Swampscott Select Board Meeting Review - June 29, 2022

Section 1: Agenda

Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance 0:01:46
Public Comment 0:01:53
- Comment on Beach Parking & Commission on Disability (Tasiya Facilio) 0:04:39
Citizen Citations 0:06:57
- Juliette Hale – Girl Scout Silver Award “Harold King Bird Blind Project” 0:08:05
- Elinor Swirski – Girl Scout Silver Award “Harold King Bird Blind Project” 0:08:39
Public Hearing: Liquor License Transfer 0:13:35
- Application for Transfer of License from Yan’s China Bistro to ThaiRiffic by the Sea LLC (146 Humphrey St.)
Aggregate Industries Earth Removal Permit Extension 0:17:08 (Taken out of order)
Appointment of Special Counsel (Land Acquisition) 0:18:51 (Taken out of order)
Update – Stand Up Paddle Board (SUP) Summer 2022 Program 0:20:06 (Extensive discussion and public comment)
Board & Committee Reappointments and Appointments 1:51:48 (Taken out of order)
Town Administrator Contract Recommendations 2:16:26
- Town Clerk – Jared LaLiberte
- Police Chief – Ruben Quesada
- Library Director – Jonathan Nichols
- Recreation Director – Danielle Strauss
- Building Commissioner – Stephen Cummings
- Asst. TA/Human Resources Director – Pete Kane
Land Use Planning and Community Engagement Processes/Timelines 2:22:32
- Hawthorne Property Reuse
- Hadley Reuse
- MA Housing Choice Initiative (3A)
- Swampscott Land Use Summit
Utilization of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funds 2:56:04
- Employee Compensation (Union and Non-Union)
Votes of the Board: Consent Agenda 3:11:41
- Vote to grant permission for Chabad of the North Shore’s 5K run on December 18, 2022
- Vote to approve revised minutes of the regular meeting of 5/25/22
- Vote to approve minutes of the regular meeting of 6/7/22
- Vote to approve minutes of the regular meeting of 6/14/22
- Vote to approve minutes of the regular meeting of 6/15/22
Town Administrator’s Report 3:13:15
Select Board Time 3:13:55
Adjournment 3:18:50

Section 2: Speaking Attendees

Neal Duffy (Select Board Member, likely Chair based on leading the meeting): [Speaker 1]
Sean Fitzgerald (Town Administrator): [Speaker 2]
Peter Spellios (Select Board Member): [Speaker 3]
Mary Ellen Fletcher (Select Board Member): [Speaker 4]
David Grishman (Select Board Member): [Speaker 5]
Katie Phelan (Select Board Member): [Speaker 7]
Tasiya (Cecilia) Facilio (Resident, Board of Assessors Member, Town Meeting Member): [Speaker 8] (Identifies self at 1:37:18)
Elinor Swirski (Girl Scout): [Speaker 17]
Ann Driscoll (Resident): [Speaker 10] (Identifies self at 1:26:21)
Danielle Strauss (Recreation Director): [Speaker 16] (Context implies role at 31:41, 1:18:56)
Andrew Steingeiser (Historic District Commission Member): [Speaker 11] (Identifies self at 1:20:48)
Jeannie Pats (Resident, Town Meeting Member, PTO Co-President): [Speaker 13] (Identifies self at 1:07:45)
Keiko Zoll (Resident, Town Meeting Member): [Speaker 12] (Identifies self at 1:15:24)
Deb Newman (Resident): [Speaker 15] (Identified by Chair Duffy at 1:32:33)
Margie Golaska (Director of Community Development & Planning): [Speaker 6] (Context implies role at 2:25:39, identified by Chair Duffy at 2:22:32)
Pete Kane (Assistant Town Administrator/Human Resources Director): [Speaker 9] (Context implies role at 2:31:44, identified by Chair Duffy at 2:22:32)
Amy Sorrow (Director of Finance and Administration): [Speaker 14] (Identified by TA Fitzgerald at 2:56:27)
Liz Pappalardo (Resident): [Speaker 18] (Identified by Chair Duffy at 1:44:10)
Juliette Hale (Girl Scout): [Speaker 7] (Initial presentation at 8:05, context suggests name from Chair’s introduction)
Judy Zoll (Resident, Child): [Speaker 17] (Identifies self at 1:14:31)
Unidentified Speaker: [Speaker 19] (Unintelligible start)

(Note: Speaker tag [Speaker 7] was used for both Juliette Hale during the citation and Katie Phelan later. This has been corrected based on context and content.) (Note: Speaker tag [Speaker 17] was used for both Elinor Swirski during the citation and Judy Zoll later. This has been corrected based on context and content.)

Section 3: Meeting Minutes

1. Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance: Chair Duffy called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance 0:01:46.

