[Speaker 1] (3:34 - 9:42)
Those of you waiting to enter, please make your way into the hall and take a seat. Having been informed by the town clerk that a quorum is present, I do call this special town meeting of the town of Swampscott March 11, 2024 to order. Thank you.

Thank you for all you who have made it here despite the change in time recently. We did have one or two people that showed up an hour early, so I appreciate your dedication. Would all of those who feel so inclined please rise and join me in reciting the oath of allegiance to our flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very much. I have a couple of things that I need to ask.

We do have a large number of visitors here tonight. I'm glad to see this civic spirit and having folks come and join us at special town meeting is always a treat. Please make sure that you are seated in a way that you don't conflict with a member's ability to rise and make motions on the floor.

As a matter of practice when it comes to speaking, it is my intent to recognize everybody I can. Residents of the town who are not town meeting members are eligible to speak. I do try to call on your elected representatives first, but I'll do my best to make my way around the room.

With that in mind, I would like to take a brief recess at this moment for two purposes. One, if you are a newly appointed or elected town meeting member who has not been sworn in, I believe there's only a handful, could you please come down and see the clerk? Secondly, if you are not a representative town meeting member and you would like to speak tonight, and I'm guessing it's on article eight, would you please come up and put your name on this list?

I've had requests coming in from left and from right and keeping them straight is difficult. So we will be recessed for approximately five minutes. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your indulgence.

I do have a short list of three persons, not town meeting members looking to speak in article eight. I'm going to give you one last chance to make sure you got your name on the list. We've also sworn in those members who have not been through the process before.

Therefore, we will resume the meeting and come out of recess. And that will bring us to, we have a couple of announcements. I would like to ask Mr. Powell or Ms. Shearer. I'm sorry, Weir. I've done that before. It's up to you.

[Speaker 15] (9:47 - 10:33)
Good evening, everyone. My name is Heidi Weir, precinct five town meeting member, as well as director of aging services for the town of Swampscott. And we have been invited just to share a moment about a conference that's coming up, excuse me, on March 23rd in the Swampscott senior center.

It's a conference on preparing a healthy aging plan. And we have some wonderful speakers that will be here, as well as a panel of folks to talk about how you can put your aging plan together. It's free of charge.

And it's from nine in the morning till two. We have a few slots left. And if you're interested, please call to the senior center to sign up.

Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (10:35 - 10:44)
Thank you, Ms. Weir. And Mr. Dulette or Mr. Runstadler, I believe there's an announcement. Thank you.

[Speaker 37] (10:58 - 12:03)
Good evening, town meeting members. My name is Ethan Runstadler, and I'm Swampscott's assistant cable TV coordinator. I just wanted to take a moment to tell you all about the new public access program that Swampscott TV will be launching this spring, starting in a couple weeks, actually, on March 26th.

Public access at Swampscott TV will welcome community members into the TV studio here at the high school to learn new skills, create films, TV shows, podcasts, and more. And they can do this by becoming a public access member for free. We plan to host a weekly public access evening at our TV studio where anyone is welcome to walk in and observe projects that members may be working on or to speak with our staff on how to become a member or volunteer.

If you would like to learn more, please join us on Tuesday, March 26th at 6 p.m. for an inaugural public access evening in our TV studio here at the high school. You can also find more information on our website at swampscottma.tv or you can send us an email at swampscotttv at gmail.com. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (12:04 - 12:32)
Thank you, Mr. Runstadler. With that, we're ready to proceed to article one. Mr. Driscoll. Yes, please. Thank you. It's always best to check with me when you arrive as well if you want to say something since my short-term memory appears to be lapsed and I need to work on my plan for healthy aging.

[Speaker 7] (12:34 - 13:50)
Tom Driscoll, precinct 6, chairperson of the Swampscott Contributory Retirement Board. What I'm going to be telling you real quickly is based on our board's opinion and really pushed by me that in the last couple of town meetings people keep coming up to me saying it's the second biggest budget in the budget yearly and what exactly is it or more importantly how do we get there. So on Monday the 25th I'll have the information in a press release and will be on all social media and on the town's website.

The retirement board is going to have a seminar which will be live streamed where our attorney, where our investment advisor, actuarial and hopefully representative from PERAC is just going to give an overview to people and to town meeting especially just how we get to where we are. How when you see that number so it makes some sense and the policies and procedures in which we follow. So pay attention, it will be in the paper, it will be online and would really I think extremely important for town meeting members to tune in because oft times we kind of look at this like we don't really understand what's going on.

So thank you.

[Speaker 1] (13:50 - 14:16)
Thank you Mr. Driscoll and my apologies. Agreed, it is an increasing number every year that we face in our budget so well worth your time. With that said, moving on to Article 1, Mr. McDonald. Meeting member. Sorry, would you again?

[Speaker 22] (14:16 - 14:39)
Sorry, Greg McDonald, precinct 2 town meeting member, finance committee member. Article 1, amend appropriation for fiscal year 2024 operating budget allocation of chapter 70 funds to the school district. The finance committee recommends the town vote to amend various line items in the fiscal year 2024 budget as shown in the printed warrant.

I move the recommendation of the finance committee.

[Speaker 1] (14:40 - 14:42)
Is there a second? Second. Mr. McDonald.

[Speaker 22] (14:43 - 14:53)
It's essentially, it's essentially accepting the $186,000 in state aid from the state of Massachusetts.

[Speaker 1] (14:54 - 15:13)
Thank you Mr. McDonald. Are there questions or discussion on the motion, the recommendation of the finance committee to transfer this money? All those in favor of Mr. McDonald's motion?

All those opposed? The motion carries. On to Article 2, Mr. McDonald.

[Speaker 22] (15:14 - 15:55)
Article 2, approve transfer of free cash, homeless slash foster care transportation. The finance committee recommends the town vote to transfer from free cash the sum of $26,444, sorry $445 to the fiscal year 2024 school operating budget line 57 to be used to offset the costs in the school budget for homeless and foster care transportation. I move the recommendation of the finance committee.

Is there a second? Mr. McDonald. Yes, essentially this is just reallocating the $26,445 back to the transportation budget.

[Speaker 1] (15:56 - 16:11)
Thank you. Any questions or discussion? All those in favor of Mr. McDonald's motion, the recommendation of the finance committee?

All those opposed? The motion carries. Article 3, Mr. Schneider.

[Speaker 21] (16:21 - 16:54)
Good evening, Eric Schneider, Precinct 5, member of the finance committee. The finance committee recommends the town vote to amend various line items in the fiscal year 2024 budget to fund the cost items contained in the provisions of the first year of the collective bargaining agreement between the town of Swampscott and AFSCME council 93 local 2610 covering the period of July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2026 as shown in the printed warrant. I move the recommendation of the finance committee.

[Speaker 1] (16:54 - 16:57)
Is there a second? Mr. Schneider.

[Speaker 21] (16:57 - 18:04)
The purpose of this article is to fund the collective bargaining agreement with the public works union for the current fiscal year. The current contract expired on, or the last contract expired on 6-30-2023. The select board recently approved the new contract covering three years, so through 6-30-2026.

This article is, you know, something we often see in town meeting. It is often that CBA negotiations are concluded a few months into the contract year and into the town's fiscal year. As a result, the costs of that first contract year are not known with certainty when the budget is approved at annual town meeting.

Accordingly, it is necessary to move some funds over to fund the cost of this contract. If approved, this article would transfer $45,900 from line item 59 employee benefits to line item 39 DPW personnel. These funds represent tailings that are not expected to be needed this fiscal year.

Years two and three of the CBA contract will be funded through the budget under normal process.

[Speaker 1] (18:04 - 18:28)
Thank you, Mr. Schneider. Long time town meeting members will remember that state law requires this body to approve the first year of any collective bargaining funding. Questions or discussion on Mr. Schneider's motion?

Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion? All of those opposed? The motion carries.

Come to Article 4.

[Speaker 21] (18:32 - 18:39)
The Finance Committee recommends the town vote to approve Article 4 as shown in the printed warrants. I move the recommendation of the Finance Committee.

[Speaker 1] (18:40 - 18:43)
Is there a second? Mr. Schneider.

[Speaker 21] (18:44 - 19:14)
As noted in the comment section to this article, Mass General Law 61B reduces the tax on certain recreational properties by reducing the assessed value to 25%. If approved by town meeting, we would seek an exemption from the Mass General Court to exempt the one property in town, the Chesapeake Country Club, from the state law. I believe the town administrator is going to speak further on this.

[Speaker 1] (19:15 - 19:25)
Thank you, Mr. Schneider. Is there questions or discussion? I believe we may have a brief presentation from the town administrator.

Thanks, Eric.

[Speaker 4] (19:26 - 25:55)
So before I begin, a former select person, Polly Titcomb, walk in. This was a conversation that we had back in 2001. We were talking about town finances and we wanted to really figure out how do we ensure that we have everybody in this town paying their fair ad valorem taxes.

You know, Tedesco Country Club is a wonderful club. I am not here to disparage Tedesco. They've been a community partner.

We have a number of projects that we've worked with on in Tedesco, but frankly, under Massachusetts general law, change was made back in the 70s that allows for certain properties to be put in current use for certain preservation goals of the Commonwealth. Some of these incentives are really for open space. Some of these incentives are for recreation, hiking, camping, the sort.

It's hard to really imagine that a piece of open space that you would walk through, that is wooded or is scenic, that really preserves nature, is the same as a golf course. But essentially, we've looked at 61B along with a number of other communities in this Commonwealth and it allows for these golf courses to pay no more than 25 percent of their assessed valuation or their market valuation, highest and best use. It does give the municipality or the town of Swampskate the right of first refusal if Tedesco ever decides to redevelop that property.

We could actually go and say, we want to buy it for millions of dollars. Tedesco, like other private clubs in the Commonwealth, qualify as social clubs, even though they're exclusive. So it's important for us just to understand these are very exclusive clubs that get 75 percent off their tax bill.

That's just a point of fact. So when we look at open space, this is the actual language in the Master's General Law. It simply says that if you preserve this property, if you keep it in open condition, if it's pasture condition or a managed forest, you get this consideration.

So in my mind, I'm thinking about some of these wonderful resource areas. We see them all around the Commonwealth. They're beautiful.

They're typically in these land trusts. They're in these wonderful organizations that preserve nature. But they put some language in here for golfing and boating.

My concern is that, frankly, it's inconsistent with the spirit of what's in our general welfare. It's not really preserving and protecting in the way that helps support these broader ideals. Here's the golf course.

We're a town of three square miles. This takes up an enormous amount of acreage in a small town. We're one of the smallest geographic towns in the Commonwealth, and this puts an undue burden on the town when we think about just the real estate impact.

143 acres. The club was established in 1903. Eight parcels comprise their overall golf course.

About 152 acres when you combine the property between Swampskate and Mobile Head. That's what we actually cut them a break on last year. $174,000.

I can't begin to explain to you how many 174,000 problems we have that we could use those dollars for. First one is your tax bill, but many of them are really the unmet needs that we have with our infrastructure, with our schools, with frankly supporting many of the broader goals in our capital plan, resiliency, you name it. Over 10 years, we've lost close to $2 million.

I just ask you one question. Is this fair? Is it fair for Swampskate residents in the past, in the present, in the future?

Is it fair that this law continues to hurt this town and the broader goals? Polly Titcom. Polly, are you here?

Can you stand up? I'm sorry to embarrass you, but if you're here. Polly, thank you.

Absolutely. It takes courage for elected officials to stand up and say something is wrong. It takes courage to say this is unfortunate.

Look, again, nothing against Tedesco. I have nothing against people that golf. I own clubs.

I haven't golfed in 10 years. I just, I don't know why I own them, but I will tell you Polly's words. Incredibly unfortunate.

We're short on resources for funding for maintaining our schools, high on taxes for residents, and there's an incredible amount of acreage that's not accessible to anybody in town, and they're getting a huge benefit. It just seems so wrong to me. Those words continue to echo.

There was a Boston Globe article last year published by John Hilliard. It's just unjust and wrong. State programs slashes elite golf clubs' property taxes.

This is in Newton, Belmont, and Swampskate. These three communities have identified this loophole in our general laws, and we want to close it. We'll work with the town of Belmont, the city of Newton, to help advance common sense language.

We need your support, town meeting, to do something that is clearly in our best interest, and frankly, in the best interest of the Commonwealth. Happy to answer any questions.

[Speaker 1] (25:56 - 26:11)
Thank you, Mr. Town Administrator. Further discussion, questions on Mr. Schneider's motion? Mr. Germa, then Mr. Schroetzer.

[Speaker 18] (26:20 - 26:39)
Good evening, Chair Germa, Precinct 3. Quick question on, I know that part of Tedesco is in Marblehead. What's Marblehead's town approach to this?

Have they also, are they also looking at this? Thank you, Mr. Germa.

[Speaker 1] (26:39 - 26:41)
Mr. Fitzgerald.

[Speaker 4] (26:46 - 27:18)
Sorry, I do not know what Marblehead's approach is. I do know that Marblehead benefits with assessing the clubhouse, and they get the sales for the alcohol and beverage, so their situation is far more advantageous than Swampskate's. We just subsidize the land, but they get the benefit of food and beverage and municipal taxes on the clubhouse.

[Speaker 1] (27:19 - 27:21)
Thank you, Mr. Schroetzer.

[Speaker 13] (27:32 - 28:09)
Good evening, Ken Schroetzer, Precinct 6. In our Precinct 6 caucus, a very interesting question was asked of me, and I clearly didn't have the answer. The question was, we have received certain easement rights from Tedesco relative to the use of their property.

The question that came up was, can they rescind any of these easements that they've granted us if we, in fact, pursue the issue with regard to exempting them under this recreational exemption that they've benefited from for all these years? It seemed like a great question, and I couldn't answer it. Do we know?

[Speaker 1] (28:09 - 28:36)
Sure, I believe those easements are already put in contract, but I'll turn to Town Council. Town Council finds that the types of easements that these would have been would not have had special language to allow them to be rescindable.

[Speaker 13] (28:36 - 28:48)
So these easements are perpetuity. These easements are in no way impacted by or could be pulled back by Tedesco in terms of some type of retribution for what we're proposing to do tonight.

[Speaker 1] (28:48 - 28:56)
That is my understanding. This is treatment for open space that I can't imagine was part of the negotiation. I think you're speaking particularly about the ball fields.

[Speaker 13] (28:57 - 29:33)
Well, I don't recall all the specific uses that the town benefited. I thought some had to do with the area where they put in the baseball fields, the ball fields, and the concern that came up, and I thought it was an excellent question, and you've just answered it, was that in no way are any of those projects that we benefit from can be rescinded by Tedesco as a result of this warrant article, if it's approved. That is my understanding.

Okay, and the second, and this isn't being flipped, why is it taking so long? It just seems like this is one of those...

[Speaker 1] (29:33 - 29:35)
23 years from his TITCOM to...

[Speaker 13] (29:35 - 30:33)
Well, no, it goes back even before PolyTITCOM. I mean, this question has been asked and answered so many times, but no one has actually proposed any change in the tax structure, and I'm just wondering why it's taking... You know, there was a period of time, you probably recall, when they put a fence up around the exterior of Tedesco so children couldn't use that in the winter to sled, and it was abhorrent to us at that time to see that, and it got such a negative impact from all of us in the town that they were benefiting from this, and not only were they excluding us emotionally, but now physically we're being restrained from even going in there when clearly they weren't playing golf, and I just couldn't understand why it's taking so long, so I'm not trying to be flipped, but it was something that I thought there would be an explanation at this town meeting as to why.

[Speaker 1] (30:33 - 30:49)
I think you make an excellent observation, and I would point out that you're in an extremely unusual position to be able to speak directly with someone who was chair of the select board prior to 2001, who may have some intimate knowledge of those discussions.

[Speaker 13] (30:50 - 30:51)
Thank you very much.

[Speaker 1] (30:54 - 30:55)
Further discussion? Mr. Birdoff.

