2026-10-13 - Select Board

Summary

Based on auto-generated captions; names, numbers and article numbers may be misheard. Speakers are not labeled in the captions, so attributions are inferred from context. Most votes were voice votes and individual votes are not audible unless noted.

Time on topic (from transcript timestamps; approximate, includes side talk):

Topic	Minutes	Share
Water Street Culvert Replacement	28	21%
Sidewalk and Crosswalk Connectivity	18	14%
High School All-Purpose Field	13	10%
Accessible Activity Bus	3	2%
Town Building Condition Study	11	8%
Select Board Agenda Practices	10	8%
Flock Camera Contract	7	5%
HousingWorks Shared Use Path Grant	7	5%
Roadway Condition Software	6	5%
InStyle Galaxy Tobacco Permit Review	5	4%
Town Staffing Study	4	3%
Traffic Safety	2	2%
New Fire Station at 10 Prospect Street	1	1%
Other business	17	13%

Regular meeting, Tuesday, October 13, 2026, at Town Hall (hybrid, recorded by ACTV).
Chair Anne Cavanaugh presided; the meeting ran about 2 hours 12 minutes and adjourned by voice vote with no executive session.
About half the evening was the Select Board's recommendations on the articles for the Special Town Meeting - October 27, 2026.
The board's preference for paying from reserves rather than borrowing shaped the Water Street vote.

InStyle Galaxy Tobacco Permit Review

01:58-07:27

Public comment from Al Rafferty (introduced as Alan Rafferty, Paul Street; spelling as heard), the only speaker signed up. A podium microphone problem forced him to start over (about 03:32-04:42).
He described the most recent Board of Health hearing on a tobacco-sales violation involving a store at the mall (name as heard: InStyle Galaxy), continued from July 22. His account: the store's representative had asked for a continuance and said he had filed a complaint with the district attorney alleging public corruption; the Board of Health chair, on advice of town counsel, denied the continuance without a board vote and had the representative removed after one warning. He called the hearing a fiasco and said the representative was treated differently from a person at a later hearing.
This is one resident's account of another board's hearing; the Select Board took no action and no one responded. The captions garble names throughout.

Other business

00:05-01:58, 07:32-18:20, 29:29-31:07, 31:48-33:22, 2:11:13-2:12:25

Opening, pledge and hybrid-meeting notice.
A public hearing on a National Grid pole petition for three poles on Sunrise Avenue (name as heard) tied to a feeder voltage conversion; National Grid's representative Fritz Jolen (as heard) said customers get notice of any outage. Hearing closed and the petition approved by voice vote. A separate outdoor-entertainment license hearing for a business (name as heard: Groove Lab Collective) was withdrawn.
Police Chief R. Scott Mills and Deputy Chief Ken Charlton (as heard) asked the board to accept three public-safety grants: a municipal road safety grant for traffic enforcement overtime and a replacement speed trailer, a state 911 emergency medical dispatch software grant ($3,628.80) and a state 911 training grant (about $63,000; digits garbled in the captions). The motion put the total near $97,000 (as heard). Approved by voice vote. The chief credited a lieutenant and the dispatch director for winning the grants.
Trick-or-treat hours for Saturday, October 31 were set at 5:00 to 8:00 PM, a half hour longer than usual, on the police chief's recommendation. Approved.
Town Manager Dori Vecchio reminded viewers of the pre-Town Meeting question session on Monday, October 19, at 6 PM, recorded for later viewing. See 2026-10-19 - Pre-Town Meeting.
Approved a $350 gift from a credit union to the DPW recreation and culture division (holiday tree lighting cookie sponsor) and a mailing-address change on a flammable storage permit at 793 Southbridge Street (as heard).
Minutes were accepted as amended after a member asked that a recorded vote on Article 22 be corrected. Next regular meeting is just under two weeks away, with the Special Town Meeting the Tuesday after it.

HousingWorks Shared Use Path Grant

18:33-25:05

Assistant Town Manager Paul Dell'Aquila asked the board to accept a $390,000 state housing-and-livable-communities infrastructure grant (amount as heard) for design, engineering and permitting of an approximately mile-and-a-quarter shared-use path from the Oxford town line toward Auburn Middle School, on a street the captions render "Bler Street".
Questions: accessibility (he said the path would have to be fully accessible), a public process (the grant scope calls for multiple public meetings) and which board would oversee it (a working group, possibly ad hoc; not yet decided). He tied it to nearby 40B housing and a long-range link toward the Midstate Trail.
Accepted by voice vote.

Select Board Agenda Practices

25:05-29:26, 2:05:37-2:11:08

Following a dispute at the last meeting over items held because the agenda did not say "vote", the Town Manager reported that the open meeting law does not require the word and that a vote is implied for any agenda item. Board members split over whether the posted agenda should say "possible vote" consistently, never, or "always where expected". One member said stating votes on some items and not others misleads the public.
Voice vote: the board adopted a policy of not including any vote wording on the posted agenda so it keeps flexibility to vote on any item. Individual votes are not audible.
Late in the meeting Steve Chambers asked for a standing agenda slot for member comments and requests for future agenda items, noting earlier names for it had been rejected by town counsel. The Town Manager said a "members may recommend future agenda items" item can be added; the board asked for a revised agenda policy at the next meeting.
In public comment Eric Richards (Precinct 4) suggested a citizen portal for requesting standing agenda items with limits per person.

New Fire Station at 10 Prospect Street

31:07-31:48

Taken off the table: the board voted to authorize signing the National Grid easement, which moves a pole that would have been in front of the new station's bay doors. Approved by voice vote.

Traffic Safety

33:22-35:06

Three-way stop at Rochdale Street (as heard: Rodale) and West Street: a member asked for variable message boards ahead of the change, and DPW Director Joanna Paquin agreed. The board approved the installation. No public comment.

High School All-Purpose Field

35:31-51:43 (shared with the activity bus item below)

Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 on the Special Town Meeting warrant. Superintendent R.J. Scaza and school business manager Jennifer Stannic attended; the earlier hold was about naming the funding source, now free cash or stabilization for Article 3 ($150,000).
The multi-purpose field dates to the 2006 building. Article 4 repurposes $150,000 of school capital money (set aside for parking work at a building the captions render "Binmar"); the DPW had done part of that work. Article 6 repurposes $60,000 of high school parking resurfacing money and $40,000 set aside for scoreboards that still work. None of the $40,000 has been borrowed.
Steve Chambers and another member criticized the pattern of reallocating leftover capital money rather than returning it to free cash and voting again later, calling it the "departmental slush fund" problem; both said they were not blaming the school department, which has a new superintendent. One member worried asphalt costs could leave the parking lot short.
Scaza said even with these articles the town is about $150,000 short: he told the board about $550,000 is lined up and the cost is likely higher (Pre-Town Meeting later said about $650,000). A further free-cash request would wait for the spring Town Meeting, so installation timing is uncertain. A member said the field was missed in the capital plan; the school side said a $300,000 request was submitted to the town but never reached the warrant.
Voice votes: the board agreed to take 3, 4 and 6 together and recommended approval, with at least one member voting reluctantly and another saying "this should not be happening. We have professionals that we pay to do this" (captions; speaker unclear).

Accessible Activity Bus

35:31-51:43 (shared with the field item above)

Article 5 ($70,000 free cash, heard as "$7,000") for a replacement wheelchair-accessible activity bus: total $140,000 with $70,000 from a state fair-share earmark; the current bus carries 12 passengers and one wheelchair. Recommended approval.

Town Staffing Study

51:53-55:50

Article 10, $70,000 from free cash for a staffing and operational study, to be done through the Collins Center. It covers town departments only, not schools and not the fire department (which recently had its own study). It is not a salary study. The board asked for the article to be amended to say what is excluded, and recommended approval.

Town Building Condition Study

55:54-1:06:51

Article 11, $80,000 from free cash for a study of all town-owned buildings (roofs, mechanical, compliance) except HVAC, which is being studied through grants; the quote came from a former school facilities official (name as heard: Joe Fehee, see Joe Fehee). It includes schools, the historical museum and fire stations.
Members asked to reuse earlier police and fire building and space studies and about grants; the Town Manager said a state program for municipal buildings similar to the school building authority is before the legislature.
One member doubted $80,000 is enough, and the board first voted to recommend approval, with at least one opposed. Then a member moved to reconsider and the board voted to defer to the petitioner instead, leaving the Town Meeting to decide. Voice votes.

Roadway Condition Software

1:06:57-1:12:55

Article 13, $20,000 from free cash (the source is now identified) for software that scans road conditions. The DPW director said vendors are being evaluated, one (a vehicle-mounted scanner with AI analysis and mapping data) will present the next day, and a decision is expected within weeks. An annual data update fee of a similar size is expected in future budgets. Members wanted more of these answers at Town Meeting. Recommended approval.

Water Street Culvert Replacement

1:12:56-1:40:28

Article 21 asks Town Meeting to borrow $1.4 million. The CFO gave current borrowing rates (about 5.25% for 30 years, 4.75% for 20) and an interest estimate of roughly $70,000 a year or about $1.4 million over 20 years at 5% (the captions are unclear, and Kirrane's earlier worst-case figure was higher).
Staff said the plan is a state grant, with this borrowing as a backup. Paquin said the grant timeline likely cannot support next summer's construction and that permitting is still pending; without borrowing, the half-closed road could wait three years, as one member put it.
Members, led by Todd Kirrane, objected to borrowing when the town has free cash and about $5.1 million in stabilization (corrected from a first answer of $1.55 million). Staff said using $1.4 million of free cash would put reserves at about 16 to 16.5% of the general fund budget, versus the 17% target discussed with the state Division of Local Services, and that rating agencies like strong reserves. Others said stabilization needs the same two-thirds vote as borrowing. Stabilization was the preferred source.
Debate over how to vote: defer to the petitioner (to avoid signaling opposition to fixing the road) versus "not recommend" (to push back on borrowing). A member's motion (speaker unclear) was to recommend against the article as written, but to say the board would support it if funded from stabilization, and to authorize the chair to say so at Town Meeting.
Voice vote with the tally heard as 3-2 in favor of that motion.

Flock Camera Contract

1:40:45-1:47:10

Article 22, the citizen petition on Flock license plate cameras. The earlier board vote was a 2-2 split between defer to petitioner and recommend. A member said they oppose approving it because it bans a vendor rather than the practice; another noted town counsel's letter says Town Meeting may request but not require action, and argued Flock differs from ordinary plate readers because of its searchable national database.
Motion to not recommend; the voice vote result is not clearly audible (it appears to have passed).

Sidewalk and Crosswalk Connectivity

1:47:16-2:05:34

Chambers raised a gap in a road and sidewalk project on a street the captions render "Bankro Street" (possibly Bancroft Street; unverified). The sidewalk stops partway, leaving about 1,600 feet and an estimated 152 homes, two condominium associations and a church without it; school bus access was a concern. Residents' notice letter did not say where the sidewalks would stop.
Paquin said the unfinished part is outside the priority plan, would need a survey and design because of driveway slopes and rights of way, and that DPW has a heavy workload. A member argued the plan is a guide, not a limit, and that mobilized equipment makes now the time. The Town Manager promised a report on cost, timing and funding at the next meeting.
Another member said Auburn Street crosswalks had been built leading to grass near Perry Street (as heard) and are being relocated; he asked that the town avoid new crosswalks to nowhere.

Sources

Video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=H6ePeNBMn4o

Video

Transcript

These are auto-generated captions; names and numbers may be misheard.

Transcript

00:05Okay, [music] good evening. Welcome to

00:06the select board meeting. This is um

00:10October 13, 2026.

00:13Um, this meeting of this open meeting of

00:16the town of Barbin Select Board is being

00:19conducted both in person and remotely

00:22consistent with chapter 107 of the acts

00:25of 2022 which suspends the requirement

00:28of the open meeting law to have all

00:30meetings in a publicly accessible

00:32physical location. Further, all members

00:35of public bodies are allowed to

00:37participate remotely as long as

00:39reasonable public access is afforded so

00:41that the public can follow along with

00:43the deliberations of the meeting. For

00:46the public to join the meeting remotely

00:48by telephone, dial 1-48-650-3123

00:54and use access code 983263437.

01:00or the public can join via computer at

01:04meet.go.au

01:08select board room. All supporting

01:10materials that have been provided to

01:12members of this body are available on

01:14the town's website. The public is

01:16encouraged to follow along using the

01:17posted agenda. Please um note that this

01:20meeting is being recorded by Auburn

01:22Cable Television. Is anyone else

01:23recording tonight's meeting?

01:26Okay. So, um, please stand if you're

01:30able for the pledge of allegiance.

01:35>> I aliance to the flag of the United

01:38States of America and to the republic

01:41for which it stands, one nation under

01:44God, indivisible, with liberty and

01:46justice for all.

01:48>> All right. So, we have public comment

01:51time.

01:56Thank you.

01:58>> So, we have one person signed up for C

02:00uh public comments. Alan Rafferty. Um,

02:02just state your name and address,

02:04please.

02:07>> And like you said, Alan Rafferty, Paul

02:09Street. Good evening.

02:12At the most recent board of health

02:13meeting, a hearing concerning a tobacco

02:17sales violation was held. The agenda

02:20clearly stated the owner of InStyle

02:22Galaxy was requesting a permit

02:25revocation review that was continued

02:27from July 22nd. Nicholas Fierella spoke

02:30on behalf of the store owner. [snorts]

02:34At the onset, Chairman Eric Art said

02:39there have been communications back and

02:41forth, but only wanted to discuss a new

02:43fourth violation despite what the agenda

02:47said. Mr. FOLO stated he delivered

02:51written requests to the town and board

02:53officials before the meeting asking for

02:55a continuence.

02:57He informed the board that he had filed

03:00a complaint with the district attorney's

03:02office alleging public corruption by the

03:04tobacco commission, the town of Auburn,

03:06and its town council to illegally rip

03:09strip a tobacco license from a

03:12minorityowned businessman.

03:15>> [snorts]

03:16>> The chair starts to ask board members if

03:19they want to review the issue submitted,

03:21but then suddenly boots the request to

03:24town council who for some reason was

03:26present that night despite the chair

03:29pleading ignorance of any prior

03:31knowledge of any allegations.

03:32>> Mr. Aferty, hold on just for a moment.

03:34Do is the um podium um muted? Can we

03:38check that? We have someone online says

03:40the podium is muted.

03:42>> It's going out live and it's

03:45coming through here.

03:46>> It is.

03:47>> Well, that's the Auburn cable

03:48television. That's that's in the

03:50meeting.

03:51>> You have to push unmute

03:55>> up here.

03:56>> I believe so.

03:59That's above my pay.

04:07>> ACTV.

04:08>> What's that? It's this one. Go to it

04:10again, please.

04:12You see where it says? Oh. Oh, he said

04:14he can. It's better now.

04:16>> It's better. Okay. That's That's us. I

04:18don't know if that's Can you right click

04:20on it? Maybe.

04:21>> Hold on a second. Mr. Rapidity

04:22>> does say no audio here.

04:24>> Yeah. On that on that, but can can you

04:25talk into the microphone and and Mr.

04:28Melanzano, can you confirm if you can

04:29hear Mr. Rafity once he does?

04:32>> Testing. One, two, one, two. Sibilance.

04:37>> Okay.

04:38>> All right.

04:38>> You're good to go now. Now, um, if you

04:40like, why don't you start over, please?

04:42Okay.

04:44>> Yes. I I love hearing myself speak, so I

04:46will.

04:49>> Good evening.

04:49>> Thank you.

04:50>> At the most recent board of health

04:52meeting, a uh hearing concerning a

04:55tobacco sales violation was held. The

04:58agenda clearly states that the owner of

05:00InStyle Galaxy at the mall was

05:02requesting a permit revocation review

05:05that was continued from July 22nd.

05:08Nicholas Fierella spoke on behalf of the

05:10store owner. At the onset, Chair Eric

05:13Utison said there has been communication

05:16back and forth, but he only wanted to

05:18discuss a new fourth violation despite

05:20what the agenda said. Mr. Felo stated he

05:24had delivered requests to the town and

05:26board officials before the meeting for a

05:28continuence. He informed the board that

05:31he had filed a complaint with the DA's

05:33office alleging public corruption by the

05:35tobacco commission, the town of Auburn,

05:37and its town council to illegally strip

05:39a tobacco license from a minorityowned

05:42businessman. The chair starts to ask

05:45board members if they want to review the

05:47issue submitted, but then suddenly boots

05:50the request to town council, who for

05:53some reason was present that night,

05:54despite the chair pleading ignorance of

05:56any prior knowledge of any allegations.

05:59Town council stated there would be no

06:02continuence. When asked why, council

06:07replied, "Because we don't have to give

06:10you one."

