[Speaker 2] (0:04 - 0:24)
I'd like to welcome you all to the Select Board Meeting, August 6, 2024. This is a special meeting for us tonight. First, we're going to start off with the Pledge of Allegiance.

And if we could ask Selectman Haas, would you mind starting us on the Pledge of Allegiance? Selectman Haas.

[Speaker 3] (0:25 - 0:26)
Meeting being recorded.

[Speaker 2] (0:27 - 0:28)
The meeting is being recorded. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (0:31 - 0:59)
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. I got you, Don.

[Speaker 2] (1:11 - 1:19)
Tonight, we're here to recognize Selectman Don Haas, and David Grishman is going to lead us in that.

[Speaker 4] (1:19 - 4:44)
Yeah, Don, we have a citation for you, but before we read you the citation, I just have a few words that I want to share with you and the board and members of the public. Good evening. I appreciate the time to talk about my friend and former colleague, Don Haas.

Here's a story you may have not heard yet. Don and I had been trying to get together for a bit, and I asked him what he wanted to drink. His response was Smirnoff Ice, an eight-pack of pink lemonade.

I don't know. I go to the packie in Peabody and ask for a Smirnoff eight-pack. The cashier looks at me like I have 12 heads and tells me I'm looking for a unicorn.

I certainly didn't want to disappoint Don, but this got me thinking. Is Don just messing with me? An eight-pack?

But everything happens for a reason. Perhaps the comment from the cashier was telling me something. Don is a unicorn, and a pink one at that.

Don Haas served his town as a long-serving member of the ZBA for over a decade and served as a two-term selectman in Swampskate, retiring from public service in 2022. Truly a unicorn with nearly 20 years of service to our town, especially since I saw a stat recently that shows the average resident of Swampskate resides here for nearly a decade. A unicorn indeed.

Don, you taught me so many lessons as a board member and as your friend, and I want to share some tonight. When I started on the board as a young, strapping board member with the second best hair on the board behind yours in 2020, I remember vividly wanting to get involved in numerous aspects of the day-to-day operations of the town. You kindly but firmly reminded me that the select board is a policymaking board, and as a board, members do not get into the day-to-day activities of the town.

I know you want to make your mark, Dave, but stay out of the weeds and in your lane. Prudent advice indeed, sir. When we were negotiating a number of property acquisitions, I remember conversations between the two of us, and you kindly reminded me that while we occasionally do something special, such as acquiring the largest open space acquisition in decades when we purchased Archer Street and the Hawthorne, one of our biggest responsibilities is the mundane.

As leadership, one of the most important responsibilities we have is to ensure that bad things don't happen. This is an everyday responsibility, one that I take incredibly seriously, and you helped convey that to me. Don, you taught me perseverance and dedication.

Your word is your bond. You had multiple reasons to resign from our board in 2020 and 2021 due to health and personal reasons, but you stayed the course, and so did your hair. You showed up for the town each and every day, whether in your bathrobe via Zoom during the pandemic or in person in your bomber jacket and aviators.

You did it with style, and you did it with pizzazz that few, if any, can match. Myself, the board, and the town were better for it. Don, members of the select board, members of the public, every time I see a six-pack of pink lemonade smeared off ice, I'm going to think of Don Haas and smile, and I hope you all do the same.

But in all seriousness, Don, thank you for your friendship, thank you for the lessons that you taught me, and thank you for the example of perseverance that you exemplified. Please know your work mattered. Thank you.

[Speaker 9] (5:11 - 8:30)
Thank you, David. Thank you, David. Thank you, select board.

Thank you, everyone who's here. I've referenced this in the past, but it's a privilege to receive any acknowledgement whatsoever for public service because, candidly, when you enter into public service, you don't do it for recognition. You do it because it's a love of community, a desire to help people, and that's what you do.

And when you take it on, you take it on, and your family takes it on, and it is 100% you're all in. And I've had the rare privilege of being able to do that. I've also been given a great gift with my cancer.

I have been given the gift of time. And what I mean by that is it has been a very difficult fight, but it's been 10 years that I've been able to fight this and still continue to persevere. And what's very interesting is also when I received the diagnosis that the disease had now accelerated, I'm still here.

So I still look to God, and there's a little bit left in the tank. There's something. And, again, I've been blessed to be able to do that.

And when you go through something like this, which I hope no one does, on one hand. On the other hand, it is a fascinating view into people and friendships and, you know, self-officiation and looking in the mirror, right, and saying, okay, I committed to this, and this is what my kids and my family are great, and this is what it is. You committed to it, and you stick with it, okay, until you can't do it anymore.

And the ability to be able to do that has also been a great gift to me. So the fact I've had the privilege of working with all of you, I've learned from everybody. Peter and I could probably spend the next 17 hours going over zoning board stories, but it's a rare community.

I've seen our community through sort of like a, you know, a sine curve where things were great, and then, you know, we had that period a couple summers ago when this community was coming unraveled, and I think I've seen the community come back together, you know, and I hope this board can help galvanize and continue the course on that, and I think they will. And I know everyone here will. So, again, thank you.

Thank you so much for an honor I will gladly accept on behalf of my family, but I don't deserve it. So thank you.

[Speaker 4] (9:00 - 10:32)
So we do have the community appreciation citation, which we will present to Don Haas, whereas it is our distinct privilege and honor to acknowledge the indomitable Donald Haas for his 18 years of dedicated service on the Swampscott ZBA and Select Board, and whereas through the years, Don has shown a powerful commitment to his community through his support for keeping Swampscott's financial footing strong. With five years of level taxation, support for the new $101 million elementary school, financial acumen to achieve a AAA bond rating, support for veterans housing, and historic acquisition of open space, Hawthorne and Archer properties, and whereas this remarkable man is deeply admired by those who have come to know him, serve with him, and indeed love him, and whereas in honor of his heartfelt service, we are pleased to acknowledge Don's selfless service and commitment to Swampscott, and whereas now therefore by the authority vested in us, we do hereby present this official citation of community appreciation to Donald Haas and urge others to join us in extending gratitude and appreciation to Donald and his family for his years of service to our community in witness whereof I have hereunto set our hand and cause to be affixed the great seal of the town of Swampscott, Massachusetts, 6 August 2024. Thank you.

[Speaker 17] (10:40 - 10:47)
Thank you very much. You got a couple more, Don, so.

[Speaker 9] (10:48 - 10:49)
Should I remain standing, or sit down and go?

[Speaker 1] (10:49 - 10:53)
You can sit down. Yeah, sit down. Dan, if you want to just.

[Speaker 7] (10:53 - 15:39)
My name's Dan Dill. I live in the heart. I've been friends with Don for many years.

I think I first met Don back when I owned the Tide restaurant a while back and he became a pretty good customer and I became a pretty good friend, but we grew closer and the friendship blossomed into a love for BC football. We had season tickets, I think, for over 20 years up at BC, and there's a number of guys from Swampstead, Nahaan, fellow friends that are, you know, between the tailgate and going away to Duke, North Carolina, different games across the country to follow them. We had a time that we'll never forget.

As a matter of fact, last week we got all those BC guys that were involved with it. My brother owns a restaurant up in Linn called The Lazy Dog and he was part of that group, so we had like 12 or 15 of us up at The Lazy Dog. We had this big area there that we always called it the owner's box, where you come back after a BC game and at that point, it's 6.30, it's too early to stop doing a little drinking, so we sit in the owner's box, continue it on, then go from there, but we had a great time and Don had his family there and everyone enjoyed spending his company. Well, you know, I called up, I've been close friends with Brendan Creighton for a number of years, working on all those campaigns, I said, you know what, Don needs to be recognized. I mean, at this point, I haven't even spoken to Sean, and I said, can we get together those citations that you give out? I've been at plenty of events, I said, the people are very pleased and it's a real special accomplishment to receive one of those, so I said, but we got to kind of do it quick because they're going to be doing something on the town, and so while we were sitting in the restaurant two hours later, by courier, we sent someone down to give them to us, which was quicker than I ever thought he could do it, but just to show you what they're like in our region, we have one from the state senate, okay, says, let it hereby be known that the Massachusetts, it is known by the Massachusetts senate, hereby extend congratulations to the selection of Don Hart for your recognition of your dedication and for the many years of town of Swanson, including six as a member of the select board and 12 years as a member of the zoning board.

It is further known the Massachusetts senate extends the best wishes for continued success that this citation is signed by the president of the senate and transmitted to the clerk of the senate for its record, so just so, just to see what the state senate is sending on, that would be an astounding for years to come. Okay, so, congratulations. It would have been great if it would have went, so, you know, I tried, I called up Tom McKee, I wanted to, like, make it a little more authentic, a politician here, and he said, I'd love to do it, I've interacted with Don, it was great, I'll tell you one thing about Don Hart, he's got stuff done, okay, and that's coming from someone that's, you know, been a state rep, senate, you know, all that stuff, he said, Don Hart's got stuff done, but he said, I'm going down to Cape tomorrow, so you're on your own, right, so, that's our first citation from the state senate.

And Jimmy Amin, okay, the state representative of the state, he also, it's great you can put something together that we would have available, hereby known as the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and his sincere congratulations to Don Hart, and recognition and dedication to his many years of service, which countless ones did, again, including six years, a member of the select board, a 12-year member of the conference, we extend our best wishes and hope for future good fortune, signed by Jimmy Amin, okay, so we have from the state senate, from the House of Representatives, he's been recognized as well, so all the time, and all the lessons learned on behalf of his daughter's home, his son wants it. Congratulations, Don.

[Speaker 1] (15:56 - 16:08)
So we need a photo op, so we're going to have to invite Tim and the family down for a few photos with these citations.

