2026-09-28 - Select Board

00:05Good evening. Welcome to the welcome to

00:08the uh select board meeting for

00:10September 28th, 2026.

00:13This open meeting of the Town of Auburn

00:14Select Board is being conducted both in

00:17person and remotely, consistent with

00:19chapter 107 of the acts of 2022, which

00:23suspends the requirement of the open

00:25meeting law to have all meetings in a

00:28publicly accessible physical location.

00:31Further, all members of public bodies

00:33are allowed to participate remotely as

00:36long as reasonable public access is

00:38afforded so that the public can follow

00:40along with the deliberations of the

00:42meeting. For the public to join the

00:44meeting remotely by telephone, dial

00:47148650-3123

00:51and use access code 983263437.

00:57Or the public can join via computer at

01:00meet

01:01go to.com/awuburn

01:05selectboard room. All supporting

01:08materials that have been provided to

01:09members of this body are available on

01:11the town's website. The public is

01:13encouraged to follow along using the

01:15posted agenda.

01:17Please note that this meeting is being

01:19recorded by Auburn Cable Television. Is

01:21anyone else recording tonight's meeting?

01:25Okay. Um if you're able, please stand

01:28for the pledge of allegiance.

01:32I pledge algiance to the flag of the

01:35United States of America and to the

01:38republic for which it stands. One nation

01:41under God, indivisible, with liberty and

01:45justice for all.

01:49>> Okay, it is time for our first um public

01:53comment section.

01:55Thank you. We have some people signed

01:57up. Let's see. Um, Steve Consilio, why

02:00don't you come on up and

02:02>> I'm going to go last

02:04at the beginning of the meeting.

02:06>> Okay. So, um, did you sign up for the

02:09end of the meeting?

02:11>> I put on the first, but I went back to

02:13the original.

02:15>> I got

02:16>> Okay. So, I'm taking you off. Okay. All

02:19right. Um, Mr. Rafferty, come on up and

02:22um, just identify yourself, please, and

02:24your address.

02:36As you said, Alan Rafidy, Paul Street, I

02:39sure hope it's not going to rain for 40

02:41days and 40 nights.

02:45I wanted to just quickly address uh one

02:48of the warrant articles that I believe

02:50you're going to be covering tonight, and

02:52it has to do with Flock.

02:54Um,

02:55Flocker is going to be on the warrant um

02:58for the town meeting agenda and I

03:01understand um that the contract has been

03:05cancelled at this point.

03:08And I also heard a rumor uh it was made

03:12by a comment on a member of the FinCom

03:14board that the article may be pulled by

03:18the petitioner. And I'm just here to uh

03:22recommend that it not be pulled because

03:25there are some outstanding issues with

03:29uh the flock contract that probably

03:31should be addressed at town meeting and

03:34that if it's pulled we won't be able to

03:36address those issues which means that

03:40several basic components of flock may

03:43continue to be used and so I think if

03:47you really want to uh clear up. Um the

03:51issues would flock. The article needs to

03:53remain on the warrant. Um so that can be

03:56discussed. Um that's it. Thank you very

04:00much.

04:00>> Thank you.

04:02All right. Next. Um Bill Melino.

04:07Melanino.

04:10>> Just identify yourself and your address,

04:11please.

04:12>> Uh Bill Milanazo, 511 Rodale Street. um

04:16here to talk about the three-way stop at

04:18Rodale and West and Hard Scrabble in

04:21West. Um I live at 5'11 with my wife,

04:25four daughters, my mother-in-law, my

04:27son-in-law. Six of us drive. I live with

04:29my granddaughter. Um I've considered

04:32asking for this for a number of years

04:34because of the way the traffic is on

04:36Rosdale Street. They fly down there.

04:37It's dangerous. My wife have tried to go

04:40out and maintain our uh frontage, cut

04:43back some of the

04:45brush, but we can't do it because

04:47they're going 50 miles an hour. I put

04:48out cones, wear a vest, they're still

04:50going 50 miles an hour, and I know the

04:52police can't put a speed trap on there.

04:54There's not enough room. There's no

04:55places. I'm not complaining about the

04:57enforcement anyway. Um, but what really

05:00made me decide, yes, it now's the time

05:03is the police were investigating an

05:04accident at that street. There's been a

05:06number of accidents at West and Rodale

05:08since I've moved here in 2018, and

05:11they've been pretty serious. People come

05:13flying over down Rodale Street and if

05:16you're trying to take a left from West

05:18to Rodale Street, you got to roll down

05:20your window. You got to listen for them.

05:23And they're flying and they're they're

05:25they're not Auburnites. They're they're

05:27coming from Worcester. They're coming

05:29from Oxford. They're not coming from

05:31where we're at. Um, one of the other

05:34things that I also asked for was one at

05:36Hard Scrabble. Um, the other day I was

05:38trying to teach my daughter Kelsey, 25

05:40years old, how to drive a stick and she

05:43couldn't pull out fast from hard

05:45scrabble and because she's learning and

05:48it was this was Saturday morning.

05:50There's still traffic and it was really

05:52really difficult for her to do that. I'm

05:54just thinking of all the trucks that are

05:55trying to pull out there and you know I

05:57drive down there and I know the police

05:59do enforcement on that street but

06:00they're flying down that hill faster

06:02than 40. Those trucks are trying to pull

06:04out. That's going to be prone to

06:06accident. Putting a three-way stop in

06:09both positions will lessen traffic, make

06:11it a lot more safer for my family that's

06:14driving up and down those streets, make

06:16it safer down the street for the fire

06:18department that's there now, but they're

06:19going to move. But the uh middle school

06:21right there, all the people that are

06:23fishing across from the school, that

06:25road doesn't have enough room for all

06:27the people are fishing there. It's let's

06:29let's lower the traffic a little bit,

06:31make those turns a lot safer. Police

06:33won't have to investigate the accidents.

06:36That's what I have to say about that.

06:38Thank you.

06:39>> Thank you.

06:42>> All right. Next, we have um Rich Venzi.

06:47>> Can you read it? I can't. It's not.

06:52>> Hello. Uh Rich Vanzi, 437 Rodale Street.

06:56I'm um

06:58uh appearing here basically to vote

07:00support for the the stop sign,

07:02particularly the one that's on um

07:04proposed for West and Rodale. Um I've

07:08I'm just two houses down, so I've seen

07:10kind of firsthand since 2014. The uh the

07:13number of accidents and near misses.

07:16It's pretty much like a routine um

07:19daily occurrence coming on um Rodale

07:23Street. Particularly people coming

07:25taking a left from west don't seem to um

07:31if you don't stop or slow down yourself

07:33even though you have the right away,

07:34you're really running the risk of

07:35getting hit. So I basically would uh

07:38like to you know support uh getting the

07:40stop sign there or the three-way stop

07:41sign at Western Watchdale. The uh the

07:44hard scrabble one is a little newer to

07:46me. I don't really have as good of

07:47understanding of that, but I've driven

07:49around there. It seems if you had to

07:52pick one, start with the Western

07:54Ranchdale Street and maybe investigate

07:55the one of Hard Scrapple a little bit

07:57more because there's there's not really

07:58a residential area there and the closest

08:00thing is the uh the Dog Hennel. But um

08:03definitely for sure the Western Rosdale

08:05Street and um I I wouldn't object to the

08:08uh the hard scrabble one, but I think

08:10you probably need to study that a little

08:11bit more just to get the the volumes. So

08:14thank you.

08:15>> Thank you, sir.

08:17>> All right. And um Eric Richards

08:29has to stand.

08:33Good evening.

08:38I'd like to begin with a date. September

08:418th, 2026.

08:43It's not my date. It's the date printed

08:46on the Commonwealth DLS Financial

08:48Management Report. In a letter addressed

08:51directly to the Auburn Board of

08:52Selectmen, this creates a simple records

08:55question for this board. who knew what,

08:59when,

09:01and why.

09:04Now, I'd like to introduce the select

09:07board to two important provisions of

09:09chapter 44 that this board should

09:11confront directly.

09:14There are section 40 and section 62 of

09:18chapter 44. Not just two chapters, not

09:22two separate statutory mechanisms within

09:25the same municipal finance chapter. They

09:28could be combined, used together, or

09:30separately. Section 40 concerns the

09:32statutory audit process. DLS itself

09:35reviewed Scanland's 23 through 25

09:37management letters

09:40and found that no formal corrective

09:42action plans or anything really had been

09:44created or done to remediate them,

09:47leaving roughly consolidated 10 areas of

09:50concern. DLS found ambulance receivables

09:54problems appearing in nearly every scan

09:56and management letter from fiscal year

09:5827 through 25. Others include treasurer

10:01issues, CFO town accountant issues, town

10:03manager issues, and more. Section 40

10:07says that if embezzlement or other

10:09criminal activity is suspected as a

10:11result of audit finds, findings, the

10:13responsible town officials shall bring

10:15the relevant shall bring the relevant

10:18information to the district attorney and

10:19the attorney general and assist with

10:21their investigation.

10:23Pro tip, auditor management letters are

10:26considered part of the total audit

10:28package products.

10:31They were even used in such a way in the

10:34DLS report we're discussing. A suspected

10:37section 62 offense can itself constitute

10:41other criminal activity is contemplated

10:43under section 40. Now, let's notice what

10:46the statute doesn't say.

10:48It doesn't say the select board must

10:50first prove a criminal actor or case.

10:54It doesn't say the board should assess

10:56feelings about a person or the matters

10:59involved. It doesn't say town management

11:02gets to investigates itself until

11:04everybody

11:05is satisfied or some show of effort is

11:09made at remediating something that was

11:11completed.

11:13It says that the statutory audit trigger

11:15is reached. The information goes to the

11:17officials employed to investigate it. It

11:20names the district attorney and the

11:22attorney general

11:25specifically

11:27as those officials and directs you all

11:30to give assistance to the investigation

11:32instituted in response to subsection 40

11:34audit derived suspicion and mandatory

11:37referral.

11:38>> Excuse me, Mr. Riches. The three minutes

11:40is up. Would a member elect to vote to

11:44overrule the chair to allow me to

11:46finish?

11:47>> Well, we're sticking to three minutes.

11:49Is that fine?

11:50>> Thank you,

11:52>> Madam Madam Chair. I'd like to uh allow

11:55Mr. Richards to finish his thoughts.

11:58>> Should we take a vote? I'll second.

12:01Okay. All in favor?

12:03>> I

12:03>> opposed. Okay.

12:05>> Thank you.

12:07Section 62 states, "Any city, town, or

12:10district officer who knowingly violates

12:13or authorizes or directs any official or

12:15employee to violate

12:18any provision of this chapter or any

12:21other provision of the general law

12:24relating to incurring the liability or

12:27expenditure of public funds on account

12:29of any city, town, or district, or any

12:32provision of special law relating to the

12:35incurring of liability ility or

12:36expenditure of public funds,

12:39as Afer said, shall,

12:43except as otherwise provided, be

12:44punished by a fine of not more than

12:46$1,000 or by imprisonment for not more

12:49than one year or both. and the mayor

12:52selectman. This board

12:57credential committee or commissioners

13:00shall and five taxpayers may report such

13:03violation to the district attorney who

13:05shall investigate and prosecute the

13:08same.

13:10It applies individually and in concert

13:13with subsection 40 or any other

13:14provision of the general law. For

13:16example, it applies also to chapter 30B

13:21procurement law relating to the

13:23incurring of liability and expenditure

13:25of those public funds. Section 62's

13:28description of knowingly describes the

13:30offending town officer's conduct. It's

13:33not a separate men's ray requirement of

13:35the select board's reporting

13:37requirement.

13:39The statute says something explicitly to

13:42the board. The selectman shall report

13:44such violation to the district attorney.

13:47Again, referral is not making a

13:49conviction and it's also not optional

13:52for the board. Fun fact and relevant a

13:56temporal example really. school

13:58committee of the Southbridge School

14:00Committee versus Southbridge Town

14:01Council number 05- 00546

14:05in the Massachusetts Superior Court in

14:07Worcester.

14:09In a judge dated memorandum of February

14:129th, 2006,

14:14the court expressly stated the essential

14:16pleading facts were not in dispute and

14:18the parties and the manner presented in

14:20question for resolution by application

14:22of law. Those undisputed facts include

14:26the fact that the Southbridge Town

14:27Council voted to remove $400,000

14:31previously appropriated to the school

14:33department on January 7th, 2005.

14:36Town accountant Karen Harwis acting at

14:40that particular town manager's direction

14:42removed the 400,000 in the school

14:44committee neither asented nor was asked

14:47to ascent to the removal. The legal

14:50dispute was whether the ordinary

14:52Massachusetts appropriation transfer

14:54restrictions of general law 44

14:57subsection 33b controlled or whether

15:00Southbridge's home rule charter supplied

15:03independent authority. The superior

15:06court held the transfer lawful because

15:08Southbird's charter contained a specific

15:10provision expressly authorizing the town

15:13council at any time during the fiscal

15:15year and the town manager's

15:17recommendation

15:19through the finance director to transfer

15:21unencumbered appropriations from one

15:23department to another.

15:32The 2005 Superior Court decision,

15:34therefore, does not establish that Karen

15:36Harwis violated the law or believes she

15:39was violating it. It does establish she

15:41personally executed and disputed

15:46or distributed rather the $400,000

15:48transfer and contravention of chapter 44

15:51subsection 33. And the legality depended

15:53on a little known charter provision that

15:56allowed it. However, Auburn's charter

15:59contains no such provision.

16:03or appropriation authority. In fact,

16:06Arburn's much narrower subsection 3.06B

16:09transfer language

16:11concerns formal governmental

16:13reorganization

16:15and expressly remain subject to the

16:17general laws. There have been dozens of

16:20subsection 33 inappropriate transfers

16:23made in Auburn over the last several

16:27years under the direction of CFO Karen

16:29Harwis. A more temporal and recent

16:32example of this is in May 2026 before

16:35the finance committee

16:40where both Karen Harwa and manager Veio

16:43in person advocated signed off on and

16:49got the moving and combining of more

16:51than 312,000 in funding transfers from a

16:54variety of disparate separate town

16:57departments and funding sources.

17:05from town meeting appropriated and

17:07specifically funded parts of the budget

17:09in violation of various areas of Mass

17:11General Law Chapter 44

17:14violating also the CFO and town

17:16manager's fiduciary responsibilities to

17:18look out for the town and the

17:20taxpayers's money.

17:23It's on video. You should check it out.

17:26It was live as of this evening and

17:28working. So watch out for the

17:30destruction of evidence, right?

17:34Things which make you go. At this point,

17:37it seems logical. Various town

17:39executives and department heads likely

17:40knew about the chapter 44 statute

17:44through conversation with DLS and its

17:46various subp parts via the DLS financial

17:48management process and likely from

17:50correspondence of same. Violations of

17:53town bylaw and this spec specific

17:56chapter are mentioned many times in

17:58their report. Even in the most

18:01charitable and narrow view, ignoring

18:03many other temporal facts if they didn't

18:07talk to DS about chapter 44.

18:10I've mentioned them at the last meeting

18:12and several times before then,

18:15even making a warning.

18:18So here's my request tonight. The board

18:21should act decisively to protect the

18:24town and its taxpayers. Staff can be

18:27provided the ev can provide the

18:28evidence. Auburn staff should not be the

18:32exclusive adjudicators

18:34of any evidence where their own conduct,

18:36management, execution, oversight of

18:38financial controls, approvals or

18:40statutory duties are among the questions

18:43being asked critically or for remedy.

18:50For each and every question in each and

18:52every statute, give the public a fully

18:55transparent answer to each. Currently,

18:58there are several dozen probable

19:00violations that the board and the town

19:02are now aware of via the state DLS

19:04report, other communications with them,

19:08and my personal letter to the board and

19:09the finance committee,

19:13providing many more documented examples

19:15of violations of at least three dozen

19:19areas of the statute. I urge the board

19:22to engage town council on behalf

19:25of itself and the town and other

19:27relevant professionals following the law

19:30and start completing your part of the

19:32shall requirements of the statutory

19:35duty. Complete

19:38all pot report all potential instances

19:41cases involving any and all identified

19:44officials. This board should not be

19:47hearing adjectives, excuses or

19:49whatabouts. There's no need for

19:50professional staff executives

19:52gaslighting. Let's begin solving

19:54problems

19:56and use outside unaffiliated,

19:58unattached, neutral parties for the

20:00adjudication. Investigate, find dates,

20:05documents, statutes, decisions, and

20:07provide an outcome. Simple. Thank you.

20:16>> Okay. Okay, next on our agenda, we have

20:19community organizations. We're going to

20:20have a public hearing. Um, and the board

20:23is going to vote on an outdoor

20:24entertainment license for Lost Glories

20:26at 65 South Street in Auburn.

20:30>> Make a motion to open the public

20:31hearing.

20:31>> Second. So, we have a motion and a

20:33second to open the public hearing. All

20:35in favor?

20:36>> I opposed.

20:38>> Okay. Um, is there anyone here from

20:40Loss? Oh, great. come on up to the um

20:43podium, please. And just identify

20:46yourself, please.

20:50>> Hello, my name is Casey Westerland. Um

20:52owner of Lost Glories located at 65

20:54Southbridge Street. Uh thank you for

20:56having me. Thank you for hearing our

20:59application to obtain an outdoor

21:01entertainment permit. Um, we are we've

21:05been in business for a year and it's

21:08essentially a celebration of a small

21:11business

21:13withstanding a year in this economy. Um,

21:15so we have a really special community

21:16that we've built of young people from

21:19the Auburn area, um, Worcester area, um,

21:22centered around a shared appreciation

21:25and love for music and art. and um

21:29thank you for permitting us to continue

21:31doing what we're doing.

21:33>> Thank you.

21:33>> Good. Can you tell us about the event,

21:35please?

21:36>> Sure. Um the event will feature a couple

21:38live bands in the parking lot of our

21:40establishment. Um it's in a portion of

21:44the parking lot that is surrounded by

21:46cement pillars, so they provide a

21:48natural sound barrier. It'll be at 6:00

21:51or 6:30 rather on Saturday evening where

21:54there will be no other businesses

21:56conducting business in our building or

21:58any of the adjacent buildings. All of

22:00our abuing neighbors have been notified

22:03of the event. Um

22:07>> that's it.

22:08>> All right. Thank you. Yes. Thank you.

22:11>> Questions?

22:12>> So if if I read this right, the event

22:14will be from 6:00 to 10 p.m.

22:16>> Correct.

22:18Oh, why don't you stay up there? Okay.

22:20Please. Yeah. Just so we can um Yeah.

22:23So, it's it's from 6:00 to 10:00

22:26on on uh Saturday night.

22:27>> Yes.

22:30>> With the band playing till 10:00.

22:33>> Sound should end before 9:30.

22:36>> Should or will?

22:38>> Will.

22:40>> Thank you.

22:44>> Um, no questions. I just want to note

22:46for the record that DCG did uh review

22:48this and um give it a favorable

22:50recommendation and it is noted that uh

22:53two police officers detailed police

22:55officers will be on scene as well uh to

22:57manage public safety as well as uh

23:00emergency vehicles will have full access

23:02uh to the lot uh with the support of the

23:052D officers.

23:09>> No questions. Thank you.

23:10>> Um and can you just tell me uh what is

23:12the date again going to be? That will be

23:14October 3rd.

23:15>> October 3rd. Okay. Does anyone from um

23:19the audience have any questions?

23:22Ginger, did you want to come up?

23:24>> Yep.

23:28>> Hi.

23:29>> Hi. To the board. Um I just wanted to

23:32let you guys know I noticed that this

23:33was on the agenda. They do not have a

23:36business certificate for town.

23:37>> They didn't what?

23:38>> They don't have a business certificate

23:40for the town. A DBA. So, I just wanted

23:44to let the board know. So, which usually

23:47after we do a business certificate, the

23:51um

23:53uh fire and building will usually do a

23:56certificate of occupancy. So, they

23:58haven't had an inspection either.

24:01>> So, I I would just note that um part of

24:03the DCG uh memo that is actually gets

24:06entered into as part of our decision. Uh

24:09the first one is that the applicant must

24:11obtain a business certificate from the

24:13town clerk's office prior to the event.

24:15>> Okay. All right. Perfect. Thank you.

24:18>> Okay. So, Miss Weslin, are you aware of

24:21the um requirements?

24:23>> Yes, I am. And I'm I'm prepared to

24:25remedy the lack of permit. Um

24:27>> you going to you going to take care of

24:29those? Okay. Does anyone from the public

24:31have any comments?

24:35>> Okay. hearing. None.

24:38>> Make a motion to close the public

24:39hearing.

24:40>> Second. I'll second. So, we have a

24:42motion and second to close the public

24:44hearing. All in favor?

24:45>> I opposed. No. Do I hear any other

24:48motions?

24:48>> I'll make a motion to approve an outdoor

24:50license for Lost Glories at 65 CPR

24:52Street, Auburn, Mass 01501, provided

24:55they comply with the rules and

24:56regulations of the town and all orders

24:58of the development coordinating group

25:00DCG memorandum.

25:02>> I'll second.

25:04Okay, we have a um motion and a second.

25:07All in favor?

25:08>> I

25:08>> oppose. No. All right. Thank you.

25:11>> Thank you so much.

25:12>> All right. Next, we have a public

25:14hearing, a board discussion on two

25:17three-way stop signs at Rodale Street

25:20and West Street in Hard Scrapple Road

25:21and West Street.

25:23>> Make a motion to open the public

25:24hearing.

25:25>> Second.

25:26>> Okay. All in favor?

25:28>> Opposed?

25:30>> All right. So, um

25:35this is um we had a uh request from a

25:39resident that um for a three-way stop

25:42sign at Rodale Street and West Street

25:44and then a request also for another

25:46three-way stop sign at Hard Scrapple

25:48Road and West Street.

25:50We have um received information from the

25:52police department and from the um

25:58DPW regarding these two um requests.

26:05Okay. is and both of the let's see the

26:07first request for the three-way stop

26:10sign at Rodale Street and West Street um

26:14uh passed or I should say um was deemed

26:18appropriate by the chief of police and

26:20the DPW, but neither of those two

26:23departments um deemed the other

26:27three-way stops on West Street and Hard

26:29Scrapple Road necessary at this point.

26:31Okay. Does anyone want to talk about any

26:34questions? I actually do have questions.

26:37Um, not so much on the Rochdale and West

26:40Street because I think that one um,

26:41sounds like it it would be really

26:43helpful, but the West Street and Hard

26:45Scrapple Road. Uh,

26:48I don't know how many of you have had

26:51kids that have gone to the new middle

26:52school, but it is at drop off and pickup

26:55time almost impossible to get out of the

26:58new middle school. Um,

27:03would that three-way stop sign help in

27:07that situation? I don't know. I don't

27:09know who would be the best to answer.

27:11>> Maybe um Chief Mills can come up and our

27:14DPW um head too.

27:20>> Yes.

27:24>> Pay attention.

27:32Good evening.

27:32>> Good evening.

27:36Uh, so I'm not sure I don't see how it

27:41would help um the middle school traffic.

27:44Um I think that

27:48it might create more of a hazard than

27:51anything else because um you're we're

27:54kind of just trying to

27:57guess at you know the the driver

28:01um reaction to being delayed at the stop

28:05sign. Uh so you might have more people

28:08stopping at the stop sign and then

28:11angrily speeding up to to catch up on on

28:14the time that they had lost. Um I think

28:17you know we want to be very cautious

28:19about putting stop signs um on

28:22throughways just because they they come

28:25with their own set of um hazards.

28:29>> I agree. Um, however, the speed that you

28:34see people go down West Street some days

28:36is like people fly down West Street and

28:39to maybe have that extra moment where

28:42they have to stop would slow them down

28:45enough to

28:48help mitigate some of the middle school

28:49traffic.

