[Speaker 4] (0:34 - 0:44)
Welcome to the March 20th, 2024 Select Board Meeting. This meeting is being recorded. Can everyone rise and join me in the pledge?

[Speaker 1] (0:47 - 0:57)
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[Speaker 4] (1:02 - 1:06)
I'm going to kick it off as we typically do with the Town Administrator's Report. Sean?

[Speaker 1] (1:07 - 11:55)
Thank you, David. So we have officially presented the FY25 budget. I know that this is a significant amount of information.

The Finance Committee has begun to evaluate the line item budget. Happy to follow up with the Select Board with any concerns you may have. I've already met with a member of the Board.

Certainly, this is our top policy-making document in town. Our budget is tight, even though it is up higher than it has been over the last few years. We've tried to keep the town budget at a prudent level of growth.

We have had budgets that have been at 1% and 2%. This budget presents at under 3%. It does, I think, support many of the core functions, but never easy to balance all these priorities.

I just need to share that the school budget is up over 4%, and this does place additional pressure on the general government department. At our April 3rd meeting, we are going to be making a presentation on the Hawthorne vision. This is after a year of community engagement.

We've had a number of public meetings. We had over 400 people at the Hawthorne restaurant. We've had a lot of feedback, a lot of ideas about what this project might become.

We're really excited about presenting a vision that will transform that property into one of the most iconic waterfronts that we have in the Commonwealth. Our building department has issued more permits this year than at this time last year. Folks are busy.

We have enforcement activities out on Humphrey Street. Notices of violation will be sent out shortly after if they don't comply. Our community development is working on updating some zoning articles and stuff like that later as we get into the annual town meeting warrant.

Our hotel RFP process has selected a preferred vendor with Clearview. We have weekly meetings to track the progress, and that is moving forward with due diligence phases. Our Kings Beach efforts continue to advance.

We're looking at our phase 2 investigations under an EPA consent order. We've had a number of technical meetings with the EPA and with DEP. We're out doing some dry weather storm flow sampling at up to 30 locations.

We are looking for indications that there are cross contaminations or failed connections. We are looking to do a major closed-circuit television inspection of this phase of the work. This is a significant phase just to identify illicit connections.

Slonsk is an old town. We have old pipes. We have a lot of historic neighborhoods.

We'll be going and looking at the under-drained systems and sampling as we prioritize how we address impairments under the phase 2 work. The design for this work will be completed in December of 2024, and a lot of the remediation will happen in 2025. I am working on a detailed presentation for the select board's meeting in early April.

We have staff from Kleinfelder prepared to discuss both the Kings Beach area and the Fisherman's Beach area so that we can just frequently update the public on some of the major efforts that we're going to spend on looking at. IDDE or some of the detection for failed pipes. Recreation is busy.

They have upcoming events on our calendar. We have Easter egg hunts on March 30th and a number of events, both for Pride celebration and Juneteenth in June. You can check out our recreation website or Facebook pages for updates.

Westcott Construction is moving along on Elm Place. You can drive by it and see the steel is being constructed. Updates can be found on the town website as well at swanscottma.gov, community and economic development. We are working on a number of traffic and transportation efforts for Humphrey, Forest Atlantic and Puritan intersection. This intersection is going to be critical as we move forward with our new elementary school. Sorry to say that our efforts to get a $50,000 grant were unsuccessful at town meeting.

I feel as though those are hard dollars to just give away. But certainly we've met as a team and talked about our work and the need to engage the community more effectively and talk about why we can advance some projects in some areas. I don't think we did a really effective job at town meeting explaining some of those efforts.

That said, Swanscott deserves a pickleball court and we deserve to have recreational opportunities that help people gather and connect with each other. Swanscott deserves that. We do have a public meeting to discuss some of the proposed MBTA or 3A zoning, ADU corrections, nonconforming homes and liquor establishments on March 27th, a public hearing on April 29th.

These will be presented at annual town meeting and we'll discuss those a little later tonight. Senior center is hosting a healthy aging plan program on March 23rd free of charge. We have a number of other programs and initiatives happening down at the senior center.

Lots of election work for our town clerk. We have upcoming local and presidential elections. Robocalls will be going out talking about early voting.

We have early voting at town hall for the upcoming April election starting on Saturday, April 20th, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Town hall will be open to 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 8 a.m. to noon on Friday, April 26th. Library director has been put on Nobles executive board north of Boston library exchange. This is the major library consortium that we have on the North Shore which will help negotiate contracts for Noble and shared book exchanges.

I met with Jonathan today to go over some of the plans for repairs and a vision for Swanscot library 2030. There's lots of ideas. Our library of things continue to be populated.

We did just add carbon monoxide detectors. So if you don't have a carbon monoxide detector in your house, go down and borrow one from our library. We have lots of other things in the library that folks can check out.

We have shortlisted a number of diversity, equity, inclusion consultants that will be presenting to the select board for a final selection. Several presentations will be made at a future meeting and hope to bring on a firm to help us continue to have some of these critical conversations about how we build a more diverse and equitable and inclusive community. A number of vacancies that we're looking to fill.

We have an assistant engineering position that we're still looking to fill. I'm pleased to report that I've sent off a conditional office benefits coordinator. And lastly, we have had a meeting of our public safety task force, both the police and fire chiefs and community and economic development director and assistant town administrators will help staff the committee.

We will meet bimonthly and have at least one meeting publicly to hear residents' concerns about traffic and pedestrian safety. We have a standing agenda that includes looking at traffic accidents and a number of pressure points and roadway and intersections. We will use this committee and this task force to really evaluate some of our complete street goals and some of the important recommendations that we'll be making both for a capital improvement plan and for grant applications.

I'm very pleased that our 61D recommendation passed our special town meeting. I have reached out to representatives from a number of communities that also are looking to advance changes to chapter 61B that allows golf courses to get a 75% reduction in their ad valorem tax obligation. This is nothing, again, I'm not being critical of anything going on at Tedesco.

They're doing everything that they are legally allowed to do. It's just unfair that Swampskate taxpayers have to pay 100% and folks that are allowed to enjoy an exclusive club only pay 25%. I've also updated our state representative and she is prepared to advance this home rule petition immediately.

[Speaker 4] (11:57 - 12:02)
That's my report. Thanks, Sean. Questions, comments from the board?

[Speaker 5] (12:03 - 12:24)
I have a couple questions. Go ahead. Sean, when you presented the FY25 budget last whenever, you had stated that we were looking at, we were on target of running short $222,000 for this year.

I just want to know what that's looking like now.

[Speaker 1] (12:27 - 12:54)
We're still waiting on some of the most significant costs for health insurance. And so when we put this budget out under the town charter, it doesn't give us enough time to get information back from the group insurance commission. And so we have to estimate that we might have anywhere between 5% and 8% increases.

[Speaker 5] (12:54 - 13:01)
No, but this year's budget right now. I'm talking about this year's budget right now. Are we still looking like we're going to?

[Speaker 1] (13:02 - 13:35)
Okay. Sorry. I was thinking FY25.

Yes. At this point, we are monitoring monthly expenditure and revenue, and we are looking like we're going to be able to meet budget. We have two townside departments that are running high, and we are consistently working with both of our public safety departments to try to manage some of the overtime costs.

But some of those costs are unavoidable based on some staffing challenges.

[Speaker 5] (13:37 - 13:50)
Okay. Because I do. You know what?

At some point, I do want to talk about those line items that keep hitting the wall and puts the rest of the budget line items. I agree.

[Speaker 2] (13:51 - 13:52)
I was going to ask the follow-up on that topic.

[Speaker 5] (13:52 - 14:09)
I just think that maybe we really have to look and see how we're setting those numbers to begin with. Just a whole other conversation on that. On the Hadley School, at any point on the Hadley School, as far as it being they're going through the...

[Speaker 1] (14:09 - 14:10)
Due diligence.

[Speaker 5] (14:10 - 14:25)
Due diligence. Are we going to have a conversation about whether or not we're going to put together a small committee of citizens for citizen input? That was brought up a few times by citizens.

So at what point, David, do you think we should be talking about that?

[Speaker 1] (14:25 - 14:49)
I think that's a wonderful point. I think we have to get through the due diligence phase and make sure that they're comfortable and that it looks as though we're able to move forward with their proposed project. Right.

I would say we're probably still a few weeks to months away.

[Speaker 5] (14:49 - 15:11)
Okay. I just want to keep that on everybody's radar. On King's Beach, I'd like to get an idea of where we are as far as with the budget, the $2.5 million that we allocated out of the state buffer money, and where exactly are we with the...

What is it? There was an acid study.

[Speaker 1] (15:12 - 15:12)
Yep.

[Speaker 5] (15:12 - 15:14)
And there was a study on...

[Speaker 1] (15:14 - 15:14)
Periodic acid.

[Speaker 5] (15:14 - 15:17)
Okay, a study on...

[Speaker 1] (15:17 - 16:04)
There's a bench scale test on that acid. And so they're going to... They're doing a test to determine whether or not they could advance a more detailed study.

This is a highly regulated state and federal process. And so we're working with the EPA and DEP on trying to take an incremental approach to determining whether or not this acid that we have good knowledge can kill bacteria would be sustainable for the microbiome of marine life. And so it's complicated.

I don't have the specific data, but as soon as we get some information, I'm happy to come back and present that information publicly with the team from Kleinfelder.

[Speaker 5] (16:05 - 16:15)
Okay, so at the next select board meeting, can you just give us an update of what it looks like, what the finances look like on that? And then my last question is what's happening with the dishwasher at the senior center?

