[Speaker 1] (0:38 - 13:34) Good evening to all of you joining us, we're waiting for several members to come in from the caucuses. While you are waiting for a quorum, could you please make sure to rename yourself if you are an elected town meeting member by putting a capital P and the number in front of your name. Welcome to all of you just joining the main session coming in from the caucuses. I understand there may be some folks still in the precinct five caucus so we're hoping they're going to wrap that up shortly. While you are waiting for a quorum to be present, please take a moment and rename yourself inside the zoom participants panel. Hover on your name, select more and the rename option will appear and please put a capital P and the number of your precinct in front of your name. This is for elected town meeting members only so that we'll be able to keep track of votes. Thank you to everyone who is just joining the session we have some late registrations coming in so we'll take a moment before we get all our members in but in the meantime while we wait for a quorum to be present I ask that you please take this moment to rename yourself in the zoom participants panel by selecting your name and choosing more where you will see the option to rename and please put a capital P and the number of your precinct before your name. This is for elected town meeting members only. Thank you and I'll be working to make sure we get the rest of these late registrants in the meeting. Good evening ladies gentlemen as we welcome more of our precinct five members in from an extended caucus session. I hope that you will take a moment please to rename yourself in the zoom participants panel. Select your name and choose more and underneath the more button you will find a chance to rename yourself. Please if you are an elected town meeting member insert a capital P and the number of your precinct before your name. Thank you ladies and gentlemen we anticipate to call the meeting to order in a few moments here. Could I also ask that all visitors whether town employees or persons who've approached the town clerk prior to 48 hours ago for access to the town meeting to please rename themselves with a capital V before their name. This will facilitate voting considerably. Good evening ladies and gentlemen we're a couple minutes away from calling this session to order. Elected town meeting members could you please rename yourselves by placing a capital P and the number of your precinct before your name. Visitors could you please rename yourselves by placing a capital V before your name. All right good evening ladies and gentlemen. As we wait for a final tally for the quorum I understand that there are a couple of announcements to be made. I believe Mr. Blonder you wanted to make a brief announcement. Mr. Blonder if you're here. Mr. Mr. Blonder you can raise your hand and unmute yourself or I can certainly help you get unmuted. Failing Mr. Blonder we'll come back to you and Ms. Scheer had another announcement to make as well. Ms. Scheer if you'd like to raise your hand I can recognize you to speak. Go ahead Ms. Scheer you have the floor. [Speaker 15] (13:36 - 14:22) Hello we just want to let everybody know that Recharts is sponsoring PorchFest this weekend on Saturday noontime to six. We have I think at this point 17 host porches and 30 bands who will be playing generally through the Olmstead area but around Swampscott as well and we encourage everybody to participate and it's a nice outside COVID friendly type event where all of the activities will be taking place at individual porches where people have chosen to host bands. So we hope everyone will come out we're looking forward to it. [Speaker 1] (14:23 - 14:31) And for more information people can go to recharts.org. Thank you Ms. Scheer. Mr. Blonder. [Speaker 22] (14:42 - 16:13) Good evening. Thank you Mr. Moderator. Good evening. My name is Jeffrey Blonder and I'm the commander of the EF Gilmore Disabled American Veterans Chapter in Swampscott. We are the largest veteran service organization in town. The past few years have been difficult for the veterans of Swampscott. We have faced strong headwinds from the town but we remain resilient. In order to serve the veterans of Swampscott better the four veteran service organizations in Swampscott, the VFW, the DAV, the American Legion, and the Marine Corps League are joining forces to create a veteran center in Swampscott. We are kicking off this effort on Saturday, September 25th at noon with the veterans and military family service event that will have entertainment, food, prizes for all attendants, but more importantly we plan to have representatives from the VA and the Laurel Vet Center to assist veterans in finding out what benefits they are entitled to. This event will be held at the Swampscott Veteran Center at 8 Pine Street and will run until 4 p.m. We are seeking donations from the community to ensure the success of this event. If anyone is interested in making a monetary or other donations please drop them off at the Swampscott Vet Center at 8 Pine Street in care of myself or Patrick Burke. If anyone needs more information feel free to contact me. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (16:16 - 16:49) Thank you Mr. Blonder. I have confirmed with the town clerk that we have a quorum present so I would like to call the September 13th special town meeting of the town of Swampscott to order and I believe the first matter of business Madam Clerk is we will need to swear in a number of newly named town meeting members. Since the last election we've had a number of people who've moved out of town or who have or who have resigned their seats. Madam Clerk if you could proceed. [Speaker 28] (16:49 - 17:25) Okay raise your right hand and repeat after me. I state your name. I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully and impartially perform all the duties imposed upon me by my election as a town meeting member in the town of Swampscott according to the laws of the commonwealth and according to the bylaws of the town of Swampscott so help me God. Congratulations. [Speaker 1] (17:29 - 18:20) Thank you Madam Clerk. As a first matter of business under the emergency legislation that allows us to conduct a virtual town meeting I'm required to ask for a motion to continue this meeting in this venue. Can I ask for such a motion? I see many thumbs up but I actually need to get somebody on record as please raise your hand and I will accept a motion perhaps Mr. Dooley. Go ahead sir. Mr. Dooley are you making such a motion please? Then Ms. Wright perhaps. [Speaker 10] (18:23 - 18:31) Hi I'd like to make a motion this is Suzanne Wright precinct four precinct two. I'd like to make a motion to conduct this meeting via zoom. [Speaker 1] (18:32 - 28:34) Thank you. I will take any thumbs up as a second. I do see several seconds. All right before we take this vote because we have new members I'm just going to walk through the process. We are using the reactions tab in the zoom interface. You will be voting with your green yes button or red no button. In a moment we'll get into the other motions or actions that you can take but for now I'm going to ask all of those in favor of motion that we continue using the zoom platform please signify by clicking the green yes button. All those opposed the red no button. I'll leave the voting open for 30 seconds. Mr. Grant you have your hand up. Do you have a point of order? I'll explain points of order in a moment. Very good. 15 more seconds. Again the green yes button will indicate approval for continuing this meeting on the zoom platform. The red no would be to disapprove. Five seconds. Ms. O'Connell are you ready to capture these votes? Mr. Gillette are you ready to capture these votes? Let me know when you are and when you're complete. Thank you Ms. O'Connell. Thank you Mr. Gillette. By a vote of 247, 8 in favor and 14 opposed. We will continue using the zoom platform. A couple of additional explanations for the procedures we'll use tonight on this virtual platform. We just covered voting yes and voting no. The other actions that you can use in this platform also found in the reaction tab. Thumbs up will be used to second a motion. Thumbs up is not a persistent reaction. It will disappear after approximately 10 seconds but if I get a single thumbs up I will treat the motion as having been seconded. There are a number of other ones that you can use at your discretion including applause and celebration and whatnot but I will only be looking for the thumbs up. We covered voting yes, we covered voting no, we covered raising your hand to be recognized to speak. The final reaction that I want people to understand how to use is the slow down button which is the gray reverse arrow found just to the right of the red no button. You may use this button to indicate that you have a point of order or a point of personal privilege. That will interrupt all proceedings. I'll ask you, I'll recognize you and ask you to state your point and then we will proceed depending on what the nature of the point is. So at this point I am going to lower everyone's hands, clearing the votes. Very good, moving on. I want to make sure that all elected town meeting members have renamed themselves. In Zoom if you go to the participants panel where you can find your name, hover over your name and choose more, you will see a rename option. Please rename yourself by putting a capital P and your precinct number before your name. This will allow you to be sorted in alphabetical order in our participants list. If you are a visitor and you are not an elected town meeting member, please indicate by putting a V in front of your name. We'll be using this to make sure that only town meeting members are voting. If there continues to be any confusion about that, I also have the option to move all visitors into the waiting room during a vote. I hope I don't have to because that will be time consuming. If you are having trouble renaming yourself, please feel free to use the chat function to reach any of our co-hosts who will help you. Very good. So welcome to town meeting. I can scarcely imagine that at the first town meeting in 1852 anyone could have imagined that we'd be carrying on virtually for almost two years now, but I'm impressed with members, staff, and all of our visitors' patience and dedication to making sure the oldest form of participatory democracy on these shores continues to operate even in the midst of a pandemic. So this evening we will hear a number of motions on articles and you will be invited to speak by raising your hand. We also have a number of non-town meeting members present who have reached out to the town clerk in the required 48-hour time window and they may be recognized to speak as well. I will tend to recognize people who have either given me advance notice that they want to speak first or to try and recognize people not necessarily in the order their hands have gone up, but based on how often we've heard from them in the past. I would like to try to get as many voices heard as possible, so if you are someone who's spoken frequently at previous town meetings, I may defer on calling on you until we've heard from other voices. Now our town meeting, our bylaws and charter specify that any town meeting member may speak for 10 minutes at a time, up to two times on any given topic, and if you do the math with 324 town meeting members, if we all took that amount of time, there would be a significant chance that we would still be here by next week. So I urge you to speak concisely, succinctly. If someone before you has made the same point you would like to make, it's absolutely fine to say I completely agree with the previous speaker's comments. Similarly, I'm going to ask that we please observe the decorum that's long been the hallmark of this meeting. You are to refrain from directing comments at another member or at a member of the staff. You direct your comments through me, the chair. I will do my best to find the answer to your questions, but town meeting is not a cross-examination, is not a back and forth. You are asked to get up and state your piece, and I will do my best to make sure that any questions that come up are answered. There will be a chance that someone will wish to amend a motion. That is fine. Amendments must be sent to me in writing before they can be considered. My address, my email address is moderator at swampscottma.gov. I'll be monitoring that email through the evening if someone does wish to make an amendment, and then we will push it over to the screen share, and people have a chance to see what they're voting on. Finally, I'm going to recall what a longtime moderator liked to say about debate here, that we will have full and fair debate, but we will not have endless debate. I urge you to keep your remarks to the point, and also going to explain for new members, there is a motion to call the previous question that someone may make at some point during the debate, which is essentially a motion to end debate and move directly to a vote. This requires a two-thirds vote. It is not debatable, so once someone has made that motion, we will see if two-thirds of the body wishes to stop debate and move on to an actual vote. Just because the language is somewhat arcane, moving the previous question or calling the question is what means to end debate. So with that, it is time to proceed to article one. If we could advance. Article one is an article dealing with the reuse of the Hadley school. I believe I am looking for Mr. Duffy. Mr. Duffy, if you can unmute yourself and make the initial motion. [Speaker 19] (28:38 - 28:52) Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Neil Duffy, precinct two town meeting member, also a member of the select board. The select board recommends approval of article one as printed in the warrant. I move the recommendation of the select board. [Speaker 1] (28:52 - 28:57) Thank you. Is there a second? There is a second. Please proceed, Mr. Duffy. [Speaker 19] (28:59 - 30:45) Thank you. For some background, it is the unanimous opinion of the select board and has been that should the Hadley school property no longer be used as a school and should the school department turn that property over to the town, that it should not be made available for market rate housing. You may recall at our 2020 town meeting, we asked town meeting members to create a Hadley reuse committee to study potential reuse scenarios of the building aside from market rate housing. That committee concluded its work last month. We are very excited by the opportunities included in this report and senior planner Molly O'Connell will provide a brief presentation on this shortly. But tonight, as a show of further commitment to preventing market rate housing at this site, we are proposing the town meeting authorize the select board to impose a deed restriction on it. This restriction is contingent on the passing of article two tonight and on the passing of the debt exclusion for the elementary school at the town wide vote on October 19th. The only way this deed restriction can be lifted is by a future authorization of town meeting. In other words, the select board, any select board would not be able to undo it without going to town meeting first. To the extent that people are concerned and understandably concerned that Hadley will become a market rate residential development, and that concern influences their support for the new elementary school project, we think it's important to provide as many assurances as possible, as soon as possible, that this will not happen without authorization of a future town meeting. I believe, Mr. Moderator that I now would like to turn it over to the chair of the finance committee Tim Dorsey. [Speaker 1] (30:45 - 30:50) Yes, I understand. Mr. Dorsey. Please, the floor is yours. [Speaker 3] (30:53 - 32:06) Thank you, Tim Dorsey precinct for a chair of the finance committee. The finance committee has decided to take no position on article one, because a neutral stance like that is certainly not our norm. We wanted to communicate the rationale for that position to town meeting. You've heard Neil's description of the select board's description of article one, and its reasons for sponsoring the article. These are primarily non financial reasons. There have been no reviews of the financial implications of excluding market rate housing as a reuse option. And there are financial costs and benefits to this decision, and to this article. Without a clear understanding at this time of those financial implications. We felt like it was not prudent for the finance committee to recommend favorable action. However, we're also not inclined to recommend indefinite postponement, because that recommendation might imply that we foresee mainly negative financial consequences to passage of the article. So for these reasons, we chose to take a neutral stance and not to express a position on article one. [Speaker 1] (32:09 - 32:27) Thank you, Mr. Dorsey. I appreciate it. I understand our town planner, Molly O'Connell has a presentation. Okay, as we wait for her to share the screen. [Speaker 30] (32:42 - 32:44) Okay, good evening, everyone. [Speaker 7] (32:44 - 32:45) Can you all hear me? [Speaker 1] (32:45 - 32:47) Yes, thank you. [Speaker 7] (32:47 - 40:48) My name is Molly O'Connell. I'm a senior planner here at town hall in the Office of Community and Economic Development. And I was the lead staff coordinator for the Hadley Elementary School Reuse Advisory Committee. So tonight, I'll be giving you a brief presentation of the work that we've done over the course of the last eight months. So just a little bit about our committee members, we had 19 committee members from various neighborhoods with various professional skill and personal experience in town. They represented multiple committees and a lot of new faces as well, which was really great. So we had a wonderful pool of talent and pool of thoughtful, knowledgeable people working on this committee. As you may know, the committee was formed