28:51So

28:53if I could suggest maybe we can look at

28:56the geometry of the road making it more

28:59narrow so that um I think that sometimes

29:02has um you know the effect of drivers

29:07feeling a little bit more claustrophobic

29:10and therefore um slowing down the West

29:14Street right now is a wide open road

29:16going downhill. Um, I'm sure it's very

29:20easy to speed. I'm sure Chief Mills can

29:22attest to that. Um, so I think the

29:25geometry of the road might um, you know,

29:28we could take a look to see if we can

29:30narrow the road down uh, more so so that

29:34it's we're not really um,

29:38changing the the traffic patterns um,

29:41artificially, but in in changing the the

29:45way the the road feels. Um, we could,

29:48you know, try to get the the traffic to

29:49slow down

29:51>> through the chair.

29:52>> Yep.

29:53>> Are there other techniques that you

29:55could use to slow traffic down besides

29:56just narrowing? And I I just ask cuz I

29:59want to make sure we're looking at a lot

30:00of options and and the consequences.

30:03Again, if people are stopping but then

30:04speeding up, it doesn't necessarily

30:06help. But we have heard several times

30:08about the speed on that road. Um, you

30:10know, there what other potential areas

30:14should we be looking at rather than just

30:15narrowing or um, you know, is there

30:18speed humps or rumble strips and other

30:21other types of things that we could be

30:23investigating to see if that would have

30:25a a better outcome on that?

30:29>> Well, through the chair. Uh, first off,

30:31I appreciate the comments from the the

30:34citizens, the residents that were in

30:36that area. Um, I was a little bit

30:38surprised quite frankly by uh some of

30:41the crash data

30:43that really pertains more to the Rodale

30:46and West Street intersection. Um, you

30:49know, depending on what you use for a

30:50landmark there, we use 441 Rochdale,

30:54too. Essentially, that intersections at

30:56I believe 500 or 505. Um, as far as

31:00directly across the street, um, there

31:02were zero accidents there in 2023. um 24

31:06had one, 2025 had one. Oddly enough,

31:112026 had four or has had four thus far.

31:14So, I was a little bit surprised by by

31:16that number. So, along with the DPW

31:20director, I definitely support the West

31:22Street and Rodale Street and speaking to

31:24the the crash recon. We have several

31:27crash reconstructionists, but people

31:29that do most of the traffic enforcement

31:31in addition to the patrol line, but the

31:33spec the specific traffic unit people.

31:36Um, West Street is one of the more

31:38highly enforced roads in the town for

31:42sure as far as total hours. And I can

31:44tell you going back to when I first came

31:46here in 1997, we used to go to 81 West

31:50Street at least twice a week and

31:54you could go there every day and write

31:56tickets, you know, coming down the hill

31:58or or whatever. I I lived on West Street

32:00for a for a short period of time. Um so

32:02I'm very well aware of what the you know

32:04the geometry of the road is, the width

32:06of the road, the speeds on that road,

32:09excuse me. um in speaking with the

32:11department experts or who I consider to

32:13be department experts, they they didn't

32:15think that the hard scrabble area was a

32:18good idea because of the curve in the

32:20road and because of just basically where

32:22that intersection occurs. Um

32:26as far as the school traffic, yeah,

32:28getting in and out of the the middle

32:29school is absolutely an issue. Um, we've

32:32tried to address it with, you know, with

32:34the school resource officers and as well

32:36as the patrol side, trying to get extra

32:38just attention to the road and, you

32:40know, directing traffic and trying to,

32:43you know, move traffic in and out of

32:44there. And, and as is usually the case

32:46with a lot of the complaints relative to

32:50traffic, it's usually about a volume

32:52thing more than a speed. I think West

32:54Street's a combination of both speed and

32:55volume, quite quite honestly. Um, but I

32:59couldn't find any data that would

33:00support putting a a a traffic sign or a

33:03three-way stop sign rather at uh at hard

33:06scrabble. Um, so I'm open to any other

33:09ideas for, you know, for mitigation

33:11obviously going towards the school,

33:14but signs signs are great, but they

33:16don't ultimately

33:18change behavior 100% of the time.

33:23>> So, Chief, um, and correct me if I'm

33:25wrong, it might be my memory. uh is

33:27going. But I know that um following a

33:31public comment um by a gentleman who

33:34lived on West Street about speed on West

33:36Street, um I think it just happened

33:38coincidentally to be at the same meeting

33:40where we were uh approving an

33:42application for a grant for the uh speed

33:45radar signs uh from Mass DOT and you had

33:47said that I believe one of the locations

33:49that you were looking at was West

33:51Street. Um, is that is that in place or

33:54is that still moving forward that that

33:56we are looking at that at West Street

33:57for one of the speed rear feedback signs

34:00which is a a nationally you know used

34:04counter measure for speed uh

34:06enforcement.

34:07>> Thank you. First I would never question

34:08your memory obviously usually pretty

34:10accurate. So uh as it pertains to the

34:14street these speed signs rather yeah we

34:15we did obtain them on the grant as well

34:17as one of the trailers. Uh the I guess

34:20the part that we weren't aware of was uh

34:22well we knew they had to go on polls but

34:25we actually had to purchase those poles.

34:27So we we got a quote uh I did the

34:29purchase order. We're just waiting to

34:31get those ordered and get the actual

34:33polls in. Um but yet that West Street is

34:36still one of the intended locations and

34:38I would think we'll probably put it up

34:39towards the school would be probably the

34:41to me the best idea. Um, I'll check with

34:44Lieutenant Tarini to see where he

34:46ultimately saw it going, but I think

34:47that's an excellent idea and and it will

34:49be helpful, I think. I hope.

34:56>> All right, this is public hearing. Does

34:58anyone want to make any comments on

34:59this? Sir, come on up. Just to the

35:03podium, please identify yourself.

35:06>> Bill Monazo, 511 Rodale. One of the

35:08reasons I recommended hard scrabble was

35:11to get the applications like Google

35:14Google and ways to pick 56 to 20 to get

35:18to the Pike instead of Rodale West to

35:21Route 12 to get to the Pike. Um, you

35:24know, my wish would be to get a Pike

35:26ramp on 56. Never going to happen. But

35:29um if we make it people go down 56 and

35:3320 instead of west and Rodale that may

35:37not happen. Maybe when you're looking

35:38and investigating you can check to see

35:40how that happens. I mean there may be

35:42numbers there may not be but that's just

35:44something that I would wish to be just

35:46looked at. Thank you.

35:48>> Thank you. Does anyone else have any

35:50comments they want to make?

35:55>> Okay. Just uh just real quick, I just

35:58want to thank the you know the police as

35:59well as DPW for putting together the

36:01memo. Um one of the things that is

36:04required for us to put in stop signs um

36:09is that we must meet the requirements in

36:12the federal manual and uniform traffic

36:14control devices. And that requires an

36:16engineering study to confirm that it's a

36:20good location and it meets all the

36:22warrants um for lack of a better term.

36:25Um, so

36:27for me, uh, we have both the police as

36:29well as DPW recommending, uh, the

36:31three-way stop at West Street and Rodale

36:34that it meets those warrants and I think

36:36we're able under Mass General law to

36:38move forward with that when it gets put

36:39on our agenda as a formal vote. um

36:43subject you know unless we see that um

36:46DPW in looking at it again uh feels

36:49otherwise because there's not an

36:52engineering recommendation at heart

36:53scarable this board would be very um uh

36:57I I would not advise um that we move

36:59forward with a stop with a always stop

37:01at that location. I do think the

37:03improvements uh with respect to traffic

37:05calming with the radar sign as well as

37:07using pavement markings to narrow

37:09visually narrow the roadway I think will

37:11help that. Um you know so I just want to

37:14thank both the police and DPW for moving

37:16forward on that uh and doing it in a

37:18relatively fast manner uh from when the

37:20request came in. And I'd like to request

37:22that our next agenda have a formal vote

37:25on the hallway stop since it's not

37:28listed as a vote tonight.

37:37All right. Any other? So, do I hear a

37:40motion?

37:41>> I will make a motion to close the public

37:42hearing.

37:43>> I'll second.

37:44>> I have a motion and a second to close

37:46the public hearing. All in favor?

37:48>> I opposed.

37:50>> All right. Thank you. So, we we're not

37:52going to vote on this tonight, but we'll

37:54put it on our next agenda.

37:57Okay. Thank you.

38:00All right. Next, we have some

38:03departmental items. First, Department of

38:05Public Works, an update on sewer

38:07projects. And Peter Bore, our assistant

38:09DPW director and sewer super sewer

38:12superintendent,

38:14will um give us the update.

38:17Thank you for the memo. I appreciate

38:19that.

38:19>> Good evening. Nice to see everyone

38:21tonight.

38:22um through the chair you have my memo

38:24but for those watching this update the

38:27majority of the update is in regards to

38:29the Sword Street force main um rehab and

38:33the Garter Drive sewer re location at

38:36your October 28th 2025 special town

38:38meeting there was a special there was a

38:40town meeting there's a warrant article

38:42authorizing $4.7 million to be borrowed

38:46for the the uh 3,500 ft rehabilitation

38:50project along Garter

38:52going from Garter Drive and extending

38:55through Cross Country easement towards

38:56South Hold and also a Sword Street Force

38:59main rehab project within project limits

39:02starting at the Sword Street pump

39:04station and extending to the

39:05intersection of Jerome AB and Hillside

39:07Street. Since that approval um the DPW

39:11has been working with Apex Engineering

39:14and we've broken it down into three

39:16phases. Phase one is going to be the

39:19initial part of the Sword Street force

39:22main rehab. Because of the length of

39:24that project, we're going to separate

39:25into two phases and the difficulty of

39:28lining the sewer force main from the

39:31pump station under the Kettlebrook and

39:33under the railroad tracks while also

39:36running a bypass from the pump station

39:39further upstream to uh Central One

39:42Federal Credit Union is ambitious and

39:45not the easiest thing to put together.

39:48That's going to be phase one. And that

39:49also focuses on where the the primary uh

39:53sewer forcement breaks have occurred. So

39:56for priority one, that's where we're

39:58starting. That project has been designed

40:01uh completely designed and put out to

40:03bid. The engineers estimate was $3.3

40:06million. Uh the low bidder was Ricardi

40:09Brothers at $2.45 million. So very

40:13favorable pricing. Um, Apex Engineering

40:17reviewed their bid, reviewed their work,

40:19and recommending approving that bid. So,

40:23the contract documents finally came from

40:26them on Friday. So, waiting to get those

40:29to the town manager and get that

40:30contract fully executed so we can go

40:33ahead and get that project ready to move

40:36forward starting in the spring. They may

40:39be able to do some work at the pump

40:40station um internally and get prepared

40:43for the lining project, but the majority

40:45of this work will take place next spring

40:48and happen during next construction

40:50season.

40:51Um again, phase two will probably be

40:55jumping over to the Guarder Drive cross

40:57country easement. That is a gravity

40:59main, a little bit easier of a lining

41:02project. We will have to bypass the

41:04small sections while we line it, but

41:06without it being uh a force man. It

41:09should be a little bit simpler and

41:10hopefully not as expensive to do. And

41:13then after that, we can finish to see

41:15what we have left for funds under this

41:17appropriation and go ahead and jump back

41:19over to the Sword Street Force main and

41:21finish that that lining up.

41:26>> Okay, great. Um questions.

41:30Uh so you mentioned you're out to bid on

41:33the Goddard.

41:34>> We we are not out to bid out. We're

41:36focusing on this right now and once this

41:39we'll probably I don't believe the

41:40GDDARD uh project is completely designed

41:43yet. It's probably at 60 or 70%. So, now

41:46that we have this ready to go over the

41:48winter, probably work with the engineer

41:50to go ahead and get the final design for

41:53the guarded uh cross country lining and

41:56probably get that out to bid sometime

41:58next year, which would probably take

42:00place the following construction season,

42:02calendar year of 28.

42:05>> So, the favorable budget doesn't move

42:08anything forward or up, does it? or um

42:12it could, but I think even though the

42:15the projects aren't necessarily next to

42:16each other or depending on each other,

42:18having those two projects of that scale

42:20going at on at the same time would be

42:23difficult to maintain.

42:25>> Thank you.

42:29>> Yeah. Um so I just have a question. So

42:32when we came before town meeting a year

42:34ago with the 4.7 million um

42:39the project wasn't designed at that

42:41point or at least the first phase wasn't

42:43designed. I'm just wondering how we came

42:44up with the 4.7.

42:45>> I believe both projects were probably

42:47well beyond the 25% design phase. That

42:50way they they could put that estimate

42:52together for you to consider a town

42:54meeting.

42:55>> Okay.

42:56I'm just and and you I know you've heard

42:59me say this before with the with the

43:00water street uh culvert issue. I have a

43:02concern that it's taking a long time to

43:04get these projects out. Um you know we

43:07came this is now a year ago that that

43:10this came before town meeting and asked

43:12for an authorization for 4.7 million

43:15with the I

43:18not expressed but with the understanding

43:19that these projects will be moving

43:21forward.

43:22>> We're now a year out. It's just now out

43:25to bid for phase one, not even the

43:27entire project. It's not going to go to

43:30construction until next construction

43:31season. So, it's about 2 years after the

43:35the the town meeting um vote for this.

43:37And I'm not holding you to this cuz you

43:40know, you've been here that long. Um, I

43:42I just I just I cannot stress enough

43:45that it seems like these projects are

43:47taking longer than they should when it

43:50comes to if if we're already past 25%,

43:53well past 25% that we can nail down a

43:56$4.7 million

43:58um, you know, estimate and actually hit

44:00it on the nose with the bids that came

44:02in. um it shouldn't take a year to get

44:05from 25% or post 25% to 100% and out the

44:09door and constructed or or or at least

44:11out the door and and bids coming in. So,

44:14I would just stress that

44:18we get this part going and we follow up

44:21very quickly for phase two and phase

44:23three. Um not not let them linger. Um,

44:28you know, this is, you know, it's this

44:31is this is important infrastructure that

44:33we need to make sure is operating

44:35correctly. Um, and I know that's your

44:37priority. Again, I'm not, you know, I'm

44:40not trying to pick on you or any

44:42department. I just think we need to

44:43start, you know, moving these projects

44:46faster, design them faster, get them out

44:48the door faster, especially when we have

44:50allocated the money. I understand that

44:52sometimes in in public works world

44:54you're designing things and you don't

44:55have the money to construct or you don't

44:56even have all the money to design so

44:58things take longer but the community

45:00town meeting you know authorized 4.7

45:03million a year ago and said go get this

45:04done and they're going to wait until

45:072027 to get it done.

45:10uh if I can respond a little bit and

45:12again not to make excuses. However, this

45:14is probably the most ambitious part of

45:17the lining project or what was approved

45:19because of all the underlying effects of

45:22like I said we have to take our gravity

45:24main out of service and go ahead and get

45:28under the under Kettlebrook and under

45:30the railroad tracks and we have to get

45:32our temporary force main through that

45:35gravity main into a pit on Route 12. in

45:38order to get all of the Route 12. I

45:40think there's three or four pits along

45:41Route 12 that we're going to be using

45:42for lining. That had to get approved

45:44through Mass DOT, which in and of itself

45:48was I don't want to say it was a

45:49hindrance, but it didn't help us get

45:51things done very quickly. We had to

45:53coordinate with the water department and

45:56they're finishing their work of their

45:58water main replacement in the same area.

46:00and it pushed us to a point where we

46:03could have possibly started this

46:05construction season. But my concern was

46:08if things didn't go perfect, we were

46:10going to be on Route 12 in the beginning

46:12of November with access pits and a

46:14bypass line on the side of the road when

46:17snow started to fall. And I did not want

46:19my first project for the town of Auburn

46:21to end that way. So part of this was a

46:24little bit of caution on my part because

46:26of where the time frame went and I

46:29understand your priority to move things

46:31forward and I yes I am not sitting on

46:34this just saying we'll let it happen

46:35when it happens. However, I didn't want

46:38to get stuck in a case where we had open

46:41pits on Route 12 and there were snow

46:43plows that had to come down and we also

46:45had a a sewer bypass line run 2,700 ft

46:48along the side of Route 12 while snow

46:50was getting plowed onto it or snow plows

46:53could be close to it. So, I think it was

46:56maybe an abundance of caution for me and

46:59again the bid results just came in and

47:01but it's one thing to get the bid

47:03results in, but it's also been 3 weeks

47:05or four weeks just to get the paperwork

47:07done and then the contractor has to come

47:09up with the bypass plan and do a bunch

47:11of groundwork. So again, I just

47:14abundance of caution from my part and um

47:18>> understandable and we'll hit the ground

47:20running in the spring and we'll be ready

47:22to move on the other two phases as soon

47:24as we can.

47:25>> Thank you.

47:28>> Thank you, sir. Um I do have a question.

47:31Why is the um the low bid so um so much

47:36less than the estimate?

47:39>> We got lucky. no market factors or

47:43anything. I mean, I would think it'd be

47:45>> I I think it's a local contractor who's

47:47familiar with the area, who's done some

47:49work for the town in the past and just

47:51believes they can they might again, this

47:53is two components where it's not just

47:55the construction work, it's also the

47:57lining. Um, I think some of the other

47:59contractors might have inflated the

48:01lining cost from from that subcontractor

48:04more than this company did. And and

48:06again, depending on which contractor you

48:08talk to, not all of them have an

48:10abundance of work. So there might be a

48:12couple different factors that came into

48:14our favor for this bid. And again, it

48:16was definitely concerned with with the

48:20amount of the bid being as low as it is.

48:23However, based on what our engineer

48:25said, um they were comfortable with the

48:28bid and with their unit prices that

48:30accompanied it.

48:31>> And they're a reputable company.

48:33>> Yes.

48:33>> Okay. Yeah.

48:35>> Any other questions?

48:38>> Okay. Thank you very much, sir.

48:39>> Thank you.

48:42>> All right. Next in our agenda, we have

48:45um the fire department is going to tell

48:47us about the National Grid easement for

48:49the new fire station at 10 Prospect

48:51Street.

48:53>> Uh thank you, Madam Chair. Um so uh

48:57thank you to the select board members uh

48:58that that took the tour um of the

49:01station uh a few weeks ago. And on that

49:04particular night uh we discussed how

49:06power was coming onto the site. So

49:09there's an existing uh pole on Prospect

49:12Street. A new pole will be erected on

49:14the site of the fire station and the

49:16primary lines will come from that

49:18existing pole on site. Uh but in order

49:20for National Grid to install that pole,

49:23do work on it in the future, the

49:25installation, um it requires an easement

49:27from the board of selectman because it's

49:29on our property. Um so that's what we're

49:32asking the board to do tonight is to

49:33grant the easement uh to National Grid

49:35for the installation of that pool.

49:39>> All right. Thank you. Um any questions?

49:44>> I just have a procedural question. This

49:45is not um noticed as a vote on the

49:49easement.

49:53>> Yeah, it doesn't say vote.

50:01>> I think we do need to wait. Do are do

50:04they usually say um

50:05>> usually um

50:06>> they the

50:07>> there's usually votes it the agenda item

50:10will usually say discussion and

50:12potential vote or discussion and vote.

50:14>> Mhm. Um, I note that the same

50:19is for the trick-or-treating hours. Uh,

50:22it does not say vote.

50:25It does say we will be signing the

50:26warrant for the state election. So, the

50:28town clerk's all set there.

50:41any um

50:42>> several of these do not have a vote

50:44indicated on the agenda tonight

50:49>> including there's no deficit looking

50:50we're not yeah there's a few that we

50:52need to vote not all of them

50:54>> right I believe

50:55>> this would be a vote this would be a

50:56vote I think that we have to um follow

51:00the rules and not vote on this tonight

51:04um is that impede the progress

51:07>> um no it you know two weeks is not going

51:10to impede um

51:11>> the progress, but um

51:14>> because uh an agenda has to state that a

51:18vote will be taken. Yes, I would

51:21certainly suggest to the chair that

51:22anything that would require a vote

51:23that's not listed not be approved

51:25tonight.

51:30>> Okay.

51:32>> All right. So, we're going to put that

51:33at our next meeting also then.

51:36Does anyone have any questions about the

51:38easement?

51:40Okay. Um, next on our agenda, our town

51:43clerk um is coming up and the board

51:45needs to sign the warrant for the

51:47November 3rd, 2026 state election.

51:53>> Let's see. Yes, we do. Do you want me

51:56just to

51:57>> It has to be legal size. I remember that

51:59from last time.

52:00>> I have that's just in there. Yes.

52:02>> Okay, here's the right one. Perfect.

52:08So we can just sign this

52:10in one place, right?

52:12>> Y.

52:12>> Thank you.

52:21>> All right, continuing on our agenda.

52:25Well, guess we'll we'll wait a second.

52:26Chief Mills, do you want to come up and

52:28tell us about the Halloween hours?

52:38Hello,

52:39>> evening again.

52:42So, I I sent the memo to the board that

52:45uh requesting or hoping that uh you'll

52:50vote at your next meeting to uh accept

52:53my recommendation for Halloween hours

52:56for trick-or-treating to be 5:00 to

52:598:00. Uh we added a half hour this year.

53:03Um

53:04it's on a Saturday. That way no one will

53:06be, you know, rushing to get home from

53:07work hopefully to get their kids out. So

53:10I thought it was thought it made sense.

53:13Um I have to thank my administrative

53:16assistant for reminding me that she came

53:18to me on the 22nd and said a year ago we

53:20we posted the Halloween hour. So I it's

53:23already in my calendar for uh for next

53:25September 22nd as well. So

53:28>> now what would Sorry,

53:30>> I'm sorry. What was the change?

53:32>> I believe I just added a half hour. I

53:34believe last year was 5:30 to 8.

53:36>> So at the beginning,

53:37>> correct?

53:38>> Okay.

53:40>> 8:30 is kind of late. So I just

53:42>> Yeah, that is

53:46>> any questions?

53:48>> No questions.

53:48>> No questions.

53:49>> Are you enforcing if people go out at

53:524:45?

53:54>> I believe there's an enforcement

53:56component to that.

53:57>> Okay.

53:58>> Recommendation. Everyone loves

53:59Halloween, I think.

54:00>> Well, hopefully we have nice weather and

54:02uh you know, it's

54:03>> it was a little rainy, chilly last year,

54:05but

54:07>> it is the end of October after all.

54:08>> The earlier time slot, especially for

54:10those younger kids, it makes a big

54:12difference. So, good thinking. Thank

54:13you.

54:14>> There's a as you all know, there's a few

54:16neighborhoods in town that get extremely

54:19busy with the young young kids at the

54:21very beginning. For sure. So,

54:24>> okay. Uh no questions.

54:27>> All right. Uh, I think we'll vote at our

54:29next meeting, but I don't anticipate Oh,

54:31yes.

54:32>> Um, just to bring to the board's

54:34attention, I don't know whether this

54:35makes a difference. I know in the past

54:37agendas have said that there will be a

54:39specific vote.

54:40>> The Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, as

54:42well as the Massachusetts Selectman's

54:44Handbook, does not require that the

54:46agenda say that something is to be

54:48voted. The law requires that fair notice

54:50of what matters will come before the

54:52board so the public can decide whether

54:54or not to attend. Um but the agenda does

54:57not specifically say that it has to say

55:00that it would be voted.

55:01>> Again this you know um with Amanda in

55:04the agenda it is a it's looking a little

55:06different. I will completely leave that

55:08to the board but legally under the open

55:10meeting law and through the selection

55:12handbook you would be able to take votes

55:15>> even though it does not say on the

55:16agenda that it would be voted.

