2026-09-30 - Select Board

00:03Please rise for the pledge of

00:04>> allegiance

00:08to the flag of the United States of

00:10America and to the republic for which it

00:13stands, one nation under God,

00:15indivisible, with liberty and justice

00:18for all.

00:21>> Good evening. Tonight we also have the

00:23county commissioners meeting. So we're

00:24going to go to that first before I open

00:26the select board meeting. and I will

00:28turn it under over to Jill Ve who is the

00:30chair of county.

00:32>> Hi everyone. Um and please bear with me.

00:35It's the only second time I've done

00:36this, but I'm calling to order the

00:38Nantka County Commissioners meeting.

00:40It's September 30th and we're all here.

00:44Um just a reminder that this meeting is

00:46being audio video recorded and Brook

00:48Moore is on roll call and we need to

00:50take um she's online and we need to take

00:53votes by roll call. Yeah.

00:56>> Okay. Is there any public comment

00:59for items not on the agenda?

01:04Seeing none, um I don't think there's

01:06any new business.

01:10And can I now we'll look to approval for

01:12the minutes and the warrants.

01:14>> So moved.

01:15>> Second.

01:17>> And on your motion, Don

01:18>> I.

01:19>> Bob.

01:20>> Matt.

01:21>> I.

01:21>> Brooke.

01:22>> I.

01:24and the chair of Ozai.

01:28We are now going to go over a review and

01:31selection of the preferred Winnit road

01:34multi-use path alignment alternative.

01:38And I think we probably have Mike Burns

01:41online.

01:43And is there anyone online that we need

01:47to acknowledge?

01:50>> Just

01:50>> Hi, Madam Chair. Thank you. I'm I'm

01:52happy to hopefully I'm sharing my screen

01:54and you're all seeing it. Okay. Um Okay.

01:58Uh if it's all right, I'm going to

02:00expedite the uh the presentation here.

02:02Uh we we've a lot of material in the

02:04slides has been presented at the uh the

02:06August 12th uh public meeting. Uh

02:10and um I know there's a Red Sox game on

02:12later and I'm sure you all want to get

02:14home and watch that. So I'll be very

02:15quick. Uh just to let you know the

02:17Wawwinet road uh multi-use path is a

02:21federal aid and local aid project. Uh

02:24we're working with a team from Federal

02:25Highways Eastern Federal Lands Division

02:27and US Fish and Wildlife Service and uh

02:29planning staff is also coordinating with

02:31the DPW and town administration on the

02:34project. Uh as you all likely know uh

02:37the wall path was originally recommended

02:39in the 1977 Anta bikeway master plan. Uh

02:43there's been three federal grants

02:45applied to this project totaling $2.4

02:47million. Uh local appropriation was

02:49approved in 2003 for $4.6 million and

02:53the pro project is now in the conceptual

02:55and uh going into preliminary design

02:57phase uh to review alignment

02:59alternatives based on a lot of field

03:00survey um materials. Uh just briefly the

03:04uh the project as you know goes from

03:06Polish road to the gate house at the end

03:08of Wallwin Road. Uh for planning

03:10purposes, we've divided it into uh six

03:12uh sections.

03:14Uh there were also a number of different

03:16alignment alternatives that were

03:17reviewed. Uh there are three alternative

03:19one options. This is option 1 a, a

03:22guardrail uh option with a 10-ft wide

03:25path and three-foot buffer. The 3-ft

03:27buffer used for guard rail uh

03:29installation uh along areas where the

03:34roadway will curve away from the path.

03:36uh and that's to protect pro protect

03:37users of the path in areas where the

03:39path does not or the excuse me the

03:40roadway does not bend away from the the

03:42path. uh a 3-foot buffer with rumble

03:45strips uh was recommended for this

03:47option 1B and based on neighborhood

03:50feedback and trying to minimize impacts

03:52to uh wetlands and abutters and and

03:55cultural assets uh an 8 foot wide path

03:59was uh recommended with a 4ft grass

04:01buffer and this has about a foot less

04:04overall width impacts to a butters.

04:07Again, this alternative was developed in

04:10coordination with the neighborhoods. Uh

04:12there's also uh alternatives 2, three,

04:14and four uh that I'll briefly go over as

04:16we progress through the slides. Uh this

04:18has a 10-ft wide path that breaks away

04:20from the roadway and has more of a

04:22buffer uh between the road and the path

04:25to utilize conservation properties. Um

04:28and I'll go over the reasons why we're

04:30not recommending al alternatives 2,

04:32three, and four later on. Um, we have a

04:34variety of slides about the uh uh

04:37permitting um that I'm not going to dive

04:39into because I the uh technical staff

04:42from federal highway is not here to

04:44present on this and a lot of this

04:46material is presented uh at the August

04:4812th meeting. I'll just note that

04:49wetland uh resources were surveyed uh

04:52last year September 2025 and the project

04:55will impact wetlands and there will need

04:57to be wetland replication as part of

04:58this and that's listed in the next steps

05:00on the slide. Uh there was also a lot of

05:02biological uh resources in the area that

05:05were surveyed uh last uh fall. Um

05:09mammals uh invertebrates, birds and

05:11plants were were surveyed and part of

05:13the next steps is again coordination on

05:15mitigating those that will be impacted

05:17by the project. And lastly, there are

05:20cultural uh significant cultural

05:22properties uh in the area. Uh I do not

05:26have a map of those as they're very

05:28sensitive and not public information. Uh

05:30but there are a lot of protocols uh that

05:32are set up for archaeological uh re

05:34assets that might be impacted. Uh and

05:37there are in the next steps uh to uh

05:40items to perform more intensive

05:41archaeological survey uh as well as

05:44oversight uh during construction if we

05:46get to that point. Uh just to go over

05:48the impacts of each of these

05:50alternatives. Uh here's a table here

05:52showing alternatives uh 1 A and B. the

05:55guard rail and the rumble strip option

05:56at the top uh with a 10-ft path that has

05:59the highest impact for cultural uh

06:01assets as it's a a bigger a wider

06:05project and on the side of the road

06:06where there's uh you know some of those

06:08sensitive assets. Alternative 1C the uh

06:11the grass buffer option because it's

06:13narrower has less rightaway impact. It

06:16has less wetland impacts. Um it does

06:18have a a higher but not the highest

06:20cultural impact because it's smaller. Um

06:23and then the alternative two which has a

06:24path on the uh west side of Wanet Road

06:28um that has because of the layout of the

06:29roadway extremely uh significant

06:32rightway impacts uh but but because

06:35there's no uh there's few less wetland

06:37resources on that side of the road

06:38there's less wetland impact and cultural

06:40impact but the the the cost of the

06:42project would be much much higher and

06:44these uh subsequent alignments it this

06:46does get repetitive so I'll skip through

06:49these if that's all right madam chair

06:50I'll just note that the lowest impact uh

06:53for uh

06:55um this is the uh grass buffer option

06:58because of the narrower uh path. Um it's

07:01the lowest cost, the lowest impact to

07:02cultural areas. Uh there's no wetlands

07:05on the east side of the road in this

07:06section, but there is on the opposite

07:08side. That's why the the bottom row

07:10there, alternative to that breaks away

07:12from the roadway. It's meant to take

07:14advantage of some of the cultural I mean

07:15excuse me the conservation assets uh be

07:18nice a better user experience of the

07:20path but it's extremely impactful to uh

07:22the ride ofway uh and there are wetland

07:25resources that would be impacted so it

07:26does have a higher cost um and uh again

07:29the same story for uh going further up

07:31the roadway uh the grass buffer option

07:34is the the least impact there is an

07:36alternative three that does break away

07:37from the roadway to utilize Nucket

07:40Conservation Foundation property uh

07:42we've heard from them that they're not

07:44uh uh uh interested in having the path

07:48run so significantly away from the

07:50roadway and through their property. Um

07:52again uh section D, same story. Uh the

07:55least impactful is the grass buffer

07:57option. Alternative three uh does have a

08:00greater cultural impact and greater

08:02cost. Uh there are no wetlands in this

08:03area.

08:05Um getting towards the end of the path

08:06in section E, again, same story. uh the

08:09grass buffer with 8 foot wide path has

08:12the least amount of impact uh for

08:14wetlands cultural and cost. The highest

08:17is this alternative four that again goes

08:19through conservation foundation property

08:21that they do not uh support. Uh and

08:24lastly as the path ends at the gate

08:26house uh again same story the lowest

08:29impactful option is alternative 1C the

08:31grass buffer option. Uh we did survey

08:33after the survey the community uh after

08:36the August 12th uh public meeting. Uh we

08:38got about 112 responses which isn't too

08:41bad for uh a project of this scale. Uh

08:44majority of the responses we got were

08:46from uh seasonal or part-time residents.

08:48Uh we did ask if uh residents were from

08:50the Wawwinet area. Uh the numbers here

08:53are really low. About 20 respondents

08:55identified to be uh Wawwinet residents,

08:57business owners or employees in that

08:59area. Uh maybe there was some confusion

09:01with that and uh they selected the wrong

09:03option, but again uh here's what the uh

09:06the breakdown of the respondents were.

09:08What did they say? Uh a lot of them

09:10drive the road uh and and some of them

09:13bike and a fewer walk. Most residents

09:17don't do not use the NRTA again because

09:20of there's really not a a safe

09:22accommodating accessible option of

09:24getting to the bus stop at Pulpus Road

09:26and Walet Road. that's rarely utilized

09:29if if ever. Uh what they do like about

09:31the area is the the character and the

09:34roadway condition. They do not like the

09:35high speeds, the the safety risk and the

09:38lack of bike walking and biking

09:40accommodations. That's pretty

09:41overwhelming. Uh project goals, they

09:44absolutely want to preser uh improve

09:46bike and pedestrian accommodations. Uh

09:49there's u some desire to minimize

09:52residential impacts more so than

09:54minimizing environmental impacts. In

09:56fact, it was it was surprising how many

09:58respondents actually wanted to utilize

10:00the the conservation properties for the

10:02user experience of the path. Uh but

10:04again, the uh because it's impactful uh

10:06uh that's not the option we're going to

10:09recommend. What staff would recommend is

10:12this alternative 1C as uh for the

10:14reasons we previously described. And

10:16Madam Chair, I should note that this is

10:18not only supported by the neighborhoods

10:20because this is what they told us they

10:21wanted. Uh and there's uh should be a

10:23letter in the packet uh um uh stating

10:27that uh the advisory committees, the

10:29historical commission supports this

10:31alternative. The transportation public

10:32access advisory committee or TAC

10:34supports this and our design team at

10:37federal highway uh believe that this was

10:39acceptable uh especially since an 8 foot

10:41wide path is acceptable if you're if the

10:44project is so impactful to environmental

10:46resources. Uh so this is the option

10:48we're recommending uh madam chair and

10:50we're asking for your support for that.

10:52Uh if approved the next steps after we

10:54get past se the September meeting is to

10:56coordinate with the federal highway

10:57design team on the uh the permitting of

10:59the project. It will be a significant

11:01amount of effort for to permit this and

11:03secure rightway. As I mentioned there

11:05are wetland impacts uh mitigating that

11:08wetland impact and any other uh

11:10environmental for animals or plants. uh

11:13that's going to be some effort and we're

11:15guessing that that'll be about a 2-year

11:17uh process uh or more and we anticipate

11:20if everything goes at the speed of light

11:23uh starting construction in the spring

11:25of 2029. Um so that said, Madam Chair,

11:28I'm happy to answer any questions uh but

11:30again the ask is to uh get your support

11:32for alternative 1C as the preferred

11:34option uh for the Wet Road multi-use

11:37path.

11:39>> Thanks Mike. Does anybody from the board

11:41have

11:41>> Yeah,

11:42>> go ahead, Matt.

11:43>> Uh, yeah, Mike, I like uh the grass

11:46buffer alternative as well. One question

11:49uh and I was one of the people who wrote

11:51in saying, "Geez, could we use

11:52conservation land?" Have you worked with

11:54the conservation foundation and they pic

11:56they specifically said they were not

11:58interested. Is that

12:01>> Oh, I didn't correct. Uh madam chair,

12:04the uh conservation foundation supports

12:07the project. uh their mission is to

12:09actually conserve the properties that

12:11are have conservation as their number

12:13one mission and that does not include

12:15conservation in their minds does not

12:17include having bike paths and

12:18recreational areas go through that

12:20conservation area. Uh so they're very

12:22supportive of the project. They just

12:23want to minimize to the greatest extent

12:24possible the impacts of the path.

12:28>> Just to follow up, I was one of the

12:29people that thought it would be a nice

12:31thing to dip in in a couple spots, but

12:33Madam

12:33>> Chair totally is here from the I'd like

12:36to hear him.

12:37if he doesn't mind.

12:38>> Cormarmac, do you want to come up and

12:40talk about

12:42>> Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

12:44Cormarmac Collier, president of the uh

12:46Conservation Foundation. I haven't done

12:47this in a long time, which is nice. Um

12:50but it's funny you guys said the Red

12:51Sox. I

12:51>> thought you were going to say Land Bank.

12:53>> I I I land council, right? Yeah. Um M's

12:56got that under control. She's good. Um

12:59it's funny you said the the socks. You

13:00guys remember 2004 when we were all at

13:02town meeting

13:04>> four nights in a row

13:05>> and then it was like till 2 o'clock in

13:07the morning every night. That was great.

13:09Um yeah, I was just I got a nice

13:11flashback of that. Okay, so um just want

13:14to maybe correct Mike just a little bit.

13:17Okay, so the first two lines the first

13:18two alternatives those are just lines on

13:20a map. Nobody even consulted anybody in

13:23terms of going through our property that

13:24the consultants just threw lines on

13:26maps. And that's what happens in

13:27alternative analysis. you just throw a

13:29couple alternatives out there. So those

13:31were those weren't even considered

13:33essentially by the town either. They

13:35were just off off they were off off the

13:36table. So what we did talk with Mike way

13:39back when um when we asked him to come

13:41to the office to discuss this um is uh

13:45the alternative where there's dips going

13:47in and out um because in specifically we

13:50said there's a number of sensitive

13:52resources that we want to avoid that are

13:54right on the side of the road and

13:55certainly you can come into our

13:57property. So, I just want to make sure

13:58the public understands that we weren't

14:00saying no. We actually want to work with

14:02the town as much as possible utilizing

14:04our land to avoid essenti resources that

14:08are more towards the road. And that

14:09means I mean there's some 120 year old

14:12trees that are up there at that line in

14:13that road and we don't want those cut

14:14down if you can come in. As you guys

14:16know, we've worked with the town and

14:17county on multiple back bike path

14:20projects, specifically Milestone, which

14:22is on our property, some of it, and then

14:24also Pulpus Road, which weaves in and

14:26out throughout our properties as well.

14:28The thing that I would really like to

14:30emphasize today is is um the process in

14:34terms of working with us, the land

14:36owner, that has almost a mile of linear

14:38feet on this road. It hasn't been as

14:41good as we would like it to be. We want

14:43to be uh working with the town to design

14:47a bike path that minimizes those impacts

14:50to the greatest extent possible. In the

14:52past, we unfortunately have just seen

14:54plans just pop up. And if we go with 1C

14:58in 7, 8, nine months time, I don't want

15:00to just see a thing that just is right

15:02along the side of the road without the

15:04town getting in in touch with us to

15:05really a avoid those. At the last

15:07meeting, I zoomed in. I had said that

15:11I'm here. I'm available. My whole team

15:13is available. We got eight scientists on

15:15staff to talk this through. We actually

15:17have people that are land managers. Nick

15:19and his team. Everybody's available for

15:21the town. I didn't hear a single peep

15:24from the town. We didn't even know this

15:25was meeting was was happening until the

15:27Abutters um contacted us this morning.

15:29We know this is part of the process and

15:32hopefully the meat will really happen

15:34after this project process. But I want

15:36to assure you that we are here to work

15:38with you. We understand there's a need,

15:39but I don't want to be back here again

15:41with a plan that we have never even

15:43really seen or renewed or uh uh

15:45commented on. Thank you.

15:47>> So, can I just follow up with you on

15:48that? Yeah.

15:49>> So, you would be open to the bike path

15:52moving into conservation land?

15:54>> It already is on conservation land right

15:56now as it's presented.

15:57>> But I mean to really come into it

15:58because I really loved that last

16:00alternative. I know it was more

16:01expensive, but it actually didn't affect

16:03the wetlands from what I could tell.

16:05>> It Well, it doesn't. Wetlands were never

16:07I I'm sorry. The wetlands were never um

16:10surveyed. Again, it was just lines on a

16:12map. So, the wetlands were never

16:14surveyed. They use some GIS, but they

16:16never actually went out there. We know

16:17this like the back of our hand. That one

16:19goes through numerous wetlands. And talk

16:21about replication and permitting

16:23problems. You're never going to get that

16:24that permitted. So, we also said, look,

16:27in ease of vital need for the town, why

16:30not go back to the 1C? But what we're

16:32saying is that there's spots where you

16:34can go in about 10 ft and come off like

16:36you see on Pulpus Road where it comes

16:38out and comes back and comes out comes

16:40back.

16:40>> Right. I think Go ahead, Bob.

16:41>> That's exactly like I know what you're

16:44talking about, Cormarmac, because I I do

16:46hunt out there a bit and there are some

16:47very old trees there right up close to

16:49the road, but if the path goes in 25 ft

16:51behind them, just like the popus path

16:53where you don't see it for sections,

16:55which is kind of nice too as well. So,

16:57it breaks up the path. Um, and it also

17:00is a safety factor. If that pass 25 ft

17:02on one of those hairpin turns, if a car

17:05comes screaming around the corner,

17:07they're not going to take a biker out.

17:08So,

17:09>> exactly. And we're there. We're there

17:10for you to mark the trees, to show you

17:12our preferred alternative.

17:14Again, just get in touch with us as the

17:16land owners. That's all.

17:18>> Okay. Thank you.

17:19>> Thank you.

17:19>> Um, Brooke has her hand up.

17:22>> Um, thank you, Madam Chair. Um well I uh

17:26you know obviously we've thrown out the

17:28deep into conservation options and um

17:32honestly the old college quad thing um

17:36you can make try to get students to talk

17:38walk in squares but they always go on

17:40the diagonal. This will be a mode of

17:43getting from point A to point B. So, the

17:45most direct route in terms of it being

17:48utilized by uh folks in the

17:50neighborhood, say to get to the bus or

17:52to get to town, um I think you know the

17:55straight shot is is going to be used

17:58more. Um and and sometimes when you see

18:02like on even on Old South Road where the

18:05where the path veers off um people end

18:09up riding down Old South Road because

18:11they get on it, they don't see it or

18:13it's it's not where they want to go. So

18:15um I'd be more inclined to go with

18:18alternative 1C and I do appreciate

18:20Conservation Foundation's um uh offer to

18:24you know avoid some of the assets by

18:27dipping in and out. So, um, I would

18:31agree that this alternative is the best

18:33one. I definitely don't want rumble

18:35strips or guardrails for sure.

18:41>> Where's one hand up online? Allison

18:43Hudson. Allison.

18:49>> Hi.

18:49>> Hi. Sorry, I think I was muted. Can you

18:51hear me now?

18:52>> We can. Thank you.

18:53>> Oh, great. Um, thank you, Madam Chair.

18:55My question was partially answered. um

18:57was Cormarmac's comments, but I did want

19:00to ask a little bit more detail about

19:02the wetlands um because it seems like

19:06[clears throat]

19:06where the lines on the map are drawn,

19:08there are clearly some wetlands. And so

19:11I was wondering if because this is a

19:13Nucketbased project, if a Nantucket

19:16based wetlands designation is applied

19:18here or if it's a federal wetlands

19:20designation and tangentially being that

19:24there are confidential environment uh

19:26historical sites that are not included

19:29on the map, how can we be certain that

19:30the historical association is on board?

19:34Thank you.

19:35>> Thank you,

19:38Miss Molden.

19:40Thank you, Madam Chair. Emily Molden,

19:42executive director of the Nant Atlantan

19:43Water Council. I just wanted to come and

19:45make a comment and sort of a request

19:47that I think's relevant to the

19:49conversation sort of more in line again

19:51with next steps and the sort of the

19:54final layout and uh permitting and that

19:56has to do with the wetlands impacts. I

19:58think, as has been said, for cost

20:00reasons and other obvious reasons,

20:02trying to avoid the direct impacts as

20:04much as possible is definitely

20:06preferred. And the town has permitted uh

20:09bike paths in multiple places around the

20:11island that has required wetland

20:13replication as a result of direct

20:15impacts. And I mean, not only is that

20:18expensive, but it's very challenging to

20:21be successful with a wetland

20:22replication. And so just looking ahead

20:24to that permitting process, I think it

20:26certainly would streamline things and

20:28would certainly help us to be more

20:29supportive of the project to avoid that

20:32wherever possible. Um but I appreciate

20:34the discussion on this and um where the

20:37conversation's headed and all the

20:38thought going into it. Thank you.

20:40>> Thank you.

20:43>> So I don't think we have to vote on this

20:46tonight. I think Mike probably wanted to

20:48get some guidance about which

20:49alternative Oh, excuse me.

20:50>> Hi there. Hi

20:52>> Tom Dixon 15 Wallwin Road and I want to

20:55thank the board Libby and Mike. We met

20:57last uh August to go over some of these

21:00issues and the one thing that I brought

21:03up that I thought was most most

21:05important was the safety of those using

21:07the bike path. The highlights, the

21:10features going out the Wallwin road are

21:13on the west side, the left hand side.