2. Public Comment:

Chair Duffy invited public comment, asking those commenting on the Stand Up Paddleboard (SUP) program to wait until that agenda item 0:01:53.
Tasiya Facilio (Resident, Board of Assessors Member, Town Meeting Member) commented via Zoom 0:04:39, expressing concern about beach parking scarcity, particularly handicap spots at Phillips Beach, questioning the impact of new parking passes for town employees without added spaces. She also inquired about the status of the Commission on Disability and urged making its reconstitution a priority.

3. Citizen Citations: Girl Scout Silver Award 0:06:57

Chair Duffy recognized Girl Scouts Juliette Hale and Elinor Swirski for their Silver Award project, installing a bird blind in Harold King Forest.
Juliette Hale explained the project originated from a state forestry report recommendation and involved collaboration with the Swampscott Conservancy and Conservation Commission 0:08:05.
Elinor Swirski described partnering with Wolf Builders, adding informational signs about citizen science, and leading a guided hike 0:08:39. She explained a bird blind allows observation without disturbing birds and noted the 50-hour requirement for the Silver Award 0:10:16, the highest achievement at their Girl Scout level 0:10:58.
Board members Grishman 0:09:26, Fletcher 0:10:05, and TA Fitzgerald 0:10:45 commended the scouts for their volunteerism, community investment, and hard work.
Chair Duffy presented official citations to both scouts 0:11:21.

4. Public Hearing: Liquor License Transfer (ThaiRiffic by the Sea) 0:13:35

Chair Duffy opened the public hearing for the transfer of the liquor license from Yan’s China Bistro to ThaiRiffic by the Sea LLC at 146 Humphrey St. Motion to open passed unanimously.
TA Fitzgerald presented the application 0:14:20, noting it’s a transfer for a new business in a B1 zone, maintaining the existing restaurant use with a full liquor license. He confirmed staff review (Police, Community Development) and stated the business aligns with Master Plan goals. Outdoor dining is permitted under temporary zoning. Common victualler and entertainment licenses were pending.
No questions from the board or public comment were offered.
Motion to close the public hearing passed unanimously 0:16:05.
Motion to approve the license transfer passed unanimously 0:16:13.

5. Aggregate Industries Earth Removal Permit Extension 0:17:08

Chair Duffy introduced the request for a 90-day extension of the permit, as the Earth Removal Advisory Committee needed more time to review information and pending questions with Aggregate Industries.
TA Fitzgerald supported the 90-day extension 0:17:41, noting it allows time for discussions while maintaining improved permit conditions established last year.
Motion to extend the permit by 90 days passed unanimously 0:18:23.

6. Appointment of Special Counsel (Land Acquisition) 0:18:51

Chair Duffy introduced the TA’s recommendation to appoint special counsel for land and easement acquisitions.
TA Fitzgerald recommended Attorney George McLaughlin, noted for land use expertise 0:19:16.
Member Spellios moved to appoint McLaughlin Brothers PC as special counsel for land acquisition representation 0:19:37.
Motion passed unanimously 0:19:51.