[Speaker 1] (16:17 - 16:39)
Well, I had a meeting with the facilities director and the director of the senior all-ages center this past week. We discussed several different types of dishwashers, and I'm happy to put a PowerPoint presentation together to update the community on dishwashers.

[Speaker 5] (16:39 - 16:42)
Yeah, I would love a big PowerPoint presentation on dishwashers.

[Speaker 1] (16:42 - 16:43)
No, we're going to fix the dishwasher.

[Speaker 5] (16:43 - 16:48)
I also want to get home in a reasonable hour, so if you just give me an update, are we going to have a dishwasher?

[Speaker 1] (16:49 - 17:54)
Mary Ellen, I cooked a meal for 80 seniors at the senior center a couple of weeks ago. The first time I heard that we had an issue with a dishwasher was when I was there, and now we've talked about it twice at a public meeting, and I've assured you that we're working on it. And so we've got it.

We have an estimate for a dishwasher for $8,000. If we have enough tailings in the FY25 budget, we may be able to transfer some money at the end of the year and help. I'm sorry, 24 budget.

Sorry, I'm focused on two different fiscal years. We may be able to address that problem this year. There's some tailings, about $5,000 in the capital line item for kitchen repairs that is available to help address that dishwasher, so the variance is only about $3,000, but there's about $2,000 worth of contingencies that we'd need because the electrical wiring is complicated, and, you know, we're working to figure that out.

But we're on it.

[Speaker 5] (17:55 - 17:58)
Great. I can report back to seniors on that. That's it.

[Speaker 1] (17:58 - 18:06)
You know, my senior center director meets with that group as well. She could give that update as well.

[Speaker 5] (18:07 - 18:09)
I like giving them an update. They live in my neighborhood.

[Speaker 4] (18:11 - 18:12)
Doug?

[Speaker 2] (18:13 - 18:49)
Yeah, just two quick things. I'm King's Beach. Is there any update on whether or not this sampling and design process can be any speedier?

We've asked this question several times. I know Gino said he was going to, like, go and ask them. I'm not sure if we ended up actually, I know there's a million things going on, but it's like a whole year to do the design feels very frustrating.

So if we can just ask them if there's any possibility of that being speedier, unless you know definitively that it can't.

[Speaker 1] (18:49 - 19:30)
I'm happy to ask them to expedite the work. It's the due diligence involved with the closed-circuit TV. Like, they have to schedule that.

Every neighborhood, they have to run it through. The more empirical data that we can establish and the more time we take to craft that scope of work, the more, you know, effective our end results are. I'm happy to have that conversation.

I've asked those questions in the past. I feel your frustration about the time. I wish we could solve this problem.

[Speaker 2] (19:30 - 19:58)
And there may be a perfectly legitimate, you know, I think it's just good, you know, if you're going to do a fuller update next time, if you can just incorporate that just so everyone understands. This is a way that we're doing it right, and it may feel frustrating, but it has to be this way to get different seasons or, you know, whatever it is. But just to make it clear.

Last thing is, on the health department, did they take a vote about how to spend the opioid funds? Did we get a report on that that I missed?

[Speaker 1] (19:59 - 20:02)
I don't have an update, but I'll get an update on that.

[Speaker 5] (20:02 - 20:04)
They are still in the process of working.

[Speaker 1] (20:04 - 20:14)
Because they were going to take a vote. They were soliciting community feedback, and I don't believe that they've taken a vote, but I'll follow up on that. Thank you.

[Speaker 4] (20:16 - 20:17)
Anything else from the board?

[Speaker 5] (20:17 - 20:32)
I just have one more quick question. When you come back with the information on Kings Beach, can you also bring back the I&I? You were going to give us the I&I summary, and also could you also bring back a ‑‑ I thought we had said we were going to talk about the I&I with the quarterly update.

[Speaker 1] (20:32 - 20:33)
We did.

[Speaker 5] (20:33 - 20:37)
Right, okay, quarterly. And can we also have an update on the seawall admission?

[Speaker 4] (20:37 - 20:45)
Sure. Thanks. Katie, Peter, anything else?

[Speaker 7] (20:47 - 20:47)
Okay.

[Speaker 4] (20:50 - 21:49)
Thanks. We'll move on to public comment. But before, just a brief statement.

Before we move on to public comment, I want to share that on Monday night, the select board voted to release the town's response memorandum and the corresponding MCAD complaint that was the subject of a recent news article in the Lynn Item. It's the board's responsibility to protect the privacy and the rights of town employees. And in this circumstance, given that both the accuser and the accused are town employees, and especially because the MCAD complaint, but not the town response memorandum, was previously released by others to the media, the board decided the interest of all concerned would be best protected with the public disclosure of these documents.

By way of reminder, the MCAD claim is pending and will likely be so for many months to come. Both documents can now be accessed from the town website. With that, I'll open it up for public comment.

Please step to the microphone. State your name, address, and precinct if known. And you have three minutes.

[Speaker 8] (21:58 - 24:18)
Good evening. My name is Katie Arrington. I'm in Precinct 1.

I'm a select board candidate. I'd like to share why I'm running for select board. I grew up in Swampscott.

Eight years ago, my husband and I returned to raise our two children. My parents are also here. There's no place I'd rather be.

I love serving Swampscott, whether as the Clark PTO president, a teacher of religious education at St. John's, a serving town meeting member, or as a key fighter for the new elementary school. I have a plan, and it's not something I only discuss behind closed doors. Being a resident of Swampscott means something different to everyone.

This community includes parents, senior citizens, veterans, young professionals, students, and more. A shared sense of respect and desire for care for our heritage and for overseeing the change-filled future is what unites us. There are things that can and need to improve in Swampscott.

I want to help those happen. I look forward to being a strong voice for them over the next three years. This includes ensuring seniors have access to outdoor recreation.

This includes ensuring Pine Street's veterans' housing is seen through. This includes ensuring the new elementary school's budget is fiscally sound. Most importantly, this includes representing everyone, not just specific interests.

I'm running because I love Swampscott, and I want to make it better for your kids and mine. Because I'm seeing firsthand with my parents just how important it is to keep our community affordable for all ages. Because most of all, I owe a lot to Swampscott, and I have a lot to give.

I'm here to listen, not to raise my voice and criticize or condemn others. That is not who I am. Negativity, fear, and anger seem to be overtaking our town and our country.

But we owe it to our children to be the exception, not the rule, and to make the exception the new rule. Thank you for serving our community and for giving me a chance to speak.

[Speaker 4] (24:19 - 24:41)
Thank you. All right. Seeing no hands in the room or online, we'll move on.

First agenda item up is discussion and possible vote to renew the use and occupancy agreement for Anchor Food Pantry at 86 Borough Streets.

[Speaker 1] (24:44 - 25:51)
David, this is an extension of a use and occupancy agreement for one year. It is incredibly inspiring to see the number of individuals volunteer, especially our former board member, Lars Fathanis, address a huge challenge that we have in Swampscott. It's surprising to see the number of individuals who line up in front of our former police station looking for some assistance with food and food insecurity.

We have that here in this beautiful town. But we also have a number of things that are busy, and we're thinking about some long-term strategies. But I think another year extension will help us continue to support this operation and continue to address a critical need that we see in Swampscott.

[Speaker 4] (25:52 - 26:04)
Thanks, Sean. Questions from the board about the use and occupancy permit? Was the only change really the date?

[Speaker 1] (26:05 - 26:05)
It was.

[Speaker 4] (26:05 - 26:08)
The May 17, 2024 to May 17, 2025?

[Speaker 1] (26:09 - 26:10)
That's correct.

[Speaker 5] (26:12 - 26:14)
So we're just looking at one year? Yep.

[Speaker 6] (26:16 - 26:17)
Is that what Anchor asked for?

[Speaker 1] (26:21 - 26:30)
Not sure. I know that it is expiring at the end of the month, and I wanted to make sure that we did not lapse.

[Speaker 6] (26:32 - 26:58)
So again, what's in my packet here is the wrong dates. You've updated the dates of the beam through May of 2025. Is that correct?

That's correct. But you don't know whether or not they've asked? I'm just trying to – it would be nice to know whether or not they are seeking more or whether or not just having a year provides uncertainty to them that they need to constantly be planning to be in a state of flux.

[Speaker 1] (26:58 - 27:08)
Sure. That's not what I'm looking for. I can circle back around and make sure that we have that conversation.

I just wanted to make sure that we didn't lapse the lease.

[Speaker 7] (27:10 - 27:12)
So are they up in May or are they up in March?

[Speaker 4] (27:13 - 27:14)
They're up in May. They're up in May.

[Speaker 7] (27:15 - 27:31)
Okay. And we're giving them until the following May. And although they have to provide us four months' notice if they'd like to extend, do we have to provide – we just provide 30 days' notice if we terminate for other reasons?

[Speaker 1] (27:33 - 27:44)
That's how the lease is written. It's not my intent to see any kind of disruption to their activities. Sure.

[Speaker 7] (27:44 - 27:44)
Understood.

[Speaker 1] (27:45 - 28:01)
Now that the REACH Arts Building is available, I think there's a number of opportunities to kind of think about where certain functions might be appropriate.

[Speaker 6] (28:02 - 29:22)
I would just ask that you – although they're a nonprofit and not town-affiliated, they are probably presenting – giving one of the most singularly important services to our community that the town in no other way provides. And you mentioned the nights that they are open, and if you drive by and if you didn't know what it is, you would just wonder why people are standing in a line. But that's real life.

It's real life. And it's real life for a lot of our residents and people from out of town as well that use it. And I've just asked that you treat them as a vital partner, as you do in so many ways, Sean, so I'm not saying that you don't, but as you consider the future and things, that they be included actively in that dialogue to see what we can continue to do to advance that.

