Board of Health: September 9, 2026

Transcript captured from MHTV’s Vimeo auto-captioning. No speaker labels; proper names and dollar figures occasionally misheard. Click any timecode to jump to that moment in the source video.

0:30 On the 24th. I think I need to explain a little bit of why here and why tonight. Please start with Mike. We found it important to address the incident as soon as possible, and we wanted to have that discussion with all five members present. Our next regularly scheduled meeting is Monday, but one of our board members couldn’t be there, so we can’t address this issue then. Merritt Alley is under construction, so we’re going to be meeting in the board room regularly for at least the next year. The board room is not available at any time that our five members could get together, so we’re up here, and I really am grateful to the work that Andrew and Kyle Wiley had to do to get all of the Owl and the Zoom technology and the TV stuff to allow this to be a full, organized, technically sophisticated meeting. So, the goal of this meeting is for the Board of Health is to hear everything that needs to be said and heard about the

2:04 incident of the 24th of August. The board was increased from three members to five last year. That was a recognition that the town knows it needs more and better public health services. Our board is prepared to work at providing those. And I hope this discussion tonight will not go beyond tonight, that we can conclude the discussion around the 24th of August so that the five-member board can get on with doing the things that we were elected to do. Which is deal with mental health for youth, to start parenting classes, which we hope to start in about four weeks, to develop wellness profiles of the town, which we did with the COM initiative. So we need to be doing board work. And so let’s make this a good meeting where everyone has a chance to say what’s necessary, and we will listen accordingly. Let me be clear. I’m the chair. I accept some responsibility for what happened on the 24th.

3:41 One of the major obligations of any chair is to manage a productive and

3:56 orderly meeting. I failed on the 24th, and I take responsibility for that. It’s not enough for me to say, “Oh, I was surprised by the intensity of the emotion.” I’ve thought a lot about my role. I am prepared to commit to the board and the community that I will work very hard at doing better. So, actually, I’ve even bought a gavel so that I can be heard. And if the gavel doesn’t work next, I’ll see what I can do about getting pepper spray or mace. But I am committed to have the Board of Health be a productive and positive meeting. And I also, as I was thinking about all of this, I am reinforced about the practice that the Board of Health has started in town of letting the public comment flow based on what was happening in the board. I think the idea, the policy of having a respectful and welcoming interaction with the public at our meetings,

5:27 when possible, is completely consistent with the idea, with the concept, the unique concept of public health. Okay. Tom has discussed the event in the newspapers and in public media, but he hasn’t had a chance to make his thoughts known to his board. So I’d like to give him that opportunity first, then the board and the public can make comments. Okay. I can do that. About an hour after our last meeting, I put out a statement on social media reflecting on what had happened. I knew I screwed up long before any articles were written. That statement was viewed around 15,000 times and was covered in three news sources. So for many of you, this statement will sound a bit repetitive. I believe that public comment should have dialogue. For those that don’t know, I ran because during COVID, the Board of Health chair made the statement, “We aren’t required to allow the public to speak,” and then muted everyone on Zoom. That’s what did it. After that, I saw the board put a two-minute timer on people speaking, which simply meant, “We are allowing you to speak because we’re required to, but we don’t care what you have to say.” Other boards still do that. I’ve always been a proponent of public dialogue and forced it into our meetings prior to any of our current board members being on.

7:01 I believe that if you don’t embrace and encourage the public to speak, you’ll miss out on the best ideas and helpful perspectives. Dr. Massar was clearly in favor of hearing from the public as well, so I was happy to see him embrace that policy. There is a difficult component to dialogue, though, and that’s when you have to keep your cool during comments you might strongly disagree with, feel are dangerous, et cetera, and where you have to let the speaker finish before you respond. I fell short on that last meeting, and the fact of the matter is, I didn’t need to interrupt the way I did. I have more support for my position on that particular issue than I can describe. I didn’t need to interrupt the opposing position, but I did, and that jeopardizes our public dialogue policy, our board’s reputation, and even my position on that topic. I can’t snap like that. I have to be better, and I will be. My promise to my board and the residents of Marblehead is that I will be better. All that said, it’s clear my board does not support the way I handled myself at that meeting, nor should they. Because of that, I’d like to make a motion that I be censured for my actions during that meeting. Is there a second?

8:24 Is that appropriate? Is there anything in any of the bylaws or anything? I’ll move that. I’m just asking about the appropriateness of the motion before it’s seconded, it might be seconded. I don’t know of any comment about anything like that in the local bylaws or the state laws that I know of. I know I was at town meeting when a recall Motion was addressed. The town finessed it, decided not to do it at the time, sent it on to the charter committee. The charter was very different than the charter committee’s responsibility. So I don’t know that the town has ever addressed it. So what are you expecting that to mean? So in that censuring, essentially, a vote of disapproval of what happened at the last meeting by the board, and since I did it, it would be a vote of disapproval on what I did. I disapprove of what I did. So I’m making a motion to censure myself based on that. Thanks. So before we really

9:54 take a motion and take a vote, I’d like to just have a little bit of discussion. In all honesty, I’ve had a couple people reach out to me and suggest that we should formally censure. And while I don’t like what happened, that was not my first impulse. Sorry about that, got a cellphone. So my interest in this meeting, particularly tonight, was that we clearly, as the board, express that we expect a certain level of conduct. And I think we all agree, we really want to be a place where people can express their concerns about health situations in this town. And we want to encourage open and respectful dialogue. And certainly, what happened on August 24th did not work in our favor in that way. With that said, I’ve been reluctant to say the word censure because I feel that there are a certain number of people in this town that certainly agree with the spirit of what you were trying to say. There are many who disagree as well. And the purpose of this should not be to put anyone off who’s genuinely interested in

11:30 the health of Marblehead. And so, again, I thought it was important here to have this meeting tonight. I know that you’ve apologized on Facebook, but I thought it was important to be on the record in this forum because not everyone’s on Facebook. And so it’s an apology, but it’s not one that’s seen by everyone. So I thought it was important for all of us to say we don’t condone this kind of behavior, and it needs to be on the record in public on board of health meeting. But that’s what I have to say about censuring.

