housing.

We it's been pushing the rents up.

Um so um that's I was kind of asking, like, does it discourage the developers and make them not want to call?

You know, you know, you don't know until you do it.

Okay, really.

You know, they tell us every time, you know, they said the 10% would drive developers away.

You know, it's um uh but it's a um it's a real you don't know until you do it.

So that's the my thought is like every so often you just I think it should be increased a little bit.

Yeah, with the frog and the cold water, and it eventually gets to the 20% we would like.

Yeah, nice 20% would be great.

Okay, um, but understand when a developer does 20%, it means that the rest of the tenants in that building will be paying for it.

So it the the flip side is it will help it'll push rents up more.

Um but it's pushing it up for people who presumably can afford it.

Okay, who knows?

Um, but it's uh I like higher higher numbers for uh the inclusionary zoning uh requirements.

Thank you.

Representative Boydberg.

Hi David, hello there.

Um so it I mean, it's first of all your um your knowledge and understanding of the of the zoning regulations is encyclopedic, and I have the greatest respect for the depth of your knowledge.

And it's and it's an incredible asset to the uh to the zoning board and to the city here, your expertise there.

Um as of course you know, uh, in addition to approving or not approving individual development projects, uh the zoning board also has the power to correct me if I'm mistaken, has the power to revise the zoning regulations.

Yes.

What can the zoning board do in the area of regulation reform to boost affordable housing development in the city, particularly deeply affordable housing development?

Um just as important, what can the board of reps do to help the zoning board to accomplish that um good question?

I think we've already, in terms of what the zoning board can do, I think we we've been doing it by increasing the requirement of uh the percentage of uh affordable units that are required.

Um the deeply affordable is a it's kind of a separate area and it's it there's a great need for it as well.

Um we do have we have a in the regs a conversion chart which says that if a developer let's say they have to provide 10 units at 50 percent.

Um if they're gonna provide units at 30 percent, that means that those people are paying less rent to the developer.

So they don't have if they're doing 30 percent, they provide fewer units so that in the end the rent numbers um will work out.

So there is a conversion for um how many units they would provide at each level if they want to provide them at 60 percent of area median income, so they're now getting more rent, then now they have to provide more units at that level.

So um, but deeply affordable um is an area that um we could require it.

We we don't, but we could require the 30 percent units.

Um we get fewer units from developer.

Um but the other half of that is deeply affordable frequently need supportive services, you know, like in Spiracus building.

So you need a a nonprofit developer generally to do this, and you need them to be providing whatever services are needed.

Do they need a case worker to help them find a job or get uh government benefits or whatever?

So it's it's harder to do the deeply affordable.

Now, the way we get there is when a um developer doesn't put units on site but instead puts the money into the affordable housing trust fund, then that money can then be used to go to a nonprofit who is providing deeply affordable because otherwise um uh they couldn't afford to do it.

So when there's a project that's going on now, um the St.

John's Towers uh and where they're gonna take down the two towers and put in uh 305 units of uh all affordable, but it's a it's a whole range of affordability.

Um and they want to include some 30 percent units, and they've come to the affordable housing trust fund to ask for some money.

Now there hasn't been any decision made yet, so I can't really tell you what'll happen, but um it's it's really the deeply affordable or something that needs to be provided by the nonprofits because the for-profit developers just can't do it.

Understood.

So and and uh I'm glad you referenced the the St.

John's Towers project, because one of the differences, which I think is which I salute in that project versus a lot of the projects that the Affordable Housing Trust Fund has helped to fund, but that project will actually increase the number of uh of affordable units rather than simply renovating and keeping the same number.

Now there are situations like the one that just opened, yeah, um, you know, McCove that uh you know where that was where it was necessary, and I'm not being critical of that project at all where it was necessary to you know to renovate uh uh and kept the number of units the same.

But if we can use the affordable housing trust fund money to be accretive in terms of the number of units, I think that's really what we're what we badly need.

I agree, and I think others do.

Um when there's a a developer, and it's very hard for these nonprofit developers to come up with a project um that'll provide new units.

Um, but when there is such a thing, I'm always in favor of doing that instead of renovating units because I agree with you, we need to increase the supply.

Even when they're and I would say even when it's it's even when the number of new units is relatively small, thinking David Martin.

Right, for example, but every one of those apartments is a home for a family that otherwise probably doesn't have one, right?

Even though the new project has fewer units than you would be renovating, um, you're still getting new units.

Yeah, I agree.

Thank you.

Are you do you have a preference between uh fee and loo or just the developer providing uh affordable units?

Um I'd like to see a balance um between them.

I mean, at one time I was in favor of only putting the units on site, um, but I've seen that with the fee and loo that we can um fund uh nonprofit developers who can then build uh like um deeply affordable.

Um so I'd I'd like to keep it as a balance.

Um and at the moment, more developers are putting them on site than they are paying the fee and lie.

Um and I'm sure that you know they just stick it in their computer model and see which works out better for them.

Um so uh if it goes out of whack, for example, if if too many developers were paying the fee and lie, I would want to um play with the numbers, maybe you raise the fee and lie amount so it's not so attractive anymore, and they would go back to doing more on site.

Okay.

I'd love a question.

Uh yes, uh uh Representative Caprelli.

Thank you, Chair.

Um thank you, Chair Stein, for for your service to the city and also for coming before the board.

I I really appreciate being able to talk to you and interview you.

Um of the challenges with the comprehensive plan is that they're visionary documents.

And residents often want to understand how those visions translate into action actionable zoning decisions.

Um and so the questions that I'm gonna ask of you tonight are going to be centered around that, but in a general way, I guess I I wanted to know your opinion on that.

Well, the comprehensive plan um is a policy document.

It's as you said, it's visionary.

Um what it does basically is to first protect the single family neighborhoods from uh development, and it um it then selects the areas that it wants to um have further development in.

Um the way it works is the zoning board doesn't get involved with it.

If a developer comes to the city and says I want to uh build a project, uh this goes to the planning board, and the planning board looks at that and they determine whether that project uh complies with the comprehensive plan, and then they advise the zoning board this project, we've approved this project as being in compliance with the comprehensive plan.

So that review process goes through the planning board.

Thank you for that.

So the 2035 plan had a lot of strong environmental priorities, which for me are very important.

Expanding tree canopy, protecting green space, promoting climate resilience.

How do those goals practically influence your vote when reviewing a site plan or a zoning change?

That's the first part of the question.

And then the second part of the question is are there specific zoning tools such as open space requirement, tree preservation standards or buffering standards that you see as particularly important moving forward that are different than the way that you would look at it prior to this comprehensive plan being put into place.

The first part of the question was keeping in mind that the new plan has strong environmental priorities, expanding tree canopy, protecting green space.

How do those goals figure into the way that you will vote on projects or the way the zoning board might change standards or things like that?

Well, it's interesting you raise that.

The zoning board has already been doing that.

And over the past few years, we have been revising the regulations, I think, to um to do just that.

So for example, we now require street trees along uh the perimeter of uh projects that we're and we've in also increase the number that's required.

Um so they have to put in trees.

Um one of the things that um that I have not been happy with over the years is that when a developer comes in, they um they take out a lot of trees, they take out mature trees.

Um and we can't stop them under our zoning race.

Um that may be something that the Board of Reps could do.

Um, and I would encourage you guys to take a look at that and see if there's anything that can be done to um uh on this uh issue.

Um so we we require um we actually did it and it got vetoed.

But we'll we'll take a second crack at it.

Thank you for saying that.

And you know, um aim it it seemed to be when you did it, um it it seemed to concern homeowners.

And it's not the homeowners to me that are the issue, it's the developer who takes down 50 trees on a piece of property um that have been there for a long time just to make it a little easier to get their work done.

Well, no good, no real good reason.

Well, no, they're gonna put their building there.

Um and um if that were only the case, yeah.

But sometimes they take they do it across the street from me right now, so it testives, sorry.

Where is that?

Uh on Japan Avenue.

Um it's that old house, the old second oldest house on Japan was torn down last winter.

Uh-huh.

And now they've gone in and they've clear cut the lot.

Yeah, for and for no good reason.

Right.

It's just easier for them to build.

They're equivalent around.

That's okay.

Yeah.

And um, so I would like to see um some sort of tree ordinance where they they have an obligation to replace them.