21:15You have Pulpus Harbor, you have the uh

21:18open land just before Chaos Corner, Jay

21:21Lamb's Old House. You also have uh

21:24Pakamo Beach, which people will be

21:26looking for. My issue is people

21:29constantly going back and forth,

21:31crossing the road. The traffic is

21:33outrageous any time of year, especially

21:35in the summer. and I'd like to know how

21:38you're going to avoid any traffic

21:39incidences getting people across the

21:41road. Thank you.

21:43>> Thank you.

21:46>> Okay.

21:52Amanda Cross, year round resident um

21:55nine wall road and a member of the

21:57pulpus association board. And I realize

22:00there may be a little bit of

22:02miscommunication.

22:04Um, Mike talked about meeting with the

22:07neighborhood associations. I don't think

22:10he quite realizes that the Wallwin

22:12association is not the entire Winner

22:15Road. That actually the pulpus

22:16association is

22:19probably about half of it. It goes all

22:21the way up to Pakamo. The Pulpus

22:23Association's natural boundaries is the

22:27drainage into Pulpus Harbor. That's

22:29where we have in common. So while I live

22:33on the wall road, I live in pulpus and I

22:35am member of the pulpus association and

22:38he did not meet with the pulpus

22:39association.

22:41Um going on I want to say I am

22:44absolutely in favor of doing this but

22:47especially for safety reasons. Um it's

22:49too dangerous for bikes and pedestrians

22:51to be sharing the road with cars and

22:53trucks. Um, at the August meeting, the

22:57preferred route, we saw this path on the

23:02east side, right? But right along the

23:04Winnipe road, but we were only given two

23:07options for the buffer. One was the

23:10guardrail and one was the rumble strip.

23:13There was no mention of that one that

23:16was right along of just the grass by

23:19itself. That was only for the roots that

23:21went up and around through um the area.

23:26For the northern end of the wall road,

23:30it is straight. It is fairly flat.

23:36Um and just having a 4 foot wide grass

23:41piece next to it is probably fine. But

23:45at the end that I live on, it is curvy.

23:49It is up and downhill

23:52and right now and there's no um shoulder

23:56and right now

23:58if you come around a corner you don't

24:00see it and you'd at least you end up in

24:01the bushes you don't end up hitting a

24:04bicyclist. Now, if we have a just grass,

24:07just grass right next to folks road I

24:10mean the winner road. I I believe in

24:13some areas you're going to need. Sorry.

24:16I believe in some areas you're going to

24:17need that um guard rail particularly in

24:22the beginning because I would prefer to

24:25hit a guard rail than to hit somebody a

24:27pedestrian or be that pedestrian. So,

24:30that option was not mentioned the August

24:33meeting. Um,

24:39another thing

24:41going forward is that please and it was

24:45it was acknowledged in the letter that

24:47the wall association wrote to you um is

24:52to please include us,

24:55anybody who uses the wall when it road

24:57every day, whether they live in Pakamo,

25:00whether they are on the side roads to

25:03please include include us in future

25:05discussions about the side path. And the

25:07best way to do that is to email the

25:10three neighborhood associations. It's

25:12easy. And don't wait till the last

25:15minute.

25:16Late last week, we thought in in August,

25:19they told us we were not meeting with

25:21you until the end of October. Late last

25:24week, we were told, "Oh, no. You're

25:26meeting with you this today." We had

25:29almost no notice. We then had to wait

25:32for the the new plans that showed what I

25:35just saw about the it's new to us. So,

25:38please in the future,

25:41can you be more proactive about talking

25:44to all of the

25:47constituents that

25:49are interested? Thank you.

25:51>> Thank you.

25:54Is there anyone else here to talk about

25:56it?

25:58>> Oh, yes,

25:59>> I would. Thank you. Robert

26:00[clears throat] Young.

26:01>> Robert,

26:02>> um, a lot of comments here. First of

26:05all, to hear Carmarmac talk about, uh,

26:07the foundation being willing to work

26:10with the town, I think it's fabulous.

26:13Uh, I think Matt's and maybe uh, some

26:17other comments about going off the road

26:20a little bit is great. I think most

26:22people who wrote in, from what I could

26:24tell, were in favor of a like a the 1C

26:28plan, which is not guard rails. It's not

26:30rumble strips. It's not a highway next

26:32to a highway. I [clears throat] think

26:34it's very attractive. Quite frankly, if

26:36you need to do guard rails anywhere, you

26:38can do them. You can put the wood face

26:39on them like you have on on the uh

26:42guardrails along Sacha Pond, for

26:44example. Um I think working with the

26:47communities is going to be really

26:48helpful. Um I think we can mitigate the

26:51wetlands and uh do replication. The

26:53replication that was done for Pulpus

26:55Road is is extremely successful. if

26:59anybody knows where it is. Uh I should

27:01say if you don't know where it is, you

27:02should check it out. Uh it's quite quite

27:05substantial. Um

27:08and uh just we're we're uh we're very

27:12anxious to get this done. This road

27:14continues to be incredibly dangerous. We

27:16live on Wallwinner Road at 40 49. We

27:20walk and bike it regularly.

27:23And uh what we'd like to see if it's

27:25going to be another 3 years before we

27:26begin construction,

27:29if the DPW could just go out with a with

27:32a loader with a blade on it and just

27:34scrape the shoulder so you could walk on

27:37the shoulder, I think it would be a huge

27:39improvement for safety in the interim

27:42because we do have an issue that

27:44shouldn't have to wait three years. and

27:46a little bit of if you decide that if

27:48you know the route you're going to go uh

27:50it's not about an easement it's just

27:52that the public shoulder could be

27:54scraped even if it's only three or four

27:56feet it would be great and thank you

27:58very much

27:59>> thank you

28:03>> I was just going to say that um Mike

28:05Burns is looking for a vote he wants

28:07direction on the alternative so that

28:10they can proceed with the planning

28:13>> okay Matt

28:13>> I have a a question for Mike

28:16is if guardrails are needed at the

28:18beginning of it, will that happen in the

28:20next phase and could they and could they

28:23have the wood like Mr. Young is talking

28:25about?

28:28>> Madam Chair, absolutely. Uh that's

28:31something we had talked about and we did

28:32get comments that there there actually

28:34some uh abutters that want guardrail the

28:37entire length of the project just for

28:38safety reasons. Uh that might be a

28:39little too extreme and it's very

28:41expensive. Uh so that's probably not

28:43going to happen. But where the roadway

28:45bends away from the path? Absolutely.

28:48Those those they'll be guarded out on

28:49those sections for safety reasons.

28:55>> Any other comments from the board, the

28:57commission?

29:00>> Jill, I'd be happy to make a motion if

29:02we're ready.

29:07>> Great. Go ahead, Brooke.

29:08>> Okay. Um I move that we support option

29:121C with the following caveats. That um

29:15guardrails be considered

29:18um where safety is necessary and um the

29:22protection of cultural assets through

29:25you know meandering off into

29:28conservation pro property be considered

29:31as well.

29:33>> I'll second that.

29:35On your motion, Brooke

29:37>> I,

29:39>> Don, I, Matt,

29:41>> uh, I with a caveat. I want to make sure

29:44that we'll win it. Opus Association,

29:46Conservation Foundation, Land Bank. I'm

29:49I'm voting yes, assuming that people

29:51will be involved in this. So, thank you,

29:56>> Bob.

29:56>> I chair votes eye. That passes. Mike, is

30:01that what you needed to move forward?

30:03>> Uh, thanks, Madam Chair. I appreciate

30:05that.

30:06>> Thank you.

30:07>> And one other comment before we go off

30:09it,

30:09>> please.

30:10>> Se was was it 77 when this was first

30:13proposed? So, what are we 50 years, 49

30:17years? So, we're we're we're moving at

30:19the speed of government. We're going to

30:21get there. [laughter]

30:22So, thank you,

30:23>> Madam Chair. Can I just add to that if

30:25that's all right? Uh this would almost

30:27complete that 1977 master plan with the

30:30Tom Nevers path going on for

30:31advertisement in about a month and this

30:33project happening and with the Oracle

30:35Monahhans path being implemented.

30:39>> Mission complete. I would think

30:40>> the only master plan ever come to

30:42completion.

30:43>> What's the one? The Dionis. I always

30:46thought that one was pretty ambitious

30:49going Dionis out to there. That's not

30:50that's not all the way out yet, but

30:52that's was ambitious. hopeful.

30:58>> Thank you everyone. Um, moving on,

31:03we are going to look to the Sheep Pond

31:06Road Order of Betterment Assessments. We

31:09have Tracy here and do we have Vicki

31:10online as well? Tracy,

31:12>> correct? Vicki is online as well. Tracy

31:14McDonald, the real estate manager. Um so

31:18as you may recall back in the fall of

31:21last year um the board voted or the

31:24county voted to um set a betterment

31:27assessment that was an estimated value

31:30of what the cost of the project would be

31:33to put new roadway access in for the

31:35Jeep pond residents. And today we're

31:37here to actually finalize those figures

31:41and do an order um of the betterment

31:44assessment for the final amount of

31:4727885651.

31:51Um and that is for the roadway that's

31:55been constructed on plan 2016-18.

31:59And um that cost is then divided between

32:03what what turns out to be 13 properties.

32:06Um some of them are there some people

32:09own two properties. So they will pay a

32:11double assessment and um that cost is

32:15broken out by each person on the order

32:18of betterment statement that um or order

32:20of betterment assessment that was

32:22provided to you in your packet. And so I

32:25just ask if the commissioners have any

32:27questions regarding the the Betterment

32:29Assessment.

32:31Any questions from the board?

32:34>> Anybody want to move approval?

32:36>> I'll I'll move approval.

32:39>> Second.

32:41>> Uh Matt Fee

32:42>> I.

32:43>> Bob.

32:44>> I.

32:45>> Don Hill.

32:45>> I.

32:46>> Burke Moore.

32:47>> I.

32:49>> The chair votes I. Great. Thank you very

32:51>> Thank you, Tracy. Thanks for getting

32:53that done.

32:54>> Thank you.

32:56>> And um now we're going to move on to the

32:59petition for the uh land court approval

33:02of the subdivision plan. Correct. Um so

33:06this is a common request of the land

33:08court for the county to assess um to the

33:12plan approval and the petition. Um, in

33:15this case it happens to be one Hatch

33:17Circle um, who has applied and

33:20petitioned for approval of a plan of a

33:23three lot subdivision. Um, it's been in

33:26Lancport for quite a while and um, it's

33:30moving forward now and so the land court

33:32has requested this ascent from the

33:34county commissioners. Um, it's pretty

33:36straightforward and um, so if you have

33:39any questions um, Vicki can Vicki or I

33:43can probably answer them.

33:47Move approval.

33:49>> Second.

33:50Um Bob

33:52>> I

33:53>> Don

33:54>> I

33:54>> Matt

33:55>> Hi.

33:55>> Brooke

33:56>> I

33:58>> and chair votes I. Thank you. Great

34:01>> motion to adjurnn.

34:02>> Hold on. Got one more which I don't

34:05think you have anything but

34:07>> I don't commissioners reports.

34:10I mean, we did have an NP and EC

34:12meeting, but I don't really have

34:14anything to report on at the moment.

34:17>> That's it.

34:18>> Now, I have a motion to adjurnn.

34:20>> Okay.

34:22>> On your motion, Bob

34:24>> I,

34:24>> Matt,

34:25>> I,

34:25>> Don,

34:26>> I,

34:26>> Brooke,

34:27>> I.

34:28>> Chair votes I. Thank you everyone.

34:31>> Nice job, Joe.

34:32>> Thank you.

34:37>> Tracy makes it easy. Sorry. Okay, I'll

34:40call the select board meeting to order

34:42at 6:04

34:44um September 30th.

34:46There are a couple of additional

34:49announcements in terms of changes to the

34:52agenda and just adding those in which

34:55the town manager will report on. Um

34:57we'll accept the agenda as written and

35:00then move to announcements.

35:02>> Thank you. This meeting is being video

35:04and audio recorded.

35:06Round four of our 2026 committee

35:09vacancies is underway and we have

35:11vacancies currently on the cannabis

35:13advisory committee, coastal resiliency

35:15advisory committee, town of Nantucket

35:17scholarship committee and applications

35:19for those are due by noon on Friday,

35:22October 2nd. Appointments will be made

35:24on October 14th.

35:26The planning board is currently

35:28accepting public written public comments

35:30on its draft 2026 master plan through

35:34October 15th. The draft plan and a

35:36message board for public comment is on

35:38the project website listed on the select

35:40board meeting and agenda. And I wanted

35:42to add to this that the planning

35:43director will be attending your meeting,

35:45the select board meeting on October 14th

35:47to review the master plan with you

35:49directly.

35:51Town council citizen warrant article

35:53consultations are available on

35:56Wednesday, October 14th from 10:00 a.m.

35:58to noon and Thursday, October 15th from

36:01400 pm to 6 pm. that is via teams and

36:04you may contact town manager's office

36:06for um the meeting links. And I wanted

36:09to add something. We're going to add

36:11this to next week as well. The citizen

36:13warrant article deadline is um

36:17in November. I think it's November 16th.

36:19I'll double check that in a moment. Um

36:22but there's a a bit of an issue with the

36:24number of signatures that I wanted to

36:26make people aware of. We had some

36:28charter amendments that were approved at

36:29town meeting in 2022. for those have

36:31been working their way through the

36:32legislature and they are now um

36:35hopefully almost ready for the governor

36:37to sign and once signed those will

36:39become effective immediately and the

36:42signature requirement will change from

36:4410 to 25.

36:47And so even though at this exact moment

36:51the state requirement is 10,

36:55it could very well be 25.

36:57>> So get

36:58>> very shortly. So the recommendation is

37:00get at least 25 if not more like 30 or

37:03>> 35

37:04>> just to make sure you have registered

37:06voters of Nantucket signing your

37:08petition.

37:10Uh executive session minutes released.

37:13Um we had a minor typo on the agenda at

37:15its September 23rd not 9th meeting

37:18executive session meeting. The select

37:20board voted to authorize the continued

37:22withholding or release in part subject

37:24to redactions under the public records

37:26law of 2024 and 2023 executive session

37:30minutes dated March 14, 2024.

37:34That's a revote. March May 2nd, 2024,

37:38that was a revote. June 6, 2024, revote.

37:42July 29th, 2024, revote. August 8th,

37:452024, revote. September

37:4912th, 2024 revote. October 3rd, 2024

37:53revote. November 7th, 2024, revote.

37:56January 5th, 2023. February 2nd, 2023.

38:00March 9th, 2023. April 13th, 2023. May

38:054th, 2023. All the rest of these are

38:072023. June 15th, June 23rd, July 13th,

38:11August 10th, September 7th, September

38:1314th, October 5th, November 2nd,

38:15November 6th, and December 7th.

38:18And that's it for announcements.

38:20>> Okay. Are there any opening select board

38:23announcements or comments?

38:26Okay. Uh seeing none, um I don't have

38:31any updates. There were mainly

38:32statements on last week's select board

38:34um public comment. Um so we'll move to

38:38public comment for items not on our

38:41agenda tonight.

38:43And um I do have to limit the comments

38:46to three minutes per speaker.

38:50Either one, we're we're back in

38:52business.

38:56Amy Eldridge, this is just basically a a

38:58comment. I had the pleasure of attending

39:00the Mass DOT um reconfiguration of the

39:03Rotary and uh they did a lovely

39:05presentation. You can go on their

39:06website and find further details on the

39:09project. Um, but it was really nice to

39:11see them hear the concerns of the

39:13islanders about the trees, the bike

39:16paths, the lengths of 18 wheelers that

39:18they're considering, you know, 73 and 70

39:22foot 75t long trailers. So, it was just

39:25really nice to see them open to hearing

39:28from us about how it's going to be used

39:30and how it'll how it will flow. So, if

39:33you get a chance, go on their website

39:35and take a look at the project. It was

39:36really nice. Thanks,

39:40Is there anyone else for public comment

39:41this evening? Okay. Um seeing none, uh

39:45there is no new business, we will move

39:47to approval of the minutes and warrants

39:50items one through three.

39:52>> So move.

39:53>> Second.

39:54>> All those in favor? Uh

39:56>> Matt

39:57>> I.

39:57>> Bobby

39:58>> I

39:59>> Jill

39:59>> I.

40:00>> Brooke

40:01>> I.

40:02>> Don I. That carries unanimously. Five to

40:04zero. Um, next up we move to a sele town

40:09manager report, a continued review of

40:12the capital improvement plan.

40:14Thank you, Madam Chair. So, Deputy Town

40:16Manager Rick Sears is going to take us

40:18through this. And as you know, we've

40:19been working on this since July. And the

40:22idea is that ultimately we will end up

40:24with a what we're calling a reset

40:27capital improvement plan that can be

40:29socialized throughout the town

40:30government and the community.

40:34Good evening, Rick Sears, deputy town

40:36manager.

40:38You received some materials kind of late

40:40this week. Um, but I think they're in

40:43printed in front of you. So, just real

40:46quickly, I'm going to take you through a

40:48few items um in a PowerPoint and then I

40:50just want to take them review the

40:53spreadsheet of of the capital projects.

40:57So, just the just where where we've

40:59gotten to so far, just the progress. So,

41:01at your second session, you reviewed the

41:03remaining 19 projects that were greater

41:05than $3 million. And um we moved you all

41:10moved nine of the 19 projects to a

41:13parking lot. The parking lot defined as

41:16sometime past the 10-year horizon of the

41:20SEP. So, of the project we move, we we

41:23moved there. Uh all any project that was

41:26ranked low by all of you was moved

41:27there. There was a bunch of conversation

41:30about phasing. So, we've we've done some

41:33phasing work for the CRP, which has

41:35changed the profile of the projects.

41:38There were some comments about waiting

41:39and seeing on on things like town

41:41employee housing. So, we moved those

41:43out. We did move um wind drive wind

41:48street project up a few years at the

41:51request of uh the board last week and um

41:55as I said, we phased a lot of the

41:56coastal resilience projects. One of the

41:58things we didn't do though, there are

42:00two NK public school projects. The new

42:02administrative building which is in 2028

42:05and the new school which is currently

42:08planned for 2037.

42:12Um just a quick summary comment. Moving

42:18those things around like that, we um

42:21took about $600 million out of the $1.3

42:24billion 10-year plan. doesn't mean it's

42:27gone away. It's just not in the first in

42:29the next 10 years. So, if you could

42:31change slides, please Erica.

42:34And it looks like this. So, these are

42:36the projects that we eliminated in the

42:38top table. So, um $450 million of CRP

42:44money was moved out beyond the 10-year

42:47horizon.

42:49106 million from town admin, which is a

42:52central municipal facility in the senior

42:54center, and then another 36 from town

42:56employee housing. That's the Tacoma and

43:00Oraca that um the comment was, let's

43:03wait and see how weight drive goes. So,

43:06what you end up with after you take the

43:08604 out is the profile on the bottom of

43:10the page. You see sort of I guess a more

43:14manageable profile. the it's it's so

43:18702437

43:20is what the 10-year SIP looks like now

43:23from 1.3 and I you used to think of a

43:26number of 1.1 1.8 but we had to that was

43:31when the school was in for $85 million

43:32it's now for $200 million.

43:36The those two numbers in 28 and 37 are

43:38the two largest. Um in 28 that's that

43:42number is

43:44most impacted by the new DPW and in 37

43:47the 209200 of that is for the school the

43:52a new school you can advance the page

43:54please Erica. Thank you. So I'm just

43:58keeping this slide in each week so that

43:59you guys remember that when you have

44:01things that you want to add potentially

44:03add to the SIP you let me know. And then

44:07Erica, if you could go to the next page,

44:09which is really just want to just

44:11confirm with uh you all what the next

44:14steps are. So for the projects that are

44:17greater than $3 million that we've

44:18reviewed them all now with the exception

44:20of the schools, um we're going to

44:23continue to work on some sequencing.

44:25We've done some sequencing. That's how

44:26we got the 600 million out of the plan,

44:29but we want to continue to refine that

44:31for the projects that are less than 3

44:33million. Now, this is thatund that list

44:35of 115 projects I sent you all um a week

44:38ago, last Thursday, I think it was. Um

44:41that just seems like a lot of projects

44:43for you all to go through and I just

44:45kind of need some feedback if you want

44:47to go through all of them. So, my a

44:52recommendation would be that pick a

44:55threshold of

44:57value that you are comfortable or you

45:00don't want to review them. So, I picked

45:02just randomly $250,000. If you reviewed

45:04everything over $250,000 less than three

45:07million, you're going to have to review

45:0845 projects instead of the full 115.

45:12I I just kind of want to know how you

45:14guys want how you all want to do it

45:15because I I I sent you the the

45:18spreadsheet with 115 and um

45:22well, I don't have any feedback at this

45:23point in time. So, I'm guessing that's a

45:25little bit of a protest vote.

45:29>> I I didn't Did you send them to me?

45:32>> Yeah. I mean, I saved it. I I thought

45:34that you got it. I didn't do the trucks

45:36draw.

45:37>> Okay.

45:38>> Too many trucks, but

45:40>> I've been away, but I did not see that.

45:41>> But I had a lot of questions about some

45:43of them, actually. I mean, a lot of X's

45:45to be honest, but I did it.

45:46>> Okay. I don't think you [clears throat]

45:49>> Listen, I think this is a really

45:51critical exercise we're going through. I

45:52think it's the most important thing

45:53we're doing all year in my personal

45:55view. And I think all of you need to

45:56look at every single one of these

45:57projects. I don't care what it costs. I

45:59do.

46:00because a lot of these things feed

46:02bigger projects later and so they're an

46:04indication of something to come. Now

46:07again the trucks I don't know if you

46:09need a 10wheel or Drew I I don't know

46:11but that's why we have the capital

46:13committee and we get to talk to you

46:14about those things but so I I was hoping

46:17not to have to rank every truck but past

46:21that I I think I think you guys should

46:24all weigh in.