06:12When asked for the reason for that, she

06:14stated again, "We don't have to give you

06:17one." Mr. Fierella asked the chair, Eric

06:20Utson, if town council was now in charge

06:22of the hearing. He said, "If you don't

06:25like the decision, you can go to court."

06:28Essentially inviting the town to be

06:29sued. Here's the problem. The board of

06:33health members never took a vote, which

06:36they were required to do.

06:38The chair on advice of counsel

06:41unilaterally denied the continuence

06:43request illegally without a required

06:47board vote. Even more shocking, the

06:50chair became impatient with Mr. Fiorello

06:52and gave him one warning and then threw

06:55him out of the building.

06:57At a later hearing, the chair gave a

07:00person three warnings and never threw

07:02him out of the building. Mr. Fierella

07:05was not given equal treatment. Talk

07:08about playing into the hands of Mr.

07:09Fierella's complaint against the town.

07:11He was denied a vote for continuence

07:14with the full presence of the newly

07:16hired town council present who should

07:18have known better and then was denied

07:21due process by being prematurely thrown

07:24out of the hearing. I only have to say

07:27what a fiascoal the meeting was.

07:32>> Okay. Thank you. Um, so our next item on

07:35the agenda is uh a public hearing about

07:38an outdoor entertainment license for

07:40Groove Lab Collective in Auburn. Do I

07:43hear that's um withdrawn?

07:44>> It is. It's okay. So withdrawn. So, the

07:48next we're going to the uh a public

07:50hearing uh for at 6:30, a board vote on

07:54a pole petition for Sunrise A National

07:56Grid to install three J0 poles on

08:01Sunrise A beginning at a point

08:02approximately 850 ft south of the

08:05central line of the intersection of

08:07Stafford Street and continuing

08:09approximately 290 ft in a south

08:12direction. Do I hear a motion?

08:16Make a motion to open the public

08:17hearing.

08:17>> A second. So we have a motion and a

08:19second to open the public hearing. All

08:21in favor? I opposed. Okay. Do we have

08:24someone from National Grid? I think

08:26online.

08:30>> Good afternoon members of the board. My

08:31name is Fritz Jolen from National Grid

08:33939 South Bridge Street in Worther.

08:38>> Okay. Can you tell us why the poll is

08:39being moved?

08:42>> Of course. Um well this work is part of

08:45a feeder conversion project involving

08:47two different circuits with the goal of

08:49converting the uh this portion of the

08:51distriution system and upgrade equipment

08:54to support the higher voltage and this

08:56section showed in some where I have that

09:02part of a feeder converter version where

09:05national grid will convert the line to a

09:07higher voltage and also upgrading some

09:09existing pole to to the standard to our

09:11standard right

09:12as well as installing three um three

09:15additional codes.

09:18So in short this this is a system system

09:21upgrade and voltage conversion project

09:23to to move [music] this tab to a new

09:26feeder configuration actually.

09:30>> Okay, thank you. Um does anyone have any

09:33questions

09:35>> um through the chair? Do you anticipate

09:37there's going to be any disruption in

09:38service?

09:42>> Um well I believe that for this project

09:47if we will have any disruption of

09:49service the way as it works that

09:52national grid will reach out to uh all

09:54the customers and 12 and let them know

09:57if the saltage um and outage is

10:00scheduled and take the necessary

10:03precautions to move forward projects.

10:06Thank you.

10:08>> Okay. Any other questions?

10:11Is there anyone here um anyone here um

10:14from the public have any questions?

10:19>> Okay. Um hearing none. Do I hear a

10:21motion?

10:21>> Make a motion to close the public

10:22hearing.

10:23>> Second.

10:24>> We have a motion and a second to close

10:25the public hearing. All in favor?

10:27>> I

10:28>> I opposed.

10:30And do I hear another motion? I'll make

10:32a motion to approve a pole petition for

10:34National Grid to install three JO poles

10:36on Sunrise Avenue beginning at a point

10:38approximately 850 ft south of the center

10:41line of the intersection of Stafford

10:43Street and continuing approximately 290

10:45ft in a south direction.

10:48>> Second.

10:49>> We have a motion and a second. All in

10:51favor? I opposed.

10:54All right.

10:55Next, we have departmental items. So,

10:57the um police department uh public

11:00safety dispatch communication grant

11:02awards. Thank you. So, gentlemen, would

11:04you like to come up? [snorts]

11:09>> And for the viewers at home, please

11:11identify yourselves.

11:17Mr.

11:18>> Chair, [laughter]

11:20sitting every time. Um Scott Mills, uh

11:24I'm the chief of police

11:26>> and Ken Charlton, I'm the deputy chief

11:28of police.

11:30>> Great. Well, grants are always a

11:32wonderful thing to hear about. So, can

11:33you tell us about these?

11:34>> Certainly. Uh through the chair,

11:36obviously. Um we are here just asking

11:40for the board's approval to accept the

11:42grant funding for uh first off the the

11:46grant from the office of grants and

11:49research which is a municipal road

11:51safety grant. It's been known by a bunch

11:53of other names, but basically it's it's

11:55uh just traffic enforcement related to

11:57mobilizations that generally fall around

12:00the holidays, but specifically areas

12:02that are identified or programs that are

12:04identified, mobilizations that are

12:06identified by that group. Uh things like

12:10click it or ticket, you drink, you

12:11drive, you lose, you know, those kind of

12:13things. Um the $30,000

12:16is partially overtime. So, $20,000 of

12:19the 30 is overtime. And uh and it also

12:24provides for $9,7772

12:28for a traffic equipment purchase, which

12:31I believe at this point we're targeting

12:34a speed trailer to replace. We have a

12:38one trailer that's very old. Uh so we'd

12:41like to upgrade that. Um so that's the

12:45the municipal road safety grant. Um the

12:48other two grants both fall under the

12:50public safety dispatch center uh

12:51communications department. The first is

12:54for the emergency medical dispatch grant

12:58which is through state 911. That's

13:00$3,628.

13:02That entire amount pays for the software

13:05that runs the EMD program. So, if you

13:09were to call and need instructions on

13:12CPR or something similar, it's just a

13:14it's a computerized checklist so that

13:16they walk you through the steps of all

13:18those kinds of programs. So, [snorts]

13:20once that software is purchased that

13:22expends the entirety of of that

13:24particular grant. Um, then secondly,

13:27excuse me, [clears throat] there's

13:28another grant through state 911, the

13:30training grant. It's uh a total of

13:32$63,000

13:34$63,21.76

13:37um portion of that it pays for uh

13:40memberships to two professional

13:41organizations overtime and mileage costs

13:44to replace communications personnel who

13:46who uh attend career development type

13:48trainings and then also the the

13:52department the communications group

13:54particular uh two I think currently

13:56right now that are trained for the uh

13:59TUR team the uh emergency mergency

14:01response team so that they go off and uh

14:04they respond to

14:07when there's a man-made or or natural

14:10disaster or you know like in the case of

14:12uh recently when uh the the Oxbridge

14:15police officer was killed you know in

14:17order to relieve their dispatchers for a

14:19period of time the tur team went down

14:20and assumed those duties um so they kind

14:24of travel around the central mass area

14:25and they respond to those kind of things

14:28so it pays potentially for those

14:30deployments as well.

14:33And just one last thing is the municipal

14:38road safety grant. I just want to give

14:39credit where credit's due. Uh Lieutenant

14:41Tarini, Mike Tarini Jr. actually has

14:44been doing a lot of the grant stuff and

14:45he does a great job. And then director

14:47Maryanne Oconor has been applying for

14:50all these state 911 grants and has been

14:54extremely successful uh in obtaining

14:56them. So we appreciate that.

15:01Do you have any questions?

15:03>> Does anyone have any questions?

15:06[snorts]

15:08>> Um I I have a question. So are these

15:10replacing um have we already budgeted

15:14the money for these costs any of them in

15:16our in the um operating budget and the

15:19this would replace that?

15:21Well, obviously I mean you can't use

15:22grants to supplant like operational

15:24costs or anything like that, but

15:27as far as we I mean essentially we do

15:30rely on the you know the EMD grant

15:32specifically.

15:33>> Um so that does alleviate that. We we we

15:36>> we do plan on it. These are grants to

15:38all three programs. Uh well, EMD less

15:40so, but 911 training, support and

15:44incentive, which is another month or so

15:46out. Um and then any of the the uh

15:49municipal road safety grants, the

15:51highway safety grants, we've been

15:53participating in those programs for over

15:56two decades. Um, so while we can't

15:59absolutely plan on the money, it

16:01>> it definitely augments, you know, the

16:03money that we have operationally to use

16:05for, you know, traffic enforcement is

16:06is, as you know, is one of the main

16:09concerns in town and continues

16:10regardless. So,

16:12>> um, so we're we're fortunate that the

16:14programs exist and that we're able to

16:16access them now.

16:17>> Okay. Thank you.

16:18>> Sure.

16:19>> Um,

16:21any other questions? No. Do I hear a

16:24motion? I'll make a motion to accept the

16:26following grant awards for the Auburn

16:27Police Department and Public Safety

16:28Dispatch/communications

16:30department municipal road safety grant

16:32in the amount of $3,327.72.

16:36State 911 emergency medical dispatch EMD

16:39grant in the amount of $3,628.80

16:43and State 911 Training Grant in the

16:45amount of $63,21.76

16:49for a total of $96,97828.

16:54I'll second. So,

16:55>> we have a motion and a second. All in

16:57favor? I oppose.

16:59>> Good. We're all set.

17:01>> Madam chair,

17:01>> can I make a motion to move up item 11B

17:05since we already have the chiefs here?

17:07>> Okay. [clears throat]

17:09Motion.

17:10>> Um, I'll second the motion.

17:12>> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second.

17:14All in favor to move that 11 item 11B

17:16up. I

17:17>> I

17:18>> I opposed. All right. So,

17:21>> this is a very serious issue as we all

17:23know. Um, and I don't know if you've had

17:26time to research it and if you any of

17:27you have any contrary or contradictory

17:31uh opinions.

17:33I thought it was in the best interest of

17:35the trick-or-treaters and the town to

17:38extend it a half hour this year at 5:00

17:40because it's a Saturday. um couple years

17:43we'll have to rever it back when it's a

17:44Monday perhaps but as of right now I

17:47think that's I felt like that was the

17:50responsible recommendation to make.

17:52[laughter]

17:53>> Excellent. Thank you. Any questions or

17:57do I hear a motion?

17:58>> I'll make a motion to approve the

17:59recommendation for Halloween hours

18:00October 31st, 2026 beginning at 5:00

18:03p.m. and ending at 8:00 p.m.

18:05>> Second. So we have a motion and a

18:07second. All in favor?

18:08>> I opposed.

18:10>> All right. So, trick-or- treat hours are

18:13from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

18:15[clears throat] Thank you.

18:16>> Thank you very much.

18:16>> Thank you.

18:20>> See, I am on a chair for this.

18:24>> All right, continuing. Um, let's see.

18:27Under select board general items, we

18:29don't have any proclamations or

18:31recognitions or gift acceptances. Um, so

18:33we'll go to town manager items. first um

18:36notification of housing works

18:38infrastructure grant award and our

18:41economic development director/ass

18:43assistant town manager Paul Dawquilla

18:45will be um telling us about it.

18:50Great. Thank you madam chair. Actually

18:52this one try a different mic here.

19:00>> Thank you madam chair. Um, so this is a

19:02more positive grant news to report this

19:05evening. Uh, back in June, I submitted

19:07an application to the state's one-stop

19:09program for uh, design and engineering

19:12and permitting work to, uh, to

19:15ultimately construct a approximately

19:17mile and a quarter mixeduse shared use

19:20path from appro from the Auburn town

19:22line to approximately Auburn Middle

19:23School. had been previously identified I

19:25believe in the housing production plan

19:27and uh trail connectivity was mentioned

19:29generally in both the open space plans

19:31and master plans. So if we were tonight

19:34I'm asking the board to accept this

19:36grant. If we were to accept this this

19:38would enable that design work to happen.

19:40Uh there would be extensive community

19:42outreach. there would be extensive

19:44involvement with staff and it would uh

19:47again with we're trying to target some

19:50development in that area as we're aware

19:52uh we had a large 40B development going

19:54into that vicinity uh and there's a

19:56similar project going on in Oxford uh

20:00and so this this uh this potential

20:03future trail would link all these

20:06residential and commercial uses we have

20:08in that part of Route 20 Route 12 I

20:11guess in that vicinity

20:13So, uh, ultimately, you know, the the

20:14the grand vision is we connect into, uh,

20:17perhaps the Midstate Trail, uh, which is

20:19to the west and this this won't quite

20:22get us to the Blackstone Valley Trail.

20:24It goes in a complete different

20:25direction. Uh, but nonetheless, uh,

20:28these p these trails get built up over

20:30time. So, as we get these pieces

20:31together, it really creates some, uh,

20:33long resources for people to use. Uh

20:37happy to try to answer any questions

20:38beyond uh what I just mentioned and what

20:41was contained in the memo in your

20:42packets.

20:45>> Okay, thank you. Any questions?

20:49>> So, I know it's early in there, but um

20:51is there any thought given to

20:52accessibility in certain areas? I know

20:54the trail connectivity is something that

20:57was discussed um like you mentioned many

20:59different boards. Um obviously paving

21:03entire trails is not something but

21:05trying to ensure access to the

21:07accessible or close to accessible parts

21:09of the trail.

21:10>> Yeah. Through the chair. Uh uh I don't

21:12have any specific spots identified just

21:14yet that will go through the process.

21:16However, I believe that this would have

21:18to be a fully accessible trail. So it

21:20would be people in uh assisted devices,

21:23chairs, uh walkers, people in strollers,

21:26bikes. So it' be really all users would

21:28be capable of using this and so we would

21:30have to incorporate uh proper access.

21:33Right now it cuts across a few different

21:35roads and so that those are sort of

21:37natural places where folks might be able

21:39to enter and exit the trails. Uh

21:42so what will that's but that's that's

21:44certainly something we're going to be

21:45sens sensitive to through the process.

21:51>> Just a couple questions. Um, in terms of

21:53the process for this, uh, once you have

21:55a design engineer on board, um, is there

21:58going to be a public process that's part

22:00of this, uh, working with the public and

22:02the abutters as the design moves forward

22:04from initial concept to to, uh,

22:07preliminary design to final design. So

22:10we, you know, can make sure that abuing

22:12businesses, residences, and also the

22:14larger community um, understands how

22:17this is moving forward and has a say in

22:19what the ultimate design looks like.

22:21through the chair. This uh the scope

22:22that we submitted calls for multiple

22:24public meetings.

22:26>> And is there going to be um given that

22:28we're a town form of government, is

22:30there going to be a board or commission

22:31that you're going to be working closely

22:33with um as this develops, whether it's

22:36the planning board um to sort of oversee

22:39and put on or the parks and wreck um

22:42commission. Is is there are you

22:44envisioned to be working with some

22:46specific board or commission on this?

22:48>> I envisioned there would be a working

22:49group. I had not gotten as far as uh

22:51picking out the uh which group might be

22:54best suited for that yet or whether we

22:55stand up sort of an ad hoc committee for

22:58this. Uh again, I I didn't want to get

23:00ahead of us accepting the grant.

23:03>> So, but you are envisioning either a

23:06specific board or possibly appointing a

23:08town a town manager appointed or staff

23:10appointed working group. Yes.

23:13>> Thank you.

23:15Any

23:17other questions?

23:19>> Okay. And

23:22do we have a um

23:27>> Okay.

23:28>> We don't need to have a um vote or

23:30anything on this. Um

23:31>> we do have to we are we do

23:33>> we do accept the grant. Okay. Um, I I

23:36wanted to bring this up because I know

23:37this came up at the last meeting where

23:40historically our agendas our agenda

23:42items would say potential vote or

23:44possible vote. Um, and we had a series

23:47that did not and there we held them

23:48over. Um, but my understanding in

23:51looking at the the open meeting law, and

23:54I'm more than open to be corrected on

23:56this, is that the agenda item doesn't

23:58have to specifically say that we're

24:00going to take a vote or not. It's up to

24:01the board whether they want to take a

24:02vote or not. So I think if we have it as

24:05a future agenda item to discuss how our

24:07agenda looks like or if we want to or

24:09Miss Carpenter might know if there if

24:11our agenda policy specifies that it says

24:14vote

24:15>> because if not as long as we have an

24:18agenda item like this that explains to

24:20the public what we're going to be

24:22discussing. We we do have the right to

24:24vote on it or not.

24:25>> Yeah. Um that'll be addressed um in the

24:28next agenda item.

24:30>> Okay. Perfect. So,

24:31>> so we'll we'll get to that in a moment.