12:11 My one concern is that September, or sorry, August 24th, my first meeting with the board was terrible. It wasn’t a one-time act. And so I would ask that what we think about is that you reflect deeply not only on the 24th, go back and watch those tapes. And what’s most of concern to me is that there’s a huge power difference here. We get to talk when we want then. And the difference between being a member of the public and a member of the board is here and here, right? I want people to feel encouraged, from those people, to talk to us and to tell us their concerns. And that this behavior disempowers them from thinking through that. So I think if we did get the bigger recommendation to say that, then I want them to feel like they’re in a safe space when they raise their hand. My daughter was the girl in the hat at the flag thing, and it was so scary that we would make a statement like that. I just want to keep it safe for everybody.

13:43 Yes, I agree with so much of what has been said. I think you recognize what you did and then try not to repeat it. And I think censure is necessary. I think it is worthy of you again, and you can revisit that. But I really want the certainty and a safe, open place for people to speak. And I do want to have some organization about how we go about addressing people’s concerns tonight. I think people should have a kind of maybe time limit in a way, just to keep things on track and to keep things focused on topic. But so we can maybe talk about how we want that to go. But one thing I really appreciate about this board is that when people ask us questions, I want for us to answer them instead of just acknowledging, have them bring their questions, let them take the time it takes in that moment to answer them in a respectful way. So I want to certainly keep that dialogue going if that’s good. My sense of censure, when I think about censure in the federal government, in the state, I don’t know much to say about it. But if a member of the House is censured, there’s a penalty for the behavior that led to the censure. The person may lose a ranking

15:17 position on a committee, may be thrown off the committee. And in one case recently, was thrown off the House entirely. We have no response. We’re fine to address Tom. I think that’s not a problem. But we have no consequences if one other of us were to misbehave. What are we going to do? Take your library card away? So,

15:59 I’m torn to open it up for public comment about this. To discuss it, we need a motion and a second. We’ve had a motion. Is there a second? Can I make a friendly amendment? Yes. My friendly amendment is we table that motion until we engage the public in comment as well, and perhaps more dialogue here. I second that motion. Okay. The motion needs approved or not approved first. So is there additional discussion about tabling the primary motion and waiting until the public has a chance to comment, and then we bring it back? So I think I- Second the motion to table the motion. Okay. You can say “I do.” Okay. Thank you. All right. What Kristen has proposed is we table Tom’s motion of censure to allow the public to make comment on it. The board’s not quite clear about that, and so we welcome hearing from you. Once you speak on that, we’ll

17:32 come back, and we’ll address the primary motion. Is that clear? Did I say that correctly, and people are comfortable? I see a hand right away. If you can’t hear me, you’re certainly going to need somebody- Hold on a motion. Oh, okay. That’s right. I spoke. Bye. All those in favor of the secondary motion, the amendment. Unanimous. Five zero. Thank you. For discussion. We would- Yeah. If it’s going to be quick. It’s not. At that meeting. We’re back at the input of the question of censure. Also understand, I think that’s a legal term, Byron. And the town of Arlington has legal counsel who can explain to you whether there could be a censure, whether there couldn’t be a censure, or whether there are any ramifications of censure or no ramifications of censure. I don’t know that, but it just seems to me that just saying the word doesn’t really mean anything. Right. Thank you, Diana West, certainly, and Lauren McGryn. So are you saying that the five of you, or six of you, include Andrew, have not discussed the possibility of a censure before this meeting, since August report?

19:03 That has not been discussed at all. It’s a total surprise that Tom came to you and said that tonight? Did you? I’m sorry, yeah.

19:18 I am not saying that. We did discuss censure. I- Your members just shook their head no. So who discussed the censure? Andrew, him and I certainly discussed cons. I didn’t discuss it with anybody. Okay. Okay. So when you discussed it with Andrew, did you discuss what it means, what it implies? We talked but we weren’t sure. Okay. I had a short phone call with Kristen and a phone call conversation with Julie. Okay. I was certainly initially opposed to a censure because I think it was blaming someone. And my sense is that he made a mistake. I got to admit, I’ve made a lot of mistakes in my life, and I’m happy if people come and censure me every time I did. In fact, on one of my very first meetings on the board, I snapped at Andrew in an inappropriate way, and I’m sorry for that now. The board members were kind to me. They didn’t make a big deal out of it. They coached me. Andrew and I, I think, have quite a good

20:52 relationship now, unless he still harbors that. But again, I think that assuming Tom’s apologies, he likes to say he believes in outcomes. The outcome of his apology is his change of behavior. He said it will change, and that’s the same way I feel I will run if I believe it. And so that was what I said when I was asked about censure. Okay, thank you. Follow-up. Tom, you have– I’d like you to say that you’ve apologized. I haven’t actually seen the words, “I’m sorry for my outburst” on Facebook or anywhere. I’ve seen, “I lost cool. I need to do better.” Yes. I’m sorry to my board members that I handled- You’re not sorry to Ms. Wilson. You’re sorry to the board members. You’re not sorry to Ms. Wilson. No, I’m apologizing to my board members. What I see Mr. Wilson was doing is perpetuating a dangerous narrative in town that endangers my kids. Even though you know he was factually accurate. He was not factually accurate, and I presented the data that showed he wasn’t, but it was ignored. I have it right here. Fair. 72% of the students said the data was low.