55:18>> Okay chair 6D does actually state that

55:22we can vote. There's a motion verbiage

55:25motion

55:26>> there. Well, the motion is there. That's

55:27on our agenda, but the public

55:30>> version does not. Yeah.

55:31>> Um, all right. I think we can vote on

55:33this one and then if we need to revote

55:35in two weeks, that will be fine. Does

55:38anyone have any problem with that?

55:40>> If we're going to wait two weeks for

55:41others, I think we don't have a delay. I

55:44think we know the intent here, but let's

55:46just cover our bases.

55:48>> All right. So, I I anticip you could

55:50>> I was a little bit nervous. I thought

55:52Chief Coleman was going to provide

55:53contradictory evidence about the house

55:55for Halloween.

55:59>> Like maybe he had the date wrong or

56:00something. I don't know.

56:03>> Date right. Right. Yeah. All right.

56:05Thank you, sir. Um, next on the agenda,

56:08um, snow and ice deficit amortization

56:11schedule for fiscal 2026. And our CFO

56:15Karen Hanoi is here.

56:25Good evening.

56:26>> Good evening.

56:30So, the snow and ice deficit from fiscal

56:332026 was 445,674.

56:38So, there's going to be a couple of

56:40options on how we can fund the deficit,

56:43but we are also going to use and it was

56:45the town manager's recommendation to use

56:48the winter recovery assistance program,

56:50the RAP funds to offset the deficit.

56:53Town of Auburn is receiving 257,262

56:57in wrap funds. So, the net deficit is

57:00188,41.51.

57:04Now, there's three different options to

57:06fund the net deficit.

57:09The first would be to raise the deficit

57:11on the FY2027

57:13tax rate recap.

57:16Now, the um the effect of this would be

57:18to put the 188 directly on when we're

57:21setting the um when we're submitting the

57:24tax rate. And this will cause the levy

57:26to increase over the 2.5% to 2.8192 8192

57:32over the prior year tax levy limit.

57:37Option number three would be to amatize

57:39the deficit over three years. The first

57:41year being FY27 in equal or more rapidly

57:45or in equal installments or more

57:47rapidly. The minimum amount that would

57:50need to be raised on the 27 tax recap um

57:54would be 1/3 of the deficit or 62,8384.

57:58Now, that would require a board of

58:00selectment vote to amortize. And the

58:03amortization just means that we would

58:05spread the amount of the of the net

58:08deficit over 3 years. There wouldn't be

58:10any additional charges or fees or any

58:12costs associated with that. And the

58:14third option which the town

58:16administration is recommending is that

58:18the net deficit of the 1884151

58:21be appropriated from free cash or

58:24stabilization and it would be listed

58:27under article the special town meeting

58:28article 2 under the FY27 supplemental

58:32appropriations.

58:33We have checked with the um legal

58:36counsel

58:37and we're going to also speak with the

58:40moderator but legal council believes

58:42that it's within the scope of the

58:43article to add the appropriation and the

58:46again the recommendation would be a free

58:48cash appropriation. So we're bringing

58:50these forward for um consideration of

58:54the board.

58:56>> Thank you. So we're talking about

58:58$188,411.

59:00Correct.

59:01>> Okay. Um, does the board have any

59:03comments?

59:04>> Yeah. Um, so in years where we don't

59:07spend the snow budget, where does where

59:08do those funds end up?

59:11>> If there's extra left over, it would

59:13close to um fund balance and then become

59:16free cash.

59:17>> Free cash.

59:18>> So in the years that we've been

59:19favorable, it's free cash. So to pull it

59:21from free cash seems appropriate.

59:25>> I agree.

59:25>> Thank you.

59:27>> Go ahead. Um, I know the answer to this,

59:29but I'm just going to ask for other

59:31people who are not nerds and watch all

59:32the meetings that take place on Auburn

59:34cable television. Did the finance

59:36committee take this issue up and what

59:38was their recommendation?

59:39>> Yes, that we brought it to the finance

59:41committee meeting last week and their

59:42recommendation was for to use free cash.

59:49>> I'm in favor of using free cash. Um, I

59:52just want to make sure that we can

59:53actually add it to uh special time

59:56meeting article 2. Um, considering it

59:58was not a part of the original

1:00:01submission that was submitted for the

1:00:03warrant.

1:00:04>> So, procedurally, does that have to be

1:00:07brought up by the floor and someone on

1:00:09the floor has to make an amendment to

1:00:10that? Can't just be added after the

1:00:13fact. I don't believe

1:00:14>> would have to do an amendment. Yeah.

1:00:15>> Amendment. It would be Is that what town

1:00:17council had advised that we do an

1:00:18amendment? Somebody from town meeting

1:00:20does an amendment on the floor

1:00:22>> to add it.

1:00:23>> Yes.

1:00:24>> Thank you.

1:00:28>> Well, I also agree we should take it

1:00:30from Cash. We don't need to take this

1:00:32debt and hang on to it if we can pay for

1:00:35it. Now, um

1:00:39do do we need a vote on this?

1:00:43>> I don't believe so. We're not The town

1:00:46manager is the proponent for

1:00:48>> Mhm. article two and

1:00:51they would somebody would have to get a

1:00:54town meeting member to

1:00:56>> make the motion to add it.

1:00:58>> So we can say it's the intent of the

1:01:00board that we should use the free catch

1:01:02and we can provide or you can provide

1:01:04that information to the town manager and

1:01:06she can follow that for the town

1:01:08meeting. Okay, any other questions?

1:01:12>> Okay, thank you.

1:01:13>> Thank you.

1:01:16All right. Next, we have some informal

1:01:18communication from orformational

1:01:21communication from the planning board

1:01:22regarding opinions of town meeting

1:01:24warrant articles.

1:01:26And I believe Aldo will present this.

1:01:30>> Yes, madam chair. Just uh I'm happy to

1:01:32go over this now. Uh this the the board

1:01:34had asked for the planning board's

1:01:36recommendations on the zoning uh

1:01:38changes. Um, happy to go over the

1:01:40substance of the changes now or if you

1:01:42want to wait till uh it's contextual in

1:01:44the discussion of the warrant. Uh, but

1:01:46the planning board did act favorably

1:01:48upon all three zoning matters that are

1:01:50on the warrant.

1:01:55>> Do you want to talk about it now or

1:01:57later?

1:01:59>> Let's do it later because we then we can

1:02:01take care of some other agenda items and

1:02:03move some things along. All right. So,

1:02:05next we have um uh select board general

1:02:09items. We have a gift acceptance

1:02:12$350 from Southbridge Credit Union to

1:02:14the DPW Recreation and Culture Division

1:02:18uh to be a cookie sponsor for the

1:02:20holiday tree lighting. So, I think that

1:02:23um I think that we're going to have to

1:02:26wait because there's nothing there about

1:02:27a vote and we usually have to vote for

1:02:29that. So, we can vote on that in two

1:02:31weeks. Does anyone have any questions?

1:02:34All right. Um, continuing, there's a uh

1:02:39a change of address for flammable

1:02:41storage permit at 793 South Street,

1:02:44Auburn, Mass for SCFRC

1:02:48funding

1:02:49for LLC

1:02:52um care of restaurant growth serve LLC.

1:02:57Do we have anyone here from this

1:02:58organization?

1:03:02>> Yes.

1:03:11for the chair. This is um a gas a

1:03:15flammable permit that we already have

1:03:17for this location. Somebody else just

1:03:19bought the property.

1:03:20>> So, in order for us to change the name

1:03:22that's already on the permit for the

1:03:24owner,

1:03:25>> we just need your vote of approval to do

1:03:28that.

1:03:28>> Okay. Does anyone have any questions

1:03:30about this?

1:03:32>> So, by not taking a vote tonight, would

1:03:35that be a problem? Are they They're

1:03:38still in compliance with everything.

1:03:39It's just a um administrative task at

1:03:43this point.

1:03:43>> Correct. Yeah.

1:03:45>> Great.

1:03:46>> Okay.

1:03:46>> Any other questions?

1:03:48>> All right. So, that'll have to go on the

1:03:50next agenda also. All right. Now we have

1:03:53a board discussion and potent and

1:03:55possible vote to establish a working

1:03:57group to review tax classification and

1:03:59related financial items. In our last

1:04:02meeting we talked about um establishing

1:04:06a working group to see what information

1:04:09we want or we we will need from the um

1:04:14the assessor and the financial officers

1:04:17of the town.

1:04:19All right. Any questions?

1:04:24Well, I know Mr. Carpenter brought this

1:04:26up, so I I think he would certainly like

1:04:28to be part of that working group.

1:04:30>> I don't know if others have a

1:04:32preference.

1:04:32>> Um, I'd like to be part of it as well.

1:04:34I'm fine not to if there's somebody

1:04:36else. Um, but since I regularly pepper

1:04:38the assessor every time this comes up, I

1:04:41figure I can at least, you know, get

1:04:43things in advance. That way, he just not

1:04:45in the hot seat waiting for my uh

1:04:47questions to come up.

1:04:49>> So, do I hear any motions? I make a

1:04:51motion that we recommend um Mr. Karine

1:04:54and Mr. Carpenter um to be on the

1:04:56subcommittee

1:04:57>> or working

1:04:59>> one of the working group. Sorry.

1:05:01>> I'll second.

1:05:02>> So we have a motion and a second to um

1:05:06appoint Mr. Carpenter, Mr. Crane to the

1:05:08working group to review tax

1:05:10classification and related financial

1:05:12information. All in favor? I opposed.

1:05:17>> All right.

1:05:19Continuing

1:05:23now we're at the item we're going to

1:05:25review, discuss, and vote

1:05:27recommendations on October 27th, 2026

1:05:31special town meeting warrant articles.

1:05:33And we will either uh recommend

1:05:36approval, not recommend approval, defer

1:05:38to the petitioner, or take no position

1:05:40at this time.

1:05:43So, let's get that wired out.

1:06:03All right.

1:06:10Just want to make sure I'm going to the

1:06:11most recent warrant here. Okay.

1:06:16Article one um jeez

1:06:21is to hear the reports the finance

1:06:23committee other town officers and

1:06:24committees or act on anything relative

1:06:26there too. We don't need to make a

1:06:28recommendation on that one.

1:06:32Um next is article two to see if the

1:06:34town meeting will vote to amend article

1:06:373 of the May 5th 2026 annual town

1:06:41meeting um as follows. So, I'm not going

1:06:45to read all these. It's available on the

1:06:47warrant.

1:06:49Um, it will in when these are added to

1:06:52it, it would further approve it would

1:06:54approve an amended fiscal 2027 budget

1:06:57for the town of Auburn of $86,976,92

1:07:03or act on anything relative there too.

1:07:07Okay, Karen, why don't you come on up,

1:07:10please, so we can ask you some questions

1:07:13if they when they arise.

1:07:17>> Okay, what questions do people have?

1:07:25>> I really don't have any questions on

1:07:26article two

1:07:28>> specifically. Um, it's pretty standard.

1:07:31Um, I know there's some debate about the

1:07:34audit and how we manage this town

1:07:37meeting, uh, the

1:07:40the special town meeting, I guess, is

1:07:41what I would say. So, this is how I

1:07:43would expect to see a lot of the

1:07:44requests and increases and stuff like

1:07:47that in article 2. So, my questions are

1:07:49more towards other articles.

1:07:50>> Okay.

1:07:53>> Yeah. I I would just say that, you know,

1:07:56for those of you who have not read the

1:07:57DLS U report, article 2 plays a very big

1:08:01part of that report um and their

1:08:04analysis on how um it's, for lack of a

1:08:08better term, a very unusual way for

1:08:11municipalities to uh do their budget. um

1:08:15with respect to three or four months

1:08:18later um doing a very large transfer or

1:08:23reshuffleling um for things that uh as

1:08:27far as DLS and best practices in normal

1:08:29municipal government um are things that

1:08:33should have been projected a lot closer

1:08:36to to what they were. Um I know Auburn

1:08:39has historically done this. Um, I'm

1:08:42certainly not going to, you know, say

1:08:45anything with respect to this year, I

1:08:47think next October. If it's still that

1:08:50way, I think I will be one of the

1:08:52members at least that uh raises a lot of

1:08:55red flags and concerns. I understand

1:08:56that the DLS report was just delivered

1:08:59that the town management needs time to

1:09:02digest it and then start implementing

1:09:04changes um on best practices or at least

1:09:07review the recommendations on whether

1:09:08they should be changed. I did just have

1:09:10one question on

1:09:13um the first aligned item which is the

1:09:16interest of $534,680

1:09:20for the for debt excluded interest in

1:09:23the bond anticipation note. I know that

1:09:26our note went out after the budget was

1:09:29put together. Um we did project however

1:09:33$75,000

1:09:34um in interest. Um

1:09:38was the 75 just the best guess at that

1:09:40time or was it thought that um it was

1:09:43sort of a placeholder knowing that we

1:09:44would be going out and we weren't sure

1:09:46how much and that's why um it's such a

1:09:49very significant increase.

1:09:52>> The 75,000 was the projected interest on

1:09:55the short-term borrowing that normally

1:09:57we do every year which is generally the

1:10:00CIP. So at that time because we did not

1:10:02have the cash flow and we didn't have an

1:10:05estimate of how much would that we were

1:10:07going to borrow. That's what the 75,000

1:10:10was based on.

1:10:11>> Thank you.

1:10:15>> So we didn't anticipate that we would

1:10:17have to um pay any money in fiscal 2027

1:10:20on the bands

1:10:22on the interest on the bands. We did

1:10:24anticipate that we were going to, but

1:10:26because it was just the initial part of

1:10:29the project, we waited for the um OPM to

1:10:32put together the cash flow for the

1:10:34project. So that's when we we could tell

1:10:37how much that we were going to need to

1:10:39borrow. So even though the 23 million

1:10:41was authorized, we only borrowed 14

1:10:44million out of that because that was our

1:10:46needs over the short term for for a

1:10:48year.

1:10:51Where does the $8 million from free cash

1:10:53come into play?

1:10:56Have we has it been used yet or?

1:10:59>> Well, the $8 million has been

1:11:00transferred to the project.

1:11:02>> Okay.

1:11:03>> So, that along with the $14 million is

1:11:05what we're drawing on right now to pay

1:11:07down the the um the vendor invoices.

1:11:10>> Okay. Thank you. Um well, I have a

1:11:12couple questions. So,

1:11:14what did do you know what the total

1:11:16increase is here of all the different

1:11:18items in Oh, maybe maybe I have it. Wait

1:11:20a minute.

1:11:21>> Yes, it's $941,217.

1:11:26>> Can you repeat that, please?

1:11:27>> Sure. $941,217.

1:11:34>> That does not include the 1888 that is

1:11:38projected to be added.

1:11:40>> That's correct.

1:11:42Okay. And I noticed that um at our last

1:11:46meeting you said that these these

1:11:48additions will not affect the

1:11:51um

1:11:53the tax increase overall because these

1:11:57tell us about what money is going to be

1:11:59paying for these.

1:12:00>> Okay. So, there was a spreadsheet that

1:12:02was provided and the um the funds that

1:12:05are going to be used to cover this

1:12:0794127,

1:12:09there's going to be ambulance receipts.

1:12:11>> Yep.

1:12:12>> The um the increase in the state aid,

1:12:16um new growth,

1:12:18solid waste revenues,

1:12:21>> and the um and then the debt exclusion.

1:12:25>> Okay. So, um the new growth, what was

1:12:28the total new growth? 35,727

1:12:32and of that amount this supplemental

1:12:34appropriation is using 21,500.

1:12:37Now that's very very low to what we've

1:12:40seen in the past.

1:12:42Do you have is there a reason for that

1:12:44or

1:12:45>> Oh no the actual total new growth okay

1:12:48>> was um 735,727.

1:12:54So, it was estimated at 700,000 and it

1:12:57came in 35,727

1:12:59higher than

1:13:00>> Okay. So, I see that that's not clear.

1:13:02All right. Then that's not clear here.

1:13:04All right. So, um

1:13:12Okay. Do we have any other questions on

1:13:14article 2?

1:13:15>> Yeah, I just have one question. um for

1:13:16the chief. Um we're adding a second

1:13:21fleet mechanic, which I fully support,

1:13:23but again, it might be my memory. I

1:13:26thought we had a conversation during the

1:13:28budget hearing that um we were going to

1:13:30be looking in that bud in the operating

1:13:32budget to add a second fleet mechanic at

1:13:34that time. Did that not did that not

1:13:38make the cut?

1:13:38>> No. So what happened um through the

1:13:40chair is uh fi the board of selectman

1:13:43finance committee and ultimately town

1:13:45meeting approved that position but the

1:13:48money was not transferred at that time

1:13:50from ambulance receipts to the operating

1:13:52budget. So this this basically just

1:13:55cleans up the money actually being

1:13:57allowed to be transferred for that

1:13:58purpose. So it was approved along the

1:14:00way in all the steps. This just moves

1:14:02the money.

1:14:03>> Okay. So town meeting did not vote to

1:14:06move the money previously.

1:14:07>> Correct.

1:14:07>> Okay. Thank you.

1:14:11>> Okay. Any other questions?

1:14:14Do I hear a motion?

1:14:15>> I'll make a motion that we recommend

1:14:17approval by town meeting.

1:14:20>> I'll second.

1:14:21>> So, you have a motion to recommend

1:14:22approval. Um, all in favor?

1:14:24>> I opposed.

1:14:27All set.

1:14:30Next, we have article three. Previous

1:14:32town meeting will vote to appropriate

1:14:34$150,000

1:14:36from stabilization free cash or finan or

1:14:39uh financed and paid in fiscal 2027 to

1:14:42fund a portion of the replacement of the

1:14:44allpurpose field at Auburn High School

1:14:46or to act on anything relative there

1:14:48too. Um may I ask a question? And it's

1:14:52when we um are we going to have an

1:14:53amendment on the floor that specifies

1:14:56where the money is going to come from

1:14:57instead of the uh the choices here. I

1:15:01believe that before this is printed that

1:15:04there's going that the choice is going

1:15:06to be on here because I believe legal

1:15:08counsel said that we have to we have to

1:15:11choose a funding source.

1:15:12>> Okay.

1:15:13>> Yeah. So, I um I kind of have a concern

1:15:17with us voting a recommendation

1:15:21that includes three different options

1:15:23and then someone else deciding what one

1:15:24of those options are for us.

1:15:27>> Um I do note that in your spreadsheet

1:15:29that you provided to us at following the

1:15:31last meeting and I believe finance

1:15:33committee saw this as well. Um you're

1:15:36slating borrowing for the $150,000 on

1:15:39the spreadsheet for this.

1:15:40>> Correct.

1:15:42Are we expecting I mean interest rates

1:15:44are pretty high right now. Does it just

1:15:48from my own personal opinion we have

1:15:49over what 8 million in free cash. Does

1:15:54it not make more sense just to bite the

1:15:56bullet now pay the 150,000 out of free

1:15:59cash rather than paying interest and you

1:16:02know sort of delaying and paying more

1:16:03for that 150,000 than than we have. It's

1:16:06not like we don't have the reserves and

1:16:08free cash to do that now. I'm just

1:16:10wondering why we're borrowing.

1:16:12>> I believe that the recommendation for

1:16:14the borrowing would be that the um the

1:16:17other articles are CIP articles and

1:16:21those are also borrowing articles. So

1:16:22just to keep it consistent with um what

1:16:25the funding source was on the other

1:16:27articles for the all-purpose field,

1:16:31>> but those monies were already borrowed.

1:16:33We're just moving them, transferring

1:16:34them from one account to another. I

1:16:36believe

1:16:37>> they actually aren't wouldn't be

1:16:38borrowed until they're they're used. So

1:16:41they're at this point they're just

1:16:42authorized, but they're unissued.

1:16:53So we can make a recommendation

1:16:57um and we can specify the funding

1:17:00source.

1:17:02I just want to go back to so I'm going

1:17:04to jump ahead right now to article six

1:17:05where article six is uh school dep

1:17:09school department capital improvement

1:17:10budget we're shifting money from FY2024

1:17:13which was approved in May 2023 for the

1:17:17repurpose of 60,000 from the Auburn High

1:17:19School building rehab I believe that's

1:17:21leftover money from parking resurfacing

1:17:2340,000 from Auburn High School building

1:17:25rehab for the scoreboards that they've

1:17:27decided not to to utilize

1:17:31That's money we already have. That's not

1:17:33money that we haven't borrowed yet.

1:17:35>> We had to have we had to have borrowed

1:17:37against that 60,000 because that's the

1:17:39remainder of the money left in that

1:17:40account.

1:17:42So, we already borrowed that money. So,

1:17:44I'm again I will just go back to

1:17:47why are we borrowing these small

1:17:49amounts? Why are we paying interest on

1:17:51money when we have the reserves to do it

1:17:53now and we have extremely high reserves

1:17:55based on the DLS report? again, why are

1:17:58we going to be paying more money in the

1:18:00future if we have the money to pay it

1:18:02now?

1:18:05>> So, has that project been completed or

1:18:07is it still pending? The Auburn High

1:18:09School building rehab for uh parking

1:18:12resurfacing

1:18:14>> through the chair. Uh the school

1:18:16superintendent when he was before the

1:18:18finance committee last Wednesday stated

1:18:19that both the resurfacing the the

1:18:21resurfacing project has been completed.

1:18:24So that is a balance and then they opted

1:18:26not to move forward with the scoreboard.

1:18:29>> Um so that is what made that money

1:18:32available

1:18:34>> and so the if the resurfacing is

1:18:37complete then that means the money has

1:18:38already been borrowed. So the uh for the

1:18:42and then the school board the um

1:18:44scoreboards have we already borrowed

1:18:45that money?

1:18:48>> I do not believe that that's been

1:18:49borrowed.

1:18:54chair. If

1:18:57>> money was allocated or a project was

1:18:59approved, who just decides that we don't

1:19:02move forward?

1:19:04There was a need, it was presented,

1:19:06people said they wanted the scoreboards

1:19:08and now we're saying, "Well, we don't

1:19:10really need them. We want to use it for

1:19:11something else." Like,

1:19:12>> I've had this problem for many years.

1:19:14And again, reallocating money, it

1:19:18should, in my opinion, it should go back

1:19:21to free cash and then request new

1:19:23things, not just transfer between

1:19:25accounts. I know I've had this argument

1:19:27many times.

1:19:28>> So, the the fact that, oh, we need the

1:19:31money, so we just won't move forward

1:19:32with something then puts us in a

1:19:34position where we need an $8,000

1:19:36scoreboard later on.

1:19:38We shouldn't be seeing things come

1:19:39before us that are nice to haves in an

1:19:42economic condition where we're borrowing

1:19:46money to do things that we should be

1:19:47planning for well in the future. I mean,

1:19:50there's a lot of articles on here asking

1:19:52for money that are operational that I

1:19:55don't know if we've had that

1:19:57conversation about do we need to do this

1:19:59now or should it have been part of the

1:20:02original budget? And I know we're trying

1:20:04to keep under the two and a half, but

1:20:06this comes back to priorities, not just

1:20:08for the board, but for the whole town.

1:20:10>> We shouldn't be borrowing money that we

1:20:12have in there, and we shouldn't be

1:20:14spending money that we don't have for

1:20:16other things and nice to haves.

1:20:18>> So, in in a way, it seems like the uh

1:20:20scoreboards were just a placeholder just

1:20:23so they can maybe they could just change

1:20:25their mind later.