24:33>> Okay. So, do we want to take a vote on

24:36this? I'm comfortable taking a vote on

24:37this tonight at

24:38>> Yep. Do I hear a motion?

24:39>> Okay. So, I will make a motion to accept

24:42the executive office of housing and

24:44livable communities housing works

24:47infrastructure program in the amount of

24:493,9 $390,000 for the design and

24:53engineering of the Bler Street shared

24:55use path.

24:56>> I'll second.

24:56>> Do we have a motion? Okay, I'll set. Do

25:00uh do we have a motion and a second? All

25:01in favor?

25:02>> I opposed.

25:05Okay. So, moving on to our next agenda

25:07item is 10B,formational communication

25:11regarding whether or not the town needs

25:13to reference uh a board vote on an

25:16agenda item. And our town manager will

25:18talk about this.

25:20>> Yes.

25:20>> Thank you. Through the chair and

25:23um Sman Karine, you're absolutely right.

25:26Um we in the last meeting there was

25:29quite a bit of discussion regarding

25:30whether or not the word vote needed to

25:32be in any of the um the agenda items and

25:36there was a little bit of communication.

25:37We did some research. Um thankful to say

25:41Amanda, my new um admin assistant had

25:45known this from her previous job, but we

25:47do not. So all the times that we thought

25:50we did, we we didn't. Um, so I agree

25:53with selectman Kraine that it's not

25:56necessary. It's actually implied as an

26:00agenda item that a vote will be taken.

26:04>> Okay,

26:06any questions?

26:08>> Not really a question, but a comment.

26:09And again, um, knowing when we are

26:12taking votes, it's helpful to have that

26:13verbiage there. So, if we reasonably

26:16expect a vote, approve or deny, I would

26:19love to see it continued in there, but

26:21not necessarily hold up items that may

26:24have gotten missed.

26:26>> Good. Good point. Okay. All right. Thank

26:30you. Any other questions?

26:32>> Just to that point, I think it might be

26:34somewhat confusing to the public. We we

26:36understand how it works, but if the

26:38agenda that we put out to the public

26:40where one item says possible vote and

26:41another item doesn't say possible vote,

26:44they might think that that indicates

26:46that it's not we're not going to be

26:47voting on that issue tonight. So, I

26:49rather for for clear transparency

26:52purposes either use the wording

26:54potential vote or my preference is

26:57relying on the open meeting law, not put

26:59any vote verbiage in there so we don't

27:01lock ourselves in one way or the other.

27:03But I think we need to be clear in the

27:05agenda that goes out to the public um so

27:08they have an understanding although we

27:10know we could vote on any time they

27:12don't necessarily know that rule. So I I

27:14think we need to be very clear one way

27:16or the other on this.

27:18>> I to the chair I agree with Mr. Karine.

27:20I think we need consistency one way or

27:22the other how we're going to do this.

27:28I think we can include as part of our

27:31standing agenda that some items may be

27:34voted on by the board whether

27:36specifically stated or not and that

27:38covers us from that piece of it. But

27:42again, the motion and the verbiage being

27:45printed is certainly helpful for

27:47everyone to understand. I'm saying I

27:50would prefer to see it in there at all

27:52cases, but know that we're not beholden

27:54to it. So again, my default would be

27:56that it's always there, but know that

27:59sometimes it might get misrepresented or

28:03omitted unintentionally

28:07through the chair. I respectfully

28:09disagree with you. I would rather not

28:11have it. I mean, the motion verbiage is

28:13something only we see on our agenda. Um,

28:18I think

28:21putting out there that if it is on the

28:23agenda, there is a potential vote is

28:25just our normal practice as opposed to

28:27having vote written on everything. I

28:30would just hate to the one time it gets

28:31missed that someone is upset that we did

28:34not notify them that there's a vote. So,

28:36that's just my preference.

28:40>> Yeah,

28:40>> I'm on the select board meeting.

28:44I I I I I I agree with uh Mr. Ruffley on

28:48this um to not include it.

28:52>> If we did would the chair like a motion

28:54one way or the other?

28:59Um yes.

29:00>> Okay. So, I will make a motion that we

29:02do not include any verbiage on the

29:05agenda that's posted publicly with

29:07respect to whether or not an item will

29:10be voted on so that we have the

29:12flexibility uh to vote on any issue.

29:16>> I second.

29:19>> All right, we have a motion and a

29:20second. All in favor?

29:22>> I opposed. Hi.

29:26>> Okay. So, 41.

29:29Um, continuing on our agenda, we have

29:32umformational

29:37communication regarding the pre-Town

29:39meeting scheduled for Monday, October

29:4119th at 6:00 p.m.

29:45>> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. We have

29:47this um posted throughout our social

29:50media being sent to town meeting

29:52members, but I wanted to make sure that

29:55anyone who's watching, we have two um

29:58town meeting members here now. Plus,

29:59anyone that's watching knows that we

30:02have the pre-Town meeting on Monday

30:04night, next Monday night at 6 p.m. in

30:07this room, which allows town meeting

30:10members to ask questions about any of

30:12the town meeting warrant articles. And I

30:16it's actually um a very well attended

30:19event. I will have department heads here

30:22and um we'll be able to answer any

30:24questions in addition to people who have

30:27submitted citizens petitions will be

30:29here as well hopefully. So if there are

30:31any questions on that they'll be um able

30:34to answer that. So I wanted to say that

30:36publicly so anyone listening tonight is

30:39aware as well.

30:40>> Okay. And that will be televised live

30:44correctly. Correct.

30:45>> It will be taped.

30:47>> Taped. Okay.

30:48>> Yes.

30:49>> Taped and replayed later.

30:52>> Taped and available to watch later.

30:54>> Yes.

30:56>> Okay. Any questions?

31:02>> Continuing on our agenda, we are now at

31:07um tabled items.

31:09Um 11A fire department discussion and

31:12possible vote on national grid easement

31:14for the new fire station at 10 Prospect

31:17Street. This was discussed at our last

31:20meeting and it involves moving a pole um

31:23that's actually going to be right in

31:25front of the bay doors um at the new

31:27fire station. So this would be moving

31:29the pole a bit and then um we need

31:32approvement approval for that. Any

31:35questions?

31:37Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to

31:39authorize the board to execute and sign

31:41the National Grid easement for the new

31:42fire station at 10 Prospect Street.

31:44>> I'll second. Have a motion and a second.

31:47All in favor?

31:48>> I opposed. Okay, let's see. Tabled items

31:5311B. We already took care of tabled 11

31:56C. Gift acceptances, discussion,

31:59possible vote on $350 gift from

32:02Southbridge Credit Union to the DPW

32:05Recreation and Culture Division BA

32:08cookie sponsor for the holiday tree

32:09lighting.

32:13>> I'll make a motion to accept the gift of

32:14$350 from South Bridge Credit Union to

32:17DPW Recreation and Cultural Division to

32:19be a cookie sponsor for the holiday tree

32:21lighting with a letter of gratitude to

32:22be drafted and signed by the chair.

32:24>> A second.

32:26We have a motion and a second. All in

32:28favor? I opposed.

32:30And item 11D, discussion and possible

32:33vote and change of address for flammable

32:35storage permit at 793 Southp Street,

32:38Auburn, Mass for SCF RC funding

32:43uh IV LLC, care of restaurant growth

32:47serve LLC. Again, we discussed this I

32:50believe at our last meeting.

32:53I'll make a motion to approve the

32:54request to change of mailing address

32:56associated with the flammable storage

32:57permit at 793 Sulford Street, Auburn,

33:00Mass 01501 from 3038 Sidco Drive.

33:04Attention RE department, Nashville,

33:06Tennessee 37204

33:08to 500 Interstate Boulevard South Suite

33:12400 Nashville, Tennessee 37210 as

33:15submitted.

33:16>> I'll second. So, we have a motion and a

33:18second. All in favor? I

33:20>> opposed.

33:22Okay, continuing under tabled items 11E,

33:25uh, discussion, possible vote on

33:28three-way stop sign at Rodale Street and

33:30West Street. Again, we discussed this

33:33last week. This would be putting in a

33:35three-way stop sign at that

33:37intersection. There is only a one-way

33:39stop sign. Now, [snorts]

33:42>> any questions?

33:42>> Yeah, I just have a question for the DPW

33:45director. Um, if

33:47>> possible.

33:54Thank you. Sorry to throw this at you,

33:56but uh it's an it's an easy one. Um

34:00knowing that the uh Rodale Street is

34:03going to have new stop signs and it's

34:04going to sometimes new drivers take time

34:06to get realized there's new stop signs

34:09there. Is it possible um that we can put

34:12out varial message boards in advance of

34:13those just saying new stop sign at

34:16Rodale Street or at um sorry not Rodale

34:19at West Street so they they know

34:21approaching it um so it's not a surprise

34:23to them.

34:23>> Absolutely.

34:24>> Great. Thank you.

34:27With that, I'll make a motion to approve

34:29the installation of a three-way stop at

34:30the intersection of Rodale Street and

34:33West Street and authorize the

34:34appropriate town officials to take the

34:36necessary steps to implement the

34:37signage.

34:38>> Um, one moment.

34:40>> Is there public comment?

34:42>> Yes. Is there any public comment? Anyone

34:45online want to make any public comment

34:47on this? I know we heard from area

34:49residents last meeting. No. Okay.

34:58I do not think so. Am I right?

34:59>> I'll second.

35:01>> Have a motion and a second. All in

35:03favor?

35:03>> I opposed.

35:06>> All right. So, now we're going to go

35:08look at our town warrant. There are um

35:11several articles that have not been

35:13approved or I should say not recommended

35:15or not recommended, etc. So, this is

35:18item 11F. So, we're going to look at our

35:20warrant.

35:22Um, we can either recommend approval,

35:24not recommend approval, defer to

35:26petitioner, or take no position at this

35:28time. So, let's start with article three

35:31first.

35:32Okay.

35:39Article three is

35:44the school and this is um regarding the

35:49um allpurpose field Auburn High School.

35:51So I see our school superintendent and

35:53school business manager here. Would you

35:54like to come up and answer any questions

35:57we might have?

36:00>> Yes. Yes.

36:02to the chair. I think the question we

36:05had on where these funds were coming

36:07from, we just wanted it to be defined if

36:10it was coming from free cash or

36:11stabilization. Okay. I just wanted to

36:13make sure.

36:17>> Well, maybe you can tell us about the

36:19allpurpose field anyway, though. So, I

36:20know that there's several articles here

36:22concerning that item.

36:24>> Absolutely, Madame Chair. Thank you for

36:27inviting us tonight. Um, so ultimately

36:31we're looking to fund a

36:34multi-purpose field. The field is

36:36original to the design of the building

36:38in 2006, so it's time for a new one. Um,

36:42and Jen and I have been working together

36:45to identify some funding sources. Uh, we

36:48have put them all in our warrant

36:50articles in terms of where um, funding

36:52would be reallocated. And I believe

36:55warrant or article three is specifically

36:58for the $150,000 from free cash or

37:01stabilization

37:03um that would be a portion of the

37:06overall funding um for the project. So

37:11we are requesting that $150,000

37:14to offset a portion of the total cost.

37:17>> Okay. Um we can move forward a little on

37:20this. So, let's talk about article four,

37:22and this would be repurposing $150,000

37:26from the Binmar building rehab, which uh

37:28which was for a parking lot around the

37:30school, and that would instead be

37:32repurposed um to go to this uh

37:35all-purpose field at the high school. Is

37:37that um has that building, Grimmma

37:40building rehab been completed?

37:43>> As we were talking about this earlier

37:44today that um the DPW thankfully had

37:47taken care of some of that parking lot

37:48restoration. Um and it freed up uh

37:52capital improvement funding for us to

37:53reallocate for um what we're proposing

37:56to be a portion of the cost of the

37:58multi-purpose field.

37:59>> Okay.

38:03>> And then continuing, let's look at

38:04article five. Again, this would be um

38:08>> that's that's a separate

38:10>> that's separate. Let's look at article

38:12six.

38:13>> All right. Um, this is to repurpose

38:16$60,000 from the Auburn High School

38:18building rehab for parking resurfacing

38:20and another $40,000 new Auburn High

38:23School building rehab for scoreboards.

38:25Have we um Can you tell us about those

38:28items?

38:29>> Yes. The parking lot at the high school,

38:33there was $175,000

38:36previously allocated in capital

38:38improvement. Um, we've been working with

38:40our facilities manager. He feels

38:42confident that we can address the needs

38:44of the parking lot for a uh lesser

38:47amount and therefore we are freeing up a

38:52portion of that and the sum of $60,000

38:57that we would put toward the

38:58multi-purpose field and the scoreboards.

39:01Apparently I I lucked out with the

39:03scoreboards and they are still

39:04functioning. So money that was set aside

39:06in capital improvement uh funds in terms

39:09of forecasting for new scoreboards is

39:11not necessary at this time. So we would

39:12take the $40,000 from the scoreboards,

39:15$60,000 of the 175 set aside for the

39:18parking lot restoration for a total of

39:21$100,000 that we would apply toward the

39:24um overall cost of the multi-purpose

39:26field.

39:27>> Okay, any questions?

39:30>> It's more of a statement. Um, articles

39:32four and six, this is a mindset thing

39:35that I think we've all discussed and we

39:37kind of need to change. We shouldn't be

39:39reallocating funds. We should be

39:41allowing them back into the um general

39:44fund and then talking about the cost

39:47that wasn't because this is going to

39:49come up again when the scoreboards are

39:50needed and someone's going to say,

39:51"Didn't we already allocate money for

39:53that?" And there's a decision that's

39:56being made that says, "The scoreboards

39:58are fine. We don't need them. one day

40:00they won't be fine. So, we really need

40:02to have these put back into it and have

40:05new votes on this, not reallocating

40:07money from things that either are

40:09discussed as not needed. If they're not

40:11needed, please be smart about asking for

40:13it. If we get a better deal, let's have

40:15that discussion and and celebrate those

40:18wins. Um, but for six, and I'm not

40:22holding the school department

40:23accountable for this. We need to change

40:26the way we do business and and start

40:28having these conversations.

40:30Again, no one we got to take out the

40:32calculator, do the math to find out that

40:34the the field is $700,000. It's it's a

40:38lot of money from a lot of different

40:40pots and 40,000 here and 60,000 there

40:43doesn't seem like a big deal, but when

40:44you start adding it up, it gets

40:46confusing real quick. So, that was my

40:49statement. I just I do have a quick

40:52question that um was from last week

40:54about the $40,000. Do we know if that

40:56was borrowed already or is that

40:58something that we would need to borrow?

41:02>> So the $40,000 has not been borrowed at

41:06this time.

41:06>> Thank you.

41:11>> Okay. Any other questions?

41:12>> No, not so much a question. I just and I

41:15believe I made the statement last time

41:16and

41:18this is certainly not directed at the

41:19school department alone. Um with respect

41:22to I support replacing this field. Um

41:26I've talked to uh coaches of the recck

41:28departments and everyone is universally

41:31um in agreement that this field needs to

41:33be replaced that it is an insurance and

41:35liability uh concern. So I'm going to

41:38support you know these warrant articles

41:39but similar to to to um Mr. Chambers,

41:43I'm concerned that

41:46we're we're basically we're we're we're

41:48putting in our capital plan money for a

41:50project and if that project gets done

41:53and it comes in under budget, I

41:55personally would like to see that money

41:57go back into free cash, not sort of in

42:00and the way and this is probably the the

42:02the wrong way to put it, but it's the

42:03only wording I can think about. It's

42:05being held for departmental slush funds

42:08essentially. It's being held by the

42:10department. um for future use of

42:14something that they decide they need to

42:16be used for. And and again, I'm not

42:18directing this at the school department

42:19and and you know, specifically or

42:22um you know, Dr. Scarza um especially

42:25since you just got here a couple a

42:27couple months ago. I'm not holding you

42:28accountable for this, but this is

42:29something that we see time and time

42:31again, and I know it's um you know, a

42:32concern that this board has has voiced

42:35before. And I I had thought we went

42:37through a process where we identified

42:38old accounts and closed them out and

42:41apparently we didn't actually get all

42:43the accounts closed out. Um I'm also

42:46concerned with the money for the Auburn

42:48High School building rehab for the

42:49parking reservicing. I'm glad to hear

42:52that it we think it's going to come in

42:54under budget, but my concern is that

42:56we're going to pull that money out now,

42:57fix the field, and then knowing the way

43:00that the tariffs are right now and you

43:03know the you know the gas and cost

43:05increasing and asphalt relies on gas in

43:08order to be made um is that we might

43:11find out that that remaining money is

43:14not enough and we're going to have to

43:15come back again to town meeting and the

43:17question is going to be by our board, by

43:19FinCom, by town meeting. Didn't we

43:20already allocate this? Why why are we

43:22doing this again? So, my personal

43:25preference, and it's the ship has

43:27sailed. I understand that. My personal

43:29preference is that we would have just

43:30taken that out of free cash and left

43:33that account whole until the work was

43:36done and then move it. I understand the

43:38school department is trying to not take

43:42so much for free cash. you're trying to

43:44to to be a good partner and trying to,

43:48you know, scratch pennies wherever you

43:49can out of whatever account you can and

43:51I respect that, but I think in the long

43:54run, um, it's it's shortsighted on our

43:58behalf and on the town's behalf to to do

44:00that. I rather, again, preferred that

44:02you kept that account whole, do the

44:04work, then return it. Um, and that way

44:07we make sure that the parking lot that

44:08we all wanted gets done, gets done on

44:11time, gets done on budget. Um, I'm just

44:14worried that we're we're being, you

44:16know, pennywise and a pound foolish, uh,

44:18is the best way to put it. But, um,

44:20again, like I said, that ship has

44:22sailed. So, I will support, uh, the

44:24Warren articles as written.