Um, we do have really robust landscaping requirements, and they come in and they've got to show us their landscaping plan and the trees that'll be on the property.

And frequently, um well, we try to get them to put in as many trees on the property, not not street trees now, but trees on the property that they took out.

Now, obviously, the trees they're putting in are a lot smaller, so they're not really equivalent, but um we we um tell them that that's what we'd like to see, and then there's lots of other landscaping that goes in.

Um we do we do require buffers around the property so that they can't they've got to have a landscape buffer so that it protects the neighbors.

Um we've um in terms of environmental, we now require uh electric vehicle charging spaces on um both commercial and residential buildings.

Um a spec house, not an individual.

We don't okay, that's individual homes don't come to us.

Right.

A development of a bunch of homes might come to us, but not a an individual.

Um we um there's something called publicly accessible amenity space that we've we now require, and that is if a um in certain areas, and so a new apartment building multifamily um has to have five percent of their area as public space where the public can use it.

And it it's this is new, and it's um generally it's been a plaza in front of a building with chairs and tables and places for people to sit.

In these um in the developments in the CD areas, the uh office parks, um it doesn't really make sense.

So we require that they put in trails, so they've got to put in publicly accessible trails that people can go and hike on on their property, um, and the places on Long Ridge, um kind of across from old Lord and Taylor, um older in the Olin property, right?

They're gonna have to put in the nursing home that's going in, Mosaic is gonna have to put in trails, and the um townhouse project that was approved, the toll brothers project is putting in trails.

So um we do we do um require those now, and um let's see, what else have we done?

We um require indoor bike parking to encourage people to use bikes.

Um, and we just changed it to say you've got to have e-bike charging facilities inside you know at your parking inside parking for bikes.

Um and um we require open space with and this is different than the public space, this is for the people who live there.

We require X number of square feet per unit, be open space there.

Um, and it's the and and does the and is the open space permeable space?

Like does it have to okay?

Yeah, and it's frequently I I the board um almost always pushes that for part of it to be a playground for kids, um and um, and then the rest is um just grass and landscaped areas.

So I think the board, in answer to your question, the board has been doing a lot of this already.

Um the one one area that we haven't done, and that I I think is under staff is looking at is whether to require sustainability requirements for new buildings.

Um buildings get what's called a sustainability scorecard, and there's a whole they fill out a form and it tells, you know, do they have I don't know, solar roof or windows that are insulated or all kinds of things, and they get a score and they're supposed to post the score.

Um you know, A, B, C, D, but they're not actually required to do anything.

So they could get a score of F and post it.

Um, but they haven't really uh done that much.

So what's being looked at is should the city require that certain uh environmentally friendly um improvements be made to buildings when they're being built.

Should we require solar panels or or a green roof and and other kinds of things, and that's that that's being looked at.

That that's a big that's a big push in a lot of um cities where they're having like gardens and and things growing on the buildings, um, you know, that's a big part of sustainable cities of the future, and so I really like that you're talking about that, and I hope that you will push for those kinds of things because the plan definitely sets itself apart from the old plan, you know.

It really is asking for all of us to do more um to create a city that is sustainable.

Um the second question, I I appreciate your answers on the first question.

The the second question um is regarding um North Stanford.

So under the the or really the R, I think it's called R S one.

Um, but for us for me and my district, it would be North Stanford and the Springdale area.

Under the 2035 comprehensive plan, um, it states that cluster homes up to four per acre would be would be permissible.

Um, and that got a lot of people in my area, you know, upset, especially with the septic system.

So, and that kind of is included in the question that I'm gonna ask you.

Um, which is for residents that that don't really know how this works, can you explain how how zoning would interpret that for places like North Stanford, the the cluster homes four per acre?

Um, well zoning, we have our own zoning requirements on cluster homes, and I I think it varies depending upon where you are in the city.

Um, but the way cluster homes work is let's say you have a four acre parcel and you're in you have one acre zoning, the old RA1.

Um, instead of putting one house on each acre, you could take the houses, put them closer together, and then take a portion of the property and put a let's say a conservation easement on it so that it can't be developed, it'll remain um wild in effect.

And um it uh I think there are um there's something to be said for it.

Um it does there is the uh septic issue.

Um if they want to have a joint septic system, and that's really up to the health department and engineering to decide whether that's something that will work.

Um the I know of one up on Erskine Road.

Um, I don't know, people were around when that battle took place, but Lake Windermere um is a development uh up on Erskine Road and has a community septic system, has a large area with a conservation easement, then they they did cluster homes and they did a community septic.

People were afraid the septic would burst and flow downhill into their homes.

It's it's worked fine, and this has been 15 years or more.

Um but it is we're all living with still the Pernal Lane failure on the septic system, so that's where we the zoning board wouldn't make the decision as to whether this a community septic system would work.

We would look to engineering and the health department to advise us on that.

But so for for cluster homes, let's let's take it.

You you used a four-acre plot, for example, right?

Would somebody be able to put 16 homes on that four-acre plot, four per acre?

No.

No.

I can't tell you what the number is, but they can't do no, they that wouldn't be permitted.

What would be permitted?

What would be the maximum permitted for that?

I'd have I'd have to look at the regs.

I I can get back to you if you want to know.

That would be that would be fantastic.

Yeah.

There are the I believe that the regs do permit something more than they would be able to do if they did just one per acre.

I don't know what the number is because it's something that we so rarely uh encounter.

Um, but the then the question is let's say it's six homes they could build.

You know, is it are we better off with six homes and a large area that's been set aside for conservation, or are we better off with four homes, one on each um one acre plot.

I see that would be the decision.

I think that the process that we would go through.

Thank you so much uh for taking the time to answer my questions.

I really appreciate it.

And I look forward to to talking more with you about the environmental directives and also um if you could get back to me on that that four per acre thing.

Yes, thank you so much, Chair Stein.

Sure.

You're welcome.

Just make it.

I yield.

Thank you, Representative Capri.

Um Representative Butter.

Um, I want to verify if zoning for food trucks falls underneath your jurisdiction.

I think that's the health department.

I'm but I'm not sure if it is okay it's the health department.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um previously I asked the question about zones being mixed between commercial and residential.

Okay.

Um I would like to hear your answer to this question.

Um, because we have serious issues in district nine and five, where um people I believe own businesses and they're using their home for their business and also residency, and it's infringing upon the other residents.

It doesn't feel like a residential neighborhood.

Um is it possible to rezone those neighborhoods under different categories?

For example, like changing it from a CL to like a VL.

Um sure.

That's it's possible.

It's um what you don't want to do when you rezone an area, though, is make someone's property non-conforming.

So let's say right now someone's building complies with the zoning laws, but and if we change the zone, it could be that it no longer complies.

Now it they don't have to stop using it because it's referred to as um legally non-conforming.

So it's it's legal, but it it doesn't conform, and that has some disadvantages to the owner.

So you have to be careful when you're rezoning an area to make sure that um it's not hurting the people who already own property there.

Um but pro we do rezoning a property uh I mean it does happen on a regular basis.

Usually somebody was warning me about being grandfathered in.

Right.

They were like, you know, that's what I mean.

Right.

If they were grandfathered, then there's nothing you can do about it, they can still continue to do that.

So then they said, well, the only thing that some cities have done in the past is offer like an incentive for them to fall into compliance underneath the new zoning.

It's interesting.

For example, the suggestion that they gave was I don't want to hinge upon your income and your revenue.

So maybe perhaps your single family that you have there now that you're running your business out of.

What if we allowed you to open um build a four-family home one?

And then all that rent as a landlord could be your revenue now, replacing what you earn from your company.

So you still, you know, we're not you know hindering your income.

Yeah, but now you're in compliance as being a residential, and we've gotten rid of the commercial because we offered you that incentive.

In the yeah, no, that's an interesting idea.

Um, the zoning regs do have certain businesses that you can run out of your home.

Like you can be, you know, you see dental office sometimes in a home or certain other home-based businesses.

Um, we have construction companies.

Yeah, I don't know if that's one that's permitted.

Do they have trucks and that kind of thing?

Well, that's yeah, that's that's the kind of thing it doesn't belong in the neighborhood.

The problem is um, you know, were they there?

Are they grandfathered?

Um for some reason.

And um, it's actually it's a problem.

We've got the the contractors' yards and these um places that park their trucks and and other things that don't belong.