46:25>> My question is of this

46:34six pages.

46:35>> 145 million for fiscal 28. How much of

46:40that?

46:44Sorry. How much of that's going to be

46:46funded from

46:49wherever and how much of its overrides?

46:51Because anything that's an override or

46:53we think it's going to be an override, I

46:54want to review.

46:57>> Sure. I my So, you've already reviewed

47:01all the big projects,

47:03>> right? But that doesn't come out to 145,

47:06>> correct? No, it doesn't. It um I it's a

47:09little early for us to be saying how

47:11we're going to fund these projects to be

47:13honest with you. That doesn't usually

47:14happen until later in the year, but um I

47:19I I don't know the answer to the

47:20question. It's a good question, Bob. I I

47:22just don't

47:22>> because I I can go through we can I I

47:25kind of agree with Jill. we could go

47:26through them and I'm I'm going to say

47:28that my rankings when we do them and I

47:32know it's preliminary and you haven't

47:34figured out what you've got and where

47:35you can spend it, but if it's going to

47:38be an override or if it's going to be a

47:39budget or a capital or something that's

47:42not paid with an override, it's going to

47:44how I rate it. If it's an override, it's

47:46going to get a lesser rating for me than

47:47if it's a uh something that we can

47:49figure out how to purchase or pay for

47:52through our regular revenue sources. Do

47:56you want to give some gu Sorry, Don, can

47:58I do you want to give some guidance

48:00there where if it's under $250,000, you

48:02might fund it through free cash through

48:04the through the budget or

48:09>> Here's the other question I have about

48:10them, and I asked this at capital, but I

48:12think it'd be really good for the board

48:14to know of the of the requests that come

48:18in that are pretty routine, and I'm not

48:21talking about trucks again because

48:23that's different. the routine request.

48:27How much unused borrowing is there? And

48:30and maybe there's unused borrowing for

48:32buying trucks from the DPW. I don't

48:34know. But I actually think that might be

48:37useful so that people can see, hey,

48:40they've had this money. They could have

48:42used it and they didn't and it's been, I

48:44don't know, seven years or 10 years or

48:46something like that. Um, I think that

48:48also kind of helps because if they still

48:51have money that they can use,

48:53>> can they actually use it for what's on

48:55this page,

48:57>> right? And sometimes they can and

48:59sometimes they can't.

49:00>> Yeah, correct. Depends.

49:01>> Depends on the vote.

49:02>> It's a debt exclusion and we haven't

49:04borrowed it yet. You're not going to be

49:05able to use it. You know, there's all

49:07>> Sometimes they ask for something and

49:08they don't go buy it and then maybe they

49:10still need to buy it and,

49:11>> you know, they have that money. That

49:13does happen.

49:14>> I've seen it happen multiple times.

49:15>> Yes, of course. So think that's might

49:18help.

49:22>> Okay,

49:22>> we know coastal resency money, they ask

49:24for a million dollars every year. We

49:26know that they have some money left, but

49:27they also have to have some money in

49:29order to get some grant money. You know,

49:31the same for other requests. It's it's

49:34usually more the the handful of repeat

49:37requests that are the annual requests

49:40when they ask for the same thing every

49:41year.

49:43Brooke.

49:46>> Um, I would just say that I actually

49:48don't mind I I did not do my homework

49:50and I apologize for that, but I actually

49:52don't mind going through and doing

49:56everything because even at a quarter of

49:58a million dollars, if there's, you know,

50:0150 of them, it's a lot of money

50:03collectively. So, um I will commit to

50:07looking at at everything on the list and

50:11um

50:12coming back with things that I need more

50:14information on.

50:17>> Can I ask one

50:18>> Bobby? Yeah.

50:18>> Madam Chair

50:20>> Rick,

50:22I guess the hardest part for me is

50:24looking at every one of these going out

50:2610 years. you know, I I would I'd be

50:29more comfortable to look at him going

50:31out three years, which is the length of

50:34my

50:36term. You know, [laughter] I mean, I'm

50:38making decisions for somebody that might

50:40be sitting in the seat different than

50:41myself. Um, so especially on these

50:45lesser ones and and I do agree with Jill

50:48that sometimes, you know, you fund a

50:49study for $200,000, but then that study

50:53turns into something else two or three

50:55years down the road. Um, so the the

50:59large number projects I had no problem

51:02doing out 10 years, but the smaller ones

51:04I think three years is a good number to

51:07start with. Um,

51:10and and then kind of going down,

51:14you know, maybe every year you add a

51:16year to it or another couple years to it

51:18and and kind of push it along. I don't

51:20know if that's a feasible or not, but

51:22it's just a thought. Well, that would

51:25kind of align with the strategic plan

51:27because we try and

51:30although it continues to reset, we try

51:32to keep it in a three-year outlook, it

51:35ends up being longer for a lot of

51:37things, but um

51:41but I don't know how that plays into

51:43trying to do a 10-year going when we

51:46meet on the 6th,

51:48that's the strategic plan that day,

51:50right? Are we do we go through these

51:52then or we just kind of talk about the

51:53overall plan? We don't

51:55>> we don't go through this but Oh, sorry

51:58Libby. Sounds like you we won't go

52:00through this but but take housing for

52:02instance. Housing is one of the four

52:06focus areas of the strategic plan. So we

52:09will be talking about housing which is

52:12in the 10-year SEP.

52:15So it's a yes and no answer really.

52:18>> Yeah, I I understand. And I mean, I I'll

52:21I'll be quite frank. I um I have some

52:24real concerns about going to town

52:27meeting this year and asking for any

52:30kind of overrides or substantial

52:32overrides, especially because there's so

52:35many things that are going on right now.

52:37I mean, I think the the impression that

52:40I'm getting from the people that talked

52:41to me is even though we approved $200

52:44million in overrides last year, I think

52:46it's starting to sink in and people are

52:48getting a little bit of sticker shock

52:50and

52:52interest rates have gone up. The tariffs

52:54just kicked in in Canada. Lumber prices

52:57are going to go through the roof. We've

52:59we've we start building things at the

53:02probably the worst time in the next 10

53:05years to build something. Um, and some

53:07of these projects may need to be pushed

53:09back a year or two till we have a better

53:10environment with interest rates and and

53:12and

53:14materials. You know, I mean, I one of

53:16the things that I always was amazed by

53:19was when we looked at the DPW complex

53:23and the fact that uh the one on the Cape

53:27that we toured, I didn't go, but the

53:29other guys did, they were able to build

53:30it for only $20 million because it was

53:32during CO and things were cheap. So

53:34sometimes you might want to just push

53:36things out a year or two and get a

53:37better a better um

53:42price or a better advant take advantage

53:44of different times in the economy. Right

53:47now building anything right now I'm I'm

53:49worried that the projects we have going

53:51forward are how the tariffs are going to

53:53affect it. I mean I I can see lumber

53:54prices going up substantially here in

53:57the next 3 to 6 months. And I don't know

53:59how much of this these, you know,

54:01materials for these projects have been

54:03locked in yet or any of that. So, you

54:05know, I know we have contingencies, but

54:07>> Well, then they're not approved, so

54:09nothing's locked in.

54:10>> No, I mean, on the projects that we

54:12approved last year,

54:13>> right?

54:13>> I.e. [clears throat] the island home.

54:15You know, I don't know if those lumber

54:17prices are blocked in yet or any of

54:19that.

54:19>> We have a guaranteed maximum price that

54:21we're going to pay for our island home.

54:24>> Okay.

54:24>> It's guaranteed you're going to pay the

54:25maximum price.

54:27>> All right. Well, anyway, that's the

54:30thought. So, yeah, I just kind of doing

54:32a quick

54:34>> uh look relative to your comment about

54:38>> um items that are going to require an

54:40over an an override or debt exclusion.

54:45>> Well, they're not this list.

54:47>> Pardon?

54:47>> They're not on this list. The debt

54:49exclusions aren't on this.

54:50>> No, no, correct. I'm I'm just saying I

54:52just did a quick little survey. My guess

54:55would be Baxter Road,

54:57DPW facility.

55:01Um

55:02there's a $10 million item for

55:06it was

55:07>> portable housing

55:08>> package of pond and the next largest one

55:11is $4.5 million which is the school

55:13administrative building. So that that in

55:17total is 100 million out of the

55:20>> Well, then you So we've got townwide

55:23municipal improvements that 10 million.

55:26That would be probably a debt exclusion.

55:28>> Yep.

55:28>> I would think.

55:28>> Yeah, I missed I missed that one.

55:30>> Dark skies street light replacements.

55:32>> Three million.

55:33>> That's three and a half three million.

55:38U

55:40drive it just, you know. Yeah.

55:43>> It's it's it's substantial amount of

55:45this is debt debt exclusions, overrides,

55:49whatever you want to call it. It's just

55:50>> Yeah.

55:51>> Yeah.

55:51>> I I I personally I'm not going to

55:53support any debt exclusions at this

55:55time. I'm not. But I realize this

55:58exercise is different. What I wanted to

55:59ask the board and if you agreed is can

56:02we come up with a number that we're

56:03comfortable with for article 10 because

56:05I feel like these 115 projects are in

56:07article 10. Yeah, that pretty much.

56:12And if we can come up with some number,

56:14people are comfortable with that. There

56:16is some borrowing. It's some free cash.

56:18But if we come up with the overall

56:20number, then I I feel better about that.

56:23You all haven't done it that way before.

56:25So I don't know if you want to, but I'

56:27I'd ask that you'd think about it.

56:29>> Is it even possible to do

56:32>> with article 10?

56:33>> Well, no. We know what we're going to

56:35collect in taxes. We don't know what

56:36we're going to get in free cash and all

56:37of that stuff, but we know basically

56:39what we're going to get. We know what

56:40our operating costs, fixed costs are,

56:42whether it be pension,

56:44>> free cash will be certified before we

56:45set the warrant.

56:46>> Yeah,

56:47>> I understand. But I understand what I

56:49think what I understand as you're saying

56:51is we're going to make X amount here

56:54regardless of free cash in taxes revenue

56:57and our fixed costs are here. So that

57:00leaves us this number and that's what

57:03we're going to fund these departments

57:04with. Is that

57:05>> And how much of this stuff can be funded

57:07with that?

57:09Yes, I'd feel more comfortable if we did

57:11it that way, but I don't think that's

57:13not how we've been doing it. So,

57:16>> well, it's it's going to be a

57:18conversation that is going to have to

57:19wait a while then if in order for us to

57:23to get to a 10-year SIP. Another

57:26alternative would be to go ahead and say

57:30and and rate these projects how

57:32important they are. Then when when we

57:35understand better how much funding

57:38resources we have, we'll take the most

57:40important projects from this plan that

57:43you've agreed and slot them in. I mean,

57:46it just

57:48doesn't matter that they're all that

57:49they're all on here right now. If we

57:51don't have the money, then we're going

57:52to, you know, we do this almost every

57:54year where we lop off the bottom right

57:56of the capital requests. That's I I

57:59could go through these these smaller

58:01ones and I could say that

58:06for example, if we can fund it through

58:09article 10, I support it. If we have to

58:10go for an override, I don't support it

58:12at this time. I could give you a yay or

58:14nay in that direction. Um if that would

58:17be helpful.

58:18>> Yeah, I think that'd be fine. Yes, same

58:22>> comment that that's where my a lot of

58:24this and I wrote originally I wrote uh

58:26it should be budgeted and I think I'm

58:28I'm sort of where Bobby is on on that. I

58:30I looked at some of these like trucks

58:33that they should have a line item or

58:34maintenance that should be a line item.

58:36It should be in the budget. It shouldn't

58:37have to be a debt exclusion. If we have

58:39to bump the budgets up to do that and

58:41then stay within that going forward, we

58:43should. But I think some of this is is

58:46normal things you need and maintenance

58:48is a normal thing we need. We have to

58:50find a way to do that. Uh I agree with

58:53Bobby 100% about interest rates. I made

58:55a comment to a friend of mine who's on

58:58one of the reserve banks uh weekend and

59:00a week weekend ago or so. I said three

59:03to five years and he said no Matt, it's

59:05more like 10 or 15 years. You aren't

59:07going to see lower rates for 10 to 15

59:09years. And he's in the business. So I

59:12you know is he right or wrong? we, you

59:14know, none of us know, but I do think

59:16that that's going to be, you know,

59:18figure that's going to influence us for

59:20a while. Uh,

59:22I I didn't get it to you because I my my

59:25Microsoft is not talking to my computer,

59:28which is not talking to me. I don't

59:30know, but it's but I have it written

59:31down, I think. And some of it,

59:34>> like coastal resiliency and some of the

59:37transportation stuff,

59:39>> I don't think we should shove it if

59:41there's a chance to get money. And so I

59:44I want to make sure we aren't parking

59:45something that, you know, either parking

59:48the beginning of of coastal resiliency

59:50so we have the right studies done or

59:52parking some of the, you know, some of

59:54the transportation stuff. There's some

59:56big transportation things that I

59:58wouldn't want to do, but if we get a lot

59:59of money, we should do them. So I I I

1:00:02want to make sure that we're doing that.

1:00:04So, I'm going to show you the

1:00:06spreadsheet in a moment which has the

1:00:07phasing for the coastal resilience

1:00:10projects which would allow us to go

1:00:12after the to go after the money.

1:00:15>> And we've seen how how the NRTA has how

1:00:17well the NTA has done going after it. I

1:00:20think it's a I think that there's money

1:00:23my my intuition tells you there's money

1:00:25available for transportation and other

1:00:27things, but we need to make an effort

1:00:29like that for it. So,

1:00:31>> Sure. Yes. May I comment on a couple

1:00:33things? Number one, um we would like

1:00:36there to be a policy directive from the

1:00:37board about whether or not vehicles

1:00:39should be replacement vehicles should be

1:00:41in the operating budget on an annual

1:00:42basis or in the capital plan. Um we've

1:00:45kind of gone back and forth a little

1:00:48bit, but of course if they're in the

1:00:50operating budget, we are going to need

1:00:52to increase the operating budget

1:00:54somehow. Some of that could be one-time

1:00:58purchases with free cash. Um, so that's

1:01:01number one. And number two, when you

1:01:04comment, Matt,

1:01:06hopefully we'll get a lot more money for

1:01:09transportation projects or coastal

1:01:10resilency. I don't know where a lot more

1:01:12money is going to come from, but um the

1:01:16idea of the the NRTA, I just want to

1:01:18mention Gary has done a fantastic job

1:01:20getting lots of money for the NRTA, but

1:01:23that is a completely different funding

1:01:25source for public transportation than we

1:01:27are looking at for our transportation

1:01:30projects and vehicles and things like

1:01:31that. Of course, if there are grant

1:01:33opportunities, we will pursue them. DPW

1:01:36director recently pursued a grant

1:01:38opportunity with the state for a new

1:01:40road grader and and we got one. Thank

1:01:42you, Drew, for that. And that was a big

1:01:44savings o over $100,000,

1:01:47right? 200 over $200,000 of savings that

1:01:51we don't have to pay for now. Came

1:01:53through a grant from the state. So,

1:01:54wherever there's an opportunity, we are

1:01:56pursuing that. But there aren't they

1:01:59aren't all over the ground to pick up.

1:02:01>> No.

1:02:02>> Well, Mike is pursuing things in the

1:02:04tip. Yes, he is. And pretty competitive

1:02:07is and my question is let's some of this

1:02:09is changing culture. Is there other like

1:02:12the culture changed at NRTA and when the

1:02:14culture changed the amount of money that

1:02:16we pursued and and achieved has changed.

1:02:19I think we need to make sure that we are

1:02:21doing that as much as we can everywhere

1:02:23on some of this. That's my only you my

1:02:25point. The other thing we haven't we I

1:02:28talk about it every year is you know can

1:02:31we increase you know some of the fees

1:02:33and things in other we we do it

1:02:35automatically on restaurants but we

1:02:37don't do it in other areas. We should be

1:02:39everyone should be going up cost of

1:02:40living or a little more and we should be

1:02:43you know in the top quarter of the state

1:02:45on expenses not the cheapest for a lot

1:02:48of these things. And if we did that we

1:02:50would be you know if we did paid parking

1:02:5315 years ago it was $2 million. It's

1:02:55probably three or four a year now that

1:02:57we would be netting out, you know, three

1:02:59or four million. And so I I think

1:03:00there's things like that that we should

1:03:02be looking at again to to take care of

1:03:05to start to fund some of this.

1:03:07>> Yeah, we've been talking about the fees.

1:03:09Where are we on that?

1:03:12Well, it wasn't completed and

1:03:16previously, so um Alicia and I have

1:03:18briefly um discussed it and we need to

1:03:23get back to it, but there's other things

1:03:25that have risen to the top now.

1:03:26>> No, I got that.

1:03:27>> Um there needs to be some analysis with

1:03:30the fees and I totally agree with you,

1:03:32Matt. We need to have an annual across

1:03:33the board fee um review. And some fees

1:03:38are statutoily capped, so we can't

1:03:40increase those too much. And some are

1:03:42based on whatever the town's cost is to

1:03:44produce a permit or something like that.

1:03:47And so there we just we just need to get

1:03:49at it. Um there's just too many things

1:03:51that have surfaced.

1:03:53>> But as we learned in the uh interviewing

1:03:56the various finance candidates, there

1:03:59are, you know, some we've been told one

1:04:01thing or I've been told one thing about,

1:04:03oh, we can't change that at all because

1:04:04of whatever. then you talk to them and

1:04:06they're talking about oh this and that

1:04:07and the other can all be included etc

1:04:09etc and it was much more uh you know

1:04:13expansive than what we have been led to

1:04:14believe what I've been led to believe

1:04:16for 20 years. So I think that we have

1:04:18more lee we potentially have more leeway

1:04:20and hopefully we look at that because it

1:04:23is substantial and yeah so anyway and

1:04:26I've and Rick I I've got this my own

1:04:29rankings as much as I did and if I can

1:04:32figure how to send it to you I will.

1:04:36Uh yeah, go ahead.

1:04:38>> The only comment and I I've brought this

1:04:40up with DPW before, Rick, is is there

1:04:43any possibility we can look at le

1:04:45putting some of these cars and trucks on

1:04:47a lease

1:04:50because then it will roll over. It

1:04:52doesn't mean that you won't need the

1:04:54money. It doesn't mean you won't cost,

1:04:55but it's more of a you're on a schedule.

1:04:59You've got a maintenance plan. Uh

1:05:01hopefully a repair plan in that.

1:05:05>> Hi Trip Padno, director of public works.

1:05:07Um we have looked into that. I I think

1:05:10the biggest challenge to leasing is not

1:05:13only that it is more costly. We get uh

1:05:16we purchase motor vehicles off the state

1:05:19bid list, which is dramatically less

1:05:20than what you see as an MSRP on a

1:05:22sticker on the lot. In addition, um

1:05:27leases obviously um don't go the full

1:05:30life of the vehicle. So if we're getting

1:05:3110 years out of a vehicle now, that's

1:05:33like say two or three leases. Um and you

1:05:36know at the end of the lease, we have to

1:05:37bring it off island and bring a new one

1:05:39back. So there's a lot more

1:05:40transportation cost included in that as

1:05:41well. The the dealers also require that

1:05:44you get maintenance done at the

1:05:46dealership. So that's incredibly

1:05:49inefficient for us to to bring vehicles

1:05:51off island to do maintenance. I'm really

1:05:53even talking about the bigger equipment

1:05:55like Caterpillar. I mean, they're not

1:05:56going to make you have it service at Don

1:05:58Allen. Like, how do they work with some

1:05:59of some of these big trucks or the more

1:06:02expensive ones? I'm really thinking

1:06:03about those

1:06:04>> and and we actually have Caterpillar uh

1:06:06Milton Cat come out here and do

1:06:07maintenance on some of our vehicles. We

1:06:08have worked to try to in incorporate

1:06:10some maintenance contracts with the

1:06:12purchase of our vehicles for a number of

1:06:14years. Um, it just I think for me, and

1:06:18maybe people would disagree with this,

1:06:19but moving vehicle purchases into our

1:06:22operating budget doesn't allow us to

1:06:24have the flexibility to say yes or no,

1:06:26especially if we we need to be a little

1:06:28bit tighter with our spending. Um, so,

1:06:30you know, these the one-time purchase is

1:06:33just a I I think it makes us a little

1:06:35bit more nimble to say yes or no,

1:06:36whereas once you're locked into a lease,

1:06:38then then we're really committed. um if

1:06:40we do need to make cuts to the budget,

1:06:42it's going to be a d tough

1:06:44>> conversation to have of who's given a

1:06:46vehicle back um and how are we doing all

1:06:48that type of stuff. So I I think that's

1:06:51>> well my view lease would lock you in so

1:06:53that you're guaranteed those trucks

1:06:55because we'd have to sign it the year

1:06:56that it got approved and then you have

1:06:58it and it's just on a rotation. You when

1:07:01the new lease comes up, yeah, then you

1:07:03got to sign it again and get

1:07:04authorization, but you could do that the

1:07:06year in advance. I don't know. I I just

1:07:08feel like it might make the process

1:07:10simpler. You might not like it, but I I

1:07:13still think it's worth looking at. Maybe

1:07:15not for all the vehicles, but for some.

1:07:18>> Yeah. And when when we um so Nick

1:07:20Torres, our central fleet manager,

1:07:22reached out to a number of um

1:07:24dealerships. We actually thought if

1:07:26anything, it would be the like smaller

1:07:27passenger vehicles that it might be

1:07:30might be viable for. I think the biggest

1:07:32problem with the bigger uh say trucks

1:07:34and heavy equipment is a how they're

1:07:36worked. Um and then the upfitting and

1:07:38stuff that's needed for them um adds a

1:07:40lot of cost if they are even willing to

1:07:42take them back. So we can certainly

1:07:44continue to look at that.