by town meeting in November of 2020. And it gave a committee charge that we tried to respond to, to the best of our ability. The charge included specific provisions for the following. As Mr. Duffy already said, market rate housing was not to be considered in our research for this. We were to prioritize preservation of some or all of the building, and the analysis should include feasibility of town ownership. There were also additional considerations for open space, municipal and public use, local commercial use, and non-market rate housing. So this is just an overview of the process that we undertook. The committee officially kicked off in January of 2021 and wrapped and gave our report to the select board in August. We had about 20, a little over 20 public meetings that included the entire committee and some of our subgroup meetings, which were held virtually and available to the public. There were two community engagement efforts, a survey and an open house, and I'll address those a little bit more. Those pictures there are from our open house, which was in July in Linsedas Park. So a little bit about kind of the framework that we worked in, some of the initial analysis that went into the scenario discussion that we'll get to in a minute. We held an initial committee visioning session and developed five themes out of the conversations that came out of that. And the themes were used as guideposts throughout our process. And additionally, the committee reviewed, you know, relevant plans and goals already as a part of the town documents, including the 2025 master plan, which covered goals for historic preservation, economic development, housing, public facilities, land use, and zoning. As I said, there were two public outreach efforts, a community survey and an open house. The survey was released virtually and we received 789 responses. We also had options for print or mailing for people who couldn't access it virtually. And we held an in-person open house in Linsedas Park in July. And additionally, we offered an online feedback component for those who couldn't make it. So we formed subgroups. Because we had a large committee, we really wanted to get down deep into some details, which required more specific focus groups. And so we formed our subgroups listed here to look at specific uses, evaluate them, and then make recommendations to the larger committee. And each subgroup was tasked with reporting on the following evaluation criteria, design and use needs, you know, specifics for each use that we might not know about and whether or not it would work on a building and on a site like Hadley, funding sources, ownership, whether town ownership was feasible to continue, a project schedule, does this use require the town to go out to bid or anyone to go out to bid, and last but not least, incorporating community input into the recommendation. We also had two committee members research interior and exterior design elements, including the design of an exterior public space, ADA access, and placement of an elevator. So this is just a high-level look at the building and site analysis that the committee did. We took a site tour of the buildings with Facilities Director Max Casper. I wanted to note a couple of major points that informed our scenarios. The existing annex is very inefficient in its connection to the main building and its lack of access, really. You know, it's only connected by a first floor walkway, and that turned out to be really not workable when we were looking at providing access to all floors, at providing an elevator, and so that featured heavily in kind of some of the decisions made for scenarios. Additionally, the current parking footprint really doesn't serve other uses effectively. It kind of wraps around the building and actually minimizes the amount of spaces you could maybe have, so we tried to rethink where parking and open space could exist on the site. So I'm going to get into the three recommended scenarios that the committee presented to the select board in August here. Scenario one we called mixed-use commercial. So in this scenario, we're reusing the main building of Hadley, but the annex has been removed, and there's a small entry addition is what we're calling it that is able to take use of the current stair corridor to provide an elevator to all floors and, of course, relocating the stairs a little bit. There are anticipated arts and civic uses in the basement and first floor and commercial uses on floors one through three. We anticipate that this would be a public-private partnership with a long-term lease agreement or split ownership with a developer and a combination of traditional and private equity and grants and public allocation. The committee identified the opportunity to reuse the auditorium as a function and performance space. This has been successfully done in other reuse models and also kind of takes advantage of a very cool opportunity we don't necessarily have right here in town to have a multifunctional performing venue. Scenario two looked at affordable housing, and again, this reuses the main building but with a new annex addition. We still are able to accommodate some truly public open space on site, relocated the parking, and on the first floor of the addition anticipate a public space for full community use. Its entrances are relocated to the new addition, as I said, to kind of accommodate this full access to the building. Low-income housing tax credits fund affordable units, and that's a key financial tool in this scenario, and we would anticipate, again, a long-term ground lease to retain town ownership. These units would count towards the town's affordable requirement and help us in meeting those goals that we've identified. The last scenario is about hospitality, and again, we're reusing the main building with a new addition slightly smaller than the one anticipated for rental units because hotel units tend to be smaller in square footage. We're still accommodating some open space amenities, including the playground and the community plaza, and we also anticipate that there would be a function room and potentially event space, again, in the auditorium, and there's potential for interior town access, which would be determined later on through site conditions but is a priority of the committee and hopefully a priority of the town. So, financing and ownership, private equity and traditional financing would be the full model. We would be looking for a hotel developer and hotel operator to develop the site, and again, we're looking at the opportunity to reuse the auditorium and providing something that's been identified in our master plan and other planning documents as a needed item, an overnight stay opportunity that we don't currently have in town. The committee also voted to recommend consensus items that emerge as priorities throughout the process. These are the four of them. I'm not going to read them all to you, but they address some of the conversations that the committee had and agreed upon and wanted to specifically include in the report, and Mr. Moderator, that is my presentation. [Speaker 1] (40:50 - 41:07) Thank you very much. Is there debate on Mr. Duffy's motion? Ms. Goodman? Ms. Goodman, raised and lowered her hand. Is there debate on Mr. Duffy's motion? Yes, Ms. Goodman. [Speaker 26] (41:12 - 41:13) All right, thank you. Can you hear me? [Speaker 1] (41:13 - 41:14) Yes, please proceed. [Speaker 26] (41:15 - 42:22) Okay, thank you. As Tim Dorsey states, the select board's reasons for sponsoring this article are primarily non-financial. However, passing this article will have a financial impact on the town. Based on the Swanscot Town Meeting Guide available on the town website under Town Meeting Basics, I quote, the Finance Committee is appointed to advise Town Meeting on all questions that have a financial bearing on the town. In the interest of the time of this body, I know there will be much debate on Article 2. Until FinCom has a chance to review the financial implications of this article and advise Town Meeting on the monetary impact to the town, this is the primary purpose of our Finance Committee, and we cannot make a sound decision without that information. I move that we indefinitely postpone Article 1. It would be irresponsible for Town Meeting to move forward with a vote on this matter without having a recommendation from FinCom. Voting on an article that has financial implications without FinCom's recommendation sets a dangerous precedent. [Speaker 1] (42:26 - 42:59) So I hear a motion to indefinitely, to amend the main motion to indefinite postponement. Is there a second? I'll look for a thumbs up. Thank you. And I don't know if you have anything additional to add to that, but I would point out that in our Charter and in the Enabling State legislation, all matters of finance are referred to the Finance Committee. There is no requirement that the Finance Committee make comment. Mr. Patsios. Thank you. [Speaker 3] (43:00 - 43:06) I find it a little unusual that we do a study to determine some of the parameters of things. [Speaker 4] (43:07 - 43:38) And prior to doing the study, you exclude certain things from being evaluated. That's a little odd. Comment one. Secondly, I did notice in the presentation you were talking about a 99-year ground lease. It's my understanding that the town can only do a 30-year lease and nothing longer than that. And to that point, a 99-year ground lease in Massachusetts does revert the fee. So I would suggest that we look carefully at that. [Speaker 1] (43:39 - 44:00) Thank you. Thank you. Any further discussion? Mr. Somalis. Go ahead. [Speaker 12] (44:00 - 44:00) Thank you. [Speaker 1] (44:01 - 44:04) Can you hear me okay? Yes. And again, your name and precinct. [Speaker 12] (44:04 - 45:04) Andrew Somalis, Precinct 6. So a couple of questions along the line of what Charlie just raised. First, I'm kind of finding it hard to understand why we're voting on what to potentially do with Hadley School before we decide whether or not what we're going to do with the Stanley School project. It seems to be putting the cart before the horse. And then also an observation. It seems like a lot of the issues that we had in terms of potential renovations for the Hadley School in terms of infrastructure, it seems like it has been able to be solved with some of these other mixed-use projects, such as putting an elevator in to make it more accessible, putting additions on, parking, driveway, reusing the auditorium. It seems like these are all things that we could use in a refurbished school that somehow we're able to do for the reused version of Hadley, but not examined for currently using at the school for refurbishment. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (45:05 - 45:17) Thank you, Mr. Somalis. I am informed that the town does currently have a 99-year ground lease involving the Michon School reuse, just in case there's a question on that. Mr. Duffy. [Speaker 19] (45:23 - 46:13) Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Neil Duffy, Precinct 2. Just on the matter of the financial impact stated in my previous words, we don't view this as a financial article. We really look at it as it's the value of that property to the town and having it used for community use. We really feel that that reflects the feelings of a majority of people in town. We certainly also view this as really almost more of like a zoning article where you're prohibiting a use and the Finance Committee does not opine on zoning articles. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (46:14 - 46:23) Thank you, Mr. Duffy. I see that Reverend Farber-Robertson is raising a point of order or personal privilege. Is that correct, ma'am? [Speaker 20] (46:25 - 46:40) Yes, thank you. I think it's a point of order. I just want to be clear. We are only discussing whether or not to indefinitely postpone or whatever that motion would be. We're not discussing the motion itself. Is that correct? [Speaker 1] (46:41 - 47:09) That is correct. Although a motion to indefinitely postpone would, if that were to become the main motion, it would be in order to discuss the thing being postponed. You make a good point. I will remind members that we are discussing whether or not to pass the amendment of Mr. Duffy's original motion. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. I see Ms. Pappalardo. [Speaker 27] (47:12 - 47:20) Hi, Elizabeth Pappalardo, Precinct 4. If we vote on this motion, are we locked into these three choices? [Speaker 1] (47:22 - 49:19) No, that is not the case. This merely enables the select board to put that restriction on it. Is there further discussion of Ms. Goodman's proposed amendment? All those in favor of Ms. Goodman's proposed amendment to strike Mr. Duffy's initial motion and replace it with a motion to indefinitely postpone, please use the green yes. All those opposed, please use the red no. This requires a simple majority. With the voting open for a full 30 seconds, 10 having gone by. 10 seconds. Please let me know if you're ready to record this vote and let me know when recorded. Go ahead. And by a vote of 68 in favor, 200 against, Ms. Goodman's amendment fails. We now return to the initial motion made by Mr. Duffy. Let me clear that feedback so we can be ready. Is there any further debate on Mr. Duffy's motion? Ms. Reverend Farber-Robertson. [Speaker 20] (49:21 - 49:38) Thank you. My question is when we were talking about affordable housing and the town's need to increase its affordable housing, my understanding is that if we choose senior housing, that does not count toward our aspiration to 10%. [Speaker 1] (49:38 - 49:44) I'm going to check to get you the answer on that, but I'm not sure that's the case. [Speaker 20] (49:45 - 49:46) Thank you. I don't know either. [Speaker 1] (49:50 - 49:56) If it is senior housing, it would count toward our 40B limit. [Speaker 20] (49:57 - 49:59) It would. Okay. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (49:59 - 50:00) Ms. Pappalardo. [Speaker 27] (50:03 - 51:00) Hi, Elizabeth Pappalardo, Precinct 4. I like the idea of it not being market rate housing. However, no offense to the committee because I think you guys did a beautiful job and I was so impressed, but you were charged with keeping the building and I would like to see a scenario where Hadley property becomes open space. I don't know if everybody realizes it. If you're kind of new, maybe you don't realize it's not just the building that this town uses. We use the whole grounds. The kids sit on the stairs. They play everywhere. Castleberry Fair the other day, 31 cars. I mean, they were jammed in, right? But there were 31 cars there. So if we give this to a developer, we're losing hangout space and we're also losing parking. And I just could see something really cool going in there. We could do a rink. We could do an outdoor auditorium. Like there's so many options. So I would encourage coming up with an open space scenario we can look at as well. [Speaker 1] (51:01 - 51:11) Thanks. That's great. And that is still a possibility. This article motion by Mr. Duffy would not preclude that. Mr. Beaupre. [Speaker 24] (51:21 - 52:47) There you are. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Larry Beaupre, Town Meeting Member, Precinct 6. I also served on the Hadley Reuse Committee and I just wanted to briefly address the question that another member raised about are we putting the cart before the horse here? And that sort of resonated with me because a number of people I spoke to during the process raised the same question. And one of the reasons why we got together and did this was if you look at the history of where we have turned over buildings, thinking the Greenwood Avenue School and then the Michonne School, we haven't really had any sort of vision or thought or alternatives about what we should do with them. And they sat vacant for a number of years and people were not very pleased by that outcome. So what we are trying to do is in advance of the vote on Article 2 to present, I hope, to Town Meeting a vision that there are some important and exciting things we can do with these buildings and that we will not have another scenario where a building goes unused. Hadley is a prime spot of land within our town and we're very excited about what could be done with it, either the opportunities that we put together in the report that Molly did such a great job on or something else that comes up. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (52:48 - 53:11) Thank you. That's well said, Mr. Beaupre. And I would remind members that we are voting tonight simply on the deed restriction to preclude the use of the space to develop market rate housing. It's not to decide what will go there. It's not to solve what it could be in the future with the exception of the market rate housing question. Ms. Vassilio. [Speaker 29] (53:15 - 54:14) Hi, thank you. Ticia Vassilio, Precinct 5. Just speaking from my perspective being on the Board of Assessors, this could be a very high tax generating property. And I think it is critical that we do look at the financial impact before we make this decision, especially given that we will be voting on the next article for almost $100 million to build the new school. This is something that could offset some of that cost potentially. And I think it's important to take that into account when we're making this decision. And again, people are talking about putting the cart before the horse. We have time to make this decision. This isn't something that has to be decided tonight. We can do a more thorough analysis and make a more well-informed decision when the time comes. Thank you. [Speaker 1] (54:14 - 54:25) Thank you, Ms. Vassilio. Ms. Martin-Epstein, floor is yours. [Speaker 21] (54:26 - 55:36) Thanks. Kim Martin-Epstein, Town Meeting Member, Precinct 3. I just wanted to clarify that it was my understanding that the whole reason that we're talking about precluding or restricting against market rate housing was that it was generally this body in this town that had decided that regardless of what else happens, that was a no-go. And so I think procedurally, we're just taking the opportunity to get over a particular ilk of zoning requirement and get it out of the way. I think that the financial impact of all of the other potential choices, they're all actual tax-generating endeavors, every single one of them. There's not a single one on the list that wouldn't have a positive financial impact if the question is how much. Agreed, it hasn't been decided yet. And all we are doing today is essentially codifying something that this body has talked about it as being, and the Highly Reused Committee as a wing of this body has talked about being something on the need-to-do list. And that's really what we're getting done now. And by the way, it does take a very, very long time to reuse town property, and there's no way to start too early. [Speaker 1] (55:38 - 56:06) Thank you, Ms. Martin-Epstein. Yes, you are correct. This body did opine at its last session that the Hadley Reuse Committee should not be looking at market rate housing. So we are taking that vote of town meeting and now making it tangible for the Select Board. Mr. Spritz, go ahead, sir. Unmute yourself. [Speaker 19] (56:07 - 56:07) Yes. [Speaker 6] (56:08 - 56:49) So Wayne Spritz, Precinct 2. I just wanted to make the comment regarding the Finance Committee's decision to not comment and to take a neutral stand. I don't necessarily look at the Finance Committee's responsibility to necessarily vote pro or against, but certainly I believe that the Finance Committee could have enlightened town meeting on some of the financial consequences one way or the other in some sense of report, which would have been, again, helpful for us to have a semi-intelligent conversation, at least regarding the financial principles of the matter. [Speaker 1] (56:49 - 57:02) I'll just leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Spritz. Mr. Iannacone, go ahead, sir. You'll need to unmute. [Speaker 30] (57:02 - 57:05) Yes, I would like to call the previous question. [Speaker 1] (57:06 - 1:00:28) Mr. Iannacone has called the previous question, which would end debate on this topic. Is there a second? I see a second. Calling the previous question will end debate and we'll move directly to a vote on Mr. Duffy's original motion. It requires two-thirds vote to end debate. Accordingly, all those in favor of Mr. Iannacone's motion to call the previous question, please use the green yes button. All those opposed, the red no button. 30 seconds, 10 seconds. Are we ready to record this vote? Please do so now. And by a vote of 254 in favor, 19 against, Mr. Iannacone's motion to call the previous question is passed and we move directly to a vote. Let me clear the votes and we will begin now. 30 seconds. All those in favor of Mr. Duffy's original motion, please signify by using the green yes. All those opposed, the red no. This does require two-thirds. 10 seconds. Are we ready to record? Please record the vote and let me know when you are done. And by a vote of 229 in favor, 50 opposed, Mr. Duffy's motion carries. Thank you very much. Now, before we come to article two, I need to announce that this is a project I'm fairly passionate about and served on the school building committee. Therefore, I'm going to step down as moderator for this. I have asked a longtime town meeting member, a lifelong Swanscott resident, a internationally renowned lawyer, and moreover, the son of our longest serving moderator ever, Jeff Goldman, to serve as moderator pro tem. So with your indulgence, Madam Clerk, would you please swear in Mr. Goldman? [Speaker 28] (1:00:45 - 1:01:17) I, Jeff Goldman, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully and impartially perform all the duties imposed upon me as moderator pro temp, as moderator pro tem, in the town of Swanscott, in the time of Swanscott, according to the laws of the commonwealth, according to the laws of the commonwealth, and according to the bylaws of the town of Swanscott, and according to the bylaws [Speaker 4] (1:01:17 - 1:01:18) of the town of Swanscott. [Speaker 28] (1:01:19 - 1:01:19) So help me God. [Speaker 4] (1:01:19 - 1:01:45) So help me God. Thank you, Madam Clerk, and thank you, Mr. McClung, for giving me the privilege and the honor of serving as moderator pro temp tonight. Um, we're going to have definitely a full and fair debate of all of the points of article to, um, I'm going to ask that article to be placed in front of the members. [Speaker 30] (1:01:56 - 1:01:57) Good. [Speaker 4] (1:01:58 - 1:02:38) I think everybody is familiar with article to regarding the new elementary school project. I'm not going to read the entire article, but the summary is whether the town will vote to appropriate the amount of $97,461,523 for the purpose of paying costs for the design construction and equipping of a new elementary school, commonly referred to as the new elementary school project, which we located at the current Stanley school site. I'm going to call on Tim Dorsey chair of the Finance Committee to make a motion regarding article to. [Speaker 3] (1:02:40 - 1:03:13) Thank you to Dorsey precinct for and chair of the Finance Committee, the Finance Committee recommends approval of article to as printed in the warrant with the following one change. Add the words in quotes at a town election and quotes. The words, subject to and contingent upon an affirmative vote of the town. I move the motion of the Finance Committee. [Speaker 4] (1:03:22 - 1:03:29) Thank you Mr Dorsey. Do I have a second. I see a second. Mr Dorsey. [Speaker 3] (1:03:30 - 1:13:32) So just, just to make sure it's clear what the amendment was if I don't know if you could put that back up actually on the screen for a quick second. I just want to make sure everyone sees where the language is being added. Briefly, article to please. About a little bit more than halfway down, there's a proviso that reads, provided that any appropriation here under. Nope, you've gone too far. Back up please go back up a little bit more please stop right there. Thank you. Thank you about four lines down from the top there's a proviso that says provided that any appropriation here under shall be subject to and contingent upon an affirmative vote of the town. What has been added is the words at a town election, just after the word town. Just to make clear that it would be a town election. So I'd like to if you could pull up my presentation at this point I'd like to take a few minutes to talk about the Finance Committee is favorable recommendation. Hopefully you all had a chance to read the report the Finance Committee report that was included in the warrant. We in that report we provided a table with key financial information, and we provided notes below the table on the funding recommendation. I'll be glad to talk about those. If needed, but hopefully you found that helpful for for this discussion I'll focus on the financial reasons for our recommendation for favorable action, and I'll talk about certain other costs to be aware of and to be managed. You go to the next slide please. Thank you. So the three reasons for our financial reasons for our favorable recommendation or set forth here first, the town has resources and strategies to fund this project in a financially prudent manner. I'd like to call your attention to a few elements of the funding structure that we've recommended. First is level debt funding, which will spread the cost across the cost of the project across current and future stakeholders. And second is we've talked about accelerating the debt to incur the debt as much of the debt as possible in FY 23 to obtain as low an interest rate as possible. And then to combine that with the use of excess reserves from our stabilization funds to moderate the tax impacts in early years. The second reason for financial reason for our favorable recommendation is that the timing for this investment is right from a financial perspective. We're in a low interest rate environment. The project benefits from a material amount of state aid, which you see listed there. And the town has available excess reserves to execute on the strategy I just described. The timing is right for this investment from a financial perspective. Finally, this positions the town well to invest in other strategic priorities in coming years. This project and the funding structure that I've talked about delivers a level of certainty. It certainly gives certainty around the investment needed for our elementary schools. We know the impact and we can quantify the impact on our tax bills. And we know the available debt capacity for other strategic investments as we move forward. This certainty is essential from our perspective in terms of assessing the financial viability of other strategic priorities as we move forward. This positions us well to really strategically think about where to invest in the future and to move forward with those. Next slide, please. There are other costs to be aware of. Namely, the first cost is associated with the acquisition of the easement. I know there's been a lot of publicity around this, so most of us are familiar with this. But the value of the proposed easement across the property of Unitarian Universalist Church is not finalized. And there are materially different views as to the value. The town's done its diligence to understand the value of the easement and has included that value in the totals authorized in Article 2. Please note that any dispute related to the value of the easement in the event that a taking is required could result in legal costs, but would not delay the project. Next slide, please. The second set of costs to be aware of in connection with the new school relates to operating costs. The operating costs will increase. Estimated at this time, a very conservative estimate from the school department is around an impact of about 1% of the FY22 school budget. The two major areas of operating costs change are associated with transportation, first of all. And there's a wide range of potential costs associated with buses, depending on the scenario that's ultimately selected. That's an assessment that's underway. The second main area of incremental operating costs relates to utilities and utility systems. I would say the utilities are actually not materially different. What is different is the makeup of the utilities. The cost of electricity will increase in the new school and the way the new school is constructed compared to the two existing schools. The cost of gas will be significantly less, given the lower usage of gas in this facility. So that actually nets out to not a significant difference. More of that $67,000 figure there is associated with the system operational costs. And really, that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, given the nature of the systems in the existing schools. These will be improvements from an efficiency and, I guess, newness standpoint. The staffing tradeoffs, I'm sure there will be members of the school that can talk to this point, but they do not anticipate material changes to its current headcount. And that's across the system. The school department characterized these estimates on the operating costs as conservative, and pointed out that there are opportunities as we move forward for potential revenue generation and further cost reduction, in the case of both transportation and solar, for example. And we're going to keep track, and we will be meeting with the school as they move forward and look to manage these costs. What they did commit and state to us in our meetings was that they do not see the change, the incremental operating costs as requiring additional funding for the school's department, beyond the typical budget increases that we have annually. And they look to live within the constraints of our budget as we move forward, despite these operating costs. Next slide, please. So in conclusion, given the strategies that we've talked about and the funding structure that we've talked about, the estimated maximum annual net impact on the median single-family household tax bill, the maximum annual, is $300. If you look at the chart on the slide, that's the green area is the estimated net impact, maximum net impact on the median single-family household tax bill over time. The green area assumes the funding structure I talked about where we accelerate the debt, apply excess reserves in early years. And then over time, as the debt from the high school and police department roll off, the net impact will decrease even further. So these are the numbers. Another way to state it is that the maximum annual net tax impact is approximately $58.09 per $100,000 of assessed property value. I know many of us received an email that suggested a $3,000 or $3,500 impact. I forget the numbers, but these are the numbers that would be relevant in the case of the funding scenario that we've talked about. So in sum, while there are some costs to be managed thoughtfully, the Finance Committee is of the view that this investment is financially sound and is proposed at the right time for the town financially. [Speaker 30] (1:13:33 - 1:13:34) Thank you. [Speaker 3] (1:13:36 - 1:13:38) Thank you, Mr. Dorsey. [Speaker 4] (1:13:39 - 1:13:50) Next, I'd like to call on Superintendent of Schools Pam Angelakis to make a presentation. Mrs. Angelakis, can you unmute yourself? [Speaker 8] (1:13:50 - 1:14:10) I did. Thank you so much. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for allowing me to speak before you tonight. I'd like to begin with a short video that will take you through our process since 2018, also highlighting all of the work that has brought us to this critical vote this evening. Could the video please be played? [Speaker 10] (1:14:33 - 1:21:03) Good evening, town meeting. I'm Suzanne Wright, Precinct 4 and Chair of the School Building Committee. I want to briefly review with you the work that the School Building Committee has done for the past two years to get us to this moment and the vote tonight. The School Building Committee is made up of these individuals who the MSBA requires as members. And these residents, we have also included in this volunteer group. It was important to include members beyond the MSBA requirements so that we could tap the expertise and the experience that we have in Swampscott. These additional members have helped to question our professional architects, designers, and engineers. They have led sustainability discussions, budget conversations, and community outreach. The SBC was formed in November of 2018. We spent a year understanding the prior failed vote and determining what we need from the professionals who would be taking us through the feasibility study to determine the best educational and financial school option for our students, our teachers, and our town. Since our design team started in January of 2020, we've had 30 public school building committee meetings, dozens of public subcommittee meetings, and nine public community forums. We commenced this work with kickoff community meetings. Our first community meetings were focused on developing a project charter. Participants identified key objectives that would determine a successful project. They included such benchmarks as on time and within budget, equitable and universal access, resilient, energy efficient, affordable to operate and maintain, flexible, future ready spaces. We have revisited this charter frequently throughout the past two years. In addition to the charter, community goals were also developed in collaboration with residents. These goals were designed to help us achieve the objectives of the charter. The goals were consolidated into four overarching priorities, education, site and traffic, sustainability, and our community. As we reviewed each site and each grade configuration option, we evaluated them through these four filters. These were the ultimate educational goals and led us to prioritizing a district-wide 3-5 school and a district-wide K-4 school. Our superintendent will discuss this further in a few minutes. Next, we evaluated sites. In a town that's only three square miles, every option has challenges and constraints. We focused on five sites and then narrowed down to three. The middle school property, specifically the lower lot and tennis courts, the Hadley school site, and the Stanley school site. Since we made sure to have a traffic engineer on our team from day one, we were able to have town-wide traffic analysis to look at student density, vehicular volume, and safety. The current traffic patterns around each school were studied, and traffic flow patterns for new schools were proposed. After reviewing traffic and pedestrian safety, vehicular volume, student density, and the pros and cons of proposed traffic and parking models at each site, the Stanley site was found to be the safest. It was also found to have less traffic and more parking than Hadley. In addition, traffic engineers suggested Stanley could have three means of egress, thus improving traffic disbursement and circulation. All sites and buildings would be new and therefore have better energy efficiency and sustainable features than any of our current buildings, but we still wanted to make sure we looked at site options with an environmental filter. A new building at either Stanley or Hadley would be bigger and therefore use more of the existing property. But a new school at the middle school site would use the most open space. A new school at Stanley was determined to have the best solar orientation for energy efficiency and daylighting, and also room enough for geothermal wells, which will offset the cost of heating and cooling. We finally looked to make a choice between a district-wide 3-5 at Hadley or a district-wide K-4 at Stanley. You can see the pros of the K-4 outnumber those of the 3-5. In addition, financial modeling from our town treasurer and external bond consultant showed the district-wide K-4 to be the most fiscally affordable option. You can see the site plan here. There are two distinct schools, a kindergarten to second grade lower