What they have done on their own and the neighbors of ours, the community of ours that they support, the gap would be enormous. And I agree with you about all the great things about them, so I just appreciate you keeping them as part of the conversation going forward.

[Speaker 1] (29:23 - 29:24)
Absolutely, Peter.

[Speaker 4] (29:26 - 29:27)
Would you like to make a motion?

[Speaker 7] (29:28 - 29:37)
Sure. I'd like to make a motion to approve the use and occupancy agreement as revised by the town administrator, but not the one in our packet.

[Speaker 4] (29:40 - 29:41)
Second. All in favor?

[Speaker 7] (29:41 - 29:42)
Aye.

[Speaker 4] (29:42 - 29:43)
Thank you.

[Speaker 7] (29:43 - 29:58)
Also, if you would like to donate to the Anchor Food Pantry, there are boxes in Town Hall that you can leave items. Also, they have two evenings, I believe, or one day and one evening time you can drop off donations. You can follow them on Facebook and find out those times.

[Speaker 4] (29:58 - 30:10)
Yep. Thanks, Katie. All right, we'll move on to discussion and possible vote on Wholesome NER's Aggregate Industries Northeast Region Annual Earth Removal Permit.

[Speaker 1] (30:12 - 30:50)
David, I'm recommending that we extend the permit through June 30th. This gives us time to continue to work with Aggregate and address a number of outstanding issues. I feel as though we're making progress, and the next three months will give us time to get into the annual permit for next year, and we can talk more about how we find common ground.

Comments, questions from the board?

[Speaker 6] (30:53 - 31:03)
I would make a motion to extend the current Aggregate Industry Wholesome Permit through to June 30th, 2024. Second. All in favor?

[Speaker 4] (31:04 - 31:27)
Aye. Thank you. And we'll move on to Pine Street.

We'll have a discussion and possible vote on the purchase of 12 to 24 Pine Street. It's not in my packet. I must have had an earlier version.

[Speaker 1] (31:27 - 33:00)
So we have been working over the last year to follow up with what town meeting has authorized the board to do, and that's acquire this property for the purposes of creating veterans housing. And this is a significant opportunity for Swampskid to work with our veterans, but also state agencies and really do something extraordinary. We have been able to negotiate a set of terms with the owner of Pine Street that will allow the town to see that the building will be demolished and present the town with an opportunity to hold funds in escrow until the building is certified as demolished consistent with environmental standards.

Did you state the fact that the purchase price has remained the same? Purchase prices stayed the same at $1.7 million, and the town will hold proceeds in escrow until we're able to ensure that the building is dropped.

[Speaker 4] (33:00 - 33:10)
Can you give us an idea of timing? So we take a vote this evening. Just kind of walk us through that time frame.

[Speaker 1] (33:10 - 33:57)
So if the board votes this evening, we'll work with the attorneys to ensure that we wrap up an escrow agreement consistent with expectations that have been established by the board, and we have 75 days to get the building demolished. I've been assured by the owners that they will do that as quickly as next week and mobilize well within that 75-day timeline. I would expect that we would be able to have that building demolished within the month.

[Speaker 6] (34:00 - 36:36)
I just want to say a couple of things. I want to be careful about setting expectations about timing just because we're not there yet. I think the vote tonight gives the town administrator the authority to close, and there are some documents that are still being negotiated, and so I just want to be clear on that.

I would also ask that given that work on this building could happen quickly, I feel like the Pine Street neighbors need to be updated, and we need to find a way in which to update them. They're dealing with a number of things in their community. They're dealing with new projects being proposed in the neighborhood generally.

They're continuing to deal with sewer backup issues, which have plagued the Pine Street, Curry Circle, and other streets forever. So there's just a number of things that they continue to be focused on, and I think this is going to be another thing. I think it's important to talk about why the building is being taken down as opposed to why is the town not just buying it and leaving a vacant building there, and that's because, and I welcome any of my colleagues if I'm not characterizing views correctly, I think the determination was made that it is safer and more appropriate to not maintain a vacant building that's in a state of disrepair and instead ensure that it's properly demolished, that any asbestos and other issues regarding the building are taken care of, and then ultimately the town will secure the site to make sure the site is secure and maintain that site ongoing to make sure it doesn't become blight because even though we're getting rid of the building, which in and of itself could be a liability, the site itself can be a liability and become blight if the town doesn't live up to its expectations to fence it, secure it, monitor it, and keep it clean until such time as the affordable housing for the veterans can get underway.

Previously we've mentioned publicly that it would likely not be until end of 24, into 25, end of 25 potentially for when construction would even begin. So you're potentially 18 months out from construction there. So I think it's really important.

I appreciate we're taking the building down, but vacant parcels can be as much of a problem as vacant buildings. So that's just something that can't be forgotten. I totally agree with you.

[Speaker 1] (36:36 - 37:29)
We've been in touch. We're looking at fencing companies now. I agree that we need to meet with the neighbors.

I think this action tonight will give us the signal that this is going to move forward and we can sit down with folks and schedule a neighborhood meeting and really get some input from the neighbors about some of their expectations and ways that we can actually address what generally is considered to be some blight in that neighborhood. This has been a building that has been frustrating. I've heard many, many concerns about that property, and I do think this ultimately will give us a chance to do something extraordinary both for the neighborhood but also for our veterans.

[Speaker 6] (37:29 - 37:58)
I would ask you to consider whether or not to include B'nai B'rith in that conversation, to introduce B'nai B'rith to the neighbors, but also ask that that demolition not be commenced without you first having that communication with the neighbors. For them to see this, our ratings are not as high as they used to be, so they're probably not watching tonight, but for them to find out about this or to see activity is concerning. For them not knowing this, I believe they deserve to know this.

[Speaker 1] (37:58 - 38:00)
We'll absolutely make that happen.

[Speaker 6] (38:01 - 38:01)
Thank you. Thanks.

[Speaker 2] (38:04 - 38:09)
This all feels very subdued. I mean, this has been a long process.

[Speaker 4] (38:10 - 38:10)
It has.

[Speaker 2] (38:10 - 39:01)
Let's not lose the headline here a little bit, right? So after a lot of work by the town administrator, by this board, by many other people, to find a way to actually make all of this come together, it's not necessarily all a done deal. The entire project, right, there's still many, many, many pieces to go, but this is kind of a major milestone to have kind of threaded the needle on how we can keep the lid on the price of this, work on the demolition, move it forward.

Peter's point's extremely well taken. We've been so focused on kind of getting to this point that now it's like we need to kind of really think about the plan, what's really going to happen, and to make sure people are aware of that. The whole town, especially the neighbors, of course.

So I want to make sure we're just acknowledging all of that.

[Speaker 1] (39:01 - 39:02)
Doug, I appreciate that.

[Speaker 2] (39:03 - 39:07)
And you all started this well before I got here, so I want to recognize that.

[Speaker 1] (39:07 - 40:24)
And it will outlive a lot of us. These projects do happen because of some incredible leadership. I want to thank Swampskate's veterans groups, certainly Patrick Burke and a number of the leaders, General Andrew Gale Bennett, who's the Undersecretary of Veterans Affairs, all have really played a big role in helping to envision a sense that Swampskate could get beyond the rhetoric of how we help veterans but actually do something that really addresses such a critical issue, and that's homelessness with our veterans.

And what's wonderful about this is it's not just Swampskate veterans, it's any veteran. And to me, this is such a tremendous act of appreciation, but it's been a tremendous amount of work. And these things don't happen without a board that really decides to step in and do something more than talk about these issues.

So I appreciate the time and effort that board members have spent advancing this initiative.

[Speaker 6] (40:26 - 40:27)
Mr. Chairman, can I make a motion?

[Speaker 4] (40:27 - 40:28)
Yes, you may.

[Speaker 6] (40:28 - 40:58)
I move that the Select Board vote to accept a deed for the property at 1224 Pine Street from the Cellar, Pine Street Development LLC in the form as approved by Town Council, and to sign the acceptance attached to the deed subject to entry into an escrow agreement by and among the Town of Swampskate, the Cellar, and Enterprise Bank and Trust Company, whereby inter alia the Cellar will demolish the building at the property within 75 days from the closing, failing which the Town will be paid monies remaining after payment of the outstanding balance to Enterprise Bank and the Trust Company.

[Speaker 7] (40:59 - 41:00)
Second.

[Speaker 6] (41:00 - 41:01)
All in favor?

[Speaker 7] (41:02 - 41:02)
Aye.

[Speaker 4] (41:02 - 41:02)
Aye.

[Speaker 6] (41:04 - 41:05)
Awesome. Thank you, Sean.

[Speaker 1] (41:09 - 41:22)
I do want to just recognize Mike Sweeney, our Veteran Services Officer, as well. Mike has been really helpful. Mike, we've got to get some grants, so it's easy, you know.

[Speaker 4] (41:22 - 41:42)
Yep. We've got to get grants and identifying those Swampskate residents as well as residents who can move in. It's really been a tremendous undertaking, and we've all been pushing that rock up the hill.

So we'll continue to do so and continue to do so together. So thank you.

[Speaker 2] (41:42 - 41:51)
If I may, I'm not sure if you said it, Sean, but just like the neighbors, we need to kind of reengage with the veterans now that this is taking this kind of reality step.

[Speaker 1] (41:51 - 42:12)
We'll circle back around tomorrow and we'll kind of think about the stakeholders and really making sure that we're reaching out to all of the key stakeholders. Lots of folks are going to be needed as we move forward. Projects like this, you know, they have a lot of complexities, but I do think we're on our way.

[Speaker 4] (42:13 - 42:15)
So, yeah, let's see if we can set up a neighborhood meeting.