1:07:45>> Okay. Thanks. I appreciate.

1:07:48>> I think maybe just from a financial

1:07:49perspective, we should think about too

1:07:51that the cost of the interest rate on a

1:07:54lease is typically going to be higher

1:07:56than our borrowing cost because nobody's

1:07:58lending us money at what we can borrow

1:08:00at. So let's just say lease rate is 7%

1:08:03and we borrow at 4%. So 3% on every

1:08:06vehicle for as long as you pay it off.

1:08:08I'm just saying there's there's a

1:08:10there's a whole there's other aspects of

1:08:13this as well. And and our cost of

1:08:15capital is actually pretty low.

1:08:17>> Yeah. That's why I think you could get a

1:08:19municipal lease. I just I just want a

1:08:21little more information on it.

1:08:24>> Bobby,

1:08:25>> just

1:08:27how do we when we replace a vehicle? I'm

1:08:32assuming some of them are by the age,

1:08:34some of them by miles. But what do we do

1:08:35with the old ones? Do we sell them? Do

1:08:38they just

1:08:39>> We typically trade them in.

1:08:41>> So, we trade in a 10 wheel dump truck on

1:08:43a new 10 wheel dump truck.

1:08:44>> Sometimes we do. Yeah. Uh otherwise,

1:08:46we'll do a surplus sale, which is

1:08:48required by law. So, we advertise them

1:08:50and sell the vehicle.

1:08:51>> So, like a town vehicle, like a

1:08:52administrative

1:08:55administrative vehicle, what do we do?

1:08:57We do do it every certain amount of

1:08:59years or we do it by miles or

1:09:01>> we have a vehicle replacement schedule

1:09:02and it's on condition. I'm not sure if

1:09:05miles is it it's more condition and age

1:09:10um

1:09:13how the vehicle is used the age of it

1:09:16whether or not can be serviced that

1:09:18there's a variety of

1:09:19>> So everyone's different roughly.

1:09:21>> Yeah. But like administrative vehicles

1:09:23are probably about the same. They're pro

1:09:25I don't remember what they are, but

1:09:27they're they're all probably about the

1:09:29same replacement schedule because

1:09:30they're used pretty much the same way.

1:09:32>> Okay.

1:09:34>> But just so you'll know, we even have

1:09:35the trucks for the enterprise funds. I

1:09:37mean, Mark will let He had a truck for

1:09:3918 years, so not everybody is the same

1:09:41before he came and asked for another

1:09:43one.

1:09:43>> Well, yeah. Not I'm sorry, not to

1:09:46interrupt, Madam Chair. Um, it does

1:09:49depend on how it's used. Yeah,

1:09:50>> there's some you could keep an 18y old

1:09:52vehicle if you don't use it that much

1:09:54and or sometimes they just use it to the

1:09:58end.

1:09:59>> Yeah,

1:10:01>> that's you know my bread trucks that's I

1:10:04try to get 10 12 15 years and hold them

1:10:07together if I can pay cash and try to

1:10:09run them as long as you can. That's the

1:10:12most cost-effective way for us to do it.

1:10:14And in the municipal world, um there are

1:10:18other considerations probably like we

1:10:20want to make sure snow plows and dump

1:10:22trucks and things like that work during

1:10:24a snowstorm and aren't breaking down

1:10:26constantly because they're too heavy.

1:10:29>> Go ahead, Tro.

1:10:30>> While we're on the topic, um and it came

1:10:32up early like all the vehicles in the

1:10:33tenure capital plan. So I worked with

1:10:35Nick Tori's central fleet manager to

1:10:36develop our our DPW tenure capital plan.

1:10:39We are also working on doing that for

1:10:41other department fleets. And for now,

1:10:43what we're what we basically did, just

1:10:45to give you a history of how we kind of

1:10:46arrived at all the vehicles in the plan,

1:10:49we took a vehicle, whatever model year

1:10:51it is, put it in the plan 10 years out.

1:10:53So, if it was a 2014, it would be in

1:10:552024. And if it's a 2018, it' be in

1:10:572028, etc., right? Um, from there on an

1:11:01annual basis, we would evaluate the

1:11:03vehicle, you know, and its condition and

1:11:05either move it up or move it out in the

1:11:07plan. So, that it's kind of just a

1:11:08placeholder, but we want to get all of

1:11:09our vehicles. With that said, all of the

1:11:11vehicles in our 10-year capital plan are

1:11:13existing vehicles. That's not adding new

1:11:16new vehicles for a growing department or

1:11:18or new, you know, need or service.

1:11:21That's just a vehicle that already

1:11:23exists and when we think it's going to

1:11:24die pretty much. So, that's that's how

1:11:26we got to where it is now. But again,

1:11:29obviously things will move. Our trash

1:11:30truck may move up and a dump truck might

1:11:32move out. So, that's that's how we

1:11:34developed that.

1:11:36>> Okay. and and if we take uh if we get a

1:11:39wash bay, if eventually that does

1:11:40happen, then we are going to get a

1:11:42longer vehicle life and they're going to

1:11:44be better taken care of. When we first

1:11:46discussed this, I looked up uh online

1:11:50and what somewhere on the Cape had

1:11:51quantified how much they were going to

1:11:53save and I'm going to get the number

1:11:55wrong, but it was like a million dollars

1:11:57a year on m it was a million or it was

1:12:00four million total or a million a year

1:12:02on replacing vehicles because they were

1:12:04having stuff under you know they were

1:12:07washing trucks and they were having it

1:12:08under uh cover etc. and it was going to

1:12:11be substantial savings. And so that's

1:12:14part of I think what we're working the

1:12:16DPW is working toward. So

1:12:21>> okay,

1:12:22>> it will be

1:12:23>> um

1:12:25>> Can you put the power?

1:12:27>> Do we?

1:12:27>> Not quite.

1:12:28>> Do we have an idea of where we're going

1:12:29to land with free cash this year? Any

1:12:32projection? Are we going to be maybe in

1:12:35the $20 million range again?

1:12:37>> I don't think we're there yet at all.

1:12:42I'm just asking where where what we're

1:12:44going to have available in free cash.

1:12:45>> Oh, that's what I'm asking. Not

1:12:47>> when when do you think we'll know? Like

1:12:49November.

1:12:50>> Is that normal?

1:12:51>> November might even be ambitious.

1:12:53>> Okay,

1:12:54I'll get back to you.

1:12:55>> Okay, that's I'll just remind you now in

1:12:57Sorry. Sorry.

1:12:59>> Go ahead. I have something else, but go

1:13:01ahead.

1:13:01>> No, you go ahead. You were speaking. I

1:13:03>> No, this is a different topic. So on

1:13:05that,

1:13:05>> I just want to remind everybody in 2019,

1:13:07article 10 was $6 million.

1:13:10>> 6 million.

1:13:11>> Six million.

1:13:12>> That wasn't that long ago.

1:13:14This year we did it at 16 and it ended

1:13:16up at 18, I think. But it was pretty

1:13:20good. The years before were not so

1:13:22great. They were 30, 50. I think one

1:13:25year might have been 72. I really just

1:13:28want to encourage us to try and keep

1:13:29that down this year. Yeah. I mean, I

1:13:32want to keep it down every year, of

1:13:33course, but I just don't know how it

1:13:36ballooned like that. And anyway, it

1:13:39happens and we get a reset and this is

1:13:42great and I'm glad we're having this

1:13:43discussion and now you guys know at the

1:13:45capital committee why it takes so much

1:13:46time to go through all the tracks.

1:13:48>> Yeah, I mean, we we did spend a lot of

1:13:50money this past year or well, we

1:13:53authorized it. We haven't actually spent

1:13:55it yet. But um

1:13:58in terms of FY28, I I mean, if we're

1:14:01talking about what we're doing for debt

1:14:04exclusions, I don't I think we have to

1:14:06prioritize the DPW

1:14:09and what the school needs.

1:14:12Other than that, I think everything else

1:14:14should probably be pushed a year,

1:14:17including Baxter Road alternative access

1:14:19and the next phase of weight drive. We

1:14:22>> they shouldn't be taken off, but I think

1:14:24they need to be pushed.

1:14:26>> I'm sorry.

1:14:26>> But I mean, this is an going to be an

1:14:28ongoing discussion till January, but I'm

1:14:30just saying that now. I I my only

1:14:33comment to that would be is we need to

1:14:35start also in the back of our heads come

1:14:38up with a plan if these all get shot

1:14:40down because my experience from what I'm

1:14:43hearing the public is

1:14:45>> that's why I think we can't bring more

1:14:47than one big thing

1:14:53>> really

1:14:54>> anyway

1:14:55>> any yeah you want to

1:14:57>> would you Rick I'll go through this list

1:15:00and I'll market

1:15:02budget or override. So, okay. So,

1:15:08are you all going to do the whole 10

1:15:09years or you want to do three years? We

1:15:11can. I mean, I'd like to do three.

1:15:14>> I think I can work if we

1:15:15>> Can we start with three?

1:15:17>> You can start with anything you want.

1:15:19Um, absolutely. If you start with three,

1:15:21I think that'll be great. And I it's

1:15:23just we'll probably have to have, you

1:15:24know, one more step in this process and

1:15:26we'll see how it all

1:15:28uh pans out and and

1:15:32go ahead.

1:15:32>> Sorry, Joe.

1:15:33>> Yeah. I mean, some of these are just

1:15:34routine. You know, it's the sidewalk

1:15:35money, it's the cobblestone money, it's

1:15:37the roads money. I mean, that that stuff

1:15:40I I'm I'm great with all that, right? We

1:15:42we have to. Although sometimes he has

1:15:44some unused borrowing and so maybe he

1:15:46didn't get to the cobblestones. I kind

1:15:47of like to know that. I do. But some of

1:15:50it's pretty routine.

1:15:51>> Yeah. But it's also the costs of these

1:15:53things may grow. Like it can't just be

1:15:55the same for the next 10 years most

1:15:58likely.

1:16:01>> And like the the school at 200 million.

1:16:04We know that that's not real. It's going

1:16:07to be a lot more than that to build a

1:16:09new school by 2037.

1:16:14>> So Erica, now you can go to the

1:16:16spreadsheet if you wouldn't mind going

1:16:18Oh, yeah. I should go back to the

1:16:19PowerPoint real quickly. Yeah, you're

1:16:21right.

1:16:24>> Um, yeah, just just stay here. So, just

1:16:29when we get all this done, the next step

1:16:31will be to run the SIP, whatever we have

1:16:35left in it, run the debt service

1:16:38analysis with Hilltop so we understand

1:16:40what we're doing each year. Um, and then

1:16:45the really good news is we get to start

1:16:46this all over again with the enterprise

1:16:48funds. So, um, this may go on for a

1:16:51little bit. Okay. Now, if you could put

1:16:52up the, uh, Excel real quickly. I just

1:16:55want to show you,

1:16:58um, how to read this. So, anywhere we

1:17:01moved a project out, I've highlighted it

1:17:03in yellow. So, downtown neighborhood

1:17:07flood barrier was low for all of you.

1:17:09So, that is in the parking lot for $105

1:17:12million. So, that's why, you know, this

1:17:14is this is how we got to the $600

1:17:16million worth of savings.

1:17:19Matt, to your to your point, um,

1:17:24Steamboat Warf,

1:17:26we we had $120 million in FY30.

1:17:31It's now $18 million so that we can

1:17:35begin

1:17:37um the planning the planning

1:17:40for that project so that we have

1:17:43resources if we need to write a a grant

1:17:46or we need to match some funds or that

1:17:48kind of thing. So, what Vince and Jeff

1:17:51did was essentially

1:17:53take about 10% of the project value,

1:17:56leave it in the year that um they think

1:17:59they need to start the project so that

1:18:02we have monies to get to construction.

1:18:06Uh it may it may be the way you like it

1:18:08may make sense to you, may may not, but

1:18:10that's how we um have shaped the

1:18:15SIP going forward. Um, and then there's

1:18:18a few things in blue where we've um I

1:18:22want to highlight that that project

1:18:24there that's highlighted in blue in the

1:18:26cells that was $40 million. We talked

1:18:29about this one last week. Um, it's split

1:18:32in a way. I just was mentioning to you

1:18:34$4 million for having funds to make sure

1:18:37that we

1:18:39can develop the project to go and get

1:18:42the construction money.

1:18:44Um there's just a few others I'm going

1:18:47to try and touch on real quickly.

1:18:51Yeah, please if you could go to the fire

1:18:54department.

1:18:56So, fire department, you can see we

1:18:58moved out the fire station.

1:19:02And then in housing, just below that,

1:19:05you can see we've removed

1:19:08the design and construction all phases

1:19:10for Tacoma and Oracawa as well. So,

1:19:14those are sitting out in the parking lot

1:19:15way out on the right. That's 35 million

1:19:17bucks. You can scroll down to the next

1:19:19yellow. You see, oh, wait. Uh, that $30

1:19:23million right there with housing. That's

1:19:25that authorized uh that's the borrowing

1:19:27authorization that was moved out a few

1:19:30years. That's why it's highlighted in

1:19:31blue

1:19:34down below. Yeah. And then you can just

1:19:36scroll down. Erica,

1:19:36>> can I can I ask a question about that?

1:19:38>> Does their override cover the debt

1:19:40service on that?

1:19:42>> Does their Yes. Correct. Yes. Their

1:19:44existing as Brooke explained last week,

1:19:46the $6.5 million

1:19:48>> will cover that debt service. Yes. That

1:19:51Yes.

1:19:52>> Okay.

1:19:55Oh, Mary Longacre has a question online.

1:19:59Mary,

1:20:02>> thank you, Don. If I may ask Mr. Shears

1:20:04through you, um, can you provide a

1:20:07little bit more of an explanation

1:20:09um, about how items in the parking lot

1:20:11will be treated? My assumption is that

1:20:15while they may not be included in the 10

1:20:17years shown on the spreadsheet, they

1:20:20could re-enter at any time based on a

1:20:23changing priority or other need or are

1:20:27you saying that by putting them in the

1:20:29parking lot, they will not appear at all

1:20:31in the next 10 years?

1:20:35>> So the

1:20:38well I mean they can always come back

1:20:39in. So, for instance, the two that you

1:20:41see towards the bottom of the screen,

1:20:42the two housing ones, the the feedback

1:20:46from the select board last time we

1:20:49talked about this was, hey, let's let's

1:20:52finish weight drive first and then wait

1:20:54and see were the exact words and then

1:20:56we'll wait and see how that works and

1:20:58and figure out if we can pull those back

1:21:00in. If some of the other ones, like the

1:21:03coastal resilience ones, if this was a

1:21:0520-year plan, you'd probably see this

1:21:07the actual

1:21:09construction of whatever it is in a

1:21:1220-year horizon, but you don't see it in

1:21:14the 10-year horizon because we're not

1:21:15going to do it in the next 10 years.

1:21:18>> Yeah. So, things c can come in and out,

1:21:20Mary. And um I mean like for example the

1:21:23central municipal facility, we know that

1:21:26we need offices, but we're looking at

1:21:29alternative ways to have more of a

1:21:31campus. So there there are things that

1:21:33are in flux.

1:21:36>> So there the parking lot they're not

1:21:39cancelled, they're just parked.

1:21:42>> Yeah. Thank you.

1:21:46>> Good answer.

1:21:47>> Anyway, so that's how that's how you

1:21:48read it. So, I think where we left it is

1:21:51you're you're going to try and rank rank

1:21:55the next three years. So, 28, 29, and

1:21:5730. And then we'll see where we get to

1:21:59after that.

1:22:01>> Okay. So, we'll do our homework,

1:22:04>> I think.

1:22:04>> Thank you.

1:22:05>> Yes. The rest of us will do our homework

1:22:09>> or and send it in.

1:22:11>> You're the you're the top student for

1:22:12today. [laughter]

1:22:14That's a star.

1:22:16Well, I was I I was fortunate enough to

1:22:18be familiar with a few of them anyway,

1:22:20but yeah, there's some you just got to

1:22:22tick through and say, "Yeah, that's just

1:22:24going to definitely be an article 10

1:22:26like the roads." I still would like to

1:22:29know about the dorm improvements because

1:22:31I

1:22:33I kind of tempted to have us encourage

1:22:36that in article 10 because if we all

1:22:38back article 10 in the warrant, then I

1:22:40think that's putting a stronger message

1:22:41behind that and it does seem like they

1:22:43need that. But that it's over $5

1:22:46million. So,

1:22:48>> Brooke,

1:22:49>> um I just want to confirm that the

1:22:52process is we take the spreadsheet, we

1:22:55add our information, we save it and

1:22:57email it back to you, Rick.

1:23:00>> Yes. Right. Yes.

1:23:02>> It's not like a shared doc, Jill, where

1:23:04if you save it, he can see it.

1:23:06>> I was just hearing you

1:23:08>> email it back to him, right?

1:23:09>> Yeah.

1:23:10>> It's not

1:23:11>> It's not like a Google doc. I don't know

1:23:13if everybody is on one drive, so I think

1:23:15you're better off just sending it back

1:23:17to me. I can just cut and paste them

1:23:18right down the spreadsheet.

1:23:21>> Oh, did you get that, Brooke? Okay.

1:23:24>> Yes, that's what I thought. I just had

1:23:26heard Jill thought she submitted it and

1:23:28I just wanted to make sure the process

1:23:30was clear to everybody.

1:23:32>> Okay. May I ask one little followup? Are

1:23:34we thinking this is going to be ready

1:23:36for next week

1:23:39>> or what? For Tuesday?

1:23:40>> No, Wednesday. the seventh

1:23:44>> um

1:23:45>> for continued review. Is that what we're

1:23:47going to do?

1:23:48>> Is that what we're shooting for?

1:23:50>> I can be ready.

1:23:51>> I will commit to doing one tomorrow.

1:23:54>> H

1:23:56>> We've got a lot of stuff between now and

1:23:57then.

1:23:58>> I'd like two weeks. Please, can I have

1:24:00an extension on my homework?

1:24:01>> No, no, Bob. We actually the capital

1:24:03committee has to start like meeting.

1:24:05>> We have five meetings in a row this

1:24:07week.

1:24:07>> Yeah, I know.

1:24:08>> And I don't have time to do this. So,

1:24:10you can do it without me if you want in

1:24:12a week, but I won't get it done more

1:24:13than likely by next Wednesday.

1:24:15>> We know your opinions come fast, so I

1:24:17feel like if you just started working on

1:24:19it, you could get going on [laughter]

1:24:20it.

1:24:21>> I have to get up at 3 in the morning.

1:24:23You want to get up with me and we'll do

1:24:24it then? [laughter]

1:24:26>> I mean, seriously, I we meeting I have a

1:24:28two meetings tomorrow.

1:24:29>> Why don't we tentatively put it on for

1:24:31next week and if we're not complete,

1:24:34we'll put it on in two weeks.

1:24:36>> Yeah. And I really do want your

1:24:37feedback, Bob, because you actually know

1:24:39a lot about these, a lot about

1:24:40everything in it. So that's all I mean.

1:24:44>> Okay,

1:24:44>> Madam Chair, back to I I don't mean to

1:24:47prolong this, but back to my original

1:24:49comment about the CIP being the select

1:24:53board's plan.

1:24:55I don't I understand Capcom would like

1:24:59to start reviewing things, but there's

1:25:01nothing for them to review until this

1:25:03process is complete. So I I don't know

1:25:05that it needs to be rushed because

1:25:08there's not going to be a lot of

1:25:11unvetted projects that is going to be on

1:25:13there for fiscal 28 and based on the

1:25:16discussion that we've heard so far there

1:25:17will be very few debt exclusions.

1:25:22So just I'm just I'm just saying I don't

1:25:24know there's a big rush. We don't want

1:25:26to linger of course.

1:25:28>> Yeah, I agree. Well, then then what I

1:25:30just think about your timeline when you

1:25:32ask us to produce a report.

1:25:34>> Sorry, I can at least get fiscal 28 done

1:25:37for next week.

1:25:38>> 29 and 30 might take me a little longer,

1:25:40but I'll get I I will get fiscal 28.

1:25:43>> We'll put it on the agenda for next

1:25:44week. If we're not fully ready, we can

1:25:47continue it to the following week

1:25:50>> or we can discuss a little bit and then

1:25:52discuss the next week, too. Um, okay.

1:25:55We're going to move on to select board

1:25:56reports and comments. First up, we have

1:25:58a discussion regarding town concessions.

1:26:00Judy's Surfside and Children's Beach. I

1:26:03believe that Charlie Palaki is joining

1:26:05us online. Libby, did you

1:26:07>> He is just just a little bit of

1:26:08background on this and some of this is

1:26:10in the presentation. Um we've had some

1:26:12internal discussion about this um a few

1:26:15times now. In 2024, there was a study of

1:26:20the three concessions, Jettis, Surfside,

1:26:23Children's, and and sort of a side

1:26:25concession, which is the tennis courts

1:26:27at Jetty's. And um that study was

1:26:31looking at coastal resiliency measures

1:26:33at each of those um because of their

1:26:36locations and physical um condition and

1:26:40what sorts of things they might need.

1:26:41And the the I kind of one of our themes

1:26:44here is that we need some direction from

1:26:46the board which will help inform all of

1:26:49us as to how much work we may or may not

1:26:52want to put into a particular

1:26:54concession. Some concessions will

1:26:56depending on the type of work needed hit

1:26:59a trigger for flood mitigation measures

1:27:03or um

1:27:05what is it called then storm pathways

1:27:09storm tide pathway requirements and um

1:27:12we can advise further on that but that's

1:27:15just a little bit of background and

1:27:16Charlie has prepared um this

1:27:19presentation that he'll take us through.

1:27:21Charlie.