7. Stand Up Paddle Board (SUP) Program Update 0:20:06

Chair Duffy introduced the topic, acknowledging public upset over the abrupt cancellation of the SUP program operated by an outside vendor 0:20:45. He stressed the importance of clarity and discussing future plans, asking for a productive conversation rather than an “inquisition.”
TA Fitzgerald provided an update 0:23:09, acknowledging the difficulty for families and expressing disappointment. He stated the town made mistakes in communication with the vendor regarding storage, leading the vendor to feel the program wouldn’t be accommodated. He noted changes were too abrupt for a solution, though the town would have taken reasonable steps to support the container/program. He took responsibility as TA, mentioning the contract he negotiated. He stated storage was always an issue and compromise wasn’t reached regarding the container location, which fell under Historic District Commission (HDC) jurisdiction, although the regulatory standard wasn’t clear. He affirmed the town’s commitment to SUP programming, citing the Harbor & Waterfront Plan, but noted complexity and risk. Staff were exploring options for this year and next, reaching out to vendors. He apologized for the outcome.
Member Grishman expressed fury 0:29:00 over the cancellation impacting children, exercise, confidence-building, Recreation Department revenue, waterfront activation, and local businesses. He stressed the need to “do better” and avoid changing rules “at the 11th hour.”
Member Phelan expressed fury 0:30:43, particularly that refunds hadn’t reached all recipients yet, calling it “unconscionable” not to communicate clearly about refunds.
- Recreation Director Strauss provided an update 0:32:00, stating all 312 refunds were processed via credit card as of the previous day, requiring extra staff effort.
Member Phelan questioned future mitigation 0:32:33, asking why the town seemed “shocked” given the container was a known issue from last year (“definition of insanity”).
- TA Fitzgerald responded 0:33:21, stating they worked with the vendor on storage options, acknowledging limited space and the need for a long-term solution (potentially embedded structure, multi-year contract for aesthetic container).
Member Grishman argued the program’s joy outweighs container aesthetics 0:35:09, noting other non-aesthetic items often occupy the Fisherman’s Beach lot. He relayed resident sentiment prioritizing a working waterfront over a “museum,” criticizing the idea that a “loud minority” opposed to the container should prevail.
TA Fitzgerald acknowledged concerns 0:37:25, stating the container staying was more important than the program failing, wished they could have kept it, but reiterated mistakes were made.
Member Phelan pressed on the restriction issue 0:38:16, asking where a town-run program would store boards if the parking lot was restricted.
Chair Duffy clarified there’s no restriction preventing a container, only HDC review of temporary structure appearance 0:38:43.
Member Spellios demanded clarity on why the container was removed or planned for removal 0:39:05, questioning why the town didn’t simply file the required HDC application after realizing it was missed (“unforced error”). He challenged the TA’s use of “compromise,” asking who was being compromised with, suggesting it was the 312 families. He cited the HDC Chair’s statement (on Facebook) that the HDC couldn’t force removal. He questioned the decision change after a year-long process and contract signing, asking what changed 0:40:15.
Member Fletcher presented her understanding 0:42:11 that the TA offered container use, but the vendor chose to pull out, notifying the town via Facebook days later.
Member Spellios challenged this timeline 0:42:44, asking when the TA offered the container after the vendor had already indicated leaving due to the proposed fish locker compromise.
Member Phelan asked when the vendor was told the container couldn’t stay indefinitely 0:43:10.
TA Fitzgerald stated town staff (not him directly) met with the vendor 0:43:17, looked at fish lockers, and reported back a consensus to try working something out, which he mistakenly thought was a viable compromise. He affirmed if he knew it was “beyond the pale,” he would have insisted on the container use because the program was paramount.
Member Spellios again questioned who the TA was compromising with 0:44:14, pointing out the TA knew the container was a concern since September but signed a contract including it.
Member Fletcher suggested staff were led to believe the locker compromise might work, so the vendor pulling out abruptly was unexpected and potentially violated the contract 0:46:00. Member Grishman noted the contract specified an 8x20 container, not lockers 0:46:15.
Member Spellios argued the vendor likely felt pressure to agree to alternatives 0:46:37 and shouldn’t be blamed for exploring them or changing her mind. He reiterated his question about who was being compromised with, suggesting it was a mix of factors including vague complaints about aesthetics and pressure from a specific board member (Member Fletcher), whom he noted had openly opposed the container since before her election 0:49:07. He criticized Member Fletcher’s communication with the HDC via email claiming to be a resident 0:49:43. He argued Select Board members wield significant influence and should be careful interfering in the TA’s operational decisions, especially when acting individually outside of public board meetings 0:50:15. He stated the board shares responsibility and the incident undermines future initiatives.
Member Fletcher defended residents’ right to express opinions 0:53:57, including disliking the container, and rejected the idea that her voicing her opinion caused the cancellation. She reiterated her belief the vendor acted improperly and could have refused the alternative. She expressed disappointment in the vendor’s cancellation method and urged focus on creating a new, town-run program quickly 0:55:13.
Member Grishman described alleged harassment of the vendor last year by “old white men from the Yacht Club and boating community” 0:57:17, stating a newspaper article gave them “cover.” He recounted intervening in a verbal altercation involving the vendor.
Member Spellios reiterated his point about board members’ influence 0:58:17, urging opposition be brought to the public table, not expressed privately or after board votes. He stressed the importance of letting the TA and committees operate without undue influence, referencing the Select Board handbook. He argued the vendor shouldn’t be blamed when the town changed a core element of the agreement.
