Petition for a Brookline tenant 'statement of rights' advances amid legal questions

Petitioners asked the Select Board to approve a warrant article that would direct town staff to create and maintain a Brookline‑specific statement of tenants’ rights and to provide that statement to tenants when they receive an eviction‑related notice.

Proponents said the statement would assemble locally relevant legal resources, human‑services contact information and inspection complaint instructions in one place and make the resource a "vital document" readily available on the town website. "When a notice to quit is delivered, tenants often do not know what resources are available or where to turn," said Alec Leibovitz, a petitioner.

Because state law limits municipal regulation of private landlord–tenant contracts, petitioners and advisory committee members recommended a version that would not require landlords to deliver the statement. Instead, the amended article would require town staff and town agents who participate in eviction‑related noticing (for example, constables or public‑health inspectors acting on behalf of the town) to provide the printed statement concurrently with any eviction notice they deliver. The article would also require translation of the statement into Brookline’s most common non‑English languages and annual review.

Constables who deliver eviction notices raised legal and operational questions: several said landlords typically arrange for private service or county deputy sheriffs, and said making town agents responsible could create confusion and increased legal exposure for constables. "If this requires the town to ensure delivery, that would create liabilities for town agents that do this work — we need to be clear who is responsible," one constable told the board.

Board discussion focused on tradeoffs: petitioners noted similar tenant‑notification programs exist in neighboring cities (Boston, Cambridge and Somerville), but town counsel advised that cities’ ordinances have not been tested in an AG review and that a town bylaw could prompt a review. Because the article was amended to avoid directly regulating the landlord–tenant civil contract, petitioners said the revised approach balances legal constraints with the practical need to get information to tenants at a critical point.

Action: The board did not vote the article on Oct. 28; members asked petitioners and staff to consult further with the Department of Public Health, the constables and town counsel to refine language and implementation steps before the next meeting.

Ending: Petitioners and a public‑health official said a central, translated statement combined with proactive outreach would help tenants find legal aid, housing stabilization funds and inspection services before an eviction becomes final.