1:27:23>> Uh, good evening. Charlie Balaki, parks

1:27:25and recreation manager. Uh, here to

1:27:27discuss the future of several town

1:27:28concession facilities and more

1:27:30specifically some of the decisions we

1:27:32need to uh begin to make about these

1:27:33properties. Uh, the goal of tonight will

1:27:36not be to simply look at these

1:27:37concessions as revenue producing

1:27:38operations. These are town-owned public

1:27:41facilities, many of which provide

1:27:43bathrooms, beach access, food service,

1:27:44and other amenities. As these buildings

1:27:47age, we need to consider how much we

1:27:48invest in them, how coastal resilency

1:27:50affects those investments, and what

1:27:52operating model makes the most sense

1:27:54going forward. Could you go to the next

1:27:56slide, please, Erica?

1:28:03Uh, we're going to look at four

1:28:04concession operations. Surfside Beach,

1:28:06Jetty's Beach, the Jetty's Tennis

1:28:08Concession, and Children's Beach. For

1:28:10each location, we'll look at the

1:28:11physical condition of the facility,

1:28:13coastal resiliency where applicable, the

1:28:15current contract and revenue picture,

1:28:17the potential future options. The intent

1:28:19is sufficient uh is to finish with some

1:28:21specific action items to get direction

1:28:23on how the board would like staff to

1:28:24proceed. Uh the next slide, please.

1:28:28Uh a lot of the information we will

1:28:30discuss tonight uh comes from the beach

1:28:32concessions resiliency study completed

1:28:33by Weston and Samson in October of 24.

1:28:37Uh it was a multi-disiplinary effort

1:28:39involving preservation, sustainability,

1:28:41coastal resilience, parks and recreation

1:28:43and real estate. Uh the options that

1:28:45were presented were reviewed jointly by

1:28:48HDC and Cong. Uh the process is

1:28:51important because the solutions for

1:28:52these buildings cannot just be

1:28:53considered strictly as a facility

1:28:55standpoint. We also have to consider

1:28:57historic preservation, environmental

1:28:59permitting, accessibility, and coastal

1:29:01resilience considerations.

1:29:03And next slide, please.

1:29:08Uh starting with Surfside, this is

1:29:10actually the least complicated of the

1:29:11beach concessions from a coastal

1:29:12resiliency standpoint. The building

1:29:15currently resides outside the FEMA VE

1:29:17zone and outside the priority high and

1:29:19moderate coastal areas uh risk areas as

1:29:22identified in the town's coastal

1:29:23resiliency plan. Uh based on the current

1:29:26information, there's no immediate

1:29:27coastal resilency projects required for

1:29:29Surfside. Gives us some flexibility to

1:29:31focus on the condition and future use of

1:29:33the facility itself.

1:29:35Can you go to the next slide, please,

1:29:36Erica?

1:29:39Uh, Surfside is currently in its second

1:29:40year of its contract running through

1:29:42November of 29 with the Surf LLC. The

1:29:45current contract totals approximately

1:29:46$250,000

1:29:48compared with $210,000 under the

1:29:50previous contract. Historically, the

1:29:53numbers show that Surfside is a fairly

1:29:54consistent revenue producing concession

1:29:56for the town. From 2017 through the

1:29:58available 2024 data, the town received

1:30:00approximately 377,000 in lease and

1:30:03revenue share payments. Could you go to

1:30:05the next slide, please?

1:30:08Uh, the biggest question for Surfside is

1:30:10what we want the facility to look like

1:30:12long term. The exterior needs some

1:30:14improvements. The bathrooms have been

1:30:15evaluated as part of the SMRT restroom

1:30:18study, and we have some drainage,

1:30:19septic, and parking lot needs to resolve

1:30:22out there.

1:30:24Making a substantial investment.

1:30:25However, before making a a substantial

1:30:27investment, we should decide what we

1:30:29want the continuing program model to

1:30:31look like at the building. One option is

1:30:33to retain the kitchen and traditional

1:30:34concession operation. The other is to

1:30:37transition towards a food truck model

1:30:38and potentially convert more or all of

1:30:40the existing building into bathrooms. Uh

1:30:43that programming decision we'd like to

1:30:45make uh before we do any significant

1:30:47improvements to the building.

1:30:50Uh next slide please Erica.

1:30:53Uh moving to jetties. This is a very

1:30:54different situation. Here is a

1:30:56concession is a significant oper

1:30:57operation a big revenue generator. Uh

1:31:00but the building also presents a much

1:31:02more significant coastal resiliency

1:31:04challenge.

1:31:05Next slide, please.

1:31:09Uh several alternatives were evaluated

1:31:12for jetties. One option was relocating

1:31:13the building further south to the

1:31:15existing parking area. That option was

1:31:18ultimately problematic because of

1:31:19historic preservation concerns and the

1:31:21relocation would still leave the

1:31:22building in a resource area.

1:31:24Public feedback also showed that there

1:31:26was limited support for relocation of

1:31:28the building. The preferred alternative

1:31:30emerged uh from the process that to

1:31:32raise the existing building in place

1:31:34where flood mitigation would minimize

1:31:36changes to the historic building and the

1:31:38site. Uh it is important however to

1:31:40recognize that this is not a permanent

1:31:42solution. Even after being raised, the

1:31:44building will be still be vulnerable to

1:31:461% wave action in 20150. Uh it should be

1:31:49viewed as a nearterm resiliency

1:31:51investment rather than a permanent

1:31:53solution.

1:31:56>> Next slide please.

1:31:59We have a current uh estimated

1:32:01resiliency work is approximately $6

1:32:03million. Uh in the SIP, we kind of

1:32:05talked about last week that the overall

1:32:07estimate for jetties was in the $16

1:32:08million range. This included the $6

1:32:11million for resiliency work, but also

1:32:13included some very high level estimates

1:32:15on renovating the interior of the

1:32:16existing concession and the bath house.

1:32:21Next slide, please.

1:32:23Uh Jenny's is by far the largest of the

1:32:25concessions that are operating

1:32:26financially. Uh the current contract

1:32:28expires at the end of 2026 and a new

1:32:30contract was awarded in May uh to the

1:32:32Sandbar for approximately $1.13 million

1:32:35along with a 7.5% revenue share.

1:32:38Historically, this operation has

1:32:40generated significant revenue. Available

1:32:42data shows nearly $17.9 million in gross

1:32:45concession revenue and approximately

1:32:46$1.6 $6 million return to the town

1:32:49through lease payments, revenue share,

1:32:51and donation or gifts. Uh so unlike

1:32:53other some of the facilities we'll

1:32:54discuss, there's a sub substantial

1:32:57operating business here at this

1:32:59property. Next slide, please.

1:33:02Uh at the same time, we have several

1:33:04building issues that cannot be ignored.

1:33:06Electrical panel is at capacity. There's

1:33:08some corroded pipes underneath the

1:33:09building that will need replacement.

1:33:10Windows and doors uh in the building

1:33:12need attention. Uh the bathrooms have

1:33:15been identified is for a future

1:33:16renovation. Uh some work is already

1:33:19underway on the exterior of the building

1:33:21of the bath house. Uh the concession

1:33:22area has installed a second walk-in. The

1:33:24new flooring in the building and town

1:33:26administration along with the sewer and

1:33:28storm water teams are looking at uh

1:33:30improvements to the lower parking lot

1:33:31and the access road.

1:33:33Uh the challenge is coordinating these

1:33:35short-term improvements with the larger

1:33:36resilency project so we're not making

1:33:38investments today that could conflict

1:33:39with tomorrow.

1:33:42Next slide, please.

1:33:44Uh Jay's concession is pretty much very

1:33:47straightforward. It's on a new four and

1:33:48a halfyear contract to begin this year

1:33:50for approximately $106,000 plus 4%

1:33:53revenue share. The building interior was

1:33:55recently refreshed uh with paint and

1:33:57flooring. Uh unlike the beach

1:33:59concession, we do not have an immediate

1:34:00coastal resiliency concern at this

1:34:02location.

1:34:05Next slide. Uh the primary opportunity

1:34:07here is to create a better bathroom

1:34:09facility. We have approximately $700,000

1:34:12remaining from the tennis court

1:34:13construction appropriation. So, one

1:34:16concept would be to reallocate a portion

1:34:17of those funds to improve this building

1:34:20uh creating an exterior access uh men's

1:34:24and women's ADA accessible bathrooms.

1:34:26This would greatly improve the tennis

1:34:27court experience, not having to use a

1:34:29porta potty and it would just add

1:34:30another uh public amenity to the overall

1:34:32jetty's property.

1:34:35Next slide. Uh Children's Beach is where

1:34:38the discussion becomes a little bit more

1:34:40complicated. We have a long history or

1:34:42difficulty maintaining sustainable

1:34:44concessions at the building. The

1:34:46building requires substantial investment

1:34:48in coastal resiliency requirements uh

1:34:50that increase the cost of renovating it.

1:34:54Next slide, please.

1:34:56Uh the history is kind of important

1:34:57because it's not new. Going back to

1:34:592011, the town has repeatedly had

1:35:01difficulty attracting and retaining

1:35:02concession. There have been cons uh

1:35:04solicitations where only one bidder

1:35:07applied or in periods where no biders

1:35:08were applied, contracts ended early,

1:35:10waved or disputed rent and renovation

1:35:12projects that could not move forward uh

1:35:15because they exceeded available funding.

1:35:18And the important thing is here kind of

1:35:19look at is since 2013 approximately

1:35:22$83,000 in contract payments have been

1:35:24lost due to concession turnover uh

1:35:26facility issues and uh and co obviously

1:35:29took a little bit of a hit. Uh so we

1:35:31consider other major investments in this

1:35:33building, we should do so in the context

1:35:34of more than a decade of difficult

1:35:36operating history.

1:35:39Next slide, please.

1:35:43Uh the current contract

1:35:45with the surf runs through the end of

1:35:462026 and totals approximately $138,000.

1:35:50Uh looking at the historical revenue,

1:35:52the scale of the operation is

1:35:54substantially different from Jetty's. Um

1:35:56obviously it's a smaller location. Uh

1:35:58the available data that I had to work

1:36:00off shows about $466,000 in gross

1:36:03concession revenue in that time with

1:36:04approximately 159,000 returned to the

1:36:06town in the form of lease payments and

1:36:08revenue share. Uh the distinction

1:36:10becomes important when we compare

1:36:12revenue generating capacity at a

1:36:13concession with a capital investment

1:36:15required uh for the future. Next slide

1:36:19please.

1:36:21We've also had constant uh fairly

1:36:24consistent feedback from concessioners

1:36:26that the concession is difficult to

1:36:27operate, noting that the facility is

1:36:29small, there's limited storage, limited

1:36:31preparation, refrigeration space,

1:36:33electrical panel is constrained, and the

1:36:35equipment that is there shows

1:36:36significant wear and tear. Um though

1:36:40those issues are compound and those

1:36:41issues are compounded by limited foot

1:36:43track rent obligations that don't always

1:36:46align with the economical operation of

1:36:48the facility.

1:36:50And next slide please.

1:36:53So we had asked MRT to give us uh

1:36:56evaluation of renovation costs doing

1:36:58very high level based on per square foot

1:37:00and usage of the building and the

1:37:01estimated ranges came between $496 to

1:37:04$873,000

1:37:06just for the building improvements.

1:37:08The complication is that any of those

1:37:10renovation scenarios trigger the coastal

1:37:12resiliency requirement is required by

1:37:14the 50 FEMA percent rule, which in its

1:37:16simplest forms means if the cumulative

1:37:18cost of a renovation exceeds 50% of the

1:37:21building's value, it must be made

1:37:22compliant.

1:37:24Once resiliency is incorporated, the

1:37:26alternatives become much more expensive.

1:37:28Three options that we looked at in the

1:37:29study for coastal resiliency range from

1:37:312 million on the low end to 4.6 on the

1:37:34high end. Next slide, please.

1:37:39Just to kind of put that into cost

1:37:40perspective based on the current lease

1:37:42structure uh in increasing annually for

1:37:46the required base 3% each year a $2.5

1:37:49million investment would take

1:37:50approximately 45 years of cumulative

1:37:52rent to recover and that doesn't include

1:37:55any ongoing maintenance that would have

1:37:56to happen in that time and just for fun

1:37:59the $5.5 million high end the break even

1:38:02point would be uh 66 years. That's not

1:38:04to suggest that every public facility

1:38:06needs to pay for itself. Public

1:38:08bathrooms, beach access, recreation, and

1:38:10other community benefits obviously have

1:38:11a value beyond the concession revenue,

1:38:14but it does illustrate the scale of a

1:38:16capital investment compared to the

1:38:17revenue revenue generate generated at

1:38:19this particular operation.

1:38:23Next slide, please.

1:38:26Uh for that reason, uh staff is

1:38:28recommending maybe we consider operating

1:38:30a different model. Uh rather than making

1:38:32a multi-million dollar investment to and

1:38:34to preserve the existing concession

1:38:35building, the concept would be to

1:38:37demolish or relocate the building and

1:38:38repurpose it somewhere else, install a

1:38:40concrete slab capable of supporting the

1:38:43existing restroom trailer and bring in a

1:38:45food truck and picnic tables to the

1:38:47area. Uh the preliminary cost there is

1:38:49somewhere between $150 to $250,000.

1:38:52This would maintain the basic public

1:38:53service at Children's Beach while

1:38:55significantly reducing the town's

1:38:56capital exposure and giving us more

1:38:58flexibility as coastal conditions and

1:39:00recreation needs change over time.

1:39:03Next slide, please.

1:39:06Uh so bring it all together, uh we're

1:39:08looking for direction in kind of four

1:39:09areas. Children's Beach, we need to

1:39:11determine whether to proceed with one of

1:39:13the resiliency options and building

1:39:14improvements or move towards an

1:39:16alternative model. Jetty's Tennis. We

1:39:19would like uh to move forward with

1:39:21planning for the bathroom and building

1:39:22improvements.

1:39:23Jetty's concession. Uh we are

1:39:25recommending to continue work necessary

1:39:27to raise the building to have a goal uh

1:39:30with a defined project and funding

1:39:32strategy in place before the new lease

1:39:33expires.

1:39:35And then finally at Surfside, uh we need

1:39:38some direction as to the long-term

1:39:39operating model model, whether we retain

1:39:41the kitchen, renovate the existing

1:39:43building, or explore transitioning uh

1:39:45the food service to a food truck and

1:39:47converting buildings to the bathroom.

1:39:49Common theme is we want to establish a

1:39:50long-term use of these facilities uh

1:39:52before we commit substantial capital to

1:39:54them.

1:39:56Next slide.

1:39:58I'm happy to answer any questions and

1:40:01I'd love to hear what the board's

1:40:02thoughts are and opinions and get some

1:40:04direction as to which way you'd like us

1:40:06to proceed.

1:40:18>> M how I noticed that we are the

1:40:22concessionary the jetties is fixing the

1:40:24floor and doing some other work. Is

1:40:26there a way to uh you know have town

1:40:30meeting approve it and put these bids

1:40:32out to a longer period so and putting

1:40:34the responsibility on some of this to

1:40:36the concessionires? That is one

1:40:38question.

1:40:41>> Oh, that's certainly something we could

1:40:42explore. Um I know we talked with the

1:40:45existing concessionire at Jettis. They'd

1:40:48approached the town about adding an

1:40:49awning uh to the town, which of course

1:40:51requires town procurement law, and it

1:40:54came in at about a $250,000

1:40:57um price tag, which they then declined

1:40:59to do. And any improvements that are

1:41:00made to the building uh the town ends up

1:41:02with ownership of as part of the lease,

1:41:05>> right?

1:41:05>> But it's something we could explore.

1:41:07>> Yeah. And and as an operator, it you

1:41:10know, you don't want to have a five-year

1:41:12lease and and then not be able to

1:41:13advertise it. But if you have a longer

1:41:16term, it might be more worth it worth it

1:41:18to do it or if you can do more business.

1:41:20I think part of what's happening uh with

1:41:23a couple of these concessions, not

1:41:24necessarily jetties, but the others is

1:41:27that we're they're trying to be more

1:41:30than what they are. There are, you know,

1:41:32it's a a hamburgers and and ice cream at

1:41:34the beach. It's, you know, people are

1:41:36trying to be restaurants and trying to,

1:41:38you know, be more. I think that we

1:41:39should be, you know, if our rent is low,

1:41:41that's fine. It's providing the service

1:41:43that you want at a beach which is

1:41:44hamburgers, hot dogs and ice cream you

1:41:46know and some bathrooms. I think you

1:41:49know uh you know the history of these

1:41:53that's what the jetty started out as and

1:41:54then Tim Madden added liquor and you

1:41:57know and then it became something

1:41:58different over time. There's a pressure

1:42:00to do that, but I think we should resist

1:42:03that pressure in the other places. Keep

1:42:05them uh at a, you know, keep them small

1:42:07and manageable. And maybe we should put

1:42:10the, you know, from a modeling

1:42:12standpoint, maybe we should put together

1:42:15the surf side and the children's beach

1:42:18to get one person to bid on and operate

1:42:21both of them. They're both similar. It'd

1:42:22be the same type of thing. Uh

1:42:26so, so it so that's one part of it. Uh

1:42:29but I think the expectations are too

1:42:31high. Some of the people are bidding. It

1:42:33should be they have got to lower their

1:42:35expectations. Uh the food truck model at

1:42:39Jetty at Children's yet maybe at

1:42:42Surfside I don't think it's necessary.

1:42:44Keep it as a you know keep it as a

1:42:45hamburger stand. It's great. Uh I think

1:42:49if we are going to do a food truck at

1:42:51Children's I don't think it needs to be

1:42:53a pad where the old building was. That's

1:42:55just going to bring, you know, notice to

1:42:57the fact that the building is gone and

1:42:59wasn't there. You know, make a nice

1:43:01place for it near, you know, near the

1:43:03road. Find a good spot there, uh, where

1:43:05it will fit. You know, maybe keep the

1:43:08building for bathrooms, uh, if that's

1:43:10the case. Uh, and don't don't change it

1:43:13so that you have to raise it that much.

1:43:15Turn it into bathrooms and keep it under

1:43:16the 50% for now and worry about that

1:43:19later. That's what I think for

1:43:21children's and for Surfside. Jetty's is

1:43:23a different topic, but I'll talk about

1:43:25that. I'll let everyone else speak.

1:43:28>> Okay. Um Brooke has her hand up, but

1:43:30just quickly on children's

1:43:33um I don't think the building can come

1:43:35down because of its history. Um but

1:43:39there was a thought of potentially

1:43:41containing the pumps that are needed

1:43:44down there inside the building.

1:43:48We already have portable bathrooms

1:43:50because the bathroom renovation was so

1:43:52expensive. Um that was one of my first

1:43:55years on the board with you guys. Um but

1:43:58let me go to Brooke.

1:44:01>> Um yeah, I mean obviously Jetty's is

1:44:04probably the most challenging one. Um I

1:44:08the Jetty's concession I I think um if

1:44:13the bathrooms are needed for the tennis

1:44:15building and we have the allocation from

1:44:17the corpse I I'm would favor going

1:44:20forward with that um can it be wrapped

1:44:23in with the other bathroom projects that

1:44:25are going on now um as a contract

1:44:28amendment as opposed to starting from

1:44:29scratch just as a wild thought. Um, and

1:44:33then for me for Children's Beach, I

1:44:36really like the idea of not doing a

1:44:39major project, not triggering the

1:44:40coastal resilience stuff and and trying

1:44:43even with this next contract

1:44:46um the food truck model and see if it

1:44:50works um before we do anything major to

1:44:53the building at all. Just um see how the

1:44:57food truck model works. And um I mean

1:45:01the idea that we're we have bathrooms

1:45:03down there that get put away seasonally

1:45:06and uh we don't have offseason weather

1:45:10impact um on facilities is an

1:45:14interesting one to me. And Surfside

1:45:17Beach

1:45:18I kind of agree with Matt. I mean though

1:45:22in terms of

1:45:24not building more than might be

1:45:26necessary but I do think it's very

1:45:29people what people want today is not

1:45:31necessarily hot dogs and hamburgers.

1:45:33People's pallets are very different in

1:45:35terms of um healthful eating and so

1:45:37forth. So I'm not sure um

1:45:42that I want to I want to presume what

1:45:44would sell, but I also don't think we

1:45:47need super elaborate facilities there.

1:45:50Um, keep it simple. Um,

1:45:54and there was a food truck down there at

1:45:56one point, right?

1:45:58>> Yes. The current concessionaire operates

1:46:00a food truck mainly as the main kitchen.

1:46:02There's a strange caveat that we're kind

1:46:04of looking into about the building where

1:46:06they couldn't have a fry lighter in the

1:46:08building. And so the I guess the work it

1:46:11just says it couldn't be in the

1:46:11building. Doesn't say it can't be on the

1:46:13property. Um, and so they're operating

1:46:16out of a food truck now. Uh that's how

1:46:18their their main kind of kitchen is

1:46:20there. I believe you order at the

1:46:21building and they have ice cream and

1:46:23other things out of the small kitchen

1:46:24area there but then operate the the food

1:46:27truck as the actual hot kitchen.

1:46:30Well, I think that's interesting. It's

1:46:31already working, right? So, um as a

1:46:34model and it's been that way for a

1:46:36while. So, putting a whole lot of money

1:46:38into that building if something's

1:46:40functioning fine with the with the

1:46:43combination of a food truck as a kitchen

1:46:45and um seems okay to me.

1:46:51That's it.

1:46:55>> I take public comment first or

1:46:56>> Sure.

1:46:58>> Hi.

1:46:59>> Hi.

1:47:00>> Can you hear me? Or you can. Um

1:47:01>> just state your name, please.

