[Speaker 9] (7:45 - 7:48) Welcome to my lecture. Recording in progress. [Speaker 2] (7:53 - 7:57) Diane, can we get a quick picture before Santa melts? [Speaker 12] (7:59 - 8:00) Real quick. [Speaker 1] (8:26 - 8:29) Santa, you can excuse yourself at any time if the elves need you. [Speaker 2] (8:29 - 8:31) I may get a call. [Speaker 3] (8:38 - 8:56) Ready? All right. Born ready. So welcome to the December 21st Swampscot Select Board meeting, ugly holiday sweater edition. We have a very special guest here with us tonight, Santa Claus. [Speaker 2] (8:56 - 9:03) Hello, boys and girls. I hope you're behaving yourselves. Look forward to seeing everybody in a couple of days. [Speaker 3] (9:03 - 9:12) Thank you for joining us, Santa Claus. We're honored to have you here with us. Santa, if you would please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. [Speaker 2] (9:12 - 9:28) Oh, absolutely. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [Speaker 3] (9:32 - 10:52) Thank you, everybody. So before we get started, just and I apologize for the change of tone, but I just I want to just acknowledge the recent passing of a member of our community. Paul Levinson died peacefully on December 18th. Paul was you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who did more for this community and for this town during their life. He was a town meeting member for over 50 years, a member of the Select Board, a member of the Conservation Commission, the chair of the Select Board or at that time Board of Selectmen. You know, we all, I think, stand on on his shoulders and everything that we do. And he's just an example to all of us. And our our incredible gratitude goes out to Cheryl Levinson, his wife and their family and in our in our heartfelt sympathies. I know Peter knows knew Paul and knows Cheryl well. So, Peter, I wanted to give you an opportunity to speak. And if others want to as well, you're welcome to. [Speaker 1] (10:53 - 12:33) Thanks, Neil. I think those those that knew Paul knew that he led with his integrity and his intellect and a tremendously serious person that took what he did for the town, his time in the service, his time in state government. His private practice really, really seriously. He was in the era of just our transition to professional town government. So it was a very different time for for the Select Board. Many, you know, that Cheryl also for worked for the town of Swampscott for many years as well. And I think this story that. I think it's worth sharing is is the love that Paul and Cheryl shared with each other and Cheryl spending endless days and nights caring for Paul in recent months. And the sacrifices she made and the demonstration of love that she showed for her husband, for another human and her compassion right to the very last breath that Paul took. And it really speaks so much of who Paul must have been to deserve that love and Cheryl to be able to give that love and be strong throughout the process. And I think it's a it's a fitting, fitting way to remember Paul and to be able to thank Cheryl for being so loving and to thank the Levinson's for all that they've done for Swampscott. [Speaker 3] (12:34 - 14:17) Thanks, Peter. Thanks, everyone, for for giving us that moment. Next, I think we're going to quickly move to public comments, public comments, an opportunity for members of the public to express their opinions on items both not on and on the agenda. It's not intended to be a discussion, debate or dialogue between or among the Select Board of Residents. Additionally, before sharing your comments, we ask that you state your name, address and if known voting precinct. Each speaker will be limited to speaking once for a maximum of three minutes. Residents may raise new issues, identify community problems and comment on past, present or future agendas. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the board will not respond or react to the issues raised and they should not be discussed or debated at the time. We request that you respectfully refrain from criticizing or disparaging individual committee members, town staff or other resident groups or individuals. And we request that you refrain from making comments that contain political statements or include commentary, criticisms or other statements about any town staff. With that, I don't know if there's any public comment here in the room or on Zoom. If there is also public comment through email, you can send it to me at nduffie at swamps.ma.gov. Seeing none. Okay, we're going to move on to our first item on the agenda, which is very exciting presentation. And I will be handing over the reins to Mary Ellen Fletcher to present some incredible awards. [Speaker 5] (14:20 - 14:52) So I'd like to thank everybody for coming. I'd like to thank the recreation department for hosting another amazing turkey trot. This year, we're going to do the awards right here with Santa. So we'll start with the family that came in third place. And I want you to know that the police department will not be coming down here tonight because they're giving us a Christmas break. So the third place family is the Marshall family. It's Erin, Kyle, Ava and Addie. Come on down here with Santa. [Speaker 12] (15:04 - 15:06) Oh, I'd be happy to take a picture. [Speaker 5] (15:06 - 15:08) You are? [Speaker 12] (15:09 - 15:15) You're Addie? Congratulations. All right. [Speaker 2] (15:16 - 15:25) Congratulations. We forgot to. Bowbell. Looks like Bowbell has been a wonderful. [Speaker 5] (15:26 - 15:28) Oh, we forgot Bowbell. Sorry about that. [Speaker 2] (15:30 - 15:30) All right. [Speaker 12] (15:30 - 15:48) Oh, you guys are going to have to fix your table. Great job. [Speaker 5] (15:52 - 16:20) For our second place finish team, we have the Andrew Palacios family with their driver. And we have Irina and Kiki and their mom, Taseya. Come on down, girls. All right. [Speaker 12] (16:20 - 16:23) All right, girls. Congratulations. [Speaker 5] (16:24 - 16:26) Oh, thank you. All right. Thank you. [Speaker 12] (16:27 - 16:28) Thank you. [Speaker 1] (16:31 - 16:33) Don't get too close, though. [Speaker 12] (16:35 - 16:36) Not far away. [Speaker 1] (16:36 - 16:37) Nice job, girls. [Speaker 5] (16:37 - 16:40) Well, I'd have to have a complete. [Speaker 15] (16:43 - 16:43) Okay. [Speaker 5] (16:46 - 17:00) And last but not least, we have our returning champions, the Phelan family, Stella and Jack, and their parents, Katie and John. Come on down here for the second year in a row. [Speaker 2] (17:04 - 17:05) Here's Santa. [Speaker 3] (17:05 - 17:06) Here you go, Santa. [Speaker 5] (17:17 - 17:49) Stella, come on in the front for a picture. I'd like to thank everyone for their participation. We had 16 families, and we're hoping next year we'll have at least 50. So thank you very much. Thank you to the recreation department. [Speaker 3] (17:49 - 17:54) Thanks, Mary Ellen. Congratulations to the winners. Happy holidays. [Speaker 2] (18:04 - 18:05) Santa's going to take a little break. [Speaker 3] (18:07 - 18:08) All right, Santa. [Speaker 2] (18:09 - 18:12) All right. Merry Christmas, though. [Speaker 3] (18:12 - 18:15) Thank you, Santa. Keep up the good work. [Speaker 2] (18:15 - 18:15) Thank you, Santa. [Speaker 3] (18:16 - 19:47) Thank you, Santa. Are you going back to the North Pole now, Santa? I'll get right back. Thank you. All right. So we have a hearing at 630, so I just wanted to quickly mention to folks that are watching the meeting that we will not be discussing the Archer Street property and a potential acquisition on that. That's being tabled tonight. And also the update on additional license renewals. I just wanted to mention that the reason that's there is there was an entertainment license that we were planning on approving, but it was for a business that is no longer going to be a business. So I just wanted to say. So Zest Friends announced that they were closing and won't be reopening in 2023, and I just wanted to thank them. It was an incredible place, and so sorry to see them closing down. And wish the owners all the best. Sean. [Speaker 2] (19:47 - 19:49) Oh, I heard Santa stop by. [Speaker 3] (19:49 - 19:51) Yeah, you missed all the excitement. I just saw him. [Speaker 2] (19:51 - 20:07) He just left on the sleigh. Did you see him? I did see him. I waved to him, and I wished him a good night. Amazing. I said that he was sorry that he couldn't stay for the entire meeting. Enter left winch. Sad but true. [Speaker 3] (20:09 - 20:59) Okay, so before we start this hearing, I think the next item on our agenda is a discussion and vote on the use of ARPA funds for the Firefighters Union contract. As you all recall, we approved an agreement between the town and the Firefighters Union recently, and then at our special town meeting, the special town meeting approved the use of free cash as part of that agreement, but there were some proposed use of ARPA funds as a piece of that agreement. So we, as the select board, need to officially authorize that use in this meeting. Are there any questions or comments about that? [Speaker 2] (21:01 - 21:46) You know, I just want to thank, you know, the Swanscot Firefighters Union. We have President Jim Snow here tonight as a representative of the bargaining team, and certainly, you know, we spent many months just going over a complicated contract. This contract does support stability. It certainly recognizes the extraordinary work of the men and women that work for the department. We have gone through quite a few years of complexity with the pandemic, and I certainly hope that this contract will provide some stability, but also recognize the extraordinary work of the men and women that keep Swanscot safe. [Speaker 3] (21:47 - 22:19) So I'll read this motion if someone can make the motion after. It's a motion to authorize the use of $223,000 of ARPA funds for payments to our firefighters, EMTs, who provided critical governmental services between March 17th, 2020, and November 9th, 2022. Such payments are being authorized in consideration of exemplary work during the pandemic, including work as deputy health agents and exposure to hazardous materials and the resolution of overtime staffing cases and additional complaints. [Speaker 8] (22:20 - 22:20) So moved. [Speaker 3] (22:20 - 22:21) Is there a second? [Speaker 5] (22:21 - 22:22) Second. [Speaker 1] (22:23 - 23:10) Further discussion? I'm going to be a no tonight, consistent with my vote on the contract. I don't believe this is an appropriate use of ARPA funds. I understand and I appreciate all your hard work in negotiating a contract, and I can only imagine how difficult it is because I'm not in the room, but I will tell you from the outside and from how it played out publicly, I think it's really unfortunate and I'm sorry to you and Chief Archer because I think you guys bear the brunt of that. But most importantly, I don't think this is a financially sound contract and I don't think this should be seen as a model that we can sustain as a town going forward. So I will be voting no. Thank you, Peter. [Speaker 3] (23:11 - 23:16) Any other comments? All right. All those in favor? [Speaker 12] (23:17 - 23:18) Aye. [Speaker 3] (23:18 - 23:21) Opposed? Aye. Okay. [Speaker 1] (23:31 - 23:42) We've got time for one more thing. Yeah. What's that? Do you want to try and do one more thing before 630? [Speaker 3] (23:43 - 26:50) Yeah. So why don't we let's go to an update and I'm trying to think of what will be quick. Yeah. We can do establish and appoint a climate action planning committee. So I sent you all a memo. You know, in our June town meeting, town meeting had approved that the town pursue climate, develop and pursue a climate action plan. The group that brought that to town meeting was the Climate Action Resilience Coalition, which is a group of volunteers, not an official town committee, but they were the ones who were essentially endorsed to go forth and develop this plan. Since that time, they've been working on the plan. Marzi was able to Marzi Golaskar, our director of community economic development, was able to garner a grant to provide technical assistance for the development of that plan, which is ongoing currently. I think a lot of work has been happening. But I just I think that in consideration of the fact that this is a this will be a policy document that will be coming before the board in the town, that it made sense to create an official climate action plan working group committee to do that work with publicly noticed meetings rather than to be doing it. So it's essentially a working group from that coalition. And I had provided the names of the of the people who would be part of that group, including including myself. There is that. The planning board and solid waste advisory both. Well, I know for sure that solid waste advisory is just going to have a liaison to this committee to this to this group and didn't feel necessary to have an official member. I think in conversations with the chair of the planning board, she felt similarly. If if if that changes, I think we would bring back more appointments. The idea would be that this this committee, just like when we developed a master plan, this is a committee that would be creating this climate action plan and bringing it to the boards. They've already met with multiple committees and done a lot of outreach and surveys. So the work is has begun. So if there is a if there is a motion to establish a climate action plan committee and appoint those listed in our packet to a term of one year, I would entertain that. So moved. Is there a second? [Speaker 12] (26:51 - 26:51) Second. [Speaker 1] (26:52 - 26:56) Mr. Chairman, you should recuse yourself from this vote because you can't appoint yourself. [Speaker 3] (26:56 - 26:57) Thank you. [Speaker 14] (26:58 - 27:10) Happily. Any questions or further discussion? So would you be a voting member or ex officio because including including you, there would be 10. I'm just curious. Yeah, I would be a voting member. [Speaker 5] (27:11 - 27:29) I do have a question. One committee. So this committee is was put together. I just want to know what was the process. Was there a process as far as opening it up? So anyone in the community that wanted to get involved or volunteer, did they have that opportunity? [Speaker 3] (27:30 - 28:16) Yeah. No, I think that's a good question. I just