[Speaker 9] (16:09 - 16:26)
Yeah, I had one point of clarification, so, you know, while we were dying the world in sequence, I don't know if it's too much of a mistake, but it's a mistake like you've seen in two weeks.

[Speaker 7] (16:27 - 16:27)
That's right.

[Speaker 1] (16:31 - 16:33)
Pray on it. Yeah.

[Speaker 7] (16:35 - 16:42)
Where do you want me to, you want to give them to your wife, or? Just put those on the, over with the one Sean gave you, right there.

[Speaker 2] (16:58 - 16:59)
Are you going to take this?

[Speaker 17] (16:59 - 17:00)
Yeah, why don't you?

[Speaker 2] (17:17 - 17:26)
Should we take a picture with Don sitting down with all the select board members he served with? Don, sit down so all the select board members you served with can see. No, they shouldn't.

[Speaker 3] (17:26 - 17:33)
Yeah, it's more like Peter and Neil. You're right, yeah. Yeah, the guys that worked with him.

[Speaker 1] (17:34 - 17:44)
Yeah, all right. Truly. Yeah.

In this respect, yeah, no, I'm with you. I'm with you. Sit on the board.

Uh-huh. Sit down. No, no, no, come right up here.

[Speaker 9] (17:45 - 18:04)
Matt. How's my insurance? Good.

I'm free. Yeah, see you in town. Didn't see that coming.

Reliability.

[Speaker 1] (18:05 - 18:06)
Okay.

[Speaker 5] (18:09 - 18:10)
Yeah.

[Speaker 9] (18:13 - 18:15)
Oh, memories, memories, memories.

[Speaker 15] (18:18 - 18:26)
Good evening.

[Speaker 9] (18:28 - 18:32)
Katie Phelan. You're welcome. Yeah, get the key.

[Speaker 2] (18:34 - 18:36)
Don, flip that old flip kit that Katie's throwing down.

[Speaker 9] (18:37 - 18:48)
Oh, sorry. Isn't my daughter supposed to be at your house? Good.

[Speaker 17] (18:49 - 18:49)
All right.

[Speaker 9] (18:50 - 18:50)
Thank you, everyone.

[Speaker 17] (19:00 - 19:23)
What? You're good. You're good.

Good job, David.

[Speaker 1] (19:24 - 19:26)
Likewise. We're Michigan fans.

[Speaker 7] (19:39 - 19:47)
I do think it's totally appropriate.

[Speaker 4] (19:47 - 19:51)
If your face is going to hang today, we're in the lazy dumps. Even if you want to get in the lazy dumps.

[Speaker 10] (20:03 - 20:05)
I could send them to somebody.

[Speaker 2] (20:35 - 20:37)
He's got to go up the ramp. Yeah, he does. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (20:41 - 20:42)
These are my glasses.

[Speaker 17] (20:59 - 21:10)
All right, Don.

[Speaker 2] (21:10 - 22:00)
Talk to you later. Call me. All right, next we're going to, we're going to go to public comment.

So if there's anyone here for public comment. Is there anybody here for public comment? Okay.

So if you could just give your name and your address. And public comment will be for three minutes. Okay.

[Speaker 16] (22:02 - 22:48)
Rachel Teradash, 71 Middlesex Ave. I am here as a board member of Big Blue Bargains to also, again, ask you for a space for Big Blue Bargains. We actually had the pleasure on Saturday, last Saturday, at the Beer Garden of hosting the 50-50 raffle. We raised $500 for the elementary school art department.

Ms. Eisman got that money today or last night. So we're excited to do that. And we've been at the farmer's market.

We've connected with the community. Many folks asking us when they can donate. So we look forward to finding a space so that we can continue to contribute to community closets.

So that's all. Thank you.

[Speaker 2] (22:49 - 22:57)
Thank you. Mr. Schultz?

[Speaker 15] (23:08 - 23:55)
Be careful when you get me in front of a microphone. Jackson Schultz, 23 Hampden St., town meeting member and chair of the Harbor Waterfront Advisory Committee. I'd just like to announce that Thursday, August 8th, at 7 p.m. in the Senior Center, Harbor Advisory is hosting a public meeting, giving everybody an update of where we are with the pier project. And I just want the public to know about this and welcome everybody to join us as we explain where we are, where we're going, and I'm excited about it. John McAllister, who is the engineer that we've hired, he's going to be in town. He's going to be at the meeting with slides and presentation.

And then what I really want to do is open it up for discussion and get feedback from everybody once we do our presentation. So thank you very much.

[Speaker 2] (23:56 - 24:43)
Thank you, Mr. Schultz. Is there anyone else for public comment? No.

Okay, so now we are moving to our next line on our agenda. We have a pretty tight agenda for tonight because we're going to be leaving to go into executive section. So the next line is Fisherman's Alliance.

The Fisherman's Alliance had requested that they have an opportunity to stand and talk to the select board and not during just resident comment in the event the select board had some questions. So tonight it's a meeting for the Fisherman's Alliance to give information to the select board and the select board can answer, ask any questions.

[Speaker 4] (24:43 - 26:07)
Madam Chair, just a process question. I'm looking at open meeting law educational materials from Attorney General Campbell dated December 2023. And on page 11, there's reference to what information must meeting notices contain.

Meeting notices must be posted in a legible, easily understandable format, contain the date, time, and place of the meeting, including instructions for accessing the meeting if public access is by remote means, and list all topics that the chair reasonably anticipates 48 hours in advance to be discussed at the meeting. A list of topics must be sufficiently specific to reasonably inform the public of the issues to be discussed at the meeting. And that's really where the question here is.

If you look at our agenda, you know, we talk about recognition and honoring the public service of Swampscott resident and former select board member Donald Haas. That's pretty explicit. Discussion and possible vote to sign the warrant for the state primary election, certainly.

Discuss and possible vote to approve legislative language, yada yada so forth. But on item 2, it just says Fisherman's Alliance. I have no idea what that means.

I don't believe my colleagues knew what that meant. We did reach out. So I would just caution that this could be an open meeting violation because this agenda item is not specific enough.

[Speaker 2] (26:07 - 26:21)
So we will cure that very quickly. We will continue resident comment. And you can make comments under resident comment.

And this time if the board wants to ask any questions of the Fisherman's Alliance for resident comment, you could go right ahead. Mr. Rossman.

[Speaker 6] (26:23 - 31:03)
Good evening. My name is Neil Rossman. I'm a member of the Fisherman's Alliance.

I support it. I fish on my own boat. And I have been asked by the group that's here tonight to speak on behalf of them and answer some questions.

But first to give some information to the board. I think I have a unique position to be speaking for the alliance because I think I am the oldest person with the most institutional knowledge of the harbor. The harbor works, the facilities, the fish house, and fishing activities.

The reason I say that I'm the oldest one with the most experience is because I was fourth from the top at one point. And the three people ahead of me have all passed away. And those people were Danny Cahill, Paul Garcelon Sr., and most recently Bob Grimes. And I think I'm fourth in seniority in terms of being around the fish house, around fishing activities, being involved in them, and working on boats when I was even a high school student. So I think I have a pretty good perspective of what's going on around the fish house and fishing activities. And as everyone knows, there has been a great deal of activity in terms of studying a possible pier project.

And the pier project, as you know, involves demolishing at some point in time the current pier and replacing it with a modern, very expensive replacement that has many possibilities to it, many models. And the models range from about 450 feet to 695 feet. And the placement of the pier is different from the current placement, which, whether you say it's adequate or it's inadequate, protects the front of the fish house in terms of storms.

It blocks the wave action, blocks the sea rise from getting to the fish house, although there has been some damage over the years from severe storms. If you demolish the current pier, and if that's the plan, and relocate it, not only do you divide the current beach area, you create a new entrance, which would be coming down, I see the plan, would be coming down off of Greenwood Avenue, down through the opening that's there now, and it would change the entire topography of the beach for beachgoers, as well as creating a new structure in a different place. I understand and have read the feasibility report.

I know the feasibility report was generated with grant money, and I know that a lot of the information in the report is the result of a lot of work that has been done by the consultants. And by that I mean there's been sonar scans of the bottom of the area, there have been wave action studies, there have been borings of lake, there's been a lot of activity, and it has been activity that has been paid for by grant money. But the grant money, it should be pointed out, is public money.

And whether it came from the town of Swampscott checkbook, or it came from public sources, it still is public money that has been devoted to doing the study. So, where are we?

[Speaker 3] (31:08 - 31:10)
I'm just waiting to be recognized by the chair.

[Speaker 2] (31:12 - 31:13)
He's speaking.

[Speaker 3] (31:14 - 31:19)
But we're in resident comment. I mean, first we were in resident comment, and then we came out of resident comment.

[Speaker 2] (31:19 - 31:20)
Why don't we let him speak?

[Speaker 3] (31:21 - 31:22)
Well, why don't we follow the rules?

[Speaker 4] (31:23 - 31:24)
Yeah, let's follow the rules.

[Speaker 3] (31:24 - 31:27)
I mean, why are we setting up a whole different set of rules here?

[Speaker 2] (31:28 - 31:38)
David was worried that we could be out of compliance with open meeting laws. So, I'm just trying to make this a little bit easier so that we can get through.

[Speaker 4] (31:39 - 31:41)
We can't skirt the rules of public comment.

[Speaker 2] (31:42 - 31:51)
Yeah, we can. The rules are not dead set, and I'm going to fluctuate with the rules here. I'm going to use a little flexibility.

So, go on, Mr. Rossman.

[Speaker 3] (31:52 - 31:54)
I object to this whole conversation.

[Speaker 2] (31:54 - 31:55)
Go on, Mr. Rossman.