[Speaker 31] (31:04 - 32:06)
Aaron Birdoff, Precinct 5. To be honest, this is the most exciting article on the warrant for me tonight, so thank you for making this happen. The reason is, I don't know if anybody did the math, but that is 7.4% of our total land area is taken up by the back nine of Tedesco, just the grass and the holes, and does anybody else own 7.4% of land in Swampscott? No? Okay. So making this fair, just in taxes, it's a small thing we can do, we can ask to do, because, you know, it still has to go through state approval, but I think it's a move in the right direction.

We always complain about not having a space, where do we put this, where do we put that? We don't have enough open space, and I think this starts getting kind of that equity question, so very excited for it. We'll be voting in the affirmative.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Birdoff. Mr. Barden.

[Speaker 22] (32:16 - 32:19)
Gary Bard, Precinct 3. I'm definitely in favor of this article.

[Speaker 4] (32:19 - 32:28)
I just have a question about the, if Tedesco goes to sell their property, we no longer have that right of first refusal, is that correct?

[Speaker 1] (32:29 - 32:30)
I will turn to council again.

[Speaker 26] (32:33 - 33:01)
Thank you, Mr. Moderator. The proposed language for the special legislation as set forth in the article is to seek to include language to not only exempt the town from the requirements and to accept applications and granting applications for Chapter 61B classification, but also to maintain the right of first refusal and the ability to assess penalty taxes in accordance with the statute. Thank you, council.

[Speaker 1] (33:02 - 33:04)
All the way in the back.

[Speaker 31] (33:14 - 33:43)
Hello, my name is Peter Frisch, Precinct 6. I have two questions, and it's about facts. I'm not going to express my opinion either which way.

First, has either the select board or the town administrator or any member of town meeting gone to Tedesco and had a conversation about this, what we're talking tonight? Second question, if we vote for this to go through, what amount will their taxes go up, either by dollar or by percentage? Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (33:43 - 33:51)
Thank you, Mr. Frisch. I will turn to the town administrator. Have we, in fact, had conversations of some sort or other?

[Speaker 4] (33:52 - 35:20)
I did not specifically ask permission from Tedesco to recommend this. I have had meetings with the general manager of the Tedesco on a number of municipal projects. They do help sponsor the 4th of July.

We have an agreement where every other year now, they're helping us raise money for the 4th of July, and we're to be every year for 10 years, but that agreement lapsed, and I shared my interest in seeing that, you know, continue. I let them know that, you know, we provide quite a bit of a benefit to Tedesco and that, frankly, you know, I would probably agree or not that would be appropriate to continue on. So I've had those conversations.

I haven't asked their permission to stand before you and make this recommendation, but frankly, what we will assess them is their ad valorem highest and best use taxes. That number on that slide reflected what additional taxes they would have to pay this year. Going forward, it would be based on what their ad valorem or market rate value, same ad valorem property tax that every taxpayer in this town has to pay.

[Speaker 1] (35:22 - 35:27)
Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Bandrewitz.

[Speaker 10] (35:31 - 35:34)
Hi, Tony Bandrewitz, Precinct 4.

[Speaker 3] (35:34 - 36:20)
I'm in favor of this, but I just wanted to ask, you know, addressing the issue of public use of the property, there's a significant wooded area in the area of the middle school and the rail trail that actually has trails in it that people use, but it is the property of Tedesco. And I'm just wondering if that can be factored in somehow that the town gets, and it's not used for golfing. It's not even, I don't think, a buffer because it's a significant piece of land, if that could somehow be factored in to get that land in some form from the golf course for the use of the people.

In other words, using golf course property for the people.

[Speaker 28] (36:20 - 36:21)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (36:21 - 36:34)
I think if I'm correct, Ms. Bandrewitz, you're referring to what we might call the cross country trails back there? Okay. Any thoughts?

[Speaker 4] (36:35 - 37:45)
As I mentioned during the presentation, look, we want a strong partnership with Tedesco. This is not about attacking Tedesco. I think, Tony, that space is really important.

We're a town of three square miles. We need that space to support recreational trails. Happy to work with them to ensure that that continues to go on.

What we want is fairness. This is just a simple question of trying to make sure that everybody pays their fair share in a town that really needs that help. If we were a bigger town and we really didn't, we had more space, we just don't have that.

This puts an undue burden on Swampset, unlike any other community in this commonwealth. I think this gives us an opportunity to get to the table with Tedesco, too. I think an action tonight by town meeting will help us bring them to the table.

It's going to take us time to work with the legislature and craft probably a piece of legislation with a number of communities, but this begins that important conversation.

[Speaker 1] (37:46 - 37:50)
Thank you, Mr. Administrator. Mr. Patsios and Ms. Vassilio.

[Speaker 30] (37:58 - 39:30)
I think I like it, but I have some concerns. If we tax it as highest and best use, which is most likely to be residential use, and you look at your tax bill, you're going to see that the majority of the money goes for land. A portion of it goes for the building.

So if we have hundreds of house blocks there, which is basically what they have, and you look at the tax book, you're talking an enormous tax bill. So the only thing that I'm fearful of is that if we actually go ahead and do this and we're taxed at the highest and best value, we might be actually forcing Tedesco to become a residential neighborhood because they can't afford the tax, in which case we now create another problem creating a lot of homes. I'm not saying that I'm opposed to the concept of this, but my only fear is at what rate do we tax them?

At what percentage? And then the other lands that are there that we're using as recreational, if we have the correct easements on it, that's wonderful. And if we don't, because we negotiated maybe not in good faith when we said that we're not paying taxes or we're not paying taxes fairly, and we're asking you for this, there might be some questions as to the legitimacy of the negotiations at the time when we asked for these easements.

I'm not saying that we're wrong for looking at this. I'm just saying that this is the solution to our money problem because we want to tax Tedesco to solve the situation that we find ourselves. We just need to trade carefully.

That's all I'm saying.

[Speaker 1] (39:31 - 39:33)
Thank you, Mr. Patzios. Yes, Ms. Vassilio.

[Speaker 16] (39:38 - 42:15)
Hi, I'm Ticia Vassilio, Precinct 5. I'm also the chair of the Board of Assessors. I just wanted to share some perspective on this as well from the other side.

I have been on the Board of Assessors for about seven years now, and when I first got on that board and learned about this tax break that Tedesco was receiving, my mind was blown. Town Council can tell you I've asked them upside down, left and right, all around, how do we get out of this? The reality is that they meet the criteria for the 61B, and in turn, we have the right of first refusal.

That is our benefit from the 61B. The 61B is to promote open space, and if you look at that map on the golf course, back to what Charlie was saying, very wise, there are no roads, there are no streetlights. The cost of maintaining that land from the town perspective is lower than it would be for the rest of the town.

Now, I'm not saying that I like Tedesco being in the 61B. I certainly do not. They are a very exclusive club by invitation only, and it isn't fair, but I don't think this is the way to go about doing it.

Just about every golf course in the state is in the 61B, and if it's not most, it's all of them. I have done a lot of research on this, so I've spoken with people, and I think the better way to go is to go to the legislature and have them change the law so that it is better on both sides. The fact that we have language in there to retain the right of first refusal is having your cake and eating it, too.

You know, you can't have it both ways. This feels very unfair to me, so even though it feels unfair that they're only paying 25% of their taxes, it's the law. They're not doing anything wrong.

There's a better way to change it so that it is changed throughout the state, and so with that, my question is, are there any other communities in the state that have used this home rule to do this?

[Speaker 1] (42:16 - 42:22)
Thank you, Ms. Vasilis. I believe we heard earlier that Belmont and Newton are at least in the process of it.

[Speaker 4] (42:22 - 42:36)
Belmont's town meeting unanimously passed a resolution to exempt the town from 61B, I think, two months ago. What's that?

[Speaker 16] (42:36 - 42:37)
Did the state approve it?

[Speaker 4] (42:37 - 43:42)
No, this is going to require a legislative action. The thought is that, you know, we'll work with Belmont and Newton, and we will use our legislative delegations. I've reached out to Representative Armini.

We've talked a little bit about some of the strategies, but certainly we get that there are vested interests here. We're not having this conversation because it's easy, and frankly, I'm not worried about Tedesco. I'm worried about Swampstead, and frankly, we'll go in and we'll have all of those conversations.

I fundamentally believe that this is wrong, and they're a private club. I have nothing against, you know, Tedesco. They can have a private club and enjoy that, but I just think it's too much that we subsidize that through a legal loophole and a law that's supposed to protect the environment.

They use chemicals. They have all sorts of other impacts. I don't want to get into the...

It's just not exactly what I think that legislation envisions.

[Speaker 1] (43:42 - 43:44)
Ms. DeCillio, I'd like you to wrap up your remarks.

[Speaker 16] (43:44 - 43:47)
So, what happens... Well, I have 10 minutes, right?

[Speaker 1] (43:48 - 43:53)
If you could direct your remarks through me, I will find whether or not Mr. Fitzgerald's the right source.

[Speaker 16] (43:54 - 44:09)
What happens if the state says you can take them out of 61B, but you can't retain the right of first refusal? Because that is specifically written into the law as our benefit for the 75% tax break. So, what happens then?

[Speaker 1] (44:09 - 44:21)
It's my understanding, Mr. Fitzgerald, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that the purpose of the Home Rule petition is to structure that special legislation the way that the town of Swanscott recommends. That's correct.

[Speaker 16] (44:22 - 44:24)
So, what does that mean exactly?

[Speaker 1] (44:24 - 44:41)
That means the language that we put in front of the legislature is, with the exception of Oblige, you'll see if you read the article in the warrant, with respect to administrative or minor changes, the general court must debate and weigh in on the language as presented by the town.

[Speaker 16] (44:41 - 44:42)
So, they can't adjust it.

[Speaker 1] (44:42 - 45:08)
That is correct. Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Did I see someone else over here? Further discussion on Mr. Schneider's motion? Seeing none.

All those in favor of Mr. Schneider's motion, the recommendation of the Finance Committee? All those opposed? The motion carries.

Coming out, Article 5, Mr. Spelios.

[Speaker 2] (45:17 - 45:26)
Good evening, Peter Spelios, member of the Select Board and town meeting member, Precinct 3. Mr. Moderator, I would move to consider Articles 5 and 6 together.

[Speaker 1] (45:27 - 45:52)
That motion is in order. Is there a second? This will take a vote of the body.

If we choose to accept Mr. Spelios's motion, we will be discussing Articles 5 and 6 simultaneously. All those in favor of Mr. Spelios's motion to combine Articles 5 and 6? All those opposed?

The motion carries. Mr. Spelios, I recognize you with Articles 5 and 6 on the floor.

[Speaker 2] (45:53 - 47:27)
Thank you very much, Mr. Moderator. The Select Board moves, in place of Article 5 and Article 6, that a town election review committee be established to examine and make recommendations to the Swampscott Select Board and Swampscott town meeting with regard to changes, thank you very much, with regard to changes in Swampscott municipal elections in order to increase voter turnout, including without limitation consideration of the change of changes in the minimum voting age, the minimum eligibility age to be elected to municipal office, changes to the date and duration of municipal elections requiring early voting in municipal elections, and such other changes or initiatives the committee believes may result in increased voter turnout in Swampscott municipal elections.

The town election review committee shall be comprised of 13 members as follows. One Select Board member appointed by a majority of the Select Board, one school committee member appointed by a majority of the school committee, one member of the Swampscott for All Ages Committee appointed by a majority of the Swampscott for All Ages Committee, one member of the Disability Commission appointed by a majority of the Disability Commission, one member preferably aged 18 to 22 registered to vote in Swampscott as appointed by the moderator, two 16 or 17 year old residents as selected by the Select Board, one registered voter from each of the six precincts as appointed by the Select Board. The town clerk, Swampscott's town clerk shall serve as an ex officio to the committee.

The town election review committee shall report back to the Swampscott Select Board in Swampscott town meeting with recommendations including for example any proposed charter or town bylaw changes on or before October 31, 2024.

[Speaker 1] (47:28 - 47:34)
Is there a second to this motion? Mr. Spellios.

[Speaker 2] (47:36 - 59:38)
Good news is I think it gets us out of here a lot earlier. So if you've watched Select Board meetings recently you probably have seen some of these slides but I do want to spend a few minutes talking about the problem and everybody's going to say well it's an obvious problem. Well I guess it is an obvious problem but in my 20 years as a town meeting member we've never talked about it and to my fault Mr. Spritz was nice enough to point that I was to blame in my nine years on the Select Board I'd never raised it and as I now think about things that worry me and this is my last night standing up as a Select Board member before town meeting what worries me as I leave I will tell you something it's this it's not the vitriol that some issues present it's not are we going to put pickleball courts or are we going to put pickleballs there or whether or not aggregate's going to get a permit that they like or that Tedesco is going to be okay with taxes it's this and there's a lot of reasons for this right and they're all good as a matter of fact there was a paper distributed tonight giving some reasons for this and they're all let's assume they're all right it doesn't do anything to fix any of the problems though in 1972 there was a statewide referendum to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 anybody know what the voting term voting it passed you know that anybody know how many people what percentage voted yes if I said 51 would you say oh god thank god it passed just barely what if I said 81 what if I said 81 percent of the public it was such an understood ripe idea by the time it got to the voters 81 percent of the public voted yes think about that and should we be waiting for 81 percent of all of us to decide that we gotta do more to fix our voting from 1974 to 2023 we've seen federal elections still at very healthy levels relatively speaking they've fallen off on average next slide please same period state elections fell off a little bit more still relatively okay not great there are european countries that would snicker at this and saying you think that's voter turnout that's not voter turnout but this is the problem and so I've heard everything which is really interesting it's amazing the amount not a single person called me about Tedesco most of my colleagues kind of the same things you want to know why that frankly they didn't call us to complain about Tedesco because they're banking on the legislature to protect them because the legislature is the one that gave them the exemption to begin with so they don't really care what you all do here and what we all do here but I did hear from groups on this and I don't want you to think this is a partisan thing this is not a typical partisan if anything it's the exact opposite you want to know what the republican town committee reached out to me and didn't express concern the democrats hair on fire absolute hair on fire and I offered to meet with them but I never heard back my nine years here I've never heard from the democrats about any issue we talked about racial justice we've talked about civil service we've talked about some serious issues and only voting did it really pique their interest and I appreciate that it piqued their interest and I'm glad that they're now empowered and they feel energized and that they want to have this conversation they want to have this debate but just think about that juxtaposition for a second how screwy it is that little swamp scott the republicans were respectful and reached out instantly and didn't express anything it's not to say they love it or hate it but the democrats the democratic town committee was the one that was just upset as a matter of fact representative showed up and said I wouldn't let my kid vote I don't mean any disrespect to my kid so why is it that municipal elections have fallen off so much some people said because we don't have a swamp scott reporter okay well guess what swamp scott reporter just went away a few years ago this started a long time ago but you're right that is a bad thing we need more media anybody want to start a newspaper here awesome let's do it the select board hasn't done a good job advocating for this fair point I'm telling you in my nine years it's the first time we're talking about it the caustic dialogue of public service and public debate scares people away again all really fair points yes yes yes yes yes yes and yes but local elections the problem with the local elections go back one more second sorry pete is this is where in local government you actually see government working because government can't not work we don't have a choice just to say no and go home and pack up and go away this is where your streets gets plowed your streets gets paved your trees get planted your taxes go and you educate your kids it's some version of yes everything we do in town government is some version of yes but yet in the one place where government actually has to perform maybe not brilliantly sometimes mediocre sometimes not really well but government always has to perform but yet in that area of government we're losing voters the fast whereas at state level in the federal level hell nothing can happen for a long time and we're still showing up we're still showing up so when i think about the concerns when i think about the things that are causing me to lose sleep this causes me to lose sleep because if people don't see what government can do when government's in action and even if they see it they decide they don't need to participate in it i believe that is a potential fatal problem for this next slide please this is the swanscott voter turnout in those elections swanscott voters i don't think anybody here is going to get up and say that's pretty good we did a nice job i think everybody here will agree it's undisputed fact there may not be a lot of facts this world can agree to i think we can all stipulate that this is a pretty abysmal showing and so we're talking about ideas and so tonight it's going to be a study committee made up of residents to ponder and pontificate and to hear from the democrats and hear from the republicans and hear from you and you and you and you and 16 year olds and 15 year olds that want to vote 85 year olds that want to vote whoever it is but one of the ideas was well maybe we should engage our younger students and so why would we ever engage our younger students well the handout that you got tonight on the back side i want you all to read it when you have time if you have it respectfully i'm not going to show it to my kids because i think it's really disrespectful arguments but we're not going to decide that tonight but we're going to now as a community have that conversation and so why do i think this matters if we think we're going to solve this with 18 year olds coming into the system we need to understand that that is a flawed assumption next slide please this is the turnout of first time 18 year olds in those same elections first time voters 18 year olds now some will say well they're at college so they can't vote okay great how about we change the data municipal elections some may say well they just don't care they don't know better i'll say oh wait okay let's talk more about that maybe they don't care but let's talk more about they don't know better they're 18 years old they're in the free world now they're free of strictures of formal education primary secondary education they're they can do what they want now and they don't know about voting they don't talk about voting they actually reflect their parents habits probably in a worse way by showing up half the time and we're surprised and we're surprised that they're not voting so one of the ideas it's an idea we're not going to resolve it tonight we're going to talk about this is why don't we capture them while we still have them and not to indoctrinate someone came to the select board meeting and said what does the public schools have anything to do with voting and i think the answer is not really nothing nothing substantively but they certainly do have something to do with civics ed reform many years ago got rid of civics sounded like a good idea then to give space and place for other things like stem and other classes but boy do we miss civics today because there is no civics but imagine a world for a second where we have civics formally have civics where we can capture the 15 16 17 year olds and we can talk to them about the civic responsibility not indoctrinate them with the answer yes no him or her but indoctrinate them with the process why it's so important what happens when people don't show up how about we have that conversation with our 15 16 17 year olds and why don't we actually do it in a way that actually allows them to walk downstairs from their very high school that we spent 50 million dollars which the best polling place in the world so they can just go vote now there are some including those that came to the select board meeting that said well what's to stop them from just voting for more money for school or for sports i don't know maybe some other crazy things that vote to like raise speed limits allow public drinking i don't just god it's amazing what they could do and i guess the answer is this vote if you don't like what 200 new 16 17 year olds will vote for show up there's plenty of 18 pluses that aren't showing up so you certainly can get them to show up and that's democracy so as you think about this please don't think of fear of what they could vote for think in fear of all the people that aren't showing up to vote to have their stake to feel like they are invested win lose or draw in an election that they're invested what's happening now is those rates are reflective in the coverage you don't know nearly as much about town governments because we don't have media we're volunteers trying to do the best we can and but abysmal at that we've got to fix the system next slide please how about that next slide so it takes me back to this um i'm a bit tongue-in-cheek about about the fact that that people are um so excited to talk about voting i i will be honest with you i couldn't have been more surprised by the number of people that wanted to talk about it and the number of people that were in the negative like like negative negative not even like ah this is me no it was like negative negative it was like i was the anti-christ for god's sakes i mean it it was amazing to me and it's caused me to learn and you know what what i learned is people want to be involved in this discussion that's what i learned people want to be involved in this discussion and that's why it was so we're going to give time the democrats can actually reach out and instead of just having their hair on fire they can actually participate in in a discussion we're going to make time now to do this because i do think that's important i think that's actually why people's hair was on fire they want to be part of the process so be part of the process this is creating committee it's a big committee but the committee needs to be 15 000 strong 15 000 strong for this to work these problems are not getting easier the world we're setting up for our kids is not getting better this path is pre-ordained unless we choose to change the path with this i ask favorable action on the study committee