1:20:26>> Again, if if someone's making that

1:20:28decision, what is the process to say,

1:20:30well, we don't really need it. We had

1:20:32money allocated for the school bathrooms

1:20:34because we were told we needed it and

1:20:35then they were like, "Oh, never mind. We

1:20:37didn't really need it." You know, like I

1:20:39understand there's priorities on that,

1:20:40but once it's been funded, that means

1:20:42you have the commitment from town

1:20:44meeting and what is the process to say

1:20:47we no longer need this project and how

1:20:49do we know that people aren't asking for

1:20:53projects that aren't needed? like I feel

1:20:55like there needs to be more vetting, but

1:20:57us saying the scoreboard isn't needed

1:20:59anymore, I didn't say that. I don't know

1:21:02if anyone on this board.

1:21:03>> I mean, so again, going back to finance

1:21:05committee, um the superintendent um

1:21:10and the business manager did testify at

1:21:13finance committee on this very question

1:21:16that um that they had been a

1:21:19reassessment of the scoreboards and they

1:21:21did not need to be replaced. they're in

1:21:23fine working order and that's why

1:21:25they're allocate reallocating the money

1:21:27to this just to put that in the record

1:21:30just so we know. So it was the school

1:21:31department that made the decision that

1:21:33that they weren't needed um based on

1:21:35their their testimony. Um but I agree

1:21:38with Mr. chambers um as I have every

1:21:41time he's mentioned this that when

1:21:44projects come before us and they get

1:21:45funded by town meeting and the projects

1:21:48get finished and I know we had a close

1:21:52out of some accounts at this board's

1:21:54request because this board voted that

1:21:57those are not um for lack of a better

1:21:59term slush funds for departments to move

1:22:02around and sort of put towards other

1:22:04other um projects. You know, if if you

1:22:08are allocating $150,000

1:22:11for a parking lot and you only spend a

1:22:13hundred, that 50,000 after that project

1:22:16is done should be closed out. That

1:22:18account is closed out. That should go

1:22:19back to free cash. And then that's when

1:22:23a new project comes forward and we

1:22:25allocate that new project and town

1:22:26meeting is presented with this money is

1:22:30in free coming from free cash. It's not

1:22:32coming from this fund and this fund and

1:22:33this fund and this fund because there's

1:22:35there's no way to track now or or you

1:22:38would it's a herculean effort to track

1:22:42where all these funds are coming from,

1:22:43where all these funds what projects they

1:22:45were tied to, what projects are done,

1:22:48which ones are abandoned, which ones are

1:22:50half done.

1:22:52It's it's it's an extremely complicated

1:22:54way um to do this. And again, I'm not

1:23:00trying to throw anything out there, but

1:23:01but it seems like we're we're constantly

1:23:04with these funds, we're constantly

1:23:05playing the game, the carnival game

1:23:07where you have three cones, and as long

1:23:09as you're moving that fast enough, you

1:23:10can't find where the ball is. Um, it

1:23:13just makes it very hard for anybody who

1:23:14wants to sit down and follow our

1:23:16finances on a municipal level to do so

1:23:18in a very transparent way. So,

1:23:22I fully support the project. I know it's

1:23:26needed. Um, you know, the field, you

1:23:29know, based on testimony in other

1:23:31meetings, the field is considered a

1:23:33hazard to the athletes who are playing

1:23:35on it right now, especially the younger

1:23:36athletes. We need to replace this field.

1:23:39Fully supportive of doing that. I'm not

1:23:41supportive of the manner in which it's

1:23:45being pieced together. And again, I

1:23:46understand this is how we've always done

1:23:48it,

1:23:49but we need to stop doing it this way.

1:23:51this board previously said we need to

1:23:53stop doing it this way and we're still

1:23:54doing it this way. Um, number one.

1:23:57Number two, I'm not in favor of when we

1:24:00have even after you deduct everything

1:24:03you have here for free cash, we still

1:24:05have, you know,

1:24:08700 plus 7 million plus dollars in free

1:24:12cash. I'm not interested in playing in

1:24:15paying interest on $150,000,

1:24:18you know, loan when we have the money to

1:24:21pay for it. Now, it just does not make

1:24:22sense to me that we're going to pay

1:24:24interest to banks to borrow money that

1:24:26we already can pay for. So, if we're

1:24:30going back to article three, if we want

1:24:33to make a recommendation that it is

1:24:35comes out of free cash, I'm in favor of

1:24:37that. If we want to make a

1:24:39recommendation that comes out of

1:24:40stabilization, I'm in favor of that.

1:24:41However, I think stabilation

1:24:42stabilization requires a two-thirds vote

1:24:44at town meeting. Free cash is just a

1:24:46majority vote.

1:24:48I'm not in favor of making a

1:24:50recommendation in favor of article three

1:24:52if it's going to be borrowed.

1:24:54Can I ask real quick? So, I know because

1:24:56we were talking about article 6 and

1:24:58article 3 and I know the $60,000 wasn't

1:25:01um funds that had already been borrowed

1:25:04and was extra, but the 40,000 is

1:25:08something we would have to borrow,

1:25:09right? it was just appropriated, but we

1:25:11don't have that on hand. So, when we

1:25:14talk about 150 that potential borrowing

1:25:17for article 3, it really is 190 that

1:25:22we're talking about potentially

1:25:23borrowing. Is that accurate?

1:25:26>> You know for certain the 40,000 was

1:25:28never borrowed for the field for the

1:25:30scoreboards?

1:25:32>> I do not know 100% for sure.

1:25:34>> And also 150 repurposing from another

1:25:37project. So, like those are all borrowed

1:25:39funds. So, we're

1:25:40>> we're borrowing funds to pay for things

1:25:43that we have funds for.

1:25:45And again, it's it's four articles to

1:25:48get fields that the kids need is is

1:25:51ridiculous.

1:25:52>> And I know that that for that 150,000,

1:25:55again, going back to the finance

1:25:56committee, um the DPW stepped in and did

1:26:00the work at Binmar um building parking

1:26:03lot and they completed that work. So I

1:26:05don't know if 150,000 is remaining in

1:26:07that budget after paying for DPWs,

1:26:10you know, resources, equipment that, you

1:26:12know, materials to do that work. So that

1:26:15could have very well already been

1:26:16borrowed already as well. And that's a

1:26:19leftover balance from that work because

1:26:21rather than going out to bid, we once

1:26:22again asked DPW to do work. They do

1:26:25great work. Again, going back to Camp

1:26:27Gleason, they do great work, but we

1:26:29distract them with all this other stuff

1:26:30that they can't get their own critical

1:26:31work done. and I'm up here beating them

1:26:33up for not doing their work when

1:26:34everyone was pulling them in other

1:26:36directions.

1:26:38>> But I'll get off my soap box now.

1:26:40>> So, if we want to go back to article

1:26:42three, so it's not clear. We've heard

1:26:45that there will be a motion for

1:26:47borrowing. I don't feel we should vote

1:26:49on this or make a recommendation because

1:26:51it one it's not stated properly and two

1:26:53the other concerns. So, I think we take

1:26:56no action at this point. Um, and

1:26:58anything that's not clear, I think we

1:26:59make it clear that we take no action on.

1:27:02So that's

1:27:03>> we can make a motion that specifies the

1:27:05the funding source.

1:27:07>> But when we get up there and say per our

1:27:09recommendation, we vote in favor. Yeah.

1:27:12>> The the chair reads a report that says

1:27:14we're in favor of these articles. It

1:27:16doesn't say we're in favor of these

1:27:17articles if you specify the funding.

1:27:21>> But my understanding is is they have to

1:27:23specify the funding before the books are

1:27:25>> right. They don't have to take our

1:27:27recommendation and I'm not going to vote

1:27:29on it knowing that they can.

1:27:31>> So the proponent of this is the Auburn

1:27:32school committee. They have to change.

1:27:34They have to make their recommendation

1:27:36on which fun which funding source. I'm

1:27:38not in favor of voting no recommendation

1:27:40at this time. We meet again before we

1:27:42get to town meeting. I rather hold

1:27:45articles three, four,

1:27:49is it three, four, and

1:27:51>> six?

1:27:51>> Six.

1:27:53um until we have that answer and and and

1:27:56the the answers that I'm looking for and

1:27:59only speaking for myself is which

1:28:01mechanism are you using to pay for

1:28:03article 3? The 150,000 that's identified

1:28:06in article 4, has that already been

1:28:07borrowed? Is it cash in the bank

1:28:09already? Uh the uh 60,000 we already

1:28:13know. The 40,000 that's in article 6, is

1:28:15that already been borrowed? Is it cash

1:28:17in the bank already?

1:28:22Um I if if we're going to do that, I

1:28:24would also look at article five, which

1:28:26says that we're going to vote to raise

1:28:28and appropriate $70,000 while this um

1:28:32the intent is to take it out of

1:28:34stabilization uh free cash.

1:28:37So we don't need to raise and

1:28:38appropriate $70,000 because that will uh

1:28:41>> it's already been raised appropriate.

1:28:42Yeah.

1:28:43>> Yeah. You know, yeah,

1:28:44>> already raised it.

1:28:44>> Um I do want to make one note though. Um

1:28:47and I understand what you're saying, Mr.

1:28:49cream. Um, sometimes projects do come in

1:28:52um cheaper than the request for various

1:28:56reasons. So there there are legitimate

1:28:58reasons for um money being left over in

1:29:02an article from a uh from a previous

1:29:04meeting.

1:29:05>> I I'm not I'm not saying there's not

1:29:06legitimate reasons. I agree there's

1:29:08legitimate reasons. We're just saying

1:29:09that when the project is closed out and

1:29:11there's extra money left over, it should

1:29:13go into free cash.

1:29:14>> Okay.

1:29:14>> Not be just kept into account.

1:29:16>> Gotcha. So Karen, I I have a question.

1:29:19We haven't closed out any um warrant

1:29:24articles to to free cash in a long time.

1:29:27I thought that used to be done annually,

1:29:30you know, where where you go through and

1:29:32you say, "Okay, from fiscal 2020,

1:29:36there was an article for $70,000 for X,

1:29:39Y, and Z, and that the intent of the

1:29:41article is satisfied, and there's 15,000

1:29:44left over. So, we would vote to close

1:29:46that to free cash. Aren't we supposed to

1:29:49be doing that on an annual basis?

1:29:51>> I I do that on an annual basis. I look

1:29:53through and if an article is or if the

1:29:56project is done, then I don't then the

1:29:58funds aren't carried over and they do go

1:30:00to free cash. It doesn't require a vote

1:30:02to close it.

1:30:03>> Okay. All right.

1:30:06And through the chair, if I could just

1:30:07make a a comment on article five. I I

1:30:10did bring that up when it went to the um

1:30:12finance committee as well that it should

1:30:14not say vote to raise and appropriate

1:30:16that it should say to appropriate from

1:30:18free cash.

1:30:19>> Yeah. Um

1:30:22yeah, this article this warrant missed

1:30:24an edit.

1:30:26>> Um so um articles article three. Do I

1:30:32hear a motion? Make a motion to hold it

1:30:34till our next meeting.

1:30:35>> I'll second it. So you have the a motion

1:30:38to hold article 3 to our next meeting

1:30:40which will be

1:30:41>> Okay. Um

1:30:44so we'll get printed with a hold on it.

1:30:47Um all in favor

1:30:48>> I opposed. No. All right. How about do I

1:30:51hear a motion to take articles four,

1:30:54five, and six together?

1:30:55>> I'll make a mo I'll make that motion to

1:30:57take the all three together.

1:30:59>> Second. So, we have a motion to take

1:31:01articles four, five, and six together.

1:31:03All in favor? I opposed.

1:31:06And do I hear a motion on those three

1:31:08articles?

1:31:08>> I'll make a motion to hold those

1:31:09articles until our next meeting.

1:31:11>> I'll second. So, I have a motion to hold

1:31:13the articles till our next meeting. All

1:31:15in favor?

1:31:16>> I

1:31:16>> I opposed. No.

1:31:19>> Through the chair.

1:31:20>> Yep.

1:31:20>> Um I heard the questions uh that Mr.

1:31:23Kraine asked uh relative to article 3

1:31:27and the borrowing. Um, are there any

1:31:29other questions that the board has

1:31:30before we forward this off to the school

1:31:32department uh for answers?

1:31:36>> Again, just on that, being that it's

1:31:39printed, we have to specify what it is

1:31:43we're voting for and the readout from

1:31:46the chair should state that we recommend

1:31:49it should it be approved for whatever

1:31:52funding source we agree on. anytime

1:31:55there's variability and it's not printed

1:31:58in the article, I think we need to make

1:32:00clear in in our board's readout to town

1:32:05meeting. Um, so again, typically we just

1:32:08say, "Yeah, we voted to whatever we

1:32:12ended up voting." So I think we need to

1:32:13make sure that there's additional

1:32:15context behind that.

1:32:17Um, and it was it was funding sources

1:32:20and whether the money has already been

1:32:24removed or um

1:32:28borrowed for some of those articles. So,

1:32:30we just want to make sure we know each

1:32:32funding source whether it's borrowed

1:32:33already or it was just approved.

1:32:37>> We'll get that off to the school

1:32:38department in the morning. And and I

1:32:40believe um if I can ask Karen, once we

1:32:43borrow the money, don't we have a time

1:32:44limit um on spending it because we're

1:32:47not allowed to make um to earn money of

1:32:51interest on it, right?

1:32:52>> That is correct.

1:32:54>> So what's the time limit?

1:32:56>> I believe that there's a pay down like

1:32:5825% and then 50 and then 75% and then

1:33:02the project should be completed.

1:33:04>> Okay.

1:33:05>> All right. And

1:33:07>> then the other thing anything pertaining

1:33:08to that one field like we should know

1:33:11the total cost of the field and whatever

1:33:14the funding sources are as well. I think

1:33:17again having

1:33:19400 plus thousand out there. We should

1:33:22be clear on that the field isn't free

1:33:25and it's not 150 or 150 or 70 or

1:33:29>> 40 or 60.

1:33:30>> Yep. Um we don't have anyone from school

1:33:33committee here tonight, do we? Nope. All

1:33:36right. So, um, continuing article seven

1:33:39to see if Tommy will vote to appropriate

1:33:41$75,000 from free cash to fund a new or

1:33:45updated economic development strategic

1:33:47plan or act on anything relative there

1:33:50too.

1:33:52U Mr. Delquilla, do you want to tell us

1:33:53about this?

1:33:55>> Sure. Absolutely, Madam Chair. So um

1:33:57this item is uh is to update or proposes

1:34:01to update our economic development

1:34:02strategic plan. Uh is a priority of this

1:34:05board and of the town manager to focus

1:34:07on economic development. Uh that's part

1:34:09of why I'm here and that's part of why

1:34:12we're looking to fill another staff

1:34:13position as well. Uh as I said this plan

1:34:15was done in 2016 2017 is when it was

1:34:18approved. uh going through the items

1:34:20there were uh multiple recommendations

1:34:24uh recommending some zoning changes

1:34:26which are accomplished uh talking about

1:34:28permitting process that we have

1:34:30instituted an electronic permitting

1:34:31process since then and are also

1:34:33currently engaged in a project with

1:34:34CMRPC to uh create a permitting guide

1:34:38that covers a lot of this. Uh the plan

1:34:41called for progress on uh on the single

1:34:44tax rate which again has been happening

1:34:45steadily over the last decade. uh talked

1:34:48about expanding housing opportunities.

1:34:50We've seen ADUs come in. Uh we've been

1:34:52dealing we're trying to we'll we'll talk

1:34:53about later, but we're proposing an

1:34:55inclusionary zoning bylaw as well. So,

1:34:58uh the guess the the the point I'm

1:35:00trying to make is that many of the items

1:35:02that were outlined in that plan done 10

1:35:04years ago have already been

1:35:05accomplished. Of course, they need to be

1:35:08maintained. Uh but at the same time,

1:35:10this was done in a pre-COVID world. Uh

1:35:12things have changed. One thing that was

1:35:14not accomplished during uh that the plan

1:35:16called for was making Auburn a biore

1:35:18ready community. At the time I uh

1:35:20looking at the context of the plan uh

1:35:23given Massachusetts strong positioning

1:35:26and research in biomed uh my hunch is

1:35:30that was uh trying to capitalize on that

1:35:31given the proximity to Worcester. As

1:35:33we've seen over the last couple years a

1:35:35lot of lab space was built and a lot of

1:35:37that lab space that's not in Cambridge

1:35:39is still uh kind of unoccupied. So

1:35:42that's an example of something that

1:35:43might be a worthy goal, but it's not nec

1:35:45maybe not be a priority today after the

1:35:48old plan. So uh this plan would aim to

1:35:51uh engage a consultant would work in

1:35:53conjunction with the EDC and town staff

1:35:57uh to go through a you know hopefully a

1:35:59robust public process. Obviously the

1:36:01Auburn Chamber would be a part of that,

1:36:02the business community would be part of

1:36:04that. Uh, and there'd be, you know,

1:36:06can't predict what we're doing yet, but

1:36:07there would certainly be a number of

1:36:09public input opportunities.

1:36:13Happy to try to answer any questions,

1:36:15but as I said, we don't really have a

1:36:17plan before us yet, but we'd like to

1:36:19proceed with that plan. And we'd all,

1:36:20one thing I should mention as well, we

1:36:22would also plan to be applying for uh

1:36:25various grants through the the state

1:36:27programs that are offered. Those usually

1:36:29tend to open up in in the spring. So if

1:36:31we were to receive uh successfully apply

1:36:33for some of those grants and receive

1:36:34them, it would uh what do I want to say?

1:36:37It would be in lie of spending that full

1:36:40amount of funding.

1:36:43>> And did you say the previous um or the

1:36:46current plan we have now was created in

1:36:472017?

1:36:48>> It was it was finalized in 2017. Work

1:36:51began on in 2016.

1:36:52>> Okay.

1:36:54Thank you

1:36:55>> for the chair. So, I I heard a lot and

1:36:58I'm excited about the opportunities. The

1:37:01only thing in there that I heard that

1:37:03costs money is a consultant.

1:37:06>> 75,000 strictly for consulting. What

1:37:08What does that look like? What do we get

1:37:10for $75,000?

1:37:12When we have an economic development

1:37:15department,

1:37:17what what do you guys need support in

1:37:20besides hiring somebody? What are they

1:37:22specifically going to do for us? Well,

1:37:24we've not crafted an RFP yet, but it

1:37:26would be if it's similar to other

1:37:28projects I've worked on before, it would

1:37:30be to engage the consultant who would

1:37:32then also uh be involved with various

1:37:35forms of data collection, do the public

1:37:38outreach for a lot of this in

1:37:39conjunction with town staff. But these

1:37:42if you're doing a worthwhile plan, um

1:37:45you do need to have a dedicated person

1:37:48to do this, whether it's a staff person

1:37:50or a consultant. And so this proposal is

1:37:53for uh to be an engaged consulting or

1:37:55consulting firm to do that. So they

1:37:58would do uh they would be involved at

1:38:00the beginning of the project. They would

1:38:02help uh lead the process. They would be

1:38:04engaging with town staff. They'd be

1:38:06engaging with the community conducting

1:38:08interviews, research, bringing us back

1:38:11best practices from other places, things

1:38:13of that nature. So, does their fee

1:38:17deliver us a product at the end, a

1:38:20finished updated plan is what we're

1:38:22paying for.

1:38:23>> Correct. I mean, so generally how this

1:38:25thing would work in the RFP, we'd list

1:38:27what we'd want to see and that would be

1:38:28developed in conjunction with staff in

1:38:30the EDC, but it would outline what we

1:38:32expect to see from the plan. It's not

1:38:34going to be a straight up, let's just

1:38:36update the dates on the one we just did.

1:38:38it would kind of be a a you know since

1:38:42so much has already been accomplished to

1:38:43see where we are today and where we can

1:38:44build on from there. So it would the

1:38:46soup to nuts that would pay for the

1:38:48process to get that plan

1:38:53developed

1:38:55vetted and approved.

1:38:59>> Thank you. So this again this my comment

1:39:03is relative to several others. So, I

1:39:05know this is a strategic priority for us

1:39:08as a board, but I also know we're a

1:39:10million dollars off of what we budgeted.

1:39:13So, I don't know if this is one of those

1:39:14things we wait until um the annual town

1:39:18meeting and not special town meeting. I

1:39:20don't know if this is going to buy us

1:39:22enough time for that. I don't know if

1:39:24we're even ready for that. But knowing

1:39:26that we have

1:39:29188,000

1:39:30in the next few articles, I think as a

1:39:34board we should be thinking about where

1:39:35the priorities truly lie and if we

1:39:37should be spending this money when we're

1:39:39asking for almost a million dollars in

1:39:42article two.

1:39:45>> So can I just jump in and ask a

1:39:47question? Um,

1:39:51are there grants on the state and

1:39:54federal level that or or certain um

1:39:58ability to take advantage of mass

1:39:59general laws or CMRs um that put us in a

1:40:02more favorable development process if we

1:40:05have an updated economic development

1:40:07strategic plan if certain initiatives

1:40:09that we want to advance are are are

1:40:12directly referenced to an economic

1:40:14development strategic plan.

1:40:16>> Absolutely. And maybe I should have hit

1:40:17that point a bit harder during my

1:40:19initial comments, but that's another

1:40:21aspect to this. It kind of functions as

1:40:23a two-level marketing document as well.

1:40:27Marketing in the sense of by labeling

1:40:29and setting our priorities in the plan,

1:40:31uh we can then when we go after these

1:40:33various grant programs, we can point to

1:40:35that and demonstrate that there's a will

1:40:36in the community for it. Also, the plan

1:40:39would stand alone. So if there's a, you

1:40:40know, a an interested developer out

1:40:42there, they would know what our

1:40:44priorities are and might make Auburn

1:40:47more attractive if they see that they

1:40:48they comport with what the plan is

1:40:50outlining.

1:40:55So for for that reason, I'm in favor of

1:40:58moving this one forward um with respect

1:41:02to again moving the town forward to

1:41:04achieve some of our economic development

1:41:06goals that we've all spent a lot of time

1:41:08talking about but have not made

1:41:10significant progress on.

1:41:15>> I would agree with that. Does anyone

1:41:18have a motion to make?

1:41:19>> I'll make a motion that we recommend

1:41:20approval. I'll second. So,

1:41:23>> we have a motion to recommend approval

1:41:24on article 7. All in favor?

1:41:27>> I

1:41:27>> I oppose.

1:41:29>> I

1:41:30>> So, we've got a um a 3-1.

1:41:34All right. Article 8 to see if town

1:41:37meeting will vote to appropriate a sum

1:41:39of funds from free cash to the town OPEP

1:41:43trust or act on anything relative there

1:41:45too. I I don't understand why there's no

1:41:49number in here.

1:41:51through the chair. The um town

1:41:53administration is recommending $150,000

1:41:57>> to the OPED from free cash.

1:42:00>> Yeah.

1:42:01>> So, is that going to be inserted in the

1:42:02language here? Take out some of funds

1:42:04and put in 150,000 before this gets

1:42:06>> It will be. Yes.

1:42:08So, we can um

1:42:10>> Okay.

1:42:10>> We can make that part of our motion.

1:42:13>> So, can I just ask a a related question,

1:42:17but not specifically to the 150,000?

1:42:20What's our current um who manages the

1:42:23OPED trust fund right now?

1:42:26>> It is managed by Bartholomew manages our

1:42:29trust funds.

1:42:30>> So we don't have an OPED trust fund

1:42:33oversight committee like some other

1:42:35municipalities have with that's made up

1:42:37of members of finance committee

1:42:39residents who have a background in

1:42:41finance that that work with our

1:42:44consultant or or our finance company to

1:42:47to to

1:42:49maximize that. We just trust Bartholomew

1:42:51to go and do it.

1:42:52>> That's correct. The the treasurer

1:42:54collector is the um is the trustee for

1:42:58the trust.

1:42:59>> Okay.