[Speaker 1] (42:16 - 42:17)
We'll do that within the next two weeks.

[Speaker 4] (42:17 - 42:28)
Great. Thank you. All right.

And next on the agenda, we're going to have a discussion and an update on Community Preservation Act. Mr. Thompson.

[Speaker 2] (42:28 - 42:34)
All right. Well, it's a great segue, actually, talking about Pine Street and then going into CPA, right? Yes, sir.

[Speaker 1] (42:35 - 42:36)
Pop that.

[Speaker 2] (42:37 - 42:37)
What's that?

[Speaker 1] (42:37 - 42:38)
Pop that.

[Speaker 2] (42:38 - 42:39)
Yeah.

[Speaker 5] (42:39 - 42:40)
Oh, I thought you said something else.

[Speaker 2] (42:42 - 42:42)
Nope.

[Speaker 1] (42:42 - 42:49)
Stop that. Nope. I heard it.

What did somebody suggest that I said? Is this becoming a pattern?

[Speaker 2] (42:50 - 42:59)
All right. Well, that was a room clearing. That Pine Street was a room clearing maneuver.

Diane, yeah, please. Thank you.

[Speaker 7] (43:00 - 43:06)
It could be just as important a conversation as Pine Street as it could propel future Pine Streets.

[Speaker 2] (43:06 - 43:08)
Boy, just like going right to the bottom line, Katie.

[Speaker 7] (43:09 - 43:09)
There you go.

[Speaker 2] (43:09 - 43:09)
Just feeling the thunder.

[Speaker 7] (43:10 - 43:12)
There we go. I'm sorry. We're done.

That's it.

[Speaker 2] (43:12 - 45:16)
That sums it up. Excellent. Okay.

So I'm going to do a really quick. We did do a review of a presentation of this. Now it's back in August.

Time flies. And we said at that time that we had intentions of moving this initiative forward around this time. And so we're picking the ball back up.

And I want to do a quick kind of review for folks about what CPA is and then give an update on some of the more recent activity and analysis we've been doing and what's coming next. So as a quick reminder, CPA, it's a smart growth tool. It helps communities preserve open space, historic sites, affordable housing, create affordable housing, and develop outdoor recreational facilities.

It also helps strengthen local economies by expanding housing opportunities and construction jobs and supporting tourism through preservation of historic and natural resources. The law was passed in 2000. And basically the bottom line is it adds a small surcharge on local property taxes, which we'll get into the details of that.

And that's how this gets funded with some degree of match from state funds, which is really the reason why this makes so much sense to do. Those funds from local surcharge and the state funds go into a community preservation trust fund. And it has to be dedicated to these very specific three primary purposes about affordable housing, historic preservation, and open space slash recreation.

Next slide, there you go. The big point here to me is that 195 cities and towns have already approved this. 70% of Massachusetts is already benefiting from this.

So guess what? Our taxes are being used to help every other community around Massachusetts do all of these great things.

[Speaker 1] (45:16 - 45:16)
That doesn't sound right.

[Speaker 2] (45:16 - 50:29)
It's been nice for us to be so generous, but it's time for us to actually share in the wealth. So and there's been, you know, thousands of open space acres preserved and projects and 10,000 housing units, major, major, major impact from this program over the last 24 years. As I said earlier, this come the funding comes from two sources.

First is this surcharge on property taxes. It can be up to 3%. That's 3% of the property tax bill, not 3% of the assessed value.

Just to be clear, and we'll go through some more detailed numbers in a minute. And then there's the state match, which varies year by year. Can vary from 20%, 30%.

There were days way back when, when it was much higher than that. But because so many other people are involved, so many other communities, the percentage is more usually in that 20 to 30% range. So this slide gives more detail about how this surcharge works.

And I'm going to go down to the second bullet for the five people that are watching. And so if your home's assessed at $500,000, and it's very common to have a residential exemption for the first $100,000 to make this even more equitable. So you're really talking about the assessment being on the $400,000, the net $400,000 multiplied by a tax rate.

You get a estimated tax bill of $4,600. Then you take 3% of that $4,600. And what that comes out to is about $141.

If you were at a 3% level, and if your home was assessed to begin with at $500,000. Now you'll see when we get to our numbers on SwampScout, the average assessment is much more like $900,000. And so the biggest question really in all of this is, what's the surcharge level?

Next slide, I think just kind of fairly repetitive to what we've already talked about. The one new item that's introduced here is that once you get to the process, and I'll talk about the process. But once it's approved, a community preservation committee gets set up amongst citizens.

And they make recommendations. There's a 75-page bulletin from the Department of Local Services of rules you have to follow and amounts you have to disperse each year. And it's up to that committee to make recommendations to the select board and then to town meeting in order to actually make disbursements.

Next slide, thank you. So one fundamental piece of this is that each year, whatever the funds raised are locally and from the state match, you have to dedicate 10% to each of the three core areas. Open space recreation, historic preservation, and community housing.

There's technicalities about whether or not you actually have to spend it each year, but it has to be kind of earmarked for specific projects, etc. 10%, so it's only 30% out of the 100%. After that, the community has the flexibility to allocate in one year.

They may decide that there is a really pressing and great opportunity for affordable housing. You can actually, in total, dedicate 80%, the 10%, plus the remaining 70% to that one initiative. It could be that the committee recommends, nope, we got 30% here, 40% there, 30% there.

So each year, it gets adjudicated, basically, by the committee depending on what the needs are. Again, this is all done by, after this gets all passed, by this community preservation committee, which I'll say a little bit more about in the next slide. But in order to get to passage, there are two things that need to happen.

You need a majority vote at town meeting, which is why we're talking about this now, kind of in preparation for Maytown meeting. And then, assuming that folks see this as a prudent way to engage in funding the projects, of which we're doing much of already, then it needs to go to the November ballot. And a majority of the voters at that election need to also approve it.

After that point, then you go into implementation and set up the committee. And basically, you know, it takes a while to get this into the tax system and then actually start collecting monies. So we're probably not really talking about funds flowing into these types of projects until 2026 at a minimum.

Okay?

[Speaker 4] (50:29 - 50:40)
We're talking about funds that would flow, the matching funds would start to match come fiscal year, come actual year 26, fiscal year 27, right?

[Speaker 2] (50:43 - 51:28)
There are some decisions we still need to make to actually fine-tune that, but yes, basically somewhere in that range. So this is, you know, we all know of, and, you know, not to let it slide by, I mean, it could be Pine Street. It could have been the Pittman House.

It could have been the Glover House. It could have been Archer. It could have been Hawthorne.

Blythwood. Blythwood. It could be all of those projects that we know we've already taken on, and there's many others that people may be thinking about, that we might be planning for.

We might not even know about at this point, right, because this is a long-term planning, but it basically says we don't have to be taking it out of capital or free cash or some other source. We're going to be saving in advance. We're going to be prudent planning and letting the state pay for some of it instead of us paying for all of it.

[Speaker 1] (51:29 - 53:34)
I think it's also just helpful to share that over the last, really, seven years, we haven't been taxing up to the two-and-a-half levy, and so we've built up $8 million worth of reserve levy capacity, and we've demonstrated and proven that we're building sound and steady budgets. We're not really focused on trying to tax to the fullest extent on a local level, and so for folks that are concerned about long-term financial impact, we're constantly trying to figure out how we keep Swampskate at that affordable level. Every year over the last six years, we've had a meeting in the fall, special town meeting, to actually talk about the tax levy and to use the town's financial position to really support prudent financial decisions that help keep Swampskate affordable.

Having a CPA will only help us be that much more affordable because we can do all of the things that we ultimately had to support with 100% of local taxes and finally get some of the broader-based support from state funding programs. We're buying open space 100% on local taxes, looking at affordable housing with limited dollars on a local level, and we're looking at historic preservation, and we're not getting ahead of that. We're always catching up.

This gives us a chance to really check the box in these three critical areas as well as most of the Commonwealth communities. There are only 351 cities and towns, and about 200 of them have adopted the CPA.

[Speaker 2] (53:35 - 56:59)
It seems well proven out. We're definitely not on the bleeding edge at this point. Next slide, please.

I'm not going to go through all this because this is a little bit down the road when this would actually be formed, but this is the Community Preservation Committee and what their tasks are. It's probably like 15 pages in the required documentation about all the things that they need to do. This summarizes it, but it's a very thoughtful process that they're required to go through to assess opportunities in general and then specifically for specific projects and then make those recommendations to the select board after review by town staff.

The next slide talks about what's required, state required, for the Community Preservation Committee, five to nine members. Certain people or representatives have to be on the committee, Conservation Commission, Historical Commission, Planning Board, Board of Park Commissioners. We don't exactly have that here, but probably from Open Space and Recreation, and Housing Authority.

In order to start thinking through some of the decisions that need to be made, we've had kind of an ad hoc group starting to get together and look at this. And the next slide, Diane, shows who... We've had just a couple meetings to kind of start going through these regulations and what we need to decide on.

We also had some great support from someone from the Community Preservation nonprofit that helps communities all over the state work through this and think through it, and they've given us some great advice and some analysis that I'll bring up in a minute. But we basically had representatives from the different committees that would be affected by the CPA. And, you know, I should...

David got this going a lot earlier on. He asked me to kind of help pick up the ball here. But, you know, we've been chatting with these folks, getting their input and thoughts about whether or not this seems like a prudent thing to do at this point.

And then what are the specifics in terms of surcharge level, exemptions, and effective date? So we've had a couple conversations with this group, and we'll probably need a couple more before circling back to the Select Board over the next month with, you know, any further specific thoughts. But today is a day to kind of lay this out for everybody to know exactly where we're at, to get feedback about the information, especially the analysis that maybe you can bring up.