And it's really a zoning enforcement issue, and that there is a you know separate from the zoning board is the zoning enforcement officer, and that's really they need to be out there um telling these people that they have to stop if they're if they are violating the zoning right.

So there's nothing that but if you did change the current i um designation of that zone, let's say it was commercial right now, but if we change it to another zoning, then that would no longer be permitted anymore.

New ones wouldn't be permitted.

New ones would not be that's right, yeah.

You know, we kind of did that on a couple of issues.

Um the pet shops, which uh we're selling the dogs and cats.

We we said the only zones that they can be allowed in now are some, you know, like far zones that no one goes to, manufacturing zones and some other places.

Um and we did it with smoke shops.

We said in most zones you can't have smoke shops because people were really getting tired of all of the smoke shops.

Now we can't get rid of the ones that are there, but we can this will stop new ones from going in.

Okay.

So we we do this already um more by changing the regs.

We'll say in zone X, you can't have a particular kind of business.

Yes, and that's what I think you're talking about.

So instead of rezoning, you just take the zone and you change the what the uses that are permitted in that town.

And um let the Trisha do the rest.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes, thank you.

Uh Representative Walsh.

Good evening, David.

Good evening.

Boy, this I I gotta tell you, I'm learning so much tonight.

I used to scream at my iPad, I'm like, why?

But I'm I'm getting a really good understanding.

And um, I just have a couple of questions.

Let me see.

I want to piggyback really quickly off what Candace.

Candace and I, we drove around in our district.

We were horrified one day on uh there is a house on the corner, uh intersection, and uh with all of those construction vehicles, they're not even like uh fenced in or anything.

I'm not sure if Candace heard anything back from enforcement, but this is what we were inquiring like if it's part of the zone, can they do this?

Because it's throughout the district nine, where people have their houses, they park their vehicles in their driveway, their commercial vehicles in the driveway and in front of the house, which you know, there's a big problem with cars and all of that in our district.

So, you know, I just want to piggyback off that.

Um we thought it was it wasn't good.

No, it's not good.

Um, and it's really uh the zoning enforcement officer who needs to deal with it.

If and they'll tell you first, is it a violation?

And if so, they're the ones who should be out there enforcing our ranks.

I think part of the problem is um these guys are overworked.

Um, and I know they've they've recently staffed up the department and hired some new people, so hopefully it'll get better.

But um, you know, you've got all of the the homes, for example, the single family homes that now have uh 12 people living in them and 10 cars parked out in front.

I mean, you you've got these kinds of violations.

Um and that's really up to the ZEO to go out and and um deal with them.

Okay.

Could you I I've spoken to uh I think it was Ralph Bessing, and he explained to me about no, I think it was about maybe two years, three years ago.

And the more the more we build that will kind of cause the rents to go down.

Yes.

Have have the rents gone down since we have more building.

They haven't gone down, but it slowed how much they're going up.

If we didn't, if we didn't have more building, we'd have all this demand, but no new buildings, and it would the rents would be pushed up.

So the more we build, the more it meets the demand, and so the increase in rents is slower.

Um besides, by the way, the more we build, um, the more tax revenue we get, um, because these all these properties pay a lot of real estate taxes.

Um they pay a lot of fees to build, you know, building permit fees.

I think you guys raised the building permit fees.

Was it last conveyance fees too?

Yeah.

2025.

Yeah.

Um, and what I think is is important is it's more affordable units get built.

So they have to meet the 10 or 12 or 14% requirement.

So there um there are there are a lot of benefits from the additional building that that takes place.

Okay, you know what?

I'm really disappointed.

When I look at like all of the buildings and like how much money has gone to the fee and blue to the housing trust, and I look, you know, hindsight.

I'm like, look at all these BMRs that could have been in all of these buildings.

Yeah, and I get disappointed with that.

I'm like, I don't like the fee and loo.

But then again, the housing trust fund is supposed to help.

And I know that uh on the east side, they had torn down over there on Ursula.

I I don't know why.

I don't know.

Maybe it was just too old to renovate.

And then, you know, we could have built someplace else, you know, left that on Ursula, and then we built more apartments, you know, because it's basically like a circle.

We took it down, but we're still replacing it the same.

And that's that's what disappoints me most, even though their apartments are are beautiful, but you know, I just wish we had more.

These are the new uh charter oak.

Yeah, yeah, they're nice.

They're they're nice.

And those buildings were really old and were falling apart and did need to be replaced.

But as Carl mentioned, and and I agree with him, I would always rather see new units get built than older units get renovated.

Because I'd like I like to see an increase in the number of affordable units.

I don't I don't understand that.

I'd I'd rather see a new building go up with new affordable units when it's possible.

When you say affordable, because I know over there, I think they were like they were chartered.

Weren't they like kind of mixed over there?

The ones that went down.

Um I'm not sure.

I I know Charter Oak does some mixed income um projects.

It's better if there's a range of incomes in the project.

Um my next question.

What about the single family homes?

Do you do you get a lot of um you know a lot of blueprints coming through for single family homes?

Because we're lacking so badly in this town, you know, and I know that a lot of the people who are here, they're leaving their homes as a legacy to their children.

So it's not being, you know, not being recycled as much.

And I get the legacy, but I truly would like to see more homes.

Do you feel that way?

I do.

Um, the zoning board doesn't deal with single family homes.

Um just you know, a sing one home here or two homes.

Um, but I do agree.

I think we need more, especially more starter homes for people who want to move to Stanford.

And yeah, and and the problem is you've got a lot of people who aren't selling at the higher level, so the the ones at lower levels can't move up.

So those starter homes get our you know, the people stay in them.

When they want to move, they can't find a a little better home.

So uh it is an issue.

Uh, but I would love to see more homes.

Could I could I make a suggestion?

Like uh, could we have like uh larger setbacks from the roads, like with the new the new buildings that are coming up downtown so that we can have more trees and stuff?

Um that's a that's well, first of all, they are required to put in trees along the street.

The question is, um could they put in more landscaping right along the building?

And could they put in more if the building were set back a little?

The um you should talk to Ralph Blessing about that.

The the theory of planning now is that you downtown you want the buildings closer to the street, and that's part of the urban streetscape.

Um this is what's what planners believe.

So I think having I I push for more landscaping whenever I can.

Um and then I'm told by the developer, well, we can't put in more because there isn't room, and I say there isn't room because that's how you design the building, and they said, Yeah, that's right.

So I hear I hear your team, I hear your team because you say the same things that I say, and I tonight was so enlightening, and I get it.

I really really get it.

So I'm I think I'm going to stop.

I think I marijuana dispensaries.

I had that on my list.

Is that still like floating around, like the dispensaries in Stanford?

Are they still putting in applications for that?

No, we put a limit on those.

I think it's five.

Um, and they've all been approved.

We've approved the applications, although the um I think there's one that still isn't built yet.

Okay.

I yield the floor and I thank you so much for your time and for talking with me.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you, Walsh.

Uh Representative Pavia.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um Mr.

Stein, it's great to see you.

How are you?

Good.

Good.

How are you doing?

Very well, thank you.

Very well.

I had a bunch of questions.

Um I'm gonna try to keep my uh thoughts together here.

Um because you touched on something that's like absolutely very important to me.

I just want to preface this.

I'm an educator, and you talked about workforce housing.

Something I really want to see done.

And you mentioned you said uh um those who work in Stanford uh should be able to live in Stanford.

I agree 100%.

And you mentioned firefighters, teachers, and city workers.

I want to tell you as an educator on the ground level, right?

What I see every day is colleagues of mine wondering if they need to transfer up to Reading because they can't afford to live here anymore.

I had uh a special ed um teacher, co-teacher of mine, that um they had their second baby.

Uh he works in Westchester, making six figures.

She works here making whatever she makes, and they they looked for eight months and couldn't find a house in Stanford, so had to move to Fairfield.

Very worried about this.

Um honestly I am because I think that what uh what really makes a city is the coaches that and the the policemen and the teachers who know the their audience and know who they're working on.

So I want to does that make sense.

Sure, I agree.

Awesome.

So could you just do me a favor?

Can you define what I feel like this word gets two words?

It gets used a lot.

Workforce housing.

What does that mean to you?

Can you define it?

Um it means to me housing for um uh workers like city workers.

Um we're not talking about for lawyers and doctors, right?

Um it's more for um people who uh you know do the the kind of work that we have to have done, whether it's people who work for uh you know city uh streets and annotation, whatever um uh can't afford to live there.