1:47:02>> My name's Bodie. Very nervous to be

1:47:04here. Um, old named

1:47:06>> Bowden Lovering, sorry. Um, I'm very

1:47:10passionate about this. I have a lot to

1:47:12go over here just because I mean there's

1:47:13a lot to uncover at least just from the

1:47:16front of children's speech. Um, I think

1:47:18Surf Side is well what it is. I don't

1:47:20think it we really need much change

1:47:22there or at Jetties. I mean moving

1:47:23jetties is not my expertise. I sell ice

1:47:25cream.

1:47:28Um, but I guess let's just jump right

1:47:31into this. I want to start by saying

1:47:33that I am 19 and that is very important

1:47:36to my perspective and how I feel on this

1:47:37topic. I would like to start by saying

1:47:40that not jetties but as it stands the

1:47:43lease for Surfside and Children's Beach

1:47:46are pretty much the golf club

1:47:48scholarship for people who want to go

1:47:50into the hospitality business such as

1:47:52myself and have an actual outing into it

1:47:55on this island. As we know, um, you

1:47:58know, uh, rent is reasonable at these

1:48:00two locations. Um, Children's Beach, it

1:48:03averages around 25 grand and at

1:48:04Surfside, I think it's rent 50 to 60

1:48:06grand. That's very reasonable

1:48:08considering the potential for money to

1:48:10be made. And considering that if I

1:48:12wanted to go through NIR, I'd probably

1:48:14have to,

1:48:15you know, I I don't know. So, I don't

1:48:17have enough stuff to sell to be able to

1:48:19rent from NI, it'd be what, like 150,000

1:48:22a year. I think that's pretty hard to

1:48:24tack on. Um, I want to start by

1:48:27addressing some of the current issues at

1:48:30Children's Beach by reviewing the

1:48:32history of Children's. Um, so 2011, some

1:48:36guy puts in a bid and then runs away

1:48:38under the name ASHack. And no one gets a

1:48:41lease until 2014. One bid goes out for a

1:48:44three-year lease. This is very

1:48:46important, and this was not covered

1:48:48properly in the presentation. I believe

1:48:50it says in 2015, word for word,

1:48:52renovation projects were cancelled due

1:48:54to bids exceeding costs of 900,000

1:48:57versus a projected 550 grand. $350,000

1:49:02is a lot. I mean, that's a long shot. If

1:49:05it was within a few grand, that would

1:49:06make sense, but that's almost well,

1:49:08that's a little more than half of the

1:49:10number there. Um, and then the person

1:49:14with the lease during the time in 2016,

1:49:16the operator refused to pay the final

1:49:17rent payment due to poor conditions,

1:49:20lack of action by town. And I don't know

1:49:23if a bone was thrown to him, but if

1:49:25nothing if this money was raised and or

1:49:28he or she, this person, sorry, was told

1:49:29that they were going to have renovations

1:49:31and they did not receive any throughout

1:49:33their years, I would be pretty mad. I

1:49:35don't know if I wouldn't pay the lease,

1:49:37but I will say I do not blame him. The

1:49:41issue of children's beaches, it's always

1:49:43been changing as we've seen in the past

1:49:4410 years. People come and people go,

1:49:46whether that's for good reasons or bad

1:49:48reasons. Um, some people because, well,

1:49:50they just ran away and disappeared. Some

1:49:53people because they couldn't afford to

1:49:54keep the upkeep. But I think what we're

1:49:56seeing now is I guess I guess I should

1:50:00have said but I it's assumed to me after

1:50:032016 you know we had a few years of

1:50:05prosperity then CO hit and there's no

1:50:07need to explain what impact CO had on

1:50:09local businesses. Um obviously people

1:50:13weren't outside the location was pretty

1:50:15much dead. Uh it's been changing rapidly

1:50:18over the past 10 years and

1:50:21a lot a good few of those years there

1:50:23was nothing there to begin with. Now,

1:50:25the ladies there right now have sort of

1:50:27brought it out of, I don't know, a

1:50:30hiding period. If you can imagine, it

1:50:32was an undesirable location. No one

1:50:34would go because it would always change

1:50:35and no one knew what they wanted. And

1:50:37now people are starting to go. Um, I

1:50:39know some of the people who live out by

1:50:41Children's and they say great things

1:50:42about it. Um, not going to comment on

1:50:45the menu just cuz I I don't guys, I make

1:50:48ice cream. You know what I'm saying? I

1:50:50do think a simpler menu is always a

1:50:52better idea when you're at the beach

1:50:53just for a children's sake. I know when

1:50:55I was little, I would never dare to eat

1:50:57fish or shrimp or, you know, if I saw a

1:51:00hot dog that didn't say like Frank

1:51:02kosher hot dog, it said wag you. I

1:51:04wouldn't know what that was. I'd get a

1:51:05little scared even if dad told me it was

1:51:06good. Um, but yeah, see these are the

1:51:10problems with the shack. And I would

1:51:12argue a lot of which are and I don't I

1:51:16don't address this to you guys directly

1:51:17but I will say they are town-caused. Um

1:51:20as we see with the negligence of

1:51:22renovations, renovations have just

1:51:24become more costly and becoming more

1:51:27costly means that there's more upkeep,

1:51:29more things have gone wrong and now

1:51:30we're looking at what like a minimum $3

1:51:32million to fix the shack. That's a

1:51:35problem. But I believe that that being a

1:51:37problem, the cost of this to need to fix

1:51:41the shack through its negligence over

1:51:43the years, I think it's absurd that it's

1:51:46being, I guess, denied because of the

1:51:50money it makes compared to how much the

1:51:52town leases it for. Like I said, this is

1:51:54pretty much the golf club scholarship

1:51:56for local kids who want to get into the

1:51:58hospitality business because we know

1:52:00rent prices and property prices are way

1:52:03too high. Um, but I just want to go over

1:52:07the whole food truck versus concession

1:52:09shack thing. I run a food truck,

1:52:11obviously. I've been running it for a

1:52:12few years, so I have some personal

1:52:14experience. Um, I will say I don't think

1:52:18a food truck is the right idea for

1:52:19Children's Beach. I think Children's

1:52:21Beach should be fully protected and

1:52:23revamped. I don't think because we've

1:52:26done one projection or a few projections

1:52:28that say it's going to be anywhere

1:52:30between 2 million and 5 million that

1:52:31that's the end- all beall solution. I

1:52:33think within the projected next uh 2 to

1:52:363 years, I think it might be possible to

1:52:39find other solutions that might be more

1:52:40cost effective. But anyways, a food

1:52:44truck wouldn't work because trucks

1:52:46aren't usually like a sole business.

1:52:48They're always complimentary. So, if you

1:52:50notice,

1:52:52Milliey's has theirs for catering. You

1:52:54know, Island Kitchen has it for

1:52:55catering, private events. I have mine

1:52:57for a summer job. That's the problem.

1:53:00It's always complimentary to a

1:53:01business's services or your lifestyle.

1:53:04If I had a well-paying year- round job,

1:53:06I wouldn't be able to run the ice cream

1:53:07truck. But I don't. I choose to run the

1:53:09ice cream truck. That gives me a very

1:53:12short window. Very, very short window

1:53:15because it means I need something to do

1:53:17before the season and after, which also

1:53:20means you can really only start heading

1:53:23out there once, you know, July hits or

1:53:26the end of June. you couldn't have a

1:53:28pre-season or a postseason like you

1:53:29could if you were a developed shack and

1:53:31people knew you were there. Um,

1:53:34but I do understand trucks are awesome.

1:53:38You got low upkeep, minimal management,

1:53:41little to no maintenance, you know what

1:53:43I mean? It's pretty nice. But all of

1:53:45these are a curse and a blessing when it

1:53:46comes to leaving a food truck stationary

1:53:48at a location like Children's Beach. Um,

1:53:51these exact reasons could be stated as a

1:53:53burden. An ease of operation

1:53:56is nice, but that restricts everything

1:53:59because on a food truck you have minimal

1:54:01space. Um, you have minimal storage, but

1:54:04the most important things people don't

1:54:06seem to consider are how you have

1:54:08minimal clients and minimal time and

1:54:10minimal potential for high yield cash.

1:54:13you

1:54:15have the option as a food truck to be

1:54:16mobile because you don't have a set

1:54:19location. And a lot of people think

1:54:20that's an advantage. I don't believe so.

1:54:23I think it's a genuine disadvantage

1:54:24because if people knew you were in one

1:54:26spot and you could have your operating

1:54:28hours upfront all day, I believe more

1:54:30people would come in. I think you would

1:54:32get more business. And I think this is

1:54:34blatantly obvious if you look at revenue

1:54:36numbers between a shack like Children's

1:54:38and then compare it to the ice cream

1:54:39truck. Um,

1:54:42it's also not that profitable like I

1:54:44just said and that's kind of one of the

1:54:47problems because the the entire I guess

1:54:51the sole purpose of the two concessions,

1:54:53Children's and Surfside, is to pretty

1:54:56much be a substantial means to invest in

1:54:58our people. And that becomes pretty

1:55:01obvious when you uh think about

1:55:03replacing the concession with a food

1:55:05truck. If you put someone in the

1:55:06concession, you have the potential to

1:55:09pay out an owner and usually I think

1:55:11it'd be two people. Small stuff, you

1:55:13know, I' I'd run it with two people.

1:55:14Let's assume there's two people running

1:55:16it right now. So, you'll get a rough

1:55:19payout of 100K plus for the both of the

1:55:22owners and around like, you know, 7K for

1:55:24employees. Depends how hard they work,

1:55:26how much they get paid, blah blah blah.

1:55:29Versus if you just put a food truck

1:55:30there, you're going to get a measly 60

1:55:32grand for the owner maybe. And usually

1:55:34food trucks don't have any employees.

1:55:37You might have one or two if you're a

1:55:39catering company. Yeah, because you know

1:55:41who doesn't have the money to go send

1:55:42someone out there. I don't. So I have to

1:55:44be on that truck. Um

1:55:47>> over for Donna's chair right now. We're

1:55:49we're

1:55:50>> you need to wrap up.

1:55:51>> We would like you to encourage you.

1:55:53We're really kind of focused on whether

1:55:54or not we want to spend money on

1:55:56renovating these locations. And

1:55:58>> sorry

1:56:00to three minutes. So Oh, yeah. I'm

1:56:02sorry. I' I've never

1:56:03>> That's okay. This is I'm learning a lot.

1:56:04I appreciate it.

1:56:05>> Pretty much what I'm saying is I don't

1:56:07think the town should treat the

1:56:10concession at Children's like it's a

1:56:13profit b or it's a spending burden

1:56:15because again it is very much the sole

1:56:18purpose of this concession is just to

1:56:21help people get a footing into the

1:56:23hospitality business whereas it would be

1:56:25literally impossible. I'd have to work

1:56:26you know how many years under someone

1:56:28else and prices go up with that. It

1:56:31might genuinely be impossible. What I'm

1:56:33saying is to not consider the cost and

1:56:35how expensive it might be, but to

1:56:37consider how much you could help your

1:56:40community, especially in today's day and

1:56:42age where most of restaurants are

1:56:44corporate owned. We could sort of, you

1:56:46know, shuffle it back. Sorry for taking

1:56:48up too much time, y'all.

1:56:49>> No, you're okay.

1:56:52>> Amy, I'm back.

1:56:55Amy Eldridge, I just um I saw on there

1:56:58the potential for two food trucks and

1:57:01reuse and repurpose of the Surfside

1:57:04building and Children's Beach. Um I just

1:57:06want to remind people about the struggle

1:57:09that food trucks have with the

1:57:12commercial kitchen aspect through the

1:57:14health department and not everybody has

1:57:17access to a commercial kitchen. So,

1:57:21you're limiting what food trucks can

1:57:23actually go out there. And not a lot of

1:57:25restaurants want to share their space.

1:57:28Um, I had a cousin that had a food truck

1:57:29that lost her space when fairgrounds

1:57:31sold. So, it it's kind of risky. And I

1:57:34think it's important if there's already

1:57:35a commercial kitchen at Surfside Beach

1:57:38as well as Children's Beach, they can

1:57:41add the food truck, but it doesn't make

1:57:43sense to take it away because not

1:57:45everybody's going to have that proper

1:57:47spacing. So, you know, I see that the

1:57:50Surfside project is to turn it all into

1:57:52bathrooms. Well, I'd rather see a

1:57:54commercial kitchen and what is currently

1:57:57happening now, which is they're frying

1:57:58food in a truck and then coming through

1:58:00the commercial kitchen with the food.

1:58:02Perfectly fine. But when you start

1:58:04eliminating commercial kitchen space,

1:58:06which is at a premium on this island,

1:58:07and you run the risk of only allowing

1:58:11the handful that are already here that

1:58:13are compliant, you're taking away that

1:58:15option for people. Thanks.

1:58:21>> Oh, you'll got to come to the mic if you

1:58:24don't mind. Oh, I'm sorry.

1:58:26>> I think the I think one of the bigger

1:58:28issues too with putting a food truck at

1:58:30Children's is if we're assuming the food

1:58:31truck does the same numbers as a

1:58:32concession, there's nowhere near enough

1:58:34storage in the food truck to be able to

1:58:35do those numbers and you're going to

1:58:36have to keep some aspect of the shack

1:58:38open for dry storage. Especially if you

1:58:40want to invite other food trucks out

1:58:42there and then it comes a problem of who

1:58:45deserves a spot. But you would still

1:58:47need to keep a piece of the shack for

1:58:48storage.

1:58:52>> Okay, Mary

1:58:54Longre.

1:58:57>> Hi, Mary Longacre. Um, thanks to Amy and

1:59:00Bod for making some of the points I I

1:59:03thought of, but I wanted to um

1:59:07take I wanted to advise you to take a

1:59:08look at the responsibilities that are in

1:59:11the lease for the property itself. Uh

1:59:15the food truck is mobile. So uh if it

1:59:19assuming that you know they're open

1:59:20certain hours, I I don't know if the

1:59:22food truck will then drive away at the

1:59:24end of the afternoon. Uh where owners

1:59:27who or or lease holders who are in the

1:59:29building, you know, might have cleanup

1:59:31tasks, might have other things going on

1:59:33would have more of a presence. Um the

1:59:36the food truck can also decide not to be

1:59:39there anytime they have an opportunity

1:59:41for a better sales day. you know, a

1:59:44catering job as as Bod mentioned or some

1:59:46other event. And so it can be a very

1:59:49irregular presence. Uh so I I I

1:59:52appreciate that you're looking at it. Uh

1:59:54I think that you need to look a little

1:59:56deeper before you make that jump. Uh,

1:59:58and I'd also say if you're looking at

2:00:00renovating these buildings and you might

2:00:03consider whether or not there is room

2:00:05for a small apartment for staff housing,

2:00:08that might help the concessionires

2:00:11um to, you know, be more successful to

2:00:14stay there longer. Um, that's something,

2:00:17you know, I I realize these are of

2:00:18course coastal locations, but something

2:00:20I think the town should consider as to

2:00:22whether or not any kind of housing can

2:00:24be incorporated in the renovations.

2:00:26Thank you.

2:00:29Madam Chair, I just want to clarify and

2:00:31um Charlie could elaborate if needed,

2:00:33but the if big if we were going to try

2:00:37the food truck idea at Children's, say

2:00:41the bid would require the food truck to

2:00:44be there all day and at certain times.

2:00:46It wouldn't be able to just up and drive

2:00:48away whenever it felt like it.

2:00:50>> Correct, Libby. It would it would be in

2:00:52the contract for certain operating hours

2:00:54uh during the day.

2:00:58Paulie.

2:00:59>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, this Holly

2:01:02Bachis, preservation planner. Uh, first

2:01:04I want to apologize for not being here

2:01:05while for all of Charlie's presentation.

2:01:07I was actually at open house for my

2:01:09junior. Um, but I was involved with the

2:01:13um the review discussions for these uh

2:01:16structures. And I just wanted to be on

2:01:18record to remind or inform you um that

2:01:21both the Jetty's beach and the

2:01:24children's beach structures are uh

2:01:25historic resources within our local and

2:01:27national historic district. Both of them

2:01:29have actually been surveyed with uh

2:01:31updated form B's with Massachusetts

2:01:33Historical Commission. They're being

2:01:35currently reviewed with um Massachusetts

2:01:37Historical Commission as well as the

2:01:38Naka Historical Commission. Um uh the

2:01:42Jetty's Beach Pavilion is an

2:01:43individually significant historic

2:01:45resource uh built by um actually in 1904

2:01:49uh by PB and Sterns architecture firm in

2:01:52Boston. And both of these structures um

2:01:55are eligible now that we have these

2:01:57updated form surveys for the

2:01:59Massachusetts preservation projects

2:02:01fund. I bring that up because that could

2:02:03be another source of revenue um to go

2:02:06towards a project, not just at the tax

2:02:09base. So before you all make your

2:02:12decision on what actions to move, um I

2:02:14did want to let you know that you know

2:02:16we've when I was involved with the

2:02:18review with Weston Samson and and

2:02:20Charlie um we did have both the

2:02:23regulatory bodies the HDC and the concom

2:02:27to review these structures because you

2:02:28have coastal resiliency you have our

2:02:30resilient anti design guidelines for

2:02:32elevating historic resources within his

2:02:34historic district and they need to come

2:02:36up to you know some sort of an agreement

2:02:38on how that's going to book. Um, let's

2:02:41just say I think there there's

2:02:43definitely room for um improvement and

2:02:46that was just a really a more of a

2:02:48preliminary um postponent, but um at the

2:02:51end of the day I think it's important to

2:02:53look at the fact that these are

2:02:54contributing resources. Thank you very

2:02:56much.

2:03:00>> Yes, ma'am. here. Uh, I was going to

2:03:02bring up that the spaces are valuable

2:03:06even if there are food trucks for

2:03:07storage and refrigeration, etc. They may

2:03:10not be full kitchens, but they may be

2:03:12valuable for that purpose. And a couple

2:03:14people have brought that up. Uh,

2:03:17regarding what these can do, a

2:03:20restaurant, if if a restaurant is

2:03:22successful, it's going to you want to

2:03:23your rent wants to be about between five

2:03:27and 10%. If you're doing 10 to 15%,

2:03:29you're not going to last five years. If

2:03:31you're doing 5 to 10% of your sales,

2:03:34you're going to make it. And that's sort

2:03:35of across all different types of

2:03:38restaurants. So, if you back into the

2:03:39numbers, something that's 25,000 a year

2:03:42has to do uh 250 300,000 a year. It's

2:03:45got to do $3,000 a day. Two and a half

2:03:47to 3,000 on a 100 day 100 days summer.

2:03:53uh if it's 50 to 60,000 you're talking5

2:03:56to $6,000 a day that's not unsubstantial

2:04:00that you know to do that is fairly

2:04:02substantial uh and so I think that's

2:04:05what we're sort of facing so if people

2:04:07go in and if we want them to put their

2:04:10own money in and put their own time in

2:04:12they need to have it for longer than

2:04:13five years we want to find consistent

2:04:16people that are going to stay there uh

2:04:18so that's one uh historic preservation

2:04:21money I had that that NHC had offered to

2:04:24look into that previously for the Jettys

2:04:27uh building and I think that that is a

2:04:30resource for us uh for the town uh

2:04:35something like the Jettys that could you

2:04:38know I think that we should have a bit

2:04:40bigger vision down there. I think if

2:04:42that was if instead of like trying to

2:04:45retrofit an existing uh you know

2:04:49historic building and and and put AC in

2:04:52and put insulation and all that. I think

2:04:55the kitchen could be a mobile kitchen,

2:04:57one or two trailers, one or two mobile

2:04:58kitchens in the back so it can

2:05:00eventually be moved if it has to be. If

2:05:02the weather is bad in the winter, it can

2:05:04be driven off to high ground. Uh

2:05:07renovate the interiors to be wood still.

2:05:10bring the bring the utilities from

2:05:12above. Uh so it is it is able to handle

2:05:16weather going in and out uh because

2:05:19they're only opened in the summer and

2:05:21there you have there are different

2:05:22building rules if you're not opened uh

2:05:25year round. So I think that we can we

2:05:28can renovate these and make them more

2:05:30efficient. Uh, and what I, you know,

2:05:33would I I I sent this like five or six

2:05:35years ago and I've spoke to the, uh,

2:05:37guys that are down at the jetties now.

2:05:40If that could be opened up so the front

2:05:42of it was uh, for concession and for

2:05:46beachgoers and sort of the left side of

2:05:48it could have uh, a patio and covered

2:05:53and make it look like the existing and

2:05:55that could be where sort of the alcohol

2:05:58and the partying and the sitdown was.

2:06:00You could make that a unbelievable

2:06:03venue. It already is kind of now it

2:06:06could be uh you know if it's doing two

2:06:09and a half now it could do four million

2:06:11a year. It could do it could do

2:06:13unbelievable. And so I think a little

2:06:15bit more money with a little different

2:06:17view I think could make that and and

2:06:20it's got alcohol. I would rather not see

2:06:23it but it's there now. Let's take

2:06:24advantage of it. But I think there's a

2:06:26way to do that and make it more a little

2:06:29more resilient, make it uh a lot more

2:06:32desirable and profitable. And if we want

2:06:35these guys, you know, the existing or a

2:06:38new tenant to do it, maybe find a way to

2:06:40lengthen it, you know, and then so I I

2:06:42just think that there's things that we

2:06:44could be doing there that could improve

2:06:46it from a business standpoint, from a

2:06:48customer standpoint, from a neighborhood

2:06:50standpoint. uh and we should be look,

2:06:53you know, sort of looking a little

2:06:55deeper on it. Thank you.