22:22 We’re not going to replay. All right. That is an important piece of data. We’re not going to replay. We’ve already seen the replay after August 24th. There you go. That’s enough. Yeah. You’re going in the wrong direction. Still- I do not want blame placed. We are trying to get better. And no- We’re not going to play the 24th. Okay, so there’s an apology for the board, but not the person you quoted. Or to the public in general? To the public, I apologize that when we embrace public dialogue, which I believe in, I will let the speaker finish speaking before I respond. Okay. I just did a very quick chat. Claire’s obviously not 100% accurate. I’m going to read the chat source here. But it essentially doesn’t mean you lose your library card. I’m sorry. It means that you express disapproval of McCauley’s behavior, and it doesn’t have any meaning beyond that. It’s not a removal, it’s not punitive. It’s an expression of… That’s what he meant. I checked with him. That’s what he said. He said, “What does it mean? Are you going to lose a library card?” I think that’s all I have to say. Thank you. Or I have all the questions that I have, thank you. Alan Jordan, 64 North South Avenue. I think an apology is in order. I accept that. I was at that meeting. I want this board to focus on the health issues. You extended to two new people on this board.

23:56 They don’t know how the public meetings run in this town. I’ve been going to them since 1974. It’s been a lot worse than this, that was said, which is very inappropriate. Wasn’t targeted towards me. It was targeted towards a taxpayer, a resident, someone that has children. You want the board not to fight with people. You’re trying to get people to participate. You’re one of the few boards that are allowing the people to come up here and give input. So if you didn’t do that, select and have an egg timer. They shut you off all the time, and they’re very inappropriate to me. So I don’t know what the word censure means. I know they did it in the state of Rhode Island to the representative from New Hampshire, that they couldn’t vote or something. I don’t want to spend my taxes at all this drama. I don’t want to get an opinion from legal counsel. I think an apology is in order, and if they’re willing to do that, I’m going to forgive, forget, move on, and let’s talk about the important things. I’m very disgusted that the local papers have been putting big articles in here. It’s very inappropriate what Tom McMahon said. But I don’t want this to go on because it’s taking away from the good work that the people are trying to do, and that’s all I have to say. Thank you. Does anybody have anything? We have one other person. As an issue that they’re likely to… It’s clear that Mr.

25:29 McMahon set a tone before censure on underage drinking. Do we agree on that? I’m sorry, you- Mr. McMahon set tone last meeting before the subject of underage drinking. Are we correct on that? Do we agree? I’m not sure what you mean by set the tone. Okay. He’s your appointed spokesperson. He’s your designated spokesperson. No, I don’t agree with that. You’re wrong. You’re having a session to the public on censure on underage drinking. Perhaps that’s inappropriate. You think the town thinks that you- I think so. I’m sorry. Right. But just something to ask as a professional, Mr. McMahon, that you all could be made so that he was no longer the voice of the board, of the public sectors around us. My point, everybody, was that I several times have thought about Tom finger-pointing for town around subjects underage drinking to single into one argument here is his darkness. Lincoln River, a town hall host of the group, in partnership with the select board members of the schools, recently succeeded to get a $60,000 one-year grant that had a threefold goal included, quote, “To increase parent involvement and foster communication around subject of underage drinking. According to the 911 call group now exposed through a T-shirt, it’s not a good

27:02 reason to feel isolated. The T-shirt, he says, is a better way to model positive choices.” Can everyone else hear her? I’m the only one can’t. It’s the echo effect. Everybody’s just a little hoarse. Oh, sure. Okay. Excellent. I know I’m speaking faster than I normally would. In Saugus, community stakeholders there. Is this better? Yes. In Saugus, community stakeholders came together in 2024 to, quote, “Provide youth with better resources and education around underage drinking.” A coalition was formed that included parents, members of town government, local youth organizations, and members of both the police and fire departments. Wow. In Boston, in 2004, in response to concerns around underage drinking, town officials held a number of small focus groups to address how best to cooperate and tackle this issue. Conversations with students in particular showed a greater need for more public spaces and business spaces in which youth could gather safely for alcohol-free events. The town is now actively pursuing such spaces in partnership and in cooperation with parents, students, and town officials. I have links to all these articles if you care to take a peek after. Do we see the difference in approach? No. Mr. McMahon, while your intentions may have been to help what you perceive to be an epidemic in this town you love, no one argues that, your approach has been to attack at every turn the very groups most critical to your cause, parents, our

28:36 police department, and our children. So I ask your board today, if you look at the data and you still agree with Mr. McMahon that underage drinking remains one of your top priorities, please consider the way in which your representatives treat your community members going forward. We will not be bullied. Our opinions should not only be encouraged, they should be, as they are in Winfield, in Saugus, in Gloucester, an integral part of any initiative this board works to implement. Speak loud or use a mic. I want to respond to that. You’re going to need this. Thanks. Such a huge room, it’s going to be very difficult. In March, the board announced a grant proposal to develop a coalition of town members. We had 10 members of the town. We were following exactly the example that you’re talking about. The grant did not make funding. We are prepared to work with you on finding additional funding to develop that kind of coalition. We will, at our meeting on Monday, develop a public health, mental health task force, a working force,

30:10 to develop the risk of that coalition and seek additional funding for it. So we are not only doing what the board has been doing at our meetings addressing the issue, we are sharing the public health science of the damage that adolescent drinking and cannabis use does to the brain. We now know much more about the science. We know that the adolescent brain is extremely vulnerable to the chemicals in both of those substances. We have written articles or columns in the newspapers in town. We have testified in someone to help us make people aware of all of the literature, the recent NPH on drugs outcomes. We’re relying on our invitation curator and her responsibility will be to bring the public health science to the community. It will be on a website that exists. We’ll show you the preliminary of the website on Monday, of where we’ll be going forward. So at one level, we absolutely agree that