44:26>> The chair, if I may, I'm not looking to

44:29make a habit of this style of

44:32reallocation. I think some of this um,

44:34potential solution find was done prior

44:37to my taking the position, which I

44:39appreciate. Um,

44:42and also through the chair, if I may, we

44:45are still roughly $150,000 short of the

44:48overall cost of the project. I had

44:50mentioned this at a prior town meeting.

44:52Um, everything that we have done in

44:53terms of thinking creatively and

44:55reallocating some funds that we think

44:57could be repurposed at this time to get

44:59the field uh constructed in the spring

45:01still falls uh that's a cost of $550,000

45:05or a total of 550. That's wishful

45:08thinking um that we can get the field

45:10done at that cost. I did mention at one

45:12of the prior meetings that there aren't

45:14as many lines, hash marks, endzone um

45:18design in a multi-purpose or a field

45:21hockey field. So it might be uh um

45:24lesser amount than you would expect for

45:26a stadium field. However, there is uh

45:29material that we have to buy,

45:30engineering cost, and then ultimately

45:32the installation. years ago, pre-COVID,

45:35that might have been closer to 400

45:37$450,000, but we're probably going to

45:40fall significantly short with the $550

45:44$550,000 amount that we currently have

45:47if these were to all pass.

45:49>> I I guess I'll just ask the question

45:51then. If we put out the bid and we're

45:53short than 150,000,

45:56what's the plan? I'll ask that to the e

45:58the school department administration or

46:00to the town administration. Yeah, that's

46:02money that we have not through the

46:03chair. That's money that we have not

46:06discussed yet. That would be an

46:08additional request from free cash um to

46:11cover to offset cover the offset of the

46:13remaining funds.

46:14>> Does that mean that that would have to

46:16wait until fall uh this spring town

46:19meeting?

46:20>> Yep.

46:21>> That means the field's not getting fixed

46:24until summer at best. Well, it would

46:27this would afford us the ability to move

46:29forward with engineering costs, with

46:31some of the materials um securing and we

46:34would probably need to talk come May

46:37about installation cost.

46:40>> I guess in the future I would um just

46:43recommend that if it's going to be 750

46:46come for the full amount. That way we we

46:48we know that things are going to be done

46:50on time, on budget um and and not sort

46:54of be delayed. But again, that's just my

46:56own personal opinion

46:57>> through the chair. I agree with you 100%

46:59and that's why I mentioned it now

47:01because I would feel remiss if we had

47:03this meeting today and I didn't mention

47:04it. I think it's some of that uh

47:06creative solution find that was done

47:08prior to me coming here uh left us just

47:10a little shy.

47:16>> May I make a comment? Was this not

47:19included in the capital plan?

47:23the capital improvement plan

47:24>> through the chair. It was included in

47:26the um FY. Let me just make sure I have

47:29the right FYI. Um

47:33prior to Dr. Scots or myself, it was

47:36included in the FY um 25 plan, the

47:39$150,000 for a down payment. Yep.

47:42>> And there was uh a missed portion that

47:44had been submitted from the school

47:46department um for $300,000 from free

47:50cash. how to be split between FY26 and

47:53FY27.

47:55That was missed, but um $450,000 is not

48:00going to replace that field at this

48:02time.

48:03>> May I request that you just take a I

48:05mean that's [clears throat]

48:06we knew once the the football field was

48:09getting replaced then you know the

48:11all-purpose field was next. Maybe just

48:13take a look at that capital improvement

48:14because those are big items to miss.

48:16Obviously, you know that just to to make

48:19sure there aren't any big ticket items

48:20floating out there.

48:22>> Absolutely.

48:22>> That you know, we take for granted that

48:25they're working now, but they might not

48:26in the future.

48:27>> Okay.

48:28>> Through the chair, can I can I ask what

48:30missed means? There was 150,000 that

48:34wasn't ever allocated, wasn't ever asked

48:36for, wasn't

48:38>> I don't believe that it it it was asked

48:41for in the the paperwork that I received

48:44the on the school department side, but

48:46it never made it to town hall to be put

48:50into the warrants and recommended cuz

48:52that's how the football field had been

48:54done prior.

48:55>> Mhm. And then it did not happen because

48:59that 300,000 from the town was a

49:01separate part. It wasn't part of the

49:05it was done a little bit differently.

49:06>> Okay.

49:07>> So So again, in the future, if it came

49:09out of free cash, we would know what the

49:11cost is and wouldn't miss the whole

49:13project.

49:16>> Thank you.

49:20Okay.

49:22>> So, I'll make a motion to recommend

49:24approval of articles three, four, and

49:28six.

49:28>> Do you have to do we have to make a

49:29motion that we take them together first?

49:31>> Okay. I'll make a motion that we take

49:33articles three, three, four, uh, sorry,

49:363, four, and six together.

49:37>> I'll second.

49:39>> All in favor?

49:40>> I opposed. Okay. I will make a motion

49:44that we recommend approval um for

49:47articles three, four, and six.

49:50>> I'll second. So, we have a motion, a

49:52second. All in favor? I

49:54>> I

49:55>> I opposed

49:56>> I.

50:01I'll say I but

50:03>> Okay. Okay.

50:04>> This should not be happening. We have

50:06professionals that we pay to do this

50:08stuff.

50:10>> All right. So now let's that was uh

50:13articles 3, four, and six. Let's look at

50:15article five. And this is to see if the

50:17town will vote to appropriate from free

50:19cash $7,000 to fund a portion of the

50:22replacement of the school department's

50:24wheelchair accessible multi-function

50:26activity bus or act on anything relative

50:28there, too.

50:29>> I I'll just say that I was one of the

50:31ones that held this item because it was

50:33not clear where the money was coming

50:35from. Um now it is clear for free cash

50:38and I'm fine with moving it forward.

50:43Um, I have a question. What is the total

50:46cost of the bus?

50:48>> We are anticipating the total cost to be

50:51$140,000. So, we were I I believe it was

50:54clear, but just to make sure there's

50:56clarity, $70,000 um of grant funding

50:59through the fair share earmark.

51:01>> Okay.

51:01>> Um and then the remaining $70,000 for a

51:04$140,000 purchase for a wheelchair

51:07accessible.

51:07>> Okay. And

51:10And how big is the bus?

51:12>> It is how many passengers?

51:15>> Right [clears throat] now, our Rocket

51:16One is our wheelchair accessible and it

51:18has 12 passengers and one wheelchair um

51:21as well as the driver and we would be

51:23looking to replace that as well.

51:25>> Okay, thank you.

51:29>> So, I'll make a motion that we recommend

51:31approval of article 5.

51:33>> I'll second.

51:35I have a motion and a second to approve

51:37article five. All in favor? I

51:39>> I opposed.

51:41>> Okay.

51:42>> Thank you.

51:43>> Thank you very much everyone.

51:50>> All right. So, let's let me just look at

51:51the list here. There was 3, four, five,

51:53six. And let's look at article 10 to see

51:56if the town will appropri appropriate uh

51:59$70,000 from free cash to fund a

52:01staffing and operational study from the

52:03town of Auburn or act on anything

52:05relative there too.

52:08Now what um what are we looking at the

52:12staff all over the town

52:16>> through the chair? It is for town

52:19employees, not school department

52:20employees and their positions. and it

52:23will um it basically looks at

52:28the um the work that the employees do,

52:31what's standard with other towns, what

52:34what this town has, and it's going to be

52:36based on a lot of comparable criteria,

52:39>> but it will not be including the school

52:41department

52:42>> or the fire department because they

52:44recently had a staffing study.

52:48>> Okay. So, are we going to have an

52:50amendment uh on um at the town meeting?

52:54Someone going to because I think we

52:56should amend this to say staffing study,

52:58but it to note that we're not including

53:01the schools or the fire department.

53:04>> We can do an amendment if you'd like.

53:09>> Okay.

53:10>> Yes, please.

53:11>> Through the chair, I I know the fire

53:12department was something I brought up

53:14last time. Are there other departments

53:16that aren't going to be addressed or is

53:18there a focal point? I again I don't

53:21know what a staffing study costs, but I

53:23certainly want to get the value out and

53:25hit the the larger departments and

53:27understand the need. So I don't know if

53:29there's a prioritization that's gone on

53:31here. Um if there's other departments

53:34that have been clamoring for this or

53:36something that would help the town

53:38manager make decisions in the future.

53:41So, I just don't know what the priority

53:43is if this money

53:45is going to get all those needs or if

53:48there's a rationale for which

53:50departments will be looked at first.

53:52>> Sure. Through the chair. Um, as part of

53:56um my goals and objectives, the board

53:58had asked me to look in the possibility

53:59of a staffing study, which I did, and I

54:03did outreach um to the Collins Center,

54:06and they sent me some draft paperwork

54:08back and forth, which basically

54:10evaluates town departments um the

54:14workload, all aspects of the department.

54:17In that conversation, I realized that

54:19the fire department would be redundant.

54:21It's not necessary. We have that. and

54:23the school department the um board of

54:25slackman doesn't have any authority over

54:27but I really feel it's necessary in all

54:29other departments especially DPW

54:32um police actually all of them I think

54:36it's is really important and that goes

54:38to maybe you know in some cases too many

54:42staff like I think it can go each way

54:44and I want it to be very um honest and

54:47something that we can use as a tool

54:49moving forward

54:52>> thank

54:54Madam Chair, if I may, um I think I had

54:56this question last time, but I do not

54:58remember. Um so I'll ask it again. Uh

55:01the $70,000 is to look at staffing

55:05levels, job um descriptions, job

55:08responsibilities. It's not a salary

55:10study analysis. Correct.

55:12>> That is correct. It is not a salary

55:14compensation analysis.

55:15>> Okay. Thank you.

55:16um through the chair. Is this uh do you

55:19anticipate this coming from the

55:20stabilization fund or free cash? It's

55:22either or here. Is there a determination

55:25on

55:25>> on this one? It's updated to say free

55:27cash. You're still working

55:28>> on my old notes. Yeah. Okay. Thanks.

55:32>> This is another one we held because we

55:33wanted that clarified.

55:34>> Perfect.

55:39>> Okay. Any other questions?

55:42>> Do I hear a motion?

55:43>> I'll make a motion that we recommend

55:44approval. I'll second. We have a motion

55:47and a second to recommend approval. All

55:49in favor?

55:50>> I opposed.

55:54So, next we're going to look at article

55:5511 to see if the town meeting will vote

55:57to appropriate $80,000 from free cash to

56:01fund a building study and analysis for

56:03all town owned buildings or act on

56:06anything relative there too.

56:11Any questions? If I may through the

56:13chair, this is also another one that the

56:16board had recommended and in our

56:18discussions in um prior meetings.

56:22I had discussed that I was going to

56:24contract with Joe Fehee who is very

56:26familiar with all of our town buildings

56:29to do a complete analysis um from the

56:32roof to mechanical systems except HVAC

56:37which he's currently working on now

56:38through um

56:41through grant funds but it will

56:43incorporate all other parts of the

56:46building mechanical

56:48um roofing everything compliance

56:52is also another area because what I'm

56:54finding here and I think you've seen is

56:57some of the improvements even made to

56:58this building for compliance and and

57:01things that we've had to do whether it's

57:03the roof at the historical museum or the

57:05the ramp here. Um we've had to address

57:09some issues that we weren't necessarily

57:11um prepared to do. This study that the

57:14board had recommended is an excellent

57:16study that will provide us our capital

57:19planning for the next many years to come

57:22because some of the improvements that

57:25you do to a building can be anticipated

57:27to have replacement costs in 20 years or

57:2910 years depending on what the issue is.

57:32So I look forward to um funding the

57:35study and getting the data so that we

57:38can properly budget some of these

57:41building improvements.

57:43um starting in next fiscal year.

57:48>> Okay. Um [clears throat] again, does

57:50this include any school buildings?

57:54>> Um

57:55>> it says town owned. So

57:56>> town owned.

57:57>> It is all buildings including the

57:59historical museum, the school

58:01departments. Yes.

58:03>> And um fire stations.

58:05>> Yes.

58:05>> Didn't we just recently have a study? We

58:08had um an HVAC study of all

58:12>> I think I don't know if yeah I think

58:13because it included the school but um

58:15town buildings by Seammens it we still

58:18have the report that's what we're doing

58:19the work from now but it was just HVAC.

58:22>> I thought we did a pretty um thorough

58:24building study prior to um approval of

58:28the um new fire station project.

58:31Obviously, we would wouldn't be looking

58:32at the Randall Street

58:34>> uh or the Randall School Station, but

58:36I'm just thinking maybe we can use what

58:38we already have for the fire department.

58:40>> Yeah, I will speak with the chief if

58:42there is anything. Actually, part of

58:44this is gathering all the information

58:45that we have and all the reports. I'm

58:47not familiar with that report, but

58:49>> there's no sense in reinventing the

58:51wheel and if we could save money on

58:52having using something that we already

58:54have,

58:55>> um I would recommend that myself.

58:57>> Okay. Thank you. to the chair to Ann's

58:58point, I think it was the police and

59:00fire that they did the building studies

59:02on, right?

59:02>> Okay.

59:04>> So, um, Mr. Fehee could pull that

59:06information in.

59:07>> Absolutely.

59:08>> Okay.

59:09>> Thank you.

59:09>> Through the chair, has has there been

59:11research on grants and funding for stuff

59:13like this? cuz I know we're not the only

59:15ones that are not up to speed on our

59:17capital planning and uh getting those

59:20projects aligned and it seems like we

59:21have peaceailed a few things when we had

59:23the budget but is there any type of

59:26program and grant funding for this type

59:30of planning and programming to make sure

59:32we're looking at it holistically and

59:35second part of that is we have an energy

59:38manager here and a lot of free stuff

59:40comes back from the utilities have we

59:42looked at segre ating those type of

59:45opportunities and not including them in

59:48this report but doing in addition to

59:52>> so through the chair that's um a really

59:54great point and in fact Juniper works

59:56very closely with Joe Feehe on all the

59:58HVAC work that's being done now because

1:00:01it does incorporate all of the energy

1:00:03and the energy grants we are looking at

1:00:06grants for this we haven't found any but

1:00:08what I did see recently is there is

1:00:10something in front of legislature that

1:00:12is going to look to establish um

1:00:15something similar to um you know the

1:00:18MSBA for the school system for other

1:00:22municipal buildings like police and

1:00:23fire. That would be extremely helpful

1:00:26for us if they do do that. Um the MSB

1:00:29program as we know is an exceptional

1:00:31program and it helps funds antiquated

1:00:33buildings that need to be updated.

1:00:35>> We're not the only ones in this boat.

1:00:37All cities and towns are in the same

1:00:39boat. So, that is something that I've

1:00:41already called Senator Moira on on and

1:00:43Representative Frost um and we'll

1:00:46continue to look forward to working with

1:00:49them on that. But we at this time I

1:00:51don't have any other besides the energy

1:00:52grants any other funding sources.

1:00:55>> And and again talk about prioritizing if

1:00:58we know there's a potential and there's

1:01:00already existing reports on police and

1:01:02fire we should probably not invest

1:01:04heavily in that and focus on those other

1:01:07areas where we don't see any potential

1:01:08for grant funding.

1:01:10>> Understood. And I I would like to get

1:01:12back to you and give you more

1:01:14information on that because if there is

1:01:17a complete police and fire building

1:01:19study, I can most likely remove both of

1:01:22them. What I do have in the office is a

1:01:25study of space, like a space study and

1:01:28how to improve the building versus

1:01:30what's currently there. But I think even

1:01:33the information in the space study can

1:01:35be used and carried over to this. But I

1:01:38would like to get you more information

1:01:39on that. And I think that would be

1:01:40helpful.

