[Speaker 1] (0:36 - 0:45)
Good evening and welcome to the September 1st, 2021 Swampscott Select Board meeting. If you would please rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Speaker 9] (0:54 - 1:13)
In a minute we're going to have public comment, which is an opportunity for members of the public to speak about items not on our agenda.

[Speaker 1] (1:13 - 2:59)
We ask members, residents to keep their comments brief, to avoid political statements, and to the extent there's any questions or comments about town personnel, to please reach out to the town administrator or any Select Board member outside of the public meeting. There are three ways you can, I said three ways, but I think two ways you can join us on, actually three ways, here in person, if you're here, you can walk down to the microphone. If you're on Zoom, you're welcome to raise your virtual hand, and if you're neither here nor on Zoom, you're welcome to send me an email at my town email address, which is Pias and Peter, last name Speleos, at SwampscottMA.gov. Following that, we have an update from our Director of Aging Services on the Dementia-Friendly Initiatives and other Senior Center programs. We will have a discussion about the Infiltration and Inflow Proposed Regulations. We'll have a brief discussion about the town, about the upcoming town meeting, and then the, most of our meeting will be a discussion on Board and Committee Appointments for Fiscal Year 22. With that, public comment.

All right, seeing no one here and seeing no hands raised, we're going to move on to new and old business, and I'm pleased to welcome Heidi Weir, who is our Director of Aging Services for Swampscott, who's joining us via Zoom tonight. Hi, Heidi. You're here somewhere.

There's like a voice coming out of the ceiling. It's amazing.

[Speaker 3] (3:00 - 3:01)
Hi, everybody.

[Speaker 1] (3:02 - 3:02)
How are you doing, Heidi?

[Speaker 3] (3:03 - 3:04)
Thank you. I'm great, thanks. How are you?

[Speaker 1] (3:05 - 3:33)
Doing great. Thanks for joining us tonight, and thanks for giving us an update. I think we're all really interested to see what you've been working on since you, I don't even want to say joined, you've joined in so many ways for so many years, but officially as the Director of Aging Services, and also to hear about both the post-COVID and reentry COVID world, and kind of, you know, how you're doing with it, and what we can do to help you.

[Speaker 3] (3:34 - 4:39)
Well, thank you. Thank you for having me, and giving me a few minutes just to share with you what's going on. When Allie approached me, she did ask specifically about the Dementia Friendly Initiative, which I have a few slides that I would like to share, and what's happening over at the Senior Center.

But I think in a nutshell, things are moving fast in many ways, and slow in many ways. It's kind of like hurry up and wait. Everybody gets in there, and then we have too many people, so we have to back off a little bit, meaning like the bingo.

We've really decided that we can't fit more than 24 people in there, and it's exciting that we have 27 people that really want to be in there, but you have to really ask folks to sign up, and so that's where we're heading with some of what we're doing. But let me get to the dementia-friendly piece first. If I can share my screen.

We got one there? Do you see it?

[Speaker 13] (4:40 - 4:40)
Yep.

[Speaker 3] (4:41 - 15:20)
All right. So part of the Aging Friendly Initiative was the dementia-friendly part, and I think I was asked to talk about this specifically because there was an article in the item last week on it, and it's exciting what we're doing with dementia-friendly. As I mentioned, the group is part of the overall Aging Friendly Initiative, but this dementia-friendly group has really moved fast and furious, particularly when COVID first struck.

We got together via Zoom and decided how much these caregivers really need some support. So we've been hosting a weekly Zoom meeting for caregivers who are providing care for loved ones who are living with dementia. And you can imagine over the last year and a half how difficult it's been for some of these folks because they are caring way over and beyond what they thought they would be doing, but they're so afraid to admit someone to a nursing home because they would never see them again.

And this happened with one of our caregivers that she admitted her mother into Jasmine and never saw her again. And in the meantime, her father also has dementia, and she's caring for him at home and bringing in an awful lot of help. And the difficulty there, too, is that especially before we were all vaccinated, she had a lot of private duty caregivers and wasn't sure if they were safe or not.

So it was a really tough time for everybody, but particularly for these caregivers caring for their loved ones with dementia. And there's been a significant amount of turnover and loss of families in this group. But it runs strong, and I'm excited to say that today we finally brought in the outreach social worker full-time at the Senior Center, and she joined us on the caregiver support group today.

So it's wonderful to have a master's-level social worker in the group with us. The other thing that we started just recently is this Memory Cafe. And if you haven't heard of the Memory Cafe before, it is a time when caregivers can come with their loved ones to an activity, and maybe a morning or an afternoon.

It's usually about an hour and a half or so, and it's a time to reminisce and reflect on art or sing songs. It's always a failure-free activity, and it's a time when caregivers can share with each other their own information, but also mostly feel comfortable that they're there with other people who understand what's going on with their loved one. And so if their loved one gets up to approach someone else, there's a feeling of a sense of being in a secure place where people know that they will be accepted and won't be judged.

It's free to all. It's open. It's at the Senior Center, and we have about five families that are participating so far.

We hope that more and more will come. It's a monthly program. And right now so far, this is Siobhan McDonald, and she's out of Marblehead, and she's been leading the groups for us over the last few months.

The cool thing about it is that when you walk into the room, oftentimes you don't know who the person is who has dementia and who is the caregiver, because the activities, like I said, are failure-free, and it's a very caring environment and a nice place for a caregiver to come out and be able to be with other folks. The third little thing we're doing are these activity memory kits, and we've created seven of them, and they're really, really cool. Each one of them has a movie.

It has a CD with music on it that goes with the theme, an activity or two, a puzzle. There's always a book for the caregiver about dementia, and then there's other kind of art projects that are all in this bag, and this bag you can pick up at the Senior Center and take it home and keep it for a week. Not all activities will speak to everybody with dementia, but some of them will be more receptive, and they're based around these themes so that if someone is a gardener, you might want to pick up the gardening one because it has some really cool activities and a puzzle on gardening, as opposed to transportation that someone else might be excited about, and it might speak to them and who that person was when they were younger. So those are going really well, and people are coming and taking those home, and we're excited to be able to offer that to anybody in the community. We are looking forward to venturing into this training.

Part of the plan that the Select Board signed last year was to try and make all of our employees dementia-aware, so dementia-friendly training will be provided to all SwampScape employees over the next month or two. It's an hour-long training. It can be done via Zoom, and we are hoping to offer it a number of times, at different times during the day, so people can just jump on and learn a little bit more about what dementia is and how to communicate most effectively with folks who do feel it.

We're also doing some work doing information tables at the farmers' market, and we're doing some more work at the Shkora Festival in October, preparing to do some work on dementia. And the final piece that this dementia-friendly action team is working on is, for next year, we're looking to do some kind of a certification for local businesses, and the design there is to help businesses become more aware of what dementia is and to become more understanding and empathetic to folks by training their employees, and also the team would go through and take a look at a bunch of different things in the business, such as lighting and signage and the acoustics in the building and maybe where the placement of the signs are and how accessible the bathrooms are, and then they would be granted a dementia-friendly certificate, which means that if you are wanting to go to a restaurant and you want to bring your loved one with dementia, you might go to one that is certified because you would know that the staff was trained and could be able to find a seat maybe in a quieter space in the dining room, as well as maybe make sure the food is cut up before it comes to the table, those kinds of things. So that's one of the things that we're excited about looking at in the future for next year. So the Senior Center is reopening.

We are very excited. In June when I started, everything was still being done outside, and there were just a few classes, and now we're up to serving two lunches a week in the building. We are forced to, those numbers down to 20, for distancing.

But we have a gentleman who is the tax work-off program, and he comes in, and he's a chef by trade, and he cooks for us on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. People call up and sign up for lunch beforehand. That's going extremely well.

And you can see here the list of all of the classes that are now up and running, including trips to restaurants in New Hampshire and in Maine this month, as well as to Encore, which always sell out immediately because everybody is just dying to go gamble. But we're starting to use the nurse's office as a nurse's office, and we have blood pressure clinics and hearing screenings are tomorrow, and we're hoping to work with deaf on flu shots in the near future. And then we also had a wonderful cookout last week.