[Speaker 6] (31:55 - 32:00)
I'm just trying to give you some information, and I'm trying to We would love to have the information in a context.

[Speaker 3] (32:01 - 32:08)
We're just blindsided by this. I apologize, sir. I would love to have support for you all.

This is really just Yeah, he'll finish.

[Speaker 6] (32:11 - 35:09)
I'm just trying to give you some background on what the commercial fishing fleet understands is going on. I understand what's going on. These gentlemen that fish for a living and work out of that fish house and off that beach, they know what's going on.

My purpose here tonight is to transmit to this board and also to the public, if anybody's listening, the position of the commercial fishermen who make their living off that beach. So, let me, since you don't want me to speak or you have some objections to it, let me just cut to the chase. The new pier project that is outlined in the feasibility study that is not in the bill creates a project that has been touted to be of value to the commercial fishermen.

To keep them employed, to make it easier for them to make a living, make it safer, make it better. That's one of the selling points. And so, I'm here to tell you that if the town, after a great deal of study and debate, and whatever goes with the approval of a project, if the townspeople want to spend $20 million to build a pier, that's their decision.

And I don't know why you're laughing, because I don't think it's funny, quite frankly. It's a $20 million expenditure of public money that may come from grants, but may come from loans, it may come from the federal government, but it's a $20 million project that's going to change the topography of the beach, it's going to change the wave action, and it's going to have a major effect on what was, at one time, one of the most beautiful beaches on the east coast of the United States. It's been eroded over time because of certain projects.

But, you want to put a pier in, put a pier in. If people in the town vote at the ballot box, or a town meeting, to put in, to do a $20 million project, go ahead and do it. Put a ferris wheel at the end, if you want.

But don't sell it, and present it to the public, or the citizens of the town, that it's something that the commercial fishermen want, and it's going to be of benefit to them, because it isn't. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else from the Fisherman's Alliance?

[Speaker 2] (35:10 - 35:13)
Anyone else from the Non-Fisherman's Alliance? Mr. Watson?

[Speaker 12] (35:22 - 36:37)
Brian Watson, 20 Oak Road. I'm not a member of the Fisherman's Alliance, but I had a boat in the harbor for about 25 years. I would like to complement, or like to add some things that complement the Fisherman's Alliance presentation that Mr. Rossman just made. The proposed new pier would be 9 feet taller, I should say, the walking surface of the new proposed pier would be 9 feet higher than the walking surface of the existing pier. That's very important to grasp. If it's 9 feet taller than the existing pier, it becomes even less effective for fishermen to use it, but more importantly, it should signal to our town that we have big problems.

The state would require this town to build the surface of the pier 9 feet taller, or at an elevation that's 9 feet higher than the existing walking surface of the existing pier. We should be asking, why is that? That 9 foot height, so to make it clear where that is, that aligns with the second floor of the fish house.

So the new pier walking surface would align with the second floor of the fish house.

[Speaker 2] (36:38 - 37:11)
Mr. Watson, Mr. Schultz, who is the chair of the Harbor Water Committee, is going to be having a public meeting on the 8th, and at that meeting they will be taking resident comment and all different comments about the actual pier. Tonight the focus was to make sure that the Fisherman's Alliance had the opportunity to express what they felt wasn't- Yeah, why the pier wouldn't work. Right, for the Fisherman's Alliance.

So I would like to encourage you to- I'll go on the 8th.

[Speaker 12] (37:12 - 38:33)
While everyone's here, I believe in democracy too, and it's an opportunity, while people are focused on it, to understand what is being proposed. How the fishermen use the harbor, how the harbor relates to the land, these things are all tied together. A pier that's 9 feet taller than the existing pier is also 9 feet taller than Humphrey Street.

It's at an elevation that's 9 feet above Humphrey Street. So the town should be asking, in terms of ocean rise, in terms of the storms that are coming, is it even appropriate to build a $20 million pier that nobody requested? And I also am very offended that projects appear from the sky, nobody's asked for them, the fishermen didn't ask for them, so people gin these projects up because it's grant money.

And that's not the way to do it. But I'm going to end, I'll go to the August 8th meeting, but we have a problem. The pier would come to the shore 9 feet higher.

What happens at the shoreline? When Humphrey Street is awash, we'll be left with this island of a pier sticking up as this bizarre thing. The town needs to get serious about what it's going to do to ocean rise.

We don't need to add infrastructure that we'll then have to turn around and defend.

[Speaker 2] (38:34 - 38:46)
Thank you, Mr. Watson. Is there anyone else from the Fishermen's Alliance? Mr. Gumballi. And then Mr. Gumballi will be the last speaker because you're the only person that's raised your hand.

[Speaker 8] (38:54 - 43:24)
My name is Mike Gumballi. I'd like to thank the board for giving me the opportunity to present myself to you. I'm coming to you solely as a fisherman.

I wouldn't invite any of you to come down to the beach, come on my boat. I'll show you how we do it. I've been there 48 years as a full-time commercial fisherman.

Half the people in this room couldn't tell you what a starboard tack is. I know it works for us. We're resourceful.

We use Yankee ingenuity. The pier that exists now works because of its height, mainly. You build a pier 9 feet high, we're done.

We're done. There's 7 fishermen left in Swampscart. I think we're proud of our heritage.

Look on any of our badges. Our police officers here, our trucks, our fire trucks, our police, Mr. Phillips, if you don't know, Mr. Phillips, a fisherman, the tiller of a fishing boat, Phyllis Beach, Phyllis Ave, Phyllis Street, Phyllis Park. So I'm here to plead with you, to ask you, please don't remove our pier.

We did a study. We took our money, hired a reputable company to do a survey on what it would cost to repair the pier as it exists. Very little money.

Could be maintained indefinitely. It works. I've heard stories of pulleys at the end of a pier.

I can assemble a trap in my boat quicker than I can lower one down with a pulley. Absurd. If a pulley worked, we'd have a pulley now.

It doesn't work. There's 7 commercial fishermen left in Swampscart. We're already scrambling to get our names on lists in other ports.

There were 32 here and still fishing from other ports with better facilities. As far as boating is concerned, you're coming from the north. You're not going to go by Gloucester, Ipswich, Manchester, Magnolia, Marblehead.

You're coming to Swampscart. If you have a big boat, there's not enough water in Swampscart. Why would you go by Marblehead where you need ice, water, pump out your holding tank, fuel, diesel, gas on the dock, overnight accommodations?

You can have your boat hauled out by a crane if you need repairs. If you're coming from the south, you've got to go past Egg Rock, 2.7 miles to my mooring. Why would you come to Swampscart when you can go to Marblehead?

There's nothing here. To build this $20 million pier for the boating community is absurd. But for the fishing community, it'll be the end of the fishing community as we know it.

I'm on a list very close to being assigned to another port. There's a few here that already have access to other ports. We're here.

We love it here. I was born here. I fished here for 48 years.

There was a man named Lewis Lucky Williams, which I believe the pier's named after. His son is here. He can elaborate.

He had an 80-foot boat, the Lady Clear, which he tied up in Newport, New Jersey, the pioneer in the offshore fishery. He took his boat from Newport to Swampscart, loaded that boat on our pier because of the facility that it is. Then he steamed 200 miles to the continental shelf to set his traps and did the opposite in the fall.

There's not much left here for us. We still push a pram off a beach and set a step onto a boat, but it's what we do. We will raise the money.

I will raise the money to repair the pier if that's what it takes. But please don't take our pier away. If you want to build a new pier, fine, but please don't take our pier away.

You'll drive us out of town, and that'll be the end of our heritage. I would be glad to show any or all of you how we operate, what we do. I'm sure you don't know.

I'm sure none of you have ever been on a fishing boat. Oh, well, yeah. Doug, is it?

I would invite you to come down, spring or fall, any time. I'll take you on. I'll show you how we do it.

I've got pictures. I've got it documented, and it works for us. This pier, nine feet higher, we don't need it.

We could list 40 bullets tonight why it wouldn't work for all user groups. We have people here from condominiums that don't want it. That's not what I'm here to tell you.

I'm here to tell you that we will leave. You will completely destroy the fishing community in Swampscot as we know it, and I'll leave myself at your disposal. Any time, any place, I'll take you, and I'll show you the whole operation.

That's all I have to say, and thank you again for letting me speak.

[Speaker 17] (43:24 - 43:24)
Thank you, Mr. Domali.

[Speaker 2] (43:32 - 43:40)
All set? Are we going to comment, or are we not going to comment? Are we going to comment, or no?

It's up to you. Do you have any questions or comments? Katie?

[Speaker 5] (43:41 - 43:46)
I think that it's clear that there are... Now we're going to walk out.

[Speaker 3] (43:47 - 43:48)
Is this public comment, or not?

[Speaker 5] (43:49 - 43:58)
When Mary Ellen went back into public comment, she, the chair, announced that we would be able to comment after this section of public comment.

[Speaker 3] (43:58 - 44:00)
We have a different set of rules for this part of public comment.

[Speaker 5] (44:00 - 44:03)
The chair...

[Speaker 3] (44:03 - 44:05)
Make up rules on the fly, I guess. Okay, go ahead.

[Speaker 5] (44:06 - 44:30)
This is just past appropriate. The only comment I would like to make is it seems like there are multiple competing interests who are here to speak on the pier, and what is unfortunate is that this conversation is happening now and not earlier. If it has happened multiple occasions prior, because I can see your faces looking as disrespectful as Doug's face might have looked towards you, so just let me finish first.

[Speaker 3] (44:30 - 44:31)
Thank you very much, Katie.

[Speaker 5] (44:31 - 44:37)
For acknowledging the disrespect. Stop. Please stop.