Right.

Yeah, so that's the same definition uh in my head too.

Um how many um workforce housing units have been put up in the last four years under that definition?

Um well that's that's you know, when you hear the term BMRs um or affordable, it's all it's all workforce housing.

And uh sir, um BMRs, right?

Uh that goes to anybody from here to Bridgeport, correct?

BMRs are below market rate.

Um the the DMR units are the below market rate units that we require the developers to provide, and these are the workforce housing units.

Um yeah, go ahead.

Sorry.

So uh excuse me.

Um back when the Glenbrook Community Center was um getting put up, we were showed a um slideshow of of Stanford uh teachers, ambulance drivers, um firefighters and policemen.

Um I didn't vote for the Glenbrook Community Center, um, not because of what of it being a community center, because I was told that it was workforce housing, and then at the last minute last hearing I asked that question.

Would Stanford workers have priority um to those to those houses?

Right.

And I was sort of laughed at.

I'm gonna I'm not gonna lie.

And that was a good thing, because I found precedent in Stanford where this has happened before.

So um, are any teachers, firefighters, ambulance workers, uh, policemen getting workforce housing who live in Stanford and work in Stanford?

Um, I can't tell you.

The process is that um they go to the particular building that has the units and they get on a waiting list at that building.

Um and then they could apply to several different buildings and get on the waiting list.

So I'm not I'm not involved in that.

Um I know these units fill up at for people at 50% of area median income, um, and that there's waiting lists for them.

Um my notes show that in the last few years we've done about 650 affordable units and um some millions of dollars of fee and lieu.

Um but I can I know over um a longer period we've we've done some thousand, two thousand.

I can get you a number if you want, but I know we've created a lot of affordable units.

I I completely um under understand and love that you created affordable units.

I'm talking about you brought up the term workforce housing.

Um, it's all the same.

It's what it's all the same thing.

Is it though?

I mean, what are workforce housing and BMR are are different things, right?

Because workforce housing, to your words, it goes through the the people from Stanford who live in Stanford and work in Stanford.

So is that the same thing as a BMR?

I mean, is that like its own category to be I'm a teacher, I'm a fireman, I'm applying for workforce housing.

Um we're below market rate means that the person who moves in there doesn't pay the full rent, full market rate rent.

They would pay a lower rent that they could afford.

Um, and that the I think um the federal government sets those rents as well.

Sir, I I completely understand that.

I'm asking you about your words before, right?

Workforce housing.

Those who work in Stanford um uh shall be able to live in Stanford.

So is that just a goal for the future, or is that something that you're saying that you've already worked on and have accomplished?

Um I'm saying it's it's happening and it's my goal for the future as well.

Um I I can't tell you that every affordable unit is occupied by someone who works in Stanford.

Um I've been told by the law department that there's some issues with restricting our units just to Stanford people.

Um so uh, but I'm sure that there are a lot of people who work in Stanford who live in the these um below market rate units.

I know, but why define it as a a category?

Like we're we're making workforce housing and then saying that you don't actually there's no category for it, you can just apply for BMR.

It's like you you're you're it's saying that people from Stanford will be able to live and work here.

Daniel's saying, but like that's not really a thing.

So is it a thing or is it not a thing?

I said my philosophy is that people who live here who work here should be able to live here.

Um we do create affordable units, which I refer to as workforce housing.

It's all the same thing, it's just different names for the same thing.

And it's housing that where the rent levels are lower than what the market is.

I understand that.

Uh well, if it's your philosophy, right?

I love that.

What what can we do to do you see a way that we can get there in the next four years where we're actually having our own category?

And in regards to the legal department, I I know that when I was criticized for bringing this up, right?

It was I was told that our grants don't cover that.

Are there other grants that we can be looking for?

I mean, like this is the time, Mr.

Stein, to get really creative, I think.

We have a we have people leaving our city who I agree.

I can't answer your question about grants.

That there is there are people in the city who deal with that, but not the zone.

That's fine.

Um just to let you know, uh, after um that all happened with the Glenbrook Community Center, I found uh precedent in the past in Stanford's where um a building on um Bedford Street was assigned just to science and art teachers.

Um and then there's another building on Spring Street where for female math teachers where that was workforce housing below market rate, specifically designed um for those categories.

So it's happened before.

Uh Mr.

Stein, I'm not trying to be um evasive here.

This is something I'm really passionate about.

And I don't want to see anybody um, I don't want to see everybody moving away.

There's there's gotta be an alternate route than working here and being house poor and and um or having to move up to Reading or Favreau.

You know, that's my philosophy.

Sure.

I was by the way, I'm I was not aware that there had been buildings set aside for certain categories of um workers that that must go way way back.

It was, yeah, yeah, it was early 2000s, but it's happened.

I'm just saying we can be creative enough, right?

Like to at least look into that, right?

I think it would be great if the city were to build something um and have it for um city employees.

Um I it I I'd like to see the city more involved in uh the creation of housing, um, which would be for for city employees.

Uh I 100% agree with you.

Um when you say the city, uh who do you mean by that?

Or what entity do you mean by that?

Well, it would I think the board of reps would have to get involved in uh in um approving the funds.

Um it would come out of the uh I assume out of the mayor's office.

Okay.

Um listen, I really like Carl Weinberg, and he said you're an encyclopedia of knowledge here.

Sorry, Carl.

Um while is this something that that is this something you and me can talk about offline?

Oh, of course.

Thank you.

I really appreciate that, sir.

I I really appreciate um questions.

They're not in any way adversarial, just for the record.

I'm just uh I would I would really like to see a program like this work in Stanford.

I think that's least we could do for our you know our city workers.

That's all.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I yield the floor.

Uh thank you, representative uh baby.

Uh uh representative Adams.

Yeah, um Robin, um I think you've been doing a great job in like one board say um um you is uh um book of knowledge.

I mean, with the knowledge you know about what's going on in the city, um, but through the chair to pay the year.

Maybe that's something that the board could work on given um work for house uh low-income housing, Stanford resident, um the first option.

Um New York State does something like that.

So maybe that's something we can um um have the legal department look into to see can we create something that at least the people from Stanford uh the working stand for living Stanford have the first option to either work for houses, low income housing, or senior houses.

So that might be something that we can work on in the future.

But um, Robin, um keep keep doing a good job you've been doing.

And um thank you for um being reappointed.

Thank you.

Thank you, Representative Adams.

Uh thank you, Representative Adams.

Do we do we have any other questions?

Are we gonna uh we're gonna shoot for Donald Trump's uh record last night?

We are all right.

Thank you very much, David.

We appreciate the and thorough uh thorough answers.

Um I've got more I can tell you if you want.

Uh stand by the best stand by for the after party.

Save it for your second interview.

Oh, okay.

Okay.

Uh is Ms.

McMahonis uh still with us.

Hello.

Oh, there you are.

You're home now.

Well, I'm not home.

I'm in New Hampshire.

Um tonight is the start of my family's annual ski weekend with my kids.

So let me just do this with my computer.

Am I uh pretty good?

You're free to go.

Okay.

Thank you.

And uh just David.

Hello, Roseanne.

Good luck.

Um what's the process now?

Are you vote tonight or vote tonight?

Yeah, okay.

You can stay just you stick around in uh and and I'll dial in when I get home.

I'll dial in when I get home.

And Roseanne will probably go to the uh on Monday.

Oh, they may be a little to say.

Okay, guys.

Thanks.

David was just the uh warm-up.

So uh just for the record, uh, this is item number seven, uh A32 dot uh zero one seven, the zoning board, uh Roseanne McManus.

This is a reappointment to a term that expires December 1st, uh 2027.

And uh there you are in the live free or die state.

And never followed David in an appointments committee.

Uh yeah, well, you that's you paid the price, I guess.

Well, uh that's okay because I hear this the conditions aren't worth anything right now.

So um so uh let's uh let's let's talk about this the zoning board.

Um where do we begin?

You you you think we'd be completely out of questions at this point, but we're not um yeah, when I when I was um when I was running for uh for the board, uh the League of Women Voters uh provided us with a questionnaire, and uh and there were there were a couple of questions on the questionnaire that uh we were advised not to answer just because it's uh outside of our remit.

So uh, but they're good questions.

So I thought I might share one with you, which is uh uh Sanford's rewriting its long-term plan.