1:43:00>> Um and do we know um where we are with

1:43:04respect to meeting our oped sort of

1:43:08100%, you know, funding that trust and

1:43:11meeting that that OPED requirement. Do

1:43:13we know where we are with that?

1:43:16Um, I believe that the last time that I

1:43:19looked at it, um, I'm I'm not I'm not

1:43:21sure. Let me get you a percentage. Yes.

1:43:23>> Okay. Thank you.

1:43:24>> Could you also provide us with the, um,

1:43:27current balance and the amounts over the

1:43:29last six years and what we've put in

1:43:32each of those six years?

1:43:33>> Sure.

1:43:34>> Okay. Thank you.

1:43:36>> I think we usually put more than

1:43:37150,000. That's why I'm just curious.

1:43:40>> We have in previous years.

1:43:41>> Yeah.

1:43:42>> Yes.

1:43:42>> All right. So, do I hear a motion on

1:43:45article 10?

1:43:46>> I will make a motion that we approve uh

1:43:50the $150,000

1:43:52amount from free cash into the town's

1:43:54OPED trust.

1:43:55>> A second.

1:43:57>> Okay, we have a motion, a second. All in

1:43:59favor?

1:43:59>> I opposed.

1:44:01>> No.

1:44:02>> No. Yes. I

1:44:04>> opposed. Okay.

1:44:05>> No. And in the comment too, you guys

1:44:07just asked questions. You don't have

1:44:08answers and you decided to move forward

1:44:10on it. It should have been a hold in my

1:44:12opinion. Mhm.

1:44:13>> So,

1:44:13>> well, just to clarify, my the the one

1:44:16answer with this direct one is the

1:44:17150,000. Everything else is sort of a

1:44:20unrelated 150,000 on in terms of OPEDs

1:44:23in general that I you know spoiler alert

1:44:26I do plan to ask to come onto agenda in

1:44:28the in the future um where we take a a

1:44:32deeper look at our OPED trust fund uh

1:44:34who's managing it and and look to uh get

1:44:38more um input through an OPED trust uh

1:44:43committee. And I I believe the chair

1:44:46made a comment that we typically put

1:44:47more money in and that just shows that

1:44:49we are in a position where we need to

1:44:51think about our funding because we're

1:44:53reducing the amount of liability or

1:44:57funding for this and we're using it

1:44:59elsewhere because someone made the

1:45:01decision we don't have enough to

1:45:03continue to fund that at the 500 or

1:45:05300,000 that we have in the last few

1:45:07years. Can I can I just ask

1:45:09clarification on that because I believe

1:45:11the current financial policy again DLS

1:45:14recommends we dig deeper into those is

1:45:17that this equals a certain percentage of

1:45:19our free cash from the from the previous

1:45:22year. Correct. That we that we dedicate

1:45:24a certain amount a certain percentage of

1:45:26our free cash left over from the

1:45:28previous year into oped and then a

1:45:30certain amount into stabilization. I do

1:45:32not believe that our policies have a

1:45:34certain percentage, but our policies do

1:45:37say that we're um that we could use 50%

1:45:41of what's being added to free cash. Now,

1:45:44with these, this would probably be close

1:45:46to 100% of what we're adding. So, we are

1:45:50going over and above the policies.

1:45:53That's why the amount is being slightly

1:45:56reduced at this time. So what you're

1:45:58saying is that our our policy through

1:46:01the years has been that any of the the

1:46:03the new free cash we can use 50% for our

1:46:07articles and other other um

1:46:10contributions. The other 50% would stay

1:46:12in free cash to savings. Okay,

1:46:14>> that's correct.

1:46:15>> Not just OPED, it's the article that

1:46:18like that's it's 50% of new growth in

1:46:21there. And again, there is a need that

1:46:22we've had to reduce it because our

1:46:24spending continues to go up. It's 50% of

1:46:27the free cash

1:46:28>> of the of the free cash left over from

1:46:30the certified free cash from the last

1:46:32fiscal year is how it's been

1:46:33>> and and we're not currently following

1:46:35policy as we're at 100%. So that's a

1:46:38problem. So we shouldn't be approving

1:46:40new things when we're outside the policy

1:46:42>> or existing polic.

1:46:43>> I agree because I don't like to see us

1:46:45rating free cash because that'll be gone

1:46:47before we can uh we need to act we need

1:46:50to come up with a plan before the next

1:46:52town meeting.

1:46:53>> Yes. Do do you remember how much we put

1:46:55in last year for OPEs? I thought it was

1:46:57less than 150

1:46:59>> and to OPED I I thought it was 250.

1:47:02>> It was 250 last year to free to ops last

1:47:04year.

1:47:05>> Yeah. Okay.

1:47:05>> I think it was 100 for stabilization.

1:47:07>> That's what it was. Okay. So it was the

1:47:09difference and and we're splitting them

1:47:11in half this time.

1:47:12>> That's correct.

1:47:14>> And has continued for the last few

1:47:16years. Again, four years ago, I know it

1:47:17was 500. I believe three years ago it

1:47:19was 500.

1:47:21Well, our our free cash has decreased,

1:47:23too.

1:47:23>> Yeah. Oh, significantly.

1:47:25>> Absolutely.

1:47:26>> All right. So, article nine

1:47:29to see if the town meeting will vote to

1:47:32appropriate. It says a sum of funds, but

1:47:35our our memo says $150,000 from free

1:47:38cash to the town stabilization fund or

1:47:41act on anything relative there, too.

1:47:48>> Do I hear a motion? I I I got a

1:47:51question. Why Why move it into

1:47:53stabilization rather than just keep it

1:47:54in free cash? Considering that you to to

1:47:58to use it to take it out of

1:48:00stabilization as a two-thirds voted town

1:48:01meeting, why not keep it in free cash

1:48:04where it's a majority voted town

1:48:05meeting, seeing as though they're using

1:48:07being used interchangeably to fund this

1:48:11item or this item?

1:48:13because I I I do believe also last year

1:48:15and I think it it it might have been on

1:48:18your recommendation as well for us to

1:48:20put a little bit more into stabilization

1:48:22than what we were recommending. That's

1:48:24why we're recommending to to split it

1:48:26between the two and also because of the

1:48:29fact that it does take the two/3s, it

1:48:31does take, you know, more than just a

1:48:33majority to take the funds out of there.

1:48:36So, we're we're kind of showing that

1:48:37we're making the commitment to to put it

1:48:39into stabilization and to keep it there

1:48:42until we need something that would, you

1:48:44know, cause us to to vote or town

1:48:47meeting to vote with the two/3,

1:48:51>> which if you've been at town meeting,

1:48:53you know, most of them are more than 2/3

1:48:56vote. So, I don't think it

1:48:58>> from our standpoint, it's probably

1:48:59interchangeable. But I understand when

1:49:02we get into tighter situations, we're

1:49:04gonna want people to actually weigh in

1:49:07on this because we are heading we're in

1:49:10good conditions now, but we're heading

1:49:12in a path where we won't be. And there's

1:49:14going to be a lot more arguments about

1:49:15where the every dollar goes.

1:49:17>> I wanted that clarification on the

1:49:19record. Thank you.

1:49:21>> Okay. Do I hear a motion?

1:49:22>> So, I'll make a motion that we approve

1:49:25Warrant Article 9 in the amount of

1:49:27$150,000.

1:49:29>> You vote. You mean recommend?

1:49:30>> Yeah, recommend approval.

1:49:32>> I'll second.

1:49:34>> Okay, we have a motion and a second. All

1:49:36in favor?

1:49:37>> I opposed.

1:49:38>> I

1:49:40>> All right. Article 10 to see if Tammy

1:49:42and vote to appropriate $70,000 from

1:49:45stabilization or free cash to fund a

1:49:47staffing study for the town of Auburn or

1:49:50act on anything relative there, too.

1:49:53>> So, I I just have a question. Um, in

1:49:55terms of the scope of this of this

1:49:57study, um, I know this is one of our

1:50:00priorities from the from the select

1:50:02board, one of the recommendations coming

1:50:05out of the DLS report is not just a

1:50:07staffing study, but actually to update

1:50:09all of the job descriptions

1:50:11um, and look at the salary ranges for

1:50:15each one. Is the scope of this going to

1:50:17include a a uh clarification and update

1:50:21of all job descriptions? Um or is it

1:50:25just simply whether the departments are

1:50:27are are appropriately staffed?

1:50:31Do we know?

1:50:32>> Yeah. Through the chair. Uh so this

1:50:34study would include uh the staffing

1:50:36study, the job descriptions. What it

1:50:38does not include is compensation. This

1:50:40is not a compensation study, but it is a

1:50:42review of the descriptions and the

1:50:44staff.

1:50:44>> Okay. So we'll get all all all of the

1:50:47job descriptions will be updated and

1:50:49brought up to Okay. And I'm can I verify

1:50:53that this does not include the schools?

1:50:55>> This does not include the schools. That

1:50:57is correct.

1:50:58>> Through the chair,

1:51:00>> does it talk about processes and then

1:51:04and potential upgrades in services?

1:51:08Again, just staffing our current

1:51:10processes are broken in many areas. I'm

1:51:13not saying all, but in many areas. So,

1:51:15we don't know what it is. So while a

1:51:17process might be very inefficient now

1:51:20and they they recommend four people, it

1:51:23could be done with one person with the

1:51:25right process in place and and that's my

1:51:27concern again. What are we getting out

1:51:29of this? If if it's a job description

1:51:32and say we need more like I I where's

1:51:35the process review? Are we getting a

1:51:37process review in this to understand

1:51:40that we're inefficient or we are very

1:51:43efficient and we need more headcount or

1:51:46what that looks like.

1:51:47>> And just to go back when we voted and

1:51:49discussed this as one of our priorities,

1:51:51that was the main one of the two main

1:51:54main uh points that we were looking for

1:51:56in a staffing study.

1:51:58>> Correct. And I don't I want to make sure

1:51:59it's in there and I don't know.

1:52:01>> So through the chair, I'm just looking

1:52:03at the town manager's note. So um the

1:52:06study would include current and

1:52:07historical organizational structure

1:52:11um including the staffing levels. So the

1:52:14organizational structure and we're doing

1:52:16something very similar in the treasur's

1:52:18office right now. It will look at the

1:52:19processes.

1:52:23>> Okay.

1:52:30Um I would prefer not to vote on this

1:52:33now because um while the amounts there

1:52:37it says stabilization or free cash.

1:52:44So, I will make a motion that we hold

1:52:45this until our next meeting so that uh

1:52:48it can be the wording can specify

1:52:51exactly which account this is coming out

1:52:53of because again I think in our

1:52:55spreadsheet it does that but the

1:52:56spreadsheet did not make it over to the

1:52:59actual uh warrants.

1:53:02>> I'll second.

1:53:04>> So, we have a motion and a second to

1:53:06what was it to hold

1:53:07>> to hold

1:53:08>> to hold this um warrant article until um

1:53:11our next meeting. All in favor?

1:53:14>> I

1:53:14>> I opposed.

1:53:18>> Next article is 11. To save town will

1:53:21vote to appropriate $80,000 from

1:53:23stabilization or free cash to fund a

1:53:26building study and an analysis for all

1:53:29town owned buildings or act on anything

1:53:31relative there too.

1:53:34So again, I know I mentioned last time

1:53:37when the town uh manager was here, um we

1:53:41did the HVAC study and stuff. I know she

1:53:44said it was deeper than that. I'd like

1:53:47to understand what deeper than that is.

1:53:49Is it plumbing and um structure itself?

1:53:53Like I I don't know what's the expected

1:53:55outcome is for this report. um except I

1:53:58know we have old buildings and is it to

1:54:01generate a potential capital improvement

1:54:05plan? Is that the idea behind that? So

1:54:08we can see where we're spending those

1:54:09monies. Is it building assessments to

1:54:11discuss future needs or you know end of

1:54:15life or rolling off some of the current

1:54:17properties just cuz they cost too much

1:54:18to maintain maintain? So I'd like to

1:54:21understand more of that

1:54:24>> through the chair. uh in conversation

1:54:26with the town manager. Um so this study

1:54:29would be uh headed up by Joe Fehee uh

1:54:32the former um head of the buildings at

1:54:35the school department. Uh we've been

1:54:37able to uh retain Mr. Fehee on a

1:54:39part-time basis. He's still doing some

1:54:41facility work for us. He organized the

1:54:43HVAC project. Uh so he would coordinate

1:54:46and uh this would allow a full analysis

1:54:49and reporting of all of the town owned

1:54:51buildings again with the exception of

1:54:52the schools. Um to include all

1:54:55electrical, mechanical, plumbing,

1:54:56structural condition um and then make

1:54:59some assumptions on continued you know

1:55:02use of life, how many how many more

1:55:04years we can get out of a building. So

1:55:06it would include all of those

1:55:07mechanicals that you just mentioned

1:55:09>> and and the deliverable will be a

1:55:11capital plan process 5 10 years whatever

1:55:15many years out.

1:55:16>> Yeah I think this this report will help

1:55:19town administration be able to better

1:55:22address the CIP the future CIP.

1:55:26And can I just confirm, I believe the

1:55:28town manager confirmed this last time,

1:55:30but just to clarify, this report will

1:55:33also include um identification of any

1:55:36ADA deficiencies and what is needed to

1:55:38>> that that is correct.

1:55:40>> Um

1:55:41>> this also says stabilization or free

1:55:43cash.

1:55:44>> Yeah, I would I would say we should hold

1:55:46it. May I also, if someone can make a

1:55:49note, article 10 and 11 should say um be

1:55:52amended to say a staffing study for the

1:55:54town of Auburn except schools.

1:55:56>> Okay.

1:55:57>> Okay. In both of those

1:55:59um do I hear a motion?

1:56:00>> I will make a motion to hold article 11.

1:56:04>> So, one moment.

1:56:06>> So, we're exempting things. We did a

1:56:09fire department staffing study not that

1:56:11long ago. Are there other departments

1:56:12that would be exempt from this? So I I

1:56:15can say that the the previous one that

1:56:17you addressed with the staffing study

1:56:18that would actually exclude the fire

1:56:20department.

1:56:21>> Are there other departments that would

1:56:23need to be excluded on that or other

1:56:25buildings?

1:56:28>> I guess we're going to hold these. I

1:56:30don't know if you can get those answers

1:56:31for the next meeting.

1:56:32>> Yeah,

1:56:33>> sure.

1:56:33>> Thank you.

1:56:34>> I will second that.

1:56:36>> So we have a motion to hold article 11.

1:56:38All in favor?

1:56:40>> I opposed. Right. Article 12 to see if

1:56:43the town meeting will vote to

1:56:45appropriate $35,000

1:56:47from free cash to fund a new police

1:56:49department phone system and all required

1:56:52equipment and services associated with

1:56:55the new phone system or act on anything

1:56:57relative there too.

1:57:00I know this is a big need over at the

1:57:02police department.

1:57:03>> It absolutely is. Then

1:57:05>> don't we have an account where these

1:57:07things should be getting done and has

1:57:10that work already started and is this

1:57:13just to clean up the books to transfer

1:57:15the money out of that? But we should

1:57:17have contingency money in there for

1:57:19emergencies such as this now in critical

1:57:21safety.

1:57:22>> You mean contingency within the police

1:57:24department

1:57:25>> or within the town budget to allow for

1:57:28these things? So instead of free cash,

1:57:30is there a an emergency fund that is

1:57:32funding this? because

1:57:34>> Mhm.

1:57:34>> we need to move forward on this and to

1:57:36me this is more administrative.

1:57:38>> That would be the reserve fund.

1:57:40>> Reserve fund. Sorry.

1:57:40>> Yeah. So, um Chief Mills, do you want to

1:57:42tell us have has have any articles been

1:57:45put forward or any requests been put

1:57:47forward to the reserve fund um to pay

1:57:49for any of this?

1:57:51>> Thank you. No. uh through the chair

1:57:53there. The town is from what I

1:57:56understand has undertaken a a townwide

1:57:58phone upgrade as far as the town

1:58:01buildings or town hall building for

1:58:02sure. Ours is I don't know if it's

1:58:06original, but it's it's 15 plus years

1:58:10old at a minimum. A lot of that cost in

1:58:13that article based on the quote that we

1:58:15got is just for infrastructure upgrades

1:58:17to accommodate the new phone system. Um,

1:58:20so that

1:58:22wasn't planned for because we weren't

1:58:24having phone issues. They weren't

1:58:26failing at the rate that they are

1:58:27failing. We we tried last fiscal year to

1:58:29purchase. Well, we did purchase a

1:58:32refurbished modem because we were told

1:58:33that that was probably going to be the

1:58:35fix for it. That didn't work. So, we

1:58:37bought an actual new modem for it. That

1:58:39didn't work. Uh, and they're they're

1:58:42failing on a fairly consistent basis.

1:58:45Um, sometimes related to power surges or

1:58:48or whatnot, weather. occasionally. Um,

1:58:50most of the staff knows how to reset the

1:58:52phone system now, so we stay up and

1:58:54running. There's only minimal delays. It

1:58:57It doesn't affect 911. That's just the

1:58:59business lines. So,

1:59:01>> so I guess I'm just going to I think I

1:59:04said this last time. I want to make sure

1:59:06that that whoever is doing the work for

1:59:09you is in the position that come October

1:59:1128th, there's no delay in these funds um

1:59:15getting allocated and and getting in

1:59:17process to make sure your phones are

1:59:19fully functional. Just to and again, I'm

1:59:21going to use the DLS report again uh you

1:59:24know because it is a gift that keeps on

1:59:25giving. Uh one of the uh main criticisms

1:59:29is that we have an extremely large

1:59:30finance committee reserve fund that we

1:59:33are regularly using um to uh supplement

1:59:37operational needs that should have been

1:59:39known and budgeted for appropriately.

1:59:41However, it specifically calls out

1:59:44something like this as as the exact

1:59:48purpose of why we do have that fund. Um

1:59:51and that that it you know that this is

1:59:53an emergency. This is something that is

1:59:55critical to our public safety

1:59:57operations. Um, and whether it was it's

2:00:00at the police station or whether it was

2:00:01at the fire station, this should be

2:00:02something that in my mind, uh, the

2:00:05administration should have brought to

2:00:07finance, got a vote as soon as possible

2:00:11from the reserve fund and, you know, and

2:00:15and started working on this for the

2:00:18police right away. Um I you know the

2:00:20fact that it's you know I don't know

2:00:23exactly when the phones started having

2:00:25problems but you filed this for the

2:00:28August date so it was at least two

2:00:30months ago maybe 3 months ago. Um it's a

2:00:33concern that we've gone you know we're

2:00:35going to go four or five months with

2:00:38phone issues at the police department

2:00:39that really should have been taken care

2:00:40of right away. Um it's, you know, it's

2:00:44it's a bad on all of us for letting that

2:00:45happen and I apologize that that

2:00:48happened.

2:00:49>> No apologies necessary. Again, it's uh

2:00:53wasn't known a year ago. I believe the

2:00:55first time we experienced the

2:00:56interruption or failure was in the

2:00:58spring, April, I want to say, and then

2:01:00it didn't happen. So, we thought it was

2:01:02just a one-off, and then it continued to

2:01:05happen more frequently.

2:01:09I'm going to vote to approve this

2:01:11>> to recommend

2:01:12>> to recommend approval. Yes.

2:01:14>> Is that your motion?

2:01:14>> That is my motion. So,

2:01:16>> I have a motion to recommend approval on

2:01:18article 12. All in favor?

2:01:20>> I

2:01:20>> I opposed.

2:01:22>> All right. Article 13, the town Thank

2:01:25you, Chief.

2:01:26>> To see if the town meeting will vote to

2:01:28appropriate $20,000 from stabilization

2:01:31or free cash to fund a roadway

2:01:33improvement software program.

2:01:36Um, do you want to tell us about this

2:01:38Joanna?

2:01:53>> Hi.

2:01:53>> Hello.

2:01:54>> Thank you. So, um I believe this is also

2:01:57one of uh the town manager's priorities.

2:01:59uh but we are looking to use um AI

2:02:04technology to um evaluate roads in

2:02:07looking at some of the packages. Um it

2:02:10gives us a lot of options um not only in

2:02:13um rating the roads but in um choosing

2:02:17uh treatment options CIP and as well as

2:02:21um having um a better idea a better

2:02:25inventory of other um things on the

2:02:28road. So, um, faded stop signs, miss,

2:02:32you know, what, um, faded street signs,

2:02:36um, that type of thing. So, it would

2:02:37get, um, help us to manage that

2:02:40inventory, um, and and stay ahead of,

2:02:43um, those items without, um, residents

2:02:46having to call in.

2:02:48>> Um, is this for software or program?

2:02:52>> It is. It's for software. So, there's

2:02:55there's a few options that we're

2:02:56currently evaluating. Y

2:02:59>> um there might be um there's software

2:03:03that you can um set up on your phone and

2:03:06your phone is collecting the data.

2:03:08There's um options where there's um

2:03:12equipment mounted to vehicles. So there

2:03:15we're just looking at the the best

2:03:17option for for Auburn.

2:03:19>> There be an annual fee to

2:03:21>> Yes.

2:03:22>> What would that be approximate? Um I

2:03:25believe that

2:03:27um it's it's a it's an annual fee. So it

2:03:30would be the same um if it was we

2:03:33approximated the um the fee to be 20,000

2:03:36but um whatever it is moving forward um

2:03:40it would be replicated.

2:03:42>> Okay. Thank you. Question

2:03:44>> 20,000 every year is

2:03:47>> Yes. Well, so this was a ballpark

2:03:51figure. Um, so if it's

2:03:54>> whatever the number is, it will be

2:03:56reoccurring and it will come at a cost.

2:03:58Is there training associated with this?

2:04:00Who will have it? How will we know that

2:04:02it's being used and is actually

2:04:04serviceable or provides that value?

2:04:07Again, I'm all for the technology to try

2:04:09it, but if we're not using it or using

2:04:11it appropriately, I certainly wouldn't

2:04:13want to continue paying for something

2:04:15that's not providing that value.

2:04:16>> No, absolutely. Um so um the the

2:04:21presentations that we've seen um it's

2:04:24user friendly. Um obviously there is

2:04:27input that we need to put in there um

2:04:29relative to um available funding that

2:04:32type of thing um so that we can actually

2:04:34use the um the planning um part of the

2:04:38the software. Um but it would be um we

2:04:43haven't been able to do a lot of

2:04:45research on this just because the person

2:04:47that is um co that would be using the

2:04:51software is also out on on um the

2:04:54roadway reconstruction sites currently.

2:04:56So he's doing a lot of uh roadway

2:04:58inspections right now. Um we're hoping

2:05:00that the roadway um reconstruction

2:05:03projects are going to slow down so that

2:05:04it'll allow us to um dive deeper into

2:05:07this. And

2:05:09>> who owns the data that's collected?

2:05:11>> We would own the data

2:05:12>> and it's inhouse or it's on a cloud

2:05:17server. Where where is that?

2:05:18>> It would be on the cloud server.

2:05:21But um the one the the one that we had

2:05:26um really taken a deeper dive into um we

2:05:31could work with um our other engineer

2:05:33who is uh very uh GIS savvy um and she

2:05:37would she would be able to um

2:05:40incorporate that into our GIS.

2:05:44>> Thank you.