Member Phelan defended the vendor 1:00:39, believing she acted out of turmoil and felt cornered, not unprofessionally, given the circumstances and prior discussions about container alternatives.
Chair Duffy agreed with Member Spellios’s points on board roles and dysfunction when members operate individually outside the board structure 1:02:22.
Member Fletcher defended her right to express opinions to the TA and others 1:03:21, denying her actions caused the cancellation and calling Member Spellios’s assertions inaccurate.
Member Spellios countered 1:04:26, suggesting repeated contacts and framing complaints (e.g., vendor social media posts) elevates the pressure on the TA. He differentiated between TA seeking input vs. interfering in decisions solely under TA authority, suggesting communication should be transparent (e.g., inform the Chair, bring issues to the board agenda). He argued a select board member’s involvement changes the dynamic for the business owner.
Member Phelan urged moving past board conduct discussion to hear from affected residents 1:06:59.
Public Comment on SUP:
- Jeannie Pats (Resident) 1:07:45: Expressed discomfort with the perceived “attack” on Member Fletcher, calling it unfair and potentially “mansplained.” Questioned the narrative blaming complaints vs. the failure to file a permit. Urged the board to work together respectfully.
- TA Fitzgerald responded 1:10:55, acknowledging Member Fletcher’s unhappiness, his job to find compromise (which failed here), and taking responsibility. He wished he knew the vendor couldn’t work with alternatives despite prior conversations and staff efforts. Acknowledged daily pressures but felt this problem “eluded” him. Called for learning from the situation.
- Judy Zoll (Child Resident) 1:14:31: Expressed disappointment, noting impacts like less playtime and fewer friends at alternative camps. Asked the board to bring the program back.
- Keiko Zoll (Resident/TM Member) 1:15:24: Expressed concern about last-minute cancellation, lack of official communication (found out via Facebook), delayed refund, and financial impact ($85k+ potential revenue). Called it an operational failure and part of a pattern of “administrative mismanagement” (citing HR turnover, Town Clerk departure, DEI director failure). Urged the board to hold the TA accountable.
  - Director Strauss clarified communication efforts 1:18:56: first email to that week’s registrants, second email attempt failed for refunded individuals, so sent to all PreK-9th grade account holders; suggested checking email settings. Confirmed refund processing time (72hrs).
- Andrew Steingeiser (HDC Member) 1:20:48: Expressed disturbance at the “dissolve of productive political discourse.” Stated HDC only asked for process to be followed, has not approved/disapproved anything, supports rec programs, and only has jurisdiction over placement/duration, not presence. Decried undermining of volunteer boards. Urged kindness and decorum.
  - Member Spellios clarified 1:24:01 he doesn’t blame HDC, questioning only why the town didn’t file the application. Member Phelan echoed support for HDC 1:25:11.
- Ann Driscoll (Resident) 1:26:21: Supported SUP but suggested this is an opportunity to rethink delivery, potentially moving from Fisherman’s Beach (citing congestion) to Eisman’s Beach with storage at Phillips Park. Noted most revenue went to the vendor, suggesting a town-run program or wider RFP process for next year. Acknowledged validity of concerns about container aesthetics in a historic district. Defended accuracy of last year’s newspaper article.
  - Member Phelan asked about the RFP process 1:31:13. TA Fitzgerald explained RFPs are posted publicly; previous years yielded few responses after the initial vendor was selected 1:31:32.
- Deb Newman (Resident) 1:32:51: Agreed with Ann Driscoll. Criticized Member Spellios for speaking independently to TA and “calling Ms. Fletcher’s integrity in question.” Defended Member Fletcher. Criticized Member Grishman’s “fury.” Argued cancellation isn’t “end of the world” for kids.
  - Member Phelan strongly disagreed 1:34:36, emphasizing the real impact on working parents using the program as childcare and the difficulty/cost of finding last-minute alternatives. Called downplaying the issue “furious”-making.
  - Ms. Newman reiterated her view 1:35:24, referencing her own experience as a single working parent and stating “don’t think bringing up the child care card is the right way.”
  - Member Spellios reacted strongly against the phrase “childcare card” 1:36:20.
- Tasiya (Cecilia) Facilio (Resident/Assessor/TM Member) 1:37:18: Enrolled daughters for 8 sessions ($2k). Echoed concerns about town discourse tone (“awful,” “out of control”), citing her own experiences advocating for middle school repairs. Recalled telling Member Spellios years ago about concerns over unanimous Select Board votes, stressing need for respectful dissent and representing diverse perspectives. Criticized members using Facebook for vague attacks (“creating the divide”). Defended Member Fletcher as trying to serve multiple interests. Asked TA about storage solutions from other potential vendors.
  - TA Fitzgerald responded 1:42:04 vendors use various methods (box trucks, on-site storage); heavier program boards make proximity crucial.
- Liz Pappalardo (Resident) 1:44:23: Echoed other speakers. Pointed out TA stated he relied on staff report that vendor was comfortable with alternative 1:44:28. Urged grace for staff and focusing fixes on where things went wrong, not just blaming Member Fletcher. Asked for clarification on the recurring phrase “activating the waterfront.”
  - TA Fitzgerald explained 1:45:47 it means enabling broader public use and enjoyment of waterfront resources through programs and events.
- Chair Duffy read an email comment 1:46:23 from Eric Schneider questioning HDC authority over temporary structures like the container and consistency of enforcement compared to other temporary structures (farmers market tents, porta-potties). Chair Duffy noted the comment reflected some misunderstanding of HDC jurisdiction previously discussed.
Future of SUP: Member Fletcher asked if there’s a goal for a program this summer 1:49:42. TA Fitzgerald confirmed a goal for offerings but wasn’t sure about a full children’s program due to safety/staffing complexities 1:49:51. Member Grishman asked where boards would be stored 1:50:36; TA Fitzgerald indicated lockers were being cleared for potential use 1:50:47. Chair Duffy urged moving on.