If you can switch to the other document now, Diane, for the moment. Pause.

[Speaker 1] (57:03 - 57:11)
That's the wheel that nobody wants to see. There you go.

[Speaker 2] (57:11 - 58:06)
All right. Hopefully people can read that. So this was an analysis done by this community preservation nonprofit that does this, as I mentioned, across the state.

And they've used our specific data here. And I'll walk this through just in case it's not, you know, clear to everyone or it's hard to read. So they've used our tax rate, and they've taken different increments for property value, property tax value.

And what the, you know, estimated property tax would actually be. So I'm going to go over to the average Swampscot single-family home. Property value is $896,000.

Again, that's the average. It gets skewed because of prices at the top end. So the median is probably lower than that.

I think, Sean, you were going to kind of pull that information together.

[Speaker 1] (58:06 - 58:11)
Yep. I just actually received it today. I'll be able to send it out tomorrow.

[Speaker 2] (58:11 - 59:09)
Okay. Great. So using the average, which all these numbers hopefully will be a little bit higher than what people would really experience when we look at it.

But $10,000 for property tax. And I'm going to encourage us to jump down to kind of the bottom set of rows because this encompasses the very standard $100,000 residential property tax exemption scenario, which just about every community uses. It brings a lot more equity to the situation, right?

So even at that point, if you did a 1% surcharge on the average $900,000 assessed value, you'd be paying $92 more per year to go into this fund. Okay? Yep.

Everyone follow that?

[Speaker 9] (59:09 - 59:10)
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 2] (59:10 - 59:19)
And then you can go down the column there. We could choose to go higher, 1.5%, 2%, 3%, and you see what the amounts are at those levels.

[Speaker 7] (59:20 - 59:27)
Doug, does that percentage stay with us through our participation in the CPA? It doesn't vary.

[Speaker 2] (59:27 - 59:38)
It can vary, but you have to go back through the process of town meeting vote and a election, town election, to actually change that type of piece of the puzzle.

[Speaker 7] (59:39 - 59:42)
And of the communities that participate, what's the average percentage?

[Speaker 2] (59:43 - 59:48)
In the beginning, everyone was doing 3% because they were getting, like, 100% match.

[Speaker 7] (59:48 - 59:48)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (59:49 - 1:01:01)
Because now the matches are lower. Chase said most people are doing 1 to 1.5. Okay. And particularly because Swampscott has a higher starting property value, that that was his kind of sense of it.

That is the most fundamental thing that we need to decide. The percentage. Yes.

Yep. And you can see then to the right what type of revenue is generated with each of those percentages. So if you take all of there's a couple other exemptions that we're not kind of going into detail here.

There's about commercial exemption and whether or not you just give them the $100,000 exemption or they're completely exempt or not or whatever. You can see that between $493,000, $490,000, $488,000, those other exemptions don't really amount to much of anything. So we can get into the details of that.

But fundamentally, once you take that $100,000 exemption, you're talking about for 1% generating something like $500,000 for the fund from local revenues.

[Speaker 7] (1:01:01 - 1:01:02)
This doesn't include a match.

[Speaker 2] (1:01:02 - 1:01:43)
Exactly. So then you add maybe another $100,000, $150,000 depending on what the match is that year. So this isn't peanuts.

Right. Everyone contributes hopefully a relatively modest amount and you generate actually a fairly significant fund. And remember, this is every year.

So you don't have to spend it every year and you can start to build stuff up. And so then you're talking about after a couple years potentially like you may have a million, $2 million actually that you can do something with. You may choose to do smaller projects on a regular basis.

That's all up to the committee and whoever is on the select board and everything at that point in time.

[Speaker 4] (1:01:44 - 1:01:50)
But you can also bond. You can also bond against this using this as future revenue. Absolutely.

[Speaker 7] (1:01:51 - 1:01:51)
His eyes just lit up.

[Speaker 4] (1:01:52 - 1:03:05)
As well. No, I mean, to me this is so exciting for those as a member of the Affordable Housing Trust for two years. There was no recurring revenue there.

That committee, that group had to be so judicious with their funds simply because they didn't know when that next check was coming. So I think by giving them a recurring stream of revenue, that allows them to go out and do more. The historic commission, preservation of historic properties.

I mean, these are- I'm not sure if we have any opportunities in that regard. Maybe they'll come along. Maybe they'll come along at some point.

But, yeah, I mean, there's just no- There was no- There were no funds available. So this gives them a chance to really do some good in our community and to do it in a way that, in my opinion, isn't very much. And it really allows- This minimal investment allows us to really look forward for the next 10, 20, 30 years to make investments in our community, which we're already making.

Right. So, thank you.

[Speaker 7] (1:03:05 - 1:03:29)
Doug, can you let us explain one more time? Ultimately, because it's not really 100% clear to me right now. There's a committee.

The committee is made up of a bunch of members from other committees. They make a recommendation to the select board. We approve or disprove of the disbursement of the funds.

So is it ultimately a select board decision, or is it ultimately a committee decision?

[Speaker 2] (1:03:30 - 1:03:35)
I think it has to go back to town- To town meeting. To town meeting. Yes, yes, yeah.

[Speaker 9] (1:03:35 - 1:03:35)
Great.

[Speaker 2] (1:03:37 - 1:03:41)
Not back to the ballot, but it has to go back to town every year. Russ, yes.

[Speaker 4] (1:03:42 - 1:04:12)
Yeah, I mean, Nahant's in this process right now. So Nahant's talking with- There's been articles in the Lynn item recently. Nahant's community preservation committee continues preparing resident-proposed grant articles ahead of their town meeting in May.

So, yes, that's correct. They have a pool of funds, and they're looking at- Their CPC is looking at how to distribute those funds and bringing those ideas to town meeting, and they are reserving balances. And they have a 3% match, just for point of reference.

[Speaker 2] (1:04:16 - 1:04:22)
Any more questions on the- And I can't see if there's anybody online at all.

[Speaker 6] (1:04:22 - 1:04:23)
I just want to shut this down.

[Speaker 2] (1:04:23 - 1:04:23)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:04:30 - 1:05:09)
It's just probably helpful to share that we've asked all the land use boards, planning board, and boards and committees that may benefit from these funds to actually schedule an agenda item to publicly speak about this opportunity and really get the word out. It's not an insignificant conversation, but certainly one of the most significant opportunities for a lot of the land use boards and committees that focus on these three key areas.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:10 - 1:05:44)
Yeah, and I would build on that, which is, you know, anybody that's interested in this from the public, you know, feel free to reach out to, you know, to Sean, to me, to anybody. Basically, you know, we had, you know, folks get together that, you know, were easy to identify, to kind of start talking through this. But anyone that's interested in participating in these conversations, welcome that input and engagement over the next month so that we get kind of a robust perspective and we're, you know, making these decisions thoughtfully about, you know, particularly about the surcharge.

[Speaker 5] (1:05:47 - 1:05:49)
Maybe you should have those in public so people can watch them.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:50 - 1:05:51)
Sure, yeah.

[Speaker 5] (1:05:51 - 1:06:07)
So last time we talked about this, I had asked for a breakdown of what the return was from the state to communities. Can we get that? Sure.

195 communities, what the breakdown has been over the last five years. Can we also have a breakdown of— Just, Mary Ellen, just make sure I'm understanding.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:07 - 1:06:08)
Breakdown how? Like how they spent it?

[Speaker 5] (1:06:08 - 1:06:15)
What is the percentage? No, just what is the percentage. Like what was the— So what did they get?

So for every community over the last five years— What the match has been.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:15 - 1:06:16)
What the match has been. Okay.

[Speaker 5] (1:06:16 - 1:06:30)
And then the other thing is in these categories, can we get a summary of how much money we have spent in these categories over the last five years?

[Speaker 9] (1:06:30 - 1:06:31)
Yep.

[Speaker 5] (1:06:32 - 1:06:38)
I think that'll help show how much we've already spent. Yep.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:40 - 1:06:41)
Good idea.

[Speaker 5] (1:06:41 - 1:07:16)
And then the last concern that I would have is if we're not taxing to the— our financial policy of how we're taxing or how we're running the budget, we're not taxing to the max. Is there a point that we're going to have to tax to the max or are we prepared to stay with not taxing to the max? Because if we're going to say, okay, let's add another 3% onto our bill and then we're going to add some more taxing up to the 2.5, what does that do?

[Speaker 2] (1:07:16 - 1:07:25)
Okay. I just want to be—I have to jump in and make sure that— saying that 3% and that 2.5 in the same sentence makes them seem like they're the same type of thing.

[Speaker 9] (1:07:25 - 1:07:26)
You're right.

[Speaker 2] (1:07:26 - 1:07:27)
They're very different, right?

[Speaker 1] (1:07:27 - 1:07:29)
Let me answer it a little differently.

[Speaker 2] (1:07:29 - 1:07:35)
So the 2.5, we could—2.5 of assessed value, we could basically go up to that, right?

[Speaker 5] (1:07:35 - 1:07:35)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:07:35 - 1:07:37)
We only go to 2, right?

[Speaker 5] (1:07:38 - 1:07:41)
What we're really saying here— Do we go to 2 or do we go a little bit over 2?

[Speaker 2] (1:07:41 - 1:07:43)
2 plus new growth. 2 plus new growth.

[Speaker 5] (1:07:43 - 1:07:43)
Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (1:07:44 - 1:07:46)
Or there are some exemptions to the 2%.

[Speaker 1] (1:07:46 - 1:07:53)
There's a simple answer to this. It all depends on how you manage your contracts. It all depends on how you manage your contracts.