1:01:42>> I think if it's helpful, it was probably

1:01:43like four years ago when they were

1:01:45talking about the joint station.

1:01:47>> Yeah,

1:01:47>> that sounds Thank you.

1:01:50>> So, not so much a question, but more of

1:01:52a statement. Um,

1:01:54I was

1:01:56doubtful that, you know, first I want to

1:01:58thank Mr. Fehee for the memo he gave us

1:02:00on everything that the comprehensive

1:02:02list of everything that it will cover.

1:02:04Um, when I thought it was just

1:02:06town-owned buildings, I was doubtful

1:02:08that $80,000 was going to be enough to

1:02:10do a comprehensive study and and do an

1:02:13in-depth study of every single thing

1:02:15that he listed. Now, hearing that

1:02:17schools are getting added to it, I'm

1:02:19even more doubtful that $80,000 is going

1:02:21to cover that, quite frankly. Um, so I

1:02:24would not be surprised if if we see a

1:02:27request at the annual town meeting to

1:02:30either, you know, to allocate additional

1:02:32funding for a full study or if we start

1:02:36chopping off departments and buildings

1:02:37and we don't actually cover them all.

1:02:39Um, because $80,000 is a small amount

1:02:43when it comes to doing that

1:02:44comprehensive list of everything that he

1:02:47included on there.

1:02:48Um, I don't know for certain, but I

1:02:51wonder if the same sort of study wasn't

1:02:52done when the middle school was built,

1:02:54just as they're looked at all of the

1:02:56other schools as well. Um, I don't know

1:03:00that it exists though, but it seems like

1:03:03it would have been a good idea.

1:03:05>> The chair, that's interesting because he

1:03:08did quote knowing it was going to be all

1:03:09town owned buildings. He may know of

1:03:11some additional studies. So, with the

1:03:13information back to you, I'll I'll get

1:03:15you that as well. Any

1:03:19questions? Any other questions?

1:03:23>> Do I hear a motion?

1:03:24>> So, I'll make a motion that we recommend

1:03:26approval of article 11.

1:03:29>> I'll second.

1:03:30>> We have a motion and a second to

1:03:32recommend approval. All in favor?

1:03:34>> I

1:03:35>> opposed.

1:03:37>> Opposed. And and just for the record,

1:03:40I'm not opposed to doing the study. I'm

1:03:42opposed because I don't think $80,000 is

1:03:44going to be enough and I'd rather just

1:03:45see a comprehensive one with a full

1:03:47budget attached to it.

1:03:51>> Okay. Um, now we'll look at article 13

1:03:53to see if the town meeting will vote to

1:03:55appropriate $20,000 from free cash to

1:03:58fund a roadway improvement software

1:04:00program or act on anything relative

1:04:02there too.

1:04:04>> Chair, before we move off of article 11,

1:04:07>> Sure.

1:04:07>> based on Mr. friends concerns.

1:04:11>> I think based on I would have thought

1:04:13this would have already been [snorts]

1:04:14done through studies and whatnot.

1:04:18>> I would recommend that we not recommend

1:04:21that we wait and that this article might

1:04:23be postponed so that we can deal with it

1:04:27forthrightly in the

1:04:30annual town meeting. And obviously that

1:04:32would mean that we would need to

1:04:35amend the manager's goals. So, which I

1:04:39would rather it done right than it not

1:04:41be done correctly.

1:04:43>> Make a motion to reconsider our previous

1:04:45vote.

1:04:46>> Second.

1:04:47>> Okay. Um, we have a motion and a second.

1:04:49Discussion. Um,

1:04:51>> yes. Through the chair, understanding

1:04:53the position of the board. I I do

1:04:58want you to know that the quote of

1:05:0080,000 came from Joe Fehee who worked in

1:05:03the school department for several years.

1:05:05I can't imagine, although maybe I'm

1:05:07wrong, that he would um give me a quote

1:05:12that wasn't going to cover the cost. I

1:05:15hesitate to delay this because I was

1:05:19hoping to start including some of the

1:05:22repairs in next year's um fiscal year

1:05:25capital budget, but at this point, I'm

1:05:28not aware of anything major or

1:05:30outstanding in any of our buildings that

1:05:32we would have to do that on. So, um I

1:05:34just want you to know it the report and

1:05:36the quote is from Joe Fehee who has ex,

1:05:40you know, extensive experience in town

1:05:42owned buildings.

1:05:47>> Any other discussion items?

1:05:49>> Uh I wouldn't make a statement. So

1:05:51again, reconsidering this still goes to

1:05:53town meeting. It doesn't have to go with

1:05:55a recommendation or any action from us.

1:05:57So that can certainly be discussed and

1:06:00the information can be brought before

1:06:02town meeting members and they can make

1:06:04their decision hopefully with the

1:06:06answers that we've asked uh the

1:06:09questions that we've asked will have

1:06:11answers and they can make their

1:06:12decision. So again I would I think I

1:06:16made the motion that we reconsider and I

1:06:18would ask that we vote to maybe defer to

1:06:22the petitioner at this point but

1:06:24>> this point we haven't even voted on rec

1:06:26>> correct. So,

1:06:27>> all right. We have a motion and a second

1:06:29to reconsider. All in favor?

1:06:31>> I

1:06:31>> opposed.

1:06:32>> I

1:06:35would make a motion that we defer to the

1:06:36petitioner.

1:06:37>> Second.

1:06:41>> So, have a motion and a second to defer

1:06:43to the petitioner. All in favor?

1:06:45>> I

1:06:46>> opposed.

1:06:51All right. That was article 11.

1:06:57So, now we're looking at article 13

1:06:59again. Um, to see if the town meeting

1:07:02will vote to appropriate $20,000 from

1:07:04free cash to fund a roadway improvement

1:07:07software program or act on anything

1:07:09relative there too.

1:07:14>> So, if I remember correctly, um, this

1:07:17was another one where we just wanted

1:07:18them to identify where it's going to be

1:07:20coming from. They have identified as

1:07:21precache.

1:07:23So, I don't have any further questions.

1:07:25>> I do I'm sorry. I have do have Do we

1:07:27know if there's going to be an annual

1:07:28fee for this and is it the $20,000 and

1:07:31is it going to be rolled into next

1:07:33year's budget?

1:07:36>> We'll have our ask our DPW chair.

1:07:38>> That was like three questions. Sorry.

1:07:41[laughter]

1:07:42>> I have one question in five parts.

1:07:44>> Uhhuh.

1:07:45>> Uh there would be a fee for us to update

1:07:48um the data annually. Um, and we would

1:07:51expect to put that in our annual budget.

1:07:55>> Do you have a ballpark of what it might

1:07:57be? I'm not going to hold you to

1:07:58anything, but is it going to be the same

1:08:00$20,000 every year or is it

1:08:03>> um So, I would expect if we wanted to

1:08:06have all the data updated um then it

1:08:09would be similar cost.

1:08:12>> Thank you.

1:08:13>> I would hope we want all the data.

1:08:15That's this is to help us.

1:08:17>> Agreed. [laughter] So I think we should

1:08:19be considering that cost going forward

1:08:22and please if if they have other bells

1:08:24and whistles that will help improve then

1:08:26we should consider those.

1:08:29Uh if I could ask a question what is

1:08:32what will it take to set up this

1:08:34information in this software program? Is

1:08:36this something staff is doing? We're

1:08:39we're talking about a roadware roadway

1:08:41improvement program. what is what will

1:08:44it take to get information into it

1:08:48>> responsible all that good stuff

1:08:51>> so there are several packages that are

1:08:54being evaluated um at the last meeting

1:08:57there was a package that um Mr. Karine

1:09:00had mentioned um that has LAR

1:09:02capabilities which um I and the the

1:09:06entire staff are very excited about.

1:09:07We're actually meeting with them

1:09:09tomorrow uh to um to get more

1:09:13information on their program. We've met

1:09:15with um another company previously. So,

1:09:18it would actually be um the company that

1:09:22we are meeting with tomorrow is um it's

1:09:26their equipment mounted on a vehicle and

1:09:30um all of our roadway system is is um

1:09:33driven and um data collected and

1:09:36evaluated um through AI um and that data

1:09:42is stored on

1:09:44in this case on the cloud with um JS

1:09:49capability.

1:09:51So um so we would have access to all

1:09:54that information. Um

1:09:57but it would be

1:09:59their software that we'd be using.

1:10:03>> Are we doing the roadway driving or are

1:10:06they doing that?

1:10:08>> So that would still be determined. some

1:10:10of the the the previous software that we

1:10:14evaluated would be um town staff. Um in

1:10:18the past for us to evaluate each road um

1:10:23it took probably two to three full days.

1:10:28Um, I think it would this would be a lot

1:10:30faster just because we're not driving

1:10:33and looking looking at, you know, okay,

1:10:36well, you know, it's it's not going to

1:10:39be as subjective. It's going to be um

1:10:41through, you know, it's the data is

1:10:43going to be collected as we as we drive

1:10:45it. So, um I don't see I don't think

1:10:49that having staff drive it would be a

1:10:51hardship, but it would still we would

1:10:53still have to determine that through um

1:10:56evaluating all the um all the packages.

1:10:59>> When would you think a decision would be

1:11:01made on which package?

1:11:03>> Um I would like to make that um in the

1:11:06next few weeks.

1:11:09>> Would this be available for next year's

1:11:12pavement plan? I would I I would be

1:11:15hopeful. Usually when um when we drive

1:11:19roads, uh obviously want we want to do

1:11:22it before the winter, but um it's also,

1:11:25you know, helpful when there's less

1:11:27leaves on the trees. Um that way we can,

1:11:31you know, we can see signage easier,

1:11:34capture, you know, um not really

1:11:37dependent on on different angles. So um

1:11:40this is usually the a good time for

1:11:42surveying. So I would assume that this

1:11:44would be similar um a surveying.

1:11:49>> How quickly would we be getting work on

1:11:52a roof or to get the information set up?

1:11:57>> Um I'm not pos I'm not sure how long it

1:12:02would take for the the process. Um on

1:12:05the software end um it didn't seem like

1:12:09it was more of a matter of weeks in the

1:12:12previous um software that we evaluated

1:12:15but I can't say for sure for um for the

1:12:19other ones.

1:12:20>> It would be helpful at town meeting to

1:12:22have some of those answers.

1:12:25>> Thank you.

1:12:26>> Thank you.

1:12:29>> Thank you. Any other comments?

1:12:35So, I'll make a motion that we recommend

1:12:37approval of article 13.

1:12:39>> I'll second.

1:12:42>> Did you want to ask another question?

1:12:44>> No, but 21's coming up and that. So, I

1:12:48was just saying she didn't have to

1:12:49leave, but

1:12:49>> Oh, sure. Okay. [laughter] So, we have a

1:12:51motion and a second. All in favor? I

1:12:54>> opposed. Okay.

1:12:56>> All right. Yep. Article

1:12:59>> um 23. Why don't you come on up? Just

1:13:03make sure I disregard the water.

1:13:06>> 21

1:13:06>> 21 I beg you pardon. Um,

1:13:10[clears throat] hold on.

1:13:13Let's get through all this zoning. All

1:13:15right. To see if the town will vote to

1:13:17approve the Water Street Culvert

1:13:20replacement project totaling $1.4 $4

1:13:22million and to raise said funds by in by

1:13:26borrowing payable in not more than the

1:13:28term provi uh provided by law and any

1:13:31premium received by the town upon the

1:13:34sale of any bonds or notes approved by

1:13:36the vote. Lest any such premium applied

1:13:39to the payment of the costs of issuance

1:13:41of such bonds or notes may be applied to

1:13:43the payment of costs approved by this

1:13:45vote in accordance with chapter 44

1:13:48section 20 of the general laws thereby

1:13:50reducing the amount authorized to be

1:13:52borrowed such costs by a like amount or

1:13:55act on anything relative there too

1:14:00questions

1:14:04>> and that we're borrowing this money it

1:14:06sounds like now Do we have uh an idea of

1:14:09what the cost the borrowing costs are

1:14:11going to be for this project.

1:14:25Good evening through the chair. Uh the

1:14:30borrowing wouldn't occur until the end

1:14:32towards the end of the fiscal year. So,

1:14:34I can give you some information on what

1:14:36the current rates are. If um we were to

1:14:39borrow long-term, if for 30 years

1:14:42currently would be 5.25%

1:14:45and 20 years would be 4.75%.

1:14:49Um the rates right now are a little

1:14:51volatile in the borrowing and speaking

1:14:54with the financial adviser. However,

1:14:56they are expected to stabilize after the

1:14:59elections in November. And again, we

1:15:01wouldn't be borrowing. who would be

1:15:03borrowing the money right away.

1:15:06>> So at that current rate, what would we

1:15:08be looking at for borrowing? Because

1:15:10obviously we we don't know that rates

1:15:13are going to stabilize after the

1:15:15election. Um so I wouldn't want to

1:15:19hedge on

1:15:24things acting rationally or

1:15:27irrationally.

1:15:29Do we have an idea at the current rates

1:15:31what that would be? Again, I think town

1:15:33meeting needs to understand the worst

1:15:36case scenario that we know of right now.

1:15:40When we initially proposed this, we were

1:15:43pursuing a grant. Now, it looks like the

1:15:46town is taking on full responsibility

1:15:48unless, you know, something happens at

1:15:51the state level that pushes this further

1:15:54to the magic uh deadline date. But for

1:15:58me to recommend it, I need to know what

1:16:01we're looking at for borrowing costs.

1:16:03Um,

1:16:05and I understand that currently we don't

1:16:09know what those would be, but we do know

1:16:11what the rates are. So, it would make

1:16:12sense to at least say that the rates are

1:16:14what they are, and this is what we can

1:16:16these are the numbers we can give you.

1:16:19So that town meeting will at least have

1:16:21some idea going forward in the budget

1:16:24because we're going to have to put money

1:16:25into the budget to cover these borrowing

1:16:27costs to give them a little window into

1:16:30the world so that they're not just

1:16:32thinking 1.4 and then oh well okay 2

1:16:35years from now suddenly oh gosh we got

1:16:37to come up with $100,000

1:16:40and we don't know where we're going to

1:16:42find that money type of thing. So do we

1:16:44have that number? Do we have any more

1:16:47information also I believe too?

1:16:49>> Yes, if I can through the chair. We are

1:16:51going out for a grant to fund this. Um

1:16:54preliminary discussions that um Joanna

1:16:58has had with the granting authority was

1:17:00very were very positive. We are looking

1:17:03to get this fully funded by the grant.

1:17:06This is a backup plan in case we do not

1:17:09get the grant. I don't know Joanna if

1:17:11you could provide any additional

1:17:12information. So, um the grant um

1:17:17timeline is um wouldn't allow us

1:17:23I don't think that it would allow us to

1:17:25go for construction next year.

1:17:28[clears throat]

1:17:29Um currently we are looking to um we're

1:17:35we're starting um permitting with Mass

1:17:37DOT. Once our um once we get comments

1:17:41back from Mass DOT, we will start

1:17:43permitting. Um the grant period or the

1:17:48um the grant

1:17:50the um application period starts um

1:17:54sometime at the beginning of the

1:17:56calendar year. Um we have applied for

1:18:00the same grant for u the permitting

1:18:04portion of the project. When we applied

1:18:06for the grant we were um we were

1:18:09notified of the award in May. Um but we

1:18:13are still looking for a notice to

1:18:14proceed from um the granting authority.

1:18:18So, um it's I'm concerned that if we um

1:18:25if we are looking to move forward with

1:18:27the construction next summer, um those

1:18:31funds would not be available. Um

1:18:34I believe that we would be very

1:18:38competitive in the grant. It's just

1:18:41whether that timing works out. Um, as I

1:18:44said, um, before the, um, the permitting

1:18:48is still in question. Not really sure,

1:18:52you know, how long it's going to take

1:18:54the timing for, um, getting everything

1:18:57approved for um, for bidding and

1:19:02construction next summer is very

1:19:03aggressive. So, if anything um slips,

1:19:07then you know, we would still fall back

1:19:10onto the grant and hopefully we wouldn't

1:19:13need this money. But if we want to have

1:19:16the best chance at construction next

1:19:19fall, then um then this would this would

1:19:24be required.

1:19:28>> Sounds like a $1.4 4 million placeholder

1:19:31that could cost us over $2 million. I

1:19:34think we

1:19:34>> I mean

1:19:36>> yeah I I just and and I think I said

1:19:38this last time. Um

1:19:40so what if we were to borrow today let's

1:19:43say knowing today's rates what would be

1:19:45the actual cost over 30 years of that

1:19:48that 1.4 would actually be x

1:19:53million million of dollars. Do we know

1:19:54what that is?