It may allow more housing in some neighborhoods.

How would you decide where to add apartments and townhomes?

And how would you make sure roads, schools, and transit can handle that growth?

Well, that's something we look at no matter where um an application is coming from.

Um often when we're looking at, you know, most of what we look at are big developments.

And from my years on the board of education, I know that the new apartment buildings don't send kids to school.

When you're looking at single family homes and expanding that, then you really have to look at um if there's room in the schools.

Um but there's so much great research at the Board of Education, um, that I would suggest that all of us always look at that.

Um I think that's probably the biggest drain on the city.

If you know we're looking at resources, is if we're overloading schools.

Um as David said, you know, with the um people worried about um adding so many more homes in North Stanford.

You know, if we have one acre zoning or two-acre zoning, that doesn't change.

Um the cluster homes that David talked about, you know, if you had two acres and uh two-acre zoning, and you um you know put two homes on a smaller spot and left, say one and a half acres um uh aside, you know, it's still two-acre zoning.

Um or one acre zoning, whatever it happens to be.

That that part of the zoning's not gonna change.

That's unless we changed our regulations, and that that's not gonna happen.

Um, the one-acre zoning, two-acre zoning, you nobody's looking at changing that.

So it's not like all of a sudden on two-acre plot of land in North Stanford, there's gonna be eight houses because that wouldn't be allowed.

Um when it comes to zoning.

Well, you know, well, I well, one question just uh back up a little bit.

Um you say the the people in the buildings don't send their kids to school.

Is that just because these are young married or just it just happened to be a little bit more?

If you look at it, most of them by the time their kids turn five, uh they move to a townhouse or a home and they move out of the apartments.

Um we keep a key side on that.

Um those uh all those buildings we built in the South End have sent very few kids to our schools.

Interesting.

Yeah, and and you know, and if you just anecdotally, if uh you know, uh uh I uh I'm it from Japan and I ride my bicycle through that area, and yeah, you see young people in their late 20s, early 30s populating those buildings to uh a great extent.

You're right, you don't really see to the extent that their families, their baby carriages, yeah, and there's people my age who are downsizing, you know, moving out of their homes and moving there.

But yeah, there's there's very few school children in those buildings.

Right, right, that's too many uh representative weather.

Believe it or not, no it happens every once in a while it happens.

I think David may have worn this body out.

Representative.

Hi, Roseanne, and uh thank you for your many years of dedication to our city.

It's just love it.

Love Stanford and spending the time.

I made the comment earlier that to a great extent Stanford Stanford thrives because of its volunteers.

Um you're just emblematic of that.

So thank you.

Um I have a question for you.

I hope this isn't I I really am asking this question in the spirit of sort of continuous improvement.

Um, so I'm not in a gotcha spirit whatsoever.

Um looking back, you know, the many decisions that you participated in the you know on the zoning board.

Can you can you cite a decision that in retrospect?

Like if I had that one to do over again, I would have decided differently.

It might not be approved versus reject, it might be you know, the nuances of the project itself, we've got approved for the for the project, or didn't get approved for the project itself, but I'm really in the spirit of continuous learning.

Um you know, it can you cite an example of a decision that you know, as I said in retrospect, you're going like you know, if I had that one to do over again, I think I would come out differently.

And here's why.

Here's what I learned.

Here's what I learned from the consequences of that decision.

That's a good question.

I mean, I constantly I drive around the city all the time because I'm always either looking at properties that are coming before us, or I'm looking at properties where they're in the middle of building or they have completed the building, and always um, you know, we look at building designs and we you know, we look at the drawings, and um we think we know what a building's gonna look like, and then it's finished, and it's like, oh well, you know, it it's hard to convert from paper to the finished item that's on the street.

Um I think maybe I wish I could remember the number on Summer Street.

It's an apartment building just south of North Street, and uh it's now owned by Toll Brothers, it but the applicant wasn't Toll Brothers, it was someone else, and then they sold it to Toll Brothers, and it's much when I look at it now, driving down Summer Street.

Um, to me, it seems enormous.

I it's a very nice looking building, and Toll Brothers, you know, nobody builds better than Toll Brothers.

Um but I I that one when I look at I I say to myself, it's not when I thought it was gonna be.

Did I remember it was going to be that big?

Um, but I don't know that there's one where I say to myself, maybe I shouldn't have um voted for it.

Um one that I didn't vote for that I well, I love it now.

Um the uh when um St.

John's on Atlantic Street sold their back property.

Um they you know they got a lot of money really saved the church, and we've done that a couple of times throughout the town where the churches have sold property and it's really saved the churches for the communities.

Um, but I didn't vote for that because to move it through faster.

Um they got a reduced fee and lieu amount, and I voted against it because I don't think anybody should ever have a reduced fee and lieu amount.

Um, and I think I was the only one that voted against it.

I love the building.

I love the fact that it really has saved St.

John's.

Um, but I I still would have voted against it because nobody should have a reduced fee and loo.

Um you know I I I came onto the board in the middle of the boat yard and um talking about being thrown into the fire new.

Um that was you know, that was two years of our lives of um, you know, I I have to say I'm still not sure what the right thing is.

Um but I really like what has happened in the south end, and um I like what it's brought to the community.

So um that um so I'm not sure if that's answered your question.

I don't know that there's one where I'd say I shouldn't have voted for it.

You know, it's gonna be interesting to see 800 and 900 Longridge.

Um but but I it but to your point, it's something that at least me on the board.

I drive around and I look at all the finished units all the time to see first of all how much it reflects what we think we were getting and um whether it's really a positive for the community.

Um especially with building materials and the looks, I mean you want everything to look as quality as possible.

I I just you know, just particularly because you know is so pivotal to uh what the future of the city is going to be.

Um I just think that this spirit of the thing like say that again.

I'm sorry, there's background talking because someone is not muted and is having a conversation.

I may go into another room.

Might be my family's television.

I just think it's so important um for a group like the zoning board to have this you know continuous sort of reflection, which it sounds a great extent you you're doing.

You're going around saying, you know, and asking, is this what we expected?

And if it's not, if it differs from what we from what from what we expected, what did we not understand at the time?

Um it sounds like those are questions you're asking yourself.

Um and I I encourage you to do that.

Always, and I and that most of it is the looks of something, which is so hard to do.

Um Chairman Stein, especially is always pushing for the applicants to give us better renderings of what the building will look like.

But even with those, um, yeah, they can come close, but it's you know, it's not the same as as seeing what the building will actually be like.

But I have to say I would say 75 or 80 percent look the same or better than I expected.

Thank you.

Do we have any other questions or should uh do we have any here in that?

Oh, oh, I'm sorry, yeah.

So representative Cambrelli, forgive me.

Thank you, Chair for recognizing me.

And uh thank you, Miss McManus, for your service to the city.

It is greatly appreciated.

Um you brought up the South End and how happy you are with the way things are turning out there.

And and from a certain perspective, I can understand that.

But from another and that is the perspective of people's health, which is paramount to anything in life.

Um, I can't agree with you.

Um the city has recently done uh air quality studies and and uh mortality studies and found that people on the south end are dying and expected 11 years sooner than people that live in North Stanford and are surrounded by tree cover.

Um the the rates of asthma and things like that are are much greater on the South and other parts of Stanford.

Um so I'm wondering how you feel about that and the things that you would do on the zoning board in the future to help safeguard that, and prove that as a better as a better way to pose the question.

Yeah, I mean, any of our um industries that are contributing to the health quality in the city are all in the south end, they're all down along the water.

I mean, we kind of know that.

Um what if you listen to any of our early talks with applicants?

Um trees, trees, and more trees.

It's it's ad nauseum what we talk about.

We find out exactly how many trees they're bringing down and how many trees they're planting.

Um when the project will be new.

And and we don't approve anything if it's not more trees than they're taking down.

Um we just don't.

Um I actually reached out not long ago to the um to the land use staff because uh um a house in our neighborhood.

Well, sold off, you know, a big piece of property that was next to it, and they built a new house there, and they took down something like 50 trees, and it just depressed me to no end.

There was absolutely nothing that could be done.

This new house went up, they're gonna plant a few more trees, but it was a nice big one acre of green.

And um, you know, it's quarter acre zoning or third acre zoning, third acre zoning, I think.

And so there's certainly room to um build a house there.

When we have an applicant come before us, it's it's all about grass and trees.