[Speaker 6] (1:07:53 - 1:07:56)
Wait, wait, wait. You're going to a different place. He's answering a different question right now.

[Speaker 9] (1:07:56 - 1:07:56)
Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 6] (1:07:57 - 1:08:00)
You're answering her question.

[Speaker 2] (1:08:00 - 1:08:10)
He's trying to make sure that we're— Yes, yes. Because it's so easy to slip into thinking like, Oh, we're going from like $11.74 and we're adding 3% on that.

[Speaker 9] (1:08:11 - 1:08:11)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:08:11 - 1:08:36)
We're not, right? First, you got to do the first math. You get the result of that, and then you take 3% of that smaller number.

And that's why you only end up with—you think about it like you're starting with a tax bill of $10,000, and you're adding just $100 to it. So I just wanted to make sure people aren't going down that path because it's easy to go down that path.

[Speaker 5] (1:08:36 - 1:08:59)
I think that's good that you made that clear. That's good I made that question. So now you did have a— And then the other side of it is—no, just to—because these are questions that are going to come up.

Yeah. The $245 versus where we're at now, I think we need to have a conversation about that, especially with our budgets.

[Speaker 7] (1:09:00 - 1:09:35)
I think that I agree that we need to have a conversation about that, but I sort of thought about it in the inverse. Like, if we are going to have to increase taxes, we are going to have to increase them for more necessary reasons than the items we might be spending money on in this package. While I feel like some of these items are necessary, I think we've shown through the years that a lot of these items haven't had large dollar amounts spent on them.

I don't think—correct me if I'm wrong, Doug or somebody else, but how much have we spent in historic preservation in the last 10 years?

[Speaker 2] (1:09:37 - 1:09:38)
Maybe $30,000.

[Speaker 7] (1:09:38 - 1:10:17)
There you go. So they're the first things that get cut from—they're luxuries in some instances. And if we don't make a space for them at the table, we're never going to have them, especially coming into a season where we might be thinking, are we going to have to increase or are we looking at that financial guardrails a little bit differently just based on our budget, which doesn't include any of these luxuries?

We're not going to have as much room to make these things happen as we have had over the last seven years. So if we don't make space at the table in a different way, we might lose out on opportunities that are coming before us in the next 10 years.

[Speaker 2] (1:10:18 - 1:11:04)
So— I think also—I think it's a great question. It's one Sean knows I was just asking him the other day. And I think we'll be moving through this process.

At the same time, we'll be moving through the budget process, which will start to give us some deeper visibility into— Sean made the numbers work. They balanced what's been proposed. But what's below the surface?

What didn't get funded? Are we really missing out on something? Are we really kind of building in a structural deficit in a way, even though we've kind of made it work this year?

What's being pushed off or not? And so that's what I want to know. It sounds like you want to know.

[Speaker 1] (1:11:05 - 1:12:29)
Yeah. I don't think I have a department head that would not ask for more. And so it's always a balance.

And, Katie, I think you make some really good points about, you know, we have been so anemic in so many of these key areas that it's just not fair for Swampskate not to be investing in some of these areas. Like, there are some real—you know, real challenges with affordable housing. There's really—we're in a really difficult spot with that.

And if we were to really have a more focused conversation and really come back and really answer Mary Ellen's questions and really get into it, like, what would a future look like if we actually had, you know, ten years' worth of funding out of the CPA? And what would that town look like? And how would we, you know, be able to address, you know, some of those critical deficiencies in a way that relied on some broader-based dollars while we keep a steady hand on all these other responsibilities?

I think the hardest thing to do for any city or town is to find that balance. And that's what we've been trying to do. I know that there's always an area that we could spend a little more or somebody could say, hey, that's not quite enough.

But it's, you know, it's trying to balance it all.

[Speaker 9] (1:12:31 - 1:12:31)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:32 - 1:13:11)
So just to kind of lay out the next steps here, probably a couple more meetings of this little ad hoc group. And, again, anyone else that, you know, wants to join? And we'll, you know, find a way to kind of make sure they're ‑‑ find a way we'll make them public.

And circle back, if not the next meeting, the following select board meeting with the recommendation and for us to kind of discuss and finalize on what the, you know, surcharge and exemptions, a couple things that we really have to decide that then, you know, get funneled into the warrant article.

[Speaker 4] (1:13:13 - 1:13:33)
Thanks, Doug. Yeah, I think if this is ‑‑ if we're going to be discussing the annual town meeting warrant, this is going to be a recurring topic. So as updates come from these regular meetings, we can certainly update the board as well as the public.

Thanks. Additional questions, comments?

[Speaker 7] (1:13:34 - 1:13:42)
Maybe we could share on the town's Facebook page the information on the upcoming meetings. That might be a way to get people engaged.

[Speaker 4] (1:13:42 - 1:14:13)
Great idea. Thanks, Doug. You're welcome.

Yeah, thank you. All right, well, we're going to move on to overview of the annual town meeting warrant. Okay, and we have Pete Kane, who's joining us via Teams to help us walk through the annual town meeting warrant.

Good evening, board. Oh, voice of God.

[Speaker 3] (1:14:13 - 1:21:43)
Sorry about that. So you should have received the draft. I'll go through the list of the articles that we support to include in the warrant.

If you want, we can just jump to the table of contents, which is on the fourth page. As always, our annual town meeting is open with a report of town boards and committees. That is typically followed by an approval of prior fiscal year bills, which is Article II, followed by the appropriation for the FY25 budget.

And then we go into a few additional financial articles, the first being establishing a retention and recruitment stabilization fund, approving transfer for water and sewer enterprise funds, which is those are standard articles. There's also the approval for the transfer of free cash for opioid settlement. I need to work with the director of finance and administration on the wording of that particular one.

I think that one needs to be adjusted. Eight is an article to amend the general bylaw by creating a revolving fund for Andrews Chapel Restoration Committee. Nine is to amend the existing revolving fund for the Historical Commission in order to increase their allowance on the amount that they can spend from their funds.

And although it's not in your draft, I currently have... Do you want me to share my screen, actually? I have, as Article 10, the Adoption of Community Preservation Act, I'm trying to pull together the actual language, but I believe this would probably occur in a financial article.

But, of course, this can be moved to any other location in the warrant. Two standard capital articles. There are the appropriations for Chapter 90 roadway improvements, as well as any recommended capital projects.

We do that in one article with the list of capital projects. There are four zoning bylaw amendments. The first is a minor correction to the ADU bylaw.

It was an edit that was missed last year when we approved the ADU bylaw update. It's simply just a house cleaning, making sure we remove one bullet point that no longer makes any sense in relation to the updated bylaw. The second one is an amendment to...

With regards to liquor establishments, we have a section in the bylaw that restricts certain uses, like filling stations, gas stations, service stations, garages, and liquor establishments from 200 feet from any park, school, library, or church. We are looking to remove licorice establishments from that, because in such a small community as ours, we have so many parks and school buildings and churches throughout the community that are near or directly adjacent to business districts, that this limitation continually requires businesses that want to open up and have liquor at their restaurants go through a special permit process simply because it's near a park. Because again, we have only limited business zones, so it's only restricting or removing the liquor establishments from that bylaw and doesn't amend anything else.

Article 15 is a zoning bylaw amendment with regards to nonconforming structures, specifically nonconforming single family and two family structures. The current bylaw makes it a little bit difficult for the building commissioner to make determinations whether a nonconforming structure, which would be a house that is on a property where it's already within its setback, and a setback is how close it is to its property line. So such as a dimensional setback where maybe the lot is undersized, it doesn't have as much square footage as the zoning district requires, and so it creates a complexity when a family needs to do an update or an addition to a home.

And very often it goes back to the zoning board. Additionally, our current bylaw is in conflict with MGL. So this proposal is to clean up that process, but also ensure that we are not in conflict with Mass General Law.

Finally, the major zoning bylaw amendment is the request to adopt a MBTA 3A zoning or MBTA community's multifamily overlay zoning. You've seen the maps that the select board, you had approved last fall with the three areas, one across from the high school, the B2 district there, as well as a B3 and B4 resident. While they are multifamily, but they're B3 and B4 zone next to Benning Square.

We are looking at adopting in order to bring the community, Swampscott in compliance with the MBTA section 3A legislation. And what this does is makes multifamily buy right where multifamily is currently special permit in all of these properties. So we're not really adjusting the use, but we're making it a buy right or as a right process that would still allow for a site plan review by the planning board.

And for all four of these articles, we will be holding a information session next week, next Wednesday night. And then finally, the two miscellaneous articles that we have in here are the first one is an acceptance of easements for public parking and sidewalks at Elm Place. Through the Elm Place approval process and their comprehensive permits, there are parts portions of land that need to be accepted in as part of the public right-of-way and public parking and sidewalk area.

And so this is simply the boards or the board, the town's right to accept those as public areas. And then finally article 18 is an appropriation for a land and water conservation fund grant. This is a grant that has been sought in order to design and construct trails within the Archer street, the conservation and open space land that the town recently acquired.

So it's utilizing town meetings approval on purchasing that land for passive recreation. And we are now going and we believe we should be awarded that grant by May town meetings so that we can request the appropriation. Then similar to other grants, it's a reimbursement grant, which means we have to appropriate the funds first, and then we will be reimbursed.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:45 - 1:21:48)
Is that a hundred percent reimbursement or portion?

[Speaker 3] (1:21:49 - 1:21:50)
I believe it's a portion.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:52 - 1:21:52)
Okay.

[Speaker 3] (1:21:55 - 1:21:57)
Sorry. We'll confirm.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:57 - 1:22:08)
Yeah. At least in my version, there was a different article 16. About seawalls that go away.