1:19:56Well, it would be I'm estimating at the

1:19:585% it would be $70,000 worth of interest

1:20:02>> a year or total?

1:20:03>> Oh, total.

1:20:05>> Okay.

1:20:06>> So, it would cost us a,470.

1:20:11>> Yeah.

1:20:13>> Um uh may I ask is that at a 5% rate you

1:20:16said?

1:20:17>> Yeah, just estimating at a five because

1:20:19if a um five and a quarter would be 30

1:20:22years, 4.75 would be 20 years. If you

1:20:25just take an average, if you say it

1:20:26would be 5%.

1:20:28>> And we were saying that over 20 or 30?

1:20:30>> Over 20.

1:20:33>> So,

1:20:36I'm going to go back to what I said last

1:20:37time. I don't understand why we're

1:20:40borrowing for this when we have an

1:20:42excess amount based on the DLS report of

1:20:46free cash sitting there. Um, I think it

1:20:49makes more sense to allocate the free

1:20:52cash, allow the project to go forward.

1:20:56Hopefully, wishful thinking, although I

1:20:58actually don't wish this because I don't

1:21:00want any more delays on this, that the

1:21:02grant works out, then that money just

1:21:04goes right back into free cash. Um, and

1:21:08everything's all set.

1:21:10But my concern is that we are paying

1:21:14more for money we already have and that

1:21:18just does not make sense to me at all.

1:21:22If I can speak to that, you make a very

1:21:24good point and also um one of the things

1:21:27that I had spoken to in depth with DLS

1:21:30about is the percentage of free cash

1:21:33that we should have on hand. Um and I'm

1:21:36concerned also of using too much free

1:21:39cash. So there's a little bit of a

1:21:41balance there. I think they said,

1:21:42correct me if I'm wrong, 17%.

1:21:45Is that the percentage that they

1:21:47>> of the general fund operating budget?

1:21:49Yes.

1:21:49>> Right. That they had um originally

1:21:52stated to us back during, you know, the

1:21:54several months that we worked with them.

1:21:56So um I agree with you in regards to not

1:22:00borrowing for this and having it um

1:22:03charge us $70,000 or any amount for that

1:22:06matter. I would be hopeful that, you

1:22:10know, based on my information with

1:22:12Joanna and her team is that this is a

1:22:15very good project for the grant. And I

1:22:18know the timeline is um is a little bit

1:22:22off from where we really want to do it.

1:22:24But if we can save um our town's

1:22:28um residents $1.4 $4 million by getting

1:22:31a grant. That might be that might be

1:22:34what we request from Joanna that we just

1:22:38we we wait and see and look at the

1:22:41timeline. I mean, so I understand that

1:22:44that I know that grant um like like you

1:22:48know, director Pin said that that's

1:22:51going to push off if we apply for it in

1:22:54January, even if you get the the the

1:22:56award amount in May, you will not get

1:22:59the the signed contract back from Mass

1:23:02DOT allowing you to use the money until

1:23:04September, October, which means we

1:23:06missed that construction season, which

1:23:07means that we're going to be three years

1:23:10with a culvert.

1:23:12shut down a a roadway half shut down for

1:23:143 years. And I just to me that just is

1:23:19wrong on so many levels when it comes to

1:23:20managing our infrastructure that I can't

1:23:22even fathom that. I understand the the

1:23:24desire to look for a grant to fund this.

1:23:27Um

1:23:29but that aside because that means our

1:23:32scheduling has gone

1:23:34hell in a hand basket for lack of a

1:23:36better term. Um, and things are taking a

1:23:39lot longer than we project. But I just

1:23:42go back to the fact that why are we

1:23:43spending money to borrow money when we

1:23:46already have it that money in the bank.

1:23:48Um,

1:23:50I just I I can't support borrowing and

1:23:53paying more for money we have and when

1:23:55when we have the free cash available

1:23:58>> for through the chair. Um, to Mr.

1:24:01Crane's point, would that 1.4 4 million

1:24:04bring us below the 17% that DLS thinks

1:24:07we should have in free cash.

1:24:11>> If I could through the chair, actually

1:24:12it would. Yes, we're just right around

1:24:15that 17% right now.

1:24:18Do

1:24:19>> you have an estimate of how much like

1:24:21what percentage it would be? It does it

1:24:23put us at like 16% or does it put us

1:24:25like well below

1:24:2712? would it would put us around between

1:24:3116 and 16 1.5%.

1:24:34>> Thank you.

1:24:43>> What is DLS basing its estimate on?

1:24:49>> What did you say DS basing its estimate

1:24:51on? Are they drawing on mass general

1:24:54law? or are they dropping off the

1:24:55>> GFOA is what they use as a standard.

1:25:01>> Are we concerned that our bond rating

1:25:03would be affected if we drop below I

1:25:06mean if we're talking about a half a

1:25:07percent or 1%.

1:25:09And I'm not necessarily agreeing with

1:25:11Mr. Crane that we just blow through, you

1:25:14know, free cash cuz we don't know what

1:25:16the next couple of years are going to

1:25:18look like. So we don't want to be too

1:25:21we're spending quite a bit of free cash

1:25:23this year. But anyways

1:25:24>> through the chair. So the rating

1:25:26agencies do look favorably on having

1:25:28higher reserves especially at a time

1:25:31given that we have a lot of pressures on

1:25:33our budget for health insurance,

1:25:35pension, education costs and SNP gave us

1:25:39a high score for financial flexibility

1:25:42and liquidity due to our high reserves.

1:25:44I did have a discussion with our

1:25:46financial advisor and also it's

1:25:48beneficial to help to maintain our

1:25:50reserves in case we do need to tap it if

1:25:52there's an emergency or something that

1:25:54needs to happen. So, um the positives of

1:25:58having higher reserves actually outweigh

1:26:01the negatives of taking on the extra 1.4

1:26:04million in the debt. I I though I do

1:26:06understand that it will there will be a

1:26:08cost to the taxpayers.

1:26:12Where are we with stabilization? And is

1:26:14that

1:26:16somewhere that we could draw this funds

1:26:18these funds from

1:26:21>> or split the funds from?

1:26:23>> Well, I think we've been given balance

1:26:25sheets, haven't we, in our packet today

1:26:29or um information? Yep.

1:26:37>> So, what is our balance right now?

1:26:40Um, I'm going to I'm going to go and

1:26:42grab my information, but I have on here

1:26:44that it's 1,552718

1:26:47is what we have in our stabilization.

1:26:50>> And is that after the um after all the

1:26:52deductions from this warrant

1:26:56>> that is after the duct sorry after the

1:27:00deductions from the annual town meeting

1:27:02but the only other recommendation that

1:27:04were given from stabilization would be

1:27:07for article 23. So that would be before

1:27:09that one.

1:27:11>> Aren't we putting um

1:27:14Okay,

1:27:15>> Madam Chair, I just have a clarification

1:27:17because the the chart that I'm looking

1:27:19at says that our stabilization totals

1:27:23um the cont annual contribution minus,

1:27:25you know, plus the earnings minus the

1:27:27appropriation shows us with a $5.3

1:27:29million

1:27:32balance of stabilization.

1:27:34But you're saying that's only 1

1:27:36something million. So, I'm trying to

1:27:37understand

1:27:39where's the $4 million delta.

1:27:41>> It was a $200,000 that was used at the

1:27:43annual town meeting for fiscal 27.

1:27:46>> Right. I understand that. But the form

1:27:48that what we're looking at right now is

1:27:49the stabilization totals, contributions

1:27:52puts us at 1.45 million. Earnings puts

1:27:56us at 1.1 million. Appropriations are

1:27:58580,000 out taking out for a balance of

1:28:015.3 million in stabilization.

1:28:04>> Did I Did I misspeak? It was

1:28:06>> You said it was about 1 million.

1:28:07>> It's 5.1 million. I'm sorry. I

1:28:10apologize.

1:28:11>> So that's [laughter]

1:28:12>> 4 million better than we were 5 minutes

1:28:14ago.

1:28:14>> But but as the chair did point out

1:28:17though, if article 19 does pass town

1:28:21meeting, 150,000 would be added to

1:28:24stabilization

1:28:26>> be taken from stabilization.

1:28:30>> No article.

1:28:31>> It's added. It would be add it's adding

1:28:33150 to stabilization.

1:28:37>> Does BLS have any recommendation on how

1:28:39much we should have in stabilization?

1:28:44>> That that I'm not sure of from the

1:28:46report. I'd have to look at that to see.

1:28:48>> Well, would not want to keep hitting

1:28:51free cash when we have stabilization. I

1:28:53understand stabilization takes a

1:28:56two-third vote and obviously everybody's

1:28:58afraid of that which they

1:29:00>> So does borrowing. So, it's the same

1:29:01thing. [laughter]

1:29:03>> To me, you don't put the money in there

1:29:06to not use it. So, to me, that's where I

1:29:11would like to see the money taken from.

1:29:14I do not want to see a borrowing for

1:29:16$1.4 million over 30 years. It doesn't

1:29:18even make sense to borrow that small

1:29:21amount for that long period of time or

1:29:22even 20 years. But, you know, I think we

1:29:26should be looking at stabilization

1:29:29to fund this as a stop gap. And

1:29:32obviously, as Mr. Crane says, Water

1:29:34Street is a small street, but it's a

1:29:36very important street because that's how

1:29:38people get from one side of town to the

1:29:40other.

1:29:41And I also am fairly leerary about

1:29:45having people driving on one side of the

1:29:47street when we have the other side of

1:29:50the street saying it's not safe for you

1:29:52to be on that side of the street. And

1:29:54we've had that now for quite a bit of

1:29:58time. So,

1:30:00my recommendation would be that we

1:30:03either amend this article for

1:30:05stabilization or some other funding

1:30:07source cuz um I would not support a

1:30:10borrowing for 1.4 million.

1:30:12>> Yeah. So, I'm fine with stabilization.

1:30:13I'm fine with free cash. I just don't

1:30:15want to borrow 1.4 million when we have

1:30:18money that can utilize.

1:30:22>> And that 2/3 vote is a two-thirds vote.

1:30:24So, stabilization is the same vote

1:30:26threshold as the bar. I mean, we have

1:30:28money, but we don't have inexhaustible

1:30:30money. So, I just want to be careful of,

1:30:34and again, we keep talking about doing

1:30:36financial policies.

1:30:38Um, we need a plan to spend this money.

1:30:41We we shouldn't be just every year

1:30:44saying, "I don't have money, so let's go

1:30:46to free cash."

1:30:47>> Right?

1:30:48>> Because I think it's great that we're

1:30:50we're not raising money on the tax levy,

1:30:53which is great because we've already

1:30:54done that. But I think at some point

1:30:57we're going to run out of money and then

1:30:58we're going to hit them harder than we

1:31:00need to. We're not budgeting properly.

1:31:03Our CIP process needs to be reformed. We

1:31:07need the financial policies. We needed

1:31:08them three years ago

1:31:11um when we

1:31:13were talking about it and we still need

1:31:14them. So I hope that we can get to that.

1:31:16But I would recommend that we ask the

1:31:20town manager to seek an amendment and

1:31:23use stabilization for the $1.4 million.

1:31:36So should we defer to the um to our town

1:31:39manager? Did we defer to the petitioner

1:31:41on this and expect that um there would

1:31:45be an amendment on town hall floor at

1:31:48town meeting floor and then we would

1:31:51speak at that time.

1:31:54>> So we can change the article from free

1:31:57cash to stabilization if that's what the

1:31:59board wishes at the town meeting.

1:32:02>> It's right now it's from borrowing. So

1:32:03go from borrowing to stabilization.

1:32:05>> Sorry borrowing to stabilization.

1:32:07>> So we can amend it right now? No, it has

1:32:09to be a me amended at town meeting.

1:32:11>> Okay, which is what I said. So, we could

1:32:13defer to the petitioner

1:32:15at this point

1:32:18and then um

1:32:20speak at town meeting.

1:32:25>> I would make a motion that we not

1:32:28recommend the article,

1:32:29>> okay,

1:32:30>> as written.

1:32:31>> I will second that.

1:32:39So [clears throat]

1:32:41with this,

1:32:42would the board support the chair

1:32:46standing up if a motion was made on the

1:32:48floor to say that the board would

1:32:51support it? Should the amendment be from

1:32:55stabilization?

1:32:57>> The funding source to be a

1:32:58stabilization.

1:33:00>> We can always post a meeting before town

1:33:02meetings director.

1:33:03>> Mhm. [clears throat]

1:33:05But it won't we won't know if that

1:33:07motion is made at town meeting. So

1:33:09having another meeting right beforehand

1:33:10is not going to help.

1:33:12>> So again, I'm I'm in favor of not

1:33:15recommending it as well. But I just want

1:33:17to make sure because if we're having the

1:33:19conversation that we would as a board

1:33:22support it should the funding source

1:33:24change to stabilization.

1:33:28>> I don't know that we can do that as part

1:33:30of this. We have three We have three

1:33:34things that we can recommend.

1:33:37>> Four.

1:33:37>> So through the chair, my concern is that

1:33:41if we say that we are not recommending

1:33:43this that um there's potential that

1:33:46water street won't get fixed and I don't

1:33:48think that's acceptable to be honest.

1:33:50So, I personally would prefer to defer

1:33:53to the petitioner

1:33:55um with the caveat that we expect

1:33:59an amendment

1:34:01>> [clears throat]

1:34:01>> um

1:34:04because I don't I don't think we we can

1:34:07continue to keep that street half open

1:34:10and it

1:34:11>> I think if we say we are

1:34:14not recommending this it is

1:34:16>> so I think the board I mean although the

1:34:19the typical the board chair says I the

1:34:22board's vote approval da da da da da the

1:34:25board can the board chair can say more

1:34:28so the board chair can say that the

1:34:32board voted either you know to refer to

1:34:35defer to the petitioner or not to

1:34:37approve because we did not want to

1:34:38borrow the money however the board

1:34:40voiced in general support for stabil

1:34:43using stabilization for it and then

1:34:45allow town meeting to make whatever vote

1:34:46they want that the the chair has the

1:34:49discretion to make whatever statement

1:34:51she wants as she makes those.

1:34:55>> No, [laughter]

1:34:56the the board should voice or the chair

1:34:58should voice the board's opinion, not

1:35:01>> whatever. So, what I'm saying is if the

1:35:04board were to say to the chair, we would

1:35:06support additional commentary saying we

1:35:09would support it, then I would say we

1:35:11can move forward with with a vote on

1:35:13that. So, let me amend the original

1:35:15motion to include language that the

1:35:18board is opposed to borrowing the money

1:35:20but would support money being taken out

1:35:24of stabilization.

1:35:25>> Okay. Is that on the motion to not

1:35:28recommend

1:35:28>> correct?

1:35:29>> I I would suggest a agreeing with Sarah

1:35:32that uh the emot that really sends a

1:35:34message in in my mind that the intent of

1:35:37the article is to fix the road and we're

1:35:39saying no. I think the defer to the

1:35:41petitioner is a little softer and it

1:35:44doesn't say that we're against the road,

1:35:46but I would think that would indicate

1:35:48some issues with it. I don't I don't

1:35:50think we should say not recommend.

1:35:52>> So, if I may, Madam Chair, so if we

1:35:56defer to the petitioner and the

1:35:57petitioner does not ask for a vote on

1:35:59the floor to amend, then we are sitting

1:36:03there saying the same thing. So I feel

1:36:05if we don't recommend because as written

1:36:08and maybe that's what it is. We do not

1:36:10recommend as written would but would

1:36:12support

1:36:13um funding from stabilization.

1:36:17>> Why would we think that the petitioner

1:36:20would not put forth an article with an

1:36:22amendment?

1:36:24>> Well, I mean

1:36:25>> I hope they would.

1:36:26>> The petitioner can't because the

1:36:27petitioner is not a town meeting member.

1:36:30The petitioner has to have a town

1:36:31meeting member. We do we have reason to

1:36:34think that that wouldn't happen?

1:36:36>> I think at the end of the day, you know,

1:36:39I I keep hearing a lot of conversation

1:36:41at the finance committee. They're

1:36:43opposed to this. They don't like that

1:36:45they're uncomfortable with the level of

1:36:46information they're getting. And at the

1:36:48end of the day, they say yes.

1:36:50And I think it's about time that this

1:36:52board and the finance committee start

1:36:55saying no.

1:36:57We're not comfortable. We're not

1:36:59accepting it. We don't like it. and

1:37:01we're not going to support it. And I

1:37:04don't mean to sound argumentative about

1:37:05it, but

1:37:07>> at the end of the day, town meeting can

1:37:09do whatever the hell it wants. Our

1:37:11recommendation,

1:37:13whether they weigh that or they don't,

1:37:15is not of concern to me. My concern is I

1:37:20am uncomfortable with the borrowing. We

1:37:22have available funds

1:37:25and we need to start saying no. So that

1:37:29I'm sticking with my original motion

1:37:30whether it carries or it doesn't. Um

1:37:34that that's my feeling.