Um, and I don't think the new buildings in the south end are contributing to that bad health.

It's not those buildings, it's the industry that is down there.

I mean, there's more trees planted than that were taken down from all those buildings.

Um staff has a notoriously bad tree canopy.

Um the amount of trees that we're planting versus the amount that we're taking down is just horrendous.

Correct, but what anything that's come before the zoning board.

So I appreciated what you you said about trees and and things like that.

So what I'm hearing you saying is that you would support um ordinances or things that protected trees or uh spoke for trees and and green space when when developing and planning.

If there's no room on their property to plant the trees, like in the downtown area, we still make them plant the trees, but they work with like downtown special services and the city to find locations in the neighborhood to plant the trees because it, you know, um we might not be able to fit all the trees we want on the property, but they'll be at least in the neighborhood.

Right.

And then the number one thing that can help mitigate all of those industries that you're talking about that are on the south end and also the bad air quality that we're receiving from New York City is green space trees, things like things that absorb the toxins and pollutants.

So the 2035 uh comprehensive plan um calls for things like um just like I wrote some of them down, uh expanding tree canopy, protecting green space, promoting climate resilience.

Would you be for adding stricter uh measures in terms of like advocating for things like that in the zoning?

Uh yes, and we push the developers to build well beyond what's in our regulations.

The staff has conversations with them.

We want them to do above and beyond what's in the current regulations, so we don't have to wait for the new regulations.

But based on the new plan, Miss McManus, wouldn't you guys look to change your regulations and and make them beefier?

Well, yes, street trees we can't beef up because we're they're at the maximum.

They can only be, you know, you can't put street trees two feet apart from each other.

They they when they grow and become mature, there has to be so much space between them.

So that we can't change.

We're at the maximum with those.

Um, but yes, for green space, you know, it does does it help with a downtown apartment building.

About the only thing we can do is ask for more building on the rooftops, which we do.

We ask for more greenery on the rooftops.

Um, but yes, I'm uh I'm all for expanding anything in our regulations that's gonna help um the climate in Stanford, if you call it want to call it that.

I appreciate that.

And to that end, and I don't want to take up too much of the committee's time is I'm gonna send you some things that that people are doing in Europe um to increase uh green space and things like that.

You just talked about one of them, which is to create uh urban forests on top of buildings and on buildings and and things of that nature.

You know, these are things that can make our city more sustainable and resilient with climate change and um help with healthier outcomes for the residents, especially those on the south end that are suffering the most.

Well you send it to me, I'll share it with everybody on the board.

I will.

And thank you so much again for your service.

Oh, absolutely.

We don't we don't spend half the time you guys do.

I yield the floor, Chair.

Uh thank you, Representative Kimbrelli.

Uh any other questions.

Well, let's um let's let's uh let uh miss McGannis go.

Are you gonna get up early in the morning and uh do some skiing?

Make a run for me.

I am can I can I just make one comment about the you know you had a conversation earlier about BMR.

Yes.

Um you know, and which is better BMRs or uh Fee and Lu.

You know, when I first got on the board, we would have speakers come and talk to us and educate us about BMRs and Fee and Lu.

And the BMR people were completely against Fee and Lu and the Fee and Lu people really thought they should get 50% of it.

And it has taken me years to see um the good that the fee and loo does.

The um the developers who build um either low income housing or moderate income housing.

Um they don't build buildings as expensive as most of the developers in town.

Um and yes, that means the person living there maybe doesn't get splashiest kitchen like they might if it was a BMR unit, but they can build maybe eight more units than the three BMR units that might go into a building.

So I've seen what both can do, and I think if we have a balance, it does it's a it's a good thing.

And and I'm I feel differently than David does about using any of that money to upgrade uh older housing.

We can't tear everything down and build new.

Um, like we had a building, we have a building that's low income and it needs a new elevator.

And you know, there's a whole discussion they shouldn't get money from the um the housing money.

And and I don't think that's pop probably the right thing.

You know, some of the older buildings need to stay, and if we put a little bit of money into them to make them look better, to upgrade the HVEC systems, which really improves the health of the tenants in the buildings.

If we make sure the elevators are working, I think that's important.

But that really doesn't have anything to do with zoning.

It's only because for two months I was I was on the committee.

Um, but anyway, I just wanted to uh put that out there.

No, I I I mean I tend to agree with you.

I just I just think with with with BMR, you're gonna build a unit at whatever that costs where Fee and Lou at least offers the potential uh to create economy of scale.

And uh so that that's why I I you know I just feel like I personally come down on that side of the equation.

Yeah, it it took me years.

We had so many different speakers come and talk to us and try to educate us one way or the other.

And it was it was really hard to decide until you really saw things um moving along.

Right.

So where do you see you tomorrow?

Where are you skiing tomorrow?

Oh, tomorrow.

Um, well, we're up near Lincoln, New Hampshire, and tomorrow I'm going to a small little hill because I'm not very good.

My kids are going elsewhere.

The kids are going to Loon, then Waterville Valley, then Cannon.

I'm going to Ragged Mountain tomorrow.

Um Ragnarok is a mellow family place.

It's cool.

Yeah, yeah.

Green long green slopes for me.

Yeah.

Oh, well, have fun out there.

Thanks.

Good night, guys.

Hope you're not there as late as we normally are.

I think you will be.

One more to go.

Hi.

Hi, this is Rep Walton.

I just want to say one thing.

My hand is up.

Oh, yes, I'm sorry.

I didn't see that.

Roseanne, thank you for saying what you just said.

I do believe that if you can renovate a place, that's that's wonderful because it still leaves some kind of history in the town.

That's one.

Secondly, you know, you renovate and you can build something else.

That's more instead of taking it's like a circle to me.

You tear it down, you build it.

It's not, you know, it's not growing.

And look at all the BMRs that we could have had in all of these buildings that have been built.

Gone, because you know, they they put the money aside.

That's all I want to say.

And have a good night, everybody.

You too.

Thank you.

Um Representative Camparelli, uh, is your hand just up because you didn't put it down?

No, it's up because I wanted to to make a comment.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, just just quickly, I wanted to echo with what Representative Walston said.

The most sustainable thing we can do is to reuse something, not to tear it down and and rebuild something.

And so I really really appreciate that comment.

I think we need more of that in Stanford.

Stop tearing things down to to put new things up and start refurbishing and fixing.

You know, these are things that we see in cities like great cities like Boston.

Um, and I hope that we can see more of that in Stanford.

So thank you for for your sensibilities and for making that comment, and I yield.

We're all that beautiful architecture that was destroyed during urban renewal in the 60s.

I agree with you.

Okay.

So we have we have one more, we have one more person.

How are you doing back?

I moved to a church.

Uh the other mic, yeah.

Uh so this is uh item number nine, uh three two dot zero one nine, uh zoning board alternate, uh Peter Rustin, uh new uh applicant uh for a term that expires uh December 1, 2027.

Uh thank you so much for sitting uh around.

Thanks for having me.

Uh we're delighted.

Uh uh.

So um uh having having uh listened to all of this.

Uh what are your impressions?

Uh my impressions that I have a lot to learn.

Um I I I thought I knew something about this having been an attorney for 44 years, but then after listening to Mr.

Stein talk about what he talked about with his truly encyclopedic knowledge of the ins and outs and specifics.

I'm thinking, wow, this is gonna be a learning process for me for sure.

But I do think that um my experience and training put me in a good place to get to where I would need to be to be effective in this role.

And how so well, I mean I've been a lawyer for a really long time, 44 years, which is hard to believe.

But here we are.

Um in my practice over the years, I've done all sorts of um I've mostly litigation, but it it's involved real property in all sorts of ways.

Uh I've represented developers, I've represented applicants in front of zoning boards, I've represented private property owners, I've represented appraisers, uh, I've represented real estate agents.

And so all of that I think gives me a pretty good holistic view of the legal issues and the policy issues that are all inherent in something like the Swimming Board.

And um, how long have you been to Stanford?

I see uh uh much of your resume here on the West Coast.

Just about four years.

In April of 2020 2022.

But I grew up in Connecticut, I'm from West Harper originally.

Oh, okay.

Went to college in London.

So uh my daughter-in-law with it.

Oh, nice.

So um, yeah, I've lived in Los Angeles for 26 years after having lived in Connecticut for about eight or nine years as as an adult.