I think that because this work was already happening with this group, it felt like let's just have it. And the coalition that I mentioned is a much larger group of people. But these are sort of the core group of people that have already started working on this action plan. So I felt like having them be the ones who are part of that group and, you know, creating an official committee such that it's a public meeting that anyone can come and participate in the planning process was preferable. Given that the goal is to hopefully have the climate action plan potentially at the spring town meeting. This seemed to make the most sense. [Speaker 8] (28:18 - 28:39) And I just certainly love the fact that there are two two young citizens to Swampscott High students that are going to be serving on this committee. And I think that's a fantastic idea. And it would be great to get to get involvement of of our younger citizens within within some of these committees in town. So thank you. [Speaker 3] (28:40 - 28:47) I agree. OK. All those if there's not any other comment, all those in favor. [Speaker 12] (28:47 - 28:48) Aye. Aye. [Speaker 3] (28:48 - 28:56) Aye. And I'm accusing myself from that. All right. [Speaker 1] (29:00 - 29:03) So let's knock out maybe number seven. [Speaker 3] (29:05 - 30:19) So, yeah, sure. So update in discussion regarding a senior planner position. So I had a couple of members that communicated to me and to Sean just questions about this. The senior planner position has been open for a while and I think we are we're always busy and in need of a senior planner. And I just I thought it would make sense because over the last couple of weeks received some communications about it. And in concern that, you know, we we need some support in certain initiatives that we're undertaking now. Not to mention heading into the town meeting season and working on bylaws, you know, that that that we still didn't have that position. So I just wanted to I thought it made sense to bring it to the board just to have an update from Sean and a brief conversation about, you know, the challenges in filling that position, but also ways that we can potentially provide support, you know, both to the planning board and to our board and to the town in general town staff. Sure. [Speaker 2] (30:20 - 34:38) Neal, I, you know, really appreciate the concern by the board members. I don't think there has been a period in time where we've needed a senior planner position more. You know, we have busy projects, not just, you know, the Hawthorne redevelopment, but the Glover and, you know, broader economic development needs of the square and neighborhood protection. So this is a really critical position. Unfortunately, just like every other community, we have faced some challenges. We posted this position. We received zero applicants. And generally, you know, you know, we have a very competitive salary range for a senior planner position, but we're not finding many individuals looking for that role. We've reached out to a number of candidates to try to recruit them. A number of them have been successful in landing community development director positions that garner a much higher salary. The type of senior planner we need really is on the level of an assistant director or a director. And frankly, you know, we've this past week updated the job description for this position to change the position from a senior planner to an assistant director of planning. We have a director of planning and a director of community and economic development. And what we really want is somebody that feels as though they will have the charge to direct and lead the planning effort. I've discussed this with our community and economic development director, Mazi Galaska, and our assistant town administrator and HR director, Pete Kane. And so we have that job description updated. We're going to post that again to MMA at a salary range that is a little bit higher in the interest of trying to garner a little bit more of attention. We also have reached out to a few of the colleges and universities. A number of staff have attended some very prestigious planning and community development programs in the region. And we're going to start to really identify individuals that might want an internship in graduate programs. We've been successful recently in attracting interns for very critical roles in town hall functions. And, you know, there may be opportunities for us to really grow an individual into that type of responsibility. I think the key attributes that we're looking for is somebody that really is focused on details and deadlines and really can help drive project development, understand zoning, and understand the importance of guiding projects consistent with the town's master plan and zoning guidelines. That said, you know, the conversation continues to evolve, and we're all pressed because we all feel the burden of not having the support of those positions. So I'm happy to, you know, keep this on a ticker and report back at every meeting and give the board an update on our progress. I do understand that this needs to be a priority, and staff are really working to make sure that we can find somebody. I do share the opinion that there is somebody out there. Even though people have not applied for this position, I do believe that there are individuals that would find it extremely rewarding and extraordinary to work in this position. Right now we're, you know, doing so much important work in developing our waterfront where, you know, we've got an exciting team. We've got wonderful projects that really could give an individual not just wonderful experience but a great opportunity to influence the development of a very busy town. [Speaker 5] (34:39 - 34:48) I have a question, Sean. Are there avenues? I know that when we didn't have an accountant, we were able to bring in a consultant. Can we bring in a consultant to? [Speaker 2] (34:48 - 35:33) We can. Actually, I did discuss short-term. We just hired a consultant to help us with our MBTA. Probably we got a $20,000 grant to hire a consultant to really help us plan and support some of those responsibilities, and I did ask for a scope of work from that consultant to, you know, help us with some short-term three or four months, six months worth of project coordination for the Community and Economic Development Department. I have heard from the staff that there are some concerns from some of the land-use boards that they need a little bit more technical support, and I think we can help buttress that with some contracted staff. [Speaker 5] (35:35 - 36:04) Okay. The reason, because I'm very concerned about this after listening to the, I listened to what happened at the Marblehead Planning Board, and I listened to our public hearing with the planning board over the Glover, and I just am concerned about getting somebody involved to support the planning board themselves so that they can write their decisions and be prepared so that we're not, you know, sitting in a tough spot. [Speaker 2] (36:05 - 36:06) Understood. [Speaker 5] (36:06 - 36:07) Thank you. [Speaker 1] (36:08 - 41:27) I think it's worth just talking a little bit more about this position because my biggest fear is that we get to a very tough upcoming budget season and people mistakenly view a vacancy as a degree of importance for position, right? And that would be a tremendous error here because, frankly, we've been subsidizing staff through the use of a lot of, frankly, select board member time, right, doing things and spending many more hours than any of us want to be spending on things, and that's great. We're all happy to do it, and others are happy to step up, but it's not sustainable. And there's a number of initiatives that, you know, Neil and I before 930 this morning had two calls on two different projects, right? And we want to advance the Hadley RFP. We know we just closed on Hawthorne, which is exciting news, and we're closing on other real estate. There's a lot to happen here, and I want to be clear. What Marcy does and what Marissa, who is our land use coordinator, does, Marissa does a great job organizing the administrative side of things to kind of take it off the desk of others so that we make sure that we do it correctly, and it helps the chairs and it helps Marcy out. But Marcy is really helping so many projects and spearheading so many projects. This position that's vacant here is really a truly, truly substantive planning position. It's one that's going to help steer the direction of the ship, but also it is clear, and I agree with Mary Ellen. I, too, listened to the Marblehead Planning Board meeting, which followed the Solomonscott Planning Board meeting, and they were very different meetings. And I think one of the main reasons is the benefit of having learned staff to be able to prepare things, to be able to meet with applicants, to be able to advance things more efficiently. Marblehead closed their public hearing and issued a decision on the Glover, and we're talking about getting extensions past March. Admittedly, there's more of the project in Solomonscott than in Marblehead, but I think that between that planner position and in the past, we had a building inspector who would be a little bit more versed, perhaps, in zoning matters, and so when petitions would go to the zoning board or the planning board or other things, those petitions would arrive with a little editorial from a planning perspective saying, this is the bylaw allows this, doesn't allow this, or at least give some guardrails and some information to the boards. That's not happening anymore, and that's a real miss, and it's asking too much of our land-use boards to make up for that deficit, and we've been lucky. We have some really, on the planning board and zoning board in particular, we have some really great, talented people, but they may not know. We talked the other night about an application for expanding a garage, right? They may not know that they actually can't give the relief, right, that's being asked, legally, but it may not be anything in the bylaws that says you cannot give the relief. What they would need to know is the law, right, and it's not reasonable to expect them to know the law, and they, frankly, should have been counseled, which is here's the application. The applicant has a right to file the application. It doesn't mean that they have a right to get the relief they're asking for. This is the law, which is, you know, X, Y, and Z, to take that burden off of the land-use boards. Land-use boards ultimately have to make their decisions, but I think we have multiple examples of where special permits or relief have been given to projects that actually, if you were to study the application and study the application to the bylaw, you would see that there's actually not relief available. It's effectively a rezoning outside of town meeting, and so we shouldn't be doing that, and it's just not fair for the land-use boards to have to bear that burden, and the glove is just a great example, where if you have learned staff, and Marblewood's had the benefit of a very long-term established professional, you see the benefits of that. They bring applicants and applications in a much better form to the board by the time it gets there, so that low-hung fruit is certainly addressed, but oftentimes bigger issues are also addressed, and it really streamlines things. We aren't going to be able to keep doing the things that we're doing, like hard stop in our town, the things that people are most excited about. I mean, yes, people are excited when we control budgets, but the things that really affect people's quality of lives, zoning, planning, development, open space, harbor, we can't keep doing these things without that position, so I'm glad. I'm really grateful that you're reformatting how the position looks and this, but this is going to take very, very active recruitment, and I'm glad you suggested some temporary help as well, but this is going to take active recruitment, and frankly active recruitment is how we got our current economic and community development head. Active recruitment is how you got your assistant town administrator. Active recruitment has shown fruits for us, and so we can all help as well, but I think it's great you reformatting it. [Speaker 2] (41:27 - 42:50) I appreciate the focus on the budget, too. Frankly, these are the kind of positions that really help us write grants, help us bring more money in. I would say it would be penny-wise and pound-foolish to try to think that we could save anything by reducing the money that we spend on community and economic development. We look at Vineyard Square, and anybody who thinks that that campus that was defined back in the 50s and still works for, you know, 2023 is reading an old textbook. There's lots for us to do, and the economic development, the needs for, you know, broader conversations around planning and master planning have never been more important. So I hear you. I will get back to the board every week or every meeting until we find the right individual to help us continue to, you know, move Swampskate forward and support some of these extraordinary initiatives. I will say I was a little troubled as well watching the planning board. The Glover was a project that was defined by a vote-of-town meeting, and I am still perplexed at some of the complexity around that project. [Speaker 1] (42:50 - 43:19) Yeah, well, it's a big project. It's a complex project, and, again, I think we are so lucky to have five individuals that are so earnest in working hard and putting forward ideas. I think staff would only help them be able to navigate this quicker. We ask a lot of our land use boards, candidly. Every town does, but they need to support staff, and so I'm glad that you're focused on it. Thank you for being focused. [Speaker 3] (43:20 - 43:37) Thanks. Thanks, Sean. And I agree with everything Mary Ellen and Peter have to say, and I think that, you know, I know that there's been effort to try to fill this position, so I just want to acknowledge that. Any other comments or questions about this? [Speaker 5] (43:38 - 43:54) No, I just want to say thank you to Angela Bolido and the planning board and to the zoning board. I mean, if you listen to these meetings, this is really hard work, really hard work, and I really