2:05:45>> Yeah. So I just wanted to you know say

2:05:48I'm very happy to see this type of

2:05:49system come forward. I know it's

2:05:51something that I have asked for as well

2:05:52as others at town meeting. Um this is

2:05:55the exact system that everybody has been

2:05:58asking for to collect the data on our

2:06:00existing pavement condition index of our

2:06:02roadways. Um be able to manage it. Um

2:06:06all of these types of management systems

2:06:08have mapping where will actually map out

2:06:10your entire uh roadway network. It will

2:06:12give it ratings one from 100 based on

2:06:14federal standards. And then you can put

2:06:17in this year the town has given me $3

2:06:19million. What's the best way to allocate

2:06:21that money? And it will spit out your

2:06:23capital improvement. This road, this

2:06:25treatment, this road, this treatment,

2:06:26this road, this treatment. And it will I

2:06:28I think it will personally open up the

2:06:31amount of work and amount of treatments

2:06:32that we are finally utilizing to better

2:06:34maintain our infrastructure. $20,000, I

2:06:38can tell you, is is when it comes to

2:06:39this is not a lot of money. uh you know,

2:06:42given given the systems that I've had to

2:06:44manage for 22 years in public works, um

2:06:47it it's it's worth every penny to allow

2:06:51our pavement management system to get

2:06:54back to where we are all demanding it

2:06:56be, which is a better management of our

2:06:58infrastructure. Um I would just

2:07:00recommend that um the phone system is

2:07:05cheaper. However, you lose um in my own

2:07:09personal opinion, you lose a lot of the

2:07:11capability of the data. It gives you the

2:07:13pictures every 10 feet. Um and it

2:07:17analyzes AI using the pictures, but you

2:07:19lose the benefit of the LAR um that that

2:07:23the the systems that are mounted on top

2:07:24of the vehicle combine both the photos

2:07:27as well as the LAR, and it's a better

2:07:30PCI rating. You get a better data set

2:07:32out of it. Another thing that you can do

2:07:34with this stuff is is again we're all

2:07:36about transparency. You could take that

2:07:39map and link it to our website so that

2:07:42people regular residents can go and see

2:07:44not only where their street is is, you

2:07:47know, on their PCI condition, but they

2:07:49can actually look up the photos as well

2:07:50if you decide to do that on our website.

2:07:52So, it it opens up a better management

2:07:54and more professionally managed roadway

2:07:57system um than what we have now. And you

2:08:00know, if if we are up here, you know,

2:08:02asking every every meeting, you know,

2:08:05that that DPW uh professionally manage

2:08:08the streets and and get better at

2:08:09managing the streets and do better in

2:08:11managing the streets, we have to give

2:08:13them the tools to do it. Um $20,000 in

2:08:16my mind is worth that tool.

2:08:18>> So, so certainly in favor of the tools

2:08:21and technology, has there been analysis,

2:08:23will this help reduce the amount of

2:08:25man-hour needed to go out and assess

2:08:28things? Will this help in the budgeting

2:08:30process? I think after this it becomes

2:08:32an operating cost, right? It's one time

2:08:35capital and then the operating cost. Is

2:08:38that going to be able to fit within the

2:08:39budget asks? And again, when we talk

2:08:42about this, I'm all for it. I think it

2:08:44provides value and will improve the

2:08:46process, which is again something I've

2:08:48talked about. Improving that process

2:08:50should yield us some benefits on the

2:08:52back end. So whether it's freeing up

2:08:53labor, being more thorough or complete

2:08:55when we go out to bid so we're getting

2:08:57accurate pricing, those types of things,

2:08:59I'm all in favor of that technology in

2:09:01use. Just want to make sure we're again

2:09:04aware that this cost is going to be

2:09:05reoccurring through the operating budget

2:09:08for as many years as it's deemed useful.

2:09:13>> I will note that again this line item

2:09:16says stabilization or free cash. So, I'm

2:09:19going to recommend um a motion that we

2:09:22hold this until the next meeting.

2:09:24>> Second.

2:09:24>> So, we have a motion and a second to

2:09:26hold this uh article until our next

2:09:29meeting. All in favor?

2:09:30>> I opposed.

2:09:33All right, that's article 13. And so now

2:09:35we'll look at article 14

2:09:39which is to see if town meeting will

2:09:41vote to amend the Auburn zoning bylaws

2:09:44by adding a new section 14 inclusionary

2:09:47zoning as follows. I'm not going to read

2:09:50this. Um Paul, will you um can you give

2:09:54us the little

2:09:54>> Yeah, I can attempt to summarize that,

2:09:56Madam Chair. Um so this grew out of a

2:09:59couple different processes. that grew

2:10:01out of the housing production plan that

2:10:03was done in 2024 prior to me getting the

2:10:05town. Uh previous planner started

2:10:07working on this with the zoning bylaw

2:10:09committee and I picked up the baton

2:10:11along the way. We also had uh

2:10:13contributions from CMRPC on that. The

2:10:16goal of this u just to back up slightly

2:10:19uh as as folks are aware that the state

2:10:22requires that communities in

2:10:24Massachusetts have a 10% uh affordable

2:10:27housing inventory SHI. Uh currently as

2:10:30it stands today, Auburn is at 9.92%.

2:10:34So we are six or seven units depending

2:10:37how you run around the numbers. That's

2:10:38how many units we would need to reach

2:10:40the 10% threshold. Uh what that allows

2:10:42us to do, not only does it create

2:10:44theoretically more affordable housing,

2:10:46it also uh creates a situation where the

2:10:48town does not have to accept any hostile

2:10:5140b applications. Uh so this is one tool

2:10:54we can use to not only create hopefully

2:10:56some more affordable housing but also to

2:10:58get us incrementally those six units

2:11:00that we can uh add to our inventory to

2:11:04potentially avoid uh some other larger

2:11:06scale 40bs that we know have been uh you

2:11:09know controversial in town shall we say.

2:11:11Uh more specifically, this bylaw would

2:11:14apply to developments of greater than 10

2:11:17units and would require those such

2:11:20developments to create 15% affordable

2:11:24units. So in this case, a 10-unit

2:11:26development 1.5 is the number, but you

2:11:29round up. So you'd get two affordable

2:11:31units in a 10-unit development. Uh so

2:11:33you know in theory if we were to get a

2:11:34couple of those developments over the

2:11:36next year or two uh and get those

2:11:38affordable units we could kick us above

2:11:40the 10% threshold uh sooner than later.

2:11:43Uh that said is no guarantee anything

2:11:44will be created that under this bylaw

2:11:47necessarily. Um but it's just one tool

2:11:49we can have in our arsenal to address

2:11:52this issue.

2:11:55>> So it it can't be applied retroactively

2:11:57to a ve

2:11:58>> No correct madam chair. It can only

2:11:59apply to new applications coming in as

2:12:02of the adoption of the bylaw.

2:12:04>> Okay. Thank you. Questions.

2:12:10>> Not related to this. I I guess I'll

2:12:12>> um and I want to note the planning board

2:12:14um recommends this article.

2:12:19>> So there's no questions. I will uh make

2:12:22a motion that we recommend approval.

2:12:25>> A second.

2:12:26>> So we have a motion and a second to

2:12:28recommend approval. All in favor?

2:12:30>> I opposed.

2:12:34Recommended. All right.

2:12:38Next, we have article 15 to see if town

2:12:41meeting will vote to amend section 4.5

2:12:45regional mall overlay district

2:12:49uh RM district of the Auburn zoning

2:12:51bylaws in regard to height standards as

2:12:54follows.

2:12:55Um and and again, sir, can you Mr.

2:12:58Delola, can you tell us?

2:12:59>> Absolutely, Madam Chair. So, this

2:13:01actually grew out of our preliminary

2:13:03discussions with the ULI consultant team

2:13:05uh when they came be even before they

2:13:06came to town. Uh they had pointed out

2:13:09that there was a discrepancy or I don't

2:13:11want to say discrepancy but a potential

2:13:12contradiction in the the bylaw uh the

2:13:15zoning bylaw. Uh the as the board might

2:13:18be aware a couple years ago standards

2:13:21were changed to allow by special permit

2:13:23to go up to 80 to 100 ft in some places

2:13:26within the business districts in in

2:13:28town. However, uh while that passed and

2:13:31was embedded into the zoning, it did not

2:13:33account for the fact that the mall

2:13:35district, which was identified as the

2:13:37area you'd most like to see that height,

2:13:39was not did not qualify to be in there

2:13:41because of it was also in the regional

2:13:43mall overlay district, which actually

2:13:45limited the height to 35 ft in that

2:13:48zone. So, this proposal attempts to

2:13:50allow uh by again by special permit uh

2:13:54to allow a greater height in the mall

2:13:56area. The idea here is not just simply

2:14:00numbers in the zoning as we know we're

2:14:01trying to uh working in conjunction with

2:14:04the business community and the mall

2:14:05ownership to maximize the development

2:14:08potential of that property and obviously

2:14:10by having the potential for increased

2:14:12height in that area. It could make the

2:14:14site more attractive to development or

2:14:17redevelopment.

2:14:19>> Thank you.

2:14:20>> Understanding a lot of that area is

2:14:21wetlands. I'm sure intense engineering

2:14:24is going to be needed if they're going

2:14:26to increase height that much

2:14:28>> through the chair. I think that's

2:14:29probably true. Certainly in the northern

2:14:31part of the site, uh, which is I would

2:14:32call the reliant side of the site. Uh,

2:14:34there's a bit more opportunity we think

2:14:36in the southern part of the site, the

2:14:38quote unquote Sears part of the site.

2:14:40But indeed, this would, you know, no

2:14:41developer is going to propose something

2:14:42without doing the due diligence. But it

2:14:45just gives again it gives the town

2:14:46another tool to if we find the right

2:14:48type of project and they go through the

2:14:50approval process uh hopefully we could

2:14:52get something attractive and beneficial

2:14:54to the community.

2:14:56>> Thank you.

2:15:00>> I'll make a motion that we recommend

2:15:01approval.

2:15:02>> A second. So we have a motion to and a

2:15:05second to recommend approval. All in

2:15:06favor?

2:15:07>> I opposed.

2:15:10Okay. Article 16 is to see if the town

2:15:13will vote to authorize the select board

2:15:14to convey a certain non-exclusive

2:15:17permanent easement

2:15:20um

2:15:23to um un under under and across the

2:15:27town's interest in a portion of hard

2:15:28scrapple road. Okay. So I'm not going to

2:15:31read whole thing. It's as presented and

2:15:34um yeah. Hi Joanna.

2:15:36Please,

2:15:39it should note the plans are available

2:15:41for viewing in the town clerk's office.

2:15:45>> Hello again.

2:15:46>> Hi. So, uh through the chair, uh this

2:15:49easement is um for the area within the

2:15:54hard scrubber road right away in front

2:15:57of 15 hard scrubber road which is

2:15:59currently occupied by Cassella. Uh

2:16:01Cassella is um doing some uh storm water

2:16:06improvements. Um I believe that they're

2:16:08required um as part of their general

2:16:10permit to um improve their storm water

2:16:12infrastructure. Um they're increasing um

2:16:16treatment and um basically

2:16:20um upgrading their system. Um currently

2:16:24their overflow is tied into the uh the

2:16:27town's drainage system. Uh we do not

2:16:30allow this. Um we typically don't allow

2:16:34this unless um unless there's no other

2:16:36choice. Uh if there's um there's a

2:16:39possibility of water going into the

2:16:41roadway, obviously we would prefer it in

2:16:43the in our infrastructure than in the

2:16:45roadway. But um this would allow

2:16:48Cassella to um put pipes underneath our

2:16:52roadway. Um, and as part of that, there

2:16:55would be an agreement between Cassella

2:16:58and the town um that would allow um that

2:17:02would allow us to require them to make

2:17:05any improvements in within that

2:17:07easement. So, anything that happens with

2:17:09their infrastructure, we're not on the

2:17:12hook for fixing our road because of um

2:17:15deficiencies in their pipes.

2:17:18>> Okay. Thank you. Any questions?

2:17:20>> So, does this get attached to the deed?

2:17:21I know you mentioned Cassella, but it

2:17:23stays with the property. Correct. So,

2:17:25anyone who has interest in purchasing

2:17:26that would still have the same

2:17:28requirements.

2:17:29>> Correct.

2:17:32>> Any other questions?

2:17:36>> I will make a motion that we recommend

2:17:38approval.

2:17:39>> I'll second. We have a motion and a

2:17:41second to recommend approval. All in

2:17:42favor? I

2:17:44>> opposed.

2:17:46Article 17 is see if a town meeting will

2:17:49vote to fund from ambulance receipts the

2:17:51following items for the fire rescue

2:17:53department or act on anything relative

2:17:55there too. $25,000 for fleet training

2:17:58and equipment. $80,000 for ambulance

2:18:01supplies.

2:18:03Uh $4,527

2:18:05is replacing money from the reserve

2:18:07fund. $410,000

2:18:10for six new cardiac monitors, three

2:18:12blood analyzers, three EMS iPads, eight

2:18:16cases or mounts for mobile data terminal

2:18:19iPads, and $29,000 for 60 waterproof

2:18:23rescue jackets for department members.

2:18:26Hello, sir. Do you want to tell us about

2:18:28it?

2:18:30>> Hello. Changing hats, changing seats.

2:18:33>> Um,

2:18:35so, uh, thank you through the chair. So,

2:18:37uh, the first item for the fleet

2:18:38maintenance and training, um, we are

2:18:42anticipating we filled the second

2:18:43mechanic spot, uh, back in July, uh, the

2:18:46gentleman that we hired is he was

2:18:48outstanding. Um, but about 8 weeks into

2:18:51the job, he realized that he took too

2:18:53much of a pay cut from his previous

2:18:54employment to come here. So, he

2:18:56unfortunately had to resign his

2:18:58full-time position. Um we have been

2:19:00fortunate to be able to retain him at

2:19:02the moment on a part-time basis um

2:19:04working for us on Saturdays. Uh but we

2:19:07are anticipating our longtime mechanic

2:19:09uh retiring in January which is going to

2:19:11put two new fleet mechanics into the

2:19:14into the department. Um so there's of

2:19:17this $25,000 there's roughly eight or

2:19:209,000 that's equipment related. Um and

2:19:22then it's roughly about $8,000 per

2:19:24member um for EVT training which would

2:19:28include the classroom travel and and

2:19:30those types of expenses. Um the $80,000

2:19:33for ambulance supplies uh this is

2:19:35something that occurred a couple of

2:19:36years ago. Um you know with the rising

2:19:39costs of of EMS equipment and where 100%

2:19:43of the EMS operation is funded through

2:19:44ambulance receipts. the only time that

2:19:47we have to access ambulance receipts are

2:19:50the two town meetings uh both in May and

2:19:52October. So what we were finding is that

2:19:55there were times where we were running

2:19:57low on our ambulance supply line within

2:19:59the operating budget. So, a couple of

2:20:01years ago, we went to town meeting and

2:20:03we appropriated $80,000 from ambulance

2:20:05receipts that sits in a supplemental

2:20:09equipment account um that requires

2:20:12access from the town manager and the CFO

2:20:15in order to be able to access. So, it's

2:20:17not an additional $80,000 that's

2:20:20available to the department in our whim.

2:20:21So there is a a process in how we have

2:20:23to access that money, but the intent of

2:20:26that money is that when we're running

2:20:28low in a in a fiscal year on medical

2:20:31supplies, we are able to cap ambulance

2:20:35receipts versus some other operational

2:20:38line item within the budget. So what I

2:20:41told town meeting two years ago was the

2:20:44this $80,000 is going to kick us off.

2:20:47Maybe I'm back next year looking for

2:20:49another 80,000. maybe I'm here in 3

2:20:51years asking for $80,000. That $80,000

2:20:54supplement um lasted us 2 years. So, you

2:20:58know, this is, you know, kind of

2:20:59technically year three. Um so, we're

2:21:02looking to reappropriate that that

2:21:04$80,000.

2:21:06Um 4500 of that is going to replace

2:21:09money from the reserve fund because

2:21:11again, um this past fiscal year, we ran

2:21:14low on supply money. finance committee

2:21:16was gracious enough to vote a $4,500 um

2:21:19reserve fund transfer, but it did

2:21:21indicate um that they would be

2:21:23interested in getting that money back

2:21:25when we were able to do an

2:21:26appropriation. So, $4,500 of that 80

2:21:28will be transferred to the reserve fund

2:21:30as part of that. Um the $410,000 for

2:21:34cardiac monitors and then that various

2:21:36equipment, about $380,000

2:21:39of that um represents the cardiac

2:21:42monitors.

2:21:44uh that you know they're they're

2:21:45expensive devices um but it is

2:21:47state-of-the-art technology for cardiac

2:21:49monitoring and then the balance of that

2:21:5230,000 is for the blood analyzers the

2:21:54the iPads and things like this typically

2:21:56what happens is you we we've never put

2:21:58cardiac monitors on the CIP plan um one

2:22:02because it's funded through ambulance

2:22:03receipts we know we have access to it

2:22:05when we want um but this particular item

2:22:09is hard to kind of gauge within the CIP

2:22:11because the technology changes you So it

2:22:15changes so much that we're we really

2:22:17have to kind of keep an eye on it. So to

2:22:19put it on a plan, it really just didn't

2:22:21make sense. And again, because it's

2:22:23funded through ambulance receipts, when

2:22:24we decide to pull the trigger, and it's

2:22:26been 15 years, not all of our monitors

2:22:29are 15 years old, but when we went to

2:22:31the version of technology that we're in

2:22:33now was 15 years ago, there have been

2:22:35enough substantial changes that that

2:22:37warrant sort of a new update. Um, we've

2:22:40always just handled this particular

2:22:42request that we put an article on the

2:22:43town meeting. It's funded through

2:22:45ambulance receipts and it's and it's

2:22:46purchased that way. The remaining

2:22:48equipment that's on here, it doesn't

2:22:50meet the CIP threshold because it's low

2:22:52dollars. So, that's the other reason why

2:22:54it's it's not on the plan. Um, and then

2:22:57the 29,000

2:22:59uh for the waterproof rescue jackets.

2:23:01Uh, you know, typically we have to kind

2:23:03of reset this button, you know, every

2:23:05you know, 13 to 15 years or so. again

2:23:10technology changes. We can't get this

2:23:12model or that model and then next thing

2:23:14you know you have a whole department

2:23:15that has you know 17 different versions

2:23:18of of uniform and coat because you can't

2:23:21get what you just bought last year. So

2:23:23usually around every 13 14 years or so

2:23:26we kind of have to reset uh you know the

2:23:29the the clothing. We just purchase you

2:23:32know every department member the same

2:23:34thing. it resets the standard and then

2:23:36we'll work, you know, over the next

2:23:37decade with that code. So, that's a

2:23:39that's a short summary of um of that

2:23:42appropriation.

2:23:43>> Thank you. Um I don't know if this Well,

2:23:46I don't know if it's possible, but does

2:23:47the town can you get any money back from

2:23:51um the old cardiac monitors or the old

2:23:54uh equipment or the uh the fire the

2:23:57rescue jackets? Uh, so the jackets, no,

2:24:00I mean those those are old, you know,

2:24:02there and again there's in some cases

2:24:04they're they're biohazard. They've been

2:24:07cleaned, they've been bleached. So those

2:24:08those are throwaways. Um, we are

2:24:11receiving we are trading in the old

2:24:13cardiac monitors and we did receive um I

2:24:16think in some cases it was over $10,000

2:24:19per monitor. So we are receiving um a

2:24:21substantial trade on those six old

2:24:23cardiac monitors.

2:24:24>> Okay, good. Thank you.

2:24:26So, I know I've asked many times about

2:24:29what's funded out of ambulance receipts.

2:24:32Um, I didn't know that you utilize the

2:24:35reserve fund for things and then come

2:24:38back or able to reimburse from that

2:24:41account. Is that probably a better

2:24:44mechanism to track things? And again, I

2:24:46don't want to get into small dollar

2:24:48amounts where you're coming in and

2:24:50requesting funds, but at some point

2:24:53we're going to have to figure out

2:24:55everything. And I know a lot of things

2:24:56are funded from that, but as again

2:24:59whether we're not getting that money as

2:25:02much or I think we're funding quite a

2:25:05few firefighters out of that account. Um

2:25:09there needs to be some understanding of

2:25:11what that budget is and and we need to

2:25:13do a better budget of that. And if

2:25:1580,000 got us through two years for the

2:25:18ambulance supplies, is there a a

2:25:21mechanism where we are utilizing the

2:25:23reserve funds

2:25:25more frequently to to reimburse that or

2:25:28like how how do we make the transactions

2:25:33more transparent without stopping

2:25:35critical operations, I guess, is what I

2:25:37would ask.

2:25:38>> Yeah, it's a good question. Um, the

2:25:40reality is that's the first time that

2:25:41that's ever happened. That's the first

2:25:43time that the reserve fund was ever

2:25:44tapped for that $4,500 to cover a

2:25:47shortfall in the medical supplies. So um

2:25:52on the annual budget when you look at

2:25:55our budget there is a breakdown of what

2:25:57is covered from ambulance receipts from

2:25:59personnel to operations and then there's

2:26:02a separate fund called certified public

2:26:04expenditure funds which essentially is

2:26:06another Medicaid reimbursement that

2:26:08funds an additional $100,000 within the

2:26:10operating budget. So yes, the ambulance

2:26:13receipts covers, you know, uh 12

2:26:16firefighters, covers a fleet mechanic,

2:26:18it covers all of the EMS expenses in

2:26:21terms of uh you know, medical supplies,

2:26:24continuing education, the stipen. So

2:26:26really, anything that has the EMS

2:26:28moniker on it is covered through

2:26:31ambulance receipts. The problem with the

2:26:34medical supplies is again right and it's

2:26:36a it's cause and effect of of everything

2:26:39regardless of your whether you're

2:26:40talking about gas or milk or whatever

2:26:42like every the price of everything is

2:26:43going up. So when the price of the

2:26:45medical supplies goes up compounded with

2:26:48increased medical calls you know that's

2:26:50where we where we run short um on the on

2:26:54the EMS side. probably coming into this

2:26:56fiscal year, one of the better ways to

2:26:59conquer this problem is we've pretty

2:27:01much stayed level funded with our

2:27:02medical supplies for the last several

2:27:04years. Instead of doing this approach,

2:27:07what we really should be doing is just

2:27:09increasing the medical supply line based

2:27:12on that annual expenditure, which over

2:27:14the last couple years has been like

2:27:16$30,000, you know, annually. And again,

2:27:19that's not just medical supplies, right?

2:27:21That's that's um a piece of equipment

2:27:24breaks, you know, whether it's an iPad

2:27:27or some piece of medical equipment that

2:27:29something that that breaks or goes out

2:27:31of warranty. It may be a $4,000

2:27:33replacement. So, it's not, you know,

2:27:36over that 2-year period like it's not

2:27:38$40,000 worth of gauze pads or, you

2:27:41know, collars. You know, sometimes

2:27:42there's uh electronic components that

2:27:45that go in that or repairing a large

2:27:47repair on a stretcher or something like

2:27:49that. So really probably next fiscal

2:27:53year we should really be looking to

2:27:55increase the medical supply item but

2:27:57probably by a minimum of $20,000 and

2:28:00then in a couple of years that will most

2:28:02likely reduce this $80,000 ask to a a

2:28:06much lower number. So I think it's it's

2:28:09kind of a combination of readressing

2:28:11what the budgeted amount is um which

2:28:16would reduce this ask in the future.

2:28:18But, you know, to your point, if you

2:28:20look at the operations budget, um, there

2:28:22are some dnotes, you know, there's

2:28:24little asterisks and things like that,

2:28:25and it it points out where the ambulance

2:28:28receipts and what those are funding

2:28:29within the operating budget.

2:28:31>> Okay. No, and for me, I I'd love to see

2:28:33operating cost there and then submit to

2:28:36the ambulance receipts for reimbursement

2:28:38on those eligible items rather than the

2:28:40other way around.