Uh moved out there to um to get married and stayed out there for 26 years, and then uh my now wife and I decided to leave Los Angeles behind return to Connecticut.

Well, she never lived here, but uh she liked the idea of four seasons and what is she getting it this year?

So she's certainly getting one.

She's pretty happy about it.

We're both kind of happy about it after living in Los Angeles forever.

Yeah.

So uh no, but we we adore Stanford.

It's great.

We live in North Stanford.

It's beautiful.

We really like living here.

Yeah, yeah.

I I spent the most of my career amusing to LA.

I had an office out there for uh 15 years.

Oh wow.

Yeah.

So regular on the Friday, four o'clock flight home.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Um, I don't miss the whole congestion of Los Angeles very much.

I mean, people here complain about the congestion and the traffic, I just say you'll know it.

95 equals the 404.

Yeah, it does.

Yeah.

Yeah.

We had Lenny Representative Walsing.

Hi, good evening.

Hi, good evening.

Um I have a question.

Have you ever served on a board before?

I have not.

I I'm asking because I I used to sit on the appointment, so I don't have your resume.

Okay, so this, you know, if you go through this, would be your first time volunteering your services.

That is correct.

Okay.

What made hold on?

Unless you want to count a homeowners association, which is maybe not quite the same thing, but other than that, no, nothing else.

Okay.

How did you hear about this opportunity?

I think I read about it online.

Okay.

Did you interview with the mayor about this?

Or I sure did.

I interviewed with so many people.

I interviewed with um a c uh certainly with the mayor, uh, a few other people, including David Stein.

Uh, so this, as I'm my understanding, is the last interview I'm gonna have, but yes, I've had many interviews.

Okay, you don't tell me to street.

Do you live in North Stanford, the West Side, East Side, Waterside?

North Stanford.

Okay.

All righty.

And uh what uh I'll hold that question.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you, Representative Walsh.

Representative Weinberg, fellow North Stanford.

Uh full disclosure, I've gotten to know Peter decently well over the last uh correct, you know, over the over the last few years uh during my service on on the board of on the board of reps.

Um you made an interesting comment earlier, and I think a really a really healthy one about having a lot to learn because that's where people should recognize that they are when they begin something new.

Um does in how do you expect that serving as an alternate on the zoning board uh rather than as a full full member?

How do you anticipate that that will help you in your learning curve?

I don't know if I see a difference in my learning curve between being an alternate and being a regular member.

I suppose to the extent that I don't have to vote on any particular issue, it gives me a bit of a little bit of leeway, but I think uh I would put the same amount of effort and and um into serving as an alternate.

I think it'd be the same amount of research, same amount of phoneme up on any particular application, the regulations that are applicable.

So I'm not sure there'd be a big difference.

Um but I think uh certainly that my past experience of working with laws and statutes and regulations, I think will uh inform my ability to serve either as an alternate or regular member.

Okay, interesting.

Yeah, David, um if we can remember back to maybe the first question.

Um he made the comment um that one of the one of the things that many people don't recognize about the the zoning board, the way the zoning board is required to act, is they have a set of regular in a in evaluating a you know a proposal, they have a set of regulations, and they have to um they have to assess the proposal in light of those regulations, not unlike which sounds analogous to legal work, um where you know, regardless of one's policy preferences, um someone who's an officer of the court, whether a judge or an attorney, needs to apply the law, not just operate on their own policy preferences.

So how do you see the rigor of what you've done for the last four plus years as an attorney?

How do you see that serving you as you embark on this on this unpaid career on the zoning board in a couple of ways?

For one thing, I think they they teach you in law school really early that your personal preferences, your policy preferences are not that relevant in reaching a decision.

In other words, you may have a particular predisposition to a kind of policy view or political view, but when you're applying the rules or a statute to a particular set of facts, your own personal preferences don't matter.

And that's that's a hard thing for first-year law students to recognize that.

Oh my gosh, this is a terrible decision.

That poor lady, she got hurt.

Well, yeah, but the question is is there a legal remedy?

Does it fall within the purview of a particular set of common law or statutes?

So bringing it around to this, I think a lot of people see that something like a zoning board acts as almost a super legislature, that it's there to uh sort for people to sort of air their own views and then make some decision in a in some sort of way that they think is consistent with their own personal policy views, and I don't see it that way.

I think as you suggest, rather it's looking at the facts of a particular situation, taking in mind the particularities of an application, the character of the neighborhood, what the regulations are, and then trying to square all of that, trying to reconcile what are going to often be uh inconsistent positions between the various people who are affected.

The neighbors might not like it, but the developer has a property right or a legal right to do something.

Uh I think the zoning board is there to adjudicate those differences while applying the statute or the regulations, keeping in mind the comprehensive plan, and trying to do what's best for all concerned as much as possible.

So it's it's tricky because a lot of people are gonna be unhappy either way.

But the question is what are the regulations provide?

Does a particular project comply with it?

Uh, what can be done to allay the concerns of neighbors or the city overall to come up with the best solution that is in the best interest of the applicant and the community at large.

Okay.

Thank you.

Very helpful answer.

Very I I was there a particular discipline type of uh law that you practice.

Um wow.

Um I so I've sort of uh concentrated on litigation, and as uh my career sort of advanced, you know, you kind of find yourself doing stuff you never thought you were gonna do, right?

But it turned out that my least favorite topic in law school, which was real property, turned out to be what I wound up practicing.

So um yeah, right.

So little did I know that that's what I was gonna wind up doing.

So I found myself working for a long time representing real estate agents uh who got sued for all sorts of crazy reasons.

Um I represented uh a lot of entities who had um I put this like I represented an applicant to who was putting up a mall in Clinton, Connecticut, who got sued by West Farm Small to try to prevent them from putting it up.

Stuff like that, which was a super interesting case, which got reported in the uh in the federal report.

Um so I found myself without even meaning to sort of concentrating on real property issues.

So that informed, for example, my work representing appraisers, and for a while I did a lot of appraisal malpractice cases because they got sued right and left, especially um around the 2008 period, as you can imagine.

So uh then in my current job, I'm actually still working part-time for my law firm in Los Angeles.

I have done less of the real property stuff, concentrating more on contract and tort-based litigation.

So I'm sort of getting out of that.

So here I am here, trying to get my hand back in, I guess.

Real property stuff.

Right.

Um LA is just sort of notorious for the zoning regulations and and and you know, what's his name?

Uh Bill Maher made a cause celeb out of uh trying to put a solar panel on this home.

Um yeah, it it's something else.

I mean, I I didn't live in I lived in Los Angeles proper for only a few years.

Uh I I mostly lived either in what's called the South Bay and one of the neighboring cities or lately when I moved away, I was in Sherman Oaks in the Valley.

Um, where I lived in Sherman Oaks was a lovely neighborhood of kind of 1940s tract homes.

And it was it was really beautiful, but I think it was nice that Sherman Oaks had its own independent say and it was free of what was going on in Los Angeles because it's an ungovernable place in the side of Rhode Island, you know, it's huge.

I thought LA County is the size of Connecticut, is it?

Yeah, I think it is.

I mean it it's it's just so huge.

There's no knowing it, you know.

Right.

But I'm I'm happy that you're back in Connecticut for sure.

Oh, that's great.

Um we have any uh any hands up, or if we warn everybody's asleep.

I can try it.

I I guess I have a couple of questions.

It's like yes or no, real quick.

Representative Wallace, it's the lightning round.

Yeah, I'm I'm going to be very, very, very quick.

So bear with me.

Did I ask you why would you want to be on the zoning?

And you know, it's been like so contentious here at one point, but you know, I don't think it's that contentious anymore.

It used to be like to me, it used to be the zoning used to be a hornet's nest to me.

I used to shudder, but what made you want to say yes?

Well, uh having moved here four years ago, I I've decided that I really like living here, and I'd like to have some small input in what this city means to me and what it means to everybody else.

I I love this this city, and I like to have some small part in how it's governed and how it develops.

So I hear you, I I hear that Sherman Oaks is nice because I have family member there.

So are you familiar with the historic neighborhoods?

And how do you feel about historic preservation?

I'm big on that.

No, I'm really big on it too.

I think it's a great idea.

You can never get back what has been destroyed.

And uh, you know, historic buildings are part of the comprehensive plan, and I think it lends uh a specific character to any given community.

And I think to the extent historic buildings can be preserved, that's a great thing, and I'm all for it.