We served 100 people, and you can see who our famous chef was. And then we also had a band playing music, and it was an extremely successful afternoon. It was very fun for their annual cookout.

And then right now we're looking at some health education programs that we will be starting with the help of GLS. The Matter of Balance is one class. It's a tried-and-true tested program on actually really helping people balance better.

And then a chronic disease management program as well. At our last Swamps Get Through All Ages meeting, we talked about doing some kind of a new series and maybe even having it based out of the Senior Center. Friday's a month or something in the morning.

That is in the future. We haven't started that yet, but we were kind of joking around by calling it Live at the Senior Center, and we invited folks in to come talk about it. And Swamps got it.

And taping it so it's available for those people that can't get to this on the local newsstand. And then finally, we're looking at an upgrade in our kitchen. We just need a larger industrial oven and a vent for the kitchen.

And so Sean and I were talking about how we might use something like that in place in the near future so that we can cook more meals for parents from our kitchen. And there's all kinds of other really fun things in the works, but nothing solid yet. We're looking at creative transportation, trying to figure out how we can get the vans out and off and running more than they are.

I can't think of what else right now. Things are going really well. And as I mentioned, we have our new social worker who started this morning.

Her name is Sabrina Clopton, and some of you might know her. She was working with Danielle Strauss downtown, I think, last summer. And we're very excited to have her on board with us.

Any questions?

[Speaker 1] (15:22 - 15:48)
Heidi, I'm excited to hear about Sabrina joining. Good people attract good people, and Sabrina's a really great addition and a real credit to you and the Senior Center for her to join the team. And I'm excited to see her back working with the town and putting her skills to good use.

She's really talented. Questions for Heidi?

[Speaker 7] (15:49 - 16:33)
Comments? Just thanks, Heidi, for everything and for the great update. We talked about the dementia-friendly training, I think, a while back now, so I'm glad to see that that's moving and the town employees will be trained.

I think I mentioned then, I mentioned now, I did the training early on. I think it's a great, very painless and very informative and educational training, and it certainly helped me in my interactions with my mother who suffers from dementia now. So I just think it's a really useful thing for people to do.

So thank you.

[Speaker 13] (16:35 - 16:35)
Welcome.

[Speaker 2] (16:40 - 17:31)
All right, Heidi, that was great. Heidi, thank you very much. Really appreciate the energy and the enthusiasm that you bring to your position.

Every day I'm really excited to hear about your ideas and really the important work of how we address dementia in Swampskate. We have a lot of families that struggle with loved ones that have dementia, and I really want to really think about how we in Swampskate can do a little bit more, perhaps even locally and regionally, to address this evolving need. We're living longer, but we're living longer with loved ones that have critical needs, and we want to make sure that we don't isolate these members of our community.

[Speaker 3] (17:33 - 18:22)
I have to say that there's so many exciting things that we are and will be looking at in the very near future. I just, I know right now we're really focused on keeping everybody safe where they are and just kind of opening it up a little bit more slowly than we would like to, unfortunately, sometimes because of this COVID. But everybody is safe so far, and people are following along, and we're excited.

So it's all going to be good. It's just going to take a little bit longer than we'd hoped. And we're also interviewing for the other position, the full-time position.

We're a manager of volunteers and programs. And when that happens, everyone's going to really start digging into the Swampskate problem, which is very exciting. Thank you very much for letting me share.

[Speaker 1] (18:23 - 20:31)
Thanks, Heidi. We'll see you soon. All right.

We're going to move on to a discussion of proposed infiltration and inflow regulations going back several years ago. And periodically, this board has raised the prospect of Swampskate implementing an infiltration and inflow regulation, commonly known as I&I regulation, which many communities have in place and is designed to help mitigate the impacts that new hookups to our water and sewer project have on our, excuse me, new projects hookup to water and sewer infrastructure and to mitigate the impacts that those projects have on our water and sewer infrastructure.

By way of example, when the landing was constructed six or seven years ago, it brought 182-ish residential units and connected to the water and sewer infrastructure in Swampskate. And aside from some minor connection upgrades, it did nothing to support its increased burden on that infrastructure. And that goes the same for all new projects to town.

Have not historically been asked, and nor has there been a regulation in place, to require projects to help mitigate the increased burden they put upon infrastructure. As we finished last meeting, setting the fiscal year 2022 water and sewer rates, it was clear that the burden is falling on existing rate payers, and this mitigation is one way to make sure that new connections pay their fair share and incur and mitigate some of the burden associated with those hookups to our existing water and sewer infrastructure. So I think tonight Sean and Gino Cresta are here tonight to give us an update on it and to engage in a bit of conversation.

So, Gino, is it to you?

[Speaker 2] (20:32 - 23:52)
I'm going to kick it off, and then I'm going to turn it over to Gino. So if we can just step through a quick PowerPoint. You know, as Peter had mentioned, we have talked about this for a couple of years, and frankly, it's a great time to move forward with this at the culmination of really the setting of our water and sewer rates.

Just next slide, Allie. So infiltration and inflow really are the terms that they use for really the impact on our sewerage system. We've got a significant sewer system, and we have a status of good repair that is constantly being challenged.

Adding any kind of new demand is going to really stress that system. As we've talked previously, we've seen pictures of the clay pipes that were put in over 100 years ago, and these pipes have a life cycle, and we need to really think carefully about how we sustain it. So we've been in touch with town council, and town council has opinion that the select board can establish these I&I regulations as the select board does sit as the sewer board of sewer commissioners.

In order to establish the I&I fee, we have to really simply just conduct a test that ensures that what we charge for these particular services are to be for the benefit of those that will receive the services. So the test really has been established by case law and has to be specific to some of the best practices that we've seen. So next slide, Allie.

The first part of the test is really making sure that the connection is really an exchange for services. So we cannot have a fee that really wouldn't provide some direct benefit. This is established in case law, and it's generally referred to as the Emerson test.

It ensures that there's going to be enough analysis done that the benefits of the fee will ensure that the new users will receive a benefit. So next slide. The second part is the sewer connection fee is paid by choice.

It cannot be mandatory. Folks, you know, should have the option of not utilizing a governmental service and avoiding the charge. This is the second feature of the Emerson test.

Citizens of Swampskid are not compelled to pay the fee and only be necessary for new users choosing to connect to the system or existing users choosing to connect to the sewer system. The sewer connection fee needs to be considered voluntary.

[Speaker 1] (23:54 - 24:03)
So next slide. But to be clear, the voluntary is they can voluntarily choose not to connect to water and sewer. That's right.

I just want to make sure.

[Speaker 2] (24:04 - 25:57)
And the third prong to the Emerson test is the sewer connection fee is collected not to raise revenue. So this is just important that, you know, we're not going to be looking to raise revenue. We're going to be looking to really meet some of the costs associated with adding these new users to the system.

There's some case law here that we've cited. We're going to put this presentation up on our Web site. So any folks that really want to research the case law will have that.

We've looked at probably. Next slide. I'm sorry, Ali.

We've looked at probably six or seven best practice regulations that have been implemented over the last 10 years from communities across the Commonwealth. We have had town council take a look at these regulations as well. And we are in the process of drafting regulations that we will propose to the board later this month.

This is part of a standard fair of regulations. There are particulars to Swampskate and we'll have to incorporate some specific language, you know, with our existing regulations. But, you know, this is, you know, a path that many communities have gone down and really will be modeled after a best practice.

Next slide. So I'm going to turn it over to Gino at this point. He's going to talk a little bit more specifically about our sewer budget and how the model is put together and how we'll use this to form the basis of our I&I fees.

[Speaker 4] (25:59 - 26:42)
Thank you, Sean. Just so we know, many communities are already mandated by the MAS DEP to implement an I&I removal system. And that's based on them being a combined system.

We don't have a combined system where our drainage and the sewage is combined. But this is definitely a best practice that, as Peter said, probably should have been implemented several years ago to offset increases in flow into our sewer system. Requirement includes a 4 to 1 removal.