[Speaker 1] (59:39 - 59:45)
thank you mr speleos are there further questions or discussion on the creation of this study committee

[Speaker 17] (59:47 - 1:00:32)
uh mr iannacone hello my name is stephen iannacone precinct four democrat notice my hair isn't on fire be thankful you still have some what's left of it i agree thank you for the opportunity to address town meeting on this important issue i wish to make a motion and i wish to be heard after i my motion has been made what is your motion sir i don't have it in writing that's a problem that is a problem

[Speaker 1] (1:00:32 - 1:00:44)
can i would you prefer to take a seat and i'll recognize someone else until you're ready thank you other discussion debate uh before i get to you mr verdoff let's see if there's someone who

[Speaker 19] (1:00:44 - 1:01:21)
hasn't spoken yet in the back with the glasses good evening mr moderator uh joseph simons precinct five i'm speaking to urge my fellow town meeting members to vote in opposition of this uh these two articles uh the first article actually both of them seek to expand voter participation town participation which i think is a laudable goal however interestingly it's also stifles would-be town meeting members by placing a minimum vote of 10 votes to become a town meeting member

[Speaker 1] (1:01:21 - 1:01:42)
mr simons i appreciate your argument the motion on the floor is to create a study to a committee to study just that oh okay maybe i misunderstood this was the replacement recommendation of the elect board to create a study committee rather than taking affirmative action on articles five

[Speaker 19] (1:01:42 - 1:03:06)
or six oh no okay so i'm still urging my fellow members to vote against that i think it's seeking to create a problem that's not a problem at least as to the minimum number of voters i have never heard anybody in this town um criticize somebody for being on the town meeting because they only got you know five votes or less than 10 what if some neighborhood wants to coalesce again you know around a neighbor and get eight votes to try to get somebody on the ballot when there's a lack of people that are here i mean we'd rather have somebody here than not here at least according to mr speleos and i think this does the opposite because people would not want to go out they'd be embarrassed if they're not going to go out because they maybe would have won but technically now they don't win i think it's ridiculous i think nobody's ever complained um in terms of the uh inquiry into younger voters i think there's been a whole bunch of research that suggests that uh people actually their brains don't fully develop prefrontal cortex doesn't fully develop until they're in their mid-20s in fact in the criminal justice system there's been a big uh you know push to try to increase the age at which people are held culpable or responsible such as first degree murderers if you're now under 21 you can't go to prison for life without the possibility of parole so um i would just urge a vote in opposition about these two uh warrants thank you

[Speaker 1] (1:03:06 - 1:03:15)
thank you mr simons mr doma lovitz and ms friedlander is that yep okay uh just a quick

[Speaker 19] (1:03:15 - 1:03:28)
question if we're the vote is about the amendment to can we have discussion about that and then if that fails then we can talk about all the other stuff but i'd rather not sit here and talk about all the other stuff than just having it put into a committee anyway so no we're currently the motion

[Speaker 1] (1:03:28 - 1:03:52)
on the floor is to create a study committee can i call the question um i do have a couple of people waiting to speak but uh that might be a slightly premature so uh mr iancone is writing furiously i'll let him get his penmanship in order if ms friedlander you wish to speak debbie friedlander

[Speaker 10] (1:03:52 - 1:05:52)
precinct six first i want to thank the select board for recognizing that we do have a problem with voter participation and with all due respect to mr speleos my understanding is that town elections are non-partisan um and as a member of so then the idea that you know democrats may have a hair on fire i will say to you that you were privy to some emails that do not hold the official position of the democratic town committee so i i think you owe me an apology secondly i am thrilled that we're going to study this my only hesitation is to have two of the 16 to 70 17 year old residents um as selected by the select board and my reasoning for that is this we have 10 000 people who don't show up to vote in town elections even now we had a primary admittedly a non-contested primary essentially they are not a designated voting group they're not allowed to vote now if the committee that is set up minus those uh two folks come up with plans that it might be a good idea to have younger people vote in our town elections that's super but they should not be included if they're not even allowed to vote the whole issue is about getting more people to vote within the 10 000 that don't show up i think it is besides the point in all honesty in my humble opinion as to whether or not we should allow you know younger kids to vote which also only equals about 200 if i'm not mistaken and if we hold the percentages that show up that's certainly not going to help getting 10 000 more people to vote so i thank you very much and i do

[Speaker 1] (1:05:52 - 1:06:17)
appreciate the select board thank you miss friedlander mr iannacone are you ready i would ask that you uh come to the mic read your amendment and then pass it to the clerk i move that we move

[Speaker 17] (1:06:17 - 1:06:24)
the language consideration of changes in the minimum voting age from the proposal for the

[Speaker 1] (1:06:24 - 1:06:50)
review committee is there a second okay please submit your language to the clerk thank you

[Speaker 17] (1:06:50 - 1:09:05)
mr iannacone again thank you for the opportunity to address town meeting the supporting issue the last time the voting age was lowered as mr speleos mentioned was either 1971 or 72 depending on the federal versus the state but we'll go with the state at that time when the change was proposed 18 year olds were already to expected to act as adults in society before the voting age was lowered 18 year olds were being drafted into the military and face the real possibility of losing their lives in the vietnam war they were able voluntarily to join the military at 18 without parental consent they were able voluntarily to join the military i'm sorry to marry to marry without parental consent if they qualified they could take out loans there were no restrictions on their driving privilege most 18 year olds could not go to college in 1972 many were sent to war others took various jobs in the economy entry-level positions in factories business or government the vote was not given as the claim is here to teach a civics lesson or to habituate them to voting that was not at all a consideration no one wants or expects our high school students to have these adult responsibilities beginning at age 16 however the only reason to lower the age to vote to age 16 would be to if they were already required to act legally as adults therefore it is my feeling and strongly felt that until they have reached the age of 18 they do not have adult responsibilities that come with the right to vote thank you very much

[Speaker 1] (1:09:05 - 1:10:02)
thank you mr ianna coney the motion on the floor is now the amendment to the original motion by mr spellings for the recommendation of the select board is there discussion or questions on mr ianna coney's motion to amend mr ianna coney has moved to strike the words consideration of changes in the minimum voting age mr clerk and we are now discussing that that is the motion on the floor is there discussion on the amendment uh i'll start with mr beaupre and we'll see how many we can get to thank you

[Speaker 35] (1:10:02 - 1:11:00)
mr mr moderator larry beaupre town meeting member precinct six uh first i applaud the decision of the select board to move this from the warrant to a study committee when i read the warrant when i started to do some research i had a lot more questions than i had answers and i wanted to think about it in a lot more detail including the issue of 16 or 17 year olds voting i think we listened to some of the debate tonight there are a lot of questions but i think those questions ought to be fully discussed as part of this committee i don't want to dictate what this committee can and cannot discuss as part of the whole package so i intend to vote in favor of establishing this committee but i would respectfully ask my fellow members to vote against the motion of mr iacone let the committee do their job thank you

[Speaker 1] (1:11:00 - 1:11:15)
thank you mr beaupre ms spaulding did i see you with your hand up uh that's fair enough uh who else did i see wishing to speak on the amendment mr pitcher

[Speaker 22] (1:11:23 - 1:11:46)
wait wait is this on okay david pitcher precinct one uh town meeting member i just want to be clear on what we're voting on here is it to not allow the committee to consider younger voters or is it to strike that the committee would have the 16 and 17 year olds

[Speaker 1] (1:11:46 - 1:11:53)
on the committee no the language would be to remove the committee's ability to consider

[Speaker 22] (1:11:53 - 1:12:00)
changing the voting age uh okay that's not what i understood from what i thought i heard there

[Speaker 1] (1:12:00 - 1:13:05)
ms friedlander spoke to a different topic with her dissatisfaction of there being 16 or 17 year olds on the committee mr anaconda's motion is strictly to strike that language considering consideration of changes in the minimum voting age okay thank you thank you mr pitcher mr perry i could have guessed that um there is a motion to call the question which would end debate at this point is there a second this requires a two-thirds vote i do understand we have a um uh a swanscott resident who would like to speak um i will ask for the vote because it's not debatable and it's not interruptible all those in favor of stopping debate before we hear from this young man raise your hands all those opposed the motion fails to carry two-thirds

[Speaker 33] (1:13:07 - 1:14:27)
young man could you uh state your name and your address please my name is james d philippi i live at 80 banks road and that's precinct four uh miss phillip you have the floor well i'd like to open with what can a 16 year old do we drive two-ton vehicles that we call cars where we're responsible and we can take our own lives and lives around us you deem us mature enough to have that responsibility however we are not deemed responsible to have representation to vote on policies that affect ourselves and others around us 16 and 17 year olds are often the most affected by the decisions that are made here things such as climate change actions let's be honest i'm around for the next 70 years my kids will be around for the next lot more than that those are going to affect me far more me and people my age far more than all of you guys if you're looking for more benefits thank you if you're looking for more benefits voting habits can be strengthened as mr spellius mentioned um by previous voting so if you start young there's more likely that there's excuse me there's a higher chance that there will be higher voter turnouts because we started so young we pay taxes just like you i'm a government worker i pay taxes to the town i don't get a vote that's taxation without representation and i really hope some of you guys have taken a history

[Speaker 1] (1:14:27 - 1:14:49)
class that's all i have thank you thank you mr d philippi mr driscoll then mr craft i appreciate

[Speaker 7] (1:14:49 - 1:18:09)
the discussion i appreciate the presentation i'm not gonna lie i'm actually gonna talk now i'm precinct six town meeting member but i'm also the clerk of courts okay so i'm around this stuff all the time that whatever ton vehicle he can drive he can also steal and not be charged as an adult he could punch his sister and not be charged as an adult i'm just saying in this town and our state representative who's here the move is and the way the evidence by the way people is overwhelming as a matter of fact there's no evidence that i have been ill find the opposite they're raised they have already raised here and in places like alabama to raise the juvenile age and it's almost gone across the country to 18 because they can't rationally consider the impact and that their decisions and what's happening why it's not a question of whether they can do the crime they don't have the mentality a maturity to understand the impact of that crime now the next move is and you better be ready because i don't know how i feel about this one there will be within the next two years a move to raise the juvenile age to 21 it's going to happen it's going to happen across the country now 21 is also deemed not old enough to have that sounding according to people who support it i don't know where that will go it's it's really not a question of whether we trust and this and that the literally the hundred percent of medical evidence psychiatric is that the brain of children 16 and 17 don't know and understand the full consequences of their decisions and their actions just is also across the state people ought to be aware that voting turnout numbers are going down because you add all these new people registered voters and as you can see they probably intend to not come out so there is a lot of evidence that way but i'm just talking about and when i talked to our representative i know she's here was they now have three of these in front of them at the legislature there is zero support to support any of these home loan petitions in fact i've spoken to 19 reps and seven senators i've called i've seen it's not happening people they have no interest in passing this they're not going to that's all been there every one of them has been sent to study if you have any knowledge of how the state government works the legislature sent to study means sent to die all right it's not going to happen and i think we really have a lot more evidence i would support that we just get the age thing out now because if if things change and the legislature passes a law of that says they can vote we can just adopt that law so get it out of there now and let's have that really other than that there's a lot of great discussion the vote the dates the town meeting great debate but let's just get the discussion for now just for now of the 16 and 17 year olds it really just doesn't make sense at this point there's too much out there

[Speaker 1] (1:18:10 - 1:18:17)
thank you mr driscoll uh in the back next to mr pitcher or just in front of him yes sir

[Speaker 27] (1:18:20 - 1:19:38)
hi peter mitsuchi precinct five town meeting member um i just want to remind everyone like i know people come in here with preconceived notions as to what they want to vote for the uh the things uh that we have to vote on but the motions in front of us right now are to talk about just the parameters of a group of people a robust group of volunteers that are going to go out and find out more information that's it like we're going to all have a chance to vote on this and so what we're just asking is what's being asked is the parameters of a group coming together to just go do more research so if it's going to die it's going to die and it'll die right but i don't know why we would prevent 13 volunteers who are going to take their own time to try to find out more information to educate us and then we can make a better educated decision if we're not going to go do that on our own so i don't understand why the process is going to stop here to go find out more information on anything and i would also just add one last thing that we should probably have a 16 or 17 year old on any single panel that we're going to put together because we should get just diverse thoughts and opinions all across the board on everything so you'll have your chance to vote yay or nay on this but why don't we go forward and just put this together thank you thank you mr

[Speaker 1] (1:19:38 - 1:20:02)
mizuchi uh mr kraft wait for it yeah go ahead with the podium please rick kraft town meeting member

[Speaker 2] (1:20:02 - 1:20:08)
precinct three to add on to that um right now we're just again talking about the parameters here