school, and a third and fourth grade upper school. Both schools have separate entrances. There are shared space in the center of the building for both schools to use. Errors show traffic flow. The lower school comes in Whitman, turns right for drop-off, and exits onto Forest Ave. The upper school enters through Whitman, but turns left for drop-off and continues counterclockwise and exits the same way they came in. Emergency access is through Forest Ave extension. This is a beautiful and safe property, surrounded by mature trees and adjacent to Ewing Woods. There is a community play field and a community playground. In addition, there is play space adjacent to both the upper and lower schools. The inside of this building is equally as beautiful. This design purposefully to be welcoming and appropriately scaled for elementary students. Each wing will house a separate grade level in their own learning community. In this floor plan, you can see the second grade classrooms on the left and the fourth grade on the right. Each community is divided into two smaller learning neighborhoods with integrated special education services. All grades share common space in the center of the school building, including on this floor, an art and tech room and a full-size gym. The only gym in our town with air conditioning. Common spaces will also be available to our community. School building committee has spent an unbelievable amount of time listening to you and to other residents of our town. Listening to our professional educators, listening to members of our finance committee, conservation committee, planning board, and to professional architects and engineers and designers. We have visited newly constructed schools and picked the brains of principals, teachers, architects, and facility personnel. We are presenting you with the best educational option for our students, our teachers, and our town. For now and into the future. I ask that you applaud and support the work of the school building committee. Thank you so much. [Speaker 8] (1:21:06 - 1:26:19) Thank you, Mrs. Wright, for that video. Much appreciated. The Office for Civil Rights at the United States Department of Education stated in a 2014 Dear Colleague letter that structurally sound and well-maintained schools can help students feel supported and valued. Students are generally better able to learn and remain engaged in instruction, and teachers are better able to do their jobs in well-maintained classrooms that are well-lit, clean, spacious, heated, and air-conditioned as needed. In contrast, students and teachers suffer when classrooms are too hot, too cold, overcrowded, dust-filled, or poorly ventilated. This is not news to any of our educators. Our schools and students are thriving despite the challenging and often frustrating working conditions they face daily. We have the fourth oldest school buildings in the state. They are deficient in all the ways our faculty and staff have highlighted and been making do with for years. We have a fantastic opportunity right now to address all of these deficiencies and provide all of our elementary students, faculty, and staff with a future-ready school that this community deserves. Since the failed vote in 2014, we have spent the last seven years exploring various grade configurations, visiting new elementary schools across the state, and attending professionally-led educational visioning sessions with members of our administration, teachers, students, and community members. Our overarching goal for this project is to provide equity, inclusion, and excellence. This can be accomplished by way of our educational goals, which were highlighted in that presentation, but I'd like to reiterate. First is to align our grades district-wide. This is critical for the Swampskip Public Schools because currently there are three elementary schools made up of very distinct socioeconomic demographics. During the last school year, a regular audit was conducted by the Mass. Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and they flagged the economic disparities between our three elementary schools. The economically disadvantaged population at Clark School is 33%. At Hadley, it's 20%. At Stanley, it's 6%. By building a K-4 twin elementary school, we're creating equity among our students, faculty, staff, and families. Improving student placement is also important. This new elementary school will improve student placement within the school. Instead of having only two or three classes per grade level, there will now be seven, eight, or nine. This provides the opportunity to select the best match for each student, matching student learning styles with educator teaching styles. It also provides an opportunity to mix the student groupings in multiple ways with additional sections at each grade level. Creating small learning neighborhoods. Each grade level is dispersed on one floor in their own learning community. Each community is then divided into two smaller neighborhoods with integrated special education services that have flexible common learning spaces within each of those neighborhoods. It's important to maintain that small school feel where everyone continues to know your child's name. Reducing class sizes in the primary grades. It has always been our philosophy that it's important to keep primary class sizes smaller in these critical learning years. However, we all know that due to budget constraints several years ago, we were forced to reduce the number of sections in all grade levels K-4 across the district. This new elementary school is designed with nine classrooms in K-1, moving to seven classrooms in grades two through four. Enrollment will obviously drive the number of sections in these primary grades, but this also provides us with some flexibility for all grades. Improving scheduling and resource efficiency. In this model, the district will no longer have to share faculty and staff at three elementary schools. This will eliminate travel time for some staff between schools and thereby improving time on learning and scheduling. Support faculty in collaboration. Having all of the elementary teachers in one building will allow for deeper and more frequent collaboration between them. Professional development can occur at one location. Cutting down again on travel time and giving more time to educator growth. I leave you with this final thought for your consideration. In 2018, Swampscott High School was recognized nationally as a Blue Ribbon School. How phenomenal would it be to have our elementary school receive that same honor? It would be amazing to showcase the talents of our educators and students at the elementary level nationally as well. Our faculty, staff, students, parents and families deserve this honor, but it begins with a future ready facility. Thank you for your time. [Speaker 4] (1:26:22 - 1:26:29) Thank you, Mrs. Angelakis. I'm going to call now on Katie Roberts from the Swampscott Education Association. [Speaker 9] (1:26:29 - 1:33:15) Hi, my name is Katie Porter Roberts, town meeting member, Precinct 1. And in full disclosure, I am a volunteer on the school building committee. I started the committee as a newlywed and now I am the mother of twin two year olds with a third child on the way. So I do have a vested interest in this project. Tonight, though, I am here before you as an almost 20 year teacher in the district who has worked in every current building and as the representative from the Swampscott Education Association. The Swampscott Education Association fully supports the school building committee's proposal to build a twin elementary school at the Stanley site and encourages residents of Swampscott to support the project. The SEA bases its support on four principles, learning, equity, accessibility and safety. Learning. As educators, we are committed to teaching our students with excellence in whatever situation we are given. We desire to teach the children in conditions that are the most conductive to learning. Last winter, I saw classrooms in all elementary buildings in which teaching was occurring with the windows open, students wearing full winter gear, struggling to hear while air purifiers hummed and heaters rumbled. This will continue this year. And yet, students made academic progress. Lack of storage means materials are stored in attics, hallways and basements. It's frustrating to have to carry classroom sets of materials up or down three flights of stairs to complete a lesson. And yet, lessons continue to be taught. Student services and reading, math and for English language learners take place in hallways or small offices, floors away from student classrooms, or even a walk outside at Clark. And yet, students are closing academic gaps. Teachers appreciate the accolades for the progress made and the positive environments created in spite of some of the current building conditions. And yet, we urge town voters to support school staff with facilities that enhance the learning experience instead of detracting from it. In equity, we are excited to have all of our elementary students under one roof, so no student needs to choose a school or change schools because of their particular needs. My little sister has dyslexia. I remember the day my parents received the diagnosis. They struggled. In Swampscot, elementary parents who find out that their student has a different learning style may need to switch schools to get the proper services and make tough choices about whether or not the siblings have to switch schools as well. It feels cruel when this happens. A consolidation of resources means all resources available to all students in one location. During remote learning, teachers had the ability to collaborate in grade-level meetings, and it was an awesome opportunity. Grade-level consolidation into learning communities means that teachers can collaborate freely with equal resources shared by all. It also means that student populations in each classroom more accurately reflect the demographics of this town. Accessibility. All students, teachers, staff, and families should benefit from the experience that can come from an environment that supports learning and working in a healthy and strategically designed place. A student who breaks their leg should not need to have to stay home or switch schools. A teacher who has an injury should not need to take multiple sick days because they cannot walk upstairs. Every parent or guardian should, in normal circumstances, be able to visit their student's classroom. Attendance at school plays or graduations should not be limited by mobility. On a personal note, someone very pregnant should not be worried about working on the third floor because the only accessible bathroom is on the first floor. Safety. We celebrate the opportunity to move our entire elementary school population into an environment that promotes well-being in all ways. Ventilation, light, energy, exits, and entrances. To be honest, I was shocked switching from the middle school to the elementary. I was greeted by sweltering heat, water fountains that can't be used, walls that can't be drilled into, multiple extension cords from that single outlet in the room, lack of classroom sinks, flooded basement classrooms, cramped spaces, and custodians forced to unpack deliveries of pallets of books outside and then carry them up multiple flights of stairs to disperse them. The staff that worked so hard for our little learners deserved more. That's my reason for joining the school building committee. One last point about safety. While at SMS, I chaperoned the Washington, D.C. field trip in which a man attempted to shoot his way into the Holocaust Museum, killing one of the guards while our students were there. Since then, safety has been at the front of my mind. A double entrance with security prevented further loss of life that day. None of the elementary school offices even have a direct line of sight to the front door. Despite video cameras, it doesn't feel as safe. You entrust us, the teachers, to keep the children of Swampstock safe. Please vote to provide a building that supports those endeavors. The SCA wants to make it clear that although we recognize the complexity of the finances of this town, we are addressing the new school as its own issue. We would never want to sacrifice the quality of the teaching staff for the benefits of a building. And we believe that students in this town have the best of both, and we will advocate for the best. Thank you to the Superintendent, Swampscott School Committee, town officials, and the residents of this town for prioritizing our working conditions and the children's learning conditions. Again, the Swampscott Education Association fully supports the School Building Committee's proposal to build twin elementary schools at the Stanley site and encourages the residents of Swampscott to support the project. Thank you. [Speaker 4] (1:33:17 - 1:34:01) Thank you, Ms. Roberts. I'm now going to begin to call upon townspeople and town meeting members to offer their points of view. I want to remind everybody to please be succinct and to the point, because there's a lot of people who want to be heard. And I'm also reminding everyone that the discussion is about Article Two, and we are talking about a specific amount of money to be spent to build a new elementary school at a specific location, and we're going to vote yes or no. And I think it's appropriate that all comments be within those boundaries. First, Andrew Somalis. Please unmute yourself. [Speaker 30] (1:34:11 - 1:34:12) Hello. [Speaker 12] (1:34:17 - 1:38:36) Yes, we can hear you. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here. I think first and foremost we all agree that the schools in town needs significant work. There's no debate about that we all should be in agreement. But I think we should be using extreme consideration and selecting projects that fitting for our town scale and character. And that being said, I don't believe the current proposal fits in line with who we are as community. We mentioned a lot of talk about diversity and equity which I think is very laudable, but I think we're looking at this in the wrong way we're considering it backwards. I think, you know, in fact and ironically is will be further perpetuating this perceived sense of inequality to continue divestment of other parts of town we're essentially saying to other areas of town that we're going to systematically strip public resources away from school to have a school in the Clark School. We're consolidating all the resources into the one perceived affluent corner of town in a town that's required in a town that's just three square miles. It's gonna require a significant amount of students to either be state managed bus or driven from K through eight. I don't see how that's particularly equitable for all students. I think every parent should be able to experience enjoyment of walking their child to school at some point while they're little, and every child should be able to experience the joy that comes with an impromptu playground session with friends after school rather than being rushed on home into a bus and keeping the focus on our students. I think the play space has not really been thoroughly discussed the combined three elementary schools have a space of just over eight acres. The new proposed place based in the school is not even half an acre for three times as many students, I'm not sure how that's going to work during recess times throughout the day. We're essentially robbing a families of very things that make living a small town special. And then further, after extremely trying past two years during the pandemic right now just things starting to turn to normal, often the very real possibility of disrupting our students again through displacement and trail classroom learning during construction of the school for those children have entered kindergarten during the pandemic, we're getting them the very likelihood minimum, the three of the five grade school years fundamental years will be significantly disrupted. If not more. I'm not sure how that's equitable. Last we looked at the price tag that still doesn't include a lot of unknowns. The first I was mentioned by the finance committee was the EU church property. And what we know is that they're they're miles away that you're the town is proposed, taking the property for $80,000 and you charge 178 million dollars, which that's one year of the reserves right there, not to mention this be a lot of work that we've done on far south law road Mason Road orchard circle orchard road far south extension Humphrey Street Atlantic Avenue to redesign the streets to attempt to accommodate the dramatic influx of traffic which is not included in price tag. The ultimate result result in increased cost of taxpayers, which we're all paying some of the highest single family rates, the Commonwealth. I don't think relying on rating reserve funds the next 10 years to delay the otherwise impending substantial tax increase is a feasible way going forward nor is it responsible. I think, as I mentioned that the debate is not about the current condition of schools which here, everyone here is in agreement that something should be done. There's a debate about the very character right town what we value want more concrete construction, do we want to develop every last remaining piece of green space as we have been doing. Do we want to give up being a town as a destination instead becomes one more place people merely drive through on the way to Marblehead Salem switch Essex and so on. Do we want to preserve the things that make our small town so special community educational values that put children first environment property rights of its residents. We have options, we can refurbish our existing schools or build smaller new ones that commensurate with the scale and scope of our town in line more cheaply the cost of proposed mega school. In fact, is what a majority survey respondents wanted almost two thirds voted for something other than this project. Why are we not listening to our citizens, what