That means four gallons of I&I must be removed for every gallon of new flow that's introduced into our system. So getting on to this model here.

[Speaker 6] (26:42 - 26:43)
Hey, Gino, I'm sorry.

[Speaker 4] (26:43 - 26:43)
Sure.

[Speaker 6] (26:43 - 26:45)
I don't understand that. Yes.

[Speaker 4] (26:45 - 33:35)
I'm sorry. So for every four gallons of I&I that goes into it, I&I is either in flow or infiltration. And that's based on must be removed for.

Well, let me get a backup a second here. The requirement includes a 4 to 1 removal, that is four gallons of I&I. Yes, because we have I&I.

So for every gallon that you're going to put into our sewer system, we have to remove four gallons of that infiltration in flow. Which isn't necessarily just coming from that project, but townwide. Okay.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

So we started talking about this, I believe, Nail, myself, way back as far as March. Rita, we've been talking about this for years. But we really started getting serious back in March.

And there was a local community that worked with a consultant to develop basically three methods to implement an IIP. Two of those I thought were worth pursuing. The first one here is based on, it's called a simplified cost benefit model.

So we started with flows. And this goes back to FY20. So that's July 2019 all the way up to June of 20.

And that is monthly flows for the month of July, August, September. And when you take those numbers out and then you divide them by the 365 days in the year, we have an average daily flow, if you want to turn to the next slide, Allie, of 1.92 million gallons per day. So from there, and this goes back, this was FY20, we're talking about modeling.

These numbers are going to change with the FY22 budget. We had an annual budget of $2.693 million to dispose of. That was our annual budget.

So when you take that 2.6 million roughly and divide it by the daily flow of 1.92 million gallons, you get a cost of $1.40 to dispose of our wastewater per gallon per year. So it doesn't sound like a lot of money, but when you figure out how many gallons we're putting in in a year. So using this simplified cost benefit model for SwampScot, adjusting to take into account the life of the project is suggested by MassDEP, a 20-year factor is used.

This results in a cost per gallon per day of I.I. mitigation of $28.06 per gallon. A typical flow basis utilized to determine prospective flows for a property is MassDEP Title V. The resultant fee charged for a three-bedroom property is 330 gallons per day.

So if you want to break that down to one bedroom, it's 110 gallons per day for a single one-bedroom home. So a three-bedroom home would be neither. Breaking this down further to account for the multi-unit developments, the resultant fee per bedroom using the 100 gallons per day would be $3,086.60 for each bedroom. So if you had a proposed 128-unit development, that would result in an I.I. fee of $395,084.80. This is using FY20 numbers. I think this number may go up a little bit because we've talked about fees to pump our wastewater when they've gone up, and the flows for this year have really gone up with the amount of rain we've received. So that's the simplified I.I. cost-benefit model that we are considering. I like that one a lot. The second one is called the modified I.I. cost-benefit. Yep, right there.

So we still use the same numbers, yearly wastewater flow, the average daily flow. This method analyzes the actual costs that are incurred as a result of the flow in the sewer system. Many of the costs from the town's budget would be unaffected by an increase or decrease in flow.

These include personnel salaries, ordinary maintenance, capital overlay, and debt service. Adjusting to take into account the impacts on the assessments from an increase or decrease in flow, an overall 50% of the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission assessment is estimated to be associated with the actual sewer system flows. So given an FY20 of $922,000, which we know has gone up this past fiscal year, a 50% allocation and a daily average flow of 1.92 million gallons per day, the resultant cost per gallon per day is $0.24, down from the $1.40 we talked about in the simplified I.I. cost analysis. Adjusting for the same 20 years, the resultant fee is $4.80 per gallon per day. That's a typical flow basis utilized, again, with 110 gallons per day per bedroom. Now we're going to a three-bedroom property would result in $1,584 annually.

Breaking this down further to account for multi-unit developments, the resultant fee per bedroom, assuming 110 gallons per day, would be $528. Therefore, a proposed 128-unit development would result in a $67,500 I.I. fee, assuming one-bedroom units. So there's other proposals out there.

These are two of the ones that I thought were pretty interesting and that we could modelize after. Obviously, the simplified one generates a lot more revenue for the town. The other one, a lot less because it's just based on the amount of flow that we're sending over.

The last slide, Ali, is the next steps. For us, if we want to vote, I know we're not going to vote today, but if we want to consider those two, or if you want me to consider some other options, I'd be more than happy to do that.

[Speaker 10] (33:38 - 33:42)
Can I ask you a question? Can you compare the per-bedroom cost per gallon of the two just really quick?

[Speaker 4] (33:42 - 33:50)
Well, the cost per bedroom remains the same. It's 110 gallons per day, per bedroom.

[Speaker 6] (33:50 - 33:52)
Yeah, that's usage, right?

[Speaker 1] (33:52 - 33:56)
The usage remains the same times the multiplier is the cost. Yes. So your multiplier is different, though.

[Speaker 4] (33:57 - 34:34)
Oh, right. The multiplier for the modified one is... So the multiplier using the simplified is $1.40 per gallon, per day, per year. And the one on the modified is 24 cents. And that's because we're taking out all the, I guess we call them indirect costs.

[Speaker 6] (34:36 - 34:39)
So I guess I don't understand. That's a huge difference.

[Speaker 4] (34:40 - 34:40)
Yep.

[Speaker 6] (34:40 - 34:41)
I mean, it's obvious.

[Speaker 4] (34:43 - 34:57)
Because you're only based in that on... The simplified, because the first one's based on our overall budget. The second one is based on 50% of the flow that we're sending to LEND.

[Speaker 6] (34:57 - 35:21)
No, I appreciate that. But I guess I'm confused how they're both reasonable options when they're so far apart in terms of the numbers that they come out with. So I guess how do we know, how would we justify one over the other?

Unless I'm missing something in the total cost that it averages out somehow. But it seems to me that they're so different, I don't know how they're both viable and reliable options for calculating.

[Speaker 2] (35:21 - 35:47)
They're both models that are established already in regulations. And so other communities have different methodologies. And so one is, frankly, a little bit more reflective of your operating budget.

The other is really specifically targeted at the flow. They do generate different levels of funds.

[Speaker 12] (35:48 - 35:50)
They've both met this Emerson test?

[Speaker 2] (35:50 - 35:50)
They have.

[Speaker 12] (35:50 - 35:52)
I find that just surprising.

[Speaker 2] (35:53 - 36:02)
There's even more. There's a lot we could bring back. You know, Gino's gone through and really identified two that really he feels.

[Speaker 6] (36:02 - 36:04)
We should go with the simplified model.

[Speaker 4] (36:04 - 36:17)
Without a doubt. And $400,000 isn't a lot of money on whatever that project is going to cost. And this money is going to go back into repairing our system.

[Speaker 2] (36:18 - 36:21)
So the thought was, you know, tonight we'd give a primer.

[Speaker 6] (36:21 - 36:25)
I mean, I'm joking, but I don't know why anybody would do the modified one.

[Speaker 2] (36:25 - 37:04)
I think, you know, maybe different communities with different types of systems, you know, with different, you know, land use, you know, they may all have different needs. When I look at Swamson, I look at the age of our system. And I think about, you know, the complexity of just that long-term sustainable, you know, status of good repair.

I really do think that simplified model is what will help support the reliability that folks depend on.

[Speaker 6] (37:04 - 37:15)
But that to me, I mean, I wouldn't say that out loud because that to me is, you're not offsetting a cost. You're kind of like making up for lost time in investment capital. From what I'm hearing, I just mean that that doesn't seem to be.

[Speaker 2] (37:15 - 37:50)
New users will put additional burden on this system, and those costs have to be reflected in their charges. You know, so I actually do think that Emerson test plays out, and it's important for us to really think about the additional demand that we put on this already stressed system. You know, somebody has to put the financial analysis together that would help ensure that new users are going to pay into a system to help support that status of good repair.

[Speaker 6] (37:50 - 37:55)
I mean, that's what we're doing here, right? Yep. I just, okay.

[Speaker 4] (37:56 - 38:13)
I just ran some quick numbers just to put it into perspective a little bit. So if you have 128 one-bedroom apartments, they're going to put over 5 million gallons of wastewater back into our system, which is considerable.