8. Board & Committee Reappointments and Appointments 1:51:48 (Taken out of order at Member Spellios’s request)

Chair Duffy led review of reappointments/appointments list. Discussion occurred regarding process, diversity, filling vacancies, and term limits.
Member Spellios questioned if the practice of reappointing all incumbents who requested it, even with many applicants waiting, aligns with goals for board diversity and new member integration 1:57:07. TA Fitzgerald described efforts to encourage diversity, sometimes suggesting non-voting roles initially, while balancing continuity needs 1:58:03. Member Spellios noted no instances of incumbents being replaced by new applicants in this batch 1:59:23. Member Fletcher noted the Conservation Commission reappointment occurred despite waiting applicants 1:59:58. Member Spellios differentiated between committees with and without vacancies 2:00:13.
Member Phelan asked about term limits; Member Spellios noted only Cultural Council has statutory limits 2:01:32.
Discussion arose about challenges filling the Commission on Disability 1:53:30.
Several committees/appointments were tabled for further review: Hadley Reuse (uncertainty over Select Board appointees) 2:03:35, Harbor and Waterfront (potential residency issue) 2:04:05, Historic District Commission (Member Spellios requested tabling for offline questions) 2:05:10, Historical Commission (term question for one member) 2:05:48, Zoning Board of Appeals (residency waiver issue) 2:10:56.
Polly Kichkum was removed from the Solid Waste Advisory Committee reappointment list as she is not seeking it 2:07:44.
Discussion on improving communication with applicants occurred 2:11:56. Member Phelan noted difficulty using the online system was why she ran for Select Board 2:13:02. Member Spellios suggested system improvements are needed 2:14:59. TA Fitzgerald agreed on needing better marketing/framing of committee roles 2:13:36. Member Grishman stressed basic responsiveness (e.g., acknowledging applications) is fundamental 2:14:20.
Motion: Member Fitzgerald moved to approve the Town Administrator’s recommendations for reappointment/appointment for the listed committees, excluding the tabled items and with the revision to the Solid Waste Committee list [2:11:01, based on previous review]. Motion passed unanimously 2:11:39.

9. Town Administrator Contract Recommendations 2:16:26

TA Fitzgerald presented recommendations for multi-year contracts for six department heads: Police Chief Quesada, Library Director Lewis-Nichols, Building Commissioner Cummings, Town Clerk LaLiberté, Assistant TA/HR Director Kane, and Recreation Director Strauss, outlining terms and salaries 2:16:45. He stated these contracts provide stability and retention for key staff.
Member Fletcher repeated prior concerns about contracts being presented after employees started work and urged contracts be finalized beforehand 2:20:22. She also stressed ensuring diverse applicant pools for positions and expressed preference against five-year contracts (referencing Kane’s), though supported the TA’s recommendations.
Member Phelan echoed the concern about approving contracts post-hire 2:21:49.
Motion: Member Spellios moved to approve the TA’s contract recommendations 2:22:19. Motion passed unanimously 2:22:32.