2:07:02Okay, so uh the tennis thing is a

2:07:05no-brainer. Put the bathrooms in, the

2:07:07money's there. Try I love what Brooke

2:07:09said about trying to lump it in with the

2:07:11other bathrooms so we don't have to go

2:07:12through another whole procurement

2:07:13process if that's possible. Um,

2:07:18Jetty's Beach is more con convoluted. I

2:07:22love what Matt just said about the

2:07:23portable kitchens. You know, the fact

2:07:25that you get a hurricane, you can unplug

2:07:27them and take them away. Um, and I

2:07:30wonder how much when you start they are

2:07:33historic buildings and when you start

2:07:35trying to raise them eight feet, do they

2:07:37still maintain their historic character?

2:07:40So, that's a big question. I think

2:07:43Surfside is a little different because

2:07:46it can be a destination for lunch.

2:07:49People will drive out there and park and

2:07:51have lunch and then go back to work.

2:07:53Guys that are working on that end of the

2:07:55island. So to me, that is a that's

2:07:59what's going on there now is is really

2:08:01what should probably be done. some type

2:08:03of hybrid where they use the kitchen and

2:08:06the building for storage, but they also

2:08:09have a food truck there all the time

2:08:10because I think that's the only way it

2:08:13works.

2:08:15Children's Beach is completely

2:08:16different.

2:08:18And and I I love your passion as to what

2:08:20you said there, but we're this isn't a

2:08:24scholarship program. Children's Beach

2:08:27really only is operates for two months.

2:08:29It's July and August. Nobody goes there

2:08:31for lunch because there's no parking.

2:08:33And if you walk there, you walk by the

2:08:35strip and there's seven stores on the

2:08:37strip. So, no one's going to go down to

2:08:40Children's just to have lunch. So, it's

2:08:42really for the people that go to the

2:08:44beach there.

2:08:46Again, it's another historic building,

2:08:47but that building would make perfect

2:08:48storage if you took the kitchen out of

2:08:50it and you just used it for

2:08:51refrigeration and dry storage and you

2:08:53put a food truck there and you tied the

2:08:56two together that said the truck had to

2:08:57be there all the time, it could still be

2:09:00a viable business for someone. Um,

2:09:04that's my thought. I I I also think, you

2:09:07know, everywhere I go

2:09:09um on vacation, they have public parks

2:09:12where they have little metal charcoal

2:09:15grill stands and you can bring, you

2:09:16know, you can bring your own stuff to

2:09:18the to the park and you or the beach and

2:09:20you can grill at the beach. Maybe we put

2:09:22some of those down at Children's for

2:09:24people so that they can sit in that park

2:09:27and grill. But to put $3 million into

2:09:30that building, it just doesn't make

2:09:33sense. It's it's never it's never really

2:09:35worked at anything because of the

2:09:38location. You just you drive down there

2:09:40and you drive down there and you drive

2:09:41around, you're never going to find

2:09:42parking. So, the only people are going

2:09:44to go that to the lunch there are the

2:09:46people that are at that beach. And it's

2:09:47such a small beach that it just it just

2:09:50doesn't work. So,

2:09:55>> I I guess my only question for you about

2:09:56the food trucks down there is it going

2:09:58to take away parking?

2:09:59>> No, because you could put it up onto the

2:10:03You drive it up on there next to the

2:10:04building.

2:10:05>> It wouldn't be down the street.

2:10:07>> So, you're just going to put it there so

2:10:08it's not going to move.

2:10:10>> Well, I guess they could take it away if

2:10:12they wanted to, but it would it would be

2:10:14there for most of the time. But again,

2:10:17it's just like the public ba the

2:10:19bathrooms. I mean, all this is based on

2:10:21the culture resiliency study, but and I

2:10:25got it today and I started to try to

2:10:27read it. It's 113 pages. I haven't had

2:10:29time to go through it, but I mean I the

2:10:32minute you start doing the work on the

2:10:33building and triggers everything having

2:10:35to be raised and then we got all kinds

2:10:36of issues with the historicness of the

2:10:39building. I I mean I think you just redo

2:10:42the outside of the building and

2:10:43restructure the inside for storage and

2:10:45keep it the way it looks. You can maybe

2:10:47sell ice cream out of it or something

2:10:49like that. That's just my thought.

2:10:52>> Holly,

2:10:52>> thank you, Madam Chair. Just to clarify,

2:10:55historic resources can be exempt under

2:10:57the substantial compliance section of

2:10:59the building code. That's um so our

2:11:02design guidelines that we created,

2:11:03resilient Nucket, which were created by

2:11:07um uh the National Park Service and FEMA

2:11:11together for guidance for historic

2:11:13districts. And then we created the our

2:11:15guidelines out of an MVP action grant

2:11:18project. And the HDC has been using

2:11:20those guidelines since 2021.

2:11:23um all contributing structures do not

2:11:26have to meet the full FMEA height. So I

2:11:28believe Jetty's beach is area is in the

2:11:30AE8

2:11:32um or AE9 all of Brandt Point is and

2:11:36contributing structures don't have to be

2:11:37the full FEMA height. They can be say 4

2:11:40feet with the proper flood proof

2:11:42mechanism underneath to allow the water

2:11:44to go under. And so that was kind of

2:11:46where the exercise that Weston Samson

2:11:49did to show the different options of how

2:11:51do we kind of elevate it just a little

2:11:53bit. How do we do all these other there

2:11:55the fact that the the restrooms are in a

2:11:57not even in the building itself. There's

2:11:59that component. Um but historic

2:12:02resources and this believe it or not is

2:12:04a historic resource um can be exempt at

2:12:07a certain compliance section of the

2:12:09building code that um so it can be done.

2:12:12it can be um brought up to compliance

2:12:16but not the full gamut and that even

2:12:18includes the stretch energy code which I

2:12:20know a lot of people have talked about.

2:12:21We have a historic determination process

2:12:23through the HDC um provided we have all

2:12:26the historic information both these

2:12:28structures we have the historic

2:12:29information now that we have surveys

2:12:31that were just um done and funded by the

2:12:33wind farm fund um for town historic

2:12:36resources. So the historic termination,

2:12:38the HDC approves it. I write the letter

2:12:40to the building commissioner allows them

2:12:42that particular structure to be exempt

2:12:44under the substantial compliance section

2:12:45of the building code. Obviously anything

2:12:48but life safety. So hopefully that

2:12:50helps.

2:12:50>> Ollie, can I ask a question?

2:12:52>> Yeah.

2:12:53>> So that sounds great. So that means we

2:12:56wouldn't have to raise the building, but

2:12:58could we add to the footprint of that

2:13:00building without change would that

2:13:02change the historic aspect of that

2:13:04building? because everyone complains

2:13:05that the Children's Beach building is

2:13:06too small. It doesn't have enough

2:13:08storage. It doesn't have enough of what

2:13:10they need to make it work.

2:13:12>> So, the Secretary of Interior standards

2:13:14for rehabilitating structures allows you

2:13:16to rehabilitate it and do some additions

2:13:19onto it to bring things up to compliance

2:13:22provided you're retaining all the

2:13:24character defining features of the

2:13:25historic resource. So, of course, you

2:13:27don't want to exasperate the size of the

2:13:30structure. You want to do a a modest

2:13:32addition. Again, that's where the HTC

2:13:34would be reviewing that for its

2:13:35appropriateness. So, there's a fine line

2:13:38um between um bringing something up to

2:13:41today's standard, so to speak, but also

2:13:43retaining it its its actual character

2:13:45defining features and its historicness.

2:13:49>> Just to follow up on that aspect, is it

2:13:51Bob, if you how I think about it, we've

2:13:54take by allowing some of the awnings and

2:13:57things that are on there, we've taken

2:13:58away from the historic building itself.

2:14:01if some of those were going away and

2:14:03that was going to be another section

2:14:05that was uh covered was a you know a

2:14:08porch that was covered that looked like

2:14:10the historic bath houses that were there

2:14:12where the coahons used to have their

2:14:14camps. If we had that to the left it

2:14:17would completely be fine. It would be

2:14:19you know

2:14:20>> we're talking about jetties.

2:14:21>> Yeah, jetties over the jetties. If you

2:14:22did something like that down there it

2:14:24would completely be fine. It would

2:14:25improve the building. And that's what

2:14:28Holly was talking about earlier is you

2:14:30know there's room improvement. It could

2:14:32bring we'd be bringing it back in some

2:14:34ways.

2:14:35>> So, yeah. I Sorry.

2:14:37>> Go ahead.

2:14:37>> Uh the jetties I I'm not it's it's I

2:14:42don't have any problem with the jetties.

2:14:43It's it's children's beach. That's the

2:14:46one that you know really it just it just

2:14:50I mean I think the only solution there

2:14:52is a combination of the building and the

2:14:54food truck and using the building for

2:14:57storage and the food truck for prep and

2:15:00And yeah.

2:15:04>> Okay. Um, Brooke, you had had your hand

2:15:06up. Did you still want to say something?

2:15:09>> I I was gonna say something that may

2:15:11sound really stupid, but um I was

2:15:13listening to Amy's um Amy Eldridge's

2:15:16point about lack of commercial kitchen

2:15:18space. And I don't know whether there's

2:15:20some when I think about what's happening

2:15:22at Surfside, the combination of the food

2:15:24truck and the kitchen inside and and is

2:15:27there a way to marry the food truck with

2:15:32um prep area in the building that would

2:15:36qualify a as a food truck home base. Um

2:15:42because that's the problem, right? A

2:15:44food truck has to have a commercial

2:15:45kitchen home base to operate out of for

2:15:48prep. And so could we structure this

2:15:52these changes in a way that would

2:15:55provide that for that some combination

2:15:58whether it's the external kitchen Matt

2:16:00was talking about at Jett's or like what

2:16:02is the way to to to work with the health

2:16:06code in a way that that provides the

2:16:09resources that someone needs to

2:16:11successfully operate a of a a food

2:16:14business at these locations. Um,

2:16:17>> yeah. No, that makes sense.

2:16:18>> The answer to that is the answer to that

2:16:20is yes that you you could that you're

2:16:22talking three basinks and the proper

2:16:24refrigeration, the proper flooring, you

2:16:26know. But the answer is yeah, you could

2:16:28do it.

2:16:29>> Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Make

2:16:30it make it the home base for the food

2:16:32truck and that way it would open it up

2:16:34to other potential vendors other than

2:16:38those that already that that we know of

2:16:40that already are in the food truck

2:16:42business because they they're also a

2:16:43restaurant. Um, so it wouldn't preclude

2:16:46other biders. I I would be curious to do

2:16:49sort of an RFI in a way uh just inquire

2:16:54from people who how they could put it

2:16:57together in that location and what would

2:16:59they would need to put it together from

2:17:01a resource point of view. Um, and see

2:17:04whether there's any, you know, ideas

2:17:06that we haven't come we haven't thought

2:17:07of because

2:17:12>> Yeah. Okay. Um,

2:17:16Mary Longacre.

2:17:21>> Thank you, Don. Um, I'm wondering, you

2:17:24know, listening to the the trend of the

2:17:25conversation, if it wouldn't be better

2:17:27value for money spent to put a new

2:17:31building at Surfside, put a new building

2:17:33at Children's Beach, make them, you

2:17:36know, modern standard for the uh food

2:17:40prep and for serving the public.

2:17:42repurpose the existing buildings. You

2:17:45know, expand the bathrooms has been

2:17:46mentioned at Surfside and storage for or

2:17:50cover for the pump system has been

2:17:52mentioned at Children's. But just build

2:17:54new for, you know, for purpose and for

2:17:58modern standards and leave the existing

2:18:00buildings, you know, in a much simpler

2:18:03configuration without pouring all this

2:18:05money into them.

2:18:06>> Oh, you mean build new and keep the

2:18:08existing building?

2:18:09>> Yes.

2:18:10I don't think we're going to well

2:18:12besides the finances I don't think we're

2:18:14going to get a com concom permit to

2:18:17build an structure next to the existing

2:18:21structures.

2:18:24>> Yeah, Vince,

2:18:28>> thank you. Just Vince Murphy financial

2:18:30resources department just to talk about

2:18:32the jetties one in particular in terms

2:18:34of um I do like the idea of build new in

2:18:37some ways. However, the existing

2:18:39building is within the dune. It's in a

2:18:41resource area. In order to do anything

2:18:43on that site, you have to more or less

2:18:45stay within the remaining footprint. I

2:18:47don't think we could even pick it up and

2:18:48turn it much. Um, it's either pick it up

2:18:50and elevate on site or retreat it. Um,

2:18:54in terms of resilience options, we uh

2:18:57looked at both. I think we ended up

2:18:59retaining it on its existing footprint

2:19:01um for historic character and also um

2:19:05for cost savings.

2:19:08Charlie Palaki.

2:19:13>> Yeah, I just wanted to touch on the the

2:19:15food truck model. Our original thought

2:19:17was that, you know, we would offer it

2:19:19out as, you know, as

2:19:23to existing food truck, you know,

2:19:24vendors, people who have an existing

2:19:26kitchen to go back to, or there's also

2:19:28the option for some people, the Hive

2:19:29exists as a commercial kitchen that food

2:19:30trucks can operate out of. Um, so those

2:19:33are just some op options that are there

2:19:34as far as bringing in food trucks. We

2:19:37had some internal conversation about how

2:19:39we would structure that where whether it

2:19:41would be one, you know, restaurant or

2:19:44business there all season or do some

2:19:46sort of a rotation with existing food

2:19:48trucks so nobody was stuck there for,

2:19:50you know, a bad a bad day. There's just

2:19:53many different options that we could

2:19:54explore as far as the food truck avenue.

2:20:00Okay.

2:20:02Where do we how do we want to end this

2:20:06conversation for this evening?

2:20:10>> Um, well, I think we wanted some

2:20:13direction on children's in particular

2:20:15because Charlie, is that leased up at

2:20:17the end of this year?

2:20:20>> It is. I mean, ultimately what our

2:20:22recommendation is in there, we kind of

2:20:24thought was to do a three-year lease,

2:20:25which is two years shorter than our

2:20:28normal lease. would align it with the

2:20:30existing lease and existing concession's

2:20:32current lease at Surfside. It would kind

2:20:35of give us three years to to sort out

2:20:37what we want to do down there.

2:20:38Similarly, you know, with jetties, we'd

2:20:40like to have something in place at the

2:20:41end of their next 5-year lease term at

2:20:44least with a plan going forward just so

2:20:46we can also notify both, you know, any

2:20:47and all of the concessionires about what

2:20:50construction may or may not be happening

2:20:52at each site.

2:20:54>> Yeah. Part of the problem is once we

2:20:57start if we start doing a renovation at

2:21:00any of these sites, they're probably

2:21:02going to miss two seasons

2:21:06at least one, but I would but likely

2:21:09two.

2:21:10>> We have we're doing a major runout

2:21:12>> for any of that anyway.

2:21:13>> We have no funding for any of that

2:21:15anyway.

2:21:16>> So the back to the parking lot

2:21:21>> question, Madam Chair.

2:21:23>> Yes. Sorry. The leasey at Surfside is

2:21:25also the leasey at Children's. Is that

2:21:27what I'm understanding? And their lease

2:21:29at Surfside has three years left in it.

2:21:31>> Is that right, Charlie?

2:21:33>> Correct.

2:21:34>> So, you need a if you I would make a

2:21:38motion then to extend the lease at

2:21:40Children's for three more years. So,

2:21:42hopefully I mean that does this go out

2:21:44to an does they automatically get a

2:21:46renewal or does it have to go out to an

2:21:48RFP?

2:21:48>> It's going to have to go out to the

2:21:50>> request

2:21:50>> I believe. So we can check with finance,

2:21:52but I believe it has to go out.

2:21:54>> Yeah,

2:21:55>> I'm I'd make that motion.

2:21:57>> Okay,

2:21:57>> if that helps.

2:21:58>> Is there a second?

2:22:00>> Second.

2:22:01>> Okay. All those in favor? U Matt?

2:22:03>> Hi.

2:22:04>> Bobby,

2:22:04>> I.

2:22:05>> Jill,

2:22:05>> I.

2:22:06>> Brooke,

2:22:07>> I.

2:22:08>> Don I. That carries unanimous.

2:22:10>> Do we need to a vote for the Jettys

2:22:13Beach for the tennis court, Charlie,

2:22:17>> or can you just go forward with that?

2:22:20uh we can go forward. We uh I don't

2:22:21believe we'll be able to get it into

2:22:22this current round of bathrooms. We

2:22:24don't have we have to do the design for

2:22:26it. Uh we don't have that yet because we

2:22:28need didn't have the funds appropriated,

2:22:29but we can work with finance to figure

2:22:31out the allocation or what we need to

2:22:33exactly do there and then we can get

2:22:35working with SMRT on some design plans

2:22:37and to put that in. So maybe into phase

2:22:39two or uh it could maybe if they can do

2:22:42it quickly because it's fairly simple uh

2:22:45later this year.

2:22:47>> Jill has a question.

2:22:47>> Go ahead. Yeah, Charlie, you said you're

2:22:50going to do that this year.

2:22:52>> So, was that Jill? Sorry.

2:22:54>> You You said you're going to add the

2:22:56bathroom to the tennis courts this year.

2:22:59We need to do

2:23:00>> Well, we need to get the funding

2:23:00appropriated and do design.

2:23:04>> So, it's probably for not this coming

2:23:07summer, the following summer.

2:23:08>> We'd have we'd have to talk to finance

2:23:10to see if if we can use the existing

2:23:12allocation or if it would have to go to

2:23:14town meeting for reappropriation.

2:23:17Uh if we can use some of it, we could

2:23:18start immediately on some design work

2:23:20and we could report back when we have a

2:23:22better idea of a timeline.

2:23:25>> Well done getting those courts well

2:23:27under budget and having so much left

2:23:29over. I've never seen that. It was

2:23:31amazing.

2:23:33>> So

2:23:34>> does it make sense to make a motion to

2:23:36authorize Charlie to move forward with

2:23:39um

2:23:41the bathroom project at Jetties or is is

2:23:44a consensus enough?

2:23:46It seems like the consensus was enough

2:23:49on this one because they still have a

2:23:51lot of steps to go through.

2:23:53>> Okay.

2:23:56>> Okay. Anything else on this for now?

2:23:59>> Okay. Um, we will move on to an acquest

2:24:03for additional compensation to residents

2:24:05of Sherburn Commons for an increase in

2:24:08the use of the leased property for our

2:24:10island home.

2:24:13Um, there's been

2:24:17an an issue that's arisen where um the

2:24:21definition of the takeback area

2:24:25um is a little bit greater than um than

2:24:29what was originally

2:24:32identified. We paid them Do you want to

2:24:35put up the slide, Erica? Um, we I mean

2:24:38we

2:24:41over the 55,000 square feet that was in

2:24:43the original lease when we factored in

2:24:47the actual size of the building and the

2:24:50landscaped areas and the parking um we

2:24:53ended up negotiating a deal with

2:24:55Sherburn Commons for an additional

2:24:5740,000 square ft and it's gone slightly

2:25:01over. So they initially came back to us

2:25:03about a month ago and asked for 59,000

2:25:07for,00 square feet. Um which we agreed

2:25:11to it fell under the $100,000 threshold.

2:25:15Um but then this past week they came

2:25:20back um with some concerns about some

2:25:23additional like paved areas where the

2:25:26driveway aprons and so forth for worth

2:25:28um were being placed and asked us

2:25:33actually for more than 141,000 initially

2:25:36but this is where we have currently

2:25:39landed and and if we do not agree to

2:25:43fund this additional $141,000.

2:25:47They're basically not going to sign the

2:25:51revised

2:25:53to so that we can move forward with the

2:25:55construction.

2:25:56>> Okay.

2:25:58>> Sausage.

2:25:59>> Yeah, sounds like it. Can I ask a

2:26:02question? So, is 59 and the 141?

2:26:05>> 59

2:26:06we agreed to already.

2:26:08>> You did it, but you did it later. I

2:26:10mean, that was still recent.

2:26:11>> Yes. So, they're basically their

2:26:13settlement is is $200,000

2:26:18>> is what they're asking for. They

2:26:19actually did ask for about

2:26:22>> closer to $600,000,

2:26:24but um this is where we've gotten to um

2:26:29>> to buy our own.

2:26:32>> Yes,

2:26:34that is correct.

2:26:35>> Where's the money come from?

2:26:37>> Contingency,

2:26:40Brooke.

2:26:43Um,

2:26:45while I'm hugely disappointed that this

2:26:47is where we're at,

2:26:50um,

2:26:52I think

2:26:54the cost of delay of construction could

2:26:57exceed this number. Um, they're poised

2:27:00and ready to go. Um, but I would make

2:27:04the approval of this. So, I'm I'm I'm

2:27:06I'm going to support the approval of

2:27:08this um additional extraction of money.

2:27:12Um but I am going to make a contingent

2:27:14on the execution of the documents by a

2:27:16week from Friday because um I don't want

2:27:21there to be further threats to delay the

2:27:24project. Um and I'd like, you know, to

2:27:28say we

2:27:31we have made this concession.

2:27:34>> Can I just suggest Uh what we are trying

2:27:36to get signed in regard to theou is a

2:27:39license agreement and I would prefer to

2:27:42be even sooner than a week from Friday

2:27:44to get the license agreement in place.

2:27:47>> Okay. So the the license agreement by

2:27:49this Friday and theou by the following

2:27:52Friday. Vicki does that make sense so we

2:27:56can proceed?

2:27:56>> Um

2:27:58>> yes um madam chair uh to Brooke. Um yes,

2:28:02because the license is the document

2:28:05that's actually authorizing us to be

2:28:07able to enter the property and start the

2:28:09construction work. Um and so um

2:28:12currently as drafted the amendedou

2:28:15um if that isn't signed um they're not

2:28:18going to sign um they're not going to

2:28:20allow us to continue the work. So, I

2:28:22think it's really important that we get

2:28:24to um get on the site, be able to start

2:28:27the construction, and then in the

2:28:29meantime um finish the negotiation on

2:28:32the amendedou so that we have that

2:28:35signed by the following Friday at the

2:28:37latest.