[Speaker 27] (1:20:08 - 1:20:16)
and the language in the motion here talks about these items without limitation so regardless of

[Speaker 2] (1:20:16 - 1:20:23)
how we vote on the amendment that is currently on the floor the committee can still decide

[Speaker 27] (1:20:23 - 1:20:34)
to consider whatever they want to that they think would be useful so it really doesn't matter it has some symbolic value perhaps but beyond that i don't think we should be spending a lot of time

[Speaker 2] (1:20:34 - 1:20:40)
debating this amendment because in the end the committee is charged to do whatever they think is

[Speaker 15] (1:20:40 - 1:21:44)
appropriate thank you mr kraft um miss lau mara lau precinct three just quickly what i would like to add is i do think that certainly a committee you know is the way to go and i'm really pleased that this is the direction we're headed i would like to see make a change to two 16 to 17 year actually be increased i think you need for um a few things um as not everybody shows up to as an elected official to town meeting for various reasons i think with young people we'll find the same thing i think we have a little broader spectrum of of students that that will be an improvement so i'd like to make that alteration please are you four are you moving 16 to 17 year old residents as selected by the select board

[Speaker 1] (1:21:44 - 1:22:24)
could you please put it in writing so this is a second amendment to the amendment yeah no there are not two amendments the initial motion is being amended once ms lau if you would like to make that amendment i do need it in writing is there a second to that motion to amend is there a second to that motion to amend okay there is a second ms lau if you would please submit that ms lau has moved to amend the language to include for 16 to 17 year olds

[Speaker 40] (1:22:25 - 1:23:07)
ms laude you have additional remarks to make mr clerk you have the language

[Speaker 1] (1:23:07 - 1:24:00)
this one then that one two at a time uh so the motion on the floor is ms lau's motion to amend the previous amendment to change the language to include for 16 to 17 year olds is there discussion on ms lau's amendment in the back way in the back hi rupert d's precinct five

[Speaker 29] (1:24:01 - 1:24:22)
so it's my understanding now that we have um the fully amended language that's in front of us um strikes from the mandate of the committee considering considering adding 16 and 17 year olds to the voter rolls but also requires there to be four 16 to 17 year olds on the committee

[Speaker 1] (1:24:24 - 1:24:40)
we are currently discussing the amendment to mr anna county's motion to amend which treats the language as a whole we will dispense first with the question of the four versus two 16 to 17 year either way that vote turns out we return to the discussion of mr anna county's language

[Speaker 29] (1:24:40 - 1:24:52)
to strike the language consideration of oh i see so this is the first vote would be on to the text itself without necessarily the first proposed amendment that's correct but

[Speaker 1] (1:24:52 - 1:25:01)
to increase the number of okay town meeting time limits us to two amendments on the floor at once i think that's about as many as we can all handle i heartily agree

[Speaker 29] (1:25:06 - 1:26:03)
i'm not i'm not gonna encourage i'm not gonna speaking to the body i wouldn't encourage anyone to vote either way on this i'm not really sure that i've made up my mind in a way where i'm in the position to convince anyone but i guess i would observe that it'd be good for us to increase turnout and this issue of 16th and seven-year-olds voting and even i think their participation committees which i guess on that i think is a good thing does seem to be divisive and i wonder um whether just as something for people to reflect on whether um the two things sort of being considered together might um kind of be at cross purposes with one another we definitely want to encourage participation and we also want to be encouraging towards 16 and 17 year olds here and i guess i worry that it's kind of um we maybe give the wrong impression of our esteem for these people who will stay in town and you know we do want them to vote and feel enfranchised when they turn 18 and probably should avoid saying nasty things about them just before they do turn 18.

[Speaker 1] (1:26:04 - 1:26:14)
Thank you Mr. Deese. I see Mr. Spritz would like to speak. I want to see if there's anyone else who has not yet.

Fine Mr. Spritz. Thank you Mr. Moderator.

[Speaker 18] (1:26:15 - 1:27:19)
Wayne Spritz, Precinct 3. So first of all i want to thank Mr. Spellios for bringing this up without any sarcasm or whatnot in all seriousness. When he brought this up last month i felt that as he did that this was probably one of the most pressing issues of democracy in general.

All politics is local and everything he said is effectively true. We just very much differ in how to go about it with all due respect so i'll leave with that part. I think that articles five and six are very different.

I did support combining them together but i believe that they are very different. One is to improve the voter turnout and to understand why out of 12,000 registered voters that took the time to register that they don't show up at local elections. We need to understand that just flat out and this is why a committee like this makes sense.

It makes i think we're all in agreement here with that.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:20 - 1:27:30)
Do you have comments sir? What i differ with to the 16 and 17 year olds. Do you have a comment on the motion to change the number of 16 and 17 year olds?

[Speaker 18] (1:27:31 - 1:27:44)
I disagree with the motion to amend to move. I would like to see that defeated and i would like after that we'll intend to present a motion to remove the two voting members of 16 and 17 year olds to make them ex officio.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:44 - 1:27:54)
Thank you. Thank you Mr. Spritz. Further discussion?

Ms. Lau do you have something to add?

[Speaker 15] (1:27:57 - 1:29:17)
I just want to add that actually our brain our last boys in particular is 26. So the last wave of brain development is fixed at the age of 26 and for females it's 25. That's solid science.

We know that. So let's just be mindful that at 18 you know our students are not fully developed to vote either and well into their 20s. So I think kind of giving kids a voice early on will really foster that voice and confidence that you need during your 20s which are turbulent for people who have kids in their 20s and it gives them a little bit more of a solid footing.

I think this is just a committee. This doesn't again have to turn into something and realistically it's a conversation because if you do follow state politics the chances of this getting anywhere at the state level is pretty damn grim. So I think the conversation is important to have and I think I would appreciate it being supported.

[Speaker 1] (1:29:18 - 1:30:12)
Thank you Ms. Lau. Is there further discussion? I think it would be appropriate to call the question at this point on Ms. Lau's motion to amend Mr. Iannacone's amendment by increasing the number of 16 or 17 year olds from two to four. Do I have an objection to unanimous consent to simply moving to a vote here? I see none. All those in favor of Ms. Lau's motion to amend please raise your hands. All those opposed? The motion fails. We now return to the previous motion on the floor which was Mr. Iannacone's motion to strike the language with consideration for lowering of the voting age. Is there further discussion on Mr. Iannacone's amendment? Mr. Spritz let me give you one shot.

[Speaker 18] (1:30:19 - 1:31:22)
Mr. Moderator I have a point of order just a question. If I were to amend other changes to the existing committee can I do that here as an amendment in addition to Mr. Iannacone's? Yes.

Okay thank you. So I would move based upon a motion that I presented to you earlier today that was the basis for much of this. There are several things to which I would like to do.

One strike the two member 16 17 year olds and make them ex officio as opposed to voting members. And secondly I wanted to add the at the very beginning that the committee shall be assigned after the April 30th within 30 days after the April 30th election. Therefore you will be getting a different select board.

You will be getting a different town meeting membership. That would be my suggestion that was on the original motion to to refer to study that I suggested before.

[Speaker 1] (1:31:23 - 1:34:24)
Mr. Spritz is moving to amend the language by specifying that the 16 and 17 year old or 17 year old members be ex officio and that no appointment shall be made until May 1st 2024. Do I have that correct sir? Yes you do.

Thank you. Is there a second? Do you have this language in writing?

Please submit it to the clerk. I have to make sure this is in order before I can put the motion on the floor. Mr. Spritz's motion to amend is in order and has been seconded. The language would change the two 16 or 17 year old members to ex officio and specify that appointments shall take place no earlier than May 1st and no later than May 31st of 2024. Mr. Domolovitz.

[Speaker 19] (1:34:28 - 1:34:48)
Joe Domolovitz, Precinct 4. I just like to say I think that we would if we're going to have a study committee we should be able to study everything. I would urge people to vote against both of these amendments.

I think that if we're going to talk about this let's talk about everything have a good report come back that has all the information and do a real debate then with the report in our hands. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:34:48 - 1:34:56)
Thank you Mr. Domolovitz. Further to uh Ms. Martin Epstein and then I'm sorry down here in the front.

[Speaker 36] (1:35:02 - 1:36:09)
Kim Martin Epstein Precinct 3. This might be a bit of a clarification but I don't understand what ex officio means on a committee that doesn't have any actual authority to do anything other than give us information. So I mean so at this point I'm feeling like this is a body of people who just want to spend all night insulting 16 and 17 year olds who by the way are going to be away one year or two years away from actually being registered voters.

So now we've instead of encouraging them to participate and then eventually vote if we decide that they're never going to be able to vote at 16. Now we've actually told them screw you you don't even bother voting at 18. We don't respect you at all.

We think you are actually have the mind of an infantile criminal and by the way the behavior that we can see many of us like on the internet I don't think there's any limit to how poorly you can make a decision or how little you can know about civics. This is not an age related problem. So I don't understand why we would limit this committee or why we would speak another minute about whether to have a committee.

Can we please call the question and vote on this committee.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:13 - 1:37:53)
Ms. Martin Epstein has called the question on Mr. Spritz's motion to amend. Is there objection to unanimous consent to moving to a vote on Mr. Spritz's amendment. All of those in favor of Mr. Spritz's amendment please raise your hand. All of those opposed. The amendment fails. We now return once more to Mr. Anacone's original motion to amend which would remove which would remove the language. I hear a groundswell of support for calling the question and settling the decision about Mr. Anacone's motion. Without objection I will ask you now all those in favor of Mr. Anacone's motion which would strike the language consideration of changes in the minimum voting age. Please raise your hand.

All those opposed. The amendment fails. We now return to the original motion by Mr. Spelios of the select board's recommendation for a study committee as shown in print here. Mr. Perry. Mr. Perry calls the question. I sense there may be two-thirds in here.

I'm going to ask if there's any objections to unanimous consent. Seeing none. All those in favor of Mr. Spelios's original motion the finance the select board's recommendation. All those in favor please raise your hand. All those opposed. The motion carries.

This brings us to article 7. Mr. Thompson.

[Speaker 38] (1:38:07 - 1:38:37)
All right. Article 7 general bylaws amendment specialized energy code. The select board recommends the town vote to amend the town of Swampscott general bylaws by adding a new article 16a.

Specialized energy code is shown in the printed warrant. I move the recommendation of the select board. Is there a second?

Mr. Thompson. I'm going to turn over the microphone to Martha Schmidt the chair of the Renewable Energy Committee to do a brief presentation.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:38 - 1:38:38)
Ms. Schmidt.

[Speaker 8] (1:38:46 - 1:43:31)
Hello I'm Martha Schmidt precinct 4 chair of the Renewable Energy Committee. Adoption of the specialized energy code is a proposed Warnock article for this town meeting. The specialized energy code is a new Massachusetts building energy code developed by the department of energy resources.

It's a climate focused energy code option created by the 2021 Massachusetts climate act. It targets new construction to be consistent with net zero emissions goal by 2050. Next slide.

There are three levels of energy codes in Massachusetts. They're all based on the international energy conservation code along with Massachusetts amendments. Most communities in Massachusetts along with Swampscott are considered green communities and have already adopted the stretch code.

Since we are a green community we adopted the stretch code in our town bylaws back in 2010. The specialized code is new. So far 32 communities have adopted the specialized code.

The specialized code really just targets new construction. Next slide. The specialized code is aimed at reducing emissions from buildings.

According to a recent greenhouse gas inventory 52 percent of our emissions in town are coming from buildings. Last year we completed a climate action plan and a major focus area in the plan is buildings and energy. Having our town adopt the specialized energy code is a specific action called out in our plan.

Next slide. Just some basics on the specialized code. The specialized code only applies to new construction.

The stretch code applies to major renovations. Both the stretched and specialized codes have the same energy efficiency standards for most types of buildings. The specialized code incentivizes electrification.

The new code option was designed to support the climate act to be consistent with net zero emissions by 2015. We propose an effective date of July 2024 that aligns with the effective date of updates to the stretch code. Also adoption of the specialized code is a requirement for a new DOER program called climate leaders.

This would enable Swampscott to be eligible for additional grants. The specialized code imposes higher performance standards for new large homes using fossil fuel. In new buildings that use fossil fuel there are additional requirements for pre-wiring for future electrification as well as a requirement for solar.

There's also a higher performance standard for large multifamily buildings which would follow a passive house pathway. And just a note on cost since, you know, many people are concerned about that. According to the cost analysis done by DOER, the overall cost including construction and operating cost is expected to be less for all electric construction, especially when incentives are factored in.

So why act now? We're proposing to act now because climate change is happening already. 52% of our emissions in town are coming from buildings and this would help to alleviate that.

We also want to adopt this code now to make it effective in July and that would align with the updates to the stretch code. Last year we completed a climate action plan and one specific action in the plan was to have our town adopt the specialized code. In addition there's also a new program called climate leaders and one of the requirements is for our town to adopt the specialized code so we would get potentially additional grants and money's always good for new projects.

And finally we wouldn't be the first to adopt the specialized code since many other communities have gone down this path already and most recently in Salem. So thank you for your consideration and any questions?

[Speaker 1] (1:43:31 - 1:43:34)
Thank you Ms. Schmidt. Before I move to questions, Mr. Rodriguez?

[Speaker 22] (1:43:46 - 1:44:06)
Adrian Rodriguez, Precinct 5 Finance Committee. The Finance Committee has no position on this article as we've received no financial analysis that would signify that there's any significant cost to the town. Additionally as mentioned there are grants which could be used to offset anything so it'd be neutral or negligible.

[Speaker 1] (1:44:07 - 1:44:12)
Thank you Mr. Rodriguez. Is there a discussion, debate, questions? Mr. Pielot?

[Speaker 35] (1:44:18 - 1:44:28)
Dennis Pielot, Precinct 4. Would any of these new requirements be mandated for the new school and what would the cost of that be and how would we compensate to pay for that cost?

[Speaker 1] (1:44:29 - 1:44:31)
Thank you Mr. Pielot. Ms. Schmidt or Mr. Thompson?

[Speaker 8] (1:44:32 - 1:44:43)
So the specialized code only applies to new construction so any additions, modifications, renovations would need to follow this stretch code.

[Speaker 1] (1:44:44 - 1:44:47)
I believe that the new school building, well Mr. Thompson perhaps.

[Speaker 38] (1:44:49 - 1:45:04)
So this isn't being passed hopefully until tonight so it doesn't apply to the elementary school. The elementary school is being built in many ways according to these standards already but it is not applicable technically to the new school.

[Speaker 1] (1:45:04 - 1:45:09)
Thank you Mr. Thompson. Other questions? Yes ma'am.

[Speaker 10] (1:45:16 - 1:45:59)
I'm a town meeting member of Precinct 1. I just want to say congratulations. I'm really excited about this.

I'm the sustainability coordinator at Salem State so I literally spend all my time working on how to make our buildings more sustainable. This is very exciting for the town. It's always better to make new construction more sustainable than to fix it later and it's just very exciting and since our 15 and 16 and 17 year olds cannot vote for this, they are the ones that are very affected by climate change so we should all vote to address climate change because they cannot vote.

So I strongly support this. I urge everyone to support it.

[Speaker 1] (1:45:59 - 1:46:10)
Thank you Ms. Gallagher. I see Ms. Friedlander. Okay for anyone who hasn't had a chance to speak yet.

[Speaker 10] (1:46:16 - 1:46:27)
Debbie Friedlander, Precinct 6. I'm psyched. So I just want to clarify if I do a renovation in my home, I put in a new kitchen, I have to adhere to these new requirements?

[Speaker 8] (1:46:28 - 1:46:35)
The stretch code. Okay. And it really depends on how big the renovation is in terms of when I...

[Speaker 38] (1:46:35 - 1:46:53)
No, I just want to be super clear. Okay. Because these words are very similar.

Specialized and stretch, right? Right. We're already subject to stretch.

Right. Everybody is and that will update regularly. Okay.

The new thing being proposed here is a specialized. Specialized does not at all apply to any renovation that you do to a home.

[Speaker 10] (1:46:53 - 1:46:57)
It would be for brand new buildings.