[Speaker 7] (38:13 - 38:31)
So if someone builds, I mean, like Peter brought up the landing, you know, a new connection now, if I build a new three-bedroom, if a builder builds a new three-bedroom here now, what's the connection fee? What are they paying?

[Speaker 4] (38:32 - 38:36)
$10 to tie into our sewer system. And what does it cost us?

[Speaker 11] (38:38 - 38:42)
To treat that? Well, no, no, no. What does it cost us to, you know, to make the connection?

[Speaker 4] (38:42 - 38:46)
It doesn't cost us anything. The developer makes the connection. Developer.

Right.

[Speaker 7] (38:46 - 39:45)
And then, but is that, so that's the same with if it's 130 units or 200 units, it's a $10 connection fee to the town essentially? Okay. Yep.

So anything is better than what exists, right? So I think, I mean, I do still wonder aside from, I guess, I do have questions about, like, I understand that the simplified models preferred because it. More money.

There's more money, right? But, like, other than that, are there other reasons that it makes sense or, you know, whether that's because it's more reflective of the cost and maybe you don't know that right now, but I don't know. I have similar questions about, like, well, why would you choose the one that provides less revenue?

[Speaker 6] (39:46 - 39:53)
How could they both be more reflective? Right. How could they both withstand that test?

I don't know. They're so different.

[Speaker 4] (39:53 - 40:28)
Well, the simplified one is simple. That's why I like it. You're just taking this is our budget.

This is our daily flow. Divide that. You get your multiplier, right?

You factor in the 20 years. You multiply that times the bedrooms. The other one seems like it's more arbitrary.

You're taking 50% of the assessment to lend. Why wouldn't we take 100? You know, maybe it costs me to come back with that.

What would happen if we made that 100% instead of 50%? I'm guessing that number will be in between the 395 and the 67,000.

[Speaker 7] (40:28 - 40:37)
And this, just to be clear, this would be a charge for all new connections in town, no matter the size. Is that how it usually is done?

[Speaker 4] (40:37 - 40:54)
No. A lot of communities have a threshold. And one of them, it seems, many of the communities, is development that puts in 2,000 gallons per day.

So when I divided that out, so that would be essentially an 18-bedroom complex.

[Speaker 7] (40:55 - 41:10)
So it's a flow threshold. Right. Okay.

And is this something that we would, these funds would be going towards addressing I&I?

[Speaker 4] (41:12 - 41:12)
Yes.

[Speaker 7] (41:12 - 41:29)
Right. So does that revenue need to go into, can it just sit in the enterprise fund, or does it need to go into a separate account where it's being tracked separately from the enterprise fund?

[Speaker 2] (41:29 - 41:45)
We'll look into that, but I believe it has to be in a separate account because they are specific to the fee. You can't use them to offset your general obligations.

[Speaker 7] (41:45 - 41:54)
And do you know if that's, is that something that would need to be established through town meeting?

[Speaker 2] (41:54 - 42:01)
I don't, well, we'll look into that. I don't, yeah, I don't know.

[Speaker 4] (42:10 - 42:18)
Questions? Question two, is that 2,000 gallons per day, that can be modified to whatever you want?

[Speaker 1] (42:19 - 43:09)
So I think what would be helpful is maybe to kind of create a matrix for us of communities and let us know communities that do have I&I, what model, what rate, and what hurdle for applicability, whether it's 2,000 gallons, 1,000, 20,000, I think would really help us contextualize and just use other people's experience. And then I think that will probably, maybe from there, we might have interest in drilling in a little deeper on some of those to understand those communities. I'm grateful that you're doing this analysis.

It's really important. So thank you for doing it. And it sounds like we're on the right path to be able to do it, but I think it would be really helpful to understand other communities.

[Speaker 6] (43:11 - 43:13)
And why, yeah.

[Speaker 1] (43:14 - 43:56)
True. So if we could maybe try and set a goal, it's now September 1st, to, my guess is you would probably need to come back at least twice, just because the next time would be to continue the conversation, that would kind of maybe, and then the last time we could maybe come up with a recommendation or support a recommendation. But if we could have a goal of having this done by November 1st, which means you're back here twice before November 1st, that would really be helpful.

If it did necessitate town meeting action, that potentially could be something we could put on the special fall town meeting, which there's no date set, but either it's very late November, early December, potentially.

[Speaker 2] (43:58 - 44:56)
I think that really lines up with what we were planning. We had thought we'd come back by the end of September with a draft of a proposed regulation that we've been modeling off of some best practice. These are some significant language about the type of connections, about the process for implementing an I&I regulation, and we can get into the weeds with that, and then we can talk about how we compare the model with peer communities.

We do have the I&I regulations from at least four communities, maybe more, and all of the methodologies are in those regulations, so we can easily kind of pull that together on a table.

[Speaker 6] (44:57 - 45:04)
Since we're going to kind of be narrowing down from here, you said there are three models, right?

[Speaker 4] (45:04 - 45:04)
Yep.

[Speaker 6] (45:04 - 45:16)
Not more than that? The three base? It wasn't like there were three, but you preferred...

There were more than three, but you preferred three, and then you narrowed it down. If there are only three...

[Speaker 4] (45:16 - 45:17)
No, there's nothing more than three.

[Speaker 6] (45:18 - 45:18)
I'm sorry?

[Speaker 4] (45:19 - 45:21)
I'm sure there's way more than three methods.

[Speaker 6] (45:21 - 45:28)
Oh, okay. What is the third one that you were considering? However you narrowed it down to three.

I'm curious what the third one was.

[Speaker 4] (45:28 - 46:07)
Let me read this one to you. All right. The third method undertakes to establish a fee based upon the average cost to remove I.I. from the system and not upon the cost to transport and treat. This would allow the town to collect the cost specific to the actual requirements to remove I.I. While not the typical method used to derive a removal fee, it provides a defendable value that looks at the cost of removing I.I. in the town system. One limitation to this method is currently the information regarding the condition of the town sewer system and that's not well understood. So it's kind of arbitrary.

[Speaker 10] (46:07 - 46:09)
And we know our condition is not good.

[Speaker 4] (46:09 - 46:14)
Right. We know it's not good, but to what extent it's not good, I don't have an exact figure.

[Speaker 2] (46:14 - 46:16)
That's going to come into focus.

[Speaker 6] (46:16 - 46:16)
That one's out.

[Speaker 2] (46:17 - 46:17)
Soon.

[Speaker 6] (46:19 - 46:20)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (46:23 - 46:28)
All right. Great. We're good for now on this?

Gino, thank you. Thanks, Gino. Thank you.

[Speaker 7] (46:28 - 46:28)
Thanks, Sean. Appreciate it.

[Speaker 1] (46:29 - 46:48)
The next item on the agenda is discussion of town meeting warrant. There is nothing specific. We will follow up and staff will be in touch with just town meeting preparation stuff.

Unless anybody has any topics, I would move on to board and committee appointments. All right. Allie.

[Speaker 5] (46:52 - 46:56)
Okay. So I have a presentation I'm going to pull up.

[Speaker 1] (46:58 - 47:13)
From the moment you make the first recommendation, Neil is actually going to do a stopwatch to see if we literally can make appointments the fastest. Look at it. He already took the stopwatch out.

He will say ready, set, go, just to give you a warning.

[Speaker 13] (47:14 - 47:15)
All right.

[Speaker 5] (47:25 - 48:32)
So for the 2021-2022 term, there are 35 members who are currently seeking reappointments. There are five who have declined to be reappointed, and there are three who are unresponsive at this point, to my request to ask whether or not they want to be reappointed. Everyone I've spoken with and I also communicated with the chairs of the individual committees as well, just to make sure there was no feedback we needed to know about these committee members before the select board made their reappointment.

So what I can do if the board would like as quickly as possible is I can go through the individual committees just one by one and just give you the quick summary, see if there's any questions and move forward unless there's any other suggestion on how to zoom. Good. Awesome.

Okay. So the affordable housing trust.