Because it's still happening. Katie?

[Speaker 3] (44:38 - 44:43)
I don't appreciate you characterizing the way I interact.

[Speaker 5] (44:43 - 46:07)
I would like to have this conversation come to a fruitful conclusion, and not continue in this manner. I would encourage, as Mary Ellen did, that you all attend on the 8th, and that we continue this conversation so it doesn't end with this display, and that we get somewhere fruitful for multiple parties. I don't know if there is not if this is it, and there's no compromise to be had, or if there is not additional conversation that can be had that gets us all to a better place, but this obviously doesn't feel like a great place for the board, nor for the public and the Fisherman's Alliance, the Harbor Waterfront, the Resiliency Committee.

There are a lot of the Conservation Commission. There are a lot of commissions and committees that are affected by this, not just you all, and Jackson, the Chair, is here, Ted's here from Harbor and Waterfront, the Conservation Commission, the Resiliency team who's put out plans regarding seawalls, and other repairs that have to be made to the shoreline. All these things are going to be affected by the Harbor plan, and we all need to get to the table, perhaps some sort of summit where we all are having this conversation is necessary, because it doesn't feel like people are feeling heard.

[Speaker 10] (46:09 - 48:19)
Danielle? Thank you. Thank you to Mr. Rossman. Thank you to Mr. Schultz. Thank you to Mr. Gambale. I'm going to be blunt.

I don't care what the rules are. I want to hear from anybody that wants to be heard in this town about things that all of us are affected by. All 15,000 people that live here are affected by what happens to this pier.

It is clear that we're not all in agreement, that you're not all in agreement, and that everybody has a voice, and that this is a much bigger issue than Harbor and Waterfront versus fishermen or anything of that nature. What I don't want to see is anybody marginalized, left out, unincluded, or not heard. So I don't care about what rule applies to how we say it, when we say it.

I want to hear what every single one of you have to say about it. Because this has to be a collaborative effort by every stakeholder that's involved, and there are many. There are fishermen, there are resiliency committee people, there are residents in this town that have personal feelings about the pier.

It is very much a piece of our history and our heritage. I agree with what Mr. Gambale said, and no one should feel like they're in a position of power over someone else. This has got to be a group effort.

I don't want to see fishermen leave. I don't want to see grants available that we can't get, that we don't go after. I don't want to see any of that happen.

But we all have to come to the table, and we all have to be collaborative. And secondly, I want to apologize for any disrespect that has been felt by anybody that got up to speak today on the part of this board, because that is not what we're here to do. We are not here to argue and point fingers and be inappropriate.

We're here to listen. You elected us to do a job. We are here to listen.

I am here to listen. Katie is here to listen. At the very least, I can speak for the two of us and say that.

So thank you for speaking, all of you. I appreciate it, and I will be there Thursday night, and I encourage you all to do the same, and we will collaborate, and we will come to a decision that's fair for everybody. I don't want anybody to feel like they are unincluded or excluded from this conversation.

Thank you. Chairman.

[Speaker 3] (48:21 - 50:52)
Since we're all going to make a speech about this now, I think this is really, really unfortunate, because there have been a number of opportunities for people to talk about this issue, and the problem here is that because we have a certain rule, and we do have certain rules to make sure that we have good policymaking, that when something is put on the agenda with no context, with no background, with only one part of the conversation, it is not in the best interest of the town to have this conversation. And when things are shared, people may have opinions about certain aspects of what the new peer may or may not be, all we're hearing is one side of it.

So that is the fundamental issue with putting something on the agenda like this, without the board having any context, any background, that you get a distorted process. Are we now going to have any group that wants to come and have their own perspective shared on any issue, that now we're going to allow any group in town, no matter what their opinion, they can come now and have their own session of the agenda? It's the process that's the problem.

I am so hopeful that we can have a thriving, not just the existing, but reclaim the fishermen and the industry that we have, and that we had over the last 40 years. I want there to be a robust dialogue to figure out the way that that can happen. Unfortunately, this feels like a lot of what I've heard about the way in which the dialogue hasn't really happened.

This is just a furtherance of that. It didn't help the cause. Now we're just all kind of tense about it, and now we're going to have, hopefully, we'll get back to business on the 8th, but having this type of dialogue doesn't help.

I really, really strongly request that the Chair in the future not take this tack of allowing one side of one issue, when there's so many different sides of this, and it's been talked about so many times, that this is not the way we do business going forward.

[Speaker 4] (50:56 - 51:03)
This isn't a back and forth. Yes. Those are the rules.

[Speaker 2] (51:06 - 51:42)
All right. Mr. Gumballi, you have asked that the Fishermen's Alliance come down and say what they wanted to say, so we would hear what you have to say, and you feel that you haven't been listened to. Tonight, we have listened, and so now the Select Board just has to finish with their comments, and then on the 8th, there'll be a public meeting, and I'm sure more people will be there.

Members of the Select Board will be there. Members of the Select Board will be there. Thank you.

Mr. Grishman hasn't had a chance to speak yet.

[Speaker 6] (51:42 - 52:05)
Can I say something? I don't understand the criticism that you only heard one side of the issue tonight. What's the difference?

You heard one side of the issue tonight. If there's another side, and they want to come in and discuss it, if you want to set up a public forum, a discussion night will come.

[Speaker 2] (52:05 - 52:32)
Mr. Rossman, we are going to finish with comments from the public right now. We're going to finish with the Select Board, and we'll meet again on the 8th, and we will continue this. We'll have more open conversations, and the agenda will be very clear and detailed and specific, and we'll be moving forward in a positive way, but I just need to make sure that Mr. Grishman has a chance to speak.

[Speaker 4] (52:32 - 53:54)
Madam Chair, I did reach out to you via email, and asked you about this very agenda item, and I received no response to it, so I welcome the conversation, just as Mr. Thompson does as well. I just think we have rules, and we suspended those rules this evening. We violated open meeting law, and skirted that by introducing public comment, which did not tie to the three-minute time frame.

It allowed a back-and-forth, which is against open meeting law, so either we have rules that apply, or we don't. That's my problem. That's my issue here.

My other issue is that, I agree, there should be a fair and balanced discussion, so I know that the Harbor Waterfront Advisory Committee has worked diligently and very hard on a number of these items, on a number of these things. They want to work with the Fisherman's Alliance. I don't think this has to be aired at a select board meeting.

I think this can be aired between the Harbor and Waterfront and the fishermen. I don't think we have to do this whole dog-and-pony show here. I don't believe this to be the venue to do this.

These two groups should sit down, meet, hash it out, and figure it out.

[Speaker 2] (53:54 - 54:29)
All right. Thank you for your comments, Mr. Grishman. I will remind all select board members that if you send emails out and every select board member is attached to that email, we cannot respond back, otherwise it is open dialogue and we will be in violation of open meeting law.

Had you sent me an email directly to me, I could have answered that. That is my answer. We're going to move on now to item number three.

[Speaker 5] (54:30 - 54:59)
Can I just say something? Two seconds. So much of this conversation has very little to do with the pier, the fishermen, and the harbor.

I just want to be very clear that the conversation that's happening right now, although it feels like it is pointed and personal towards this topic, it is not. You all should understand that perspective of it, so you're not walking away thinking anything more of this conversation than it actually is. I just want you all to know that.

[Speaker 2] (54:59 - 55:09)
Thank you for coming. So we're going to move to discussion and possible vote to sign the warrant for the state primary election.

[Speaker 4] (55:10 - 55:16)
Motion to sign the warrant related to the state primary election. Second.

[Speaker 2] (55:17 - 55:19)
All in favor?

[Speaker 4] (55:19 - 55:19)
Aye.

[Speaker 2] (55:22 - 55:31)
So moved. Number four, discussion and possible vote to approve legislative language related to the town's home rule petition. Sean, you want to?

Sure.

[Speaker 1] (55:32 - 55:55)
This is language that Representative Armini sent the town. This is required language if we're going to move forward with the bill that would help ensure that the town would be able to tax land that currently is exempt from taxation at the Tedesco Golf Club. The language that we received from Sean, I'm sorry.

[Speaker 2] (55:55 - 55:58)
One second. Mr. Schultz, Mr. Watson, thank you very much for coming.

[Speaker 1] (56:00 - 57:18)
So the language that was presented from the general council to the House of Representatives is the same language that the town of Belmont has presented. This language is seeking an exemption from certain sections of Massachusetts General Law 61B, an act updating the tax treatment of recreational lands in the town of Swampstead as follows. Section 1, notwithstanding any general or specific law to the contrary.

Section 2, 2A and 16 of Chapter 61B of the general laws and any general or special law to the contrary. Section 2, 2A and 16B of Chapter 61 pertaining to the valuation assessment and taxation of recreational lands as defined in the Massachusetts General Law. I'm not going to read the whole thing, but generally that's the gist of it.

You have it in front of you. It's on a publicly posted agenda. If the board votes to support this, it will be advanced through the legislative process and we will track it.

We will advocate on behalf of the action voted at town meeting and we will look to see equity in how we assess properties throughout the town.

[Speaker 4] (57:19 - 57:28)
Motion to approve the town's home rule petition seeking an exemption from certain sections of Mass General Law Chapter 61B with the language in agenda item 4.

[Speaker 2] (57:29 - 57:29)
Do we have a second?

[Speaker 4] (57:30 - 57:30)
Second.

[Speaker 2] (57:31 - 57:31)
Discussion?

[Speaker 3] (57:32 - 57:41)
Can you just for me as a refresher, for anyone that happens to be listening at home, can you just, what does this really mean? Layman's terms?