[Speaker 38] (1:46:57 - 1:46:57)
Exactly.

[Speaker 10] (1:46:57 - 1:47:14)
New buildings. Town buildings. No.

And any new structure. So if a developer comes in or you're building a new home. Correct.

Obviously any new store, whatever. And if we do our development in Vinden Square, they would have to adhere to this. Yes.

Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:47:17 - 1:47:37)
Further debate or discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of Mr. Thompson's motion, please raise your hand. All those opposed?

The motion carries. Ms. Musilinski. And thank you, Ms. Schmidt. Thank you for the work on this.

[Speaker 32] (1:47:39 - 1:47:54)
Mr. Moderator, Tara Musilinski, town meeting member, Precinct 6 member of the Finance Committee. I would request that we move and we take... I would move to take Article 9 out of order and address it now before the Article 8.

[Speaker 1] (1:47:55 - 1:48:13)
Is there a second? Ms. Musilinski is moving to forward Article 9 to present consideration. All those in favor of Ms. Musilinski's motion?

All those opposed? The motion carries. We now come to Article 9.

And Ms. Musilinski.

[Speaker 32] (1:48:20 - 1:48:42)
This article is to increase local room excise tax. The Finance Committee recommends the town vote to increase the local room occupancy excise tax assessed pursuant to GL-64G Section 3A from 4% to 6%, effective as of July of this year. I move the recommendation of the Finance Committee.

[Speaker 1] (1:48:42 - 1:48:43)
Is there a second?

[Speaker 32] (1:48:44 - 1:49:08)
Ms. Musilinski. Just some background on this. The law changed for the state of Massachusetts, allowing towns to increase local, this is hotel excise tax, from 4% to 6%.

Most towns have increased. Swanscots has been 4% since 1989, so this would bring us current and maximize what we're currently allowed to charge as hotel tax.

[Speaker 1] (1:49:09 - 1:49:15)
Thank you, Ms. Musilinski. Mr. Spellius, I understand you have a quick update for us on the rooms tax?

[Speaker 2] (1:49:17 - 1:54:47)
Good evening, Peter Spellius, member of the Select Board, town meeting member, Precinct 3. Really quickly, because I know we want to save all the energy for Pickleball, but Hadley, last week before you, you folks authorized a rezoning and the issuance of an RFP for us to go out to the market. If you remember, I sat here qualifying the likelihood of success to say the market's really tough.

I'm pleased to report that with the help of consultants and staff, we were able to get seven solid proposals for the Hadley Hotel proposal. With the help of a committee of 23 16-year-olds, we paired it down to three finalists, and then we let the adults in the room pick which of the three finalists we were going to move forward with. On your screen there, you see Delamar.

Delamar is a Connecticut hotel, both developer and operator. Let me just, for a second, first of all, all the proposals are on the town webpage. I encourage you to look at them, because it's really interesting to see different ideas.

They were different ideas. Why this one? It was a unanimous choice by the select board, which really says something, because there was so much on that.

First of all, you don't ever see us unanimous. That's what it says. I see Mary Ellen laughing.

Second of all, because there was so much to choose from. Really, what mattered here was two things. There's building a building or rehabbing a hotel.

I think the board overwhelmingly put a lot of weight on running a hotel. Not to minimize what it takes to rehab a building, and we'll get to that in a second, but running the hotel is a thing, and who's going to run it, and what it's going to be is a thing that we are really concerned about. We want to know.

We want a hotel, but we don't want a Motel 6. We want a hotel, but we don't want the Park Plaza. So we really spent time talking about the operations.

Delamar is both a developer and an operator with a hospitality company. Delamar operates under its own brand. They're opening two hotels this year, one in Mystic Seaport, right on the campus of Mystic Seaport.

Three of us at different times actually visited their hotel unannounced in West Hartford as part of Blueback Square. I encourage you to look at the stuff online. I encourage you to look up Delamar in Google and see and understand what comfort we could get with what this town is going to get.

Secondly, next slide, Pete, is just to let you know this. This proposal proposes actually the reuse of both the historic portion and the annex portion of the Hadley School. Other proposals, as you may recall, it was a requirement of keeping the historic portion, but virtually every other proposal was not going to use the annex and was going to demolish the annex and build new buildings.

This felt like the least insertion into the community in terms of building. Obviously, now we're going to go through a process of negotiating agreements. We're going to go through due diligence.

We're going to go through permitting, and there's a community process there. Next slide, and this is going to be the last slide. So we did pretty good on time.

Government's not known about being very good at time. So a couple of things happened a little later by a month or so, just based on the fact that the bids came in a little later than we thought and et cetera. The good news is it's not going to change where we think the end is, which is the opening of a hotel.

And this is based on information from Delamar. So staff has weekly calls with Delamar. With the help of council, I currently negotiated the legal agreements with Delamar, consistent with the type of legal agreements that we did for the Michon School.

So if you're a neighbor of the Michon School, you might be more aware of what we did for the Michon School than not, which was, so I'm going to take a second there. If your neighbor tomorrow wants to privately develop their land, they can apply to the zoning board and they don't even need to knock on your door. Now, they're probably not going to do that well at the zoning board.

Maybe they'll do well, who knows, but they don't need to. The benefit here to the neighbors of Hadley and to the residents of Hadley is the town owns it. So before you file anything with the planning board, before you file for a building permit, before you do everything, the town has to approve it.

So it adds another layer of community involvement, and that community involvement is going to start soon. After Delamar does due diligence, make sure they understand all the warts and problems with the property, and after we have the legal agreements, they will then spend significant time designing and coming to the community and having a series of community meetings to talk about the things that they're proposing. It's going to talk about all the typical things.

It's going to talk about traffic. It's going to talk about light and shadow. It's going to talk about activity.

It's going to talk about noise, and so that process is even before we get to the permitting process. From there, once the select board, just like the Machon School, once the select board approves the plan, then it goes to the planning board for site plan review, and then there's a whole other level of review by our elected planning board about this plan. So we believe this is encouraging, exciting.

There's a lot of things still moving, and nothing's done until it's done, but we wanted to give you this update and appreciate your support for increasing room revenue, because the room revenue, projected room revenue here is very significant. As you know, the state doesn't give municipalities very many tools. We get a food tax of 0.75 percent, and we have a hotel tax, and the hotel tax is six percent of gross revenue on rooms. It is very, very significant. So thank you for your support.

[Speaker 1] (1:54:48 - 1:55:08)
Thank you, Mr. Spellios. Further question or discussion on Ms. Misalinski's motion? Seeing none, all those in favor of Ms. I'm sorry, there is one in the back. I gotta have at least one comment.

[Speaker 23] (1:55:10 - 1:57:10)
Test, okay. Justina Oliver, Precinct 4, member of the Swampscott Historical Commission and former member of Hadley Reuse Committee. I obviously support the hotels.

I just want people to understand I'm a short-term rental property owner. I have one unit in Swampscott, and this added tax affects everybody, not just hotels, but even small business owners, as I consider myself, because I'm not a millionaire making huge profits. What the tax does is it's added to the consumers.

So we as consumers, when we go and we book our vacations, rentals, we see our taxes and fees are added to our booking amount, and Swampscott's not a destination town yet. Hopefully it will be on the map. So for me, I compete with Salem and Marblehead, because that's destination towns.

So if people are out there shopping for a place to stay, they're looking in Salem, and then hopefully my property falls on the map. Awesome. But what I'm really afraid of doing this now, before we actually have hotels and we have lodging, big lodging, that it's going to negatively affect me as a small business owner and the other people that some of them are in this room today are experiencing, and I can say personally, I've already seen at least a 50% drop in my booking rates for this year alone.

So I'm already seeing a negative impact on people just not doing as many vacations this year. So I just want people to understand that this could negatively impact a lot of the residents in town, not just the big corporations that will be bringing in hotels. So I just would like to consider if maybe we could hold this or table it until the hotel is actually coming in operation and see what the revenue could be, because right now there's less than 40 short-term rental properties in Swampscott, and that's it.

[Speaker 1] (1:57:10 - 1:57:15)
Are you proposing an amendment to indefinitely postpone this?

[Speaker 23] (1:57:15 - 1:57:17)
Yes. Do I need to write that down?

[Speaker 1] (1:57:18 - 1:57:59)
That one I don't need written. Is there a second to an amendment to indefinitely postpone action under this article? Thank you, Ms. Lau. Anybody have questions or discussion on moving to indefinite postponement? I think it is in essence the same as discussing. So I will welcome a vote on the amendment to indefinitely postpone.

All those in favor? All those opposed? The amendment fails.

Now return to the discussion of Ms. Misalinski's original motion of the Finance Committee's recommendation. Any further discussion? Yes, ma'am.

[Speaker 10] (1:58:02 - 1:58:20)
Diana Kaplan, Precinct 5. I just had a question. If a homeowner has an individual room that they use as a bed and breakfast rental, what is the mechanism of the town in overseeing whether taxes are collected and turned over?

[Speaker 1] (1:58:20 - 1:58:30)
I'll defer to perhaps the clerk or the town administrator, but I assume if you are duly permitted and registered with the town, that would happen in due course. Ms. Serra?

[Speaker 32] (1:58:31 - 1:58:55)
So if you have a room that you rent and when you file your taxes with the state and you have that listed as a short-term rental, that is where 3% is given as the local option. If you have a hotel and therefore are doing rooms taxes, that is when you fall under the rooms tax. So short-term rental is what we consider the Airbnb rate.

[Speaker 1] (1:58:56 - 1:59:44)
Thank you, Ms. Serra. Further discussion? Seeing none.

All those in favor of Ms. Misalinski's motion, please raise your hand. All those opposed? The motion carries.

Returning now to Article VIII, before I recognize Ms. Hilario, I'm going to mention that I have received the names of four non-town meeting members who would like to speak. I will keep this list here. I will attempt to recognize two town meeting members and then one non-town meeting member until we run out of town meeting members who wish to speak or until the question is called.

Thus, Ms. Hilario?

[Speaker 24] (1:59:50 - 2:01:28)
Joan Hilario, excuse me, town meeting member, Precinct 1, member of the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee recommends the town vote to transfer from free cash the sum of $103,870 for the purpose of improving, renovating, and equipping Phillips Park with four pickleball courts, including, without limitation, all costs incidental or related thereto, provided, however, that no funds shall be expended until the town has received a grant commitment or allocation for a portion of such costs under the park grant program 301 CMI 5.00 and or under any federal and or other state program to undertake the foregoing project. B, dedicate said park to park and active recreation purposes under the provisions of General Law, Chapter 45, Section 3, and C, authorize the select board and or its designee to apply for and accept, on behalf of the town funds, on behalf of the town, funds granted under the park grant program and or any other funds, gifts, grants under any federal and or state program in any way connected with the scope of this article and enter into all agreements and execute any and all instruments as may be necessary or convenient to effectuate the project on behalf of the town.

I move the recommendation of the finance committee.

[Speaker 1] (2:01:28 - 2:01:43)
Is there a second? Congratulations, Ms. Salerio, on the longest motion this evening. Well done.

So what I'd like to do is to recognize you to discuss the finance committee's standpoint, but then we need to hear from the select board because they have not yet reported on this.

[Speaker 24] (2:01:43 - 2:02:02)
Okay, so the finance finance committee voted to approve this motion to appropriate monies from free cash, the location of the actual pickleball courts in Phillips Park will be a separate process determined by public process after town meeting.

[Speaker 1] (2:02:02 - 2:02:12)
Thank you, Ms. Salerio. Mr. Grishman, it's my understanding the select board met earlier this evening and reached a vote on their support.

[Speaker 2] (2:02:12 - 2:02:25)
Yes, we did. David Grishman, select board, precinct one town meeting member. Yes, the select board met this this evening and we we voted favorable action for one.

[Speaker 1] (2:02:26 - 2:02:26)
Thank you, Mr. Grishman.

[Speaker 2] (2:02:26 - 2:02:27)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:02:27 - 2:02:34)
Now before we debate, I would like to hear from our director of the office of economic community development, Ms. Golaska.

[Speaker 3] (2:02:35 - 2:16:08)
Good evening, Marcy Golaska, community development director and town meeting member, precinct six. It's my pleasure this to be here this evening to seek your support of this article and the construction of the pickleball courts at Phillips Park. I'd like to also provide you with the history and the process that included the planning to bring pickleball courts to the As you can see on the on the screen, this article requests for items.

It requests the appropriations of funding as Ms. Salerio stated. So we're looking for appropriation of $103,870. We are seeking town meetings request to accept a park grant of $58,167.

The town received notification of the grant award last year and the $58,000 represents 56% of the total project cost and that is the maximum amount of grant funding that we are eligible to receive towards this project. We also request that town meeting authorize the execution of the park project agreement and to dedicate the park for recreational uses as that has not happened to date. Next slide, please.

As you know, pickleball is the fastest growing sports that offers a wide range of physical, social, and mental benefits, making an excellent choice for individuals looking to stay active, have fun, and connect with others in our community. The request to construct pickleball courts goes back to 2019. This was at the start of COVID and at that time residents were looking for safe outdoor recreational options that provide safe distances and a fun outlet of just recreating in town.

Some residents were former tennis players and others who were just looking for a low-impact activity. Some of you probably know that pickleball was invented in 1965, but local popularity just grew or started to peak around 2020. If we could just stay on that map for one minute because I wanted to highlight the open spaces or land that we have available for recreational uses.

The grant requirement is such as we can only construct the pickleball courts on town-owned land. The grant is also specific to Phillips Park. On this map you can really see in the green that outlines our open spaces and some of the limits that each of these areas provides.

In the far left corner you can see the map that kind of shows the area of Harold King Forest. It's a wonderful active and passive recreation, but that area also has a conservation restriction, therefore we can't really construct pickleball courts there. The newest acquisition of land that this town meeting approved is the Archer Street parcel.

Unfortunately at the time when we were putting the grant application together, the town did not own the land. We are looking to install a conservation restriction on this land and we also just submitted a grant to construct walking paths within that area to make it accessible and also another sort of passive area for residents to be able to enjoy the outdoors in its natural settings. Jackson Park is another area just adjacent to the high school and that currently has other uses that we would not be able to accommodate pickleball courts there.

You can see the cemetery. I have heard from many residents that advocated for placement of pickleball courts at the cemetery. Collectively I think that we feel that the area is not appropriate for pickleball courts.

There's no space where the dog park is. We would not advocate to take away any type of utility. There's also changes in topography and our DPW department uses some of the space at the cemetery.

Other open spaces that we have in town, you can see the middle school. The middle school is fully built out. There's lower and upper parking areas there.

The parking area will be at a maximum as that will support the parking at the new school and the tennis courts and sort of the playing fields, we just earlier were talking about that, they are on Tedesco land. Again, they are not on town-owned land. The other area is that we have Ewing Woods and again that has conservation restriction.

One other small area that I wanted to point out is Clark playground. We just recently rehabbed the top lot area with a park grant and there's really no space in there for pickleball courts and also Linscott Park that also has a recreational restrictions on that land in regards to placement of any kind of additional utility. So that really leaves us with Phillips Park.

As you can see, Phillips Park is already a recreational area and added additional utility to it would really enhance the recreational opportunities to the area. Next slide, please. These are some of the benefits that we talked about that it's really centrally located.

It really provides, it's accessible to individuals of ages and abilities. It really benefits, provides physical health benefits to our community, social interaction. One thing that I have heard during some public forums that we had was from elder residents and how really that brought them out to be able to socialize and meet other residents within the community.

So there's definitely a large social aspect to playing pickleball. Mental well-being, obviously, it's important for all of us to be able to have an outlet and also pickleball is a low impact exercise that really could be played by a lot of individuals. Next slide, please.

As I had mentioned to you, the grant that we receive is specific to Phillips Park. The design has not been finalized due to the fact that we really need to, Town Meeting needs to accept the, allocate the grant funding and accept the grant. The two renderings that are proposed here shows potential layouts and potential location for the pickleball courts.

One thing that I wanted to be clear about and to state is that the Town would not take away one utility to replace another. We have heard of some potential location within Phillips Park, but I think that really impacted on other uses, specifically the basketball court or potential impact to the practice fields for soccer, lacrosse, or football. So we were asked to, after the December meeting, we were asked to go to the community, really have a public outreach and try to fully understand some of the concerns or thoughts that the community has regarding the construction of pickleball courts.