appreciate it. [Speaker 3] (43:57 - 45:06) Great. Okay, moving on to our show cause hearing. Diane, I think that Tom McEnany and then Brian Riley should be promoted from KP just to have them on the line. So I'm now opening the show cause hearing. This show cause hearing is to consider whether to cancel the all alcohol Yeah, come on down here. To cancel the all alcohol section 15 package store license issued to C&L Package Store, Incorporated for the premises previously located at 26 New Ocean Street in Swanscot, pursuant to Mass General Law, Chapter 138, Section 77. I'd like to note the show cause hearing is being held in public, but it's not a public hearing that we're accustomed to, so public comment will not be taken during this hearing. Is the license holder here with representation? [Speaker 4] (45:06 - 56:46) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Attorney Sam Vitale. My office is in Lynn at 60 Andrew Street. I'm here on behalf of C&L Package Store and Fran Peralta. Fran was a businessman here in the town for over 40 years. What brings us here this evening is the extraordinary circumstances that led to his long career as a businessman in Swanscot coming to a sort of abrupt end. I also welcome the opportunity to report to the board and forward some information with respect to what happened since the town made its decisions with respect to that location. As the members of the board know, Fran's operation on the Lynn and Swanscot line was a town on land. He had a lease for many years. I believe until perhaps 2017 or so when the lease wasn't renewed. But he stayed at the property until the town made a decision with respect to that site. And I'm certain from the town's perspective, it was a wise business decision. But government doesn't only operate as a business. I'm certain there are people who think it should. But there are other considerations, like, for example, the VFW that was next door. There may be people who could pay more rent than the VFW. But there are other considerations, and one should be with a small businessman who served the public need, served the public convenience, and has a property right now in this license. That's why the ABCC and the state statutes afford people who are in this circumstance a right of appeal because essentially depriving somebody of a property interest, they're entitled to fairness and due process, and this hearing is part of that. I welcome that, and I thank you for that. I'd like to just give you an update. These are the locations that – and I'll give you my card. These are the locations over the past several months that C&L Package Store has investigated with the hopes of finding a new home. The other factors that make an impact here is the town has got a limited geographic area. The town has a zoning ordinance and bylaw. And when you're in the package store business or in the alcohol business, you need two things. You need a license, and you need a licensed premises. The licensed premises is one that is determined by the licensing board to be a suitable place to serve the public need. And for many years, this location was determined to be that, and annually the license was renewed and renewed and renewed. And then we came to a circumstance where there was no long release. Let me clarify something, that there is no statute, there is no regulation, that says that if you cease business, you only have six months. You might have three months. That's your determination. You might have a year. That's your determination. It's the totality of the circumstances that led to that. So if there was a conflagration and a fire that destroyed it or a flood and the place couldn't be rebuilt in a year, I'm certain the select board would say, well, we understand that. It took longer to rebuild. It took more than six months. Or if there were some other circumstances. So that's left to you with respect to make a determination. But the real reason I think you need to look to that is that it's to foster competition. It's to serve the consumers. What they don't want, the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, is to have somebody withhold a license that could serve the public because they want a higher price for it or they're trying to make a different deal with someone else. They want the licenses out there. They want competition. They want the benefit for consumers and prices. They want convenience. And so the irony is you hold a pocket license. You have a pocket license right now because the decennial census came along and said based on the way licensing is done with respect to the package stores, it's based on the population and the population is based on the decennial census. So you now have an additional license. But there's a fundamental difference, and let me explain it to you. You're not obliged, nor can the ABCC tell you on license number four that you must issue it or to whom you must issue it. That's your decision. The ABCC and the statute recognize on a new license, it's the determination by the local board as to whether to issue it and whether there's a public need. But when you have a license that has been issued, there's a fundamental difference because the ABCC and the regulatory scheme recognizes that somebody now has a property interest. And here in America, you can't be deprived of your property interest without due process, and that due process is fundamental fairness. So let's look at why C&L package store closed, because unlike other people who may lose a lease or other individuals who can't conduct their business because of some natural disaster, here what happened is really it was your decision to take that site and for whatever purposes you saw to do something else with it. That's what deprived C&L of the location that it had for 40 years, and that was your prerogative. But at the same time, it seems ironic, at least to me, that the individual who was the proprietor at that location for 40 years is now being told you must act within a certain time frame when you know better than most there are constrictions within the size of this town and the zoning bylaws and the effect on neighbors and the effect on traffic to find a suitable location. So I think I gave you a list of 18 places that we looked. Now, the good news is that one of those has come back to the forefront, and we're engaged in negotiations with a strip mall along Humphrey Street across from Phillips Park. I personally have spoken to the owner of that location who these people met with, and at that time he had a different plan, the owner of the property. He told me that that didn't work out. He would clearly consider them again, and they begun the negotiations for that site. But it's hard to put a timetable on when that can come to fruition, and I also think that part of it is that in recognition of what Fran has done for 40 years and the business that served the community over that period, you did give them an opportunity. There's no question about that. But I also think that when you renewed his license, that gave him a certain ability to go out and look for another location. If you deprive him of that now, he does have a right of appeal to the ABCC, but it seems to me that it's going to be discouraging to other businesses, especially small businesses. We know there's a large package store in Vinnon Square. There's a smaller one on Barlow Street, I believe. But in terms of serving the public and serving competition, it seems to me you should be working to support local businessmen, especially people who've been here for a long period of time. Now, if you had a trouble spot, I don't think anybody would question your ability to say, this has been a trouble spot. We don't need more trouble spots. But that's not the case here. The case here is that someone made a decision, and to me, I'm experienced. I represented marijuana establishments. I know there's a linkage between the number of package store licenses and the minimum number of marijuana. And I've got to believe that when you calculated to have two marijuanas, you counted in the package store numbers that you had C and L. So it led to his own demise because it was part of the formula that allowed you to have two. So, in fact, that location is a good location, and I'm certain that the marijuana people can do very, very well there. But the real question is, with the growing population, which the decennial census reflects, should there only be two package stores in the town of Swansco? I'd love to be only one of two lawyers in the city of Lynn. It doesn't work that way. Okay? People have determined that competition is good, that when people have choices, it's good, and it benefits the public. So the real question, I think, for you this evening is, if you were to cancel this license, is that really in the public interest? It certainly is not in Fran's interest because it's going to deprive him of a property right that he heretofore had and shepherded and served well the community for this period of time. And so you can grant him additional time. You can grant C and L additional time. I can't say to you that it would be tomorrow or two months from tomorrow, but I think he deserves an opportunity, a continued opportunity, to try to find a home here in Swanscot where he's had his business for the last 40 years and that this, as I said at the outset, is not the ordinary circumstance where someone has had a disaster, has a financial problem, has had problems in their operation, and that's where the term pocket license came from. But the real reason, if you look for that policy, why there is some impetus to have people have an active role, it's that they not profit by depriving others of the opportunity. Here, others have an opportunity because you've got a fourth license, and that opportunity is subject to your control, your decisions. But he should have the same opportunity as someone else who can come in for license number four if they choose to. But anybody coming here is going to be confronted with the same circumstances. We've got a geographic area that's this wide. We've got business zones that are determined by the zone ordinance and the zone map. And then there are business considerations, traffic, parking, and the viability of your business is public convenience. And so I think that list that we gave you as an update for the places that he's looked at reflect the diligent search that they have made. If you look at the list, you'll see that it is in places where they think there would be sufficient parking, there is proper zoning, and there's some opportunity for success because it's convenient for the public. And so I love you, Christmas guy, but I don't see anybody dressed as the Grinch, and I guess in parting I'd just say I hope you don't hand Fran a lump of coal. Thank you. [Speaker 3] (56:46 - 56:58) Thank you, Attorney Talley, and thank you, Mr. Peralta, for being here. I'm assuming you don't have any witnesses that you're- Other than Mr. Peralta. [Speaker 4] (56:58 - 57:41) Yeah. He said to me he's really nervous about this. He doesn't like public speaking, and why I asked him to be here, I'll tell you candidly. I said people like me are viewed as a hired hand, okay? I think you've got to put human faces on it, okay? This is somebody, when he told me how long he had been there, and I've known Fran a long time, I go, geez, you're really older than I thought, Fran. You've been there for 40 years. I couldn't believe it. But somebody who invested their time in one location, and I don't think that there's been a problem with the location as far as his operation. So I think that does deserve some consideration. Fair enough. [Speaker 3] (57:41 - 59:32) Thank you. So before we get started, I just want to-I think they're-I'm anticipating there may be questions for Angelica Noble, our admin at the police department. So for these show-cause hearings, I need to swear in any witnesses. So, Angelica, if you could stand up and raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? All right, thanks. And before I hand it over to board questions or comments, I just wanted to provide a brief statement for a little bit of context. So C&L Liquors vacated 26 New Ocean Street on or about September 1st of 2021 and has failed to exercise the license since it vacated its former premises. The board renewed that license on December 1st of 2021, as Attorney Vitale explained, with the condition that it must be exercised within six months of our notice. That notice was provided on December 10th. In that notice, the board informed the license holder that absent the license being exercised, we would hold a show-cause hearing to consider the cancellations of this license. And so we did provide a six-month extension, if you will. We didn't have that show-cause hearing at the end of that six months, so there has been essentially a full year since that time for Mr. Peralta to seek an alternative location for his package store. Are there any questions from the board for Mr. Peralta's representative or for Angelica Noble? [Speaker 5] (59:33 - 59:42) I have a question. How much time do you need? I'm sorry, that was KB's question, too. [Speaker 1] (59:42 - 59:55) I guess if Mr. Peralta's answering, he has to be sworn in. I think he's the license holder. He's sworn in? No, that's fine. Great. Very untrustworthy. [Speaker 10] (59:58 - 1:00:22) Can you hear? I can even hear. We would like to see the license renewed for the year so that we've not so much pressure, but we can find a location. As you can see by the list, we've looked into many locations over the past year, and nothing has been suitable or come through for us. [Speaker 12] (1:00:25 - 1:00:26) Okay. [Speaker 5] (1:00:26 - 1:00:33) So it's your opinion that you'd be able to find a location by this time next year? [Speaker 10] (1:00:34 - 1:00:58) I would think so. As Sam had said, the proximity of the town, the size of it, it's tough. There's not a lot of locations that are feasible with parking and size for product. Angelica, how many— It's been tough. As you can see, we've looked at a lot. [Speaker 8] (1:01:01 - 1:01:10) Angelica, how many licenses do we have in the town where there is not an address certain for any of our packaged stores? [Speaker 11] (1:01:11 - 1:01:11) Zero? [Speaker 8] (1:01:12 - 1:01:12) Zero. [Speaker 11] (1:01:12 - 1:01:13) Well, one. [Speaker 8] (1:01:14 - 1:01:21) This