2:28:41>> Yeah. It's, you know, honestly, like

2:28:43it's just something that we've never

2:28:45done. We've never done it that way. When

2:28:46I went to Fincom this year, it was

2:28:48because I didn't have $4,500 anywhere

2:28:51else and they did it, but they had

2:28:53indicated that they wanted it back. But

2:28:55in all honesty, there was a part of me

2:28:58that was like, this is this might have

2:28:59been the way we should have just kind of

2:29:01done it along because it it did kind of

2:29:03streamline it a little bit. Um, but I

2:29:06think there's another way to address it

2:29:07operationally.

2:29:09>> Well, I have a question. So, what's the

2:29:11what's that line item called now?

2:29:14Uh it's a I don't know the exact name.

2:29:17It's a it's an ambulance equipment

2:29:21account that again needs approval from

2:29:24the CFO and the town manager to access

2:29:26those funds.

2:29:27>> So we have two um

2:29:32and that's it. Let me ask you a question

2:29:34about doesn't the uh aren't the new

2:29:36ambulances paid for from the ambulance

2:29:38receipts also?

2:29:39>> They are. So, we're taking delivery of

2:29:41uh two brand new ambulances that have

2:29:42been on order for three years, and we

2:29:45are finally uh going to be taking

2:29:47delivery of those uh mid to end of

2:29:49December. They'll be in service in

2:29:51January. Uh and those those are fully

2:29:54funded from ambulance receipts as well.

2:29:55So, those will be cash on delivery.

2:29:58>> Great. Thank you. Any questions?

2:30:00>> So, I have a related but unrelated

2:30:02question since I have you in the chair

2:30:04as the chief. Uh, for those of us who

2:30:06read the DLS report, can you confirm

2:30:08that you've not retired as our fire

2:30:10chief as the report indicated?

2:30:12>> If if I have, I don't know why I've been

2:30:14sitting here for the last couple of

2:30:15hours. Uh, no, I have not retired as the

2:30:18as the fire.

2:30:18>> Okay. Cuz I was pretty upset I missed

2:30:20that party. So,

2:30:20>> yeah, me too.

2:30:24>> With that, I will recommend uh I will

2:30:26vote that we uh make a motion that we

2:30:29vote to recommend approval.

2:30:30>> I'll second.

2:30:32So, we have a motion and a second to

2:30:34recommend approval. All in favor? I

2:30:36opposed. Okay.

2:30:37>> Thank you.

2:30:38>> Welcome. Article 18 to see if Tammy will

2:30:40vote to appropriate $99,000 from sewer

2:30:44retained earnings for the purchase of a

2:30:46sewer truck replacement F350 with plow

2:30:49act on anything relative there too. Do

2:30:52you want to tell us? Hi Joanna. Or

2:30:53Peter, you want to come on up? Yep.

2:31:05I do you want to just tell us about it?

2:31:07>> Sure. So, this is um proposed to replace

2:31:10our current sewer truck S2, which is a

2:31:122014 Ford F250 uh utility body with a

2:31:16plow and liftgate. It also currently

2:31:19serves as a frontline uh plow truck for

2:31:21snow and ice um and has its own

2:31:24dedicated plow route. So, the new

2:31:25vehicle is will be a new F350, which

2:31:28will be able to handle more weight. And

2:31:30we're also proposing to get an aluminum

2:31:33utility body to go along with the

2:31:34aluminum uh pickup body so that we don't

2:31:37have the utility body rot out while the

2:31:39pickup body is still fine.

2:31:42So, uh the concern is again with its age

2:31:44and condition, one or two major repairs

2:31:47will cost more than the what the value

2:31:50of the truck is.

2:31:52Is there an opportunity to repurpose the

2:31:54truck in a less critical role or the

2:31:57plan to um just discard the truck?

2:31:59>> Uh at this point, uh the fleet

2:32:02maintenance team has looked at it and

2:32:03they are um considering or planning on

2:32:06repurposing it as a spare or extra

2:32:09vehicle to be used if another truck goes

2:32:12down

2:32:13>> in a non-critical fashion.

2:32:14>> Correct.

2:32:17>> Any other questions?

2:32:20We'll make a motion that we recommend

2:32:22approval.

2:32:23>> Second. So, you have a motion and a

2:32:24second to recommend approval. All in

2:32:26favor? I opposed.

2:32:29>> All right. And the next article is

2:32:32article 19. The state of town meeting

2:32:34will vote to appropriate $170,000

2:32:37from sewer retained earnings for the

2:32:39purchase of a replacement pump for the

2:32:41pinrock pump station or act on anything

2:32:43relative there too.

2:32:46So, uh, the Pinrock pump station is your

2:32:49largest and, um, highest priority pump

2:32:53station. Any flow that goes to the upper

2:32:55Blackstone goes through the Pinrock pump

2:32:56station. I believe in the mid90s, these

2:32:59pumps were increased from three pumps to

2:33:02four pumps and all four were replaced at

2:33:04that time. Uh, when that replacement

2:33:06happened, my understanding is pump one

2:33:09was the priority pump that ran the

2:33:11majority of the time. And based on the

2:33:13hour meters that we have for all four

2:33:15pumps, pump one has approximately 37,000

2:33:18hours. And it at startup has a very loud

2:33:22noise of sounds similar to bear some

2:33:25type of bearing failure or something

2:33:27that's not operating correctly. Um so

2:33:31the plan is to go ahead and order a

2:33:33replacement for pump one. The time frame

2:33:36to get that pump is one year out. Once

2:33:39we get that pump, install in pump one's

2:33:41place. have pump one rebuilt or

2:33:44refurbished so that we can then have a

2:33:46spare pump to recycle across the other

2:33:48three pumps uh that remain in the

2:33:51Pinrock pump station. In comparison, I

2:33:54believe pumps 2, three, and four range

2:33:56anywhere from 17,000 to 24,000 hours.

2:34:00Currently, right now, pump one we have

2:34:02decommissioned. It's still in line,

2:34:04ready to be used if necessary, and the

2:34:07majority of the of the work is being

2:34:09done by pumps 2, three, and four at this

2:34:11time.

2:34:12So, we have redundant pumps down there.

2:34:15>> Yes, we definitely have redundancy.

2:34:17>> Yeah, which we definitely need because

2:34:19that's the final place in town.

2:34:21Everything goes through. Okay,

2:34:23questions.

2:34:24>> So, four pumps, does that two of them

2:34:26will handle the heaviest load or are all

2:34:29four needed on?

2:34:31>> Most of the time, I don't believe

2:34:33there's ever been a chance or that the

2:34:34pipe can handle all four pumps. So, it's

2:34:37truly just in the sense of redundancy

2:34:40where two pumps will come on as if

2:34:43needed and a third pump will kick on if

2:34:45those two pumps can't keep up or if one

2:34:48of the impellers maybe has some type of

2:34:50debris in it limiting how much it can

2:34:52flow.

2:34:53>> And then the operations, you said pump

2:34:55one was the primary. Has that been

2:34:57rectified where now it will rotate

2:34:59through the pumps?

2:35:00>> Yes. Since you've done your uh skate

2:35:02upgrade and VFDs have been installed,

2:35:04the programming is that one pump will

2:35:06run the majority for of 24 hours and

2:35:10that the frequency going to that pump

2:35:12will ramp up or ramp down to keep the

2:35:14wet well elevation at a constant level

2:35:17so that it won't just be on or off and

2:35:20it will cycle pump to pump dayto day.

2:35:23>> Okay. Thank you.

2:35:24>> Sure.

2:35:25>> Any other questions?

2:35:27So I will u make a motion that we vote

2:35:29to recommend approval.

2:35:30>> A second. So we have a uh a motion a

2:35:35second to recommend approval. All in

2:35:37favor? I

2:35:38>> opposed.

2:35:40>> All right. Thank you.

2:35:41>> Thank you for your support.

2:35:42>> Thank you. Um article 20 town meeting

2:35:45will vote to enact a one-year moratorum

2:35:47on the issuance of building permits for

2:35:50electric electronic data storage

2:35:52projects as currently listed in line

2:35:553.2. 2.6.17

2:35:58in the table of principal uses and the

2:36:01associated description of use in order

2:36:03for the to allow for the town to study

2:36:06and adopt additional regulations

2:36:08pertaining to such a project or act on

2:36:10anything relative there too. And we have

2:36:13the um the the the text of this here

2:36:17too.

2:36:19Okay, any questions? This is put forth

2:36:21by the town manager. Can I just confirm

2:36:23that the planning board recommended

2:36:25approval of this?

2:36:26>> Yes, through the chair. That's uh indeed

2:36:28the planning board did hold a hearing

2:36:29and uh uh endorsed the moratorum

2:36:35>> through the chair.

2:36:36>> Is is there a project plan on this or

2:36:38are there meetings already set up to get

2:36:41the deciding actions out of this? It's a

2:36:44moratorum so we can study. Is there

2:36:46anything if this is approved ready to go

2:36:50again to to work through a year sounds

2:36:52like a lot until nine months in we're

2:36:54going oh we didn't do that.

2:36:56>> Absolutely. And I so we already have

2:36:59some models the many communities in

2:37:01Massachusetts have already adopted

2:37:02different moratoriums. I think some have

2:37:04adopted bans as well. We got this late

2:37:06in the process to get to the warrant. Uh

2:37:09so we didn't want to uh put forth

2:37:11something that was cut and paste for

2:37:13some other communities. We wanted to

2:37:14take the time to look at it more

2:37:16deliberately. And so, uh, we already

2:37:18have some models here. Uh, I don't want

2:37:20to get ahead of it. Could we

2:37:23theoretically have something in time for

2:37:24spring town meeting? Yes, I think we

2:37:27could. Uh, although we would have a

2:37:28year. So, we would have the spring town

2:37:30meeting and then theoretical fall town

2:37:32meeting to to get this done. But indeed,

2:37:35the calendar does creep up on you,

2:37:36especially when you have to account for

2:37:38the vetting through the different boards

2:37:40and different public hearing

2:37:41requirements.

2:37:43Any

2:37:45other questions?

2:37:47>> So, I will make a motion that we vote to

2:37:50recommend approval.

2:37:51>> Second. So, we have a motion and a

2:37:52second to recommend approval. All in

2:37:54favor? I opposed.

2:37:57>> All right.

2:37:59Next, we have article 21. See if Tommy

2:38:01will vote to approve the Water Street

2:38:03Culver replacement project totaling $1.4

2:38:06$4 million and to raise said funds by

2:38:10borrowing payable in not more than the

2:38:12term provided by law and any premium

2:38:15received by the town upon the sale of

2:38:16any bonds or notes approved by the vote.

2:38:19Les any such premium applied to the

2:38:22payment of the cost of an issuance of

2:38:24such bonds or notes may be applied to

2:38:27the payment of costs approved by this

2:38:29vote in accordance with chapter 44

2:38:32section 20 of the general laws thereby

2:38:35reducing the amount authorized to be

2:38:37borrowed um to pay such cost by a like

2:38:41amount or act on anything relative there

2:38:43too.

2:38:44>> Hi

2:38:45uh good old water street. All right.

2:38:50Um do you want us to te to tell us about

2:38:52it?

2:38:53>> Sure. So uh the last time um I was here

2:38:56we were talking about the water street

2:38:58covert and the timeline um and the board

2:39:00had asked me to provide um a timeline

2:39:03for the reconstruction of the um water

2:39:06street covert um as it relates to the um

2:39:11grant funding for the municipal small

2:39:13bridge program. Uh so we went through

2:39:16the a relatively aggressive time frame

2:39:20for um when we would expect uh

2:39:24reconstruction um for the construction

2:39:26to be started and finished. Um currently

2:39:29we have the plan plans submitted to Mass

2:39:32DOT for review. Um those were submitted

2:39:35in August. Um it's an expected one to

2:39:38two review uh time period. We have not

2:39:42heard anything um back yet. Um but um

2:39:46subsequent to that review um we'll be

2:39:49addressing whatever comments that Masdot

2:39:52um provides and we'll move forward with

2:39:54permitting.

2:39:56Um once permitting is complete

2:39:59um we'll move forward with um bidding.

2:40:03Um we are expecting um a 3mon lead

2:40:08period for the box coververt. Um so um

2:40:14once the project is bid um the soonest

2:40:19that we would see any any construction

2:40:21would be you know once once the project

2:40:24is awarded and signed and everything um

2:40:27three more months before we see um

2:40:30before we see any construction. Uh so we

2:40:33would be looking at the summer of 2027

2:40:37start of construction and um the

2:40:41finished product in the fall of 2027.

2:40:45Um the timeline for the small bridge

2:40:48project uh grant um is

2:40:53um doesn't fit into this. Um so it

2:40:57doesn't appear that we're going to be

2:40:59able to apply for this. We're still

2:41:01going to keep an eye on it depending on

2:41:03when we get the review from MASDOT if

2:41:06the review trips any additional

2:41:08permitting that we require um any delays

2:41:11um just because the uh the time frame

2:41:13for the small bridge project

2:41:16um the um the funding we would expect a

2:41:20notice to proceed if we were to be

2:41:23awarded the the grant to be um in the

2:41:26fall. Um we had submitted um an

2:41:30application for the permitting of the

2:41:33bridge um and we

2:41:37received the notice of award in May um

2:41:41we have not yet received the notice to

2:41:43proceed. So, um it's even though it

2:41:47looks like the time frame would would

2:41:49work with with that aggressive time

2:41:52frame of the construction, um I'm not

2:41:55really hopeful that we would get a

2:41:58notice and proceed before we actually

2:42:00wanted to move on move forward with

2:42:02construction. But that would also, you

2:42:04know, if um once we get to that point,

2:42:08we can also speak um to the state and

2:42:11see, you know, what could be possible

2:42:13and um if that's the time the time frame

2:42:15that we

2:42:17um of the grant that we just got

2:42:21awarded, if that's typical or if that's

2:42:23something that's, you know, um out of

2:42:26the ordinary

2:42:28to be waiting for that in order to

2:42:29proceed.

2:42:31>> Okay. Thank you. So the the ask is 1.4

2:42:34million to proceed.

2:42:36>> Correct.

2:42:38>> Thank you.

2:42:38>> I just have a question. Um probably

2:42:42better asked to our CFO.

2:42:45Do we know the approximate

2:42:47interest we're going to pay on a $1.4

2:42:49million borrowing

2:42:52ballpark figure based on what you've

2:42:54seen in the market?

2:43:04We received a rate of 4% on the

2:43:06short-term borrowing. So I would say

2:43:08maybe between five 6%.

2:43:15>> Over what period of time would you

2:43:17expect borrowing at 1.4?

2:43:35I'm not really sure what we think. Maybe

2:43:36like 10 years.

2:43:39>> So that's going to be about 80% of the

2:43:41value in interest.

2:43:44Um it's a lot of money. Again, a

2:43:46discussion about free cash or borrowing

2:43:48and costing us, you know, another

2:43:51million dollars. So,

2:43:52>> right. So, so a 1.4 becomes a 2.4 for

2:43:55when we're all done paying interest.

2:44:01So again, I will go back to my earlier

2:44:03statement that if we have the money in

2:44:06free cash and our free crash and our

2:44:09stabilization reserves are high for

2:44:11similar communities, why are we

2:44:14voluntarily going to pay more for these

2:44:17projects when we can pay for them now?

2:44:20and why are we basically giving money to

2:44:23bankers to loan us money that we already

2:44:25have? But that's just my own personal

2:44:27opinion.

2:44:28>> I think those are questions that we'll

2:44:30answer when we go over the financial

2:44:31policies,

2:44:33>> right? But

2:44:34>> so I I do as I do as well, but right now

2:44:38we have this vote before us

2:44:42>> that that

2:44:43is a relevant conversation now, not just

2:44:46when we go over our policies. Again,

2:44:48this this is a true need

2:44:49>> and we've already spent plenty of money

2:44:52tonight or recommended to spend plenty

2:44:54of money tonight on other things that

2:44:56might not be a priority. And I

2:44:58understand the desire to keep some money

2:45:01in free cash, but this is where the

2:45:03tough conversations have to come. And we

2:45:05have to decide, are we going to spend

2:45:08another million dollars on projects of

2:45:09need so we can fund an $80,000 nice to

2:45:13have and something again we we need to

2:45:16as a board have more discussions around

2:45:18that. We should have more joint meetings

2:45:20with finance, school committee,

2:45:23>> and other boards because it's going to

2:45:25get real hairy real soon and free cash

2:45:28will run out.

2:45:28>> Yep.

2:45:29>> And and for the record, I'm in favor of

2:45:31this project. I'm in favor of spending

2:45:33the 1.4 4 million. I was in favor of

2:45:35spending the 1.4 million 6 months ago,

2:45:38so it could have already started.

2:45:40I'm just not necessarily in favor of

2:45:43borrowing and paying extra to the

2:45:46banking industry when we have the money

2:45:48in the bank. That's just my opinion. I

2:45:50just don't understand why we would do

2:45:52that.

2:45:56>> Do I hear a motion?

2:45:58>> I'd make a motion to hold this.

2:46:02>> What?

2:46:04Well,

2:46:06sorry.

2:46:06>> You hoping to see if the

2:46:09>> administration who is

2:46:11>> administration discuss whether Yeah.

2:46:13whether it needs to be financed or not.

2:46:15And again, I wouldn't put this

2:46:17recommendation. I wouldn't

2:46:18>> put in favor of borrowing, but I am in

2:46:21favor of this project.

2:46:22>> So, this is again a nuance thing. If we

2:46:25vote in favor of it currently,

2:46:27>> I would vote negative or

2:46:29>> as would I. So then we'd be in a

2:46:31position to two potentially. So

2:46:33>> do we have a second?

2:46:34>> Second.

2:46:35>> So we have a motion and a second to hold

2:46:37this article. All in favor?

2:46:39>> I opposed.

2:46:42All right. Article 22.

2:46:45Just not the right.

2:46:48>> Okay. is to see if town meeting will

2:46:50vote to request the termination of any

2:46:53and all contracts between the town of

2:46:55Auburn and flock safety and the removal

2:46:58of flock cameras from all town of Auburn

2:47:01mass properties and right of way under

2:47:03their jurisdiction.

2:47:05I'm not going to Well, section one is um

2:47:11uh request immediate um formal ter

2:47:14formal ter uh termination to flock.

2:47:17Section two requests that all equipment

2:47:20will be fully deactivated and physically

2:47:22removed. Section three prohibits the

2:47:25town um its departments and any

2:47:28municipal law enforcement agency from

2:47:30spending any funds on any contracts,

2:47:32memoranda of understanding or pilot

2:47:35programs with flock. And four, town

2:47:37requests, town manager mandate that all

2:47:41uh information previously collected by

2:47:43the flock system and stored uh be

2:47:46permanently purged and destroyed.

2:47:49All right. Citizens petition by Vera

2:47:51Crane.

2:47:55>> Is Vera here? No.

2:47:56>> No. I I don't believe that there was any

2:47:59notice given to the citizen petitioners

2:48:00to show up tonight.

2:48:05>> Would the board be in favor of holding

2:48:06or defer to the petitioner on a

2:48:08citizen's petition?

2:48:13>> Through the chair. I'm going to be

2:48:14honest. I voted no against the flock

2:48:17system in the original vote of the board

2:48:21and I

2:48:23personally would be recommending

2:48:25approval for this item.

2:48:29>> I I I I note that section one has

2:48:32already

2:48:32>> been done effectively. Section two has

2:48:35not been done. Section three has not

2:48:37been done. Section four has not been

2:48:38done. And going back to Mr. Raffert's

2:48:40comments earlier, I think those are the

2:48:42the the the crux of the conversation um

2:48:46and followup that that residents want to

2:48:49see um become more

2:48:53um more uh

2:48:58firm uh for lack of a better term. um in

2:49:01that uh you know the cameras are going

2:49:04to be removed that any attempt to

2:49:08create another contract or memorandum of

2:49:10understanding or pilot program with

2:49:12Flock um is going to go through a public

2:49:14process um etc. So I I agree with uh

2:49:20Miss Ruffley that we should be

2:49:21recommending favorable action on this.

2:49:25>> I would make a recommendation or a

2:49:27motion that we defer to the petitioner.

2:49:30Um I have a question. In section two, I

2:49:33beg you pardon, section three, the town

2:49:36would prohibit the town and its

2:49:38departments etc. from expending any

2:49:40funds on any contracts, memoranda of

2:49:43understanding or pilot programs with

2:49:44flock. Are we able to is town meeting

2:49:47able to um is that legal? Can town

2:49:50meeting do that and say the town

2:49:52shouldn't have any uh any contracts or

2:49:55dealings with a particular company?

2:49:58So my understanding is town council

2:50:00reviewed this language and did not red

2:50:01flag that as something that could not

2:50:03happen. However, again I think this is

2:50:06something that town meeting and then

2:50:07eventually town council would have to

2:50:09sort out perhaps on the floor of town

2:50:11meeting if town council has not already

2:50:13answered that question.

2:50:14>> Sure.

2:50:15>> Madam chair just quickly with regards to

2:50:18this article I don't think town meeting

2:50:20has the authority to decide this quite

2:50:22frankly. Uh it doesn't fall under their

2:50:25purview. Uh the purpose of this article,

2:50:28the purpose has already been met uh in

2:50:31the sense that the cameras have been

2:50:32turned off. The existing contract is

2:50:35over. Uh not a single penny of town

2:50:38money or any money was expended. Um

2:50:43I you know I understand some of the

2:50:45emotional reaction to the to the program

2:50:47as it as it got going.

2:50:49This board did vote three to two in

2:50:51favor to of supporting the the grant and

2:50:54using those grant funds for block

2:50:57cameras. Um it was determined that the

2:51:00procurement process was flawed and the

2:51:03contract was essentially invalidated. Um

2:51:08there was no appetite to go forward with

2:51:10a an additional or a new contract which

2:51:12I understand.

2:51:14uh as it pertains to section three of of

2:51:18the the article itself, it's actually

2:51:20where did any municipal law enforcement

2:51:22agencies. So I don't think the town

2:51:25meeting has the authority to legislate

2:51:26what other law enforcement agencies do.

2:51:30And if we were to present, which we have

2:51:32absolutely no intention of presenting

2:51:34any flock camera project,

2:51:38you know, it would obviously be a

2:51:39project that we would bring before the

2:51:41town and encourage community

2:51:44involvement in and and uh solicit those

2:51:48opinions.

2:51:50Um, but

2:51:52the

2:51:56to me it's a little bit shortsighted as

2:51:58well because the the department is

2:52:01looking at the potential of a a drone as

2:52:03a first responder program in the future.

2:52:06And you hate to rule out one company

2:52:09versus another. And I think

2:52:12if you decide, well, you're not going to

2:52:14do business with this company, you know,

2:52:15is this board or any other board or

2:52:18committee going to furnish a complete

2:52:19list of vendors that we can't do

2:52:22business with? And is that just the

2:52:24police department or is that every town

2:52:26department? So

2:52:29while I understand the intention or the

2:52:31intent rather of the article, I think

2:52:33the main intent or object or objective

2:52:36rather has already been met. the the

2:52:38contract was invalidated. Like I said,

2:52:41the cameras have been shut off since the

2:52:42date that we said they were shut off.