they want what they value. Don't send our youngest students to a college campus, life is hard enough, but the majority being kids while they can a safe, small environment where they can learn play the friends and grow and not be overwhelmed. Don't throw away the rest of our scarce remaining green space, once it's gone, it's gone forever. I asked you to please consider this when you vote and think about what you'll be giving up as a town. The school isn't who we are. Keep swamps got small. Thank you. Thank you. [Speaker 4] (1:38:36 - 1:38:52) Thank you, Mr Simons. Claire Dombowski. I don't know that I see her here she had asked to speak earlier. I think she's not here is Mr Dombowski here. [Speaker 20] (1:38:52 - 1:38:53) No, I'm here. [Speaker 4] (1:38:53 - 1:38:56) Mrs Dombowski is here. Thank you, Mrs Dombowski. [Speaker 20] (1:38:56 - 1:40:41) I'm speaking, but I'm glad to talk about the importance of this new school relative to real estate. I'm a realtor for 43 years. And I just wanted to contribute that when people are considering what community to buy into the quality of the schools is definitely a big deciding factor. Our natural competitor is Marblehead, and I'm keenly aware that Marblehead has their educational house in order. They have the newest schools in the state, and we have the fourth oldest schools in the state. So from a real estate point of view, I think we have plenty of room to improve our situation. I know that there are some people who are concerned about the financial impact, i.e. the annual taxes on our property, but I would suggest that we put more focus on creating more value, more demand for our town. And when we have good schools, we send a message that we care about the future, that we have a high quality of life. And I think that in and of itself will add to the value of our real estate. And ultimately, we will all prosper. I'm very grateful to the Finance Committee and the management in this town because I think they've lined their financial ducks in order. So the bite on the cost of this school will be mitigated by all their planning. So that's all I have to say in relation to how the new school would benefit us from a real estate point of view. [Speaker 4] (1:40:42 - 1:40:51) Thank you, Mrs. Domboski. Elizabeth Gallo, and could you please, would each speaker please state his or her name and precinct number, as you begin. [Speaker 25] (1:40:55 - 1:40:56) Thank you, Mr. Temporary. [Speaker 4] (1:40:57 - 1:40:58) Yes, we can hear you. [Speaker 25] (1:40:59 - 1:41:36) Okay, thank you. Elizabeth Gallo precinct one. I have two questions. In the warrant. Under the Finance Committee's report. It breaks out the cost. The estimated project cost is 28 million plus the state aid was 34 million plus, and the town share is 64 million. So, if the town share is 64 million. Why in Article Two, does it stay 97 million plus. [Speaker 4] (1:41:37 - 1:41:39) Don't defer to Mr Dorsey. [Speaker 3] (1:41:45 - 1:42:43) Okay, that so that is, there's others that can speak to this as well but that is as I understanding an MSBA requirement that the full amount of the project, the MSBA is the state agency that's giving the aid that's committing the aid that it's a requirement that the motion in the article. Be for the full amount of the project. And they're, they're, they're granting of the state aid is dependent on approval of the full amount. They are committed to their, their portion of the state and they're they're committed to the state aid, but they require that just as sort of a. That makes sense as part of the process for the way they do things the town has to show commitment to the full project, they will contribute 35 4.35 million. Upon that, though, if you're muted Miss Gala. [Speaker 4] (1:42:49 - 1:42:52) Miss Gala Can you unmute. Could you please unmute yourself again. [Speaker 25] (1:42:53 - 1:43:27) I'm sorry. So, from voting from a layperson voting for this. I'm being asked to vote for the town to appropriate 97 plus 97 million plus. I understand what you're saying, but it to me it seems like, I mean is the 34 million, a positive thing. So I don't see that anywhere in the article to saying, we will get 34 million from the MSBA. [Speaker 4] (1:43:30 - 1:43:40) I think it's stated in all the details that we've been hearing about to answer that question I'm going to call on Peter Spillios, Mr Spillios. [Speaker 2] (1:43:41 - 1:44:47) Thanks Mr moderator Peter Spillios precinct to member of the select board. Miss Gala ask a great question. The MSBA program is a reimbursement program. They have a system of determining eligible and ineligible costs and if you actually you can go online on the school building committee website and there's a great detailed breakdown. In the form 3011 which shows those costs which are eligible, and those costs are which which are ineligible. And as we get closer to construction into construction the MSBA essentially audits our expenses to make sure that they are only reimbursing eligible costs, as opposed to ineligible costs. So, because it's a reimbursement program is the way that that is set for the borrowing capacity issue. The MSBA has entered has voted as a board, the next step assuming positive action by town meeting and positive action by a town wide boat will be entered, entering into a project funding agreement, which is consistent with the numbers that are set forth in your work. [Speaker 25] (1:44:49 - 1:44:59) Okay. All right. One last question. How many children are currently in K through four. [Speaker 4] (1:45:01 - 1:45:04) This is Angela, are you here to answer that question. [Speaker 8] (1:45:13 - 1:45:31) I am muted now sorry enrollment was 738 we'll wait till October one report, we're actually running less than that right now. Due to the pandemic, but we were at 738 students in June. Okay, thank you. [Speaker 4] (1:45:34 - 1:45:37) Next I'm going to call on Jaron Landon. [Speaker 5] (1:45:37 - 1:46:03) Thank you. And I have a couple of slides that I prepared this alley could put this up. Thank you. So, I wanted to speak here tonight. Can you hear me. [Speaker 30] (1:46:03 - 1:46:04) Yes, we can. [Speaker 5] (1:46:04 - 1:55:02) Okay, thank you. So I'm, I'm Jaron Landon precinct five, and have long been involved with the schools and variety of different capacities from school committee to PTO to the task force after the 2014 failed vote. And I just wanted to emphasize a couple of points of things that are important to me and those many in precinct five that I represent. So, you know, this is a 50 to 100 year decision I know it's a 50 year school Suzanne has reminded me, you know, well, are we going to rebuild in 50 years or is it going to take another hundred but regardless it's a really important long term decision for us, and, you know, if we had passed the school in 2014, we could be on our second building now. And so it's really important that we get this right, and that we have a long term plan for, you know, middle school and other schools if needed and so on Scott, so we can go to the next slide. Okay. So I just, I know, Miss Angela has presented a chronology and by the way I agree with everything that superintendent Angela Kiss and Katie Porter said, I want to get Marianne Hartman the best nursing suite, that's possible. You know, there's so many things that we need in our schools and I don't dispute that. And what I do question is this is the right plan. And, you know, and I know there's also questions about whether we can afford to wait or not. So I wanted to just take you through, you know, a little bit of a chronology and how I've become involved with the schools and, you know, what, what the task force led to, and how we led up to where we are now. You know, we had the failed town vote, and you know it failed, you know, less than 30% of our town supported it. And so a task force was, you know, pretty immediately assembled, which I thought was a great sign I volunteered to join immediately. And we recommended a few things we recommended a survey, what, what can we learn from the failed vote. We recommended immediate resubmission of the SOI it took a bit to do that. And then we recommended an update to the mass town master plan so folks moving into town excuse me would know what to expect the town community would know what to expect. And that, unfortunately, I don't believe ever happened. The superintendent created with her leadership team and educational vision she spent several months working on that and presented it back to the task force. The survey about a year later was was conducted by our town planner at the time Peter Kane I'll show you the results of that. And then the submission finally occurred a few years later. And then in February 2018, the school committee voted to endorse a budget cutting one teacher per grade in grades K to four. So this increased our class sizes from 16 to 18 up to 30 per class. That's when I personally decided to remove my child from elementary school, due to that class size increase and. And this is something that the new school definitely takes a good direction and reducing those class sizes and grades K and one, but it does not remediate this for grades two, three or four. Next slide please. So this was the survey that was conducted in 2016 by Peter Kane the town planner, and you can see what people ranked as the top four priorities educational quality, you know investments in things like curriculum, teachers, and retaining neighborhood neighborhood elementary schools was on the list at the time because that was very much part of the discussion at that time, I realized there's no neighborhood elementary schools any longer but smaller schools was what the task force took away from that long term school planning, you know, in the current plan, still, we don't have a long term plan, and then cost and you know we're proposing the most expensive option here, and I'm concerned about the ability to invest in teaching and learning. Next slide please. So, the six month time that the leadership team took to work on the educational vision and I'm not going to go through all of this but the leadership team is listed. And there were two things that were determined and, and one of those two was mentioned tonight as a goal and objective of the new building, and that was grade level consolidation. The other one was that fifth grade belongs in the elementary level not in the middle school, and this was emphasized to us over and over again. And the recommendation from the leadership team was an early education center which was pre K to grade two, and then elementary school grade three to five in the middle school and high school. And so I'm concerned that we're only meeting half of this vision, and that the vision changes based on what's available or the site that's available or the building that we can configure at that time and I want to make sure that we're making the right decision for our town to keep that community feel. Next slide please. So one thing that I am very concerned about is, you know, the US News and World Report, you know, as Claire Dombowski mentioned you know you move into town, what do you do you look up the school rankings. And this is what you see now we can debate the rubric, and how it's calculated from year to year whether using M test scores makes sense, but it is what it is, I mean it is a sign and one signal of school ranking, and our high school is currently ranked number 91 in Massachusetts, it's fallen in the last 20 years from number 30. And again, it can't directly compare from year to year the rubrics is slightly changing but I'm Cass class size, all of those things are consistently part of the rubric. And I want to know how we're going to continue to invest and make more investments because we need to make investments in teaching and learning, you know, teachers contracts we've had no contracts for a number of years at a time and then, you know, and then pretty low increases when we finally get when it's really important that we invest in these wonderful teachers that we do have in swamp Scott. What you know so my proposal would be to take on smaller more affordable projects if we can't afford to do both. And the SCA also comments on, you know, not having cuts. I happen to be on the school, the school committee for town. When the high school, just following all of the budget cuts that were made at the new high school in 2008. And these are the things that were limited eliminated at the time that I and my colleagues on the school committee we're trying to return and restore and find the funds to restore. This was all of health band up until the high school all of library, all three librarians were cut sped teachers were replaced with tutors. And, you know, we took out the middle school safety door monitor for example, and that wasn't a choice I made but a choice that the committee prior to me made and we tried to restore these things. Elimination of full day kindergarten has been repeatedly discussed year after year after year because it's not a state mandate we have. And I don't, I don't have to explain this to the educators that are here, but there's unfunded state mandates that the state requires every single year, that costs money that the schools have no choice but to do, but in order to pay for them they have to find money. So things like adding three buses or four buses sorry and where you know there's no guarantee we can do it the first year, but there's no guarantee that will be retained for the lifespan of the school because it can't it goes as part of the operational costs. And when you're making a decision about whether to have a monitor in the middle school, or to pay for a bus, you have to make difficult choices. And I just wanted to, you know, these are just some of the headlines that occurred at this time, about, you know, cutting health and library that were in the patch or on in our in Swanscot reporter. Next slide please. And in terms of safety and traffic you know safety is a top priority, I personally, you know, am less concerned with the traffic more concerned with educational quality, but I know my neighbors don't agree so this is a picture just from this last spring, you know, of the area right off of Forrest Avenue and Sergeant road. And this, you know, typically is what it looks like my neighbors have tons of videos of this. And I'm just concerned about how we're going to add, you know, 600 plus cars to this mix, and I haven't seen this adequately address both from a financial standpoint, or from a safety standpoint, you know how that's going to work. Next slide please. [Speaker 4] (1:55:04 - 1:55:06) Is Landon, you have about two minutes left. [Speaker 5] (1:55:06 - 1:56:52) Good. I'm almost done. So, the proposed school, you know, in 2014 this was the schematic that was used in the school at the middle school and elementary combined was going to be point four acres. This new proposal, and we've tried to estimate based on the U10 regulation field, and the community playground is estimated at less than we would have had if the new school had been at the middle school we're estimating about point three three acres. That doesn't include several pocket playgrounds, which are behind the school. And so, you know, we currently enjoy over seven acres and children 900 children are going to have to share, you know, point three three acres now. And one thing I didn't mention about traffic and safety is all elementary students are also in car seats, so I'm not sure how all the lanes are going to work. If children need assistance buckling in. You can go to my last slide now. Thank you. So, I just wanted to share my personal concerns about, you know, I think we can do better. I don't know if we can wait. I am concerned about the state of the schools but I wish that we had chosen an option where you know we knew that met the top four criteria that we had set out that met the educational vision, and you know retain that sense of community connection, even the preschool coming out of the middle school, you won't have those connections to those middle schoolers and as Liz Papa lighter pointed out, you know, we don't, we won't have that town resource of Hadley school and three, you know, schools in which kids can hang out and play after school. So that concludes my presentation. Thank you. [Speaker 4] (1:56:54 - 1:57:16) Thank you, Miss Landon. I have people who have signed up to speak ahead of time, as, as the town moderator had requested. But next I am going to take. I would like Miss Angelica to come back and perhaps respond to a few of the points that that were raised by Miss Landon. [Speaker 8] (1:57:16 - 1:59:04) Thank you very much. I know that this isn't a place for debate but there are some clarifying points I'd like to make based on that presentation for those town meeting members who are new. You should understand that I came into the position and the role of superintendent of schools in 2014, there had been three superintendents who touched that school building project. I was the third. So in my first few months of superintendent, I came into a building project that was already well underway. So following that failed vote I did form a task force, but a couple of points about that educational vision was developed in isolation by my leadership team because I felt it was important to get the people who voted no and the people who voted yes together in a room to figure out the issues. Half of my leadership team or most, almost all of that leadership team is no longer here in Slomstad. Everyone has moved on. The point about the reduced sections and classes when we had the budget cuts and we cut down to seven sections, there was not one elementary class K-4 that had 30 students in it. We went up to about 23 or 24 students. So that figure of 30 students is also inaccurate. In addition to that, those cuts that were made, I don't know that they correlate with when the high school opened, but we worked really hard in my tenure to restore all of those cuts that were made at that time. And I don't recall it being a direct correlation with the high school opening. So those are just a few points I wanted to make. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. [Speaker 4] (1:59:05 - 1:59:06) Thank you, Ms. Angelakis. [Speaker 11] (1:59:06 - 2:04:48) Mr. Grishman, please state your name and your precinct. Sure. David Grishman, Select Board Precinct 1 Town Meeting Member. It was October 2014, and I was walking with my wife, Amy, and our two kids, both in a stroller to Jackson Park after the last school boat when it hit me. And our two boys, who were two and 10 months old at the time, would never attend a new elementary school in Swampscott. It was truly an awful feeling as a parent to look at my kids and know they wouldn't have this opportunity, which is one of the main reasons we moved to town, the schools. Amy and I talked about our thoughts about why the town wouldn't invest in educational infrastructure. But most importantly, Amy told me if I didn't like it, I should go do something about it and be the change I wanted to see. Fast forward seven years later, and here I am doing something about it. Esteemed members of Town Meeting, we have an awesome responsibility tonight. As tonight we debate the course on which we will set the future of elementary school education in the future of our town for the next several generations. Change is hard, certainly isn't free, but we have an incredible opportunity to invest in our new elementary infrastructure. Basically, for every $2 we invest, the state will fund more than $1. We cannot pass up this incredible opportunity to update infrastructure with the state picking up a large portion of the tab that will ultimately save taxpayers in Swampscott tens of millions of dollars. This new school has been thoroughly vetted with dozens of public meetings held over a multi-year process. This was not done in a vacuum or under the cloak of darkness, no. These meetings were held on Zoom outside of business hours to allow for maximum attendance and maximum input. All the meetings were publicized and recorded and are viewable online. A big thank you to all SBC members for spending your time to make Swampscott and its elementary schools better. Yes, the school project is one of the most vetted projects ever, and rightfully so. It will be Swampscott's largest infrastructure investment to date, one that's long overdue and brings our elementary schools into the 21st century. For goodness sake, the Hadley School was built in 1911, which is one year before Fenway Park opened and one year before the Titanic set sail. Yet many are arguing about maintenance. A common argument I've heard from the no side is, had our buildings been better maintained, they could have lasted longer. How insulting, how demeaning to our hardworking town employees who currently maintain the fourth oldest elementary schools of all towns in the Commonwealth. You cannot, nor could you ever, maintain your way in the classrooms that meet or exceed today's educational standards, nor can you maintain your way to larger classrooms. The Hadley, Stanley, and Clark buildings have served generations of Swampscott children well. To me, this should be a happy goodbye. We simply cannot do what we have done previously, town meeting, which is kick the can further down the road and let another town meeting make a decision that we can make tonight. Let's do this, but let's first talk about what no means. So what does no mean? Well, for starters, it doesn't mean we're going to build three new schools. It means nothing happens. It means status quo. What it likely means is those with small children, like my wife and I in 2014, will have kids that are deprived of an opportunity to attend a modern new school in Swampscott. No would indeed send a message to children and families looking to move to town that Swampscott and its elected town meeting members that it's okay with substandard infrastructure and is unable or unwilling to invest in educational infrastructure. This would mean our children and teachers, both groups we all proclaim we love, would continue attending schools that have poor light, poor ventilation, poor exits and entrances, and lack ADA accessibility, among other deficiencies. Change is not easy. When considering the options tonight, remember the Select Board, Finance Committee and Capital Improvement Committee support this proposal. And as you heard earlier, the district, including the superintendent, support this proposal. The Swampscott Education Association, our teachers, support this proposal. Our elected officials and experts responsible for educating our children in the best manner possible are telling us this is our best option. Personally, when I'm not the expert, I listen to those who are. And the experts are telling us yes. The experts are telling us this is the best plan. And while it may not seem perfect to some, we cannot let perfect be the enemy of good. This plan is a very good plan that takes action and prevents the town of Swampscott from kicking the can down the road once again. For the sake of our kids today, and the kids of tomorrow, and for the financial future of our town, we absolutely and unequivocally need to vote yes. And we need to vote yes tonight. And once again, we need to vote yes on October 19th. My kids missed their opportunity after the last school vote in 2014. But tonight, I want to ensure that your kids, your grandkids, your neighbors, and future generations of Swampscott children don't miss theirs. Vote yes. We can't wait. [Speaker 4] (2:04:49 - 2:04:59) Thank you, Mr. Grishman. I'm going to next call on Tom Driscoll. And just to alert you, following up on deck will be a visitor, Angel Fagundo. Mr. Driscoll. [Speaker 23] (2:05:00 - 2:06:49) Mr. Goldman, great to see you up there. Thanks for doing this. I don't speak here tonight. I just like to review my personal opinions in terms of not the school, because in some respects, the positions we're taking today on the schools at this meeting are somewhat irrelevant. I'm elected by my neighbors, my precinct residents to represent them. My neighborhood has entered into quite heated battles about the school issue. Amazingly, some of the leading yes proponents who have been charged to work our area and seek support didn't even know it wasn't on the ballot. I haven't met anyone who is either in favor of it or against the school who doesn't agree it's supposed to be on the ballot. This is too big for town meeting. There's something the town needs a vote on. We can sit here and argue the point of whether we should have a new school or not. There's probably 100 people watching at home. This needs to go to the ballot, people. All we need to be talking about is put it on the ballot or don't put it on the ballot. I can look at my screen and go down the list and come within 10 votes of how this is going to come out. Let's get on with it. This is not about whether you want the school, don't want the school, why we need a school or don't need a school. It's all about the ballot. Let the people vote on this. They're the ones who are going to be impacted. We're just town meeting. The people we represent want this on the ballot. I'm telling you we could take the vote now. Put it on the ballot. The people need to vote. I just don't see if we're going to go back and forth about whether we need a school. We need a school. Thank you, Mr. Driscoll. Mr. Fagundo. And next we'll hear from Ms. Hartman. [Speaker 4] (2:06:50 - 2:06:51) Mr. Fagundo. [Speaker 18] (2:06:52 - 2:10:21) Thank you very much. I appreciate the time. Thank you all very much for attending tonight. This is the first time I've joined a town meeting and I'm very impressed with the conviction that everybody's speaking with. I think it's fantastic. My name is Angel Fagundo. I'm a resident of Precinct 5, 184 Forest Avenue. Just before I begin, I want to say that I am for our children. I am for education. I am for our teachers. But I'm against this mega school for the following reasons. The first of which is cost. I think there was some reference made earlier to specificity of cost. And I feel as though there is a lot of missing items in terms of specificity. The most notable of which is the Unitarian Church and the conversations that are going on there that could amount to as much as $8 million. The MSBA submission, specifically the environmental and geotech survey, which I reviewed, doesn't make reference to the blasting that's going to be required to make this project happen. Which is another item that I haven't seen addressed. And it's another cost that's going to be extensive. Then there was the operating costs that were brought up. Initially, I heard that this was going to be a $300. Most residents or an average household would pay about $300 extra in taxes. But the operating expenses, the additional operating expenses, would be added to that less than dollar a day number. But I haven't seen exactly how. I was told that it would. And then finally, there have been school board committee meetings that have been happening for quite some time. I don't want to go over the chronology again because we've done that quite nicely. But initially, this school was estimated at $110 million. And now we're talking about $97 million. I find that impressive because we're in a market where a cost of lumber has increased 100% over the last six to eight months. So for the actual budgets who have gone down almost $12, $13 million in light of the raw material increases is surprising. And it's bringing up a lot of questions in my mind. The size of the school, 60% more space. I think I've heard there are about 700 children enrolled. We're building a school to accommodate 900 students. That doesn't make any sense to me. We need to build the right school. I don't disagree with that at all. MSBA funding. There's also references to losing the funding. In 2014, there was the same conversation to losing the funding. That funding is a contingent on our proposal. And the proposal we made was for a building, for a larger school. If we had made a proposal for rehabbing the schools, the MSBA website indicates that there's opportunities to do that for them to help in that funding. So I'm not sure why we keep saying we're going to use it or lose it. That doesn't make any sense to me. And finally, I'm not going to dwell on this one, the safety. I think my neighbor brought up the safety issue. There are cars that are double parked all over Forest Ave. To exit traffic through the Unitarian Church through Forest Ave extension is creating a huge safety risk. And it's my firm belief that this project is going to lead to a child being hurt. And that's something that I just will not sit by and watch happen. Thank you very much. [Speaker 4] (2:10:22 - 2:10:29) Thank you, Mr. Fabundo. We're going to hear from Mary Ann Hartman, followed by Eric Backman. Ms. Hartman. [Speaker 13] (2:10:35 - 2:15:00) Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Mary Ann Hartman precinct one town meeting member. I'm also the middle school nurse, and I am chair of the Board of Health, also previous building committee member of the high school. So I say thank you to all those hard working committee members who are currently working on it on this project I feel your pain. Mr. Moderator that looks like your father's bow tie and I really hope it is. So, I thought so. So, before I was the middle school nurse. I was a substitute nurse, and I had the privilege of working in all the nurses offices and all the schools. So I'm pretty familiar with all the elementary buildings, my own children long graduated went to Michon, and I'm also a lifelong resident of Swampstout, although I went to parochial school for my elementary grades. I really hadn't planned on speaking tonight but when I read something posted on Facebook by someone opposed to the project. I really felt I couldn't be quiet. I know that's a real shocker. The author said he talked to many in his district that he felt he was representing so I'm guessing that many would agree with his sentiments and following views. Two things that struck me about the author's post was first, and I quote state funding is not essential in building a new school and losing funding in the cycle is not fatal Swampstout has had an unprecedented boom in real estate values Swampstout can afford to build any school that people want. This was one of the more, more privilege arguments I've heard today. It just assumes everyone voting isn't actually a homeowner in good financial standing and can just afford to throw away that 33% that the state is going to give us for this project. I think that funding goes a long way to keep the tax burning down for a lot of citizens in this town is vital to this project to say that Swampstout can afford to build any school they want is is pretty myopic. The second thing that really got to me was the writer saying that the nurse's office at Stanley School was tiny and straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting like that was a good thing. That makes it sound hang out and play checkers and drink lemonade. Yes, your kids were treated with the best of care there by nurse Cassidy, because she is fantastic at what she does and in, but that was despite the incredibly cramped inadequate poorly ventilated space that she's forced to work in many houses and swamp Scott have bigger walking closets than that office. This is like saying that you would like the nurse using the same medical instruments from that time period as well. Maybe some reusable syringes and cloth bandages would be equally as acceptable. The office is so small that there is no place to privately examine or talk with a child confidentially or in distress. No place to call to make a call to discuss sensitive medical information with a parent or a doctor, no place to separate a sick child from one who maybe just needs a little extra love because they having a rough day, a tiny cabinet to store vital supplies and records. I would get guaranteed that the person who penned this essay and many who are like minded who say it's not the building it's the staff that makes the school, or they wouldn't change anything about the small schools just update them a bit would never accept the conditions these nurses in the professionals that work in that building, taking care of the children of this town. They'd never accept those conditions and work in those conditions. They are unhealthy and physically and mentally challenging for both workers and children alike. These past two years alone, there have been. They have had to have strict limits on the number of children allowed into the health offices at one time, because of the concerns about air quality and ventilation. Think about that for a second, limiting seeing children in the health office because the ventilation was so poor, the health of those in the office would be put at risk. Well, I certainly didn't know Mr Rockwell and his paintings are very nice, but as sure as hell I'm glad that the medicine has advanced since his day. Maybe it's time that our elementary schools do as well for the health and safety of all our children of swamp Scott, and the staff that work there. I urge you to please vote yes on Article Two tonight to at least put it forward to the town for a greater vote. Thank you. [Speaker 4] (2:15:01 - 2:15:09) Thank you, Mrs Hartman. And we're going to hear from Mr backman followed by Mr hail. Mr backman. [Speaker 16] (2:15:09 - 2:18:53) Thank you. I'm Eric Bachman precinct five. I really appreciate the expertise, and I certainly heard the school committee present in various forums and I really appreciate they extended themselves. My, my main concern is in the design of this particular project which it's easy to come along and say no not this design maybe another when all this work has gone into it and it's just enormous. But I want to tell you what my impression is I've been here for 15 years the first thing I noticed I don't live next to it but I live within a half mile of it is the green space the open space I taught my kids how to ride bikes there in the church parking lot. I noticed I happen to be a wildlife person, I noticed on warm spring night. The salamanders migrate across the parking lot to that Vernal pond. That might not mean a lot to everybody but I have brought kids there they brought their parents there with flashlights listening to the spring peepers. This road that's going through there will destroy that habitat, period. I know that I've seen and I grew up in western New York I saw things get paved I saw congestion. That's what will happen it goes right next to it in fact I question whether the weapons, if it's in within 100 feet it will just be knocked down at a later time because it just can't be built that close to a critical wetland. If you go at night with a flashlight you'll see the ferry from come to the surface you'll hear the peepers this is like, you can't recreate this and our town is there are very few towns in my opinion that have this already so I think altogether I'm not sure what the number is probably 20 acres of open space the church allows us to be there. So, you know, to the Claire's question about the real estate. You know the reason East and the Upper East Side and Upper West Side are what they are is because of Central Park, not because of gleaming buildings and cars and parking lots. That is what they're for and so I think that the value of the houses in our whole town is due to that. So that's my own point now, if we could get to, is it possible to get rid of that design feature quickly and come up with something different I do feel I have to say you know Suzanne listened and came and met me and I really have to say that I feel, I feel as if they did that diligence but I don't think we were involved in a sense of an irretrievable loss, a road will just do that I don't you don't have to be a PhD to know that. To the other points, you know I am questioning I'd like to know, you know, a sliver of my lawn wouldn't be worth $80,000 that was what the UU church was offered that's, it's about 100 times more than that we all know that property is just invaluable so that part of the process makes