[Speaker 1] (1:22:08 - 1:22:24)
Did go away. The chair of the conservation commission more time. And we want to make sure that we get that right.

There aren't many communities that have that requirement. So we're working with town council to perfect it.

[Speaker 2] (1:22:25 - 1:22:28)
Meaning we know it definitely won't be on this warrant or we're not sure.

[Speaker 1] (1:22:29 - 1:22:36)
Definitely won't be on this warrant. It's not going to come with a recommendation. And I want to make sure our con comm is a hundred percent behind it.

[Speaker 4] (1:22:39 - 1:22:46)
Doug, we've had three or four special town meetings in the last year. So, you know, in a couple of months, who knows, it could be. We'll have another one.

[Speaker 7] (1:22:47 - 1:22:49)
Let's not will that to existence.

[Speaker 4] (1:22:53 - 1:22:56)
Is that anything else, Pete?

[Speaker 3] (1:22:58 - 1:23:11)
That's all of the current articles. Certainly once the board opens the warrant And you receive any further, we can certainly all be sure to add these. And we can continue to review these with the board.

[Speaker 4] (1:23:12 - 1:23:21)
Understood. And Pete, just do we do we have a citizen's petition in hand already? Not that I am aware of.

[Speaker 6] (1:23:21 - 1:23:27)
I just have a placeholder in case there is one. There can't be for the annual deadlines passed.

[Speaker 4] (1:23:28 - 1:23:36)
Well, I think there may have been one that was that was provided previously. And I just I just want to make sure that if it was provided and it had.

[Speaker 1] (1:23:36 - 1:23:42)
I'll check with town clerk's office. But I haven't been noticed.

[Speaker 5] (1:23:43 - 1:23:46)
What time is that planning board meeting for the warrant articles?

[Speaker 3] (1:23:49 - 1:23:59)
It's it is being done by the office community development. And it is next Wednesday night at 7 p.m. In the high school and be 129.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:06 - 1:24:35)
There are a few other articles that we're currently considering. And so I think this will be a reoccurring agenda item. And we'll just continue to step through some articles as we get this warrant ready for our annual meeting.

So we're not opening it formally tonight. It's not my recommendation. We open it tonight.

I think we can open it up at our next meeting.

[Speaker 5] (1:24:35 - 1:24:49)
And so I would like to see an article put in around. We received an email from a citizen about the leaf blower. Yeah.

We did.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:49 - 1:25:00)
We're looking at that right now. Absolutely. Hopefully we'll prepare that and put it in the warrant and we'll talk about it at our next meeting.

Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:25:00 - 1:25:13)
I have some thoughts to share about that. But we do it. I'll just say right now we do have to realize that it's just actually going into effect for the first time in May.

Really just to remember that.

[Speaker 5] (1:25:16 - 1:25:21)
Yeah. So what's the plan here? We we're not talking about this tonight.

We just have the information.

[Speaker 4] (1:25:23 - 1:25:37)
You can certainly have a conversation about any of the articles this evening. It was really just meant to provoke a discussion. And we were going to open the warrant at our first meeting in April.

[Speaker 5] (1:25:38 - 1:25:49)
Okay. So this one here that's being sponsored by the select board that we're just looking at for the first time or we're hearing anything about it. Establish a retention and recruitment stabilization fund.

What is that about?

[Speaker 1] (1:25:49 - 1:25:52)
You know, we've had retain us.

[Speaker 9] (1:25:52 - 1:25:52)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:25:53 - 1:26:59)
You know, we've we've talked about ways that we can help stabilize the annual operating budget. Both the town and the school district have had significant impacts with retirements. These retirements are based on contractual terms.

They can have significant unexpected impact on on the town's operating budget. So we want to recommend that we use a portion of the town's free cash to help just stabilize the operating budget from changes. Unexpected changes in staffing.

We're a small town. These can have a, you know, one retirement of a police officer could be 30 to $50,000. I mean, there's some significant costs associated with tenure.

And we're doing our best to try to insulate the operating budget from that type of impact. We were also considering. Maybe I'm going a little bit too into.

[Speaker 5] (1:26:59 - 1:27:03)
Didn't we already do this last year?

[Speaker 1] (1:27:03 - 1:27:28)
Yes. You know. So.

We do. I'm just, you know. Providing the rationale.

So. This is intended to actually.

[Speaker 2] (1:27:29 - 1:27:31)
Are you thinking about salary reserve?

[Speaker 5] (1:27:32 - 1:27:36)
I'm not. I'm just trying to find out what this is. Yeah, I know we did something last year.

[Speaker 2] (1:27:36 - 1:27:39)
You think we did a warrant article like this last year?

[Speaker 5] (1:27:39 - 1:27:40)
We did a warrant.

[Speaker 7] (1:27:41 - 1:27:46)
We did a warrant article related to retirement.

[Speaker 5] (1:27:48 - 1:28:02)
Right. So if an employee is retiring early. Right.

And the schools put their retirement into their budget. I'm still waiting on those numbers too.

[Speaker 7] (1:28:02 - 1:28:22)
Because they have to under their contract. Give notice of retirement. But the other.

The other. Don't have to do that. Correct.

Which is what makes for that flux. Mm-hmm. From time to time.

This is more about. I mean. If I'm reading the article explanation correctly.

But this is more about recruiting to fill the vacancies. Or retaining people to.

[Speaker 2] (1:28:23 - 1:28:25)
I think your example threw us a little bit.

[Speaker 7] (1:28:25 - 1:28:25)
Yeah, yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:27 - 1:29:25)
So let me give you a better example. You know, if we're. We just had to recruit a number of.

Public safety. Physicians. Just that process alone.

You know, the recruitment. Test taking and. Sending employees to the academy.

It does add significant. Cost to the operating budget. So when you brought up earlier.

Cost to. You know, the town for overtime and other things. You know, this.

Retention, you know, helping to negotiate. You know. Strategies to retain.

Employees. You know, from. Other communities that are looking to recruit.

Our staff. You know, this gives us the ability to have a few more tools. To support that retention.

And offset some of those. Costs that might impact. The town budget.

[Speaker 2] (1:29:25 - 1:29:37)
Yeah. So two, let me just be like more concrete. Maybe at least for myself about that.

One is like. Do we not have enough in the regular budget? To do the right type of recruitment.

In general. You don't have to answer this off.

[Speaker 1] (1:29:37 - 1:29:38)
Not always.

[Speaker 2] (1:29:39 - 1:29:39)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:29:39 - 1:29:40)
Not always.

[Speaker 2] (1:29:40 - 1:30:23)
Because that can fluctuate. Right. So that's what you're getting at.

Like, you know, in general, we think we have one or two. Senior employees that we have to recruit for each year. And while this year we have four.

And now we don't have enough. So that would be a concrete thing to kind of. Make more sense to me.

And the second would be. Well, we have someone that's left, but now we're going. And that person's salary was.

$85,000 and now we have an opportunity. So therefore in the budget, we only have $85,000, but now we have an opportunity to get someone for a hundred thousand, but. We get in a jam.

And so now this gives you a little bit more flexibility to say. You know, actually I have a little bit of. Room there to make this good choice.

[Speaker 1] (1:30:23 - 1:30:25)
Both of those are excellent.

[Speaker 5] (1:30:25 - 1:30:26)
So this would be like a salary reserve.

[Speaker 2] (1:30:27 - 1:30:32)
You know, examples. Right. But then, so then.

Differ from the salary reserve.

[Speaker 5] (1:30:34 - 1:30:37)
Then you take the salary reserve and you put it in other line items within the budget.

[Speaker 1] (1:30:38 - 1:31:36)
Salary reserve. We have usually have a pretty good idea of how we're going to use those dollars. Okay.

And so there's a, there's a budget that goes with the salary reserve. That helps us anticipate. Contracts that were.

We're going to be renegotiating during that fiscal year. It's the unknowns that frankly, this. Fund would help us address.

And again, we, we see that from time to not every year, but maybe, you know, when that does happen. We have a dramatic, you know, we had the great resignation. Just a couple of years ago, we started dramatic shift in the workforce and it's happened across the country.

We were impacted by that as well. And I. I think if we had a few more dollars that we could have accessed.

We may have been able to address a few. Situations because, you know, we, we had some. Staff that were clearly able to go in.

And get significant. Higher remunerated positions.

[Speaker 7] (1:31:39 - 1:32:09)
I think the other concrete example that. Just the one that you didn't mention. But I think it's covered by this would be.

If. Somebody was offered a job at a higher value. But we wanted to keep them here.

And we didn't have the funds in the budget to do so. So to either. Market correct their salaries so that they would stay or have some.

Funding incentives. To keep good employees from leaving town.

[Speaker 4] (1:32:18 - 1:32:29)
Additional thoughts. All right. Thanks, Pete.

Thanks, Sean. Right. Thanks.

[Speaker 1] (1:32:30 - 1:32:34)
We will be updating this and. Putting it on our next agenda.

[Speaker 4] (1:32:34 - 1:32:53)
Awesome. All right, we'll move on. The approval of the consent agenda.

The consent agenda is designed to expedite the handling of routine and miscellaneous business to the board. Select board may adopt the entire consent agenda with one motion. At the request of any board member, any item may be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda for discussion.

[Speaker 7] (1:32:55 - 1:33:13)
I have a question before we move. That's okay. About the consent agenda.

So. I only want to ask this question. Removing it on the liquor license.

The certificate of liability insurance is not checked. Perfect.

[Speaker 8] (1:33:14 - 1:33:14)
Then.

[Speaker 7] (1:33:16 - 1:33:18)
That's okay. Just wanted to make sure before we.