31:41 just complaining about the current situation isn’t enough. We are prepared to bring the science and the history of other people who have played it. So thank you for sharing what the three towns, I know Gloucester, I’ll look for maybe the other two, but we are not dependent on the commentaries that are made in our board. We are doing homework. We are dealing with these issues at all limits. That’s a… You want her to- Maybe I can follow up. It’s okay if it’s me. If she says okay, we have no problem. With all of that said, if you’re looking for cooperation with the community, right? You acknowledge it. I think there’s a lot of community members that have a vested interest at the moment in our children and our community that feel as if the tool of the way you’re communicating, having a conversation with this board, is struggling. So you can present all this, I mean, obviously there was a great power of law that we have a moment there, but you can present all the science and data you want. You need your community to feel welcome, and then you’re going

33:15 to laugh. My suggestion is that perhaps a leader in this conversation, go up and proceed to seeing Mr. McMahon, so that we can directly then fix that image that you have now given. Thank you. Point well taken. Thank you very much. My name is Charlie Turner. I’ll put it right here like this. No, it’s not. Right in front. But it gets garbled, so it doesn’t matter. It is what it is. A little background. I never really knew Tom until he ran for his first term, and I used to see him regularly campaigning out by the dump. He was a little pickup truck and a sign. I talked to him a little bit. I liked his ideas of common sense. And having regularly attended for what I helped with this prior to he was on there, it was not quite run the way that it is presently run in allowing public comment. It was not organized. And when he did get elected, I worked hard to campaign against him. And it became apparent that the leadership of the board at the time was a different, my personal opinion. He wanted to control everything, allow people to make comments and real general discussion. I’ve seen a vast improvement over the years. It turned out that after I knew a little bit more about Tom, I actually knew his wife. I didn’t even know that they were married. I used to see her on my morning walk sometimes with this cute little daughter. And then I found out he went to high school with one of my kids, which I found this

34:47 out subsequently. I think there’s not anybody in this room that has never screwed up at some point in time. And unfortunately, in Tom’s case, it was very public. It happened. We got to get past it. We go forward. I’m perfectly agreeable. Apology is in order. We do the apology, and let’s go forward. Let’s not go back. And since you’ve been the chair, Tom, you’ve worked very hard to let everybody have their say. Sometimes it be good, sometimes may be bad. As you know, I attend probably 98% of the board of health meetings because I’m interested in it for a variety of things. Originally, I was interested for the transportation stuff, and then as I got to learn more and more about what people did. I thought he would just sat around and bonbons all day, and he’s involved in so many things. Between taking care of the water quality at the beaches, went to all sorts of meetings regionally for stuff, to negotiating a contract, our new contract for the rubbish pickup. A lot of people aren’t happy with it. But in my personal opinion, knowing other people in other communities, he did a bang-up job. We’re not always happy. We could always improve, just as Tom proved. We all want to improve and do better. I think after tonight, we should be over this. We’ve got too many good, important things to be working on to spend time with this.

36:18 And it’s sad that this gentleman here has been there sitting here for every meeting. It’s sad that this came about. It’s happened. Let’s get over it and go forward. That’s about all I have to say. I can barely sound close because I’m deaf, so I hope this is okay for you. Okay. Thank you. My name’s Barbara Roy. I live at Washington Street, here down the street. And it’s my first year being part of the board by way of the transportation. Steve laid a good path there. I’m not here to discuss the pros and cons of what we did going forward with public health, children’s health, the alcohol thing. I am here in concern about the conduct of Mr. McMahon, what happened at that meeting, and my experience as it relates to that event. It happened that I had exchanged emails with some board members a month or so ago, and I’ve been Zooming into some of the meetings. And Mr. McMahon made some comments on social media, and I raised a question in the public comment section about what he said on Facebook. And next thing I know, in a group email, he’s telling me… I said, “I’m sure we’ll be able to converse about other topics.” And he said, “No.

37:55 I mean, all correspondence between you and I will need to be done during the public comments at board meetings.” Okay? And so he said, “You burned the bridge with me when you called in last time and just directed criticism at me and made personal attacks.” Well, I came to the board a couple of weeks ago because I couldn’t hear on Zoom, and I was present, and I tried to make a comment at the mic, and I was disrupted by Mr. McMahon. And he argued with me like a petulant child wanting to get his say in, and I didn’t appreciate that. It doesn’t welcome public comment. It doesn’t make people feel safe here. And, as an elected person, to be shoved down like that, like I’ll only talk to people that agree with me. I wasn’t making any personal attacks. I questioned the comments he made. It was nothing personal. It’s all business with me, nothing personal. So it’s not this isolated incident. Okay? It’s not. And I brought it to you. Okay? Tom Passaro brought it to you, and you said, “Oh, don’t worry about it. He’s a hothead.” You didn’t say that. I’m not quoting you. You just said, “Don’t worry about him. Focus on the other board members.” But that’s not right either. And if anybody wants to know, if anybody hasn’t done so already, I looked up what it means to be censured. Have you guys looked it up yet?

39:29 You all know what it means to be censured. Do you know what it means to be censured? No. Okay. So nobody can hear your voices, and you haven’t given the public a clear explanation of what it means to be censured. So I’m going to try and give it to them, and you can correct me where I might’ve made a mistake. All it says is to be censured means to make a public apology, to have it on note, to have the board member say, “Your conduct wasn’t appropriate.” It doesn’t prevent him from resigning or being fired. I don’t know anything about that. I take it his intention is good, but you serve all of the community, not just the people that agree with you. And sometimes the best ideas come from the quiet people in the back corner, and you won’t hear those ideas if you don’t continue to allow people to express themselves without being combative. I hope that helps. That’s my side. Thank you, Barbara. I think what we’re here to do tonight is to improve what we have done in the past. And you outlined what happened in the past to you, that’s regrettable, and we can be better. So I do have some people online that would like to speak as well. Okay. We got a hand here back here. Go ahead. I’m downstairs. I’m in a meeting, so I have to be quick.