[Speaker 1] (48:32 - 48:33)
Ready set.

[Speaker 5] (48:35 - 48:46)
Comprised of six members and four members are currently seeking reappointment. There are no vacancies on the board. Those members.

Do you need me to read them or can you read them and I can move on to the next one?

[Speaker 1] (48:46 - 48:46)
It's fine.

[Speaker 5] (48:47 - 48:48)
Sorry. Yeah.

[Speaker 6] (48:48 - 48:57)
I just do care. These are people who are seeking reappointment, but nobody else has applied for these.

[Speaker 5] (48:58 - 49:39)
Other people have applied for positions. Yes. But at this point in time, this, they're not being.

Considered considered up against these people as replacements. That wasn't part of the process. I'm familiar with there's there's pending applications.

There always are pending applications based on whether or not there's vacancies. If we. As part of the process, because there's, you know, Any number of people who are just kind of waiting to see whether or not these positions are positions are going to open up.

So if the process is to look at the, The big picture of all of the candidates and decide whether or not we're replacing somebody. With somebody new. That's just not a process I've.

Engaged in, but could certainly do that. If that's the preference.

[Speaker 6] (49:40 - 49:48)
I don't have a preference. I just think it's worth. Talking about before we make a decision for another year.

[Speaker 1] (49:48 - 50:47)
Well, I think as though we, we engaged in a conversation. And we sent boards and committees. A memo that outlines are.

A set of goals. As we make reappointments. And I think that inherently in that.

Just reappointing everybody who wants to be reappointed. Contrary to what the letter seems inconsistent with that. Now it doesn't mean that we wouldn't reappoint everybody who's already appointed.

But I guess. Maybe let's go at it a different way. Did we.

At least explore how the reappointment of members. Fit. Those goals and objectives that the board put out as.

Our goals and objectives, meaning. Where we left comfortable with the diversity of skillset. Diversity of experience, diversity of background.

Demographics, et cetera, such that we felt as though. This committee or board couldn't benefit from an infusion of. Different types.

Of volunteers, for example.

[Speaker 5] (50:48 - 51:15)
The process that I undertook did not. Take those into consideration. In this, in the way that you're referencing.

I think that that, you know. There's a lot of. Digging deep that would have to happen for me to be able to make those decisions myself, not knowing these candidates.

So it'd be conversations to be had with the chairs. And the kind of understanding the committee is better. I just, I don't feel like I'm in a position to be able to.

Say whether or not a committee is meeting these goals. Myself.

[Speaker 1] (51:16 - 53:00)
No, no, I agree. Don't. I'm sorry.

The question is being directed at you, but don't. Please don't feel the burden of it being on your shoulders. It's one that I think is though.

But there needs to be a system. Agreed. I agree that you, you should not bear that burden, but I.

But I do believe staff needs the Sean. You need to be. Taking our goals and as staff bringing it back to us and saying, well, how are we going to execute those goals?

Because they're not self executing. Right. But if you're.

If you haven't established a system yet. To do it. So I think we've.

There's a heavy, heavy deference to staff. Review of applications for appointments. Because again, these, these appointments are really about just.

Is the person serious and can they commit the time that that's really what. And then do they have a skill set of the skill set? And then we've set now some other goals.

It's not really about. You know, philosophy or stuff. It's really about that.

So, so we have heavy deference to staff to do that, but. Those additional goals need help. Right.

They need lift. If you will, and to practice here, but it sounds like that. It's okay.

It just hasn't happened yet. I do think there is a. A D.I. position that obviously hasn't been hired. That is going to be somewhat helpful because not everything I think falls within the D.I. scope. Some are just are they a first time volunteer or have they been on the same committee for 25 years and. And how do we get new people involved?

If the average 10 year on a committee is 10 years, right. For example, and we want to find that balance. In a totally non punitive way, but just to make sure that we make space.

For the young or the first time volunteers. I'm just using that as a, an example, right?

[Speaker 6] (53:01 - 53:12)
I mean, I was, I just, I. Wish that we can maybe take off the affordable housing trust. If I don't know if that's on the camera, it just, you don't have to.

I just want to make clear. It's not a result of this was just a right. So.

[Speaker 1] (53:13 - 53:15)
Why don't you stop screen sharing? I just.

[Speaker 6] (53:17 - 53:55)
I actually think. I think maybe the lawyer in me is being over technical, but I think any process other than a review of. Everyone's seeking reappointment and everyone who's applied.

Is fundamentally unfair. And I don't think we should consider reappointments until we've considered those who are. We don't have to consider it here, but there has to have been some screening process in town hall.

Prior to getting here. That led to the recommendation of reappointment. I think.

So I don't think, and I want to hear and be. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, otherwise I'm really uncomfortable with that.

[Speaker 8] (53:55 - 54:12)
So. So, I mean, one of, one of my, one of my thoughts is the liaisons to these committees could work with staff. I mean, it's, it certainly does make the process a little more, a little more time consuming and a little more cumbersome than, than, than previous, but.

You know, I'm.

[Speaker 6] (54:12 - 54:16)
But otherwise we're just saying people can get on when there's a vacancy, when somebody decides not to be on it anymore.

[Speaker 2] (54:17 - 55:38)
Yeah. We've actually talked about. Pulling out a chair.

For. Alternates. For individuals.

We don't need to be so exclusive with these committees. These committees generally have members. That can't make meetings.

Individual members and having more. Opportunities for alternates from perhaps encouraging existing. Members to serve as an alternate and, and when we have new members.

You know, rotating in. Some individuals to get some experience and really, you know, looking at that, we've had these types of discussions and I think the practical. You know.

Application here is to really, you know, make sure that we, we are inclusive. We're pulling out chairs when, when. There's an opportunity.

And, and we, we've talked about trying to. Work with board chairs and really build that culture of, of. Exchange and, and not so much.

That we don't want to lose the history of the, the experience. Of some of these members because it truly is extraordinary. But we also want to make sure that.

You know, we, we have opportunities. So. There is a mindfulness here.

And I. Certainly.

[Speaker 6] (55:38 - 55:45)
Well, but I think there needs to be a mindfulness. I don't know that. Just reappointing.

I mean, I'm not trying to be critical. I just, I'm really surprised.

[Speaker 2] (55:46 - 56:08)
I mean, for generations, I don't think we have had that. Mindfulness. And I think we're starting to bring a sense of, Hey, you know.

We've got to make sure that we have. More opportunities. And we're going to go out and recruit individuals and.

Encourage individuals to really. Be part of. Some of these extraordinary teams that are doing.

Important work.

[Speaker 1] (56:09 - 56:43)
So Ali, let me first of all, this memo is awesome. It's really great. Do you happen to have with you tonight information as to number of.

Applicants for each committee. Such that, because I believe. Sadly.

The situation we're describing of multiple people trying. To fill is actually not the norm. The norm is.

We end up with a vacancy on a committee because we don't have enough people. And so I just wonder if you have information such that tonight can certainly deal with those committees for which we don't. Have multiple applicants.

Cause I, my guess is that's going to be more than 50% of them.

[Speaker 5] (56:44 - 56:53)
I don't have updated information that would, that I'd be comfortable saying definitively that there's no applicants. I think I have a little bit of a backlog of people who I haven't entered in my spreadsheet.

[Speaker 6] (56:54 - 57:16)
Well, I think that, I mean. I guess it's. The ones that already have a vacancy.

I would be safer, but I guess maybe theoretically there's multiple people who apply. I mean, it does get. It's giving too much credit to the number of applications that are probably on your.

In the office somewhere. I don't know whoever it goes to, but.

[Speaker 1] (57:17 - 57:44)
So let's, let's take a minute here. And. Talk to us about how you accumulate you again, just cause you're the person sitting here.

How does the town, I'm sorry. It shouldn't be personalized. How does the town accumulate.

Volunteer applications and how do like what's our methodology for both soliciting. And then tracking. Those right.

[Speaker 5] (57:45 - 59:33)
So currently I'll start with solicitation and that is. Very general. When we have vacancies, the last couple of newsletters.