2:28:40>> Thank you, Vicki. Uh yes.

2:28:44Okay. Yes. Go ahead.

2:28:46>> Can you just give us a little bit more

2:28:47explanation about what happened?

2:28:50like why why they're asking for more

2:28:52money and when and like

2:28:54>> because when they had to go revise their

2:28:58agreement with their lender I believe

2:29:00they had to finalize a definition of the

2:29:04takeback area and

2:29:10you know we can agree or disagree with

2:29:12their methodology but they came up with

2:29:16an additional takeback area. Um, we

2:29:19initially said 59,000 will be okay for

2:29:23because that was

2:29:25within the building envelope of where

2:29:27the building was going. There was an

2:29:29additional,00 ft². We didn't love it,

2:29:31but we said, "Okay." Then they came back

2:29:35more recently defining all of these

2:29:38little areas of sidewalk areas and

2:29:42driveway aprons in terms of getting off

2:29:44Sherburn Commons Lane, the the driveway

2:29:47to the main development into

2:29:50this was when we really started to have

2:29:54concerns. Um but at the same time

2:29:59we went back and forth with them and we

2:30:02came to the 200,000 and we do need to

2:30:04start this project because time is

2:30:06money. Um so it's not ideal. We also we

2:30:09did act request or invite we invited

2:30:14them to be here tonight to go over their

2:30:17reasoning and they declined.

2:30:20Um,

2:30:23so yeah, I mean, Bobby, I would have

2:30:26used a diff a different word, but yeah,

2:30:28they are holding holding us hostage a

2:30:31little bit on this, and I don't think

2:30:32that it's a very

2:30:35that it's in terribly good faith, but I

2:30:38think that we don't have a choice.

2:30:42>> Amy Amy Eldridge. Um, who is the pro who

2:30:46owns the land that Sherburn Common sits

2:30:48on? And what is their

2:30:52rent if it's us, the town?

2:30:57>> We No, we we are not paying them rent.

2:30:59We're paying them a lump sum.

2:31:00>> No, I mean, we own the land.

2:31:03>> We own the land. We lease it to them for

2:31:05what? A dollar a year for 99 years.

2:31:08We had a percentage that's actually if

2:31:11you look at the we are we have in this

2:31:14agreement waved the rest of their

2:31:16payments.

2:31:18I find that really interesting. I I

2:31:20agree with Brooke and you. I'm not I I

2:31:24think delaying this is just going to

2:31:26cost us way more money, but I feel like

2:31:28we're being held hostage for stuff that

2:31:30we we already own. We've made

2:31:32concessions on whatever their lease

2:31:36agreement is with us for a 100red years.

2:31:38>> The the waiver of the annual lease

2:31:40payments, the estimate on here is 2.870

2:31:43million, but it would probably with

2:31:45inflation be more than that over time,

2:31:48>> right? I mean, I just feel like they're

2:31:49just

2:31:51>> Why couldn't they do it through that

2:31:52then? What I mean,

2:31:57why do we have to

2:31:58>> They're already getting that.

2:31:59>> Yeah, but why do we have to pay them? I

2:32:01mean, that's

2:32:02>> Yeah, that's what I don't understand why

2:32:03we why we have to pay them when they're

2:32:06already getting kind of like a really

2:32:09sweet deal. Thanks.

2:32:11>> Thank you.

2:32:14>> And I hear you on the pressure about

2:32:16having to do it and I I understand that

2:32:19except you've all assured me that it's a

2:32:21maximum price bid so it can't go over.

2:32:24It is a me it's complet it's a

2:32:27completely separate issue and yes I did

2:32:30argue that we already went to town

2:32:33meeting for the money why is this coming

2:32:35up now and but

2:32:39this is where we are

2:32:40>> hi Raymond Dassa I'm speaking as private

2:32:43citizen what happened there you have

2:32:4655,000 square feet that you purchased

2:32:48back from Sherburn Commons and you

2:32:50needed an extra 1,100 and they charged

2:32:53you 59,000 Is that where we're at? And

2:32:55then after you paid him 59,000, they

2:32:58said, "Oh, we're going to need another

2:33:00141 for frontage." Is that That's

2:33:03basically

2:33:05Did I follow it? It

2:33:06>> I sort of

2:33:09>> Okay,

2:33:11>> you've got the gist of it, but your

2:33:13facts are a little bit off, but

2:33:15>> Okay,

2:33:15>> you've got the gist of what's happening.

2:33:17>> So, I have a couple questions then. How

2:33:20much is left in the contingency fund?

2:33:22because I know it's

2:33:24certainly now.

2:33:25>> I'm going to invite John Lemieux up from

2:33:27Vertex.

2:33:31>> Unreal.

2:33:34>> Hi, John Lemu. Vert.Ex. Um, the

2:33:37contingency fund is 6 million. We

2:33:39haven't touched it yet. The project is

2:33:41just starting. Um, and just to one

2:33:43thing, Jill, what you said, a guaranteed

2:33:45maximum price is great for things that

2:33:47are in their control. if this issue

2:33:50blows it up, that's not in their control

2:33:52and they have contractual rights to come

2:33:54back at us for costs. We don't get the

2:33:56building, but it lists out what they can

2:33:58and can't do because it's this issue

2:34:00with Sherman Commons has nothing to do

2:34:01with them just like um if the tariffs if

2:34:04suddenly there's a 10,000% tariff. They

2:34:07didn't cover that in their bid either

2:34:08and we would have to work something out

2:34:10with them with that. But for right now,

2:34:12they have made no issues with this. It's

2:34:15only been a week. there. You know, I

2:34:18don't anticipate there being any issues.

2:34:20So, right now, the contractor isn't

2:34:22saying anything about this about the

2:34:24time that it's taken to um get this

2:34:28squared away because we're still dealing

2:34:30with a bit of a a bat concern um up in

2:34:33the trees and we're, you know, so we're

2:34:35hoping that both these things grow

2:34:37themselves out for the next couple of

2:34:38weeks.

2:34:40>> Okay. So, six million. Thank you. So

2:34:44200,000 is that coming out of the six

2:34:46million?

2:34:47>> Yes.

2:34:48>> Yes.

2:34:48>> Yes. Okay. So when you I have a couple

2:34:51other questions then when you reach over

2:34:546 million just let's say we do

2:34:56hypothetically what happens?

2:34:58>> Uh the plan is to not reach over six

2:35:00million because that

2:35:01>> let's say it does let's say it does what

2:35:03happens is the project then just latered

2:35:05or what happens?

2:35:07>> No it's it's a good question. So, a

2:35:09couple of things. The contingent

2:35:12contingency that's being talked about

2:35:13right now is above and beyond the

2:35:15guaranteed maximum price you've heard

2:35:17referenced from the builder. The builder

2:35:19themsself has some contingency within

2:35:22their number. And to date, we've been

2:35:24very successful with the buyout. So

2:35:26right now in contingency funds between

2:35:28the six million, the two plus million

2:35:31they have within their bid and then the

2:35:33buyout, we're well over 10 million right

2:35:36now of let's call it one big bucket of

2:35:38contingency. So we're in a really good

2:35:40place. But again, we haven't put a

2:35:41shovel in the ground yet either.

2:35:43>> So I feel really good because of the

2:35:45results of the buyout. We're in a better

2:35:47position than we could have hoped to

2:35:49have been at town meeting, which is

2:35:51great. Now again, tariffs and those kind

2:35:54of crazy things, something new, you

2:35:56know, whatever comes up in the news over

2:35:58the next few weeks, those things, they

2:36:00snapped the line when they were at bid

2:36:02day. Anything new with Canada, any of

2:36:04those kind of things,

2:36:06>> we haven't seen any impacts yet, but

2:36:08that's what we would cover with that

2:36:10that those buyout savings if if in fact

2:36:12they end up happening.

2:36:14>> Okay. So, here's what I would say. My

2:36:16biggest concern is that this project is

2:36:17going to exceed these numbers. I say I

2:36:19understand where you say that you're in

2:36:21a good place right now, but like you

2:36:23just said, you haven't put a shovel in

2:36:24the ground. If we blow these numbers on

2:36:27this project and we don't get this right

2:36:29and we turn it into a project like um

2:36:33the housing development over here that

2:36:34went 14 million or whatever that was, if

2:36:36we do this, we will not clear an

2:36:38override ever again at town meeting. You

2:36:41can forget the school for my future

2:36:43kids. You can forget any other projects.

2:36:45The the town is already looking at the

2:36:49massive amount we spent this last year

2:36:52and no one I know is really thrilled for

2:36:55an override to come forward.

2:36:57If we if we blow this and we go over

2:37:00these numbers, I just I don't know where

2:37:02we would go from there. And I also would

2:37:04love just I don't have anything else but

2:37:08who drew up the 55,000 square feet and

2:37:11how did they miss the 1100 and the

2:37:14frontage and if it was because Sherburn

2:37:17Commons waited for theirou

2:37:21like who who is this on

2:37:24I don't understand how we could go to

2:37:26town meeting and ask for this insanely

2:37:29big number which I agree we need a place

2:37:32for, you know, the older folks of this

2:37:34town. But how do you go through all that

2:37:38process, have us vote, have us vote on

2:37:40the ballot, and then before we even

2:37:42stick a shovel in the ground and move a

2:37:45grain of sand, we got $200,000 of, you

2:37:49know, a hostage ransom from Shering H.

2:37:52Thank you.

2:37:56>> We we might want to clarify a little bit

2:37:58of that. Um the 55,000 was in a ground

2:38:01lease from many years ago. It there was

2:38:04a lease provision that allowed for when

2:38:08the town entered into a long-term ground

2:38:10lease with Sherburn. Um that 55,000

2:38:15would be allowed for a new our island

2:38:17home facility. This is years ago

2:38:20[clears throat] when we brought the

2:38:24project forward to the most recent town

2:38:25meeting because remember we brought a

2:38:28different project forward to the 2027

2:38:312017 town meeting which did not pass.

2:38:34the design had um increased in square

2:38:39footage because of building codes and

2:38:43nursing home requirements and things

2:38:45like that to an additional at least what

2:38:47was determined at most recently to be

2:38:5140,000 square feet. So that takeback

2:38:55number of 40 was more or less agreed on

2:38:59until the design began to get much more

2:39:03refined and this 1100 square ft issue

2:39:07came up and that's where the 59,000 came

2:39:11in. And then much more recently

2:39:15the larger number came up with

2:39:17additional things like driveway aprons

2:39:20and sidewalks. And um that's where we

2:39:24had to have some discussion with

2:39:26Sherburn about

2:39:28the reality of what is being taken back

2:39:32truly.

2:39:40>> Yeah. Go. Go ahead. Right.

2:39:43>> So, who drew the plans? Like if if you

2:39:47had an essential thing in 2017 and then

2:39:51the codes changed and we had to make it

2:39:52bigger, why couldn't we have cut the

2:39:54number of beds to stay on that site? Who

2:39:56drew these plans?

2:39:57>> The 55,000 square feet was in the

2:40:00original lease. We reserved that. I

2:40:03mean, that was before I think all of our

2:40:05time when this lease was entered into.

2:40:08Maybe not all of us, but um but

2:40:10regardless um

2:40:14right at the beginning of this, I will

2:40:16say there was an argument back and forth

2:40:19about what 55,000 square feet meant

2:40:22because to me it would mean the

2:40:24structure, not the parking, not the

2:40:26ancillary stuff around it. But then we

2:40:29made a settlement with Sherburn Common

2:40:30so that we could move forward with

2:40:32building on this site. Um and that's

2:40:35what you see here. That was um a a 2

2:40:40million40,000

2:40:422 million40. That was what we agreed

2:40:44with them to essentially buy back

2:40:47another 40,000 square ft of land area.

2:40:51That's why it feels a little bit picky

2:40:56to come back and say even we need the

2:40:5859,000 for another 1100 square ft.

2:41:02But we said, "Okay, we need to move

2:41:04forward." Then to have it come back

2:41:07again was upsetting. I mean, I'm I'm

2:41:10going not going to lie in the public

2:41:12this is a public meeting and this is

2:41:14what happened. And we went back and

2:41:16forth,

2:41:19but essentially they have come back to

2:41:21us and said that their absolute bottom

2:41:24line final offer don't ask us to give

2:41:27another thing is you have to give us

2:41:29$200,000.

2:41:30That includes the 59. And that's why

2:41:32we're at 141.

2:41:33>> If you pay that, can they does that set

2:41:36precedent? Can they nitpick us on

2:41:37anything else down the line or is there

2:41:40is this the final nail in the coffin for

2:41:42them?

2:41:42>> There is a provision in theou that there

2:41:45is a final survey done after the project

2:41:47is built and if there is a discrepancy

2:41:50either they get paid or we get paid

2:41:52back.

2:41:54>> Okay. Thank you.

2:41:54>> Can I ask your question?

2:41:56>> Yeah. about their lease payments,

2:41:58>> their their their waiver of lease

2:42:01payments. When does that get

2:42:02renegotiated

2:42:05or is that for

2:42:07>> that's until the end of their lease and

2:42:09its extensions?

2:42:11>> Yeah.

2:42:11>> Do we know how long that is?

2:42:12>> It's

2:42:1482 years.

2:42:16>> 82 years.

2:42:19>> Amy,

2:42:20>> if I may.

2:42:22>> Yes, Vicki.

2:42:23>> John, I

2:42:25sorry. Yeah, for the board members who

2:42:27weren't here through all of this, um

2:42:30this was a very challenging negotiation

2:42:33to get um to to get us the ability to

2:42:40locate this project at this location. Um

2:42:45I I'm really hesitant to go back and

2:42:48second guessess. Um I I will ask you all

2:42:52not to go back and second guessess the

2:42:54process by which we arrived at the

2:42:56numbers other than what is before us

2:42:59tonight because

2:43:02the process of that negotiation was long

2:43:05and intense and it went on for quite

2:43:07some time and ultimately those numbers

2:43:10were included in the allocation approved

2:43:12by town meeting for the total cost of

2:43:14this project. Um,

2:43:17unfortunately I cannot think of a better

2:43:21example of being caught between a rock

2:43:23and a hard place on this additional

2:43:25request.

2:43:27Um, and I and I really don't want to

2:43:30throw a, you know, $130 million project

2:43:35in put it in jeopardy over $141,000

2:43:40no matter how much this sticks in my

2:43:42craw. So I um

2:43:46It doesn't feel right. And I and I uh

2:43:49understand the frustration of my fellow

2:43:52board members and of the members of the

2:43:54public who have spoken. Um

2:43:58and

2:43:59I don't want to throw the project at

2:44:01risk. So, I would make a motion to

2:44:02approve this further allocation of

2:44:05$141,000 from the contingency fund

2:44:09contingent on the uh authorities at

2:44:13Sherburn Commons executing the license

2:44:15for the project to access the property

2:44:17by this Friday and the completion of

2:44:21theou

2:44:23by a week from Friday. Um, so there's my

2:44:27motion.

2:44:29>> Thank you. I'll I'll second it.

2:44:31>> Thank you, Matt.

2:44:32>> And note my disappointment as well that

2:44:35we couldn't just move on

2:44:38without having to pay some more. But

2:44:40that's all right.

2:44:40>> Thank you. Um before we vote, Amy, I'll

2:44:43let you say

2:44:45>> I just want to ask so Sherburn Commons

2:44:49is basically like

2:44:52owner person used owned now, right?

2:44:54After a couple of the bankruptcies that

2:44:56they'd had. So, it's my understanding

2:45:00from some people who live there that not

2:45:02all of the people in Sherurn Commons are

2:45:04excited and jumping for joy of the

2:45:06island home going there. And so, to

2:45:09through you, Madam Chair, um to the

2:45:11previous speaker, Mr. Dosta,

2:45:14what's going to stop them from halfway

2:45:15down the road them wanting big dollars

2:45:18for noise issues and annoying me at my

2:45:21house while you guys are building this

2:45:23and then there being some other, you

2:45:25know, strong armed situation? Um, at the

2:45:29end, like you were saying, we're either

2:45:30going to get money or they're going to

2:45:31get money. And I just think that it's

2:45:34shame on Sherburn Commons for doing this

2:45:3711th hour Hail Mary kind of thing and

2:45:39and really putting this whole thing at

2:45:41risk. I mean, I didn't support it, but

2:45:43I'm behind it now because it's the will

2:45:45of the voters and it's got to get done.

2:45:47But I agree with Brooke, like we we

2:45:49can't wait, but what kind of guarantees

2:45:53do we have that they're not going to

2:45:54come back halfway down the road going,

2:45:56you know, we want uh noise, we want

2:45:58money for noise abatement because the

2:45:59construction is driving us crazy and you

2:46:02you know, that kind of thing. I mean, if

2:46:03this is what they're doing now, I can't

2:46:05imagine halfway through the project and

2:46:07then at the end what it's going to cost

2:46:09us.

2:46:10>> Well, that's why we want this agreement

2:46:11signed so that everything's in writing.

2:46:14>> Well, that's why this vote is contingent

2:46:16on that. Well, I hope the contingent is

2:46:18that they can't come back in the middle

2:46:19of the project and complain about noise

2:46:20and want $2 million for the annoyance.

2:46:22So, I just think that it's, you know, a

2:46:25lot of money and,

2:46:27you know, it's just it's just it's sad

2:46:29and and and and just shame on Chevron

2:46:31Commons for putting us in this position.

2:46:34>> Thank you, Amy. All right. Can we go to

2:46:35a vote?

2:46:36>> I look at it slightly differently. I

2:46:38think that they they're a non they're

2:46:40they're they're doing they're providing

2:46:42a service and you know fortunately we

2:46:44were able to negotiate and get that back

2:46:47cheap enough that they were able to do

2:46:48it there but they've got a fiduciary

2:46:50responsibility as well and I think you

2:46:54know so so I you know as as much as I'm

2:46:56disappointed you know I would like to

2:46:58think going forward that we will have a

2:47:00uh you know a congenial amicable working

2:47:04relationship there's some things that in

2:47:07the future

2:47:08could be combined from those two

2:47:10different operations that would be that

2:47:12would benefit both of the operations

2:47:14once they're up and running. And I think

2:47:17that that's, you know, at least I think

2:47:19the town's thinking that way. With my

2:47:21conversations with some of the board

2:47:23members there, I think they're thinking

2:47:24that way, too. So, I, you know, I I

2:47:26don't think it's all doom and gloom. I I

2:47:29think we've got to, you know, vote this

2:47:31and move on and and make it a positive

2:47:34relationship. Tracy, before we go to a

2:47:37vote. Yeah, thank you. Um, you know, I

2:47:39don't often speak as a citizen. Um, but

2:47:42it is extremely disappointing and I just

2:47:45want to say in I think that under the

2:47:49circumstances, you're making the right

2:47:50decision and that, you know, to quote

2:47:53Michelle Obama Obama, when they go low,

2:47:56we go high and and this was taken the

2:47:59high road. So um it is very very

2:48:02disappointing but I think it's what has

2:48:04to be done to move the project forward.

2:48:06Thank you.

2:48:08>> Okay. Can I go to a vote or other top?

2:48:11>> I mean the the the most frustrating

2:48:14thing in this to have to been two weeks

2:48:15ago when John was here. He stood up and

2:48:18the first thing he talked about was a

2:48:19contingency money. The second time he

2:48:21comes contingency money. And we're we're

2:48:24going through it and we haven't even put

2:48:26a shovel in the ground. I mean I just it

2:48:28makes me nervous. I'm not saying I won't

2:48:30go along with this tonight, but you can

2:48:32understand like I've never believed that

2:48:34this project's only 140 $137 million and

2:48:37it's not. It's actually more than that

2:48:38because we have to borrow the money. So,

2:48:40no one's ever really understood that it

2:48:42would cost so much more than that. And

2:48:44now, you know, I'm I'm take we're taking

2:48:48our time to nitpick like whether or not

2:48:50somebody can buy a truck in an apartment

2:48:52and then we just blow through $200,000

2:48:54tonight. Like, this is nothing. I'm

2:48:56sorry. I I I think that's a lot of money

2:48:59and so disappointing. I'm really

2:49:01disgusted with them. I will prove this

2:49:03so that you can keep going forward, but

2:49:05I do not think under any circumstances

2:49:07that this project is going to come in on

2:49:09budget. But I really hope I'm wrong.

2:49:15All right, let's go to a vote. Matt, I

2:49:18>> Bobby,

2:49:18>> no. Jill

2:49:21>> I Brooke

2:49:23>> I

2:49:25>> Okay

2:49:27chair votes I

2:49:30very reluctantly

2:49:34areas four to one.

2:49:37Okay. Do we have any committee reports

2:49:39this evening? That was pretty much my

2:49:41island home committee report.

2:49:44>> True.

2:49:44>> I have none.

2:49:46>> Okay. Can we adjourn to executive then?

2:49:50>> Some moved.

2:49:50>> Um, we're making a motion to adjourn to

2:49:53executive session, not to return to open

2:49:54session for the reasons stated in the

2:49:56agenda. And I do have to clear the room

2:49:58and shut off the recording now.

2:50:01>> So moved.

2:50:03>> Okay. All the Yeah. Um, Brook Matt made

2:50:07Brook seconded. All those in favor Matt

2:50:09Fay, Bob Dosta,

2:50:11>> Le Brook Moore.

2:50:13>> I Don Hilly. That carries unanimously.

2:50:15Five to zero. Brook, you got that link?

2:50:17>> Yeah, I'll find it. Thanks.