Select Board approves amended Article 9; town debates sanitation staffing and private contract risks

The Brookline Select Board on Tuesday accepted the advisory committee’s revised motion on Warrant Article 9 — a budget item affecting sanitation and related services — after a sustained public comment period and a lengthy staff presentation of options.

Nut graf: The meeting featured sustained debate about whether to preserve in-house sanitation collection or proceed with a competitive contract for hauling and related services. Residents, advisory committee members and sanitation employees described operational strain and urged restoring an “early release” practice that had been used previously by sanitation crews. Town officials described chronic hiring shortages, operational breakdowns, and the town’s need for a reliable service model.

What the Select Board voted The Select Board moved and approved the advisory committee’s motion on Article 9 (the board’s vote recorded as: John Vascojak — aye; Paul Warren — aye; David Perlman — aye; Michael Rubinstein — aye; Chair — aye). The board then considered a citizen amendment (filed by Alec Liebovitz and others) intended to restore staffing and protect in-house sanitation funding; after debate Select Board member(s) moved “no action” on that amendment and the motion carried (vote recorded by name in the meeting transcript: John Vascojak — aye; Paul Warren — aye; David Perlman — aye; Michael Rubinstein — aye; Chair — aye).

Key discussion points - Staffing shortages and service performance: Commissioner Aaron Shute, Commissioner of Public Works, described efforts to run collection with many vacancies. The department’s budgeted staffing for collection is eight regular driver positions plus a supervisor, with an operational cushion of about two additional staff to cover vacations and sick leave. At the time of the meeting the department reported roughly three of the eight driver positions filled and the supervisor in place; operations have relied on temporary coverage from other divisions and overtime.

- Early release pilot: The “early release” arrangement had permitted employees to leave early on days when work was completed; supervisors and staff said the program required a collaborative culture — and the pilot that followed its proposed reinstatement did not succeed because teams did not consistently finish routes. Commissioner Shute explained that the program had been eliminated after instances of incomplete routes and difficulty sustaining cooperation; later pilot attempts failed despite extensions.

- Contracting and vendor market: Speakers expressed concern that cancelling or failing to fund a private hauling contract now could leave the town without service or at a weak negotiating position with prospective vendors. Testimony from Richard Murphy and others emphasized industry views that trucks can have much longer vehicle life than suggested in some cost estimates; private contracts may be more expensive for residents on fixed incomes but could provide route reliability if in-house staffing cannot be filled.

- Public input and process concerns: Multiple residents and an advisory committee member said they had not been consulted early enough in the process and asked for better engagement. Others, including the Town Administrator and Commissioner Shute, said the Select Board had been briefed and had made a difficult choice in light of chronic vacancies and service breakdowns.

Clarifying program and fiscal details - The Select Board was told the in-house sanitation collection roster is budgeted for eight drivers plus a supervisor; operationally the division needs approximately 11 staff to cover normal leave and achieve reliable daily service.