2:52:45Because we have no business relationship

2:52:47with them, it's very hard for us to to

2:52:49tell them that they have to move us to

2:52:51the front of the line. As you all more

2:52:53than well aware that this has been a

2:52:55thing across the Commonwealth and

2:52:57there's I couldn't even tell you how

2:52:59many departments even locally in central

2:53:02Mass that have that have walked away

2:53:03from the flock cameras. Um and and again

2:53:08not I'm not trying to take one side or

2:53:11the other necessarily more more than is

2:53:13what is probably already obvious but the

2:53:15the technology is useful but I

2:53:18completely understand the concerns that

2:53:20people have especially with flock

2:53:23>> and when we started this well over a

2:53:25year ago

2:53:27I think I was here in September if I'm

2:53:29not mistaken last year um it hadn't

2:53:33evolved or devolved depending on your

2:53:35point view to the point that it got to

2:53:38or that it's at now even. So, um,

2:53:42with that said, I just I I don't think

2:53:44it falls under under the purview of town

2:53:46meeting, number one. And number two, the

2:53:49objective of the article's already been

2:53:52accomplished. And again, to reiterate,

2:53:54no town money was spent. I don't know if

2:53:57in the future there may be money that

2:53:58needs to be spent in order to get them

2:54:00to take the cameras down. That I don't

2:54:03know. So I guess I would respectfully

2:54:05disagree.

2:54:07It is within the the authority of town

2:54:09meeting to request whatever they want.

2:54:11They can't mandate certain things, but

2:54:13they can certainly request that we paint

2:54:15the ceiling black here. And sections

2:54:18one, three, sorry, sections 1, 2, and

2:54:21four simply say the town meeting

2:54:23requests XYZ. They are not mandating.

2:54:28They're not forcing. They are requesting

2:54:30it under the recognition that others

2:54:33within town government under a town

2:54:35charter have the authority to make the

2:54:37decision yes or no. But they have the

2:54:38right to request that.

2:54:40>> Understood.

2:54:40>> For for section three, it is a funding

2:54:43mechanism. It is it is specifically

2:54:44funding. And if you look at the

2:54:46authority in both master general law as

2:54:48well as the town charter, town meeting

2:54:50specifically

2:54:51is the final

2:54:54say in terms of what money gets spent

2:54:58from town funds. Town meeting holds that

2:55:00authority. So in sections one, two, and

2:55:03four, they're simply requesting. In

2:55:05section three, they are they are voting

2:55:08prohibiting the use of funds that are

2:55:10under their jurisdiction under both Mass

2:55:13General law as well as um you know under

2:55:17you know our own town charter

2:55:19and you know again I'll go back to town

2:55:22council has already reviewed this

2:55:23language. Uh they did not red flag

2:55:25anything that was inappropriate here. I

2:55:28will tell you that this language was

2:55:30branded by an attorney who works for the

2:55:33state who signed off on it as well. Um,

2:55:37so there's no question in my mind that

2:55:40town meeting has the jurisdiction to

2:55:41take this action. Whether town meeting

2:55:43wants to take this action, whether it's

2:55:46appropriate to take this action, whether

2:55:47they want to have this discussions and

2:55:49have the discussion on sections 2,

2:55:51three, and four that's that have not

2:55:52been met yet. I leave that to town

2:55:54meeting. That's not that's not for for

2:55:57us or town council or anyone else to

2:55:58decide. That's for town meeting to

2:56:00decide. But I just want to be very clear

2:56:02that town meeting has the authority to

2:56:04do everything that is written here.

2:56:06>> It's it reads any municipal law

2:56:08enforcement agency.

2:56:11>> Whether it reads any it's it's any

2:56:13municipal law enforcement agency that is

2:56:14under the authority of town meeting.

2:56:16>> Just the wording would imply

2:56:18>> I understand the word the wording but

2:56:20it's it's it's any that are under the

2:56:22authority of town meeting. They can't

2:56:24mandate that Worcester does something.

2:56:25>> Well, that's

2:56:26>> but they can but they can mandate that

2:56:28any any municipal authority under their

2:56:30jurisdiction.

2:56:32>> So tomorrow we could create a park

2:56:35ranger law enforcement that would fall

2:56:38under this. We can create a different

2:56:40enforcement agency, a fourth enforcement

2:56:42agency that would fall under this. We

2:56:44could break out parking enforcement and

2:56:46have them be their own department that

2:56:48may use ALPRs and they would be under

2:56:51this because they would be a municipal

2:56:52law enforcement agency that is under a

2:56:55jurisdiction of town meeting.

2:56:56>> So, we can squabble over that. It it's

2:56:59going to go to town meeting. They're

2:57:01going to have their vote. If they vote

2:57:02in favor of supporting it, it's going to

2:57:04go to the attorney general's office and

2:57:06they will be the one that says whether

2:57:07it's legal or not or the language needs

2:57:09to change. So,

2:57:10>> right.

2:57:10>> We don't need to fight over.

2:57:12>> Right. I will say in article on section

2:57:15three uh two um it's not bey pattern

2:57:19three it's not inconceivable that flock

2:57:21the company come up with a product that

2:57:23the town would find acceptable

2:57:25>> and at that point we can go back to town

2:57:26meeting and town meeting can reverse

2:57:28their decision just like they do on a

2:57:30million other issues that they take up.

2:57:32So why you put it in here if

2:57:34>> because I think because I think what the

2:57:36intention was of the people who signed

2:57:39this as well as the people who wrote

2:57:40this was to ensure that the products

2:57:42that right now that the town at the time

2:57:46that this was written engaged with which

2:57:48was a surveillance system. They did not

2:57:51want that surveillance system here. They

2:57:53did not want any further money invested

2:57:55in flock surveillance at that time. At

2:57:58some point, I am hoping that we are

2:58:00going to go back to town meeting and

2:58:02reverse our opinion on chickens, but we

2:58:05have that authority to do that. Town

2:58:07meeting initially voted no, no chickens.

2:58:09We're hoping to go back at some point,

2:58:11the agricultural committee, and say town

2:58:13meeting votes yes on chickens. Now,

2:58:15>> just to be clear, they didn't vote no on

2:58:17chickens. They voted no on more than

2:58:20four

2:58:21>> four

2:58:22>> animals. Yes. And you can only buy

2:58:24chickens in sets of six.

2:58:25>> Six. Yes. Just

2:58:28>> just one quick quick thing. If you do

2:58:30decide to create a separate parking

2:58:33enforcement division, I just spent

2:58:36$5,000 on parking tickets. So,

2:58:39I know a guy.

2:58:42>> Do I hear a motion?

2:58:44>> I already made a motion,

2:58:45>> which is what? Say it again.

2:58:47>> To not uh to defer to the petitioner. Do

2:58:50>> I hear a second?

2:58:57Second.

2:58:59All in favor?

2:59:00>> I

2:59:00>> I opposed.

2:59:01>> No.

2:59:02>> I

2:59:02>> Okay, so nothing happens.

2:59:04>> I will make a motion that we recommend

2:59:06approval.

2:59:06>> A second.

2:59:09>> Okay, we motion and second. All in favor

2:59:12to recommend approval.

2:59:13>> I

2:59:15>> uh

2:59:16do not recommend approval. I

2:59:18>> I

2:59:21>> um I'll make a motion that we hold this

2:59:23until we have a full board.

2:59:25>> Second.

2:59:26>> Okay. Uh we have motion and second. All

2:59:28in favor?

2:59:29>> I

2:59:30>> I

2:59:30>> opposed.

2:59:31>> I

2:59:34>> All right. Article 23 to see if the town

2:59:38will vote to appropriate a sum not to

2:59:39exceed $70,000.

2:59:4670 or 75. I'm not sure from free cash,

2:59:49available funds, taxation, or any other

2:59:51lawful source for the purpose of funding

2:59:53phase one of an independent performance

2:59:55audit and forensic review of the school

2:59:58department student activity fund um

3:00:03uh and the townside custody, treasury

3:00:05warrant, accounting, transfer,

3:00:06reimbursement, reconciliation,

3:00:08adjustment, correction, and reporting

3:00:10records directly related thereto

3:00:12providing that such funds appropriated

3:00:14under this article may be expended only

3:00:17only pursuant to an engagement contract

3:00:20that satisfies the mandatory scope,

3:00:22independence, qualification, evidence,

3:00:25deliverable, reporting, spending, and

3:00:27phase 2 limitations set forth in part

3:00:29two of this article or take any action

3:00:32relative there too. And we have in our

3:00:34um we were provided today with the

3:00:36backup documents.

3:00:38Okay. Do you want to tell us about this,

3:00:40Mr. Richards? This is your article.

3:00:42>> Can I can I just Sorry, Mr. Richards. I

3:00:44just want to confirm that the

3:00:46information we were provided today is

3:00:48your full warrant article. I know

3:00:50there's been issues where the full

3:00:52amount has not been transmitted.

3:00:54>> So, it should be part one and part two.

3:00:56And part two has a total of

3:01:04it looks like there should

3:01:08is what we have in our binder. the

3:01:12>> there were in your packet there was the

3:01:15official warrant that was printed and it

3:01:18was just the first two paragraphs of

3:01:20part one the much longer I believe it's

3:01:23like eight pages six seven pages long

3:01:25and there are seven subp parts uh that

3:01:28should be there

3:01:28>> so that okay so there's the full amount

3:01:30>> article two or phase two

3:01:33>> we have it

3:01:34>> nominally uh in a sentence I I had

3:01:36remarks set up to I'll spare you All

3:01:40right. It's we're requesting if town

3:01:43meeting we'll decide to find $75,000 to

3:01:46fund a service

3:01:48and that service is narrowly scoped,

3:01:51clearly defined and has objective

3:01:54criteria to be both funded and

3:01:57delivered.

3:01:59End of story.

3:02:02Happy to take questions.

3:02:07Any

3:02:17questions?

3:02:18>> So, do we know when finance committee is

3:02:21going to be making a recommendation on

3:02:22this? The reason why I ask is because

3:02:25as as I expressed at the last meeting, I

3:02:28think Mr. Carpenter Express as well on

3:02:30any financial related ones. We were we

3:02:33wanted to hear from finance committee.

3:02:35Any zoning related ones we wanted to

3:02:37hear from planning board.

3:02:39So

3:02:40>> I believe they're going to meet prior to

3:02:42the town meeting. I believe in in the uh

3:02:44if town meets at 6:30 they'll meet at

3:02:46600.

3:02:47>> So they're not going they're not going

3:02:48to hold a meeting between now and then.

3:02:50>> Not to my knowledge.

3:02:52>> The chair.

3:02:52>> Yeah.

3:02:52>> Uh the finance committee did uh hold

3:02:55this. They have been provided with the

3:02:57full warrant article as you have in your

3:02:58packet and they will be taking a

3:03:00position on this prior to the town

3:03:02meeting.

3:03:03>> So they're going to wait until town

3:03:04meeting.

3:03:05>> So they'll they'll wait till that night.

3:03:07>> Yes.

3:03:07>> Okay. Yep. Like we said. All right.

3:03:10>> May I ask is it 70,000 or 75,000?

3:03:13>> Should be 75.

3:03:14>> Yeah. And the

3:03:15>> and it's not to exceed.

3:03:20>> So that needs to be corrected too.

3:03:22>> Yep.

3:03:24Again, I would defer to the petitioner

3:03:26or make a motion to defer to the

3:03:28petitioner.

3:03:34>> Second.

3:03:37>> Second.

3:03:40>> So, we have a motion and a second to

3:03:41defer to the petitioner. All in favor?

3:03:44>> I

3:03:44>> I opposed.

3:03:45>> I I'd like to hear what finance

3:03:47committee thinks first.

3:03:50In order to do that, we're going to have

3:03:51to hold a meeting right after they do

3:03:54before.

3:03:56>> Yeah, there might not be time in between

3:03:58the meeting. We don't know what their

3:03:59schedule time is.

3:04:00>> I don't know that town meeting has ever

3:04:02started on time and to talk about one

3:04:04item. I think it could happen

3:04:08>> and through the chair certainly if there

3:04:10are questions I'm happy to answer on any

3:04:12part of this article.

3:04:16>> Yeah, that's true. We could we could

3:04:18look into posting a joint meeting with

3:04:20um finance committee.

3:04:21>> I think we just voted to

3:04:22>> voted to petitioner first. So

3:04:25>> I'm going to make a motion that we

3:04:26reconsider that vote and as part of the

3:04:29winning side I can do that.

3:04:33>> I'll second.

3:04:34>> So the motion is second to

3:04:36>> Yeah, she can second

3:04:37>> even if she was on the non-winning side.

3:04:39>> Yes, the person making the motion has

3:04:41to.

3:04:41>> Okay.

3:04:42>> And what's your motion again? You

3:04:43>> motion is to reconsider our previous

3:04:46approval.

3:04:47>> Motion to rec. We have a motion and a

3:04:48second to reconsider. All in favor?

3:04:51>> I

3:04:51>> I

3:04:52>> oppose. I

3:04:54>> I

3:04:56>> So we're staying with defer to the pet

3:04:58petitioner.

3:04:59>> Yes.

3:05:00>> Okay,

3:05:01>> that could change. We could mo motion to

3:05:04uh reconsider this at um our next

3:05:07meeting, too. I think we're all set for

3:05:09now then. Thank you.

3:05:16All right,

3:05:19that's done. So, now we're going to look

3:05:21at our next item,

3:05:26which is

3:05:29um

3:05:31we have a board vote on drain layers

3:05:33license for wall construction

3:05:36uh at 44 Hancock Street, Shbury, Mass.

3:05:3901501

3:05:41and the drain drain layer licenses have

3:05:44already been vetted by the DPW.

3:05:48So they don't even need to be here. Do I

3:05:51hear a motion?

3:05:52>> I will make a motion to approve the

3:05:53drain leer license for Wall Construction

3:05:55Inc. at 44 Hancock Street, Shrewsbury,

3:05:58Mass 01545,

3:06:00provided that all applicable

3:06:01requirements of the state and town and

3:06:02any of its departments, boards, and

3:06:04commissions have been fulfilled. Said

3:06:05license is subject to all the conditions

3:06:07stated upon it. favor to comply with any

3:06:09and all conditions. I'll invalidate the

3:06:10license and render it null and void.

3:06:12>> Second. So, we have a motion and a

3:06:14second um for um recommend this. All in

3:06:18favor?

3:06:19>> I opposed.

3:06:25All right, we have public comments next.

3:06:27We have one person signed up. Mr.

3:06:28Consilio.

3:06:42I got a couple actually a couple of

3:06:44different things, but

3:06:47since we mentioned the

3:06:51finance committee and it seems to me

3:06:54maybe the agenda should include talking

3:06:58about the uh ESL report

3:07:02because I was kind of shocked at that to

3:07:05say that to to say the least. Um,

3:07:10I was kind of,

3:07:12you know, I kind of suggested that

3:07:15because I heard about it at a finance

3:07:17committee conference and they did it in

3:07:19a they did a uh a presentation and they

3:07:22explained how it helps the towns and it

3:07:25sounded like a good idea.

3:07:29the

3:07:31I cannot possibly chart the torturous

3:07:34thinking I've had over the last four

3:07:35days over this reading this thing a

3:07:39couple of times over. Um, you know, my

3:07:42cliff notes are about five pages long.

3:07:45It It's I I think we need to

3:07:49um

3:07:51I we need to do something seriously

3:07:53different in in the way we're operating.

3:07:56I I think we are

3:07:59We are tolerating too much um

3:08:05too many short short comp uh

3:08:07shortcomings

3:08:09and we're just too much in the dark

3:08:11about all of these decisions. the the

3:08:15association of town finance committees,

3:08:17the government finance officers

3:08:19association and DLS

3:08:22have tons of training materials for us

3:08:26as boards

3:08:28to be and we have authority to oversee

3:08:32and do a much better job than what we

3:08:34are doing. uh you know part of me wants

3:08:37to ask for resignations but part of me

3:08:40also thinks we deserve a lot of this

3:08:42blame because we don't have

3:08:46you know when I came into this job and

3:08:49I'm very grateful that I was appointed

3:08:51to it I have done all I can to keep

3:08:54learning what is going on but if you ask

3:08:56me how much I was actually taught by the

3:09:00town of what is going on the DSL report

3:09:04pretty much establishes is that

3:09:06everything I've been taught within this

3:09:08room has been false.

3:09:12But there is this huge body of data out

3:09:14there all free. You don't have to hire a

3:09:17consultant.

3:09:19>> They will train us how to be better

3:09:21citizens.

3:09:23And I just

3:09:26the fact that this thing even came to

3:09:28light the way it did and that the the

3:09:31the administration is sitting on it for

3:09:34three weeks

3:09:36is to me this is all egregious.

3:09:39I I I just

3:09:43I I just don't understand what we're

3:09:46doing. We got $86 million.

3:09:50We have no oversight.

3:09:53That doesn't make any sense.

3:09:57We can be doing a much better job.

3:09:59>> Thank you. Uh sir, the three minutes has

3:10:01expired. Thank you, sir.

3:10:03>> I'll make a motion if Mr. Casilio has

3:10:05anything longer to say that we let him

3:10:07continue his thoughts.

3:10:09>> I would second that.

3:10:11>> All in favor? I opposed.

3:10:18I you know I really try to keep myself

3:10:20into the three minutes but I do appre

3:10:22you know I can talk right um

3:10:26the the question about the culvert

3:10:30you know if if we could take the grant

3:10:34why not apply for the grant and wait

3:10:36another six months and save a million

3:10:38dollars

3:10:40if I understood what she was saying

3:10:42correctly you know we've missed this

3:10:45window where the state decides you you

3:10:48can get a grant. So why not do it in the

3:10:52window if it's much less the the

3:10:55interest on the million dollars. How

3:10:57about the whole million dollars?

3:10:59Like this is

3:11:02there was so much stuff in that that

3:11:05report

3:11:07that you know if you strip I had five

3:11:09pages of cliff notes. If you strip away

3:11:12the the fluff that you know of

3:11:16communication,

3:11:18I mean, almost every piece of it is

3:11:20pretty damning. The fact that we have

3:11:23money in the bank and we're not bankrupt

3:11:26is not really an establishment of, gee,

3:11:29that's good enough. I mean, it's good

3:11:30enough at home. It's not good enough

3:11:33when we're taking care of 15,000 people.

3:11:36It's just not.

3:11:38And if you wonder why Washington is a

3:11:40mess, it's because we're a mess. If we

3:11:43want to do economic development, how

3:11:47come we don't have our own house in

3:11:48order? How come we can't do our own

3:11:50bookkeeping properly? How come we can't

3:11:52follow our own procedures properly when

3:11:55we're expecting the the public and the

3:11:57business to do this stuff? A business

3:12:00has to have a pretty solid bookkeeping

3:12:03system. We obviously don't.

3:12:06It's, you know, a a business is making

3:12:08stuff that we're eating and driving it.

3:12:11Like, they're pretty rock solid. We have

3:12:13all of these laws built on high

3:12:16expectations,

3:12:18but we don't have them here.

3:12:21We have, and this is not about, this has

3:12:24gone through based on the DSL. This

3:12:26thing is, this has been going on for

3:12:28multiple administrations.

3:12:34So

3:12:35I I just

3:12:41we need to do better. We know there's a

3:12:43wall coming right at us. We know the

3:12:46economy is going to collapse. It's not

3:12:48hard to predict cycles because the

3:12:50cycles keep coming. We don't want to

3:12:53discuss economics. But if you want to

3:12:55have economic development, you need to

3:12:57have understand economics. We are as a

3:13:00nation economically illiterate. We might

3:13:03as well think the king is divine because

3:13:05the stuff we believe is not

3:13:07mathematically provable.

3:13:10We are just creating the inflation where

3:13:13we're we're we're trying to escape. And

3:13:15for the most part, it starts in this

3:13:17room. That 2 and a half% that the DSL

3:13:21DSL says is a good base back is actually

3:13:27is driving the entire country to hell.

3:13:30It's why the banks keep changing their

3:13:32percentages. The businesses change their

3:13:35percentages. It has to come back around.

3:13:38A system is a system. It's a closed

3:13:41loop. The money has to go through it to

3:13:44lubricate. But we don't need this kind

3:13:46of bookkeeping where everybody gets a 3%

3:13:49raise, every price goes up 3%, all the

3:13:52rent goes up 3%. It makes no sense

3:13:56what we are doing make as a as a

3:13:59society, not just as a town, but the

3:14:02town is really,

3:14:04you know, I've been studying this stuff

3:14:05for way too long. At the end of the day,

3:14:08the only people that can save this

3:14:10country is Town Hall. It's not going to

3:14:14happen on Wall Street. It's not going to

3:14:16happen in in in Congress. And I don't

3:14:18think it's going to happen on Beacon

3:14:20Hill unless the towns run better and

3:14:23tell the state what we want better. When

3:14:28I learned about the DSL audit,

3:14:32the DSL representative

3:14:35um

3:14:38at that time was one of the solutions

3:14:40for them cutting chapter 90 funds was to

3:14:43give us the opportunity to raise our

3:14:46local meals tax 1%.

3:14:49Which was a complete joke compared to

3:14:51how much they were cutting. But it also

3:14:54shows yet again how they think adding

3:14:56percentages is somehow the problem is

3:14:59the solution to percentages that are

3:15:02going up. There's a this is like a

3:15:05fundamental dis disconnect or a double

3:15:09think between how money flows. If you

3:15:12want to have an economy that works there

3:15:16is tons of literature out there that ex

3:15:19that has studied all this stuff. There's

3:15:22renaissances. We could have, you know, a

3:15:25fountain on every corner. Instead, we

3:15:27have flock cameras. It doesn't make

3:15:30sense what we have done to ourselves as

3:15:32a society.

3:15:34It just doesn't.

3:15:38And you know, we can change. If we ask

3:15:41for resignations,

3:15:43we still need to actually step up to the

3:15:46plate and do a better job and use the

3:15:49information that's out there and and you

3:15:52basically use the free help that's out

3:15:54there and

3:15:57basically set a standard for other towns

3:15:59to follow. This thing where you call up

3:16:01other towns, how much are you making?

3:16:03How much are you spend on this? How many

3:16:05car accidents were in your erected sick?

3:16:08Who cares? makes no difference. You need

3:16:10to know the difference between right and

3:16:12wrong and go towards right. That's all

3:16:15that you can do and every day you wake

3:16:18up. What is more true than what I

3:16:21thought I believed yesterday?

3:16:25>> And anyway, thank you for hearing me

3:16:26out.

3:16:27>> Thank you.

3:16:27>> Thank you. Can

3:16:30>> you just make a comment um in general um

3:16:33to the board because I believe we all

3:16:36since we've been on the board have taken

3:16:38actions to bring some of this stuff to

3:16:40light. Obviously probably more damning

3:16:42than even we realize, but there has been

3:16:46action taken by this board and this

3:16:48administration to try to at least bring

3:16:51some of these to light. We we obviously

3:16:53weren't here for a long time,

3:16:56>> but when we got here, we realized there

3:16:58were some processes and some things that

3:16:59needed adjustment.

3:17:01>> I know from day one when I got on the

3:17:03board, um it was a challenge to get the

3:17:05support needed to move forward. So, some

3:17:07things didn't come forward. I I would

3:17:09like to say thank you to this board for

3:17:12listening, for taking action, and trying

3:17:15to bring these things together. It will

3:17:17take time. I've been on the board four

3:17:18years, and I've never stopped trying.

3:17:21Um, we've seen some improvements in our

3:17:23budgeting process. Is that the end? No,

3:17:25it's not. There's a lot more to do. We

3:17:28can all squabble over it. But I do think

3:17:30this board and their leadership have

3:17:34tried to bring some of this to light and

3:17:35get to resolutions. It's going to take a

3:17:37lot longer than even our terms are here,

3:17:40but we're working on that. So, thank

3:17:42you.

3:17:44>> Thank you.

3:17:45Um,

3:17:47we received some minutes in our packet

3:17:49for September 14th, 2026. Does anyone

3:17:51have any questions or issues?

3:17:53>> Okay, so these minutes are accepted as

3:17:56um presented to us. Um, does anyone have

3:18:00anything else?

3:18:02>> I'll make a motion to adjurnn.

3:18:04>> A second.

3:18:05>> So, a motion and second to adjurnn. All

3:18:07in favor? I oppose? No. Thank you.