41:01 I’m glad everyone’s here to feel validated in those feelings. Sorry, what? I know it’s shocking to have your feelings hurt. I’m sorry to interrupt. I’m 115 Jersey Street. I know it’s a tough feeling to have, not agreeing with a politician. The residents with- To not agree with a politician, we don’t always agree with our politicians. We don’t always like the behavior. But we can do this. Evaluate your tenants, your feelings were hurt. He didn’t behave appropriately last afternoon. And we’re principals in a school here. We’re all adults. Can we please move on? Thank you.

41:49 Let the other folks to the board. Yeah. I just want to say one thing about the conduct on public business on Facebook. I think it needs to be stated that any person who is posting on Facebook posts in their own name only and not on behalf of the board. I, for one, am not even on Facebook, so I only know what goes on there when something gets someone’s attention and they bring it to my attention, but it cannot be the public statement of the board. Yeah, it’s not. It’s always just my opinion or my belief. Somebody else on the- Yeah. No, we’ve got somebody else on the other Zoom.

42:38 Samantha, go ahead.

42:50 Samantha Rosado?

42:55 Can you guys hear me? Yep. Okay, great. All right. So I have something prepared, but I just wanted to throw in before, I would just ask the Board of Health to reflect on the open meeting law and what it says about public comment. I’m not sure if you guys are familiar exactly or if you have your own rules. I know some of the boards in town have rules about public comment and how it works. So that might help you if you don’t have anything that you voted on that you might want to prepare something like that. Okay. So what I wanted to say is that nobody, not one single person that I know, wants to see more lives lost. However, the accusations that the police chief and members of the select board and others embrace the culture or enable others to put youth in dangerous situations, I feel are untrue and very painful to hear. This behavior alienates many people who want to be part of the solution. The question is: how can we, as a town, move forward together instead of making accusations and trying to lay blame? As a member of the public mentioned at a previous meeting, there are additional issues to worry about, and I do agree with him on those issues. Mental health, vaping, texting and driving.

44:28 These are issues that can be considered, as well as speeding, substance abuse, technology addiction. As an observer at many public meetings in the past few years, I know there is a process that needs to be followed to get anything done in town. It requires an open mind and collaboration with multiple groups to make change. For example, the opioid settlements where Dennis King, Thatcher Kezer, Andrew Petty, and Jason Gilliland worked as a group on how to allocate the funds. I would recommend that the Board of Health bring in experts as a group to ask the questions, to educate all of you and the public on what has already been done. Here are some of the groups and some examples of what they do and have done. The school resource officer is involved in student engagement and student safety. Public and private schools educate our youth regarding many of the issues that I mentioned above. Some examples from Marblehead Public are curriculum. Students are breathalyzed prior to attending the prom and are only allowed to travel by school-provided bus. The mental health support surveys. They’ve banned bags and outside drinks at football games. It would be great to know what some of the other schools that our children in Marblehead do, like Essex Tech, St. John’s Prep, Tower School. Marblehead PCOs bring in school administration-approved speakers. Marblehead Auto and other driving schools do educate our youth on the state laws,

45:58 safe driving, consequences for breaking the laws, impaired goggle simulation, required parent information sessions. The police department sponsored a six-week program, Understanding Addiction and Recovery, along with the Board of Health. They recommend diversion programs. They have a mental health clinician on staff to support 911 calls that involve mental health crises and substance abuse. The Board of Health brought in the district attorney. We have the Blue Map now, and they did a town-wide survey. Can the Marblehead Counseling Center do more? Does the Marblehead Mental Health Task Force still exist? Do they have any input? So what has been proven to work, backed up with data and facts? This is what we need to focus on, things that actually work. Things like to signage on school property to say alcohol, tobacco, and drugs not allowed. Does that work? More signs like the one at the fire station that’s currently flashing, “Don’t text and drive.” A sobriety checkpoint. What do the experts say? So I believe that visible, identifiable actions about all the things that put our youth at risk, not just one issue, can help make Marblehead a safer place for our children and the adults. And it does take all of us working together, not against each other, to make a difference. And I know you are all trying to make a difference, including Tom, and I appreciate it. I just think the way that we are doing it should be more collaborative. Thank you.

47:37 Thank you for your comments. I have one to add to the list. I think it’s very appropriate for the selectmen to make a comment. You people are elected, okay? You should decide what’s going on here. I’ve been up here since 6:00 in this heat, but I’m sitting in the AC downstairs. They should come to the public meeting like I have to, because I can’t go to their public meeting to see how they’re spending my money tonight and talk down there. But I tell you the following, I want the police chief, this lady from Winfield that we hired a couple of years ago that I’ve seen once. I want the town to know these people and the resources that we have. I want to really thank the Board of Health for all the programs they’ve been trying to implement, that I’ve seen three people at the Board of Health meetings, and I haven’t seen the support from the selectmen. I’ve seen one member there. And when you have Mr. Tucker in there, I saw a couple other members. But we had the poor girl killed at 2:00 in the morning, okay? We need to get this town and these high-paying department heads to listen to the taxpayers. Thank you.