So on February 15th, we held a public forum, public meeting at the Senior Center. It was very well attended and we received three overwhelming comments. One thing was really clear that majority of the individuals that spoke at the meeting said that they were fully in support of the construction of pickleball courts, but had some concern about the location.

Other issues that came up was noise, flooding, and parking. On February 2nd, we did a noise test at Phillips Park. We also measured the noise from Sutton Place, Smith Lane, and Puritan.

The test was conducted having eight individuals there utilizing four pickleballs to try to simulate four pickleball courts, and I can tell you that there was no audible sound that was noted at the full location that we looked at. Again, it was rare of the parking lot, Sutton Place, Smith Lane, and Paradise. We did speak to the residents of Bertram House in regards to their comments or concerns, and they did not have any concerns.

They were really in support of it. The administration and the residents thought it would be something fun for the residents to look at. They are fully in support of all activities that take place at Phillips Park.

They love to see individuals there either watching football games or just listening to some of the other sports and activities that are ongoing. We also looked at the flooding area, and the park is located within a 100-year flood zone. FEMA has it characterized as a 1% chance of flooding per year.

So again, it's something that does not preclude us from constructing pickleball courts there. It's just we have to take some precautions. We would have to go to Conservation Commission to seek a permit in order to be able to construct within this area.

But again, I just wanted to be clear that the location within this zone does not preclude the child from constructing pickleball courts there. And parking was another concern. We are looking at constructing or looking at specific layouts for a parking plan.

We also go into work with our Recreation Department, with our DPW staff and the Police Department to look at enforcement issues and signage for recreational parking. Next. This is just talks about the slide kind of shows us the sound levels when you look at the variety of different sounds that could be emitted.

And pickleball sounds are typically about 70 decibels at about 100 feet away. The current layout of the parks is of the pickleball courts is at least 200 feet away from the nearest residential property. And again, you can really see on this map that the sound emitted is on the lowest spectrum of the decibel levels.

Next slide. This just kind of shows us the FEMA flood map. You can really see in the sort of blue-gray area, you can see Phillips Park and the AE zone area.

Again, this is a flood area that FEMA classifies as 100-year flood zone. And in purple, you see the VE flood zone. Next, please.

This just slide talks about the potential layouts for parking. Again, this is only a rendering, a design. We'd love to work with some landscape as well as traffic engineers to really look at the approach, the layout, and the impact to the area to allow for safe parking and safe traveling to the playing fields as well as to the beach, the access to the beach.

Next. Parking or creation of a designated parking layout is something that has been supported and identified in the harbor and waterfront plan. I just wanted to show you the rendering in regards to the potential, another option for potential layout of the area.

Next steps and or approvals that we'll be meeting, meeting is the town meeting approval of the article in regards to the funding, the grant, and the acceptance of the grant. We would then need to work with a landscape architect to really fully design and finalize the design. Throughout the process, we are committed to have a public meeting and public participation.

And once the design and the layout has been completed, we will seek a permit from the Swampscope Conservation Commission by filing the notice of intent. And if all of these thresholds or timelines are measured, we hope to construct, to begin construction on July 1st of this year. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:16:09 - 2:16:24)
Thank you, Ms. Golasko. Is there discussion or debate? Sir, and then in the back.

[Speaker 39] (2:16:28 - 2:17:00)
Waldemar Schwartz District, Prison 2. So it sounds like the, oh sorry, so it sounds like the proposal for the grant was done before the purchase of the land. And because the grant was granted for the current location, we cannot reconsider the land that was purchased by the town later.

Why is it so difficult to re-approve the grant for the other location?

[Speaker 3] (2:17:02 - 2:17:53)
So I'm happy to address it. So yes, the grant was specific to Phillips Park, as when you look at the other map in regards to the suitability and the feasibility of any other location, we found them not to be suitable. When you look at the map and the areas that we have available for construction or accommodation of Pickleball Courts, no other areas were found to be viable.

In regards to the grant, when the grant goes in, yes it has to be specific in regards to the location. The Department of Conservation and Recreation does do a site visit to really look at the suitability of the location, and they approve it based on the location, the site visit, and the potential success of the location.

[Speaker 39] (2:17:54 - 2:18:12)
So because my concern is about this location second to the left, lower to the corner, that's the land we purchased last year. Yeah, here. And it was deemed not applicable for the Pickleball Courts because of what?

[Speaker 3] (2:18:14 - 2:18:45)
Yes, so the topography of the area is such that it's very hilly. If you can take a look at it, there would have to be a lot of clearing that would need to take place because it's a wooded area, and I think that the thought process has always been to allow that land to stay in its national form and to really allow residents just to ability to walk through it and really enjoy nature and enjoy some of the lookout areas that are there, that are existing within the area.

[Speaker 1] (2:18:46 - 2:18:50)
Okay, thank you. I understand. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Smith.

[Speaker 6] (2:18:59 - 2:27:05)
Thank you, Mr. Moderator. It's Jim Smith, Precinct 5, town meeting member. This is not about pickleball.

A lot of my peers are attracted to that sport. I have no idea why, but they seem very interested in pickleball, and God bless them all for that. This is not at all about pickleball, nor is it about this parliamentary procedure.

We defeated this at the last town meeting, but by a little rephrasing of it, it's been rephrased, so it gets to come back. There apparently is a huge interest in pickleball at that location from some folks. This really is about hard surfaces.

I would oppose a building at that location, a dance floor, a tennis court, a basketball court. Anything that's a hard surface at that location is inappropriate. Now, yesterday, most of you enjoyed a partly cloudy, partly sunny day.

No weather event at all. None at all. Unless you were on Puritan Road at noontime, at high tide, you would have seen in the middle of Puritan Road this guy waving his arms, turning vehicles around, so that they don't go through a huge amount of water.

That was the third time since the middle of January I have been in the middle of Puritan Road stopping vehicles. I will say you're all very, most of you, one was very impolite, people did turn around. They were very kind when I explained what happens.

I was in nine inches of water at 12.15 yesterday noon. It wasn't raining. It was 11.4 foot tide, relatively high, there was an offshore storm, and the wind was coming from the southeast. That floods Puritan Road. Now, Puritan Road sits slightly higher than Sutton Place, and it sits higher than this location that Tom wants us to support for Pickleball. I got nothing against Pickleball.

However, I do have strong opinions about nine inches of water in front of my home yesterday at noontime, and 12 inches of water in the middle of January shutting down Puritan Road. Now, I know the city and town manager is here and running the DPW. He came and they put up sawhorses because we were all very surprised by what happened, but we shouldn't be surprised as a coastal community what might happen with the Atlantic Ocean with certain weather events.

To then put a hard surface in what has been, frankly, since the ice age, an area where ocean waterfront overflow has gone. If you come coming into Swampscott at the gas station where Puritan goes out to the right and Humphrey goes straight, go straight on Humphrey. Everything to your left is high.

It's a mountain. It's hills. Everything to your right is flat.

That's former wetlands. That's where the floods have gone for millennia until we came along a couple hundred years ago and developed something, filled in Phillips Park, and we took what is the natural area where water would go, and we put buildings on it because we did not know that the future would include climate change. Well, the future is now.

We have climate change. We can turn our back and say, oh, don't worry about it, but don't come down my house, my road when it's raining or stormy because you'll meet me in the middle of the road and ask me to turn around because there'll be up to 12 inches of water in the middle of Puritan Road as happened yesterday. Now, we heard, and I'm so pleased that whoever put us after the discussion on the stretch code, the energy code, we heard that we're going to be climate leaders in Swampscott.

We all adopted that. We just voted for it. Climate leaders.

How can we be climate leaders or claim to be climate leaders when we're filling in areas with hard surfaces that need to be there for water retention? I want to point out that the climate action plan is an excellent plan. It's called resilient Swampscott.

Resiliency. That means the water has to go somewhere. We have to be resilient.

This is where the water goes, folks. This is where it goes. There are puddles there today on the very area where this pickleball court is planned.

Puddles. So if you want to play pickleball, as my peer group apparently does, half the time it's going to be wet. This is not a good place to pickleball.

And again, this is not about pickleball. I love it. It's a great sport.

It's about the environment. It's about flooding. It's about climate.

It's about property protection. That's what this is about. Now, the climate action plan, which I think is an excellent plan, Mr. Monterey, and I give great, great credit to the town for putting this together, suggested to be up to 20 inches of level of sea rise increase in this area by 2050. 20 inches higher than it is today. There won't be any pickleball courts there, folks. They'll be underwater.

Realistically, this is not a place for pickleball. It also suggested to be 9% additional participation in our town by 2050. That rain is going to go someplace.

Now, the suggestion that we get from our climate action plan is that we prepare Swampscott's assets for anticipated sea level weather conditions and develop the phased plan for upgrades. This is the opposite of that. Why would we do this?

I have no idea. And this also suggests, and it's a great plan, I do credit the committee, that we place conservation restrictions on large town-owned open space parcels. Phillips Park, for example, a place where the water has got to go and will go.

We won't be able to stop it without pickleball court. And the plan goes on to suggest that we create resilience just as we did a few moments ago. We decided that we're going to discourage fossil fuel development and we're going to encourage, and I have solar on my roof, I drive an EV, I'm very sensitive about all this stuff, because it's real where I live.

It is very real, and by the way, I don't live alone. If you're on Sculpin Way, that water goes down into this very area. If you're coming, Wales Beach has had all kinds of issues the last few years.

Robin Lane, Smith Lane, Willow, and of course Puritan all go into that area. That's where all the water goes. Why, in God's name, would a town that wants to call itself climate leaders, and actually vote to be climate leaders, then put a hard surface in an area that has got to be used to receive the water, to retain the water, for water retention?

So Mr. Monroy, I urge my colleagues, you will be sitting here in five or ten years voting for millions of dollars of money for resiliency in this community. We are a coastal community. In fact, I want to, oh, I have my own FEMA map.

Everything from Humphrey Street to the right, FEMA says it's a flood zone. If anybody thinks there's one chance in 100 years we'll have a flood in that area, God bless you. There'll be floods a lot more than one time in 100 years.

But one of our selectmen, one of our selectmen, I just want to close with this, said nothing, the town has done nothing, nearly nothing yet, enough on climate change. The truth is we haven't made any investments, he said. There cannot be even a reasonable debate that we've done, never mind enough, we've done nothing meaningful as a coastal community as exposed as we are.

We've done nothing meaningful to date, and here we're going to go backwards. I strongly urge a no vote on this, Mr. Moderator. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:27:05 - 2:27:12)
Thank you, Mr. Smith. Sir, in the back, and then Mr. Hill.

[Speaker 26] (2:27:22 - 2:28:59)
Good evening. Precinct 3, name is Barry Kushner. I'm the former president of Mixed Doubles Tennis League of Swampscott.

I'm here this evening to urge you to pass a yes vote on Article 8. I'm going to share with you a few relevant facts about pickleball that you may not know about. It is the fastest growing sport in the country.

It's increased exponentially by 171.1 percent just in the last five years. Thirty-six and a half million people have played it at least once just during the past 12 months. Many communities in the country have pickleball courts, dedicated courts, many in the North Shore.

But in Swampscott, we don't have any. And the question I've been asking myself along with many other advocates, why is Swampscott being left behind? Now, with the PAC grant offering to pay 50 percent of the construction costs when town funds are available through free cash, as we've heard, this is a no-brainer.

It really is. Now, in my view, a yes vote is one thing, but a no vote is not just against pickleball. No, a no vote is just against senior citizens who play the sport the most.

Thank you for my time.

[Speaker 1] (2:29:00 - 2:29:19)
Thank you, sir. Mr. Hale, before I get to you, I'm remiss. We have a resident, Ann Weymouth, who has asked to speak.

Mr. Hale. Ma'am, if you would, use the mic. Identify yourself, your name, and your address.

[Speaker 28] (2:29:20 - 2:31:06)
I am Ann Weymouth. I'm in precinct six. I live at 1006 Paradise Road, the Summit Estates.

And as a senior living in a condo, thing that I look for in my community is that there's areas in which I can engage in recreation. And I've been going to Marblehead Courts. I've been going to Salem Courts.

And I've been looking around saying, you know, what do we have here in Swampscott? I'm a resident. I pay a lot of taxes, as well as the entire development that I live in, as well as the other condo developments in the area that are looking for ways in which they can engage in outside recreation.

When I hear the concerns about hard surfaces, I also point out that they're still talking about the design. And with Pickleball, there are permeable courts. There are courts that, when they're designed, the water flows right through them.

And I'm as concerned as anybody about not spending a lot of tax dollars today and having it ruined a year from now. And I think that you get that information when you go through the design process and you go through the Conservation Commission. So here, I think you're making a decision about whether you're going to even try to make Pickleball available here in Swampscott.

Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:31:09 - 2:31:15)
Thank you, Ms. Weymouth. Mr. Hale. And then, is that Ms. Driscoll?

Did you have your hand up?

[Speaker 41] (2:31:15 - 2:31:15)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (2:31:16 - 2:31:20)
Mr. Hale. Hi, it's Ryan Hale, precinct chief.

[Speaker 18] (2:31:20 - 2:31:35)
I'd just like to build upon the previous comment, Mr. Rondere, if you could ask Ms. Golaska if you could clarify whether the language of the Warren article, the language of the grant, or the budget scope would prevent us from pursuing a design that would include permeable materials.

[Speaker 1] (2:31:36 - 2:31:49)
Okay, just for the folks at home, in case that mic wasn't picking up well enough, Mr. Hale asked Ms. Golaska if there's anything in the terms of the grant that would prevent consideration of a permeable design. Ms. Golaska.

[Speaker 3] (2:31:50 - 2:32:02)
The design is really up to the community. The grant is specific only to the location and to the courts, but in regards to the placement of the courts or the type of courts we wanted to design is really up to the community.

[Speaker 1] (2:32:03 - 2:32:09)
Thank you, Ms. Golaska. Yes, ma'am, is that...

[Speaker 10] (2:32:09 - 2:32:39)
Hi, I'm Barry Atkin, precinct six, town member. I think the permeable concept is a good one, but I had another question related to the map up here, and that is, that's town-owned land, but so are all the school areas. In all of the areas we have for school is there no place that could add four pickleball courts?

[Speaker 35] (2:32:41 - 2:32:41)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:32:41 - 2:32:46)
Thank you, Ms. Atkin. Ms. Golaska, I think you have addressed this, but if you care to again.

[Speaker 3] (2:32:46 - 2:32:59)
Yes, thank you. We have looked at other locations. The map is specific just to the areas that are owned, and we also did look at the middle school, but unfortunately that location was not suitable.

[Speaker 1] (2:33:01 - 2:33:04)
Ms. Cassidy Driscoll, then I have a name on my list here.

[Speaker 25] (2:33:10 - 2:34:24)
Tara Cassidy Driscoll, precinct six, town meeting member. I'd like to just start by saying I'm 100% in favor of pickleball courts, but I am not in favor at Phillips Park. I'm an insurance agent.

I've been in the business for about 30 years, and when we had that flood map up there on the screen, it showed a VE zone, which is a wave action zone, you know, in the Puritan Road area, but I want to be clear that that has not been that way in my entire time in the business. That area was all an AE zone, for most of it was, when I started, and it has since been changed now to a VE zone, and I find it hard to believe, you know, it was classified for a hundred-year storm for a long, long time, and as you can see, you know, and anybody that's lived in this town a long time, we had a lot more storms down there, and they were not one in a hundred years, so obviously, that was then changed, but my concern is, is that zone going to roll back further at all, and you know, what are we looking at in terms of that, and so I would just advise caution, and that this, is this a zone that's going to change over time, because it's changed significantly in my time since I've been in the business.

[Speaker 1] (2:34:25 - 2:34:26)
Thank you, Ms. Cassidy Driscoll.

[Speaker 3] (2:34:26 - 2:34:51)
Mr. Moderator, may I comment? Just a brief comment, if I could. Tara, thank you for pointing it out in regards to the VE zone versus AE zone.