[Speaker 1] (57:42 - 58:29)
Under Massachusetts General Law, certain properties are exempt under 61B. Some recreational lands, if it's open space, this law typically is applied to rural communities when you have big tracts of open space and those properties are exempt from the normal type of appraisal and taxation that municipalities use to balance the fiduciary responsibilities. And so when we look at golf clubs, in particular the Tedesco, this is a club that doesn't pay taxes for a large portion of their obligation.

They get a significant discount under 61B. And so we've looked at this over the years.

[Speaker 3] (58:30 - 58:31)
They pay some taxes.

[Speaker 1] (58:31 - 58:32)
They do.

[Speaker 3] (58:32 - 58:32)
It's a reduced rate.

[Speaker 1] (58:33 - 59:16)
It's a significant 25%. It's a significantly reduced rate. And so this will help to try to help balance that equity.

When we look at the impact of this property on the town, this is a huge tract of land in a town of three square miles. In a bigger community, this would have less of an impact. But this is really encumbering quite a bit of the town.

It does put demand on water resources. Certainly the clubhouses in Marblehead, so we don't even get the food and beverage taxation. So it really is a painful inequity that Swampskin has to deal with.

[Speaker 2] (59:16 - 59:37)
Well, town meeting already voted for this. It's just that the language that we sent to the legislature wasn't complete. So state representative Armini just said it's not complete and sent this back so that we can send it back complete.

So we do have a motion. We have a second. And all in favor?

[Speaker 17] (59:38 - 59:38)
Aye.

[Speaker 2] (59:41 - 59:46)
Okay, next. Financial update preview?

[Speaker 1] (59:46 - 1:04:31)
Yep. So the town is working on one of our annual financial updates in the past. We have had financial updates over at the Salem Waterfront Hotel.

We've had them over at the middle school. The board has asked that we coordinate a number of additional you know meetings so that we can really look at Swampskin's financial position. We had a big debate at town meeting this year.

We had a debate over the budget. We had a debate over whether or not our financial policy, 2% plus new growth, is really important to hold on to. That has been a certain stressor for all of the town departments.

It's helped us build up our financial reserve. It's certainly been key to helping us achieve our AAA bond rating. It helps us force discipline through the budget and ultimately keep the average single family tax bill and median single family tax bill fairly reasonable.

I say that understanding that most folks struggle to pay taxes in Swampskin. It's always difficult. It's not a week that goes by that I don't hear from somebody saying, why is it so expensive?

Why is the taxes constantly going up? We've got to make investments. That said, part of the way that we look at Swampskin's financial position is to compare it to other municipalities.

We've looked at a bunch of different municipalities. We can all agreeably disagree about which communities best represent the comps. We look at socioeconomics.

We look at the size of the community. We look at population. We look at demographics, the budget, their commercial real estate, their residential real estate, ratios between different property categories, single family residence, apartments, condos, all those things are part of trying to figure out are these reasonable comparisons in terms of how we spend per capita funds on education, public safety, infrastructure, parks and rec, open space, conservation, all the key metrics. What defines the master plan quality of life?

Pulling all that information together takes a lot of time. Staff are filing Freedom of Information requests with other municipalities. We're trying to herd all this information through annual reports, annual budgets, annual audits.

Every city and town is required to do an audit. That audit has detailed information in there about not just what is budgeted but what is expended, what is reconciled so we can actually get into the details. We've done this previously a couple of times.

It's a tough conversation, though, because it brings some facts, things like student-teacher ratios, student population trends, the shift of some costs in terms of regional schools and charter schools and all sorts of additional state aid that follows some of these trends. All of that has to be pulled together and shown in an explosion of clarity. We often hear a lot of people state that they have some facts or they have some information about certain trends or certain expenditure lines and if it's taken out of context and we don't talk about it with that big picture, it's hard for us to build consensus as a group and really think about where are the pressure points in the budget and how do we actually balance some of these financial priorities. That said, I really do think it would be a helpful part of the board's time tonight to think about that policy, 2% plus new growth.

Should it be 2.1 or should it be 2.0? Should we stay that course? What does that kind of help Swanson achieve?

[Speaker 10] (1:04:36 - 1:04:40)
Danielle? Is there a date for this set already, Sean?

[Speaker 1] (1:04:40 - 1:05:29)
We've actually targeted mid-September but we've got a couple of dates in mind but frankly we haven't set that date yet. We have a few stakeholders that we have to work with. We haven't reached out.

The schools are very busy right now. They're preparing for a grand opening on a consolidated elementary school. We're going to do the data analytics and we're going to crunch the numbers.

We're going to sit down with our colleagues over at the school and we're going to talk about what date would best work for them but we're generally thinking Saturday. That's when we've had these summits in the past and we've got to work with the finance committee and perhaps a few other groups to really make sure that we can have the best outcome.

[Speaker 4] (1:05:29 - 1:05:33)
And will this be at the new elementary school or do we have a location?

[Speaker 1] (1:05:34 - 1:07:25)
I think it'll be where this board decides. I think the new elementary school sounds great. You have a waterfront restaurant as well.

I think there's a lot of places that might be appropriate. I think sometimes when you go to a municipal building you get the weight of some of the issues in the building. So if you had it at Town Hall, folks would think that's Town Hall.

They're going to have more. If you have it at a school, the schools will kind of... I know it doesn't have to be the case but the reason why we went over to the Salem Waterfront Hotel was so that we could have a neutral location and we could actually get out of a mindset that I think made folks feel like they had to support some position.

What we want is everybody to go with an open mind and say, hey, look, we just want to get the facts. We want to get the consensus around numbers and then we can sit down and start talking about policy decisions. Where are we in the universe of municipal expenditures?

Are we high or are we low? Are we in a good spot or should we shift some of the financial priorities and really help address some needs that perhaps are emerging or have dissipated? We've made a lot of financial changes over the last few years.

There's been some changes. If we go back and compare where we've been over the last 10 years or the last 5 years, you're going to see some real progress. But you're also going to recognize that there's some areas that continue to lag.

[Speaker 17] (1:07:25 - 1:07:28)
I'm going to turn it back over to Thank you.

[Speaker 3] (1:07:29 - 1:08:02)
So a couple things. Have we, you know, the schools are busy, but I think a lot of this will be driven by the data, but a lot will be driven by perception. And I want to kind of make sure like right from the get-go that even if the schools are busy and they can't be pulling certain data, have we kind of gotten the blessing from the schools to say, yes, we're going to be the data collectors.

I want to make sure like right from the get-go that we're reaching out, we've got a balanced, holistic approach to this.

[Speaker 1] (1:08:03 - 1:08:16)
I haven't reached out to the schools to ask them for their blessing to pull data that they are statutorily required to by law to post to the DOE website. I mean, I can do that.

[Speaker 3] (1:08:16 - 1:08:34)
No criticism here, but I just feel like as soon as possible just make sure everyone knows right now we're having this conversation. I'm afraid someone sitting there from the schools, they're like, oh my God, this is happening. I don't know.

I want to make sure that we're engaging.

[Speaker 1] (1:08:36 - 1:09:24)
We are engaging. I've had conversations with Mary Ellen about engaging with the Tri-Chair, making sure that we're just in those conversations. We had a busy town meeting.

We had a lot of gymnastics around school finances, and I do think it would be helpful for us to really sit with the school finance team and share some of the responsibility to present some of the data. The data is the data, and candidly, we're just going to pull state information and information from audits. If it's uncomfortable, I totally get it, but we're going to have to look at it.

[Speaker 3] (1:09:24 - 1:09:27)
I'm going to bring up one other thing. Did you want to get to that particular point?

[Speaker 2] (1:09:28 - 1:09:29)
No, go ahead and finish.

[Speaker 3] (1:09:29 - 1:11:20)
I brought this up once before. I'm going to bring it up again because I think this is really so important. I'll just quickly say I don't think there's any way in the world I'm prepared to say whether it's 2 or 2.1 or anything. That to me seems like it comes at the end of this process, not the answer tonight. But in terms of making sure that everyone's comfortable that we are processing this data in a neutral way, because data, in my opinion, John, is not just data. Facts are not just facts.

They can be presented in many different ways. What's emphasized, what's not, what's pulled, what's not, everyone, what community, what every single thing can be questioned. What I really don't want is for people to put in umpteen hours, we go through this process, and we come back out the other side basically saying well, I had my answer before, and I still have my answer after, and that's that.

That's not really going to be helpful to anyone. I'm no expert in this. Someone mentioned to me that knows something about this, that there are places that actually help facilitate these types of processes like the Collins, I think it's called, the Collins Center at UMass.

It's super, relatively speaking, super reasonable in terms of what it costs for someone to kind of be that neutral facilitator or data aggregator, etc. I know you all are super busy. I just don't want to get to a place where oh, we were too busy, we couldn't exactly do this the right way, and then we're kind of slouching through something, because there are a zillion things on the town's plate, and it's great that you're saying hey, we're all going to jump in, all these people are going to help and pull the data and everything else.

Already in the works. It's already in the works. That's great, but that's my recommendation.

[Speaker 1] (1:11:20 - 1:11:32)
I'm happy to reach out to the Collins Center and see if we can... That's just my recommendation. They actually did do some work I think four years ago, five years ago.

[Speaker 10] (1:11:32 - 1:11:33)
No longer.

[Speaker 1] (1:11:33 - 1:11:35)
With the schools also.

[Speaker 10] (1:11:36 - 1:11:37)
What's that? They were in the schools also.