48:56 I absolutely agree with what you said about Facebook. That’s your personal opinion. However, I zoomed into a meeting some weeks back at which there was a discussion about how the Board of Health had a Facebook page that hadn’t been used in about four or five years. And there was discussion about communication from the Board of Health to the public. And as I’m not going to begin quoting because I could never accurately relate what the quote was, but it was something to the effect that Mr. McMahon is very active on Facebook, and he relates things on his Facebook page, or maybe he has some other public-facing Facebook page. And the implication to me, I think, to the other people that were there, was that he is speaking for the board. Now, maybe that’s wrong- But there was no- But there was no disclaimer to that effect. So something’s got to give somewhere. I see a fast one. I have to take a photograph. So I just have a question, Tom. How many times in our sessions have

50:27 you directly called me a coward and challenged me on problems like so many? Hi, Nicole. The answer is B. B? Is that right? Yeah, sure. Okay, so right there, this is not an isolated incident. We’re not talking about a one-time thing, and we will get our message. This has been a very, very long pattern of behavior with said meetings, and I’m on, and it works. Okay? So I just want to put this all to sleep here. Let’s have a conversation with Phil. I’ll always pretend where we get to sort of discuss it at a very high level and move on. I appreciate when you do it with this account, but this is really enough. So I just ask the board to have a really thoughtful conversation, which really… And I also wanted to just share that part of why I value so much Tom accusing me of being a coward and the reasons I ran for office. Well, first of all, I held office, and I’ve also had. That’s my first one. And second of all, I’m advised that the only way to contribute to the community, or best way to contribute, is by

51:57 being welcome. And I think that really says a lot about the heart of the public. So I would just ask that when people bring their opinions to you from receipts, even though they’re not most welcome, but if that’s maybe the reason for their presence, and people like serve online versus the average.

52:27 Thank you for your comments, but I couldn’t hear that very well. There’s a resonance, at least for me. I want to get a comment with this about how people like the- To recap, she had eight incidences with Tom. I don’t know what they were about, but they were unfavorable, and she wants him to be more polite. Perfect. That we should all be more polite to encourage people to engage. Basically, the disconnect with Tom, we’re not on the same page. Like the guy down on 24 said, “Here’s where I come into the chat,” because he didn’t have the same opinion as Tom. He got yelled at. But we’re all going to talk the same talk. I’m just astonished. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. I’m astonished that he refused to apologize to Ryan Wilson, sitting right here, whose feelings are not hurt, Tom. They’re not hurt. Ryan is fine. It’s inappropriate. If I looked at you right now and said, “You’re a f**g moron. You are a fg moron. You are a f***g moron.” This is not okay, and I’m not saying that to you. Right? You all should be… Because I don’t care. I don’t care what you think, Tom. You’re going to be who you are. But the rest of you, it’s your job to stand up and tell him no, and tell him that he does not speak for your board.

54:05 Did he ever apologize? No. My feelings aren’t for Tom. I brought you something. Do you want me to take it? No, that’d be rude. Do you want… Go ahead and take it. Don’t use the mic. Just pronounce it. I want to start with the line from Whitney Johnson. “Y’all know me, right?” No, but they don’t on Facebook. My name is Ryan Wilson. I went to my first board of health meeting a couple weeks ago, and I came back for this one because I had so much fun the last week. My feelings are not hurt. I don’t know what the hell Terry Torah was talking about. She’s off on a bender. I can’t figure that out. Whoa. She’s off on a bender? A bender. Unphilosophical train of thought. Unphilosophical train of thought. I don’t understand what she’s talking about. I don’t have her feelings, Tom. I brought you inconvenient facts that you don’t like. And in exchange for doing that, you called me names. You impugned my character. You said, “We’ve had this conversation. I’m not going to let you win.” That is terribly, terribly manipulative, Tom. It is evil. It is going to be very hard, transparent, for you to create wellness with such toxicity on your board. Tom is a bully. Flat out, you are a bully in this town. And you would like to invoke your kids and taking care of your kids. What are they going to say one day when they realize, and they say, “My dad is a bully.” Because that’s what everybody’s saying. You are making your comments the most aggressive way possible to stifle anybody who sees things differently than you do. Okay? That’s what bullies do. You can’t do that anymore. I hope more and more people come to these meetings and

55:37 present their ideas, and if you don’t like them, that’s fine. You can’t try and silence people, Tom. You’re not the only person who might contribute to the solution. The problem is if you think you are the only one that has the only solution and you have to teach everybody else here a lesson. What’s even more concerning after I saw your emotional outburst is that you’re also talking about parents taking matters into their own hands. With what I saw at the meeting, that statement and your emotional control, that’s a terrible combination. You have a pattern of abusing people verbally, beating people down. I have to say, I was actually very impressed with this, Tom. The number of people who reached out to me that I don’t even know to say, “Thank you for standing up to Tom. It needed to happen.” And multiple people who also said, “This is what he said to me. This is how he shut me down. So thank you for doing that.” And it wasn’t just one, multiple people, okay? Multiple people who served on boards in this town got in touch with me to express their concerns. Tom, I think in a way, your heart to serve the kids is in the right place, and that’s laudable. Your approach sucks. It just sucks. You have to do better and find a better way. You need to choose kindness. You need to choose inclusivity. So you accused me the other day at that meeting of saying, “You don’t want us to do anything.” No, that’s not true. I’ve heard from people who have parks and rec board because I think they can be part of the solution for addressing some of these challenges.

57:09 I met with the superintendent of our building on Wednesday to talk about how we can extract more value from the data from the surfer board. I’m doing what I can as a citizen to help push things forward, and you’re telling me, “You don’t want us to do anything.” I’m doing things, Tom, and I’m doing what I think are the right things. And you might disagree with them, but you don’t get to be a bully about it just because you see it differently. Own it, man up, change. Okay? And obviously, it would be more polite. You need to change the way you think about the community around you and how you’re going to get to a solution. Okay?