We'll just have a, a section that says these are the vacancies we have available. And then people actually get a pretty good response to those newsletters. When we have a vacancy like the board of health, for instance, that we're very actively trying to fill.

We'll do a press release or a special post for that. Otherwise it's a somewhat passive process for. Recruiting new members.

In terms of the process of when somebody submits an application, the process that I had been. Following. I believe we've kind of talked about altering a little bit to give a little bit more intentionality to it, but what we had been doing is I receive a volunteer application.

I track it. In a spreadsheet. I send that application off to the chairs of the boards, no matter whether or not they have a vacancy.

I send it to them and tell them this person is interested. The chair of the board oftentimes will either bring it up at their board meeting to talk with their members or they'll call that person individually to talk to them a little bit more. Come to me and say, we really like this candidate.

We'd like to recommend them. Sean and or I will get on the phone with them, talk to them more. And that's the point that they get to you.

So that as admittedly, as we noted at previous meetings is heavily reliant on the chair to make those connections and recommendations just because they're who knows that committee best. We've been talking about shifting it a little bit more to being more intentional about what the select board in the town thinks is the appropriate fit as well. So it's not just people filling seats with people they know and us just going with it.

So that that whole process does need to shift. But that is where it is right now.

[Speaker 1] (59:34 - 1:05:46)
Okay. So, so I think that to kind of separate different layers here, right? The, the goals that the select board put out a few months back, that's a thing that we need to work on and that I, I'm entirely comfortable that two months or so after we rolled it out, we haven't fully implemented it.

Right. So let's, that's, that's okay. And so let's just kind of understand that the goal is to do that and to create a process that may permeate all these other things just because it requires a deliberateness.

I think to use your word, Ali, which I think is a really good word. So that's one. Two is I think generally speaking.

Let me take a reverse. The issue that Polly raised while what's before us has been the norm, right? Including last year and the year before.

It's a valid point, which is we should certainly at the very least understand the pool of applicants. Not again, it's really to understand other, other choices and how did we, you know, just to, to confirm it. It's not unlike when the town administrator makes a recommendation for a personnel position, which under our charter, the town administrator makes the recommendation, but we have to approve the recommendation, right?

And it's not, it's, it's often that we ask not to interview all the candidates, but to at least understand what was the pool of candidates? Because the pool of candidates also helps define the chosen candidate a bit, right? Which is so if you were one of one, it seems to be very different than you're one of 30, right?

And when it's one of one, you say, did we not advertise it right? Is there something wrong with our positions? Is there something wrong with our compensation structure?

Is there, it, it provokes a number of dialogues that, but for that context, you might not think to ask, right? Sure. So I think here having that information and then ultimately combining it with the first one, which is the goals, right?

And having it go through that filter and that lens or whatever you want to call it, I think are going to be very helpful. And I think you can, and Sean and staff, you, you can, I, I agree about the reshuffling a little bit away from just reliance on chairs, right? Because we want to have a, I think the goal set forth broader perspectives than, than perhaps the chairs should be responsible for.

The last thing is communication, right? Is to make sure that there is a acknowledgement of application and an acknowledgement of either we can't appoint you. We didn't appoint you.

We did appoint you, right? So that everybody who does reach out to us gets a touch point back that, that they don't go into black holes and, and well before your time, Allie, frankly, it happened all of us, right? That, that it's just silence.

And it's just because the submissions would come. Someone presumably was logging them, but no one, everyone was busy doing other things and not thinking about that. And inadvertently I think it turned off a number of applicants, a number of volunteers and people who just wanted to donate their time and that just an unfortunate thing.

So I think fusing those three things together over time, I think let's start with, you know, who you've looked at. What are they, you know, number of applicants, et cetera, and how do you do that? The communication certainly should happen now.

And then ultimately work to, you know, together with the DEI hire and system that this time next year, when we're looking at it and that we really are. And as over the next 12 months, we have one off openings that we need to fill. We are asking those questions, right?

We are welcoming that opportunity. I think one of the, if you look at the demographics in town versus the demographic of committees, I think having totally non-scientific, but just Anadolu, when you look at it, the, the age and newness to town is way off there. Our percentage in town is up here.

Our percentage of people that get involved are down here. Now that's somewhat systemic just because younger people may not be as involved. They may have younger families and obviously time constraints.

So, so it's not, this is not a static fact that you can view. You have to equalize them, taking those things in consideration. But I think we haven't successfully the big, we I think reached out to newcomers in Swampscott and truly engage them early.

I think several of us are exceptions to that. I mean, I was here less than a year when, when certain people reached out and said, Hey, you're a zoning attorney. Do you want to be on the zoning board?

And is that a possibility? And same for some others here. So let's just revamp that.

I think for tonight, I think we're going to end up tabling our votes to give you all a chance to just supplement your tables with the number of applicants and to give you just a chance to go through it and just make sure with their perspective, again, put the goals aside. If you can, if you can implement one or more of those goals and look at it with that lens, that's, that's, that's great. But I also want to give you time and space to develop how is efficient for you guys to do that.

But really just go through just the applicants say, yep, for the affordable housing trust, there's three other people. And, and you don't, again, the intention isn't to necessarily have a public airing of every applicant here in the pros and cons. It's really more about us knowing that you went through it and there was consciousness given to the decision, which I think all in all probably does result in a great percentage of reappointments, especially if a committee, I'm going to speak about the affordable housing trust has such amazing talent on it.

Like this is talent that we couldn't buy in a million years. It's, it's just really great. The Harbor and advisory committee has some really talented and driven people.

You know what I mean? So many, like I'm just saying, like, so, so I think as though them being on there and being reappointed is a byproduct of just how dedicated they are. So I think we're going to find a high degree of the same appointments.

It's just making sure that we've gone through that point.

[Speaker 6] (1:05:46 - 1:05:47)
Isn't turnover.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:48 - 1:05:49)
Exactly right.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:49 - 1:06:18)
I think we have what you would like to see crystal clear. I think we all believe in the spirit of, of what you're getting at. And I think we'll, we'll come back.

I do think it's going to require some heart to heart with some of the chairs and really thinking more critically about, you know, the composition of each of these committees. So there may be a little bit more time and effort into this.

[Speaker 5] (1:06:19 - 1:07:21)
I do. Yeah. I want to acknowledge that me being me, I want to make sure that if we're going to, if we're going to be, if I'm going to come back to you with names and say, these are the people who apply, but we're still, we still feel confident that these are the appointments that reappointments that we think should happen or, or if we are going to have to decide that we're going to pull potentially not reappoint someone in, in exchange for someone else. I think there does need to be a lot of time put into actually speaking with the, the people who have all of the candidates who have applied, because some people just enter their name that they're interested in a committee and then move on. And some people write a narrative about why they're great for it.

And so I, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable saying, well, this person didn't put anything. I don't feel, I don't want them. So we really are going to have to speak with everyone.

If this is the, the, the way to move forward. And I do believe that's going to take a significant time to do that. And that's fine.

And I think this is the right way to move forward, but it is going to take time and a lot of dedication. And I want to give ourselves the time for that. So we'd request a couple of months to be able to really come back to you with a real good suggestion.

[Speaker 1] (1:07:21 - 1:08:57)
Yeah, no, I appreciate that. And I think as though I want to encourage you all to think about how you do it. Right.

The, the intake, the tracking and the outgoing communication is something that I'm just going to suggest alley is something that probably can be delegated to someone and that you or someone like you gets involved when it's now. Okay. We have to review it to David's point.

I think David made a really good suggestion. We're here. And again, I come back to, and I think we, we, I know we all firmly believe our best involvement is supporting you all and doing what you do full time in our part-time opportunities here.

Right. Which is for us then when you do after putting them through some, the filters say, Hey, there's an opportunity here or I'm not clear to engage with the liaison to, after you've had a chance to talk to the chair perhaps and say, Hey, there's an opportunity here. There's something worth exploring to engage with the liaison and then have the liaison take the burden, right.

Which is you've taken it to a point. And just to, to again, to not put it all in one person. I don't think it needs to be on one person, but I agree with you regardless.