[Speaker 4] (1:33:19 - 1:33:33)
I would just ask that we remove the vote to approve the minutes from the meetings of February 7th, 12th and 28th. I just have not had an opportunity to review them. The next meeting.

That would be most appreciated. So.

[Speaker 7] (1:33:34 - 1:33:34)
Second.

[Speaker 4] (1:33:35 - 1:33:35)
All in favor.

[Speaker 7] (1:33:36 - 1:33:36)
Aye.

[Speaker 4] (1:33:36 - 1:34:37)
Thank you. Select board time. I'll go.

I'll go. I just. It's so exciting.

High school is putting on the Seussical. Seussical welcomes who's from all over the district. Swampscott High School Drama Club is proud to present this year's spring musical Seussical.

A wonderful cast of 45 students from Swampscott High School, middle and elementary schools will bring Horton the Elephant, Jojo the Who's and all their friends to life on April 4th, 5th and 6th at 7pm in the Swampscott High School auditorium. This year's family friendly show is suitable for all ages and tickets are available. You can you can find them on social media on Swampscott parents.

I'll post something. Hopefully the town can also post it on their on their Facebook page. Perfect.

Perfect. Come out and come out and support our our young. That's been.

[Speaker 5] (1:34:41 - 1:34:43)
Go ahead. You go. I have one thing.

You'll be.

[Speaker 7] (1:34:44 - 1:35:51)
I don't have one thing. No, you go ahead. I just want to reiterate from the town administrator's report that if you're tracking the Hadley Hotel progress that you're tuning into.

The community and economic development page under Hadley School reuse. We talked a lot about in the we were discussing which RFP to go with. We spoke a lot about community involvement.

We talked a lot about community engagement in the process. And we will. I will continue to try to live by that mantra that that, you know, trying to make it easy for the community to engage with Clearview or Delamar.

But I just want to when we have things like this come out, want to just reiterate that you too can find the data and it's available for you on the town Web site. And if you have any questions or concerns, you can e-mail the select board of the town administrator and we'll make sure they get to the correct people for that project.

[Speaker 5] (1:35:54 - 1:36:24)
I want to thank Sammy Dowd and Nathan Kent and Mr. Joe Dulette for their hard work once again tonight. Thank you, gentlemen. Diane, this the retirement board is having a public meeting to go over.

Retirement benefits, how to understand that benefits, but that's the line item in the budget, which is one of the largest line items. And I think that is that Monday. It is at seven at the high school.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:25 - 1:36:26)
That's correct.

[Speaker 5] (1:36:26 - 1:36:50)
OK, so I just want to let everybody know about that. The health department is discussing. A possibility of having an article that pertains to.

The. Sale of cigarettes and smoking. Smoking.

Whatever they're working on.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:51 - 1:36:52)
Is this the Brookline?

[Speaker 5] (1:36:53 - 1:36:53)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:53 - 1:36:57)
Yep. So they don't need an article. They just need a vote.

[Speaker 5] (1:36:57 - 1:36:57)
OK.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:58 - 1:37:11)
And just it has to run in the newspaper. I asked town council to send our health director the legal parameters that the Board of Health would need to vote to adopt that.

[Speaker 5] (1:37:11 - 1:37:32)
OK, great. They're having. So they did.

They were having a conversation about it tonight during the select board meeting. And that conversation is taped. So if anybody wants to listen to it and solid waste is just working on, you know, setting up their goals for what they want to achieve this year and this coming six months.

And that's really all I have on my committees.

[Speaker 2] (1:37:33 - 1:38:06)
Thanks, Mary. Sorry, you gave me time. I didn't have anything.

I've got three things. So. Back to Kings Beach for a minute.

We said we voted to put in an application for state revolving fund. So is that we're working on? Yep.

It's like contracting with Kleinfelder to start getting ready. It's like August or something. I think we have to apply.

Right.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:07 - 1:38:37)
We've committed to EPA that we're going to be doing that. You know, there was some conversation, too, around that. Why, you know, why we didn't two years ago.

And frankly, the interest rates were so low two years ago that the state revolving fund was at 2 percent. We were getting interest rates below that. So, you know, it wasn't just a question of the town neglecting to apply for those.

It just didn't make financial sense for us to look at that. But we will be aggressively going after revolving funds.

[Speaker 2] (1:38:37 - 1:39:15)
Yeah. The second thing is I have heard a couple rumblings about a potential article coming out of renewable energy solar panels. Another one potentially coming out of historical commission.

And I couldn't even tell you exactly the nature of it. And maybe even affordable housing. But just giving you the big heads up without a lot of information.

[Speaker 1] (1:39:16 - 1:39:24)
Normally, you know, those committees should be in touch with me or my department heads. We need to get stuff to town council ASAP.

[Speaker 2] (1:39:25 - 1:39:29)
Right. Yeah. I thought I saw some deadline like around now, basically, that people needed to have stuff in.

[Speaker 1] (1:39:29 - 1:39:38)
I don't want to. I love the ideas. I don't want to discourage any conversation about war articles.

I just we need to get those in.

[Speaker 2] (1:39:39 - 1:39:43)
Can you right now or maybe reach out to them?

[Speaker 1] (1:39:43 - 1:39:48)
I will. I took the notes. Give everyone a very hard deadline.

Yeah. We'll send an email out tomorrow. Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:39:55 - 1:39:57)
I've forgotten the third one. Glover?

[Speaker 1] (1:39:57 - 1:39:59)
Is there a Glover update?

[Speaker 2] (1:39:59 - 1:42:09)
Oh, actually. That wasn't what I was going to say. I guess the very brief update on Glover, if I didn't do this already, is, you know, we did pass that $30,000.

And that's being put to work. And Structures North and the specialized team has been into Glover with a lot of work from Sean, working with the Athenas family to get us in there. And so they've been in there researching it.

They now think actually something like 75% actually could be saved. Which was their, you know, deeper analysis. But there's a lot of work to do.

You know, not surprisingly, as you get in deeper, it gets a little bit more complicated. And there's multiple parties, you know, of course, to kind of be working through. So, you know, without getting into all the nitty-gritty, like there's a lot of work to kind of figure out how to get everybody on the same page.

And Sean is doing a lot of work to try to make that happen. The other thing I was going to say was on resiliency. Just to kind of give a little update on that.

We're out of here so early. It's just, you know, it's almost criminal. No, it's not.

I know. There's a lot of work going on in that regard, too. In some ways, it's a similar thing.

At first you think, oh, hey, we're going to do this, this, and this. And there's a bunch of grants, and we'll apply. Now we're getting kind of deeper into Coastal Resiliency Grants versus Municipal Vulnerability Grants versus the Hazard Mitigation Plan, and really trying to kind of knit these things together and figure out.

We had another conversation with CZM folks today, really kind of pushing to understand the nuances of, you know, what maybe at Fisherman's goes with this, what at King's goes with that. You know, how does Hazard Mitigation, which we have to do a refresh of that, we've got a grant to do that. How does that complement all of this?

So there's a lot of conversations going on there to make sure people are aware. It's, you know, there's kind of technical stuff. Once we kind of have some semblance of what makes some sense, bring it back up here for digestion.

[Speaker 5] (1:42:12 - 1:42:25)
I have a question on that. So do all these different committees on coastal resiliency and the other ones that you are liaison to, are they all looking at different grants together?

[Speaker 2] (1:42:26 - 1:42:47)
All together. Marcy's got us all together. So it's water and sewer infrastructure.

It's climate action. It's renewable energy. It's capital improvement.

It's open space. And harbor and water and open space. All these committees together are looking at these and trying to kind of put it all together.

[Speaker 9] (1:42:48 - 1:42:48)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:42:49 - 1:43:15)
The state's done a good job, too, with their one-stop application. There's so many opportunities to kind of connect to a number of state grants that come down through the feds. And so that can help us, you know, identify many opportunities for a lot of these committees and support a more comprehensive strategic alignment.

[Speaker 5] (1:43:15 - 1:43:17)
How do we compare to other communities on federal grants?

[Speaker 1] (1:43:18 - 1:43:33)
We haven't done as well. I look at the congressman's list of projects every year, and I'm thrilled for the other communities.

[Speaker 5] (1:43:34 - 1:43:37)
Can we ask him to come to one of the meetings?

[Speaker 1] (1:43:37 - 1:44:10)
Certainly can. I'd be happy to reach out to the congressman's staff, and we'll talk. I have put in for funding for Kings Beach a few times, and I really do know that he's speaking down in Washington about Kings Beach, and it's my hope that he will help support some funding for the Hawthorne and some of these other really important projects.

That's right. We are not going to get anything that we're not asking for.

[Speaker 5] (1:44:12 - 1:44:18)
All right. I'd like to have a better understanding of what other communities, where we stand. Sure.

[Speaker 1] (1:44:18 - 1:44:20)
I can get a list of grants.

[Speaker 5] (1:44:20 - 1:44:23)
If it's going to be equitable. Great.

[Speaker 4] (1:44:25 - 1:44:30)
Peter, do you think? Do you have a motion perhaps? Yep.

Motion to adjourn.

[Speaker 9] (1:44:30 - 1:44:31)
Motion to adjourn.

[Speaker 4] (1:44:31 - 1:44:32)
I second that.

[Speaker 9] (1:44:32 - 1:44:33)
Okay.

[Speaker 4] (1:44:33 - 1:44:34)
All right. All in favor.

[Speaker 7] (1:44:34 - 1:44:35)
Aye.

[Speaker 4] (1:44:35 - 1:44:36)
Thank you.

[Speaker 7] (1:44:36 - 1:44:38)
Thank you. I think we broke the record.