So you probably know in regards to that VE zone really deals with the velocity and the storm surge, and the location of the pickable courts are in a different zone behind Holmes and sort of within Phillips Park.

[Speaker 25] (2:34:52 - 2:35:35)
No, I agree, but my point is that the zone has changed significantly over the last 20 years, and what does the future lie for us with that, and again, I would just say to anybody that thinks about a flood zone area, just open, if you could picture just throwing out a bag of marbles and watch where they run. They're going to run downward, and that's how the water runs just in general, and we've all seen a flood zone, and it's only getting worse. So as that water comes up more, it's going to continue to roll back further, and I just find it hard to believe it's 100 years.

It's going to be, that's what it's going to be is 100 years. So just my point, my experience, I've been in the business for 30 years, and what I've seen.

[Speaker 1] (2:35:35 - 2:35:47)
Thank you, Ms. Cassidy Driscoll. I have a Neil Pearlstein who has asked to address the body. Again, if you'd approach the mic, identify yourself, and your address.

[Speaker 11] (2:35:53 - 2:40:01)
Hi, Neil Pearlstein, Precinct 5, Sutton Place. I'm the close abutter. I knew nothing about the pickleball courts or the plans until after reading about it in the newspaper.

As a matter of fact, for the February 15th meeting, I received my invitation to that two days after the meeting. It just seems wrong, to borrow somebody else's phrase from earlier tonight, that you would choose to build a solid surface in a flood-prone area. Mr. Smith spoke to that, and that I actually spoke to a neighbor of mine who lives on Sculpin Way. Mr. Mark Mahoney was a chairman of the Conservation Commission and made it clear to me, first of all, he also owns the land from Sculpin Way down to Phillips Park, and the drainage system there is also connected to basically a check valve from the ocean surge, and that area floods on a regular basis. As Mr. Smith pointed out, just within the past couple of months, we've had some of those 100-year floods, and I've lived there long enough to experience a number of them. The idea of permeable surfaces, and I want to let you know what he said, because I'm not an expert on this, but he said, drainage through the town storm drain system and the remnant system that was constructed for the new Ocean House golf course, which runs from the parking lot behind the Bircham House nearly a century ago, is not capable, is not adequate for dealing with the flooding in that area.

The other thing that he said was that the area, according to Massachusetts, considered that a wetlands protection area that needs to be preserved. Residents in this area, myself included, have FEMA flood insurance. My insurance agent is right here, she can verify.

We all have flood insurance. Is the town going to have flood insurance for this pickleball court? It just seems wrong that we do this and base it on 200 feet away, as far as sound, 200 feet from the nearest residence.

Well, that would be me, and that comes from the Pickleball Association, whose sole purpose is to promote pickleball. Everything else I've seen says 600 to 900 feet away from the nearest residence. Now, once you put it up, it's too late.

Change.org is trying to get legislation passed through the state house to set up a distance of over 600 feet from people's homes. What happens if that passes? Are you going to come in and move it?

I don't think so. The bottom line is this whole thing was done, it just seems wrong. This thing was done without any input from anybody in the community, and without any thoughts or concerns for us.

The noise was the number one thing on that list, but the reality is the people who live there, our homes are under threat, and that's just not right. It just seems wrong. So I urge you vote against this.

Let's find another place for pickleball courts. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Perlstein.

[Speaker 1] (2:40:03 - 2:40:19)
I have two more members of the public who've asked to speak. I'm looking to see if there are other town meeting members who wish to speak. How about if we do Mr. Schutzer, and then I have a Joe Smullen, who has requested to speak.

[Speaker 13] (2:40:24 - 2:41:07)
Oh, here we are. Ken Schutzer, Precinct 6. I just have a question.

It's actually a point of reference. In the original Article 8, it had a provision which identified the care, custody, and control of Phillips Park to the select board. Apparently that has been removed because that was not read when the warrant articles was read that we're to vote on.

You are correct, sir. So that being said, who is currently, or who will the care, custody, and control of Phillips Park be? Who is in charge of it now, and where will it be, assuming that this warrant article is passed?

I'm just trying to get a sense of who's overseeing some of these concerns.

[Speaker 1] (2:41:07 - 2:41:22)
I appreciate the question, Mr. Schutzer. It did come up in our pre-town meeting discussions. We have checked with council.

We've gone back through the town records, discovered that the property was already given to the care and custody of the town for purposes of Park.

[Speaker 13] (2:41:22 - 2:41:31)
But who is that? The town? No, I understand who the town is, but identifying the select board, who theoretically...

[Speaker 1] (2:41:31 - 2:41:36)
The town administrator is the head of the town government.

[Speaker 13] (2:41:38 - 2:41:47)
So he's the gentleman that if anyone has an issue with regard to the care, custody, and control, they direct their comments to Mr. Schutzer?

[Speaker 1] (2:41:47 - 2:41:51)
Certainly, if that's where you need to go to get your questions answered, the buck does stop there.

[Speaker 13] (2:41:51 - 2:41:55)
Well, I just was curious about the care, custody, and control, and you've answered the question. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:41:57 - 2:41:58)
Mr. Smolin.

[Speaker 9] (2:42:06 - 2:46:38)
Hi, Joe Smolin from Precinct 5. I live on Woodbine Avenue. I'm pretty far from the court.

I don't think I'm going to be much affected by the noise. We get affected by seas. If you look on Google about pickleball and noise, you'll find page after page.

So noise from pickleball is quite unique, different from other sports. It's not like tennis. It's about 10 times louder.

That's 10 dB. Call it twice as loud, 10 dB. If we talk about 70 dB at 100 feet, which is probably correct, when you get to 200 feet, which gets to be the closest residences, it drops by about six decibels.

So that would give you 64. If you take that area when it's quiet in the evening and the winds have dropped down off of Puritan Road, it may be that the background noise is going to be around 40, 45 dB. Typical evening conditions, nice time for playing pickleball in the evening.

Also a time when people might be out in the yards relaxing. So 64 compared to 40 is a truly intrusive noise. So this is an issue.

At the meeting in February, noise was certainly a concern of a number of people speaking there. That particular area around Puritan Road and across to Humphrey Street and also up on the hill above the field is a noise-impacted area. There's a lot of activities that happen on the field.

I get calls. I don't know if I've mentioned, I'm an acoustic consultant. I have a company in Salem.

And I get calls from that area once or twice a year about excess noise. It might be from the fields. Nothing much you can do about that.

Bertram House has a big air conditioning unit. That was an issue, and you'll notice there's big stockades around which reduce that noise. The sewage plant has machinery that makes noise, and it all transmits up on the hill above Humphrey Street.

So these are areas that would be impacted by one more noise affront. It's crowding in extra noise issues in that area. You talk about fences around it which can make some reduction of the noise.

We talk about 10-12 foot barriers, but they still won't affect the people up on the hill who have basically line of sight across these fences unless they're very high. So it's going to be an issue. At the moment, Thelmuth has a noise issue from their pickleball courts that has been running for two and a half years now in the courts.

Going back and forth, it almost sounds like trying to delay stuff until after the election. But I think that if you look at the situation, you're looking for noise. I don't think there has been an official noise study made of this site, and I think it's important because I think the town is looking for trouble and finding another site.

If it was the one behind the cemetery, okay, it means you have to do another grant proposal. But I think that that is the proper direction for the town, and I think this will be trouble. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (2:46:38 - 2:46:45)
Thank you, Mr. Smullen. I do have Harry Pass on this list, but ma'am first.

[Speaker 20] (2:46:53 - 2:49:18)
Hi, I'm Marianne McDermott, Precinct 6. So this has been super interesting. I reached out to people in my precinct to ask questions about how they felt about, not about pickleball, but how they felt about this location, because that's really what we're voting on here.

We're not voting on pickleball. We're not voting on older people. We're not voting on community activities.

We're voting on the location of these courts. So concerns that were expressed to me were flooding, which we've all heard. Ms. Golaska pointed out that it's a hundred-year flood zone. January 13th, that parking lot was so flooded, four hours after high tide. You could have floated things in that. I can send you photos if you'd like, but it was really quite flooded.

So courts that the water flows through might not be relevant when they're submerged in water for extended periods of time. So that's a concern. The other concern is that parking lot, when it's heavily used, is extremely heavily used.

For high school sports, away buses park in the back lot. The lots are filled, as are this, as is Humphrey Street. So it's not as though people choose not to park on Humphrey Street.

Humphrey Street's also filled for busy, any youth sport, Humphrey Street's filled. Anybody who drives through Humphrey Street knows it's difficult to get two cars past each other during youth sports, which is most weekends in the fall and in the spring. Again, high school sports, the buses park in the back lot.

Those designs didn't really look like they would allow for buses to even get through, much less park there. So those are two really big concerns for that specific location. And then relative to Ms. Golaska's statement that we don't take land, recreational land, for a different purpose, there were tennis courts at Phillips Park not that long ago, and they were taken to make a nice entrance to the stadium. So it seems like that if it's a new precedent, it's a new precedent, but perhaps we could revisit that in some way. So those are the concerns. So the concern from the constituents I spoke to is the location of the pickleball courts, and I would suggest that we look for different locations and perhaps not vote positively on this.

[Speaker 1] (2:49:19 - 2:49:23)
Thank you, Ms. McDermott. Mr. Pass, are you here?

[Speaker 12] (2:49:24 - 2:53:34)
And then Mr. Perry. Harry Pass, Precinct 5. I am a 27-year resident of Swampscott, former ZBA chairman with Peter Spellios.

I also coach youth soccer and basketball in town. I live next to Phillips Park, and I am not thrilled with the constant potential pinging of pickleballs, but I can live with that. To me, that's not the issue.

The problem, though, is that Phillips Park, as we already heard, is a complete swamp. I was just looking at pictures from last week where the entire park was inundated with water, and that wasn't any hundred-year storm. These hundred-year storms happen, I'd say, twice a year.

So I'm in a unique position because I built my house right next to Phillips Park 20 years ago, and it has been miserable dealing with the water problems there. The soil, because I know we did all soil tests for my house, that soil is peat about three to four feet down, and underneath the peat is hard clay. So there is nowhere for this water to go.

So if you put a pickleball court, you'll go three feet under, then you hit clay, and there's nowhere for the water to go. So you're going to be coming back here, and that pickleball court is going to be ruined just like the basketball court is getting ruined on Humphrey Street. So there's no place for the water to drain.

On an average storm, the water puddles everywhere, has no place to go. On a severe storm, Phillips Park is a lake for weeks at a time, and I look out my backyard, and I can see it. It doesn't go away, and it's not going to go away with anything that the town wants to do.

If you put a permeable surface there, the water still has no place to go. It can go underneath the surface. It can't get through the clay, and I know because we did soil tests.

So what does this mean? It means that that $56,000 grant is going to be eaten up by all the engineering and the water mitigation costs that the town's going to have to incur. The taxpayers are going to be burdened by this high cost.

It's going to take, you know, whatever is necessary, that $56,000 is going to be gone to be able to just to prevent these courts from floating away. I'm also in the construction business, and my professional estimation is $103,000 in free cash isn't going to be anywhere near what it's going to cost to build these courts, to keep the water out, and more than that, every year it's going to be constant maintenance, and where is that money going to be coming from? So that's the flying issue we've heard from.

There's another issue. The other one is that parking lot is for beach parking in the summer, and by my calculations, the court in the parking will wipe out 40 to 50 parking spaces, and that's an enormous amount of parking the town's going to lose, which shouldn't happen. It's not fair to the townspeople, not fair to the taxpayers who want to enjoy Isman's Beach, and when that lot was created, it was envisioned as a beach parking lot.

I urge you, don't let a small group of special interest people take away our beach parking. Don't let them waste taxpayer money by building on a swamp. There's other alternatives.

We can find another location. I think, you know, the Archer Street project, the cemetery, these are all locations that are going to cost less money to build on than building in a complete swamp flooded area. So I would ask that the town meeting deny this article or at least table any vote until there's a full review of the soil conditions and the actual verifiable construction costs to the town so the taxpayers know exactly what this is going to cost.

[Speaker 1] (2:53:35 - 2:53:39)
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pass. Mr. Perry.

[Speaker 5] (2:53:47 - 3:01:28)
Good evening, everyone. Jerry Perry Precinct One. I rise tonight as a senior citizen now, unfortunately, with less hair and a wider girth and an enthusiastic pickleball player.

I rise in total support of this proposal and I'd like to address some of the concerns that have been raised tonight, not only here but at some public hearings and some other events. I want to talk about the finances. When the select board came before us to do it as a borrowing, I had some reservations.

I didn't think that's the right approach and I've been in the municipal finance business for over four decades and I can tell you that this is the most cost efficient way to do it by taking it from free cash and not doing from borrowing because borrowing requires interest payments. And as such, even though I did vote for it in December, I did it with hesitation. So I commend the select board for coming forward because this is the best approach.

And anyone who understands municipal finance knows that when you have matching grants, it's the best way to do it. And I think it's the right approach from a financial perspective that's how Swansky did, in my opinion, is doing the right thing. With regard to parking, they've been talking about the parking problems.

We saw the plans there. I've had the privilege of living in this town for 43 years and I raised my family here. My kids are younger and I can assure you back 25 years ago when I was heavily involved with Little League and Pop Warner and everything else, we always found that the park was used, in my opinion, from my observations, far more than it is today.

And a lot of it has to do with, quite frankly, baseball. There was a lot more baseball playing down in Phillips Park back in the day than there is today and I'm absolutely convinced there really isn't a parking problem down there, even though people are trying to articulate that there is one. And to alleviate some of the parking problems, the Board of Selectment has some authorities here.

If it does turn into a problem, which I personally still don't think it will, but if it were to be a parking problem, they have the ability to regulate the usage of the pickleball courts. So if we're really interfering with Eisner's Beach in the summertime, they have the ability to shut it down and I'm sure they'll assess that and look at it. So the bottom line to it, there are solutions to the parking problems.

I don't think there's a parking problem. I think it's a problem trying to be made up here to try to defeat this problem. With regard to the flooding, there's flooding down, there's no question about that, but we're premature.

It is not the role of town meeting to determine whether we can or cannot do this or whether we should or shouldn't do it in this so-called flood zone. It's the role of the Conservation Commission. It is extremely premature, I think, for town meeting to not do this for flooding reasons.

We should be sending this to the Conservation Commission. It's entirely possible maybe we don't build this even if we approve this tonight, but at the same token, let the experts, let the people who regulate this stuff, let the people who oversee this stuff, that's our Conservation Commission, let them do their jobs. But if you understand how this all works, they can't even assess the situation until we give them a proposal and the only way we can give them a proposal is to pass this tonight.

So I think we should do that and let them do their jobs. I'm not an expert in this, though I've had some experience on it. I've heard a lot of people articulate their concerns about it.

Let the experts address it. I don't think it should be done at town meeting. With regard to the history of Phillips Park, I was more involved with this community years ago back in the 80s and 90s than I certainly am today, but I can assure you, and if you go back in the town clerk's records, there was a report done back in the 1990s.

There was consideration given to taking Greenwood Avenue, which was a middle school at that time, and building a middle school down at Phillips Park. And a lot of people, myself included, and I don't live in that area, fought that. We wanted to preserve Phillips Park for a park and for nothing else.

We fought that and we won that battle. What happened? My neighborhood got hit.

We ended up, you know, getting the high school here, we flipped it all around, Phillips Park got, you know, protected, and we lost Jackson Park. That's okay. I thought we did the right thing here by doing that, but we still protected Phillips Park.

There was another thing that happened down there that the neighbors got upset about. 10 or 15 years ago, there was a discussion about a doggie park. The doggie park, they originally thought about putting it at Phillips Park.

The neighbors got all upset about it, and what happened was, it come over again. The precinct won behind the cemetery, where, in my humble opinion, it's absolutely inappropriate to put a pickleball court, and quite frankly, I don't even think the doggie park should have gone behind the cemetery, because that's a whole different conversation. It's totally inappropriate to do that.

I can't believe anyone would consider putting a pickleball court at the cemetery. That's just wrong. It belongs at a park.