You taking the time to come back with something thoughtful and comprehensive is great. I think for this time around, I'm going to say, I, I, this isn't going to wait several months for this time around. I think here what we're looking for you to do is you've made your recommendations right here.

Look at them, see if anything changes. I, again, I think the expectation is typically they're not going to change. Right.

Meaning that unless something's abnormal, we're not looking, we're not looking to create turnover.

[Speaker 5] (1:08:57 - 1:09:07)
The challenges for me is that I can't, I don't know the board members who are serving currently. So I, I don't know. And you know, Sean and I know some of them.

I don't know that we know them well enough to be able to say that there shouldn't be a change.

[Speaker 1] (1:09:08 - 1:09:32)
I understand. But to Polly's point, that speaks then to why, like even the ones you're recommending, right. And sorry, I'm looking at you.

I should actually be looking over here. Right. The ones you're recommending, you've got to be comfortable.

You're recommending them. So we've got a one way or another, you've got to figure out how to do this. Now, sadly, there's not so many volunteers, right?

I wish it was like, it's just going to be this, you know, huge amount of volunteers.

[Speaker 5] (1:09:32 - 1:09:54)
We do actually have a lot of people who are patiently waiting for information because there's a lot of that committees that have no vacancies. So people have applied over the last six months or a year who I have told there's no vacancies, but who are still, you know, validly eligible to be on the board. So there is quite a number that we would go through.

[Speaker 6] (1:09:54 - 1:10:48)
So I, yeah, I think I understand the time thing. I guess I totally understand the time thing. And I have no, I'm not going to weigh in.

I mean, I agree with Peter on this round. I think I really like the shorter term and longer term goals of integrating the letter because we don't want that to just be, you know, an empty intent or whatever. At the same time, you know, we do, I do think the town just needs to figure out if this is too overwhelming for one person or liaisons, then we need to create a system.

Like we can't, it's sort of like, I always think in terms of court, but like justice is a pain. When a long process, due process is such a hassle, it would be so much better if we could just, but that's kind of like you can't do that. So not saying that you want to do that, but there are just certain things that are a lot of work and they are time consuming and we don't have a system in place for it, but it's not, I just want to make sure that we're all clear, it's not a reason that we're not going to make it fair.

[Speaker 2] (1:10:51 - 1:10:52)
I do think we can come back.

[Speaker 5] (1:10:54 - 1:11:15)
I just want to clarify what I'd be coming back with then. The idea of the kind of comprehensive review of talking to everybody and really evaluating everyone would not be happening this cycle, is what you're saying. We kind of look at what we have on a more truncated version of what I've described as the process and make a suggestion that way to make it so that we're not taking quite as much time?

[Speaker 1] (1:11:16 - 1:12:23)
Yes, but that's said without knowing who are these list of volunteers. We do want you to look and I think it is worth having a conversation with the chairs, just to have a one-off conversation with chairs and say, hey, look it, this is what it is. These are the volunteers.

Do you have any suggestions? Do you have any preference? And at least have that conversation, one conversation.

Yes, I think you're hearing it's fine and modified. I think we at the very least this year want to have the information to understand, and I think you guys having some conversation will be helpful. Then take the time to develop a more robust way to do it.

This is a really important thing, volunteers, but I also don't want this to overwhelm someone who has a stable of responsibilities like you do. I don't want this to diminish what you are otherwise doing because what you're doing is too important. So we've got to find the town administrator is going to have to help with that, solve that problem, just because I think that is.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:23 - 1:12:29)
It sounds like we have a couple of select board members that might be helpful.

[Speaker 1] (1:12:30 - 1:12:36)
Really just one offered. Let's be clear. In fairness, there was just one that offered, and I think you should take him up on it immediately.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:36 - 1:13:24)
From my perspective, though, these are select board appointees, and having that liaison from a number of the committees just play a role in helping to usher in a new mindset and a new framework for how we're going to really integrate more volunteers into committees I think is going to be really helpful. And, you know, I want to encourage board members to, you know, work with us as we try to, you know, shape consensus around inclusion. But, yeah, I'm happy to do that.

This is a core belief of all of ours, and I think, you know, frankly it's a conversation that I would be eager to have with all of our colleagues.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:26 - 1:14:10)
All right, we're going to move on. Thank you, Allie, for all your effort. We're going to move on now to the Consent Agenda, which is designed to expedite the handling of routine miscellaneous business of the board.

The select board may adopt the entire Consent Agenda with one motion at the request of any board member. Any item in the Consent Agenda can be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the regular agenda for discussion. The Consent Agenda tonight has meeting minutes from August 24th, 2021.

Approve and execute an easement for Verizon New England at the Michon Project on Burpee Road, which is being developed under a ground lease from the town, or has been developed. Vote to approve an application for a 5K run. Vote to approve an application for another 5K run.

Any questions or comments on the Consent Agenda?

[Speaker 6] (1:14:11 - 1:14:21)
I do. The Verizon easement, I guess, first of all, I don't think I – should I not vote on this?

[Speaker 1] (1:14:22 - 1:14:24)
You are a direct butter.

[Speaker 6] (1:14:25 - 1:14:26)
But I don't know.

[Speaker 1] (1:14:26 - 1:14:28)
I don't think it – Okay.

[Speaker 6] (1:14:29 - 1:15:10)
The other thing is – well, I should have asked Gino, I guess, before. But there – I mean, does this give us any – I'm just going to use a hypothetical. If there's a service box in front of somebody's house, on a telephone pole that's in front of somebody's house, and it blocks this person's everything frequently, and it happens to be Verizon, hypothetically, I just am wondering if this easement – because if it does, I would like to not vote on this and then, as a resident, deal with that.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:11 - 1:15:29)
So the decision to recuse is the member's decision. I will tell you your hypothetical probably is such that I might heavily suggest that you – Well, but if it doesn't relate, then I wouldn't. You are a direct butter to this property, so I'm just giving you a suggestion.

It's ultimately your choice.

[Speaker 6] (1:15:29 - 1:15:29)
Well, I asked.

[Speaker 10] (1:15:30 - 1:15:32)
I'm happy for the recommendation. I'll recuse myself.

[Speaker 4] (1:15:33 - 1:15:34)
I'm going to make that call from now on.

[Speaker 10] (1:15:35 - 1:15:35)
Thanks, Gino.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:38 - 1:15:59)
Any other questions or comments on the consent agenda? So let's pull out – actually, let's pull out the easement for a second. Hearing none, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda minus the Verizon easement?

So moved. Second. All those in favor?

Aye. Great. Is there a motion to approve the easement to Verizon New England?

[Speaker 7] (1:16:00 - 1:16:01)
So moved.

[Speaker 1] (1:16:02 - 1:16:15)
Is there a second? Second. Any conversation or questions?

All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Aye. Opposed? And recusing yourself?

[Speaker 6] (1:16:15 - 1:16:16)
I am. Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:16:16 - 1:16:22)
Polly has recused herself from that vote. All right, we're now going to move on to the town administrator's report.

[Speaker 2] (1:16:23 - 1:23:53)
Okay. So we still are, you know, dealing with a pandemic, and we continue to want to encourage folks to wear masks and to take precautions, but I'm really pleased that Swampskate has a high percentage of our residents that are vaccinated. We continue to see residents get vaccinated, and I still want to encourage folks to just be responsible.

You know, we are, you know, moving forward, you know, and monitoring the number of cases in Swamp Street. We are seeing an uptick, and we will continue to, you know, get information out about, you know, efforts that everybody is taking to keep safe. Over the last few weeks, I've met with Swamp Street's veterans agent and a number of veterans.

We continue to look at ways that we can help improve services and programs for our veterans. There are a number of great ideas and suggestions that have come up, and I'm eager to follow up with our veterans agent. We have worked on a number of pedestrian safety projects in town.

You'll notice some slip lanes that have been eliminated on Monument Ave and Humphrey Street. We're going to continue to find ways where we can help improve crosswalks and pedestrian safety throughout town. I've had a number of discussions regarding our solid waste contract and our solid waste committee.