1:37:35>> Okay. Can you repeat the chair?

1:37:37>> Oh, go ahead. Yes. Yep.

1:37:39>> I don't disagree and I don't have a

1:37:41problem saying no. Um

1:37:47my concern is the street is not going to

1:37:49get fixed. And that's like this might be

1:37:51not the

1:37:54stand where we say no. Like that's my

1:37:56concern is that if this we say we vote

1:37:59not to recommend because of how because

1:38:01we don't agree with the borrowing and I

1:38:03don't agree with the borrowing either. I

1:38:04think if we have the funds to pay for

1:38:06this, we we should pay for this um and

1:38:08hope that we get the grant and we get

1:38:10the funds back. Um but that being said,

1:38:16I don't know if this is the this is the

1:38:19one to say no on this means somebody's

1:38:21road doesn't get fixed. This was and if

1:38:23I lived on Water Street, I have to tell

1:38:25you if it took three years to get it

1:38:27fixed, I would be unimpressed.

1:38:30>> Well, I would say to you, our

1:38:31recommendation doesn't say their road

1:38:34isn't going to get fixed because Town

1:38:35Meeting has spending authority. Frankly,

1:38:39everything that we're doing here, if

1:38:41Town Meeting wanted to just say, I'm not

1:38:43voting for this budget. I want a budget

1:38:45of $40 million. There is not anything

1:38:48that one of us up here can do because

1:38:50town meeting is the appropriating body.

1:38:52We are not telling town meeting what to

1:38:56do. We're saying this is what we believe

1:38:59and town meeting in their wisdom can do

1:39:01whatever the heck they want. I'm not

1:39:03trying I think you're overemphasizing

1:39:06our influence on town meeting at least

1:39:08in my experience. I disagree in that I

1:39:12think you are underemphasi like what

1:39:16sway we have over town meeting members

1:39:18and how our recommendations and how the

1:39:22finance committee's recommendations

1:39:25sway their vote like we've had so many

1:39:28discussions I mean on water street alone

1:39:30that like

1:39:33people look to these boards for

1:39:36recommendations

1:39:37and I just my concern on this one and

1:39:40and I I agree with everybody that I

1:39:42don't want to borrow the money.

1:39:43>> Mhm.

1:39:44>> I would prefer to defer to petitioner

1:39:46because this this has to get fixed.

1:39:50>> Town meeting can make that decision.

1:39:51Madam chair, there's a motion on the

1:39:52floor. There's a second. I would call

1:39:54the vote.

1:39:54>> Can you repeat the motion, please?

1:39:56motion is that we recommend against

1:40:01this article, but in general would be in

1:40:04favor of the article if monies were

1:40:06taken out of stabilization and we

1:40:08authorized the chair to say that at town

1:40:10meeting.

1:40:11>> So the we would be in favor of the

1:40:13article um if the funding source was not

1:40:17borrowing but would be stabilization.

1:40:22>> All right. So we have a motion and a

1:40:24second. All in favor?

1:40:26>> I

1:40:26>> opposed.

1:40:27>> I

1:40:28>> I So it's 32.

1:40:45All right. So we have one more article.

1:40:47We're looking at article um 22.

1:40:51This is the article. Um,

1:40:56this is the article determination of

1:40:58automated license plate reader, flock

1:41:00safety contract and removal of

1:41:01surveillance equipment.

1:41:04Um, and this has the four sections.

1:41:07Okay, I'm not going to read them all.

1:41:09They're as they're as presented here.

1:41:14Any questions?

1:41:18Again, not a question, but a citizens

1:41:20petition asking the town not to be in

1:41:24contracts. I think we had some

1:41:26conversation about this. Uh, again, I'd

1:41:29be okay deferring to the petitioner. I

1:41:31think it was a 22 vote last time, but I

1:41:36still stand with deferring to the

1:41:37petitioner on this.

1:41:39>> Yeah, it was a 22 vote on defer to

1:41:41petition and then the two vote on

1:41:43recommend approval.

1:41:45So, we're waiting for the tiebreaking

1:41:47folk to to join us. [laughter]

1:41:50>> I'm going to be perfectly honest with

1:41:51you. I'm not in favor of this article.

1:41:55Um, I would support in general a

1:41:58citizens petition that addressed

1:42:01plate readers. I'm not in favor of

1:42:04banning a company. Um, ownership can

1:42:08change, behaviors can change,

1:42:11and I certainly don't support doing

1:42:14that. So, I'm not in favor of deferring

1:42:17to the petitioner. I'm not in favor of

1:42:19approving it. I'm in favor of saying no.

1:42:23Um, I believe we have guidance from

1:42:26council that we received today through

1:42:28the town manager that this is a

1:42:30non-binding action.

1:42:32>> That town meeting does not have the

1:42:34authority to inhibit our ability to act

1:42:36and our authorities any more than we

1:42:39have an authority on them. So, in that

1:42:45I'm not in favor of banning companies

1:42:47from being in town. Again, if the

1:42:49article was related to the actual

1:42:54activity that they were saying, I just

1:42:56don't want license plate readers at all.

1:42:59I don't care who they are. I don't care

1:43:01what company it is. I just fundamentally

1:43:03think that it's a violation of my rights

1:43:05and I'm being

1:43:08stalked by the government or by people

1:43:12who have authorized access to same

1:43:16equipment but are abusing that

1:43:18authorization which obviously is a

1:43:21offense that bears with it consequences

1:43:24potentially both at the state level as

1:43:26well as at the municipal level up to and

1:43:29including termination and at the state

1:43:31level, they could potentially lose their

1:43:33right to be a peace officer in any of

1:43:35the communities in the commonwealth. So

1:43:38the tiebreak vote isn't going to tie

1:43:40break on either of those options.

1:43:42>> I would make a motion to knock around

1:43:44recommend.

1:43:46>> Second.

1:43:49>> Any other comments?

1:43:50>> Yeah, I just want to clarify the letter

1:43:52from town council made it clear that

1:43:54this petition is worded correctly and

1:43:56that it says town meeting is requesting.

1:43:58Town meeting is not requiring. Town

1:44:01meeting is not forcing. Town meeting is

1:44:02not trying to usurp. Town meeting is

1:44:05simply requesting that these actions be

1:44:07taken by the town manager, by staff. So

1:44:11the the the the

1:44:14reason that letter was requested, I'm

1:44:17assuming, was a discussion between board

1:44:20members and the chief. and the chief

1:44:22opined that he thought that it was out

1:44:24of town meetings jurisdiction to to take

1:44:28up um this article and what town council

1:44:32said and and how regardless how we're

1:44:34going to vote tonight. What town council

1:44:35said was that no town meeting can

1:44:38request. They cannot require and nowhere

1:44:41in here is it requiring it is

1:44:43requesting.

1:44:46And with respect to LPRs versus flock,

1:44:49anyone who does research on this issue

1:44:51knows that flock is a very different

1:44:55system than the other LPR systems that

1:44:58are out there. Flock is not a strict LPR

1:45:01system. It is a sur more of a

1:45:04surveillance system that not just picks

1:45:06up license plates but picks up any

1:45:09defining

1:45:10uh change in a vehicle. So it can pick

1:45:13up whether you have roof racks or not.

1:45:15It can pick up the make, the model, the

1:45:17color, whether you have dents, whether

1:45:18you have bumper stickers that say Trump

1:45:20for president or Biden for president. It

1:45:23picks up and and and creates a national

1:45:26database that is searchable not just by

1:45:28law enforcement, but by anyone that has

1:45:32a flock account to then track movements

1:45:37of people moving throughout a community,

1:45:41community to community, state to state.

1:45:43No other LPR system has that capability.

1:45:46No other LPR system has tried to have

1:45:49that capability. So when it references

1:45:51flock versus LPRs, it's not comparable.

1:45:54Flock is not. It's simply an LPR system.

1:45:58>> You stand by my statement and I'm

1:46:00getting a little tired of being lectured

1:46:02by other members as to my point of view.

1:46:05Um

1:46:08technology can change. It can be abused

1:46:11by anyone.

1:46:13And just because today an LPR doesn't

1:46:17seek to do this, we have seen companies

1:46:20get purchased and things change. So I

1:46:24stick by my original statement which is

1:46:27I would be more comfortable if this

1:46:29article addressed the activity itself

1:46:32and not a specific company. if that

1:46:35company should change ownership, change

1:46:38behaviors, change technologies,

1:46:42I am not going to be in favor of banning

1:46:44it from town. So, we have a motion. We

1:46:47have a second on the floor. I call the

1:46:49vote.

1:46:50>> Can you repeat the motion, please?

1:46:53>> Make a motion to not recommend.

1:46:55>> Okay. So, you have a motion and a second

1:46:56to not recommend article um 22. All in

1:47:01favor?

1:47:02>> I I opposed. Hi.

1:47:04>> Hi.

1:47:10>> All right. So, that's it for the warrant

1:47:12articles

1:47:15we need to take a look at. Now, we have

1:47:16a um couple member items. Um let's see.

1:47:20Steve, you wanted to talk uh discuss the

1:47:22review of current road and sideway

1:47:24projects, sidewalk projects, along with

1:47:27a holistic discussion of future

1:47:29infrastructure needs and priorities.

1:47:31Recognizing that roads may not be

1:47:32scheduled for additional work for 20

1:47:34plus years.

1:47:36>> So I I worded this so we can include

1:47:38more roads, but um this past week u

1:47:41there's been a lot of discussion about

1:47:42Bankro Street. It is under construction.

1:47:44There are sidewalks going in on um a

1:47:48section of that, but it doesn't um go

1:47:51down the entire street. And after um

1:47:55many neighbors have notified me their

1:47:58concerns, um I did a little bit more

1:48:00research. So there's two condo

1:48:02associations, a church, and a couple

1:48:05side streets. So by not completing this

1:48:08section of road, and I'm going to throw

1:48:10out numbers. It's not they're not

1:48:11engineering their Google numbers, but

1:48:13there was about 1,600 um linear feet or

1:48:16about 64 um00 um square feet of sidewalk

1:48:22that is not being done. That could

1:48:24impact 152 houses according to my Google

1:48:28search. I don't know exactly how many

1:48:30numbers are in the um condo associations

1:48:33um for such a small thing and I know

1:48:36we've had other discussions about other

1:48:38sidewalks and they lead to nowhere and

1:48:40we have to start somewhere. Um this is a

1:48:43great opportunity to make that more um

1:48:47connected. It actually would connect to

1:48:49the bridge which then also connects to

1:48:51the tuttle post and then connects um to

1:48:53Milbury Street. So there really is an

1:48:56opportunity here for what I would

1:48:58consider um small dollars huge impact

1:49:03and I don't know what those dollars are.

1:49:04So I'm making assumptions here but

1:49:07knowing that this happened here I'm

1:49:10wondering if it's happened in other

1:49:12places and where we're not seeing it

1:49:14because if we're doing roadway

1:49:16construction on a 90 plus year plan when

1:49:19are we going to come back and revisit

1:49:21these things? And again, there's a lot

1:49:23of opportunity that we should be looking

1:49:26at more than just the high priority

1:49:29plan, looking at what is being

1:49:31constructed and where the dollars can be

1:49:34spent the most. Um, some concerns around

1:49:37public safety were brought to my

1:49:38attention. Children accessing the school

1:49:41buses and uh trying to get there. Um,

1:49:45not being able to make this connection

1:49:48until the next word. So, the letter did

1:49:51go out to the residents explaining that

1:49:53sidewalks were going in. It wasn't

1:49:55detailed where it said the sidewalks

1:49:57were going to stop. It was a the

1:49:59sidewalks would be getting installed.

1:50:01The roadways were marked. So, there's

1:50:03definitely um misalignment in in that. I

1:50:07don't know again if others have heard it

1:50:08from other areas, but I do know there

1:50:11was a sidewalk to nowhere or something

1:50:14that wasn't complete. Um there we have a

1:50:16lot of sidewalks that do dead end. Um,

1:50:19so it's not just that one area, but

1:50:21that's the main concern being brought

1:50:24up. Um, and I know some of them couldn't

1:50:26make it tonight. If it was a Monday

1:50:27meeting, it'd be a little different. Um,

1:50:30but I don't know if there's an

1:50:32opportunity to amend the contract to fix

1:50:34this before the roadways close up and

1:50:36they have to come back and cost us a lot

1:50:38more. But certainly want to open it up

1:50:42for discussion and maybe revisit some of

1:50:45the other areas that aren't fully

1:50:46connected or where um the plan has not

1:50:50met the needs of the residents.

1:50:54>> And do we know the reason that all the

1:50:56sidewalks are not going in on Bankro

1:50:58Street?

1:51:00So, I think the sidewalk plan did not

1:51:04list the entire street.

1:51:07>> Um,

1:51:09>> chair, if I may. Yep.

1:51:10>> Um, I have spoken to Joanna about this

1:51:13and I have spoken to many residents on

1:51:16Bankrupt Street. Um, apparently the area

1:51:19that was done was on the sidewalk

1:51:21prioritization plan and we're now

1:51:23looking to expand that plan to include

1:51:26this part of the part on Bankraftoft

1:51:28Street. Um, there are multiple issues

1:51:33from mail delivery cuz the mail the post

1:51:37office will not deliver mail there for

1:51:39some reason. Um and we are looking into

1:51:43this and I can prepare with um DPW I can

1:51:46pair prepare a report for next time

1:51:49>> on where we are on that and addressing

1:51:52um the issue and what we have for

1:51:54funding if we can do an amendment and I

1:51:56can provide that to the board

1:51:58>> through the chair. Can I I'm sorry.

1:52:01>> Um

1:52:02>> the potential new software that is in

1:52:05town meeting would that also evaluate

1:52:07sidewalks? Do we know if that would

1:52:09evaluate sidewalks? I'm sorry to put you

1:52:11back on the spot, Joanna.

1:52:18Uh, through the chair, the new software

1:52:20would look at the condition of sidewalks

1:52:24and it would allow us to see if there's

1:52:26sidewalks or not, but I don't believe it

1:52:29would prioritize

1:52:31where sidewalks need to go in. That's

1:52:34fine. But it would at least give us an

1:52:35idea of where they dead end and to for

1:52:39future

1:52:41potential future sidewalks. Thank you.

1:52:45>> Yes, sir.

1:52:45>> Yeah. So, um through the chair, I guess

1:52:47um so when I read this agenda item, I I

1:52:52went back and reread the prioritization

1:52:54plan by the CMRPC to understand why it

1:52:56left off.

1:52:58Um I understand they did the

1:52:59prioritization plan as a guiding

1:53:01document but nothing in that report

1:53:04requires us only to stick to that. In

1:53:07fact several times it references um

1:53:10taking advantage of other projects going

1:53:13on to expand the network. Um one of the

1:53:16key important things was connectivity

1:53:18and you know as Mr. chamber said,

1:53:21you know, take with this you connect to

1:53:24P package hog and all that sidewalk

1:53:26network all the way to Milbury Street

1:53:28and all that sidewalk network. That will

1:53:30not happen if we just stop right where

1:53:32they drew the line. So there's no

1:53:34requirement

1:53:36that we amend the plan. There's no

1:53:38requirement that we follow it strictly

1:53:41ABC.

1:53:42um staff has the flexibility in that

1:53:46plan as they're doing it to say it makes

1:53:49sense to go an extra 1,600 feet to get

1:53:52all of this connection. So, we're just

1:53:54going to pri we're just going to do that

1:53:56because it's in line with the thought

1:54:00analysis that was behind the development

1:54:02of that priorization plan even though

1:54:04CMRPC for whatever reason decided to

1:54:06draw the line where they did. Um, you

1:54:09know, so I don't I don't think it I I

1:54:12don't think it needs an amendment from

1:54:13the CMRPC to redo the prioritization to

1:54:16allow us to go forward. I think if DPW

1:54:19has the ability and the money to do it,

1:54:22it makes sense to do it and it makes

1:54:24sense to do it now while the equipment

1:54:25is there, while it's mobilized, um, and

1:54:28not to delay further with

1:54:32amendments of priority plans or looking

1:54:35at, you know, alternative analysis. I

1:54:37guess, you know, and I don't want to

1:54:39speak for Mr. Chambers, but my

1:54:41assumption is is that, you know, the

1:54:43thought I'm putting this on the agenda

1:54:45now, we're in the beginning, we're in

1:54:47the middle of October at this point. You

1:54:49really only have a month and a half left

1:54:50at best to do this work under under the

1:54:53current project. And the desire is of

1:54:56the residents is to see this done.