We've overdeveloped this town. I've talked about that numerous times at this podium here. That's why we're having this problem.

There is no other place. You've heard Ms. Golaska talk about it. They give you the reasons why you can't go anywhere else, and I agree with you, because there really is no place to go.

The pickleball courts belong in a park that many of us, years ago, long before we had the current leadership, protected Phillips Park to make sure it was used for a park, and that's where pickleball courts, in my humble opinion, should go. Now, the noise. The noise is a legitimate issue.

A lot of people don't like that banging of that thing there. I got it, and I don't blame them somewhat. They're concerned about it, but they did the studies.

They showed you the decibels. I'm not an expert in this stuff. It's far enough away.

I'm lucky enough. I have a second home up in New Hampshire, where I'm only 50 yards from a pickleball court, and it doesn't bother me in the least, but I like pickleball, so I guess I'm biased. The bottom line to it, I think the town has done their job on the noise thing, and with all due respect, it does make noise, but it's a heck of a lot louder at the football game when you start hearing the PA system flying around here, so the noise is a lot larger, and certainly on football games and things of that nature.

So I would respectfully reject the fact, because when you live at a park or near a park, like I used to anyways, you're going to have noise there. I guess I'm closing a couple of things, and I'm only repeating a few things. This is the fastest growing sport in America.

Swampskate does not have anything. For those who are opposed to this, which has been on the table since last December, if there's an alternative that meets financial, legal, and political considerations, I'm all ears for it, but all I keep hearing people getting up and saying is, what about this, or what about that? They haven't come up with a concrete proposal that meets those criteria, because there really isn't one.

If you do not pass this tonight, even though they're against, they're not against pickleball, they're just against the location, I am guaranteeing you, we are not going to build a pickleball court in the town of Swampskate if you don't put it down there. You have to make up your mind. It's not going to happen no matter how much the neighbors up there are hoping for that.

I share with you that the following, the towns of Nahant, Lynn, Marblehead, Salem, Beverly, and other communities I didn't actually research because I've only played in these areas here, all have pickleball courts. Swampskate has nothing. Again, if we don't pass this tonight, you're not going to have pickleball courts.

I hope that you will support the motion that's on the table. The board of selecting by a four to one vote supported this. I don't know what the finance committee's vote was, but they've recommended this from a financial perspective.

This makes sense. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a park. This belongs on a park, not in a cemetery or in the woods somewhere.

It belongs in the park and I think this is where it belongs. We've protected Phillips Park for many years and I think we should use it as a park. I hope you'll support the motion of the finance committee.

Thank you very much.

[Speaker 1] (3:01:29 - 3:01:33)
Thank you, Mr. Perry. Mr. Barden.

[Speaker 34] (3:01:49 - 3:03:05)
Hi, Mark Barden, Precinct 3. First, I just want to say that we have the hardest working professionals of any town that I know of. I mean, Sean and Mark Barzy and Pete.

I mean, everybody works very, very hard. A couple of town meetings ago, this town meeting voted to rezone Benton Square. At that time, we were told, hey, we're in the driver's seat.

We can design what we want. Why don't we put the pickleballs there? Why don't we tell those people that, hey, you want mixed use?

You want a market street development type place? Why don't we tell them you can put stores, you can put residents, and you can put pickleball courts? All right, let's look at that.

Maybe, all right, so we're giving up $50,000, but maybe we're going to spend nothing, zero, to build the pickleball courts. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (3:03:06 - 3:03:13)
Thank you, Mr. Barden. Ms. Zippolito, do you have something to add?

[Speaker 16] (3:03:20 - 3:03:34)
Just a couple of comments. In terms of the Benton Square proposal, that's privately owned property, so we were never in control of privately owned property, so that's the reason why we're looking at town-owned land. Thanks.

[Speaker 1] (3:03:34 - 3:03:45)
Thank you, Ms. Zippolito. In the back there. Yes, with the baseball hat.

I'm sorry, you're sitting behind Mr. Driscoll.

[Speaker 14] (3:03:45 - 3:06:58)
Tom Peleria, Precinct 6. I just wanted to start by saying at the last special town meeting, we spoke about this article at length, and I am disappointed that we're back with a very similar article, albeit nuanced. I feel like maybe the town wasn't willing to listen to the voice of the people last time we got together, and it makes me wonder, when will it stop?

Is there a time where we can vote down the pickleball courts and they'll go away? The other thing I wanted to talk about was at the last town meeting, there was a lot of discussion around development in town, and a lot of people agreed we had to build a thoughtful plan that prioritized the use of our land and the use of our resources. There was commitment from town leadership at that time to put a lot of work and energy behind developing that thoughtful plan, and a thoughtful plan of attack for how we leverage our resources, and what I see here is a vote that looks remarkably similar to what we voted down at the last town meeting.

I see very few additional questions answered. I see a lot of the same concerns that people raised last time, and I still haven't seen answers for them, and just wanted to bring that to light and say, if we are going to do something like this, I think we need to look very carefully at what our opportunities are, what our priorities are, what does town need? Do we need pickleball courts in that area more than parking or more than maybe some other amenity?

So I think I'd love to see this come back at some point in the future as part of a larger plan and vision, rather than something that I feel we might be pushing prematurely just for use of some state funds, which are our funds anyways. Next, I wanted to call out, I did some cursory research. There is very low estimate, 42 pickleball courts within five miles of my home in Swampscott.

That does not include any indoor or private clubs, and I just think that this group here has to think about, can we have one of everything? Do we need one of everything? We're a very small town, we're challenged with resources, we're challenged with a mostly residential tax base that is struggling to grow, and I just think that if we're going to do this, we have to be really thoughtful about it, and I don't think that we necessarily, I haven't seen the proof to suggest that we need pickleball courts in Swampscott, and why all these impassioned players can't drive to courts that are very close locally, several within just one mile, so I'd like to see a more thoughtful approach from the town.

I'd like to put less blind faith in the hands of our leadership, and I'd ask them to come to this body with a more well-formed and detailed proposal, taking into account more of the questions and the concerns of their constituents, and really I think that pickleball courts could be a great amenity, I don't know, and I'd just like to see the town take a more thoughtful approach. I suggest we vote no on this tonight, and really come together as a town and build out that plan and vision for what we want the future of Swampscott to be, and how we're going to take advantage of those limited opportunities that are left for us. Thank you very much.

[Speaker 1] (3:06:58 - 3:35:00)
Thank you, Mr. Peleria. Before I continue, and I do commend Mr. Peleria and encourage him to become involved with the Master Plan Committee, I do want to clear up some misconceptions that exist with some members of the public and even members of this body. The notion that the select board is somehow constrained from not asking a very similar question to this body is simply incorrect.

There is a prejudice against bringing back a failed article for planning, for zoning purposes. Beyond that, the warrant is the purview of the select board, and it is our job to deliberate whatever they put in front of us and vote it down if we so choose. But to think that having this vote come back to this body is somehow a subversion of democracy, as was stated at the most recent select board meeting, I find a little challenging, especially coming from a member of this body.

That said, Ms. Hyanna Coney, I believe it is. I would ask if there's any objection to unanimous consent to calling of the question. Ms. Neumann, you have an objection, so we will instead go to a vote. All those in favor of Ms. Hyanna Coney's motion to end debate, this is a two-thirds vote. All those opposed, the motion carries, debate has ended. We now move to an immediate vote on Ms. Hilario's original motion for the recommendation of the Finance Committee, which would take steps A, B, and C, as shown on the screen. Is that still on the screen? Thank you. Appropriating these monies and accepting the park grant.

All those in favor of Ms. Hilario's motion, please raise your hand. All those opposed. All right, the chair's in doubt.

We'll move directly to a roll call vote. I will call your names. You will state yes, no, or present.

Ms. Arrington, Mr. Baldacci, Ms. Bartlett-Genest, Mr. Bombardier, Mr. Briones, Mr. Burgess, Ms. Burke, Mr. Callahan, Ms. Callahan, Mr. Contreras, Ms. Cresta, Mr. Cresta, Ms. DiPaolo, Ms. Driscoll, sorry ma'am, I'm in Precinct 1, I apologize, Ms. Driscoll-Ann, Mr. Dunn, Mr. Edwards, Ms. Ferraro. What is your order, ma'am? I have a Joseph and a Claire in Precinct 1.

Thank you for clarifying that. That is a legitimate point of order. Mr. Joseph Callahan. Thank you. Proceeding. Ms. Flannery-Pitcher, Ms. Gallagher, Ms. Green, Ms. Grishman, Mr. Grishman, Mr. Hancocks, Mr. Hartman, I know he is not in attendance, Ms. Hellman-Flatt, Ms. Hilario, Ms. Karametsopoulos, Ms. Lanzilli, Ms. LeClerc, Ms. Ledbury, Mr. Loggins, Mr. McGovern, Ms. McMahon, I know she is not in attendance this evening, Ms. Newman, Ms. O'Brien, Ms. O'Brien, I'm still in Precinct 1, Ms. Pagan. Is Reggie here? I don't see her. Mr. Page, Mr. Perry, Mr. Piccarello, Mr. Pitcher, Ms. Powell, Ms. Pulaski, Ms. Reddin, Ms. Roberts, Mr. Serino, Ms. Serino-Michelle, Ms. Serino-Julia, Ms. Speranza-Hartman, Mr. Strauss, Ms. Strauss, Mr. Tenney, Ms. Titcombe, Ms. Tweed, Mr. Wood. Moving to Precinct 2, Ms. Blonder, Mr. Blonder, Mr. Schwartz, Ms. Brandt, Ms. Bonaparte, Mr. Cassetta, Ms. Critch, Ms. Delano, Ms. Malve, Candace, Ms. Doherty, Ms. Farrer-Muir, Ms. Delano-Shawna, Ms. Farrer-Muir, Ms. Gallagher, Ms. Gambale, Ms. Guidici, Mr. Hale, Ms. Hale, Mr. Hoffman, Ms. Hoffman, I apologize, Dana, Lori Jackson, Ms. Key, Mr. MacDonald, Precinct 2, Ms. Marshall, Mr. Marshall, Mr. MacDonald-Gregg, Precinct 2, Ms. Millett, Mr. Montague, Ms. Murphy, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Pastor, Ms. Rubin, Mr. Snow, Mr. Swanstrom, Ms. Swanstrom, Ms. Tatum-Bannister, Mr. Urbano, Ms. Weiner. Moving to Precinct 3, Mr. Barden-Mark, Mr. Barden-Gerry, Ms. Boggs, Ms. Bova, Ms. Cameron, Ms. Carmen, Ms. Connor, Ms. Cooper, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier, Ms. Cormier Dewing, Mr. Frankl, Ms. Goldman, Ms. Hendrie, Ms. Hitchcock, Mr. Hitchcock, Ms. Honig, Ms. Ms. Hughes, Ms. Julian Hayes, Mr. Germa, Ms. Kelleher, Mr. Kraft, Ms. Lau, Mr. Lincoln, Ms. Martin Epstein, Mr. Mastroianni, Mr. Mulvey, Mr. Norton, Ms. Phelan, Mr. Phelan, Ms. Pierce, Ms. Rosenberg, Mr. Saunders, Mr. Schultz, Ms. Schultz, Ms. Sharpless, Ms. Spathenis, Ms. Spaulding, Mr. Spelios, Ms. Spelios, Mr. Spritz, Ms. Taradash, Ms. White, Mr. Walensky, Ms. Wright, Ms. Yang, Mr. Young, Precinct 4, we're halfway through, please be patient. Mr. Allen, Ms. Bandrewitz, Mr. Bryson, Mr. Callahan, Gary, Ms. Carangelo, I believe it's Ms. Cummings, Mr. Dansdell, Ms. Dansdell, Mr. Dawley, Ms. Day, Ms. DiCillo, Mr. DiCillo, Mr. Domalovitz, Mr. Dooley, Ms. Dooley, Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Epley, Ms. Fasella, Ms. Fasella, Reverend Farber-Robertson, Ms. Fletcher, Ms. Ford, Mr. Ford, Ms. Giontas, Mr. Giontas, Mr. Godfrey, Mr. Gordinas, Ms. Grian, Mr. Hirshberg, Mr. Hyman, Ms. Hyman, I apologize, let me try that again for the sake of clarity, Ms. Hyman, Ms. Hyman is, no, thank you, Mr. Iannacone, Mr. Jacus, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Landon, Ms. Lilak, Mr. Lord, Ms. Lord, Ms. McKean, Ms. McNerney, Ms. Miller, Mr. Mohan, Ms. Munoz, Ms. Oliver. Mr. Peika, Mr. Peelot, Ms. Peelot, Mr. Powell, Ms. Powell, Mr. Quinn, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Russo, Mr. Russo, Ms. Shear, Mr. Shear, Ms. Smullen, Mr. Sprague, Mr. Sprague, Mr. Burdoff, Ms. Caniff, now in precinct five, Ms. Caplan, Ms. Cella, Mr. Cella, Mr. Serra, Ms. Caesars, Mr. Charney, Mr. Deese, Ms. Deese, Mr. Ficken, Ms. Goodman, Mr. Grant, Ms. Greenbaum, Mr. Greenbaum, Ms. Greenbaum is not present, Mr. Greenbaum votes no, Mr. Greenfield, Ms. Greenfield, Ms. Hodgkin, Ms. Ippolito, Ms. Kyle, Ms. Lagerquist, Ms. Lagerquist again, Mr. Lorber, Mr. Lorber, Mr. Lyons, Mr. Mazzucchi, Ms. Neumann, Ms. O'Brien-Anna, Mr. O'Neill, is there a point of order? There is a question of whether or not there are Neumann's in both precincts. I don't remember calling that name again, but I will check.

There is a Neumann, Debra Neumann, in precinct one, I did call her name. I have just called Stephanie Neumann's name in precinct five. Is Debra Neumann here?

I will check the records briefly. Mr. Patios, Ms. Patios, Ms. Patz, Mr. Racky, Mr. Rodriguez, Ms. Roman Mazzucchi, Mr. Rose, Ms. Sackett, I know she is out of town, Mr. Schneider, Ms. Sheridan, Ms. Simons, Mr. Simons, Mr. Smith, Ms. Sullivan, Ms. Susserate, Mr. Talcoff, Mr. Thompson, Ms. Tucker, Mr. Van Damme, Ms. Vassilou, Mr. Weir, Ms. Weir, Mr. Whitman, Ms. Whitman, Mr. Williams, Ms. Wilson, Dr. Zerinsky, and Ms. Zoll to finish precinct five. One more to go.

Ms. Atkin, Mr. Baker, Mr. Beaupre, Mr. Beerman, Mr. Burke, Mr. Kaplan, Seth, Ms. Cassidy-Driscoll, Mr. Damati, Ms. Dembowski, Mr. Demento is not in town, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Ehrlich, Mr. Fillenworth, Ms. Friedlander, Mr. Frisch, Ms. Galazga, Ms. Gallo, Mr. Giard, Mr. Henry, Ms. Henry, Ms. Hickey, Mr. Kornitzky, Mr. Lehmann, Ms. Lehmann, Ms. Levinson, Ms. Levine, Mr. Levine, ah,任貴, No. Ms. Locke, no. Mr. Maloney, Ms. Maloney, Ms. Marshall, Ms. McDermott, no. Ms. Mislinski. Mr. O'Connell. Ms. O'Connor. Ms. O'Connor is a no. Ms. O'Hare. Mr. Polerio. Mr. Phelan Matthew. Ms. Plymate. Mr. Reen. Ms. Reese. Mr. Rottner. Ms. Rottner. Ms. Runstatler. Mr. Runstatler. Mr. Sapp. Mr. Seligman. Ms. Schutzer. Mr. Schutzer. Ms. Simmons-Wetmore. Ms. Stewart. Mr. Wilson. Mr. Winter. Mr. Zucker. We've reached the end of the roll.

Please stand adjourned, but don't leave now. Thank you for your patience. I told you I could not tell by a show of hands.

By a vote of 88 in favor and 96 opposed, the motion fails. This dispenses with all of the articles in the special town meeting warrant. I would welcome a motion to dissolve.

Is there a second? All those in favor?