[Speaker 1] (1:11:37 - 1:12:19)
They were in the schools too? They've helped us with our financial forecast, and I think if we can bring back the team that worked with us, they came over to the Salem Waterfront Hotel and actually gave a presentation, so I think the idea that we can get somebody in that's out of the bubble, I think that's a very good strategy because I think it brings a professional in to speak about municipal finances that really doesn't have a stake in the game, and doesn't have a role, and they can look at the data and help context it.

[Speaker 5] (1:12:19 - 1:13:38)
Okay. Anybody else? My point was going to be if we're worried about what venue we're sitting in, because that makes people feel to a certain degree heightened, then who's pulling the data is going to also heighten people, right?

Like even if you feel the data is the data, data can be made to say a lot of things, or the data you pull, or the time frame you pull. So I could not agree more, and also as much as we feel like we may be being super thoughtful about not bothering the schools because they're in this crunch time, they could view that differently. So I just want to make sure that we're really communicating, and that the lines of communication are open, and that they feel comfortable saying, you know, yes, we want the summit, yes, September's great, no, we don't have the time to talk about it now.

Sounds like we're doing that, so that's fantastic, but if we could have some sort of neutral sort of facilitator, I feel like then people feel a little more like they have to defend whatever they come to the table with, and a little bit more like, okay, where's the compromise, where's the, where can we have the movements forward in the conversation instead of putting on the armor to go into something.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:40 - 1:13:52)
Okay. All set? Everybody all set?

All right, so we'll move on now to discussion and possible vote on traffic patterns in the neighborhood of Reddington Street.

[Speaker 3] (1:13:54 - 1:13:59)
Can I just ask one clarifying question on that last thing? The financial update?

[Speaker 17] (1:13:59 - 1:14:00)
Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (1:14:01 - 1:14:13)
Are we kind of resolving and giving direction to Sean to actually definitely go and have someone from the outside as a result of this conversation, or that's kind of in the ether, we're not so sure about it?

[Speaker 2] (1:14:14 - 1:14:14)
Well, how about...

[Speaker 3] (1:14:14 - 1:14:15)
You agreed.

[Speaker 2] (1:14:16 - 1:14:18)
Yeah, he said he was going to look into that.

[Speaker 3] (1:14:18 - 1:14:21)
Okay. I just didn't know if we all felt that way or not.

[Speaker 2] (1:14:22 - 1:14:24)
Well, why don't we have him look into that?

[Speaker 1] (1:14:24 - 1:15:03)
I hear it as consensus. And I also hear Katie's comment, you know, that we've got to work with our colleagues over at the schools and accommodate them as best we can. Look, we want to share these responses.

When we did it a few years ago, finance committee played a role, school committee, or school administration played a role, town staff played a role, and we had an outside facilitator. I think that seems to work, and I think if we can replicate that, I think we can try to find consensus around financial principles that will help the town on a broad policy level.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:04 - 1:15:09)
Sounds great. Excellent. All set?

[Speaker 17] (1:15:09 - 1:15:09)
Yep.

[Speaker 3] (1:15:09 - 1:15:10)
Thank you.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:10 - 1:15:21)
So now we'll go back to discussion, possible vote on the traffic patterns, neighborhood of Reddington Street. This is the second time we're bringing this up. Do the officers need a microphone?

[Speaker 1] (1:15:21 - 1:15:24)
Yes, we have Officer Wilson and Officer Reen here.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:24 - 1:15:33)
We have Officer Wilson and Officer Reen here. I'm just wondering, do we have questions?

[Speaker 3] (1:15:35 - 1:15:38)
I think it's fantastic that they're here as a follow-up to those.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:38 - 1:16:04)
We also have Assistant Town Administrator and DPW Director Gina Acresta. We are recommending that we go back to a two-way street. We had Chief Archer here earlier tonight.

They all have evaluated this issue, and they feel confident that going back to a two-way would help support public safety, but also they're here to present some insight into this as well.

[Speaker 2] (1:16:04 - 1:16:20)
I do have one question. So all the town staff, you're in favor of making this a two-way. At our last Select Board meeting, there was a resident who had an issue with the bump-out.

I'm just wondering if...

[Speaker 17] (1:16:22 - 1:16:23)
Thank you.

[Speaker 14] (1:16:25 - 1:17:04)
We're kind of getting some bearings on it. We're all in agreement that a two-way is absolutely acceptable, but the bump-out now is on a side where it's making the turn off of Reddington Street difficult. Putting it on the other side will protect the crosswalk with the two-way traffic coming out to make sure that cars have to look before they just cut the corner too tight.

Also making that a no-turn on Red was a discussion that we had to make sure you allow the pedestrians time to cross. That's our biggest concern there. The data didn't really show one way or the other if it was better or not, but we see it, the influx of foot traffic down there with more things we're putting in.

Even with a hotel, it's going to increase the foot traffic. So if we can make some safety advances before that even happens, we were all thinking that's the best way to go about it.

[Speaker 11] (1:17:04 - 1:18:17)
One other point of information that we also came up with was to put in new signage for no parking at the corner of Reddington and Humphrey where Tyriffic is and where OYO is. Because of the recent change, some of the signage has been adjusted and moved and some of it is just unreadable. So new no-parking signs to prevent parking near the corner of those areas, as well as maintaining the no-parking in front of the Hadley as it is now, is still going to maintain a safe and sufficient traffic flow and pattern in that area.

We weren't able to find any data whatsoever within the, since 2004 when we started documenting it with our CAD QED system up until 2024, very minimal. There has been no effect of traffic you could say south of King Street that has an impact of anything on Reddington up to Humphrey Street. So reverting it back to its two-way we believe would be appropriate.

[Speaker 5] (1:18:20 - 1:18:38)
I just have a question on if we do vote to support the two-way, how we will communicate to the community that now we're going back to a two-way. I did see recently, hopefully they weren't from in town, some folks going already up a two-way on Reddington.

[Speaker 14] (1:18:38 - 1:19:00)
So part of that problem is the left arrow is now visible again. The paint has faded off over time just from a winter. So some people see that, don't see the do not enter.

We're going to revert all that back. Obviously we'll have to be down there educating that it is a two-way now again. If people are, you know, we'll have to have a police presence obviously because that's what we did originally.

We slowly opened it up again. So I think us being visible down there is huge.

[Speaker 2] (1:19:01 - 1:19:03)
So what would be the date, Sean, on doing this?

[Speaker 1] (1:19:04 - 1:19:08)
You know, I think we'd have to give folks at least a month notice.

[Speaker 11] (1:19:09 - 1:19:48)
Time is on our side. We can definitely if you want to say slow roll it, you know, communication is key whether it's through local newspapers, Facebook, social media posts, robocalls, extra signage, sign boards. Just as much effort as we put into changing it to a one-way we're willing to put in the effort to revert it back to a two-way.

So we don't have the opening of a, we don't have the school mechanism being our goal line that we have to get to. So taking our time to make sure that it's communicated eloquently and appropriately I think is just something that we can take advantage of.

[Speaker 14] (1:19:49 - 1:20:02)
We talked about Upper Rockland also reverting back to regular traffic flow like it was before, not being a one-way because it's not designed for that volume that's been going up there. So that would also be part of this too just reverting all of that back before we did any of these changes.

[Speaker 1] (1:20:03 - 1:20:35)
So if the board's inclined to support this recommendation I think we could take the vote tonight we could circle back around at the next meeting, give you a schedule and have a few of these recommendations for signage rolled up so that the board can take those votes too. I think there are a number of changes. Gino can also look at any other infrastructure work that we need to do to ensure that the roadway is going to be properly marked and we've got to get contractors in to stripe and make sure it's...

[Speaker 2] (1:20:35 - 1:20:42)
Great, so Katie can we have a motion to change the traffic pattern in the neighborhood of Reddington Street back to its original?

[Speaker 5] (1:20:42 - 1:21:05)
You can but I have one more comment. Okay. And then just the conversation going back to the pedestrian safety if it necessitates some beacons or something at that intersection I think it's really important because so many folks park at the Hadley parking lot and walk to the Humphrey Street corridor and it's just...

[Speaker 11] (1:21:05 - 1:21:54)
One of the things that we have considered and taken into consideration in a long term project with this is the development of the Hadley into a commercial product. So that's a commercial project. That's going to be a whole thing down the road but as we focus our goal is immediate pedestrian safety.

So we do have the RFB there. We're attempting to try to utilize that as appropriate as necessary whether it's there or somewhere else. I believe that there's also been Mr. Creston can speak on this further but I think we do have other products that we're looking at purchasing for the town so just as we reintegrate this it definitely will be a priority considering what's going to be going in place within the area for the commercial properties.

[Speaker 5] (1:21:56 - 1:22:03)
So I will make a motion to approve the two-way traffic on Redington Street.

[Speaker 4] (1:22:04 - 1:22:04)
Second.

[Speaker 5] (1:22:05 - 1:22:13)
All in favor? Aye. And Rockland.

Well Rockland's not on the agenda just Redington so we'll have to come back for Rockland.

[Speaker 3] (1:22:14 - 1:22:14)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:22:15 - 1:22:19)
Do we have to come back for Rockland at a later time?

[Speaker 4] (1:22:22 - 1:22:22)
Yes.

[Speaker 5] (1:22:22 - 1:22:30)
The recommendation by neighborhood of Reddington Street. Oh neighborhood of Reddington Street. Is it vague enough David?

Patterns in the neighborhood.

[Speaker 14] (1:22:31 - 1:22:34)
And that was changed originally when we changed Reddington Street. That's what the language was.

[Speaker 5] (1:22:35 - 1:22:47)
Okay. So I'll make a second motion to amend the motion to say two-way traffic in the neighborhood of Reddington Street. David will you accept that friendly amendment?

[Speaker 2] (1:22:51 - 1:22:55)
So you're still set. All in favor again?