10. Land Use Planning and Community Engagement 2:22:32

Chair Duffy introduced the item, stemming from a meeting with staff (TA, Kane, Golaska), to discuss processes and timelines for Hawthorne reuse, Hadley reuse, Mass Housing Choice (3A) zoning, and a potential Fall Land Use Summit, seeking board consensus on direction 2:22:32. Noted Planning Board was discussing this concurrently.
Director Golaska provided background 2:25:39, emphasizing the opportunity for community engagement on key parcels (Hawthorne, Hadley, potentially Archer St lots) and the need to coordinate with the 3A requirements. She outlined goals for a Land Use Summit: community engagement, education on board functions, fostering collaboration.
Asst. TA Kane detailed proposed timelines 2:31:44:
- Hawthorne: RFP for consultant (Summer ‘22), consultant start/initial work/Land Use Summit intro (Sept ‘22), community outreach/option development (Winter ‘22-‘23), public forum on options (Feb ‘23), presentation to Town Meeting (May ‘23), refine final option (Summer ‘23), public forum on final option (Sept ‘23), Town Meeting vote on use (Fall ‘23). Chair Duffy clarified “final option” refers to the use category requiring Town Meeting approval, not detailed plans 2:34:29.
- Hadley Reuse: RFI/RFP (Summer ‘22), review submissions (Sept ‘22), present findings at Land Use Summit (Oct ‘22), determine next steps based on feedback (Nov ‘22). Member Grishman inquired about previous discussion to issue RFI in fall, not summer 2:36:08; Asst. TA Kane acknowledged the point but noted the timeline aimed to feed into an October summit 2:36:37. Chair Duffy suggested work on the RFI could begin, with issuance timing revisited 2:37:29.
- Mass Housing Choice (3A): Potential Task Force creation (July ‘22), research/evaluation (Aug/Sept ‘22), present findings/get feedback at Land Use Summit (Oct ‘22), develop bylaw (Winter ‘22-‘23), public forum (Feb ‘23), potential Town Meeting adoption (May ‘23). Member Fletcher questioned if Planning Board should lead 2:40:12; Asst. TA Kane confirmed zoning is under Planning Board but task force was a suggestion 2:40:21. Chair Duffy supported the task force idea (originating partly from Planning Board chair suggestion) possibly including liaisons from various boards and helping plan the Summit 2:40:41. Director Golaska stressed defining Summit goals and Planning Board leadership 2:42:46. Member Grishman asked about stakeholder definition; Golaska confirmed involving residents and large property owners is key 2:44:10.
Asst. TA Kane presented a visual timeline integrating all projects 2:45:35.
Discussion on consultant hiring process: Golaska noted planning/engineering services are exempt from Chapter 40B bidding, allowing for solicitation of proposals and interviews 2:46:54. Staff (Golaska, Kane) would draft RFPs in collaboration with Planning Board and share with Select Board.
Discussion on interrelation of Hawthorne and Hadley: Member Fletcher asked if they should be tied 2:49:33. Golaska affirmed exploring synergies is crucial 2:49:47. TA Fitzgerald emphasized a holistic approach is needed as uses will affect the whole corridor; suggested potentially separate consultants but coordinated planning 2:51:08. Member Phelan noted Hadley context changes with Hawthorne acquisition 2:53:37. Member Fletcher stressed Hadley Committee work provides options but implications need consideration 2:53:57. Chair Duffy agreed on interconnectedness 2:54:24.
Consensus appeared to be reached on moving forward with the proposed planning steps over the summer, with specifics (RFP drafts, task force structure, RFI timing) to be refined and brought back.

11. Utilization of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funds 2:56:04

Chair Duffy introduced the item regarding ARPA funds for employee compensation, stemming from a prior board request.
TA Fitzgerald presented the recommendation 2:56:27 to use $413,394 in ARPA funds (as replacement revenue) for one-time supplemental compensation to recognize employee work during the pandemic. This included amounts previously approved via collective bargaining for union employees (DPW, Police, Admin Professionals, Fire) and $102,750 (revised amount) for non-union personnel. He stated this aligns with federal guidelines and consulted CPA Eric Kinshaft. Finance Director Sorrow was present.
Finance Director Sorrow elaborated 2:59:43, explaining the focus was on full-time, in-office staff present during the bulk of the pandemic (using a date cutoff). She noted staff inquiries about recognition compared to other towns and felt it was a good, small-percentage use of ARPA funds.
Member Fletcher asked if it was a bonus; TA confirmed one-time supplemental pay 3:02:00. She asked if FinCom reviewed it; staff confirmed FinCom vote isn’t required for federal funds, but they could be notified 3:02:13. Member Fletcher expressed discomfort with financial decisions lacking FinCom input, though acknowledging it wasn’t required 3:03:08.
Chair Duffy supported the allocation 3:03:37, noting it paralleled union agreements and was fair to non-union staff. He explicitly stated he requested an amount be included for the TA, who deserved recognition.
Member Phelan asked if union ARPA funds went to FinCom; TA confirmed they were part of CBA votes approved by FinCom/Town Meeting 3:04:53.
Member Grishman echoed support for the compensation 3:05:14.
Member Fletcher questioned the need for a Select Board vote if it’s under TA authority 3:05:36. TA Fitzgerald clarified CPA advised a Select Board vote was needed 3:05:47.
Member Grishman made a motion to authorize the $413,394 allocation as outlined (with corrected non-union amount of $102,750) 3:06:23.
Member Phelan moved to table the motion until the Finance Committee (FinCom) could provide a recommendation 3:07:06. Member Fletcher seconded the motion to table 3:07:20.
Discussion on tabling: Chair Duffy noted funds don’t expire until 2024 3:07:27 but argued FinCom review isn’t required for federal funds (like grants) 3:08:35. TA Fitzgerald expressed desire to provide recognition soon but understood updating FinCom 3:09:22.
Vote on Motion to Table: Passed (Fletcher, Phelan Aye; Grishman, Duffy No; Spellios absent) 3:11:43. Item tabled until next meeting pending FinCom review.

12. Consent Agenda 3:11:41

Items included: Chabad 5K run permission (Dec 18, 2022), approval of minutes (Revised 5/25, 6/7, 6/14, 6/15).
Motion to approve the consent agenda passed unanimously 3:13:11.

13. Town Administrator’s Report 3:13:15

TA Fitzgerald noted end-of-year closeouts, thanked organizers of recent Pride and Juneteenth events, and promoted upcoming 4th of July fireworks 3:13:24.