57:47 Yeah. We’ve got people back there. Perfect. You good, Tom? No, go ahead. I think I want everybody to make sure anyone who wants to speak that hasn’t spoken, please let us know. A couple of things in her comments over there about Tom’s Facebook page. Some people have perceived that Tom’s a spokesperson for the Board of Health. I’ve never seen that. The Board of Health, they’ve had their own website for a number of years. Something happened, somebody took over the domain, and they’re in the process of getting it back, I understand. Same with your Facebook page, and they’ve hired Flat Rock, a digital or something from Flat Rock, and a young lady who’s helping to put it all back together. I heard this earlier in the day. So we can have it, and the public can get direct information that’s been authorized by the chairman and the director of the Board of Health, rather than just individuals making comments. That’s a good thing, in my opinion. Something else that, as you know, I’ve been to hundreds of meetings. Lots of those meetings, it was just myself and two or three reporters there. Some meetings, like when we had the district attorney come, there was a big crowd, and it was the most I’ve ever seen online because we had a count.

59:18 It was 27 people were online. Most of the Zoom people, it’s five or six. And that’s it. There’s not that many people. One of the best things that may come out of this sad situation is more people become involved, and we’ll have to set up more chairs when we finally get back to the new normal. But I think there’s room for improvement for all sorts of things, but it’s not that people don’t care. People are passionate about a lot of things, especially when it involves kids. I’m still a fan of Tom’s. I don’t necessarily like everything he does. I’ve been married 32 years, and I don’t like everything my wife does. It’s the same with her for me. Yeah. We’re going to get past this, and we’re going to go forward. Mm-hmm. I’m glad that we now have a five-member board through a comedy of errors which should’ve happened a few years ago, but it didn’t. But we’re making progress. Nobody’s perfect. We just want to go forward. Thank you. Does anybody else want to say anything? We need better speakers. Christina. I’m also going to project my voice. Yeah, okay. I’m Laura Taylor. I’m on Marsh Road. I was just hired by the board to be their Director of Health Commission Curator. I have a question about whether or not you can actually act as not a board member

1:00:50 when you choose to. Like when Tom is, or when any of us are sending emails or text messages or posting on social media, are we able to take off hats of being public health? Yes. All of us have private lives, all of us. Is that- I mean, yeah, Tom posts on Facebook, that doesn’t say anything for me or the rest of us. When the president posts on Twitter X, he can’t just say he’s posting as Donald Trump, right? He’s always the president. Well, I’m still Tom McKeon, a member of the Board of Health, but I’m not speaking for the board. Okay. That’s the difference. Dave, are you making a statement? Is there a difference or there isn’t? The other thing that I would urge you to think, too, which is about cases of Fort Bird in 2024, which does call into question how public officials can use their personal accounts for public business. So if you reach out to the public for an opinion on something the board is doing, that’s you as a board member, not as a personal individual, even if you’re using your personal account. And it’s pretty well documented now. So I’ll forward you all an email, and I’ll have it as an invite over to you. We’re way over the line on that with citations and something we should assess if the rest of you want to clear on how that works. Okay. Is there anyone else on Zoom?

1:02:25 Blake, I know you might. I’ll speak up. Can you hear me, Barbara? Mike? Speak for Tom. I think the primary issue is the First Amendment allows us to disagree on concept, but courtesy and decency does not allow us to attack the person who’s presenting the ideas. I think that’s the fundamental question in the town. And I personally think the whole issue with the internet is one that we have to look at over time. I don’t think we’ll solve that tonight. But can we agree that the issue is attack the message if you choose with science and facts, but don’t attack the messenger under any circumstances? Yeah, I agree with that. Mm-hmm.

1:03:33 To the extent that we will all try to move forward with that as a fundamental principle. Is that… All right. I do want a little amendment. I think thinking about when we are acting as ourselves versus members of the board, I think for the… I’m just going to share that with us. I’m interested to read that. I think when you’re responding about board of health business, you should be responding as a board member and kind of thinking of maybe how we all would respond professionally, obviously in that setting on Facebook. The distinction is if I do something, I find nothing. I’m not saying this is okay to do, why this is, I know everyone’s okay with this, but I’m saying if it’s something like that where it’s not town board of health business, you are acting as your own person. But we’re talking about the trash barrels or social hosting. I think you do have to be more professional and respectful, even if you feel like people aren’t respectful towards you because of that power dynamic. I think just always err on the side of just kindness and respect when you can. Mm-hmm. I just want to thank everyone for bringing their desserts tonight. I hope that’s not .

1:05:04 Okay.

1:05:09 Do we want to go back to the motion? Well, I was going to say, it sounds like- I have- … the amendment has had a discussion. Do we want- I would like to take that amendment, the motion off the table. I would like to say that we are not voting on that motion right now. Your amendment or his motion to censure him? His motion. My intent, I don’t want him to censure himself. I don’t think that that’s the point of it. And this conversation makes me feel my feeling that this didn’t start September 24th, but it’s happened in some way, shape, or form at every meeting I’ve been at with you, Tom. That maybe censure is not the answer, but whatever we do should require him, the fact that this apology can even start with a crisp start, and that you still refuse to apologize to everyone publicly I think would act. You’re not in the right headspace to accept anything tonight, and I know you want to .

1:06:36 I wish, Tom, you just take up the times that we mentioned. Watch every public health meeting for the past year and see how many times you behaved inappropriately, drunk, or not sober. And then come back with an apology or whatever you want to. But right now, I saw you almost go at it with the guy about the drinking numbers again. You’re not in the space to change your behavior when you’re still demonstrating it in this room tonight. Thank you.

1:07:28 So where does… We’ve handled the motion to hold. We can vote. We voted on- Yeah … to table- Yeah … the vote again. Okay. The motion that Tom made to censure him was not seconded. If there’s not a second, it dies. Again, let me read the definition of censure. It’s a formal reprimand or deep disapproval of someone’s behavior, to criticize or condemn someone publicly and officially, which has already been done. So voting on censure, I mean, he’s made a public thing, so get it on the record, do the censure, and move on. Thank you for your opinion. There still is no second to that motion. I have one. I think Barbara has basically said what I’ve been thinking. Essentially, three of us, Amanda wasn’t present on August 24th. Three of us have said this is not acceptable behavior. So in essence, this is what this meeting has been about. We got distracted by getting into the weeds about what we should or shouldn’t do in collaboration with other departments or modeled after other towns. That is all beside the point for tonight. The point of tonight was to say this behavior, not okay, that everyone here deserves to be heard respectfully.