1:55:00>> So, and again, I just want to clarify, I

1:55:02said 1,600 that took us to the bridge.

1:55:05um there's still additional so I'm not

1:55:06the engineer um and I was taking

1:55:10concerns from the residents that brought

1:55:11it up to me. Um, so I I think again

1:55:16without getting into the day-to-day

1:55:18business of every department, I think we

1:55:21need to have that confidence that things

1:55:22are being looked at. And again, 150

1:55:24households plus are affected by such

1:55:28what I would consider a marginal, you

1:55:32know,

1:55:34uh, addition to the project. And there

1:55:36are, again, there may be other areas.

1:55:38And I I don't know what else has been

1:55:40missed. Not everyone in town contacts

1:55:42me, but I don't know if others have

1:55:44other concerns or other areas. Um, I do

1:55:47know we have the prioritization plan and

1:55:49I think that was centered around

1:55:50walkability for schools and seniors and

1:55:53and such. So, it is a good thing, but I

1:55:56don't think we should just be beholden

1:55:57to that. And I know I've been an

1:55:58advocate for sidewalks um since before I

1:56:02was on the board. And uh even when

1:56:04developers tried to get out of it, I

1:56:06forced or the board had discussions to

1:56:09at least include one sidewalk because

1:56:11you don't know what the future holds for

1:56:13these properties.

1:56:14>> Um but again, the letter that came out

1:56:16said they were doing the sidewalks said

1:56:18that you couldn't dig up the road for 5

1:56:20years. So it's a potentially a missed

1:56:23opportunity if action's not taken. And

1:56:26>> um I'd like to again without getting

1:56:29into the day today have um DPW maybe

1:56:32look at some other areas where it makes

1:56:33sense to extend and and make that

1:56:35connectivity

1:56:37>> um going forward.

1:56:39>> The chairman if I may. Um so I just

1:56:42wanted to clarify that the section

1:56:43[laughter] of the of Bankro Street um we

1:56:47looked at that as a a pretty easy

1:56:50opportunity to add sidewalks. Um it's a

1:56:54um the roadway was relatively um wide,

1:56:58so we were able to narrow it somewhat.

1:57:00Um in addition to the fact that the side

1:57:03um the the yards adjacent to the roadway

1:57:06are relatively flat. So, it wasn't it

1:57:09wasn't a huge lift to put sidewalks in

1:57:12there um without any survey um just

1:57:16because there's a wide variet of way and

1:57:20um and a relatively level slope. Um the

1:57:24section past

1:57:26I'm sorry I

1:57:27>> overhill

1:57:28>> overhill

1:57:29um the section past overhill it I don't

1:57:33disagree that those sidewalks sidewalks

1:57:37should be placed there but we need a

1:57:39design for that um to see where the

1:57:42limits of the rightway are and how we

1:57:45can um tie that in to the existing

1:57:48driveways. Um it's similar to the

1:57:53Brenmar sidewalk um where we had there

1:57:57was only a pan actually probably a

1:58:00couple of houses that we had um we had

1:58:03issues with um but it in that survey we

1:58:08identified the fact that we need to

1:58:10lower the grade of the road. we need to

1:58:13shift it out further away from the

1:58:15houses so that um those property owners

1:58:19don't bottom out when they come out onto

1:58:22um Bremar. So, um even though we did

1:58:26resurface the road, um that wouldn't

1:58:29preclude us from looking at that and um

1:58:32allocating money to designing it, but

1:58:35that would be a much more complicated

1:58:37design than just adding a strip of

1:58:39sidewalk on a flat level land. I'm sure

1:58:43if I can y

1:58:44>> do we not have the capability in house

1:58:46that if you I I know we don't have a

1:58:48survey crew in house but if we hire a

1:58:50surveyor to do the survey to then take

1:58:53that inhouse and do a design on CAD

1:58:56based on the survey um within the

1:58:58engineering division

1:59:00>> uh it would depend on um the constraints

1:59:05uh because it we um we started doing

1:59:08that on um

1:59:11on Walshav

1:59:13We did have a survey done and we were

1:59:14looking at the design for that. Um and

1:59:18that again is relatively level but it it

1:59:20still had some constraints just because

1:59:22of the um of uh wetlands and some

1:59:26encroachment issues. Um with respect to

1:59:32steeper slopes um that right away would

1:59:36be the key where where the rightway ends

1:59:39and where where private property begins.

1:59:42No, no, I understand all that. But do we

1:59:44have the capability from an engineering

1:59:46perspective that if a survey is done

1:59:49that we don't have to hire a consultant

1:59:51to design it for us that we can design

1:59:53it in house using CAD?

1:59:55>> Um in an ideal world, yes. Um but

2:00:00currently we have a lot of [snorts]

2:00:01projects going on. So um timing is a

2:00:05little bit limited.

2:00:09So, um, not being able to focus on on,

2:00:11you know, strictly a design, um, you

2:00:15know, it might extend the the length of

2:00:17a project.

2:00:21>> But you're already saying that we can't

2:00:23most likely we can't hit this

2:00:24construction season anyways.

2:00:26>> No. So, I'm just wondering if we can

2:00:29save money on design by hiring a

2:00:31surveyor to do the survey and then have

2:00:33our over the winter time do the survey

2:00:35now then over the winter time when all

2:00:37the projects are not going on have the

2:00:39engineers design it.

2:00:41>> That that's actually what we started to

2:00:42do with with Walsh a

2:00:44>> I'm just asking can we do it on

2:00:46>> for this to prioritize Braftoft Street.

2:00:49Um

2:00:51the only the other caveat is is funding.

2:00:54So, we would defin definitely need to

2:00:56take a look at um you know what funding

2:00:59we have available for the the survey and

2:01:01then um the a cost estimate for the

2:01:05construction of the sidewalk.

2:01:10>> I'm not an engineer so please forgive

2:01:12but I know there's some existing. Do you

2:01:15have to engineer the whole thing or just

2:01:17the areas where the slope is too much?

2:01:21data.

2:01:22>> So the the issue is that um no some of

2:01:27it is a lot easier than other areas but

2:01:31um when you have the grade of the road

2:01:33so sorry I'm kind of more of a visual

2:01:36person but you have the grade of the

2:01:37road and then if you have a driveway

2:01:38sloping down

2:01:41um now you're raising a section of that

2:01:46profile first driveway so now your

2:01:50driveway I I mean for a sidewalk. So

2:01:53your driveway needs to go get steeper to

2:01:56get back to that level area. So um so

2:02:02there there's

2:02:04there's a lot of constraint. Well,

2:02:06that's the biggest constraint that I'm

2:02:08concerned about is affecting the current

2:02:11residents and being able to make sure

2:02:14that they can, you know, safely get in

2:02:18and out of their driveways.

2:02:20Um, is that you?

2:02:22>> If I may, um, if you if we could, um, go

2:02:25back to what I was originally saying,

2:02:27and I'd like to work with the department

2:02:28on the details of this and provide that

2:02:30to the board. In addition to what Joanna

2:02:32is saying, um, I think we will be able

2:02:35to provide the numbers. We will be able

2:02:37to provide estimates on what we have for

2:02:39funding and what a timeline would look

2:02:41like. I would like to look into it a

2:02:44little bit more um, and get back to you.

2:02:48>> Thank you. Thank you.

2:02:52>> So, I'm going to take this opportunity

2:02:54since I think it falls under this uh

2:02:56discussion. Um Auburn Street was

2:02:58recently redone and as part of that um

2:03:02some crosswalks were relocated and we

2:03:04created two crosswalks to nowhere. um

2:03:07where they the sidewalk is was primarily

2:03:11in the in these sections on the southern

2:03:15side of the street and specifically in

2:03:17front of the package daycare and then

2:03:19further down between Perry um and the

2:03:22off-ramp for 290

2:03:25and we did the roadway, we did all the

2:03:28curbing. We rebuilt the ramps and then

2:03:31we built these two areas where the curb

2:03:35ramps were done. The pavement markings

2:03:37were put in. So clearly the thought was

2:03:40that this was going to be the location

2:03:42of the crosswalk specifically near

2:03:43Perry. Um and we created a crosswalk to

2:03:48nowhere. Um you could get across the

2:03:50street. The ramp on the other side was

2:03:51ADA compliant, but then it led to grass

2:03:54and there was no actual [snorts] path

2:03:57being done to to be installed to Perry

2:04:00Street or Perry Place. Um, and

2:04:05you know, it was brought up by several

2:04:07residents that said, "Why do we have

2:04:08these crosswalks to nowhere? What if

2:04:09somebody on a wheelchair crosses over?

2:04:12You know, I'm able body. Yeah, I can

2:04:14walk over the grass to get there. Um, I

2:04:17don't want to do it when it's raining.

2:04:18I'm especially not going to want to do

2:04:19it when it's snowing. Um, and now I see

2:04:22that, you know, that I know these issues

2:04:24were brought to the administration and

2:04:26the contractor is now moving the

2:04:29crosswalk back to the other location

2:04:31where it was previously and building the

2:04:33necessary ramp on the opposite side. So

2:04:36now somebody coming down Perry can use,

2:04:39you know, a small sidewalk section to

2:04:41cross the street safely and and get

2:04:43across. And

2:04:45I don't know if it was just something

2:04:47the contractor did. I don't know if the

2:04:49contractor was directed to do this, but

2:04:50I think that, you know, we need to be

2:04:53more cognizant of creating these

2:04:55sidewalks or crosswalks to nowhere um

2:04:58before all that's put in. I hope we're

2:05:00not paying I hope we didn't pay Lynch to

2:05:03do that and then undo it and now paying

2:05:06them to put it back correctly. Um and

2:05:08again, I'm not trying to micromanage the

2:05:10projects. I'm just saying that I think

2:05:13we need to do a a better job of of of

2:05:16considering the pedestrian access,

2:05:18making sure that we are uh taking care

2:05:21of these missing connections and not

2:05:23creating additional missing connections.

2:05:31>> Okay, any other questions?

2:05:34Um Steve, you all set?

2:05:37>> Yeah. So, let's look at our next item.

2:05:39Um, member items also by Steve discuss

2:05:42potential changes to the agenda to allow

2:05:44for board member comments and requests

2:05:47for future agenda items.

2:05:51>> Can you talk tell us?

2:05:52>> Yeah. So again, I know things come up um

2:05:55you know, we've had some discussions

2:05:57here where we're differing views, but um

2:05:59I would love to be able to have a

2:06:02placeholder here where uh the chair

2:06:04would stop and ask, you know, if there's

2:06:07anything additional or something we need

2:06:08to discuss going forward. Um I think

2:06:12just that pause allows us a moment to

2:06:14think about what we've heard. um maybe

2:06:16follow up on some of the things that had

2:06:18been asked previously in the meeting,

2:06:20but like a little bit more succinct. Um

2:06:23and then if the um if it was not an

2:06:25agenda item, we could definitely ask for

2:06:29things to come up. And this again

2:06:30spurred from public comments. We're not

2:06:33interacting, but maybe there is some

2:06:34action that we're being asked to take

2:06:37and someone could um you know say, "Hey,

2:06:39I'd like to hear more about that. Let's

2:06:41add it to the agenda." or hey can the

2:06:43town staff um provide some additional uh

2:06:47resources around this for our next

2:06:48meeting. So it's not for comments or

2:06:51discussion but more for uh placeholders

2:06:54so we can get our thoughts together and

2:06:56and provide the direction to the town

2:06:59staff or town manager to direct the

2:07:01staff um on potential items.

2:07:05>> I think that's a good idea.

2:07:08>> Yeah. So, I I know I'll wait for the

2:07:10town manager to come back. Um,

2:07:14with this issue, I know that we've

2:07:15discussed this in the past and we put

2:07:17out a whole litany of different options

2:07:19to call this uh and everything we

2:07:21whether it was, you know, new business

2:07:23or business unforeseen by the chair or

2:07:26business unforeseen by the board. Um,

2:07:27and each time town council sort of said,

2:07:29"No, no, no. I understand what you want

2:07:31to do, but no, you can't do that." Um,

2:07:35I agree. I want some way for us to say

2:07:38on your next agenda, I would like this

2:07:40report or on the next agenda, I would

2:07:42appreciate staff looking at this or that

2:07:44public comment was great. It's not

2:07:46really under the board's jurisdiction,

2:07:47but staff, can you please take care of

2:07:49this? Um,

2:07:51have we asked town council for here's

2:07:54what the board wants to do. Can you give

2:07:56us an agenda item or name of an agenda

2:07:59item that we can put on our agenda so

2:08:02that we can do it? And

2:08:04>> if we haven't asked that, can we ask

2:08:05that?

2:08:05>> Yeah. And it wouldn't be for

2:08:08deliberations. It would just

2:08:10beformational at this point.

2:08:12>> The chair. Yes. Um we've discussed this

2:08:15before. We can put an agenda item on

2:08:18where members can recommend agenda items

2:08:20for future meetings.

2:08:22>> Okay.

2:08:24>> Do we need a vote to add that to our

2:08:26agenda as a regular occurring item? Why

2:08:30don't you wait till you get the

2:08:32information from her?

2:08:34>> So,

2:08:35>> I think we have the information.

2:08:37>> I do believe the chair sets the agenda

2:08:39though, so she could add whatever item.

2:08:42>> No, but we have a policy.

2:08:43>> Yeah.

2:08:43>> Right. So, what's on the agenda? So, to

2:08:47amend the policy so that it's included,

2:08:49but it should be

2:08:50>> so as as part of this discussion

2:08:53>> for you next time. Can I ask that for

2:08:56our next meeting that we have a revised

2:08:59policy that has that agenda item

2:09:01specifically listed so that we can

2:09:02consider it?

2:09:03>> We just said we're going to do that.

2:09:04Yes.

2:09:04>> Oh, I just want to put it on the record

2:09:06that we're asking.

2:09:06>> Yeah. And and we just said it, too.

2:09:08Yeah. So, you're all set. Any other

2:09:11issues, comments? All right. We now have

2:09:15um public comments, please.

2:09:23See?

2:09:27>> Um, Mr. Richards,

2:09:29>> I didn't sign up because I didn't want

2:09:31to interrupt anything.

2:09:33>> Okay, why don't you um Yeah, why don't

2:09:35you have me sign up and then come on up?

2:09:37You can.

2:09:47>> Good evening. Eric Richards, precinct 4.

2:09:50Uh, I have a idea that might dovetail

2:09:53with your last member item. I know a

2:09:56number of you have brought this up

2:09:57before. Um, [snorts] one avenue you may

2:10:01consider an approach to, it's a little

2:10:03out of the box, is setting up an open,

2:10:07transparent system where citizens would

2:10:11have a standing agenda agenda item and

2:10:13you would just simply as part of your

2:10:15policy make a criteria. you know, the

2:10:17same person can't have six agenda items.

2:10:19It will go into a portal and it will be

2:10:22approved or denied or whatever the case

2:10:24may be. And that way you don't have to

2:10:27worry about an open meeting law

2:10:28violation because you would have that

2:10:29standing item and it would in encourage

2:10:32more citizen participation on these

2:10:36sorts of issues. Now whether you all

2:10:37want the noise or not, I don't know, but

2:10:40I think it uh might be a way to

2:10:44bridge the gap between some of the

2:10:47concerns and it would allow everything

2:10:50to happen within the law and it would

2:10:52give a lot more opportunity for

2:10:55democratic participation, especially in

2:10:58an era where folks are timing and

2:11:00limiting public comment and that's

2:11:01something that you guys have always been

2:11:03great about here. So, it might be a

2:11:04great place to set an example for other

2:11:06committees and boards. Thank you.

2:11:09>> Thank you. Okay. Um,

2:11:13minutes.

2:11:16Do we have any questions or concerns

2:11:17about the minutes?

2:11:19>> Uh, Madam Chair, there was one item on

2:11:22the minutes where it listed um favorable

2:11:25vote for a 22 vote. So,

2:11:28>> want to make sure that's adjusted. I've

2:11:30already had that conversation.

2:11:31>> Thank you.

2:11:32>> Under article 22. Okay.

2:11:37All right. Any other questions or

2:11:39concerns? So, they are um

2:11:45they are

2:11:48accepted as um amended.

2:11:53All right. Our next meeting is in um

2:11:56just under two weeks and we have the and

2:11:59next week is the um free town meeting

2:12:02and then the following week we're

2:12:04meeting on Monday night and the special

2:12:06time meeting is on Tuesday night.

2:12:08>> Okay.

2:12:10>> Yes.

2:12:12Do

2:12:12>> I have a motion?

2:12:13>> Motion to adjurnn.

2:12:14>> Second.

2:12:15>> We have a motion and a second to

2:12:16adjurnn. All in favor? I I oppose. No.

2:12:25>> [music]