one. Historically, I mean, do you have any historic data? Did we ever do that? [Speaker 11] (1:01:21 - 1:01:22) I don't. [Speaker 8] (1:01:22 - 1:01:23) Did we ever have a floating license without a physical address? [Speaker 11] (1:01:23 - 1:01:24) I'm not sure. [Speaker 8] (1:01:24 - 1:01:36) I don't have that information. I mean, that's my concern. I want to support local businesses. Thank you. But we just don't know where you are going to be located. That's the challenge that I have. [Speaker 10] (1:01:36 - 1:01:41) Yeah, it's just something comes available, something that, like, we're looking into one now on Humphrey Street. [Speaker 3] (1:01:42 - 1:01:47) Angelica, can you—how many licenses are available currently? [Speaker 11] (1:01:48 - 1:01:55) There's one license currently available, and then if you were to cancel the license, the C&L license there would be two. [Speaker 3] (1:01:55 - 1:02:11) Okay. And what is the fee to renew the license that Mr. Peralta has already— $2,100. $2,100. And so what is the cost to apply for a new license should we cancel the license now? [Speaker 11] (1:02:12 - 1:02:19) That would be $200 paid to the ABCC and then the $2,100 to the Town of Swanscot for the annual fee. [Speaker 3] (1:02:20 - 1:02:21) So it would be an extra $200. [Speaker 11] (1:02:22 - 1:02:23) Correct. [Speaker 3] (1:02:24 - 1:02:24) Okay. [Speaker 5] (1:02:29 - 1:02:33) And the risk of not having a license available. [Speaker 3] (1:02:34 - 1:02:39) Do you know how long that other license has been available, that other package license? [Speaker 11] (1:02:39 - 1:02:44) That was given to us at— A special— Just now. Yeah. [Speaker 1] (1:02:44 - 1:02:45) Now it's the census change. [Speaker 11] (1:02:45 - 1:02:46) Yeah, through the census. Yeah. [Speaker 1] (1:02:47 - 1:02:52) That was just given to us because of the 2020 census. When I say just, sometime in 2021. [Speaker 5] (1:02:52 - 1:02:53) Exactly, yeah. [Speaker 1] (1:02:53 - 1:02:55) When it hit our books, once they certified the census. [Speaker 5] (1:02:56 - 1:03:04) And if we've had a business publicly state that they were going to be leaving, closing their doors, does that make a change? [Speaker 1] (1:03:04 - 1:03:08) No, that's a different type of license that we're talking about here. [Speaker 6] (1:03:09 - 1:03:13) Package license is separate from an on-premise consumption license. [Speaker 1] (1:03:13 - 1:03:28) So this is a so-called Section 15 license and the restaurant licenses for on-premises are Section 12 licenses. So I don't have any questions. [Speaker 6] (1:03:28 - 1:03:44) Are we— I do have one more question. Just—I understand the circumstances to how we got here, but is there an instance where the applicant could apply for a license without a physical address? [Speaker 11] (1:03:45 - 1:03:52) I don't—I've never experienced that. I don't think that you can. No. Yeah. It's never happened when I've been. [Speaker 6] (1:03:56 - 1:04:07) So if we rescinded the license, he could not apply for it back again without having a lease or a deed to a property for which he would be conducting business? Yeah. Yeah. [Speaker 1] (1:04:10 - 1:04:24) It's really the premise of the license, right? To be clear is your—one of the many things that you're doing when you look at licenses is the appropriateness of the location. So the location is very relevant to the license for that. [Speaker 6] (1:04:24 - 1:04:41) So it's not the only consideration, but it's— So then say our applicant found a new location, is there a chance the ABCC could still reject his— him operating at that premises? [Speaker 11] (1:04:41 - 1:04:49) They could. We have not had that happen. We've had multiple transfers and new license. I haven't experienced that, but it certainly could happen. [Speaker 1] (1:04:49 - 1:05:13) So typically the ABCC is analyzing the applicant more so than the location. They are—they act after the local licensing authority acts. And so if the zoning and the local authority has granted the permit, the ABCC typically on location isn't the— that's not the reason they don't grant the license. It's usually an underwriting issue having to do with the applicant. [Speaker 5] (1:05:13 - 1:05:27) So how would it work out if he were to turn around and go into one of these locations, and it's a location that we think this isn't a good location, how does that play out? [Speaker 1] (1:05:27 - 1:05:28) Isn't or is? [Speaker 5] (1:05:28 - 1:05:28) Is not. [Speaker 1] (1:05:28 - 1:05:38) So they would have to come back to us for a change of location on the license anyways, and then that still would need to be sanctioned by the ABCC, but they would need to come back to us. [Speaker 5] (1:05:38 - 1:05:42) Okay, so he just can't move into— Correct. All right. [Speaker 1] (1:05:42 - 1:05:48) Correct. I'd move to close the public hearing. [Speaker 3] (1:05:52 - 1:06:00) Do we—I'm going to ask Brian Riley or Tom McInerney, do we close this before we make any motions, or do we do that as part of the CHOCAZ hearing? [Speaker 13] (1:06:03 - 1:06:05) Mr. Chairman, this is Tom McInerney. Can you hear me? [Speaker 12] (1:06:06 - 1:06:06) Yeah. [Speaker 13] (1:06:07 - 1:06:17) Yes, so you would just close the evidentiary portion of the hearing at this point, and then the board can deliberate and make a motion and a decision on how it would like to proceed. [Speaker 3] (1:06:18 - 1:06:20) Okay. Is there a second? [Speaker 6] (1:06:20 - 1:06:20) Second. [Speaker 3] (1:06:21 - 1:06:47) All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. So, I mean, we have before us, I think our options are pretty clear. We could extend the license for a certain period of time, or we can make a motion to cancel the license pursuant to General Law, Chapter 138, Section 77. [Speaker 1] (1:06:50 - 1:09:05) So I'm going to make a motion to cancel the license, but, Mr. Peralta, I hope that you continue looking for a location. I come from the position of that licenses, I think you've been given a year. We understand how difficult it is, but the next person that asks the same thing, whether or not they had the license for a day or a year or 40 years, I believe they're entitled to the exact same treatment. And so, therefore, if we allow you to hold the license, I would feel as though we would need to let the next person, even if they were just here for three days with a license as opposed to 40 years. And I feel it's arbitrary then for us to be deciding multiple people, one, two, three, can hold licenses for a prolonged period. I'm glad that we gave you the time. It was a very fair request that you asked for, and I'm glad that we didn't do anything middle of last year. I hope that you continue looking. The good news is the license is here, so you'll be able to come get it, but I'm more concerned about the fact that if tomorrow another package store decided that they were closing or something, that they would seek that same remedy to hold that license, and then we would be having two. And so, for that reason, I'm going to move to cancel it, but I do hope that you continue the conversation, and the good news seems that you can come back. And I appreciate, Mr. Vitale, your comment about the license being a property interest. I accept whatever Massachusetts law is on this point, and you do have rights to appeal, and you should decide accordingly. I do fundamentally, just personally, although it doesn't cloud my judgment here, do have a problem with the fact that a license that you can get from the town for a small administrative fee all of a sudden becomes a forever property interest of someone that's not the town. We're not like Cambridge or Boston where the license holder is selling them for hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars. That doesn't happen here, but I do believe fundamentally it's about the public good and the public service, and I hope that you do find a place. I really do, and I think there are some locations that I could get comfortable with on this list personally, so I really encourage it, but I just can't be comfortable with, for the first time in my years, and I'm not familiar with other towns doing it, allowing this prolonged license without a location. [Speaker 3] (1:09:07 - 1:09:23) So, Peter, just given the language from town council, the motion would be to cancel the all-alcohol Section 15 package store license issued to C&L Package Store, previously located at 26 New Ocean Street, pursuant to Mass. General Law, Chapter 138, Section 77. [Speaker 1] (1:09:23 - 1:09:25) That would be my motion. [Speaker 3] (1:09:26 - 1:09:26) Is there a second? [Speaker 6] (1:09:27 - 1:10:32) So, I have been thinking, yes, I am seconding the motion. I have been thinking about this since our last meeting, and I agree with what Peter stated with regards to the fact that we are setting a precedent here that I don't think that we can sustain for all business owners, and I think that's an issue. I definitely agree. I would love to see you back before us applying for a new license in some of these locations that are listed here. This is not an anti-small business sentiment at all. We appreciate your 40 years of service to the town. However, I don't know that we could or would afford another small business this same outcome if they came before us now, and if that's the case, then I don't know that we should do it again. So, I second the motion. [Speaker 3] (1:10:34 - 1:10:35) Further comments? [Speaker 5] (1:10:37 - 1:10:57) Yeah, I have a comment. I completely respect what you and Peter are saying as far as the worry about setting precedent, and the reason why I don't think that it is setting precedent is because we have a business that was renting from the town, and we canceled their lease. [Speaker 1] (1:10:58 - 1:11:10) We didn't cancel their lease. Their lease ended. Their lease ended. The town decided not to renew it. We didn't renew it. It's not like the town did an early termination or anything. It ran its term, just so you know that. [Speaker 5] (1:11:10 - 1:12:29) Thank you. But the fact still remains you had a business going for 40 years in a community with, and somebody correct me if I'm wrong, with no complaints, a good business, good neighbor, everything is going fine, and then it doesn't get renewed. So, the reason why I don't think it's setting precedents, if you turn around and say take another year or even take six months, I am not comfortable with just shutting down, not supporting a small business. I mean, I come from a small business background. I know how hard it is, and I just think that this was an existing business in town. We played a part in them not renewing a license. I don't think it's a precedent because how many more liquor stores or packing stores, are they called packing stores? Package stores. Would get canceled that had an affiliation with the town beforehand. That's why I think we have some room there. That's how I'm looking at it. The reason I don't think it's precedent is because there's history here and there was a reason for it. And I think another six months or a year is, I don't see how it's going to hurt the town to give a little bit of relief here. [Speaker 10] (1:12:29 - 1:12:29) Thank you. [Speaker 3] (1:12:32 - 1:13:06) So this is how I feel about it. I think that we did provide an opportunity last year when we renewed the license. I appreciate all the work that has gone into trying to find an alternate location, but I don't think we are neglecting that opportunity to still find another location. There will now be two licenses available, so it doesn't shut the door on that opportunity. And I agree with what Katie and Peter said previously. [Speaker 8] (1:13:07 - 1:13:49) I'm in the same camp. We did offer the opportunity. We did renew December 1st at 21 for six months. We're here the week before Christmas with the Show Cause hearing. Business hasn't been operational in 15 months. I'm a huge proponent of small business, and I wish Mr. Peralta the best of luck in finding another location, and hopefully he'll be back in front of us shortly. But without a physical location, I can't vote to extend or renew any longer. [Speaker 1] (1:13:50 - 1:15:27) If I can say one more thing. Mary Ellen, thanks for what you said. Let me say this. Mr. Peralta can speak for himself, but I will let you know from what I know during my tenure, I sit here in a very, very comfortable position, saying that the town of Swampscott has been very forgiving and supporting of this small business for a prolonged period of time, and did a number of things that I think were extraordinary and that perhaps someone in the private sector as a landlord would not have shown such support for a small business. So I sit here even despite this. This is not about pulling the rug out from a small business. This is the rule that we all functionally have operated under. And so I appreciate, and no disagreement, we were on different sides of this here, but I do sit here very comfortably, and I think frankly Swampscott should be proud of the fact that whether they know it or not, Swampscott made some sacrifices and was very supportive of this business for a prolonged period of time. So I don't want this to be construed as anti-business or anything. I hope Mr. Peralta can come back. And I'm sorry he hasn't been able to find a location, but I hope this then encourages others also to join exactly what Mr. Vitale said, which is the spirit of competition, which is maybe someone else will have greater success in finding it, and we can put this license to use, which is the whole point of the license. [Speaker 6] (1:15:29 - 1:15:30) I have a question. [Speaker 1] (1:15:30 - 1:15:30) Sure. [Speaker 6] (1:15:31 - 1:15:52) Is it within our power to allow the current license holder to— if he's going to owe another $200 if he applies for a license, could we allow if he applied for a new license in the next year to reduce our fee by $200 to cover the cost of paying to the ABCC? [Speaker 8] (1:15:52 - 1:15:53) That's also setting a precedent. [Speaker 6] (1:15:55 - 1:15:56) Okay. Fair. That's fair. [Speaker 3] (1:15:58 - 1:16:03) I don't—I think we could have that conversation should that come before us. [Speaker 6] (1:16:04 - 1:16:09) I think that's within our— He's trying to find a relief that is not in holding a license. [Speaker 3] (1:16:10 - 1:16:21) Yeah, I think it's within our authority if we were to do that. Great. Okay, so the motion to cancel. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? [Speaker 5] (1:16:21 - 1:16:23) Aye. Opposed? [Speaker 3] (1:16:23 - 1:18:42) Yeah. Mr. Peralta, thank you. I'm sure—I know you've been working with town staff and Angelica, and I'm sure they would be happy to continue to help you find a location and find a place. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Angelica. Okay. Aggregate Industries Permit. John Piccarello and Tony Brandewitz are joining us. You guys want to come down or grab a mic? So I wanted to put this on the agenda because this—the aggregate permit, John sent a memo to Sean and me on December 14th that we provided for you all, and just explaining and reminding us that the aggregate permit will expire at the end of January. And so it was a good reminder and a good nudge in considering that we are now at our last meeting of 2022, and our first meeting will be January 11th. That's not a lot of time, and I just wanted to have that conversation, as it seems likely that ERAC's recommendation will be to extend the permit again to June 30th and just make sure the board has a chance to ask any questions. Now, we are currently in litigation with aggregate, so it makes some of this conversation challenging, but I think that the point is that's also one of the challenges of changing the permit at this point. And so I think we can discuss at a high level where we are and what options may be available to us besides extending that permit. At the end of June. John, I don't know if you want to correct me on anything I said or add anything to that. [Speaker 7] (1:18:42 - 1:19:53) Well, you're perfectly right. We discussed just ending and writing a new permit at the end of January, and we came to the conclusion that it would be a benefit for us and for aggregate if we waited until the end of June, so we had time to meet and discuss any improvements, any changes, any additions to the permit that the committee wants to make. There's just not enough time to do it between now and June 28th when the present one expires. We just soon let it run on another six months until the end of June, and in that time have some discussions, whether it be executive session or with aggregate, to try to work things out. I mean, this could take another year in litigation before any court makes a decision. You know, that's reality. So our suggestion is as follows as we wrote. Let's extend it to June 30th, and then we'll have meetings between now and then to see if we can't iron out some of the differences. [Speaker 3] (1:19:55 - 1:20:03) Thanks, John. And, yeah, to be clear, I think it is, but that's not any action that we'd be taking tonight. I just wanted to put it on everyone's radar. [Speaker 7] (1:20:04 - 1:20:12) Now, you don't have to make that decision tonight. I just wanted to bring it to your attention so that you have a chance to make that decision. [Speaker 2] (1:20:13 - 1:20:58) I think it's important just to note, you know, we are in litigation, and we do have, I think, an open line of communication with aggregate, and it's my hope that we can continue to work with aggregate as we have done over the last many years and really come to resolution to some of the concerns. And, again, you know, I appreciate the work of the ERAC committee and, you know, some of the hard conversations that we've been having, and certainly, you know, I think we can look forward to a few more of those critical conversations with aggregate, but also, you know, following up with the board and discussing the permit at a later date. [Speaker 7] (1:21:00 - 1:21:12) Yeah, it hasn't been an easy discussion with aggregate and the lawyers involved. It's very limited to what they can discuss and or agree to. [Speaker 2] (1:21:13 - 1:21:41) Because we're in litigation, I also would just – I would not get into too many of the specifics of those issues, and I would just simply say I think we have made some extraordinary progress with the standard of care that we have in that permit, and I really appreciate the good faith efforts on both sides to really try to work together and protect the public health and public interest of the citizens of Slabskip. [Speaker 1] (1:21:42 - 1:22:49) So, Sean, Chairman, if I can. So, Sean, I think I hear a polite call for we can help with that dialogue. It's in executive session, and it's with their lawyers and with them, but I think the recommendation that's being put forth makes inherent sense, and I'm really grateful, Tonya and John, you guys, you two in particular, bear the brunt of most of this. So I think that recommendation, if it comes back before us on our agenda, is a good recommendation. But, and I think this is important, but I think now we need to convene perhaps with John and a subset of ERAC in executive session to talk about the open items and then meet and empower council perhaps to find if there's resolution there. But I think I hear in what John's saying we need to step in to help advance discussions on those points and not wait until June. We've got to do that starting now to make a June renewal realistic. Is that fair to say? [Speaker 7] (1:22:49 - 1:22:49) Perfect. [Speaker 8] (1:22:50 - 1:22:55) Well, we have to do it now anyway since we have, since the existing permit expires. [Speaker 1] (1:22:55 - 1:23:07) No, but I'm, I was assuming, I was assuming we'd extend it for six months just because that's not done and it's not realistic it's going to get done in the next 30 days. These are not easy topics. [Speaker 5] (1:23:07 - 1:23:08) Yep. [Speaker 1] (1:23:08 - 1:23:08) So. [Speaker 5] (1:23:09 - 1:23:27) Right, just so I understand. So you're inclined to say let's go with the six months, which I would totally agree with you, but also are we saying to get ERAC in the room with everybody, not everybody, get some people together so that possibly we can avoid some of this? [Speaker 1] (1:23:27 - 1:24:07) So I think what, yes, but more importantly the issues that are the ones being litigated, ERAC by themselves can't settle. They need us to do that and so we would need to meet in executive session, just us with ERAC, without ERAC, with council to authorize council to negotiate, not negotiate, perhaps we even have a meeting with aggregate council to try a settlement meeting or something. I'm not saying any of this is possible. Settlement may be beyond the reach, who knows, but they can't have John, Tonya and others on ERAC can't do anything on these issues without us intervening and we will only do that in executive session because we're in litigation. [Speaker 7] (1:24:08 - 1:24:23) Let me make it perfectly clear that the sticking points in the permit that they're objecting to are totally taboo at any of our meetings. The lawyers say we are not discussing that. So we're not getting anywhere. [Speaker 12] (1:24:24 - 1:24:24) Right. [Speaker 6] (1:24:26 - 1:24:40) They should since we're in litigation. Right. I don't blame them, but to your point, you're at a brick wall, unless we or other folks step in and take it out of a public session basically. [Speaker 7] (1:24:41 - 1:24:48) Maybe you have some better ideas than what we want. Or not, but at least we can say yeah. [Speaker 15] (1:24:48 - 1:24:51) At least we're going to plead ignorance in private session, not publicly. [Speaker 2] (1:24:53 - 1:25:04) It could get, well, I'll save it for executive session. That's it. I thought you understood what I said. [Speaker 3] (1:25:06 - 1:25:07) Go ahead. [Speaker 6] (1:25:07 - 1:25:11) Is there a reason we cannot send the permit tonight? [Speaker 3] (1:25:11 - 1:25:12) No, we can't. [Speaker 5] (1:25:12 - 1:25:12) Because we didn't. [Speaker 2] (1:25:13 - 1:25:22) We can't do it tonight because we didn't notice it. We're going to have to invite them in for a public hearing and give them a chance to participate in the discussion. [Speaker 7] (1:25:22 - 1:25:25) And I'm sure the other members of the committee would want to be present. [Speaker 2] (1:25:26 - 1:25:26) Yeah. [Speaker 3] (1:25:28 - 1:25:37) I thank John for bringing it to our attention now, and I just wanted to make sure since we have three weeks until August meeting that we're all sort of thinking about it and know that it's coming. [Speaker 5] (1:25:37 - 1:25:49) I just want to ask you one quick question on your letter that you sent us here. You say here that this year there was only 46 blasts, which is under the 50 limit that's in there. Is there a reason why it was only 46? [Speaker 7] (1:25:49 - 1:25:50) I'm sorry, what? [Speaker 5] (1:25:50 - 1:25:52) Is there a reason why it was only 46? [Speaker 7] (1:25:54 - 1:26:24) I'm not aggregate, so I can't answer that. But it's pretty much normal. I mean, they have not done any blasts since the first week in December because they've got all kinds of equipment changes going on. Granted, the weather has been perfect, but they have other plans that they're trying to get accomplished. And they don't normally start until March of any year. So depending on the weather, climate change, that may change in the future. [Speaker 1] (1:26:24 - 1:26:35) I think, though, correct me if I'm wrong, that limit was set at a number that they never exceeded anyways. So we set it at once per week with a cap at 50 or 52. [Speaker 12] (1:26:36 - 1:26:37) Twice per week. [Speaker 1] (1:26:37 - 1:26:56) Twice per week, but a cap at 50? Yep. But we set it in a way that they hadn't exceeded that previously. So at the time it wasn't seen as a big deal. But if blasting was going to become more voluminous, it would become a big deal if all of a sudden they had a spike in it. [Speaker 2] (1:26:56 - 1:27:21) A few years ago, they blasted more than they had historically blasted in years, and that's when we actually identified that the number of blasts needed to be regulated because there was no sense of how many we were going to have to deal with per week, or per month, or per year. And so that was part of the evolution of this regulatory permit. [Speaker 1] (1:27:22 - 1:27:37) So we should meet and executive. Great questions. There's a lot to talk about. It's really complicated. But we should heed your request, I personally think, sometime in January. Agreed. [Speaker 7] (1:27:39 - 1:27:40) Thank you. [Speaker 2] (1:27:40 - 1:27:43) Thank you both for coming down in person. I appreciate it. Tony. [Speaker 3] (1:27:45 - 1:30:07) All right. In keeping with the theme of sort of putting it on people's radar, the last item is discussion of setting select board and town administrator goals for 2023. I don't expect or want necessarily an in-depth discussion of those goals tonight, but I just wanted to mention and, again, put forth that I think at our January meeting, probably our January 11th meeting, we'll have a conversation about board goals and setting the town administrator's goals, which we didn't do during his review. And some of those are tied to one another, so I think it's important that there's a sense of our goals as the town administrator is working on his goals. Just to give you a sense of it, you know, last year we sort of approved goals for the board, but the conversations we had were more about goals that we saw as, like, board goals, but then also goals that we had as individual board members. So the goals we set last year were working on pedestrian safety, retention and filling some of the open town positions, and then a land use summit, which we didn't do. So that gives you, and then, you know, so, like, for individuals, working on a climate action plan was one of my goals. You know, so that's, and, you know, Polly, the previous chair, Polly, had a goal of creating the handbooks that we had adopted. So that's kind of, that's just an example of the kind of conversation that we had. It's both to provide the town administrator and staff a sense of where our priorities are, but then also just to talk about sort of, like, what we're hoping and planning on working on, and it's not, you know, it's good to set goals, but it's also, you know, it doesn't mean you're not working on anything else. Any questions about that process or the timeline there? [Speaker 5] (1:30:08 - 1:30:43) I have a question about the process and the timeline. The town administrator is judged on goals, and the timeline on the judging on the goals affects his bonus. So I think that there should be a conversation about how to really make a timeline that's fair and, you know, effective for everybody. Otherwise, it's like, okay, here's your goals, and now you have, the clock's ticking, and you have five weeks to get those goals done. So I think that has to be addressed. [Speaker 12] (1:30:45 - 1:30:45) Certainly. [Speaker 5] (1:30:46 - 1:30:53) You know, do we do goals on a calendar year, or are we doing goals on our fiscal year? And that's just a thought. [Speaker 2] (1:30:54 - 1:31:19) Yeah, I think we have to agree on that timeline, and I think, you know, there's a sense of, you know, if there's an absolute, you know, goal of getting handbooks updated or, you know, measuring, you know, progress towards a goal. Like there's a way to kind of look at certain performance in achieving certain outcomes. [Speaker 3] (1:31:19 - 1:31:39) So I think that you bring up a good point, and I think that it's a bigger issue, I think, because, so I think we can set the goals and then have maybe a conversation about the timeline in January, but that may be a continued conversation. [Speaker 5] (1:31:39 - 1:31:39) That might be a goal. [Speaker 3] (1:31:39 - 1:32:14) Yeah, a goal. That's a good goal. And I think that, like, there are other questions about the review process, too, and when it occurs, and I think we can have that conversation because, you know, if it occurs when it's intended to, that's actually as you, you know, we did it after some months after when we were supposed to, but that could be potentially after a select board election. And so you don't know, like, some people are reviewing a town administrator, potentially you didn't, you know, talk with them. [Speaker 14] (1:32:14 - 1:32:16) Hypothetically. Hypothetically. [Speaker 3] (1:32:16 - 1:32:25) Didn't I say that? Yeah. So I think that, I think there's a lot there, but I appreciate you bringing it up because I think we should figure that out and think about that. [Speaker 1] (1:32:27 - 1:34:55) The only other thing that I would add is I really think the select board