1:09:00 And so I would second the censure motion, actually. Yes.

1:09:10 Motion has been made and seconded. Is there any discussion of the motion on the floor? I think you were talking, Julie, but- Yeah. Does anyone agree that censuring himself sort of lets him off the hook? Well, if the board votes on it, it’s not him censuring himself, it’s all of us saying this is not okay. Okay. I want to know that the behavior is going to change and what he can do to do that. I’m not asking for therapy or anything, but just, hey, stop. I mean, my kids, there were four rules for an apology. You had to say you were sorry. You had to say why what you did was wrong. “Hey, pulling my sister’s hair could try and get them a good quarter.” You had to say that you were never going to do it again, and then that you understood it. So, “Hey, I’m sorry I cursed you out. I’m sorry, Charlotte, I pulled your hair. I realize I’m bigger than you, and I really could’ve hurt you. I will not ever do that to you again. I’m your big sister, and I’m supposed to protect you.” And then you’re done. Four core components of an apology. I’d love one with all four.

1:10:44 Is there anyone commenting on the motion? We have a motion on the floor to move to a vote. Members voting on censure.

1:11:01 I- Okay … I disapprove of what Tom did, so therefore I’d be in favor of censure, but I don’t think, in a way, I agree with you, Kristen, that that should just be it. I do think we should, because of the past events, what should we do if it happens again?

1:11:26 Fair enough. I think we think about that and come up with kind of a written plan and maybe talking with legal counsel about what has been done. I think that’s the missing piece. I don’t know what we can or should do, but I do think we need guidance on that issue. So I’m okay censure, as long as it’s not the end of the story, that we can still look into it further. Censure is not the end of the story. Censure is what you’re already doing, which is publicly condemning what he’s doing. It’s just getting it on the record so we can move on. You’re already publicly condemning it. He’s already acknowledging it. It’s just to get it on the formal record. And if you back off of this, hoping it’s going to change and we know it’s going to get better, that’s mute. He’s made a motion to censure himself. Any one of you could have made the motion. It’s just to say we disagree with what you did. He disagrees with what he did. It’s not asking for an apology. He’s not giving an apology to the public, to me, or anyone else. He’s not apologizing. He said, “What I did was wrong.” But essentially just gets it on the record that you as a group disapprove of what he did. We don’t want it to happen anymore, and let’s move on. Point of order. I thought we were here tonight to talk on one particular thing that happened on a certain date. Okay? I’m not here to talk about months and years ago, what’s been going on at the Board of Health. The chairman, you treat him like a piece of meat. Okay?

1:13:01 I do not want to hire legal counsel. I think he’s already been censured by the public if he hasn’t heard it. If you can’t hear me, Tom, don’t do it again. If you do it again, don’t bother to come to the next meeting. Just resign, because I don’t want this to go on. The Board of Health has done a lot of good work, okay? And we’re laughing. The Slepmans are downstairs hiding. Okay? And they should be up here in public. I’m appalled by the Board of Slepmans, and they’re downstairs crying. This hearing’s upstairs. Okay? Enough. Sorry. They’re meeting scheduled parts. Yeah. They should not… This is a board meeting. That’s not the time or the place. Enough, enough, enough, please. I’m sorry. I’m just trying to get some clear… I think it sounded like you were committing to do something moving forward, and I was going to ask about making sure that it doesn’t violate open meeting law, because I believe you. It seems like you are all taking it seriously. Um, and I’m not a, a open meeting law expert, but I hope that you will do it legally. Well, each or two of us can meet at a time with the lawyer or the lawyer we can ask to come probably to our next meeting to talk more detail. That’s actually why Tom’s motion took us by surprise is because we can’t talk among

1:14:32 ourselves. It violates the open meeting. Anytime three or more of us talk about anything, it violates the open meeting, unless it’s posted, and you all can come and listen. So that’s why we might- You can go ahead and take recess at 5:00, before the meeting. And this should come to an end tonight and we’re going to the good things. Mm-hmm. Are you making an amendment to Tom’s motion that we censure him and then follow, talk to town counsel about the details of that? Or do we just take this motion, vote on it? And then as a board- I’m not amending anything. I think it’s an up and down motion. Do we censure or do we not censure? Um, and you know, as far as further, I would fervently hope that we don’t ever need to visit this topic again. But if we do, then I think we need to know what our recourse is. Yeah. We should- That’s also, I think, it’s a question the state ethics commission could answer and not settlement. Okay, fair. Okay. There’s a motion to… Motion second in the floor. Actual discussion has concluded. All those in favor of the motion to censure Mr. McMahon. The motion is unanimous.

1:16:04 Thank you all for this. And on behalf of the board, I know that we are all committed to being the best possible board we can be because we all care about this town. Mm-hmm. And so, we’ll have to work together with the community, um, to make, uh, make the best of the situation we find ourselves in. But I think this is a good start. I appreciate everyone coming. Uh, I appreciate the honesty, um, that every, everyone, uh… There was a quote at the anti-discrimination council that was quoted from Ali Raja. “The opposite of love is not hate. It’s indifference.” This community is not indifferent. This community is not sitting back and, uh, letting things happen. So I think that’s positive. So thank you very much. Is there any other issue that the audience would like to bring to the board relating to the, uh, August 24th meeting tonight? Hearing none, I think the motion to adjourn is appropriate. Motion to adjourn. Second. Any discussion? All those in favor of adjournment?

1:17:39 Okay, it also passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you.