[Speaker 5] (1:22:55 - 1:22:55)
Aye.

[Speaker 2] (1:22:56 - 1:23:49)
Motion carries again. Alright. Possible Thank you.

Discussion of possible appointment process for boards and appointments. This is what we looked at last week and I didn't get any emails or phone calls on any other additions other than David's recommendation to to speak with professionals and Katie's recommendation to drop the timeline on vacancies during regular session to 15 days versus the 30 that I first presented. So what I would like to do is to get a motion to accept this.

[Speaker 4] (1:23:49 - 1:23:56)
Wait where is the where will professional staff be involved and engaged here?

[Speaker 2] (1:23:56 - 1:24:28)
Under May 1st application sent to select board members to be integrated and scaled on a one to five recommendations and appointments. That's where it should say so that would be to the liaison that would be for the liaison to be contacting professional staff professional staff, chairmans and anyone else that you would feel you'd want to get their recommendation. So how would you like to put that in there?

How would you like that to read?

[Speaker 4] (1:24:30 - 1:24:49)
Typically these run typically with the highly technical committees such as water sewer infrastructure advisory I am a liaison certainly but you know Sean and Gino are certainly far more versed technically and they may roll up those recommendations to us

[Speaker 2] (1:24:49 - 1:24:53)
so that's what you would do as a liaison is go and work with them and say

[Speaker 4] (1:24:54 - 1:25:11)
that's fine it just didn't say it here so I'm fine with that process I just want to make sure that was included it wasn't just a responsibility of the liaison we were incorporating the feedback and commentary from the professional staff

[Speaker 5] (1:25:13 - 1:26:01)
More to say it is not the liaison's option it is the requirement that they work with professional staff or are you saying it's the option? Because I think that to me that's the comment that I felt like you were making before was that and correct me if I'm mischaracterizing but the way it sort of comes across now especially on these very technical boards and commissions is that they know better than the liaison sometimes and so their opinion should be heard, must be heard in these situations and it is not rather than say it's the liaison's responsibility to hear it why not just integrate it into the process so that it is heard it is committed to be heard and then liaisons take those comments and then go forward

[Speaker 4] (1:26:02 - 1:26:06)
I'm good with that I think that captures the spirit of what I was trying to do

[Speaker 5] (1:26:06 - 1:26:08)
because I think that makes a lot of sense also

[Speaker 2] (1:26:10 - 1:26:17)
I just want to make sure how should we have that read so it should say liaison will

[Speaker 5] (1:26:17 - 1:26:38)
so I think like simultaneously with the applications coming to select board they should go to professional staff as representative on the committees like Gino being the tree warden he has a say in the tree committee and he should be reviewing applications if he so desires the same way

[Speaker 2] (1:26:38 - 1:26:41)
and then it's the liaison's job to just

[Speaker 5] (1:26:41 - 1:26:44)
yeah and then the liaison can communicate with those professional staff

[Speaker 2] (1:26:44 - 1:26:45)
reel it all in

[Speaker 5] (1:26:45 - 1:26:50)
committee members and the chair to make a recommendation to the select board

[Speaker 2] (1:26:50 - 1:27:07)
ok so with that said we have a motion to adopt this new policy for boards and committees so moved second all in favor

[Speaker 5] (1:27:08 - 1:27:34)
can we just make sure that now that we have a process that the process is available for the community to get a hold of so whether we're posting it on the town website or so that when folks want to get involved they don't have to run for select board they could easily find this information on the town website and and they understand you know when their application will be

[Speaker 2] (1:27:34 - 1:28:12)
reviewed that sort of thing we will do that ok so now moving on to the consent consent agenda with our consent I need to pull out one one section on the consent agenda and that is the discussion on possible vote for reappointment for committee members conservation commission I need to make an adjustment on the conservation commission to add John I just don't I need some help Tony with the language on that

[Speaker 3] (1:28:15 - 1:28:18)
I'd like to pull the whole reappointment out of the consent

[Speaker 2] (1:28:18 - 1:28:30)
agenda you want to take the whole thing out I'll hold on a minute but the conservation commission you want to take all of it out correct all right for discussion purposes at

[Speaker 3] (1:28:31 - 1:28:35)
least all right so we

[Speaker 2] (1:28:35 - 1:28:43)
take ok so we're going to take that out we're going to take out all of this for discussion purposes so then can we have a motion for everything else

[Speaker 3] (1:28:43 - 1:28:53)
I have a question the minutes unless I'm just not tracking here minutes say 629 and 723 do we have 629 here

[Speaker 2] (1:29:01 - 1:29:10)
oh wait the 629 is our Saturday yeah I'm sorry take that out yeah so take out so let's remove minutes to for next time

[Speaker 10] (1:29:14 - 1:29:15)
yes please

[Speaker 4] (1:29:16 - 1:29:20)
motion to approve the consent agenda as amended

[Speaker 2] (1:29:21 - 1:29:22)
so

[Speaker 4] (1:29:23 - 1:29:24)
items 1 through 4

[Speaker 2] (1:29:24 - 1:29:31)
items 1 through 4 all in favor aye so now let's go to discussion of possible vote

[Speaker 3] (1:29:31 - 1:29:50)
can I say one note on that there was one of these walks or runs or something that it seemed like the group was offering to kind of monitor themselves or kind of shepherd themselves through the streets or something like that I assume that's not going to be the case no

[Speaker 1] (1:29:50 - 1:29:56)
you know our police department does have to review these applications and certainly I just wanted to

[Speaker 3] (1:29:56 - 1:29:59)
take note that yeah someone needs to be

[Speaker 1] (1:29:59 - 1:30:01)
I can certainly follow up make sure that

[Speaker 3] (1:30:06 - 1:30:07)
okay sorry

[Speaker 2] (1:30:07 - 1:30:20)
okay so we have six off so now we're going to seven for five and six I'm sorry going back to five six is off going back to five right

[Speaker 3] (1:30:21 - 1:30:30)
yes so should I go you should go okay so I'm just I'm just confused why we just have a few of these and why we're not doing all of them

[Speaker 2] (1:30:30 - 1:31:03)
so the reason being is on these committees right here we do not have multiple applicants involved in these committees whereas the other committees had multiple applicants that have come in on these committees here no one else is applying except for in the conservation commission and in the conservation commission they did go Tony went through all the other applicants and the applicant that they have she and Sean are recommending is the applicant that they need

[Speaker 5] (1:31:06 - 1:31:18)
that's also the same case for the tree committee the tree committee had multiple applicants they reviewed all of them and they made a recommendation for the tree committee because I checked with them today

[Speaker 3] (1:31:18 - 1:31:21)
in earth removal

[Speaker 2] (1:31:21 - 1:31:41)
earth removal didn't have additional war memorial didn't have additional Katie said tree committee was all set they had followed through on everything constable we didn't have anything so in order just at least to get a bulk of committees through and on our agenda that's why you see these committees

[Speaker 3] (1:31:43 - 1:32:01)
if the committee has certain people that need to be reappointed plus they may have other openings or maybe other people applying are we saying that we want to hold off from people being reappointed because we're waiting to evaluate if some people are applying would knock them out

[Speaker 2] (1:32:01 - 1:32:49)
I think what we're saying is if we have a committee if we have a committee and we have people whose terms are up and they need to be reappointed but we also have maybe several people who have applied I think the question has to come in at what point are we looking at the other people who have also applied so we need to have a more robust conversation about that because you sit on a committee it doesn't mean that you're grandfathered into the committee so the reason why you see these these few committees on here they were just simpler there weren't multiple there weren't multiple applicants for the committee and we didn't have to have a long drawn out conversation about it

[Speaker 3] (1:32:51 - 1:33:05)
I'm following that and then I kind of look at the first one affordable housing trust so four were expiring four seeking reappointment nobody's seeking number not seeking reappointment

[Speaker 2] (1:33:06 - 1:33:14)
so on affordable housing trust we have a number of people who have applied for affordable housing trust

[Speaker 3] (1:33:16 - 1:33:20)
so we really are talking about so the question is everybody's up

[Speaker 17] (1:33:22 - 1:33:23)
this is a

[Speaker 3] (1:33:23 - 1:33:45)
I think this is a shift not necessarily good or bad this feels different so we have volunteers who have been involved and committed and they want to be reappointed and now we're kind of putting a little bit of a pause button to say now we're going to kind of look at you in the context of other people that are applying

[Speaker 2] (1:33:45 - 1:34:22)
it's actually not a shift it has happened several times in the past I have experience with that myself it's just if there are other applicants the question to the other applicants we have to address other applicants because they have put an application in you have to be able to say yes we think that you would be a good fit on here or no people need opportunity and to have a chance to get onto a committee if they want to be on a committee it's just about opening up and having a conversation which we can do at another meeting

[Speaker 3] (1:34:28 - 1:34:46)
I hear that I also hear from a lot of committees that I'm a liaison for anxiety about the fact that these reappointments it's been a month and a half or so since they expired even though they're being told it hasn't expired and people are like can I vote can I not vote

[Speaker 2] (1:34:46 - 1:34:51)
legal counsel is weighed in and they can vote so there's no issues with that

[Speaker 3] (1:34:53 - 1:34:57)
but still for them it feels a little bit like they're kind of being left in a little bit of limbo

[Speaker 2] (1:34:57 - 1:34:58)
I can understand that

[Speaker 3] (1:34:58 - 1:35:16)
so I guess I'm trying to find the middle ground here which is can we we just talked about the process can we definitively vote on the rest of these next time for example