Right now, we're looking at having a tour of our solid waste contractor's recycling facility. There's a lot of changes happening right now with recycling, and we have a number of excellent conversations happening around how Swamp Street really can play a role in improving recycling standards so that we can have a stronger recycling market. Chief Kurz has met with me a number of times over the last two weeks to talk about some of the progress being made over at our police department, but we also have outlined a number of community engagement strategies for discussing the qualities that we're going to be looking for in our next police chief.

I've shared a draft job profile and a memo the chief has drafted on the selection process, and I look forward to getting the board's feedback over the next couple of weeks and perhaps even engaging a conversation with Chief Kurz about that process. Certainly, we're going to be looking for community stakeholders to be involved in that, whether it's youth sports coaches, board and committee members, civic groups, religious and faith-based organizations. Chief had mentioned that he was hoping that he could get three names from each of the select board members of citizens that you think would be helpful, so I just wanted to relay that.

I'm pleased to report that we have a new school resource officer. Officer Brian Wilson was one of five Swanscot police officers that put their hat in the ring for this position. Superintendent Angelakis told me that any one of the individuals would have made an outstanding school resource officer.

It was truly that difficult to distinguish between them all, but she and a number of the school administrators thought that Brian really had a lot of the skills and abilities that they were looking for, and his relationship skills, I think, were really impressive, so really pleased that Brian will be filling that important role. Last week, I connected with Alice Stein, talked more about the flight path recommendations and flight path 22L specifically that goes over Swanscot. We continue to have questions about the number of planes and the volume of planes that will be coming over Swanscot, and we are looking to meet with Massport, but we're also gearing up for a public hearing on September 15th to share our concerns about the disbenefit to Swanscot.

Last week, I had two negotiation sessions with our DPW union and our town hall clerical union. I had a wonderful trip to the senior center, as Heidi Weir had discussed. I have Rich Baldacci, our building commissioner, looking into a quote to digitize all of our town parcel maps.

We currently have a lot of our maps in the building inspector's office, but also in the basement. Digitizing all these maps, including the maps in DPW, I think would be a terrific resource. The city of Salem has digitized a lot of their maps, and I'd like to follow suit.

Lastly, we have a number of events coming up, Septemberfest or Swamptoberfest. I've started calling it Septemberfest because I think we have an October, you know, fest that we've had previously, and my hope is, you know, we can have some fests for different months, but I have reviewed the event with our health director and our health team. I want folks to just understand that being outside is very different than being inside.

We're still going to take precautions. We're still going to ensure that we have masks available for this event, but this is truly a family event and a time for us to really celebrate, you know, things that we hold dear, and I hope that folks come down and really enjoy themselves and just be mindful of the fact that we have a beautiful community and a wonderful opportunity to reflect a week before September 11th. This will be the 20th anniversary of September 11th, an event that impacted many of us, and it was amazing how nonpartisan and how wonderful it was to come together as a nation after that horrific attack, and it's my hope that we all can spend a little time thinking more about what we hold dear.

Following September 11th, we'll have a day of giving where residents can give food and other items to support local non-profits in our community, and we'll be getting more information about that. That's my report.

[Speaker 1] (1:23:54 - 1:23:56)
Questions or comments for the town administrator?

[Speaker 7] (1:23:58 - 1:24:14)
On the barriers on the corner of the town hall lawn, I didn't realize that was a traffic safety measure. I actually thought maybe they were there for the September fest, so is that to be sort of semi-permanent, you know, at least for the time being?

[Speaker 2] (1:24:15 - 1:24:48)
For the time being, yes, we're taking away that slip lane. That's a dangerous kind of corner when people drive down. Oftentimes you're looking left, driving right, and so for years we've identified that as a risk.

We're looking at those types of slip lanes in town, so the idea is that we're going to try to come back to the board with some permanent recommendations at some point. We want to give them a try first and see how that affects traffic and flow. Got it.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:50 - 1:25:29)
I gotta say, the one on Atlantic and Humphrey and how you've narrowed that coming off of Humphrey makes a big difference. It causes cars coming down off of Humphrey onto Atlantic to slow down. It requires them to look hard left and they're at a slowed position such that if someone's crossing the crosswalk right around the corner there, it really makes a difference.

It's amazing how when you narrow, we know this, it's like we're, but it works. These traffic calming things, small things, we look forward to seeing more and suggestions.

[Speaker 2] (1:25:29 - 1:25:53)
We've got it. I do want to thank Gino, but I want to thank Chief Archer and Captain Cable and Marsy Golaska. These, they are the task force that is really going out and going into each neighborhood and looking at intersections and really making these improvements.

So, you know, they're on it. Great.

[Speaker 1] (1:25:54 - 1:26:38)
Select board time. All right. I'm hearing none.

Last topic for tonight is this room is occupied for September 22nd, which was going to be our next meeting here. We still have a meeting at 530, did we say, on the 13th, right before town meeting, which will be virtual, obviously. So we have a meeting at 530 on the 13th, but our next meeting, official meeting here, not official, but general meeting, non-town meeting specific meeting was originally the 22nd.

So my question to you all is whether or not you have flexibility to switch it to the 21st or the 23rd.

[Speaker 11] (1:26:44 - 1:26:51)
23rd. 23rd would be better for me. Yeah.

Is everyone okay with the 23rd?

[Speaker 6] (1:26:51 - 1:26:57)
It's harder for me. I don't know if I'd be able to make it. I can't say.

It depends on child care.

[Speaker 11] (1:26:58 - 1:27:03)
Okay. So David is the 21st. The 21st is an affordable housing trust meeting.

[Speaker 8] (1:27:03 - 1:27:08)
So we would have that at, we would have that first. That would, I think that's at six o'clock.

[Speaker 10] (1:27:10 - 1:27:12)
They're usually at five. Do they need six?

[Speaker 8] (1:27:13 - 1:27:18)
I think so, since people are back to work. I can try.

[Speaker 6] (1:27:18 - 1:27:20)
I can't get, if there's a majority, it doesn't matter. So.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:20 - 1:27:24)
Well, it does matter. We want to, we want you there. How about the 20th?

[Speaker 13] (1:27:31 - 1:27:31)
Okay.

[Speaker 10] (1:27:36 - 1:27:37)
Unless you guys want my kids here.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:43 - 1:27:45)
How about the 27th?

[Speaker 6] (1:27:48 - 1:27:49)
Is that a Monday?

[Speaker 1] (1:27:49 - 1:27:58)
It is. You want me to avoid Mondays? Yes.

How about the 29th? Wednesday. That works.

I can do that.

[Speaker 13] (1:28:00 - 1:28:00)
Yep.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:01 - 1:28:02)
Allie, does that work for you?

[Speaker 5] (1:28:03 - 1:28:04)
It's my birthday. So.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:05 - 1:28:11)
No, it's your birthday. What other days do you want us to avoid besides Mondays?

[Speaker 10] (1:28:12 - 1:28:13)
Thursdays.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:13 - 1:28:15)
How about Tuesday the 28th?

[Speaker 10] (1:28:16 - 1:28:17)
That works.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:20 - 1:28:36)
After the meeting, we will all go out jointly to buy, you know, shop for Allie's birthday. So that meeting will not be overly long to give us ample time. All right.

So Tuesday the 28th.

[Speaker 5] (1:28:36 - 1:28:40)
Peter, I just, I'll confirm, I'll put that down and then confirm with Barbara tomorrow.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:40 - 1:28:41)
Perfect. No, it's great. Thank you.

[Speaker 5] (1:28:41 - 1:28:43)
I appreciate everybody. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:48 - 1:29:13)
Our intention is to continue to meet in person. We will continue to use Zoom so people can join us via Zoom. People that do attend in person will be required to wear a mask for the duration of the meeting, but certainly people are going to be welcome to join on Zoom as well.

All right. With that, is there a motion to adjourn? So moved.

Second. All those in favor? Aye.

[Speaker 2] (1:29:13 - 1:29:13)
Aye.

[Speaker 1] (1:29:13 - 1:29:14)
Good night. Thanks, everyone.

[Speaker 2] (1:29:15 - 1:29:17)
Thank you. Happy Labor Day.