14. Select Board Time 3:13:55

Member Grishman thanked Rec Director Strauss for successful Harbor Fest and Strawberry Festival; promoted upcoming fireworks (July 3rd) and Wetwater Day at the Beach (July 16th) benefiting the Fish House 3:13:58.
Member Phelan echoed thanks for weekend events, noted the 50/50 raffle at Wetwater benefits Hadley PTO, and commended the Rec Dept/Town for quickly addressing accessibility concerns raised at the Strawberry Festival 3:14:57.
Member Fletcher thanked Dr. Friedman for the rabies clinic and DPW staff support 3:15:56. Relayed assurance from School Building Committee Chair about website updates on demolition/blasting timeline. Requested updates on the Veterans Lease and discussion on Big Blue Bargains’ future.
Member Grishman provided context on Big Blue Bargains 3:17:07: involved in RFP for 86 Burrill St (Anchor Food Pantry selected), difficulty finding space, potential solution with portables at Clark School after new school opens. Agreed continued search is warranted.
Chair Duffy noted Big Blue Bargains involves school property/funds, requiring School Dept/Committee involvement 3:17:56.
No further Select Board time comments.

15. Adjournment:

Motion to adjourn passed unanimously 3:18:50.

Section 4: Executive Summary

This Swampscott Select Board meeting addressed several key operational matters and featured an extensive, often contentious, discussion regarding the recent cancellation of the popular Stand Up Paddleboard (SUP) program. Key outcomes and discussions impacting residents include:

Stand Up Paddleboard Program Cancellation Fallout:

The meeting dedicated significant time [0:20:06 - 1:49:42] to discussing the abrupt cancellation of the summer SUP program run by an outside vendor. Town Administrator (TA) Sean Fitzgerald acknowledged communication failures regarding the vendor’s storage container led to the cancellation and took responsibility 0:23:09.
Board members expressed strong reactions, ranging from Member David Grishman’s “fury” over lost opportunities for children and impacts on local businesses 0:29:00, to Member Katie Phelan’s frustration over refund delays and process failures 0:30:43. Recreation Director Danielle Strauss confirmed all 312 refunds were processed 0:32:00.
Significance: The cancellation significantly disrupted summer plans for over 300 families, highlighting breakdowns in town process management and vendor relations. The debate revealed deep fissures within the Select Board regarding communication, responsibility, historical preservation vs. waterfront activation, and appropriate board member conduct influencing administrative decisions. Member Peter Spellios sharply questioned the TA’s rationale and suggested interference by Member Mary Ellen Fletcher played a role 0:49:07, a claim Member Fletcher denied 0:53:57. Public commenters expressed disappointment, frustration with town administration, and deep concern over the increasingly negative tone of local political discourse [1:07:45, 1:15:24, 1:37:18].
Next Steps: The TA stated staff are exploring options for limited SUP offerings this summer 1:49:51, but a full replacement program is uncertain due to logistical challenges. The long-term future of SUP programming remains under discussion.

Land Use Planning Initiatives Launched:

The Board reviewed and generally endorsed preliminary timelines [2:22:32 - 2:55:59] for several major land use initiatives expected to ramp up over the summer and fall:
- Hawthorne Property Reuse: A process involving hiring a consultant this summer to lead extensive community engagement throughout the next year, aiming for a Town Meeting vote on the property’s future use in Fall 2023 2:31:44.
- Hadley School Reuse: An RFI/RFP process to solicit interest/proposals this summer, with findings presented at a Fall Land Use Summit to guide next steps 2:35:10.
- MA Housing Choice (3A) Zoning: Exploration of forming a task force (likely led by the Planning Board) to research requirements, evaluate Swampscott’s status, and develop necessary zoning bylaws for potential Town Meeting consideration in May 2023 2:38:34.
- Land Use Summit: Planned for Fall 2022 (likely October) to engage the public, educate on processes, and gather input on the various initiatives 2:25:39.
Significance: These initiatives represent major decisions about Swampscott’s future development, housing, and community character. The coordinated planning effort aims to ensure community input and strategic decision-making on key town-owned properties and state housing mandates. Active resident participation will be crucial in the coming months.

Appointments and Town Operations:

The Board approved the reappointment of numerous volunteers to various town boards and committees, while tabling several for further review (including residency questions and process concerns) [1:51:48 - 2:11:39]. Issues around communication with applicants and diversifying committee membership were discussed.
Multi-year contracts for six key department heads (Police Chief, Library Director, Building Commissioner, Town Clerk, Asst. TA/HR, Recreation Director) were approved, aimed at ensuring leadership stability 2:16:26.
Special Counsel was appointed to assist with land acquisitions 0:18:51. Aggregate Industries’ earth removal permit was extended 90 days pending committee review 0:17:08. A liquor license transfer for ThaiRiffic by the Sea was approved 0:13:35.