[Speaker 2] (1:35:16 - 1:35:17)
I would say so

[Speaker 5] (1:35:18 - 1:36:28)
I would think Doug it would be unfair for us to say this set falls to a certain set of guidelines and then the set next week falls to a different set of guidelines I don't think that would be very fair and even if we set the boards and committee process if we're holding everyone to that process great I think that we are I think we've confirmed that we are I think at least the committees that I've spoken to that I am a liaison to they have confirmed that they have when they looked at the new appointment they looked at the other applicants if there were any so if that is the case for the ones that we go over week after next then I think we should put them on the agenda and approve them as well because it's sort of a drawn out process and I know it's a constraint on the committee members who are not seeking reappointment because they're carrying the weight right of a lot of it and answering questions that they don't all know the answers to feels a little maybe unnecessarily anxious so let's just get it all cleared up

[Speaker 3] (1:36:28 - 1:36:30)
so we with town staff

[Speaker 10] (1:36:30 - 1:37:00)
so can we run through just to make this crystal clear so to use your affordable housing trust so there are four that are expiring four that are seeking reappointment but then there are candidates in addition to those four is that what we're saying so then it's up to the liaison right to work with town staff to vet those candidates that are not you know currently in place right to see who then is going to be the new board is that what we're saying

[Speaker 3] (1:37:00 - 1:37:13)
yeah and I wasn't aware that there are other applicants for affordable housing so but anyway so we each be whoever we're liaison to we're kind of responsible for jet streaming this over the next week basically

[Speaker 2] (1:37:14 - 1:37:16)
that would be good I can send you all a list

[Speaker 10] (1:37:16 - 1:37:23)
I have folks for all of those boards I got some from you I think

[Speaker 4] (1:37:23 - 1:37:25)
just today you can send them to everybody that would be helpful

[Speaker 2] (1:37:28 - 1:37:53)
so are we okay so I'd like to just pull out the conservation commission one because the recommendation is for Sam and and a recommendation for Jonathan Gombrowski to be the alternate please go ahead

[Speaker 5] (1:37:53 - 1:37:59)
would you mind that way we the folks at home can hear you

[Speaker 2] (1:38:02 - 1:38:05)
does this mean that Jonathan has to return his gift

[Speaker 13] (1:38:06 - 1:40:43)
I just Tony Berendowitz 34 Bayview Drive chair of the conservation commission just two points I want to make about the conservation commission to be aware the commission is a little different from other town committees we are implementing we are the administrators of a state law and there are you know strict deadlines so it's very important that we have a full staff we've had trouble in the past about meeting quorum the second thing about the commission is I do appreciate you want to get more involved although I am not in favor of getting rid of the Chevron case at Supreme Court level to have the courts examine the expertise of the boards because it's very important in the commission to have people who have been there for a long time because it's not easy stuff and the longer you're there the better so just those two points I want to make we have one person Randall who has expertise she's in the marine center over in Nahant that is up for reappointment and we have Sam who is going to fill John's voting position and he with his 16 page resume I think shows his background is good for this job John Gabrowski after the presentation at the last meeting was so felt so strongly that he enjoyed working on it and he had something to offer that he said since Molly left she was our alternate non-voting member that he would be more than willing to be the non voting member he had issues with being able to devote enough time but if he's a non-voting member he doesn't have to come to every meeting it would be less but we could still tap into his expertise which is also extensive so that's what we have Randall up for reappointment we have Sam up for appointment as a voting member and John as an alternate non-voting member right I don't know if there's any questions second

[Speaker 3] (1:40:44 - 1:40:45)
you're the liaison

[Speaker 2] (1:40:45 - 1:40:57)
okay so we have a motion and a second all in favor Tony thank you so much thank you very much make sure John knows he can keep that gift

[Speaker 17] (1:40:58 - 1:41:01)
the commissioner

[Speaker 2] (1:41:01 - 1:41:06)
all right great so now we're going to move to select board time

[Speaker 3] (1:41:08 - 1:41:11)
did we just approve just the conservation commission

[Speaker 2] (1:41:11 - 1:41:31)
you're right hold on so now we just have to also do the constables earth removal tree committee and war memorial scholarship committee do we have a second all in favor okay so we got everybody there select board time Doug

[Speaker 3] (1:41:33 - 1:41:46)
yes so I don't know if it was an oversight or not but we don't have the town administrators report on the agenda so is that

[Speaker 2] (1:41:46 - 1:41:51)
there's a recommendation by the town administrator if we're pressed for time we should drop his report

[Speaker 3] (1:41:52 - 1:42:26)
okay we've done that two meetings in a row this will be the third in a row and it wasn't even on the agenda so it seems unfortunate at least for I mean it's not about me it's about people in town understanding what else is going on in town so I know at certain times our town administrator can be enthusiastic and sharing what's going on in town and we want to keep our meetings streamlined but I do feel like there could be some reasonable middle ground to make sure that we're sharing kind of what's happening

[Speaker 2] (1:42:26 - 1:42:45)
so as you know tonight we need to go into executive session and that was the issue with tonight so possibly could we post the town administrator report on the website and in the future we should be able to always get that in there

[Speaker 3] (1:42:45 - 1:43:21)
the next item is that I fervently request that on our next agenda that we take up the issue of the select board handbook because this is an outstanding kind of festering issue that not all of us have signed this handbook and I'm not even clear why or who but I think it's really important that we're all operating with the same set of rules and if there's issues that we kind of get all on the same page about that

[Speaker 2] (1:43:21 - 1:43:48)
okay so on the last time the handbook was presented we had a number actually you had several issues I had several issues so maybe we well we'll go over the entire handbook and then well I don't know if we need to go over the entire yes because Danielle's doing we'll go over the entire handbook and then we'll start taking out issues and then we will bring it back around so we'll probably have the handbook

[Speaker 3] (1:43:48 - 1:44:46)
on the next two meetings okay I'm not looking to make a mountain out of molehill we went through it last time I got comfortable I signed it so that you know I feel I'm done I don't have an issue but I feel like it seems like some people do and let's just make sure we get that resolved because it doesn't really feel good that we're kind of operating in this gray space to me at least since we're not having the full time administrators report the big blue bargains we've I think we've had a couple requests I know there's like a million line list of things to focus on I just want to call that out and see if it really feels like they're so flexible they're like such an incredibly important spirit in town even if we can only find a space for a couple months

[Speaker 2] (1:44:46 - 1:45:02)
the superintendent of schools over a year ago said that once they moved into the new school she felt that they would be able to find something at the school so that was over a year ago and I'm hoping that she still has

[Speaker 3] (1:45:03 - 1:45:04)
I don't care where

[Speaker 2] (1:45:04 - 1:45:16)
I think everybody on this board really wants to get that going appreciates all their hard work can I

[Speaker 5] (1:45:16 - 1:45:37)
say something about yes I would love to see them anywhere including the schools but if there's a space that is not controlled by the school it does make the volunteering a little bit easier because of custodians and quarries and things in school buildings so just throwing that out if there's a space not school adjacent

[Speaker 4] (1:45:39 - 1:48:01)
so I just have a few things so we had a very successful on July 27th big blue bargains was there they raised money they really got out there and they were shaking folks down for the 50-50 raffle tickets you did it too Katie it's a rite of passage but they were awesome so just to piggyback on your point Doug I have had conversations with Max Casper as recently as last week Max is working on a solution to potentially move big blue bargains to the modulars at Clark is the goal obviously his focus is on opening the new school first and foremost but once we're beyond that grand opening we anticipate having further conversations and hopefully getting them a temporary if not permanent home within the mods there I do just want to bring up and then just as far as DPW we had great help from Brian and from Justin with the DPW so Sean I'll send Gino Gino's here, Gino, thank you sorry but you guys were fantastic so thank you also for making that parking lot shine and having a great event so thank you also I'm concerned that as a result of the town administrative report being skipped at our last meetings our board may not know that our director of assessment Cheryl Michella has resigned and her last day is August 29th I think as a town considering we've had three assessors within the last two years with the third recently submitting a resignation that we should utilize this opportunity to bring in a consultant and most thoroughly evaluate the assessing function as well as property valuations within the town now is not the time to be complacent with our assessing function and we need to ensure that we as a town have an exemplary process in place that will allow for our board of assessors and the next director of assessment for our town to work together in a most collaborative manner and I ask you Mr. Town Administrator can you make that happen

[Speaker 1] (1:48:02 - 1:48:31)
certainly happy to look into it and report back to the board we have done that previously just four or five years ago we hired a consultant that prepared a report I'll send that off to the board so you can take a look at what that consultant had identified certainly I have been concerned about making sure that we have the right fit I am hopeful that we can work something out

[Speaker 5] (1:48:40 - 1:50:11)
I'll be brief I just feel like it would be remiss if I did not say that we spent the very beginning of this of this meeting loving and supporting a man who has given many years of service to this town whose family has given up many things for him to sit in these seats and participate in the democratic process who has been through some of the worst things and is still here smiling and commending us for our service we just need to try to respect one another and respect the community when they come into this room I just don't enjoy being part of this board when we bring ourselves down to that level it's the worst part about public service and I implore all of us to rise to a level of respect that we each deserve and to display that to each other and to display that to the community because I just it's the worst part about us when we get into those spaces and it's hard to pull yourself back when you're in those spaces and Doug if you felt like I was being disrespectful I apologize but I don't think that we were all the best versions of ourselves so that's something we could all work on

[Speaker 2] (1:50:18 - 1:50:35)
I want to take a moment to thank Joe Duet Alden Bruno and Danielle Oretzky for bringing tonight's select board meeting to the public. Thank you gentlemen Motion to adjourn?

[Speaker 8] (1:50:35 - 1:50:37)
So moved Second?

[Speaker 2] (1:50:38 - 1:50:39)
All in favor? Aye