Brookline hears hours of public testimony on proposed ceasefire resolution; amendment offered to soften language

The Town of Brookline Select Board spent the bulk of its March 12 meeting on a contested warrant article urging an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Gaza and calling for humanitarian relief and the return of hostages.

Petitioner Navin Tahar, who said he is Egyptian American and a Brookline resident, opened the case for the resolution by describing what he called "unbearable suffering" in Gaza and urging the town to use its voice to call for a halt to civilian deaths, an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, return of hostages and safe passage for aid. "Killing and starving children is simply unacceptable," Tahar said. Co‑petitioner Beth Miller, who identified herself as Jewish and a Brookline resident, said the resolution is a way for the town to "let everyone in our community know that they belong" and to stand against antisemitism, anti‑Arab sentiment and Islamophobia she said have surfaced locally.

An amendment offered by Scott Gladstone (with Michael Burstein) would remove explicit "ceasefire" language and instead ask Brookline to "support the Biden administration in its efforts to seek a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza and secure a lasting peace." Gladstone argued that softer, unifying language would reduce local harm and make it easier for the town to rally around a call for peace while avoiding procedural and factual disputes at Town Meeting.

The hearing included approximately 47 public speakers in a tightly timed public‑comment block. Speakers for the petition stressed humanitarian urgency and reported incidents of anti‑Arab and anti‑Muslim harassment in town and in schools; some said municipal statements matter because U.S. policy and tax dollars play a role in the conflict. Speakers opposed to the petition argued that Town Meeting is not the appropriate forum for foreign policy, warned the debate would inflame local divisions and said the petition's text was unbalanced or factually inaccurate in places (several opponents cited Hamas's designation as a terrorist organization and raised the issue of hostages taken on Oct. 7). Several members of the Jewish community testified that local antisemitic incidents had risen and said a ceasefire resolution could exacerbate fear rather than alleviate it.

Select Board members also split publicly. Members Miriam Ashkenazi and Mike (last name on transcript) said they opposed advancing the petition in its present form because they feared it would deepen local divisions and inflame emotion. Paul Warren said he could not support the petition as drafted but would listen to possible amendments. John Van Scoyak said he supported holding the discussion at Town Meeting and stressed the value of allowing town deliberation. Chair Bernard Green urged civility and urged the public to "listen with an open mind and an empathetic heart." The board did not take a vote on a recommendation at the March 12 meeting.

The petitioners and amendment proponents emphasized different goals: the petition calls for an immediate ceasefire and humanitarian access and explicitly names the return of hostages as part of a path to peace; the Gladstone‑Burstein amendment would instead ask town officials to support the federal administration's diplomatic efforts and to call for lasting peace. Neither text binds federal policy; supporters said the measures are symbolic advocacy to shape public debate and encourage elected representatives to act.

What happens next: the Select Board indicated it would not vote on a recommendation the night of the hearing; members said they may take up a recommendation at a subsequent meeting before Town Meeting. The warrant article and any approved amendment would go to Town Meeting for a vote if kept on the warrant.

Quotes (representative):
- "We lost 1,200 people on October 7. In Gaza, 30,000 human beings have been killed since and counting…we need a new way forward," petitioner Navin Tahar said.
- "This is not a time for more division, but to try to build bridges," Select Board member Miriam Ashkenazi said when explaining her view against advancing the article as written.
- "The Gladstone‑Burstein amendment threads the needle — it is a positive and hopeful statement that people from all segments of the town can rally behind," amendment proponent Scott Gladstone said.

Meeting context and scale: roughly 90 minutes of testimony were scheduled for Article 19; the Select Board warned that many speakers and strong emotions were expected and asked speakers to keep remarks to two minutes to allow broad participation. The Select Board did not vote on a recommendation that evening; the article remains set for the annual Town Meeting warrant process.

Next steps: the Select Board may take up a recommendation at a future meeting; both the original petition text and the Gladstone‑Burstein amendment, if moved and sustained, would go to Town Meeting for a final vote.