collective goals are really important. Individual goals are really important. But I would appreciate, whatever the timing is that we decide on all these things, having the town administrator lead with, begin the dialogue for us such that he or she is identifying what the priorities are, and those priorities are oftentimes reflected in the town administrator's budget, town administrator's recommended capital, et cetera, et cetera. And so what that does is it informs us a bit where the town administrator thinks we need to go as a town, and that's the professional side of things, right? The professional advice, the professional expertise. That doesn't compel our goals necessarily, but it certainly informs our goals to know that, is it consistent? Is it not consistent? Do we need to have a discussion about that? Alternatively, even if consistent, do we have enough resources to do it, right? Or are we spread too thin? Or is town staff spread too thin? Or does the budget just not support certain things? And I think hearing kind of the state of the city, if you will, from the town administrator, as a beginning of the process is a really important thing because I want to make sure, and Sean, you are so good at saying I'm here to support the select board, and you say it, and I keep correcting you, and I said I believe we're here to support you because you're the one that's charged full time, in charge of a lot of people, and in charge of a big budget to do things, and to put your recommendations forward, and we'll have discussions and debates if we don't agree on direction and things like that, but what I don't want to do is have our goals collectively and individually overshadow or force you away from where you think, unilaterally anyways, where you think the town needs to go and whether or not we can actually do certain things because we've, and this board deserves a lot of credit, the past board deserves a lot of credit, we've started a lot of initiatives, right? And we've got a lot of work to do in the next 12 months just of things that we started, open space, hard stop there, right? We have Hadley, we have, I mean, there's a number of things that we have a lot of work to do, and so I just want to make sure that we hear from the town administrator and hear his vision, and hear what he thinks the budget's going to support, not support, so that realistically we're just having a very candid conversation about those kind of expectations, but start it with the town administrator. [Speaker 5] (1:34:57 - 1:35:25) So I can appreciate that. However, I do vary from there as far as, I do agree with Sean. He is here to support the select board, and as much as I appreciate everything, I think we are the elected officials, and we should be setting what the future should look like for the town, and, of course, based on what Sean is saying and what Sean has accomplished, but I view it just a little differently than you do. [Speaker 1] (1:35:25 - 1:35:59) Yeah, no, I think that if people were able to summarize your and my difference, that philosophy right there is it. I frankly am so grateful for our professional town government, and I believe we've been spending 20 years on doing 60 years worth of damage, and that's because of professional town government, not because the people elected me. So all I'm suggesting is to make sure that we hear from the town administrator before we, as the elected people, decide to just place our. I agree with that. [Speaker 6] (1:36:03 - 1:36:05) That's a good note to end on. [Speaker 2] (1:36:05 - 1:36:10) Yeah, all right. Look, I just want to make one small point. No. [Speaker 12] (1:36:12 - 1:36:14) We just agreed, Sean. We just agreed on that. [Speaker 2] (1:36:14 - 1:37:49) Everything that we do is rested in teamwork. There's nothing a town administrator could do without the support of a majority of the members of this board or vice versa. It really is the essence of how communities succeed or fail. I can't tell you how many communities just can't get out of their own way because of the petty politics of their select citizens, and for me, that becomes theater, and the important work of all the things in the master plan, they disappear for decades, and you're all, I think, aware enough about the successes that we've had, and nothing would be possible without everybody pulling the oar in the same direction. That said, I have a lot of ideas, and I'm happy to kind of roll them up and give you a sense of where I think this budget in FY24 needs to go and where some of the critical needs are that are either going to be part of our very busy agenda in FY24 or will confound us as we kind of look to the future. We've got to make some changes, and I don't want to be dour, but I do think there's some big questions on the horizon about how we continue to evolve Swampskate. [Speaker 3] (1:37:51 - 1:38:21) Thanks, Sean. Consent agenda. Tonight on the consent agenda, we have a vote to approve a one-day liquor license for the Historical Commission for an event on January 25th, and then we also have the approval of the minutes of our meeting on December 5th and December 7th. Is there a motion? We can remove things from the consent agenda if needed or wanted. [Speaker 8] (1:38:21 - 1:38:23) Motion to approve the consent agenda. [Speaker 3] (1:38:23 - 1:38:24) Is there a second? [Speaker 12] (1:38:24 - 1:38:24) Second. [Speaker 3] (1:38:25 - 1:38:29) All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All right. [Speaker 2] (1:38:29 - 1:44:48) Town Administrator's report. Okay. All right, so as a follow-up to the agenda item of the Town Administrator's goals and the Select Board goals, I did reach out to department heads last week and ask them to send me their top three or four goals to ensure that we can align all of the Select Board goals and Town Administrator goals. We are continuing our efforts to really put together the FY24 budget. Amy Sorrow and Patrick Luddy are working with department heads, and over the next few weeks I'll be meeting with department heads to go over their initial proposed FY24 budgets. I have asked them to submit a level-funded budget and a budget that represents a 10% reduction. This is an exercise in really thinking about how would we support core services with a significant constraint on appropriations. I don't anticipate that we will present a budget that will be a reduction of 10% next year, but we need to know where are those core functions and how do we sustain them. Certainly, as Peter had mentioned, we should have an executive session to really talk about the agri-industry's permit. We are working closely with EREC, and I would be happy to coordinate a meeting with the attorney that is representing us in that litigation. Our town clerk, Jared Liberty, is working on getting our annual census mailed and coordinating a comprehensive update for 10 years of missing annual town reports. I want to thank Jared, but also the department heads that are working to compile a lot of those reports. We are updating our public records request process. We are going to be charging $25 an hour. We are receiving a lot of commercial requests for information. It's surprising how many commercial agencies are looking for information that is publicly available, but it does impact time and staff, and so we're going to set that at $25 an hour. In January, Jared will be coming to the board to talk about polling locations. He is interested in keeping the polling locations at the high school for ease of coordination. Let's see. Trash and recycling will not be delayed due to Christmas and New Year, so make sure you get your recycling and trash out. Our senior center is busy. We have a new website, Active Aging in Swampskate, for all of our senior citizens, so please check that out, www.activeaginginswampskate. There is an uptick on scams for elderly persons, so our police department is working with our senior center to really reach out and ensure that our seniors are really getting information. If you need more information, please contact our senior center or our police department. Library Director Jonathan Nichols is busy with a number of community engagement programs and expanding services. He's updating library policies and looking to really roll out a whole host of new initiatives for FY23. Last week, I worked with town treasurer and interim assessor Dick Simmons to set the tax rate. I really want to thank Dick for all of his work over this interim period. I think he's done an absolutely fantastic job filling in on that important function. Patrick is also working on our capital improvement plan and our debt service budget for FY24. Pete has been busy coordinating the hiring of a number of vacant positions but also has focused on that senior planner position, as I updated the board earlier on. Recreation is planning a first night celebration. There will be a lot of great performance and fun at Swampskate High School from 1 to 4. There are tickets for this event, $25 for a family or $5 for each additional ticket. These can be found at SwampskateRec.com. We did receive a $20,000 grant from Mass Housing Partnership to comply with the multifamily zoning requirements of the MBTA communities. We will be working with Bowler Engineering. I want to thank Mike Sweeney and our Disabled American Vets for the 140 wreaths that they placed on our veterans' graves this past Saturday. We have an exam that is posted for our police department. We've received over 20 applicants, but I would encourage anybody that would like to be a police officer in Swampskate to reach out to our police department and speak with our police chief, Ruben Quesada. These are wonderful opportunities for anybody that wants to be a police officer, but you do need to apply and take this exam, but certainly reach out and get some information. We are specifically looking for more women and individuals that historically have not been represented in police departments. Lastly, we are planning a kickoff to discuss the Hawthorne. We'll have times and dates out shortly, but the town has acquired or passed papers to acquire the Hawthorne, and we are really going to reach out to residents to ensure that they have a chance to really share their ideas about how we can use this property and think about what that property will mean both over the next few years and the next few hundred years. So this is your opportunity to really think about that extraordinary property and get ready to share those ideas as we start to come up with that broad vision for Swampskate. [Speaker 3] (1:44:49 - 1:45:01) Thanks, Sean. And just briefly, we do have the date, just as a reminder, is Saturday, January 28th, but the other details will be coming soon. Any questions for Sean? [Speaker 8] (1:45:02 - 1:45:11) Sean, you'd mentioned 20 applicants for the upcoming police exam. What's the date certain where folks would need to apply by, and when's the test? [Speaker 2] (1:45:12 - 1:45:17) The test's in February. I can get that information. I don't have an offhand date, but I'll log on. [Speaker 8] (1:45:17 - 1:45:22) That's fine. So February, and then individuals would have to apply by? [Speaker 2] (1:45:27 - 1:45:37) I'll get that date to you. I don't have an offhand. Certainly, I think it's by sometime in January, but I want to get that specific date before I announce it. [Speaker 5] (1:45:38 - 1:45:39) Can we get that on the website? [Speaker 2] (1:45:40 - 1:45:40) It is. [Speaker 5] (1:45:40 - 1:45:43) It is on the website? Like front and center? [Speaker 2] (1:45:44 - 1:45:47) Yep, we can put it on the town website as well. [Speaker 5] (1:45:49 - 1:45:58) I have a question on the $25 an hour. So how does that get set? [Speaker 2] (1:45:59 - 1:46:25) State law. We have a state law that governs the amount that we can charge for public records, and based on the amount of work that our town clerk's office is involved in, we just have decided that it's important to just start applying that fee to offset some of the cost of those record requests. [Speaker 5] (1:46:25 - 1:46:47) Yeah, so I can understand a lot of work, but I don't see any data on how much work is really going on there. We don't see anything presented to us. And the fact that if a citizen wants a copy of a record, the fact that they have to now pay for a copy of their own information is troubling to me. [Speaker 15] (1:46:48 - 1:46:49) I understand. [Speaker 3] (1:46:49 - 1:47:29) So I don't think, I mean, if a resident wants information from the town, they can email the town and ask for information. My understanding is the difference between a formal FOIA request and just an email to the town saying, I'm interested in information about such and such, and me receiving that information. It's not every request information is going to be charged $25 an hour. It's specifically, technically, a FOIA request, Freedom of Information Act. So that's my understanding of it. It's not, you know, Mr. Smith also says, I'm just curious about whatever. That's a different situation. [Speaker 5] (1:47:29 - 1:47:34) And what about the press? When the press is asking for something, they also have to pay? [Speaker 2] (1:47:35 - 1:47:36) I'd say it depends. [Speaker 5] (1:47:39 - 1:47:46) And are there any, how is this determined? It just depends on who? On Jared? [Speaker 2] (1:47:46 - 1:47:55) Yep. Given the town clerk the discretion to determine, you know, the fees. I mean, the recommendation, I've supported it. [Speaker 3] (1:47:55 - 1:48:19) I'm not an expert in FOIA, but I, you know, so I'll briefly just say that there is a difference. Because when there's a FOIA request and there are, you know, you have to provide a response in a certain timeframe. There's materials that have to be provided. And so it's different than just an informal request for information that happens all the time. [Speaker 5] (1:48:20 - 1:48:38) Right. And also I think that one thing that should be looked at is how, you know, maybe as a town we need to get more information. People should have, you know, an easier time getting information. Like if somebody really wants to look at what our budgets are, you know, where we are with our budgets, things like that. [Speaker 1] (1:48:39 - 1:48:53) Yeah. I agree with Mary Ellen on that. We should. But we should also shed light on exactly what the FOIA requests are actually asking for. Because I think we're going to find out