me question the diligence of the town in this. Another point of my own kids went through the system. And I had to be there to drive to Newton to get a music lesson because there were no individual music lessons in band. At the time and sports fees are going up so I did see the lack of investment it's a bit ironic to see $98 million being sent for a gleaming new building. And we didn't get that right. So I do defer to the educators and the parents. They are the experts, not me in terms of what the kids really need. I tend to think that the small schools I'm told that they are better for education it's a fact, but that's what I'm told by lifelong educators. I'm told by a former principal, the kids are in danger. When cars are parking and idling and all the kids who, who walk who bother to walk are actually in danger I've seen that myself I had to constantly tell my son stay out of that parking lot. This is going to happen with this kind of plan. So let me ask, you know, I'm going to say no. But I'd be very eager to see if a bipartisan group could get together. Is it even possible to resurrect this in some other form, other than that road going through the UU church. Thank you. [Speaker 4] (2:18:53 - 2:19:02) Thank you, Mr backman Mr hail before you speak I do want to ask Mr speleos to quickly and briefly respond to the comments that were just made. [Speaker 2] (2:19:03 - 2:20:21) Thank you, Mr. Moderator. I want to respond specifically to the environmental concerns, raised by Mr Bachman but before I do that I would ask Mr Bachman any town meeting member that hasn't gone by the Clark school or the Hadley school in the morning and watch drop off. Of hundreds of kids on the street, doing drop off that I think that's a great field trip for residents to take as to the environmental concerns, we all share them. This project like every single project has to go through regulatory review and has to comply with all laws including environmental loss. In this case the design team brought on an environmental consultant very early on the process to advise about the design and to sensitize the design team and the school building committee about the concerns and the constraints of the site. This project, like other projects. Upon passage by the town will have to go to the Conservation Commission, and that is because there are some improvements within 100 feet of a resource area. And that work within that hundred feet of a resource area is regulated and is subject to Conservation Commission review and DP review. So that process will happen. And the concerns that Mr Bachman raise are valid concerns and they will be addressed and there is a process to make sure they are. [Speaker 11] (2:20:22 - 2:20:22) Thank you. [Speaker 30] (2:20:52 - 2:20:54) Okay. I think you can hear me now. [Speaker 4] (2:20:56 - 2:21:08) Thank you, Mr Spillers. We're not going to hear from Mr Hale followed by Mr Demento then Mr Burke then Mr pastor, please go ahead Mr Hale and because you're a visitor, would you please clearly identify yourself and where you reside. [Speaker 17] (2:21:09 - 2:24:24) Absolutely. I'm Ryan Hale, I live on Paradise Road here in Somerset, and I'm addressing you today as a member of the Capital Improvement Committee. The chair of the Renewable Energy Committee in town and participant in the sustainability subcommittee of the school building committee. I'm also a taxpayer. I'm also a parent of two children who fortunately had the means to opt out of the public school system because we were quite disappointed with what we found when our kids attended earlier on in their career. But today I'm here to speak to you solely about the environmental benefits and the progress that we can make as a community towards sustainability in our infrastructure. You've heard a lot of different perspectives tonight, and this proposal has been vetted very thoroughly by experts who live in the town and were also retained from from from outside of strong Scott to help us prepare really the best proposal that we could find. As it's been pointed out by a previous speaker. Tonight's not the night that we make a decision about the school project tonight's the night that we decided to put it in front of the voters to decide, and I can assure you that this project will help us advance our goals for the community around reducing our emissions, reducing our consumption of fossil fuels and improving the learning environment for our students, the air quality, the lights, the positive environmental learning, learning, learning environment improvements that we can make by building a structure like this. And it can help us really become a leader in in our, in our Commonwealth for the types of investments that we want to make right we've seen other investments around the town around, you know, rooftop PV, reducing consumption of fossil fuels in our homes, adopting electric vehicles in our town, and the design for the school would be one that it's entirely electric no no fossil fuels, using geothermal heating and cooling. It's cool technology. It's also very efficient technology. And so, by choosing to invest in a very efficient building like this, we can shift the operating budget that we have from the town from spending money on fuel to spending money on education, we can reduce the amount of money that we spend on on gas and electricity and we can put that operating budget towards teacher compensation program expense and really shift that money towards expenses that will have a direct impact on the educational outcomes for our community. So I wanted to reassure the meeting members today that these proposals have been thoroughly vetted. This is a smart choice for our community from a sustainability and renewable energy perspective. It is a smart choice from a fiscal and capital and operating expense perspective, and I encourage all of you to vote yes tonight and put it in front of our, our broader voter base and vote yes again when it comes up on the ballot. [Speaker 4] (2:24:24 - 2:24:50) Thanks for the time. Thank you, Mr Hale, Mr Demento. Mr. Mr Demento I'm going to cut you off because you're reverberating and I think maybe you have your speaker on that any better. Much better. Thank you. [Speaker 14] (2:24:52 - 2:24:53) The first guy to shut me down. [Speaker 4] (2:24:54 - 2:24:56) Won't be the last either. [Speaker 14] (2:24:56 - 2:28:16) Amen. I rise with emotion. And the preference of that motion. I wanted to remind town meeting members that regardless of what you heard. No matter what you do this will appear as a item on October 19. So, this isn't the only route to a town wide vote, no matter what happens tonight, it'll still be on the ballot for a general election on October 19. The election will not be canceled under any circumstance. So it will, the town will get to vote on this. But I, I rise with emotion that I have submitted to the moderator and I'd like to make sure that that he has passed it on to the moderator pro tem. Yes, yes, we have it. And that motion. I've been asked to submit on behalf of the Unitarian Universalist Church. And the reason is a mechanical reason not a substantive one. The church is unfortunately in the position where it appears that if their parishioners and the people who are very concerned about. Eminent domain as we heard a few minutes ago and the environmental impact. If they urge their voters, their people to vote no on October 19. That's a vote against the school. And they don't want that and they don't like that. So they have asked me and emotion they prepared to submit a motion that would bifurcate the issues and have two separate votes. One on the school and one on the taking of eminent domain as outlined in the, in the article and emotion submitted by the select board. And I have submitted that if you want me to read the emotion that you you has submitted, I would be happy to do it, but I wanted to explain the purpose of it. The purpose of it is so tonight. It would be dispositive of the issue. If the town meeting votes in favor of the taking of an eminent domain of the easement at the UU church. There is no appeal from that to the October 19 general election under no circumstances with this aspect. Be before the voters. It's only going to be decided tonight. And we would like to see it divided decided separately. So people who are opposed to eminent domain can get to vote. The way they want to vote on this issue separately and the church doesn't isn't caught in the pro school no school situation. It's a real conundrum for them. And I understand that and agree to submit as a town meeting member on their behalf. [Speaker 4] (2:28:16 - 2:29:08) Okay, I do believe we have the motion in writing and we're now going to share the screen. So that our members can see the motion to amend by Mr Dementor. And I'm not, it's in front of you I won't read it word for word but essentially, the motion is to separate the issues and article two to make one issue, the new school, and the other, the easements over the church property. So, do I have a second on Mr Dementor motion. And there's a lot of hands up who are waiting to speak, but I'm just looking for a thumbs up to see if anyone's giving me a thumbs up I see a thumbs up. We have a second. Mr Dementor, do you have more thoughts to add or would you like others to speak solely on your motion. [Speaker 14] (2:29:09 - 2:29:10) I am done. [Speaker 4] (2:29:10 - 2:29:26) Okay, thank you, Mr Dementor. I'm now going to take. We've cleared the hands for the moment, because I just really want to see who is going to speak solely on the motion to amend. [Speaker 30] (2:29:27 - 2:29:31) And I'll start with Mrs videos, and then move on from there. [Speaker 2] (2:29:33 - 2:31:33) Thank you, Mr moderator. I appreciate the time Peter spelling as precinct to share the select board. I appreciate the conundrum that the, you know, the church and residents feel relative to certain aspects of this project. I have for a long time, months now heard and been involved in conversations with you you and tonight is certainly not a forum for us to be negotiating or debating amongst the two parties. But I've been listening to their expression of neutrality about this, so they've expressed the conundrum they feel. And I appreciate Mr Dementor clarifying who asked this amendment to happen tonight. But the truth is, this amendment. If passed. And the discussion about the school. And so let me tell you why and the discussion. Now I don't believe that the church. Sorry, I don't believe that the intent of the you. But it is the legal effect of what what happened tonight. And it's for two reasons. Reason number one is back on June 23 the Massachusetts School Building Authority voted to give swans got the opportunity of a grant of about 35% of this project costs. Their vote was about the need to obtain the easement through the church. It wasn't implicit. It wasn't inherent. It was explicit. And that is because they approved the site plan that was reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and it was determined that you access provided the safest provided the safest. [Speaker 30] (2:31:34 - 2:31:36) Give me a second I think we're having audio problem. [Speaker 2] (2:31:42 - 2:39:30) Sorry. Sorry. And so the MSBA in approving that site plan asked us to make sure that we could have an approval that made it explicit, specifically from the MSBA says this vote is contingent upon the town of painting and easement by agreement or by MSMA for the use of the adjacent Unitarian Universalist Church of Greater Lynn site for the purposes of vehicular circuit circulation as described in the preferred schematic submittal, and the plan shared with the facilities assessment committee on June 2. Reason number two that effectively approving the amendment that's being sponsored by the UU through Mr Demento is by dividing the question, you will have removed the funding source for the easement, because the funding source. It's in the other part of the question. And so therefore, this easement won't have a funding source. And the truth is, we are going to be paying money for this easement. And yes, there is ongoing discussions and negotiations about it. And no I can't tell you for certain what that dollar amount is going to be. But I can tell you for certain that I know that if the town has to resort to a taking that I know what that value will be. And I know that we have budgeted properly within the amount that's being asked to town meeting. So voting for this tonight will do two things. It will clearly make sure that we can't comply with an express condition of the MSBA funding. And number two, it will remove the funding source from the easement thereby removing the tool necessary for us to come to a fair and equitable solution with the UU. And so while I don't believe the UU intended this to be a poison pill. This amendment is in fact a poison pill and supporting this amendment is effectively a no vote on the school tonight. That being said, I want to share with you some details about the easement because I know you are curious and I know it's very relevant here so Molly Can you put up, please. It's a couple of quick slides for you. The town is committed to a fair and equitable resolution with you. I want to remind you, before I go to the slides that meeting easements is not unique for projects like this, and it's certainly not unique for the town of Swampscott. For those of you that were here at the time that we were approving the high school. You know that's the case, because the high school required multiple easements from multiple entities. Upper Jackson needed help from agri industries relocating the little league fields that were in Jackson Park, Jackson forest to the middle school required an easement from Tedesco Country Club. Those of you involved with that process back then and on town meeting members or just residents will remember that Tedesco vociferously opposed the easement. They hired an attorney, they claim their property was worth a lot of money. This all may sound familiar to you. It is part of the process, especially before we have both because it's a political process. Soon after the high school vote, and the town wide vote, approving the high school, the town and Tesco Country Club came to an amicable resolution. You want to share the screen please. The easement that's being discussed here. I think you need to have full screen my perfect Thank you. This is an aerial of the site. I trust that you all recognize that the family elementary schools on the right hand side, and the churches on the left side with Forest Avenue, heading towards the middle school. Next slide please. Earlier this evening and else than prior to tonight you saw the site plan with the lower and upper elementary school, and Suzanne right in her video pointed out that for the lower elementary school people will come in off of Whitman, turn right and drop off in front of the lower elementary school, and they will then proceed towards Forest Avenue. You have seen in publications, some from the you some from people who are opposed to school, that the town is going to destroy the environmental nature of the property in the neighborhood with this. So I think it's really important to show what the easement is. Next slide please. In a second I'm going to zoom in on this. The easement is simply to use their existing parking lot has an axe and exit. The only increase in impervious asphalt or concrete is the connection between the family school, and the property, which will zoom in in a second, and sidewalks, one being a meandering path to go through one of the medians to make sure kids have a safe route. And the second to be one on the opposite side towards Laurel, to help them get to Forest Avenue safely. Do you mind zooming in and go to the next slide please. And the top of this image you see the word site exit with a red arrow. That is the only place, except for the sidewalks that the town is adding any bit of asphalt or concrete. So I share this with you just so you can see the expenses, because a lot of things have been said that sounds scary that sound awful that sound environmentally insensitive and it sounds disrespectful in the extreme to the EU. And I want to clarify that because the town doesn't want that to be the case doesn't believe it is the case. That being said, we are imposing ourselves on the EU, there needs to be full and complete acknowledgement of that we are asking our neighbors for something. And it wasn't done lightly, it was done after the SBC spent two years coming to the solution. It was done after the SBC and the design team team coming to the select board, and at length, talking us through every scenario. Every reason, bringing in their traffic engineer bringing the design team and convincing us that this was the safe and appropriate route, and therefore this easement was an absolute requirement of the project. The select board voted five to zero, that this easement was absolutely necessary for the safe and effective functioning of this project. So now we need to finalize an agreement, or not with the EU, but regardless of whether or not we're going to finalize an agreement, or ultimately the town will need to use eminent domain. I'm telling you that we are going to be fair and reasonable and we're going to work hard to come to a fair and reasonable resolution. Aside from the money that you've talked about the EU church has asked for several things. I think they're all really fair and reasonable things. They express concerns about the hour of operations. So the town agreed to limit it to a small duration in the morning on school days, and a small duration in the afternoon. On school days on non school days and during all other times, it would not be open for vehicular egress. The EU was concerned about lighting. So the town said, the EU will have final say over the location and type of lighting. The EU said they had concerns about science, and the town has said that you will have final say over the location and type of science, as long as it meets a minimum safety standards for our kids. The list goes on. And while we're not going to negotiate tonight. It's going to take some time. I do want to just reinforce to you that we take it really seriously. And regardless of whether or not we find agreement, or ultimately eminent domain is needed. We are going to find a fair and equitable resolution here, and we are grateful for the EU as a community member. And I think it's important to acknowledge that and to acknowledge that we know we are asking something of the EU church, and we don't take that lightly at all. Thank you for moderating. [Speaker 30] (2:39:33 - 2:39:34) Okay. [Speaker 4] (2:39:44 - 2:40:18) Thank you, Mr speleos. We've cleared the hands I do have written down the order in which people are asking to participate but at this moment we are only speaking on Mr Dementos motion to amend. Mr Behrman. Oh, I'm so sorry before Mr Behrman. We have a point of order. One of our members. Miss Martin Epstein, please go ahead and unmute yourself. [Speaker 21] (2:40:21 - 2:41:19) It's possible that Peter answered my question but I really just wanted to clarify the amendment. Because I wasn't, it wasn't clear to me since it's coming from the EU whether the real objection and thus the asking to to bifurcate it had to do with potentially a signal that the EU as well, what really doesn't want to go the eminent domain route and would wish, wish the town to bifurcate, you know, or leave to another time, a vote as to whether eminent domain would have to be used, or whether they really just bifurcating any method of dealing with the easement and if that's the case then I guess I would have to. That's what I'm asking. I'm just asking whether that whether the real decision to bifurcate had to do with an agreed upon easement or an easement after eminent domain or whether it was just any, anything having to do the easement that needed to be in their view carved off. [Speaker 4] (2:41:20 - 2:41:30) Thank you. I'm not sure that's an actual point of order but I will ask Mrs videos to briefly respond, and then we'll move to Mr. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. [Speaker 2] (2:41:30 - 2:42:16) By having it, I can certainly not speak to the intent of the you by having it be a bifurcated question and providing the opportunity for town meeting to vote yes on the school, and no one eminent domain is effectively a no vote. Mr Demento properly and correctly stated that the eminent domain question is settled here. Tonight, and only tonight. So we leave tonight with a yes vote on the school and no vote on eminent domain, then we will not be able to enter into a project funding agreement with the MSBA as this is an express requirement of the MSBA grant, nor would we have a funding source to enter into an agreement, in any event, because there is no funding in this divided question. [Speaker 4] (2:42:16 - 2:42:28) So, Mr Demento also has made a point of order Mr Demento. [Speaker 14] (2:42:30 - 2:43:27) Mr Demento you are muted. Thank you, Mr moderator. Based on, I want the opportunity to respond to Peter but Peter Spellios, but based on what he said using the word poison pill, and knowing Mr Spellios to be pretty good lawyer. If he says it's a poison pill. There is no way knowing the membership of the Unitarian Universalist Church, that they would want to be the dispenser of a poison pill of a new school, no matter what. If it's a poison pill. Then I'm going to make the decision as the proposer of the motion to ask the consent of town meeting to withdraw my motion. Okay. [Speaker 4] (2:43:28 - 2:44:12) Mr Demento has asked to withdraw his motion I don't believe we need a vote. Mr Demento has withdrawn the motion. The motion is off the table. And we're going to go back to the main issue. Article two, and I'm going to continue to call people who wish to speak. And I did say that I would next call on Mr Burke. Scott Burke. I'll come back to Mr Burke if he joins us again. [Speaker 6] (2:44:13 - 2:53:27) I was trying to unmute the moderator but it wasn't letting me but now it has. Thank you. Good evening, my name is Scott Burke I'm a town meeting member from precinct six, and I'm also a volunteer member of the school building committee but I'm speaking in my individual capacity right now. I grew up on Pine Hill Road off of Forest Avenue very close to the neighborhood of the middle school in Stanley, I attended Hadley and graduated Swampscott High. When I first moved back to Swampscott as an adult in 1996 for 10 years I lived right across the street from the cafeteria entrance of the middle school so it's a neighborhood that I know very very well. Personally I love living across the street from the action at the middle school and within walking distance of the field and playgrounds at Stanley. But I understand that living in an area like that is a choice of personal preference. I have three children who are now all out of our town schools, but all three attended Stanley. In 2014 I stood before town meeting and I argued strenuously against the 2014 proposal. It was a difficult decision for me because I wanted a new school. And difficult because good friends like Glenn Pastor and Joe Crimmins were on that committee and worked really hard and I felt badly to try to defeat what they worked so hard for. Some of the points that I made at town meeting at the time were picked up by the newspapers and some advocates of a no vote have recently posted some of those articles and comments on social media to support their opposition. Let me be clear. The two projects are not the same. And I want to remind town meeting and people are at home that are listening or do listen to this, that my main reason for opposing the 2004 project had nothing to do with the current proposal, nothing. My main reason for opposing the 2014 project was because the new school was proposed to be built in the bowl. And for those of you that don't know what the bowl is, that's the field behind the middle school. I strongly believe then and still do now that we need to save the bowl for the construction of a new middle school that will be needed someday. The best way to be able to replace the middle school will be to construct a new building in the bowl right behind it, while our kids still attend the middle school. And once the middle school is constructed the old building can be demolished and replaced by playing fields. Now at the time I had a preference for two schools at Clark and Stanley, but my main opposition at the time was saving the bowl. Now despite my opposition in 2014, town leadership invited me to join the school building committee three years ago last month. I appreciate that opportunity. I think my membership on the SBC demonstrates that our leadership, the select board members, Ms. Angelakis, moderator, town administrator, wanted to make sure that all voices were represented on the school building committee. Now you've heard all sorts of reasons tonight to vote yes, but I wanted to tell town meeting two reasons for why part of me regrets my role in opposing the new school in 2014. The first reason is that it's been seven years for us to get back to a town vote. That's longer than I expected. Those of you who are voting no because you want a different project, please realize that whatever your alternative project might be, whether it's two schools or renovations, I would not expect it to move forward any more expeditiously than the current plan. In fact, if this vote fails, the state could very well slow track, our third attempt. It's a little bit like the boy who cried wolf. We will have shown as a town and as a community that we are not willing to step up and do our share. The second reason for why I have some regret about the failure of the 2014 project is very important. And here I would disagree with David Grisham who said that a no vote means status quo. A no vote is worse than status quo, and here's why. When the school building committee sought invitations from experts to bid for our project and to do the design work. Most of the well known professionals did not submit proposals. As a lawyer who represents architects and project managers I reached out to a number of them to find out why. And what I learned was that these professionals do not make money on the work up to this point in the project. When we paid project managers in 2017, and what we have paid so far in this project, please understand that that's basically a break even proposition for them. This work is a lost leader. They bid to do this work in order to get the construction project. That's where they make their profit. And after the 2014 vote we had a black mark against us. We were a risk. In fact, some of them had even been able to refer back to social media comments during the election in 2004. We truly looked dysfunctional to them. Now we have a great project manager and a great design team, and I feel after talking to those people that would not bid that we were really lucky to get these experts to help us with this proposal that you've heard about tonight. But I'm very concerned and please don't take this lightly, that if this vote fails, the town of Swampscott will be in a very disadvantaged position to retain the services of experienced firms for another MSBA proposal. Voting this down will set us back in more ways than one, and that's not hyperbole. But to offset that regret. I'm excited because I know that this project is really great. It meets the community goals. It is the solution that best satisfies the educational mission of our school leadership. It's the best solution financially and I say that as someone who was a member of FinCom for a dozen years, and I've studied the numbers myself. It is the best solution in terms of equity. Equity between our neighborhoods, equity for students, staff and parents and guardians with special needs and special requirements. We can't afford to wait. We can't kick the can down the road. And on this point, I just want to give some history to town meeting that's part of my life experience in town. Back in May of 1975, the school building committee appropriated $4 million to convert the Alice Shaw Junior High School to a four-year high school. That was back in May of 1975. That set up the Greenwood Ave building to become a middle school for 6th, 7th and 8th. The new school was completed in the fall of 77 as I entered the 10th grade. And if any of you have noticed that the school on Forest Ave has some orange brick and some red brick. The orange is the original Shaw Junior High and the red brick is what was added to make it a high school. Folks, the SPC at the time did us no favors. They kicked the can down the road. We should have built a new high school in 1975 so that 15 or so years later we would have paid off the debt and we would have been able to start working on our elementary schools before the conditions became desperate. Also, not only didn't they protect us for our future, they went with the cheap alternative of moving a middle school into such an old Greenwood building that we put money in to renovate. But it left us with crowding problems back then. The Clark sixth graders had to move to Hadley because Clark was so full. Because Hadley became full, we had to rent St. John's parochial for K and 1. The cafeteria at Hadley was lost. It was horrible. They did not step up into the plate and I've regretted it ever since. They took the cheap way out. That meant we were faced to build a new high school that should have been built decades earlier. It left us to build a new high school at a time when we should have been working on our elementary schools. That's why we got to this point. Our decisions have immediate consequences and long term consequences. There's cycles of what needs to be done with our town's capital improvements. And if you fail to act and do the right thing at the right time, you unfairly burden the next generation. Let's not kick the can. Thank you, Mr moderator pro temp. [Speaker 4] (2:53:27 - 2:53:32) Thank you, Mr Burke. I'm calling on Doreen Hodgkin, followed by Jerry Perry. [Speaker 15] (2:53:40 - 2:56:41) Hello, Mr Goldman. Hello, Mr. Thanks. Um, I've heard some new things tonight and I guess that's what this is all about. But my name is during Hodgkin precinct five. I'm a member of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Greater Lynn Stanley School Project Task Force, and I've worked in education for more than 35 years. I agree that we need a new school, but I believe that town owes it to the taxpayers to do its homework and capture the full cost of taking land by eminent domain. When the church learned of the town's plans to take part of its land, and to fully understand what that meant, we hired expert appraisers who assessed the highest and best use of our land, given current land values. The preliminary estimates of value of the damage to church land caused by the proposed easement are between six and $8 million. After hearing tonight, I'm wondering why the town did not do its homework and do an appraisal before it reached this point, but I'll go on. The town, which to my knowledge, has not conducted a thorough assessment, has offered the church $82,500 for damages based on vague sketches and descriptions of the easements. The church has asked the town how they came up with this number, but we've not received a response. In addition, if you read the SBC report that was submitted in May, there's no budget line that contains the cost to taxpayers of taking church property via eminent domain and making the church hold the loss of its property value as is required by law. There is a big gap between $82,500 and $6 to $8 million, and it should concern taxpayers. We know there are other alternatives, or we thought we were working, supposedly the town has been saying they've been having conversations with us, we thought there were other alternatives other than taking the church land, but they have not been fully explored by the town. The church has been a close and cooperative neighbor with the town and the school department for more than 40 years, and we will continue to be good neighbors regardless of the outcomes of the proposed easement. I have high regard for Pam Angelakis and her staff, Catherine Porter Roberts, amazing. But as a taxpayer, I know my tax dollars could be better spent than on an eminent domain taking. It's time to ask our leaders to do their job. Tell us what, move it forward. So if this was, again, if this was the only option, why haven't we been informed of that? But I guess that's for discussions later between the church and the town. I thank you very much, Mr. Moderator. And I thought highly of your dad. So thank you for being here. [Speaker 4] (2:56:42 - 2:56:43) Thank you, Mr. Perry. [Speaker 22] (2:56:48 - 2:56:50) Can you hear me, Mr. Moderator. [Speaker 4] (2:56:50 - 2:56:51) Yes, I can. [Speaker 22] (2:56:52 - 2:57:14) Evening. Your father would be proud of you tonight. I know I wasn't him. Jerry Perry precinct three Mr. Moderator. I want to thank so many people involved with the process tonight, both for and against. But I think I speak on behalf of most of my fellow town meeting members. I know I'm ready to take a vote on this. Mr. Moderator. I call the question. [Speaker 4] (2:57:16 - 2:59:52) Thank you, Mr. Perry. Mr. Perry has called the question. That means at this time, we'll have no further debate until we resolve Mr. Perry's suggestion that we call the question and we'll take a vote. It requires a two thirds vote on Mr. Perry's request to call the question. This is not the yes or no vote on the school and the easement. This is a vote on Mr. Perry's call of the question. So, we're going to have everyone go back to their voting green or. Yes. To call the question and have a vote or no to not call the question and to continue debate on article two. As a reminder to everybody. At the bottom of the screen is a reactions tab. When you click the tab. You see a green checkmark for yes, and a red circle with an X through it for no. And at this time, I'm asking all town meeting members to vote yes or no. Shall we call the question and end the debate and have a vote right now on article two. We're going to have 30 seconds, starting right now. 30 seconds, where people can vote. I see a lot of people have not voted, and so I'm giving you 20 seconds to vote. Visitors of course cannot vote. Only town meeting members of voting 10 seconds. Five seconds for free to one, our voting is done. And I'm asking the town officials here to tell me if they can now register the vote, and I'm seeing a yes, please register the vote. Okay, we have now have registered the vote. And the vote has passed. I don't see the numbers. The vote has passed with 254 voting yes to call the vote and 19 people voting. [Speaker 12] (2:59:52 - 2:59:53) No. [Speaker 4] (2:59:53 - 3:02:16) So, we have, we will now vote on article two. A yes vote will mean that the town meeting has said yes to the new elementary school project, and to giving the selectment to the select men, a power to either negotiate an easement or to take by eminent domain, an easement, a no vote means that will not happen, the town meeting will not agree to the new school project, and the easements. And at this time, I am asking everyone to vote. Yes or no, an article to will 30 seconds of voting. I'm looking I see that most town meeting members have voted but not all 15 seconds to finish the vote. If anyone is having trouble voting. Say so now. Okay, I'm now ending the voting. I'll actually I'll give you five more seconds, 54321. Our voting is concluded, and I'm asking the town officials, if you are ready to record the vote. And I see that you're ready, please record the vote. Article two has received. Yes, votes of 244. No votes of 39 article two has passed by at least a two thirds majority. Article two is passed. I thank everyone for their thoughtfulness of comments and discussion on article two. And I will entertain a motion to adjourn this special town meeting. [Speaker 1] (3:02:17 - 3:02:19) So move Mr moderator. [Speaker 4] (3:02:20 - 3:02:26) Thank you. I see numerous seconds town meeting is now adjourned. Thank you everyone and good night.