Okay, my last question.

Um are you aware of um well, yeah, I'm sure you are that we do have a need for deeply affordable housing here in Stanford, and you know, we've had a lot of displacement over the years happening here, and I'm sure you saw that out in California.

So you are aware, like to me, that should be at the top, a deeply affordable, because usually those people living in deeply affordable, they're the ones who's working in the service industry and providing service, you know, services, but they're not getting top pay.

I absolutely am aware of that, and I couldn't agree with you more.

I think it's an important thing to have affordable housing in a community so that as was discussed earlier tonight, the people who work here should be able to live here to the degree that that is within the purview of what the zoning board can do.

I don't think you can make wave a magic wand, but by the same token, I think that it's a laudable policy goal, and I'm all for that as well.

Okay, I appreciate you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Representative Wilson.

All right.

I think we're uh I think we're good.

Okay, thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Thanks for thanks for sitting and waiting and uh with us.

I hope you learned something along the way.

A whole lot.

Thanks, folks.

Thank you.

So um forgive me, I I I missed the parliamentarian uh exercises last week.

Um I'm sorry I did actually, but uh do I now uh ask for a motion to take these things to a vote?

Correct.

So you guys still have to entertain a motion for each of these items.

Uh uh so entertain a motion for Mr.

Chair.

Yes, uh uh leader more.

Sorry to interrupt.

Uh yes, and and per our distinguished parliamentarians uh uh guidance uh when you entertain the motions, you should entertain a motion to approve so we're clear on exactly what we're voting.

Okay, so this is uh I will now entertain the motion to approve uh item number uh one, which is A32 uh dot 011, which is uh Michael Briscoe uh for the golf commission.

I move second.

All right.

Well, um uh Christina, shall we uh discuss ask for any discussion?

Oh uh yes, will we like to discuss this?

Any discussion?

Uh we can try the voice vote coming.

Uh yeah, I think so.

Seeing none, I'd like to try this via voice vote.

Okay, uh shall we do this as a voice vote?

All in favor?

Aye.

Uh any opposed.

Okay.

That uh two uh oh one one is if I may.

Yes, yeah.

A couple of um committee members, I think are muted.

Um so particularly if we're doing voice votes.

Ah you asked them you asked them to leave.

Yes, uh uh for all those who are with us and are muted and our committee members, could you please unmute so we can conduct these uh voice votes?

That was definitely me.

I said I to nobody in the room.

We felt you, Bobby.

Representative Campbell, if you want to unmute for the votes.

I I do unmute for the votes.

Perfect.

Okay.

So shall we redo that?

Uh we redo that vote.

Uh take a voice vote on uh A32 uh dot 011 uh golf commission uh Michael Briscoe uh reappointment.

Uh all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Um Mr.

Chairman.

Any abstentions?

Uh Representative Morrison.

Just a reminder to call for abstentions as well.

Oh, okay.

Thank you.

Um now uh motion to take uh item 832012, uh golf commission, Susan Flynn, uh to a vote.

So move second.

All right, uh all in favor?

Discussion.

Oh, any discussion?

Sorry.

Should have I I wish I could have made it.

Uh you're doing fine.

You're doing fine.

Any discussion.

He's a writer, not an actor.

That's true.

Uh yeah, all right.

So all in favor?

Aye.

Anyone post?

Fantastic.

Um, any abstentions?

All right.

Uh no sense is this uh uh take a motion uh to uh can if I can suggest for um for the audio and video record?

Yes, is it a motion carries unanimously?

Oh, I see.

Okay, so the motion carries.

And uh so now uh motion to take uh item number A three two oh one three, Stanford Golf Authority, Gina White.

So moved second.

Uh any discussion?

Uh all in favor?

Aye, aye.

Opposed.

Oh does this require uh a roll call vote?

That's Eric, do you know?

I'm actually unsure on this in a committee.

Um what was the question again?

It doesn't.

If there's a no on a voice vote here, uh but it's still an overwhelming yes, does that have to flip to a roll call?

No, it does not.

As long as the yeses and no's and abstentions are noted on the vote sheet that the chairman has uh and the vote tally is announced at the end.

That's all we need to do.

All right, uh I I was unclear if Karen was saying was voting no or saying no, it doesn't work.

I'm sorry, I was just answering his question.

Sorry.

Uh are there any abstentions?

Who's this to again?

Steve?

Uh this was uh Gina White, the Stanford Golf Authority 83213.

Um shall we uh motion to take oh I'm sorry, the uh that is uh I mean one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight yeses, uh one no.

Uh uh that carries uh Gina White.

Uh motion to take uh item number A32.014 is only Board of Appeals, George Dallas, some of a reappointment.

Second if I may interrupt, forgive me.

Remember to call entertain a motion to approve, not to take up that was part of parliamentary and uh parliamentary instructions.

Yes, um motion to approve.

Uh so moved.

Uh seconded.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Did I hear a no?

Any abstentions?

The item A32014 is approved.

Next, item number five.

Do I have uh A32.015?

Uh Board of Assessment Appeals.

Uh Daniel Lax.

Uh motion to approve.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Uh second.

Okay.

Uh any discussion.

Uh all in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Any opposed?

Uh any abstentions.

The uh item uh A32015.

Uh uh zoning board of appeal of board of assessment appeals, uh Daniel Axe is approved.

Moving on to item number six, a three two dot oh one six, board of ethics, uh Dennis Torres or reappointment.

Um motion to approve.

So move second.

Uh all in uh any discussion.

What's that?

I oppose with um Dennis Torres.

Okay.

Um we hadn't go to a vote yet.

So uh all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Uh and we have uh uh all opposed.

Aye.

Okay.

Uh any abstentions.

Okay, well, the uh this uh is approved.

It carries uh vote of one, two, three, four, five, six, and eight to one.

Uh and we move on to uh item number seven, uh a three two dot oh one seven, and uh this is uh uh Roseanne McManus uh for the zoning board, a reappointment to a term that expires uh December 1st, 2027.

Um motion to approve, so moved.

Seconded.

Thank you.

Uh any discussion.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Abstention.

Okay.

So that carries uh this is approved uh by a vote of uh eight yes, one abstention.

And we move on to item number eight, a three two dot oh one eight uh zoning board, David Stein, reappointment, uh motion to approve.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

Uh all in favor.

Discussion oh, any discussion.

Any discussion.

Thank you.

Yeah, I'm Mr.

Chair.

I'm gonna vote to abstain on this, uh, just because I I as I said, I would like to have a uh more thorough conversation with him uh offline here to weed out workforce housing, something that he brought up and then said didn't exist.

I would like to and I'm sure that's not what he meant, but I would like to get answers to that.

So for this I will be abstaining.

Right.

Yeah, I uh I I heard that discussion, and and um it was almost like he was he was using he was defining a term.

He was he was he was using uh it wasn't even defining a term, he was in in in the in the context of BMR, he said it was almost like for example workforce housing, right?

Right, and they're not the same thing, as he said right, okay.

Uh so um uh Mr.

Chair, just to be clear, he said um those who work in Stanford Um shall be able to live in Stanford.

That's his quote about workforce housing, and I would just like to talk to him further about that.

That's not BMR.

Um I think we all know that.

And so I would I think workforce housing is a great idea to keep um our workers here.

So I would like to try to have a conversation and see if uh we can move that needle a little bit.

Right.

Right.

Uh yeah, I get it.

I get it.

Um uh yeah, motion to uh oh we're in the discussion phase, right?

So uh all in favor.

Aye, uh all opposed.

Uh we have uh one abstention.

So uh this well, this two extensions.

Okay, Lori, got it.

So that's uh seven uh aye.

Uh and uh two abstentions.

Um so that motion uh A three two dot oh one eight, David Stein carries, and uh finally item number nine, A three two uh oh one nine, uh zoning board alternate Peter Rustin, uh who's kind enough to sit through all this.

Um motion to uh approve some of uh second any discussion.

Uh all in favor, aye uh any opposed.

Uh any abstentions?

Uh the motion A three two dot oh one nine.

Uh Peter Rustin, uh zone board alternate, uh has carried uh by a vote of nine zero.

And uh motion to adjourn.

Second we went we went longer than Trump.

We went longer than Trump.

1023.

Oh, we we had Trump by a solid hour.

Well done, everybody.

Well done.

Good night, everyone.

Yeah.