the FOIA requests aren't asking for that. The FOIA requests seem to be regular and constant from the same individuals. Well, that's what I'm saying. [Speaker 5] (1:48:53 - 1:48:55) We don't have any information here. [Speaker 1] (1:48:55 - 1:49:46) And they tend to be asking for more detailed, voluminous information. But we should make that. We should pick up that conversation. Mary Ellen's on. I agree with her generally. We just got to be careful that we're not using it to deter. It's really got to be a reflection of once Jared has to change his path or his staff needs to change their path in a meaningful way because of something, and state law allows this, by the way. So you're not proposing anything that state law doesn't actually have. You're just giving Jared more of an ability. But I think in reality what we've been seeing, what we have been seeing is not people asking for tell us where you are in your expense line item for paperclips in town hall. I think what we're seeing is people asking for extensive communications and other information that I think. [Speaker 2] (1:49:46 - 1:49:56) We're not here to be research assistants for individuals that are curious about government. If they want us to get these records, they're going to have to pay for. [Speaker 5] (1:49:57 - 1:50:02) My concerns are just that the citizens of Swarmscot have access to public information. [Speaker 2] (1:50:03 - 1:50:29) That is not public. I want citizens of Swarmscot to be curious about government, and I want them to feel as though if they contact us, we will be forthcoming with any kind of reasonable request for information. It's the voluminous requests, and it's the things that really do place extraordinary burdens on staff that we really just want to. We just want some reasonable recovery of taxpayer time and effort. [Speaker 5] (1:50:31 - 1:50:32) Thank you. [Speaker 1] (1:50:33 - 1:50:34) Do you want to do something? [Speaker 3] (1:50:35 - 1:50:40) Well, I see Amy has her hand raised. Amy Sorrow. I don't know, Amy. [Speaker 9] (1:50:40 - 1:51:35) I just wanted to clarify something on what items would be getting charged versus what are not. Because any request that's, well, first off, a FOIA and a public information request are the exact same thing. So whether it comes from a resident or a corporation, it falls under the same MGL. But for anyone that sends a basic request that is, like Mary Ellen said, you know, a budget request or anything like that that we can provide in less than an hour, that doesn't get charged at all no matter who requests it. It's when the request exceeds an hour of time that it's going to take for someone to get it. And specifically the town clerk was looking to charge for this for outside corporations, especially out-of-state corporations, that are just data mining from numerous communities. Yes. [Speaker 12] (1:51:35 - 1:51:35) Okay. [Speaker 9] (1:51:36 - 1:51:37) That's good to know. [Speaker 1] (1:51:40 - 1:51:52) Thanks, Amy. So I have a couple things to follow up on Sean's stuff. The first question I have is whose responsibility is it to do annual reports? The clerk? [Speaker 2] (1:51:53 - 1:51:58) It is the clerk, but I would say every, you know, town department. [Speaker 1] (1:51:58 - 1:52:55) No, but it's the clerk. The clerk issues the town report every year, and the town report is our history. It is essentially what the government did for the last 12 months, right? There are volumes in the library of town reports going back how many years Swampscott is telling you every year, literally that the fence reviewers approved a fence on Humphrey Street in 1902. And why is that important? Because that's the history of our town. It's really important. So Jared's only been here less than a year. How did we get to a point where we have 10 years of history missing? And I really appreciate that you're raising this because it shows that you reflect this, but how did we get to a point where we have 10 years, a decade of missing history? How did we get there? We just didn't compile the reports. We being the clerk didn't compile the reports at the time. I just want to make sure I'm clear on this because it's not – I want to make sure people understand it is the clerk's responsibility, but it's not Jared's responsibility. He's been here less than a year, correct? [Speaker 2] (1:52:55 - 1:52:56) That's correct. Okay. [Speaker 1] (1:52:57 - 1:55:19) Can I ask maybe a written submission relative to the police exam? I'm glad it's coming up, but I can't help but notice that, and I understand that they're different positions, but the first fire exam and the first police exam had a disparate number of applicants, and obviously they're different positions with different backgrounds, and so they're very different. But I would be really interested in, I think, just a memo to the board from each of the chiefs saying this is what they did to advertise, to go out, and I'd really be interested in seeing what the efforts are of the two departments in terms of advertising their exams and hear from the chiefs on that, both to understand the differences and also to see where there is some more ideas and collaboration. Twenty people for an exam isn't a deep bench for an exam, and just like when you come forward with a recommendation for a department head, one of the things we oftentimes ask you is how many applicants you get, because if you had two applicants, regardless of who the two are, it generically gives less confidence than if you had 20 applicants. And here with the fire department I believe had in the 80s of applicants the first fire test, and I think it was under 40 for the first police exam. So I just want to make sure that we're getting the deepest possible bench for these exams, and I'm so glad they're doing it. I'm so glad that they're all collaborating and working on it, but I would be interested to know what the efforts are so that we maybe can also suggest some ways of promoting it. I will note you said it's on the website. It's not on the website, or it's not obviously on the website. In the news section, I frankly think as though positions and openings in town should be on the front page, and it should be there as a direct link every time. If anybody ever wants to know about any position in the town of Swanscot that's open, they should be able to click Jobs Available and see the listing and take them right there. It shouldn't be put in the news box because the news box gets rolled. It should really just be put there, just a banner saying, you know, come work for us. That's the easiest job recruitment tool we have is something we already have set up, and we don't use it that way. And, you know, if we wanted to know right now what jobs were available in Swanscot, we couldn't. Without a FOIA request, that was a joke. I'm charging $25 to find that out. No, but in all seriousness, I do want to make sure that we let's put it right up there. Let's advertise. [Speaker 15] (1:55:20 - 1:55:20) Absolutely. Let's put that. [Speaker 1] (1:55:21 - 1:55:47) You will get that right up. I appreciate how you use social media. Let's put that on social media once a week. One of the posts should be Jobs Available, come work for us. It'll be in our newsletter. Right? I just think a newsletter is great, but again, social media is regular. There are town websites every day. Let's really put it out there. There are a lot of great residents who would love and, you know, a lot of the jobs here have a lot of good things that we can make. They're flexible. For the right people, we can make the job work. [Speaker 6] (1:55:51 - 1:55:56) Mary Ellen thinks I'm going to join the police force, so that's what she's not going to be doing. [Speaker 1] (1:55:56 - 1:56:01) She's too busy running turkey races and things. Winning. And winning. Sorry, not running. Winning. [Speaker 2] (1:56:02 - 1:56:10) So the exam is on February 13th. Applications. Let's see. [Speaker 5] (1:56:12 - 1:56:22) Sean, I have a question on there's 20 applicants that have already taken the test. My understanding is it's a revolving test, that there's a test, I think, every month, and it goes on for several months. [Speaker 2] (1:56:22 - 1:56:22) That's right. [Speaker 5] (1:56:22 - 1:56:39) Is there any possibility, if there are 20 applicants right now, is there any possibility of escalating a physical test, you know, or doing several physical tests so that, you know, applicants, if there are applicants that, you know, we really want? [Speaker 2] (1:56:39 - 1:57:05) I have had a discussion with the chief about ways that we can expedite the review of these individuals. But, you know, I think we want to see what pool we have and, you know, make sure that we have the broadest opportunity to have a very fair process for all that are interested. [Speaker 1] (1:57:07 - 1:57:21) Can I ask a clarifying question? Just to make sure I understand it. You say there's 20 applicants. There's 20 applicants for the February 13th test. Those are in addition to, I'm saying it as a question, those are in addition to people who previously passed a test that are still on a list. [Speaker 2] (1:57:21 - 1:57:22) That's right. [Speaker 1] (1:57:22 - 1:57:29) But we've now called for a new list. Am I right? So these 20 people that you mentioned now are people that haven't taken a test, but on February 13th will take a test. [Speaker 2] (1:57:29 - 1:57:35) Some of them have already taken it because they've opened it up and it's been a rolling exam period. [Speaker 5] (1:57:35 - 1:57:37) So are these 20 that have already taken a test? [Speaker 3] (1:57:37 - 1:57:50) I'm reading the opening on the website here. It says, to be considered for their current recruitment effort, all interested applicants are encouraged to register and pass the PES entry exam on or before the February 13th exam. Right. Right. [Speaker 1] (1:57:51 - 1:58:02) So the applications received after February 20th will be kept on file. So I'm sorry. So is the PES, whatever it is, this is my ignorance. Is that the same exam that's given on the 13th? Yes. And so the 13th is the last time. The last day. [Speaker 6] (1:58:03 - 1:58:03) Gotcha. [Speaker 1] (1:58:04 - 1:58:16) And so let me just ask another question. Is there a reason we don't have that test going all the time, 12 months a year? Said differently, do we have a contractual obligation that prevents us from running the test all year long? [Speaker 2] (1:58:16 - 1:58:36) And it's one that has caused me great grief that has limited the town to one test per year. And it absolutely handicapped our ability to go out and find the broadest number of applicants to fill, you know, these incredibly important. [Speaker 1] (1:58:36 - 1:59:01) So I would ask you to, frankly, hearing that, I would say I would encourage you to impact bargain the fact that you should be able to take a test, call a test whenever you want to have a test to keep that pool as deep and broad as we can be. It feels like that is designed to protect something, and I don't know what it is, but what it's protecting maybe is vacancies. And I can't imagine anybody wants vacancies because I've heard that the police department wants us to fill those vacancies. So let's take a test 12 months a year as far as I'm concerned. [Speaker 2] (1:59:01 - 1:59:08) I think we should be able to post for any position any time we need to fill it. [Speaker 6] (1:59:09 - 1:59:11) So how are we currently having multiple tests? [Speaker 2] (1:59:13 - 1:59:24) We have one test with a firm. It's the same test. But that just started. We hired a testing agency. [Speaker 1] (1:59:25 - 1:59:29) No, I understand. She's asking the logical. [Speaker 6] (1:59:29 - 1:59:34) If you only can do it once a year, how is it that's an obligation not to offer it more than one time a year? How is that happening right now? [Speaker 1] (1:59:36 - 1:59:37) Because we're at the one time a year. [Speaker 2] (1:59:37 - 1:59:37) Yeah. [Speaker 6] (1:59:38 - 1:59:41) But it's not. No. We're at the one period. [Speaker 2] (1:59:41 - 1:59:52) We're at the one period of the year. Last year we had it on December 16th. And so we passed the date. And so now we can go out back out and schedule this new exam. And the new date is February. [Speaker 1] (1:59:53 - 2:00:22) So don't think of it as just one exam, but one period of time in which the exam can be administered. So the exam is being administered multiple times within a 60-day period, getting to February 13th. But that's the only time. So if he wants to, under the current contract, if he wants to post again in May, he has to use the results of the February 13th list in May, and can't go back out and recruit like he could for an HR director or a DPW person. He could go back out and say, let's apply. Let's see who's now interested in May. [Speaker 6] (2:00:23 - 2:00:26) It's not one test. It's one hiring period. [Speaker 1] (2:00:27 - 2:00:27) Yeah. [Speaker 3] (2:00:28 - 2:00:28) Sorry. [Speaker 6] (2:00:29 - 2:00:30) February 16th. Yeah, yeah, yeah. [Speaker 8] (2:00:31 - 2:00:38) And Sean, how does this impact laterals? Could police department potentially hire? [Speaker 2] (2:00:39 - 2:01:00) Yeah, we actually can hire with laterals. I have worked with the chief and the union to look at using our ability to go out and recruit laterally. But that can still present some challenges. But we do have that ability. I have authorized that, and I would certainly entertain looking at laterals. [Speaker 6] (2:01:02 - 2:01:25) I think to Mary Ellen's point, the worry is that if you wanted to be a Swanscot police officer, so you took the test the first day you had the opportunity to do it, and you took that test, and you did well, we are not even looking at you until 60 days later, and you could take a job somewhere else, or you could have an opportunity come upon you somewhere else, and we could lose out on great applicants. [Speaker 5] (2:01:26 - 2:01:38) So Katie takes a test tomorrow, has a great score, and we're going to turn around and wait, and then all of a sudden Marblehead calls and says, Katie, you have a great score. We want to hire you. And she's like, yeah, great. I want to wear blue. [Speaker 2] (2:01:39 - 2:01:46) So I've had that conversation with the chief about really reaching out as quickly as we can. Is there anything that prevents him from reaching out? [Speaker 1] (2:01:46 - 2:01:51) No, nothing. So there's