ARPA Funds for Employee Compensation Tabled:

A proposal by the TA to allocate $413,394 in ARPA funds for one-time supplemental compensation for union and non-union employees recognizing pandemic work was discussed 2:56:04. While supported by Chair Duffy and Member Grishman as fair recognition paralleling union agreements, Members Phelan and Fletcher moved to table the vote pending a recommendation from the Finance Committee 3:07:06. The motion to table passed 3:11:43.
Significance: This delays the distribution of recognition pay requested by the administration, highlighting differing views on process and the Finance Committee’s advisory role even for federally sourced funds not impacting the town budget directly.

Section 5: Analysis

The June 29, 2022, Swampscott Select Board meeting transcript reveals a board grappling with significant operational challenges and internal friction, most notably exposed during the lengthy and emotionally charged discussion about the cancelled Stand Up Paddleboard (SUP) program [0:20:06 - 1:49:42].

SUP Program Failure as a Microcosm: The SUP cancellation served as a focal point for broader issues. The Town Administrator’s (TA) explanation, centering on miscommunication and failed compromise regarding the storage container [0:23:09, 0:43:17], appeared insufficient to several board members and the public. Member Spellios’s pointed questioning about why a simple permit wasn’t filed and who the TA felt pressured to compromise with [0:39:05, 0:44:14] suggested a belief that the TA’s stated reasons didn’t capture the full picture. His explicit suggestion that Member Fletcher’s known opposition and repeated contacts unduly influenced the TA’s handling of the situation [0:49:07, 1:04:26], while denied by Fletcher [0:53:57, 1:03:21], laid bare significant intra-board tension and differing interpretations of appropriate conduct. The TA acknowledged feeling pressure 1:10:55 but framed the failure primarily as an inability to find a workable compromise and an underestimation of the vendor’s inflexibility, ultimately accepting responsibility. The arguments presented highlighted a potential breakdown in process management (failing to file the permit proactively), risk assessment (underestimating the impact of proposing last-minute changes to the vendor), and internal communication (staff reporting consensus where none truly existed, or the TA misinterpreting staff reports). The vendor’s perspective was defended by Member Phelan 1:00:39 but questioned by Member Fletcher 0:55:13, leaving their agency and motivations debated in their absence. Ultimately, the episode appeared as a significant unforced error stemming from attempts to appease conflicting interests (program supporters vs. container objectors/historic district concerns) without a clear, decisive administrative path forward once the contract was signed.

Board Dynamics and Governance Philosophy: The SUP debate explicitly surfaced contrasting philosophies on Select Board member roles. Member Spellios argued forcefully for maintaining a separation between individual member advocacy and administrative operations, particularly those solely under the TA’s authority, emphasizing that private communications from board members carry implicit weight and risk becoming undue influence [0:50:15, 0:58:17]. He advocated for policy disagreements to be aired publicly at the board table. Member Fletcher defended her right, and the right of residents, to voice opinions directly to the TA and contested the idea that doing so constituted improper interference 1:03:21. This disagreement reflects a fundamental tension in the Select Board/Town Administrator structure regarding influence versus interference. Public comments from residents like Jeannie Pats 1:07:45, Keiko Zoll 1:15:24, and Tasiya Facilio 1:37:18 underscored community fatigue with perceived infighting and urged more collaborative, respectful discourse from town leadership.

Land Use Planning - A Path Forward? In contrast to the SUP discussion, the presentation and discussion on land use planning [2:22:32 - 2:55:59] appeared more structured and forward-looking. The proposed timelines and integrated approach for Hawthorne, Hadley, and the 3A zoning mandate suggest a strategic effort by staff (Kane, Golaska) to manage complex, overlapping initiatives. The emphasis on community engagement and consultant support acknowledges the scale of the task. However, potential friction points remain, such as ensuring genuine Planning Board leadership (as desired by Golaska 2:42:46 and Fletcher 2:40:12) while potentially using a cross-committee task force, and balancing resident input with the practicalities of attracting development partners (as raised by Grishman regarding stakeholder inclusion 2:44:10). The success of this ambitious planning effort will likely depend on maintaining focus, securing effective consultant support, and fostering the kind of collaborative engagement that seemed absent in the SUP situation.

Administrative Processes: The discussions around board/committee appointments 1:51:48 and ARPA fund allocation 2:56:04 highlighted ongoing process questions. Concerns about applicant communication and committee diversity, while acknowledged, haven’t resulted in visible changes to reappointment practices yet. The tabling of the ARPA vote demonstrated differing views on the necessity of Finance Committee input for non-budgetary federal funds, potentially delaying compensation seen by some as overdue recognition for staff. These instances suggest a need for clearer, consistently applied administrative procedures.