no contract requirement on that. So that can be solved. [Speaker 5] (2:01:51 - 2:02:00) But then they have to wait to take the physical exam. So now the question is can we have multiple physical tests? Are we still within the parameters of whatever has been agreed with? [Speaker 2] (2:02:00 - 2:02:11) I'd have to work with the chief and kind of look at schedules and times, but I don't think there's anything that would preclude us from having multiple physical tests. [Speaker 1] (2:02:13 - 2:02:15) So that sounds like good news. [Speaker 12] (2:02:15 - 2:02:17) That sounds like good news. [Speaker 1] (2:02:18 - 2:03:09) My point is a little different, which is I'm worried about the other ten months of the year when we're not giving the test that we are confined to a list by the end of the year, which is ten months old. So if we're concerned about losing these wonderful people, ten months later we're definitely concerned that they're not there. So that list of 20 applicants, let's say they all pass. But ten months later, if they're all that good, they're not going to be sitting around waiting for a police offer. And so ten months later, we can only use that list because, for some reason, we've agreed to that contractually with the unions. So I guess I would suggest, and I'm only one person here, that you impact bargain something that gives the chief greater flexibility to make sure that he or she can get the deepest, best, most qualified pool of applicants whenever they want it, as opposed to having to be limited because that system just limits the pool of applicants. [Speaker 8] (2:03:09 - 2:03:22) So, Peter, are you suggesting that we set up policy that defines the minimum number of applicants that should be on that list before we would have another test or set up a list? [Speaker 1] (2:03:22 - 2:03:25) No, I have tests all the time. I'm saying tests all the time. [Speaker 8] (2:03:25 - 2:03:27) Mary Ellen just said tests all the time. [Speaker 5] (2:03:28 - 2:03:29) Which is just like any other position. [Speaker 1] (2:03:30 - 2:04:48) Again, I mean, I don't say this lightly because I do remember one time I've only voted against one department recommendation by a town administrator in my eight-plus years, and that was when a former town administrator presented a then-building inspector candidate, and I said, how many people did you interview? And his response was, that's not your business under the charter. This is my recommendation. And I said, well, can you tell me is it two, or did you do 20? And he said, it's not your business. And I said, well, the depth of it, I wouldn't get it through the FOIA. That's the thing. But that matters. That depth of base just matters. Just numerically, statistically it matters. We are going to have better DPW workers when we have a better pool to choose from because the vacancy compels decisions. And so if you only have two people, and you don't love either, but you have a vacancy and everybody else is getting stressed out, you're going to say, good enough, I can make them better. I can hire them, when in truth, that's not who you'd want to hire if you didn't have to. You would have found someone more qualified or with a different set of specialties. And I think that's just true. And so we should always want the biggest, deepest list on these things. So, again, if you have to impact bargaining, you have to impact bargaining. I don't know why it would be something. [Speaker 5] (2:04:49 - 2:04:53) Well, I'm not sure why you would have to impact bargaining. We've sat here. We've heard the union say. [Speaker 1] (2:04:53 - 2:04:53) As soon as it gets to the contract. [Speaker 5] (2:04:54 - 2:05:01) Well, hold on a second. But we did hear the union say that there's an issue with staffing. And we heard the union say that they wanted more staffing. [Speaker 2] (2:05:02 - 2:05:04) Believe me, I heard them say that too. [Speaker 5] (2:05:04 - 2:05:10) Well, then it sounds like they want to be able to have more staffing. So why not just have the conversation? [Speaker 1] (2:05:10 - 2:05:31) Well, because I think technically, as my understanding is, the union requested and required as part of a negotiation that the test only happen when it's happening. That they don't want, notwithstanding what they said, they can come explain why they wanted that. But they wanted it. So despite what perhaps they've said to us about wanting this. [Speaker 5] (2:05:31 - 2:05:36) I think an adult conversation about that. I hear. I just. [Speaker 1] (2:05:37 - 2:05:39) Yeah, Sean, see if we can do it. [Speaker 5] (2:05:39 - 2:05:47) We have serious issues going on with staffing. And that would help. Let's just have a conversation. [Speaker 1] (2:05:47 - 2:05:52) Yeah. I think those conversations. Marilyn and I stopped there too. Three times tonight, her and I. [Speaker 6] (2:05:52 - 2:05:53) It's a Christmas miracle. [Speaker 1] (2:05:55 - 2:05:57) It's a Christmas miracle. So let's listen. [Speaker 14] (2:05:58 - 2:05:58) Motion to adjourn. [Speaker 2] (2:06:00 - 2:07:33) I just want to say Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah. And I hope everybody does have a wonderful holiday season. I also do want to say that, you know, I send my sympathies, you know, to Cheryl Levinson. And I had the extraordinary good fortune of serving on the Marriott Corp Board of Trustees for four years with Paul Levinson. And I knew him way back when, as well, when I began my public service. And he was a member of the Select Board. He represented Swampskid on a board that I worked for that had 24 Chairman of the Boards of Selectmen and 10 Mayors. And Paul was well respected by every member of that board. Mayors and Selectmen from across Essex County all thought of him as a statesman. He had a voice that was so unique and so powerful. You all serve in a seat that he shared, and you are select citizens. And, you know, it is really a wonderful part of democracy that we have these dedicated citizens that pour their lives into public service. You know, we should not forget how precious this democracy is. And, you know, certainly I know all of you appreciate just how important your roles are in this little town. Thanks, Sean. [Speaker 3] (2:07:36 - 2:07:37) Select Board time. [Speaker 6] (2:07:38 - 2:08:36) Katie, do you have anything? I do have something real fast. And I'm going to try not to sound like a Hallmark movie right now, but I do want to acknowledge all the things that are happening around town during this holiday season. Whether it's the rec department, what the library is having, some wonderful programming happening, the senior center. And it's just a reflection of this time of year, but also of the spirit of Swampscott and what it means to be part of this little town where, you know, Santa shows up at a Select Board meeting or at a holiday parade. And it's just lovely because it is really creating core memories for my kids and for people all around town. I hope people take the time to stop and appreciate the things they see around town happening, especially this time of year, because it does make Swampscott a wonderful place to live, despite all the other stuff that's happening in the world. [Speaker 3] (2:08:37 - 2:08:37) Thanks, Katie. [Speaker 5] (2:08:38 - 2:10:03) So keeping with keeping Swampscott a wonderful place to live, I do want to request that the police chief and the animal control officer and Sean put together some type of a policy on how we can keep ourselves from being in the situation that Nahant is in. For those of you that don't know, Nahant, the Select Board, voted to exterminate their coyote population. You know, coyotes must fear humans in order for us to survive and to share our habitats. So whatever it's going to take, huge fines for people that are feeding coyotes or to have a coyote task force in case we see coyotes. How do we, you know, get rid of them? There's a group in California, I listened to a webinar, I guess a webinar or some type of a Zoom meeting, and there are professionals from Canada and California who volunteer. They're volunteering their services to come in and help Nahant change the behavior or try to minimize the effects of the coyote issue. And if we can find out whatever they're doing or just have some type of plan. I don't want to be, I don't want to ever have to vote to. [Speaker 2] (2:10:04 - 2:12:52) Mary Ann, I don't think I've ever met anybody that cares more about our four-legged citizens than you. And I appreciate your compassion and sensitivity to wildlife. I did speak with the Nahant town administrator last week, and I did share with him that I have frankly gone on record, I have mentioned to my ACO, my police chief, many months ago that I do not believe in euthanasia of coyotes. I believe that we live in a habitat. We've lived in this habitat for millennia as human beings. We understand that we don't feed animals at the zoo and you don't feed them in your backyard. You live in a habitat, and we share it with wildlife. We share it with turkeys, and we share it with all sorts of wonderful things that are dangerous, but I don't believe the coyotes, the eastern coyote specifically, not the ones in California, not the ones in Arizona, these are different. They're smaller, and they are not as dangerous, but they are dangerous, and we have to be mindful. I think the biggest failure that we've had is in really educating people that they need to be left alone, and they should not be engaged with human beings. You need to respect their ability to live in certain pockets of wildlife. Even in suburbia, we have pockets of wildlife. Let's ensure that we all respect that. I've talked to our ACO, Scott Constantine. I've talked to our police chief about making sure that our young citizens and our older citizens and everybody in between respect wildlife. If they have a problem with coyotes, contact our ACO. Contact our police department. If you can't get a hold of them, contact me. I will make sure that we help you interact with the small, absolutely extraordinary pockets of wildlife that we have in Swampskate. It's not something we should fear. It's something that we should understand. The biggest public safety issue we have in Swampskate is pedestrian safety and automobiles, and I want people to focus on what's most important. We should be shooting automobiles. It's amazing to me, and I don't think the Lynn item did anybody a service by putting a vicious-looking animal on the front top of the fold. I think they sensationalize a really important conversation that we should be having about how humane we should be, not only to each other but to wildlife, that we are here to help support. That said, I don't think you have to worry that I will waver on this. [Speaker 5] (2:12:52 - 2:12:56) No, I appreciate that. I just want to see a plan. [Speaker 2] (2:12:56 - 2:13:06) Some proactive action. We've talked about a nonlethal way of deterrence and making sure that we do find people and we go after individuals that are feeding. [Speaker 3] (2:13:06 - 2:13:11) There are people that are feeding us at no cost that will harass. [Speaker 2] (2:13:12 - 2:13:15) We've got to start with the public education effort. [Speaker 5] (2:13:16 - 2:13:17) That's the beginning of the plan. [Speaker 2] (2:13:17 - 2:13:20) That's part of my soapbox right now. [Speaker 1] (2:13:22 - 2:13:55) Four things Mary Ellen and I agreed on tonight. Mary Ellen, Merry Christmas. I know, but I've got to tell you, look at the Nahant decision befuddles me, and they have a right to make decisions that they want to make, but in one hand they are fighting to keep Nahant wild, and in the other hand they are attempting to make Nahant not wild. I don't want to disparage Nahant. That's all right. I'm doing it for him. I just don't understand it, and I just think it's remarkably and it sends an incredibly bad message. [Speaker 2] (2:13:55 - 2:14:14) My hope is that we can work with Nahant and help all, because these issues do not just affect Swampskate. These pockets of wildlife, they travel through and around our communities, and so I don't want Nahant to feel as though they're isolated, and my goal will be to try to do that. [Speaker 3] (2:14:14 - 2:14:14) They are. [Speaker 15] (2:14:15 - 2:14:17) I think they feel that way. [Speaker 5] (2:14:18 - 2:14:30) I understand. Well, wait, I do want to thank Nathan and Ethan for the great job that they're doing back there again. I constantly forget to say thanks. [Speaker 6] (2:14:31 - 2:14:44) And I have one more thing. If a family wanted to attend first night and they were not in a financial position to do so, could you please have somebody post something about that on the RECs page? Thank you. [Speaker 1] (2:14:46 - 2:14:48) I'll make a motion to adjourn. Second. [Speaker 6] (2:14:49 - 2:14:54) Wait, did Neil have anything to say? I guess not. He was asking if you had like work done. [Speaker 3] (2:14:55 - 2:15:06) That was it. That's fine. No, I just wanted to say happy holidays to everybody, and it's been a good year, and it's been a pleasure working with all of you, and I look forward to 2023. Can we just show off? [Speaker 1] (2:15:06 - 2:15:14) Can you get a close-up of David's sweater, please, before we leave? Look at those. I'm on the naughty list. I'm on the naughty list. TV people, there you go. Oh, my goodness. [Speaker 6] (2:15:14 - 2:15:14) Nice. [Speaker 1] (2:15:15 - 2:15:16) And then now nice. [Speaker 15] (2:15:17 - 2:15:17) Watch the other way. [Speaker 1] (2:15:17 - 2:15:20) Go the other way again. That's a beautiful sweater, David. [Speaker 6] (2:15:20 - 2:15:21) Shedding, by the way. [Speaker 1] (2:15:21 - 2:15:32) Nice. It doesn't have any more Christmases left. Naughty doesn't even come up anymore because it's been shown so much. All right, David wins the ugly sweater contest. [Speaker 6] (2:15:32 - 2:15:33) I think so. [Speaker 1] (2:15:34 - 2:15:34) Well, come on. [Speaker 6] (2:15:35 - 2:15:36) Yours is ugly also. [Speaker 1] (2:15:36 - 2:15:41) No, no, mine's ugly, but mine literally doesn't change. It doesn't change. It's not a sweater either. [Speaker 3] (2:15:43 - 2:15:44) That's right. [Speaker 6] (2:15:44 - 2:15:47) He's out by default. No, we haven't even adjourned. [Speaker 3] (2:15:48 - 2:15:54) Yeah. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Thanks, everyone. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Have a good day.