[Speaker 13] (0:11 - 2:01)
. .

[Speaker 4] (2:25 - 4:45)
. . .

. .

[Speaker 1] (4:45 - 4:59)
. . .

. . .

[Speaker 3] (5:08 - 5:14)
. . .

[Speaker 1] (5:14 - 5:22)
. . .

. .

[Speaker 12] (5:47 - 7:14)
. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. Panama principal Tony situación My brother John and I both served in Vietnam, and I feel that it's a disgrace to them the way the town is treating the VFW. I really am upset with the way that the town has offered nothing really in the way of compensation or represent for the fact that we built the post ourselves on town land, and then because of agreements with the town about the property underneath it, we're not allowed to own the land or the building, and it just seems to me that this close to Veteran's Day, next Monday, Veteran's Day, we're now going to close the post, do away with it, another decision made to get rid of us, and it seems like that's all this town wants is to get rid of the veterans. Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (7:15 - 7:22)
Thank you, Mr. Jason Mora.

[Speaker 8] (7:34 - 11:42)
Good evening, Maura Lau, 15 Outlook Road, Precinct 3. I guess I'll just start real quick with just a couple of events coming up that I just wanted to make sure get well-documented and well-publicized and in support. So the Master Plan Committee will be hosting an open evening for community members to join.

It will be here at the high school. It's on November 14th from 6.30 to 8 p.m. We look forward to the community coming out and having their voices heard and being part of the process. So that's one of two public evenings for that.

And then also on the same evening, so hopefully, we're hoping you can dip into both events, Matt Bocci is an opioid awareness speaker that came to the high school last May. It collided with town meeting night, unfortunately. So we didn't probably get as much of a robust engagement as we may have otherwise.

So hopefully, people can kind of pop in there and also hear his important message. It is an important message for whether you have students or not. So many people are dealing with addiction, have had it in their family, or just need to be aware, right?

So we can kind of see the signs and be supportive of each other in our community. So I do want to address, sorry I'm rusty at this, okay, I would like to address the topic of Hadley and wrap in our community need for togetherness. I'd like to just remember and kind of remind the board about the topic to be mindful when making this really important decision and signing on the dotted line, that you are mindful not to give over everything to the developers.

That the best interest of our town and our community members is really fully considered. Obviously, finances have an important role, but you know, there is more to consider than just that. So if we could also keep in mind its proximity to Linscott Park and that Linscott Park will be enhanced, not damaged by the construction, please.

That would be significant. You also want to keep in mind that with Blaney School, the direction I realize for Reddington, if it hasn't changed, I know it's going to, it might be thoughtful to kind of send the trucks around to the other parts of the community so just that one little area isn't just so heavily burdened by that. Something down the road to consider.

Finally, I want to make sure that the community space is considered in there and that that is actually going to happen and it's not going to be an afterthought and dismissed as was if I had a redo button. I think we'd all know a redo button right now, but if I had a redo button back two days ago, I would have known a couple of different things. I would have known to indefinitely postpone that warrant.

And I would, yep, I'm going to say one more sentence. And then I would also have probably known to do a recall the night following. Thank you.

Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (11:45 - 11:47)
Mr. Schultz.

[Speaker 11] (11:55 - 13:29)
Jackson Schultz, 23 Hamden Street, chair of the Harbor and Waterfront Advisory Committee. I'm here to speak tonight about transparency and process. I know that the board is looking at appointing five members to the Harbor Advisory Committee meeting and I have a list here of 23 applicants that applied to be on the Harbor Advisory Committee.

I'd like to know what the vetting process was to narrow it down to three new members when I have a list of 23 here that want to be on the committee. The liaison who's supposed to put together the list of new appointments was supposed to, I understand, work in conjunction with the chair of the committee, who is me. We have actually never met.

And I don't, sorry, with stop and shop, I wouldn't even recognize you. So I think what I'd like to do is propose possibly tabling this tonight until we have a chance to sit down and look at the applicants and process what the process was for vetting those people. Also, the people who are not reappointed, I think they deserve to understand why they were not reappointed.

There should have been a conversation with them as well as to what the motivation was for not reappointing two members who have been on the committee for a long period of time and they really were invaluable. One person used to work for the EPA. So when we're dealing with the eelgrass issue, he's a really important person to have on the committee.

So I think that's it. So thank you very much. I'm going to go home and log on from home.

[Speaker 1] (13:30 - 13:57)
Okay. We'll be here. Thank you, Mr. Schultz. Is there anyone else here for public comment? Okay. Next, we are going to postpone the town administrator's report at this time and we're going to go straight into capital improvement plan with our town treasurer, Patrick Luddy.

Mr. Luddy?

[Speaker 6] (14:13 - 16:21)
Okay. Can you all see that? Yep.

All right. So let me do a brief update on the capital process. I'm going to talk about some projects that have been approved by town meeting in the last couple of years and where they stand.

And then I'm going to talk about the process for updating the plan for a town meeting in May. Okay. To recap, some recently completed projects, the Swampscott Elementary School is up and running.

We have students in the building, which is excellent. That's the largest undertaking the town has ever had for a project. So that's great.

Phase one of interactive whiteboard replacements at the schools is complete. Acquisition of mobile LED trailer for the rec department is complete. I know some of you probably have been out there and seen those movie screenings.

They're very popular. So that was great to see come out of the capital plan. We've done control room upgrades at the police department and we've installed a sprinkler system at the fire department.

Ongoing projects we have in place are a water main replacement program. That's appropriated nearly every year. That's ongoing at various locations throughout town.

We have a water main replacement program. We have ongoing seawall repair work, sprinkler system repairs at the high school, auditorium upgrades that we've been talking about in prior meetings a lot, that's ongoing, and upgrades to the middle school STEM lab. And on the next slide here, we have projects that have been approved but haven't officially started construction phase.

These are either in planning or design phase or procurement phase. I tried to list the biggest ones outstanding so that they're in front of you to keep in mind. Moving forward to update the capital plan ahead of town meeting in May.

I've been working with the capital improvement committee. Yeah?

[Speaker 3] (16:47 - 16:53)
I didn't know if it was because it was IDDE and the thing we're doing is technically something different, but I just wanted to...

[Speaker 11] (16:53 - 16:59)
My apologies, Patrick. Thank you for the clarification. Contract that's been signed.

[Speaker 3] (17:00 - 17:00)
Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (17:01 - 17:11)
I have a question on that slide too. So the things that are in the planning and design phases, can you give any additional information about any of them?

[Speaker 6] (17:11 - 17:19)
If you have questions about specific projects and where they're at in the design phase, I can take those from you and go back to the department heads that are managing the projects.

[Speaker 2] (17:19 - 17:29)
Sure. If maybe we could just get like sort of a like a percentage of completion through the design or when we expect the design return to us.

[Speaker 6] (17:29 - 17:29)
Sure.

[Speaker 2] (17:30 - 17:33)
So we know if it's this year, next year.

[Speaker 1] (17:37 - 17:42)
Is that on the capital project, the capital report that you sent, percentage completed?

[Speaker 6] (17:42 - 17:59)
Projects that have construction in progress and there's purchase orders issued or spending that's occurred, that'll show up on the report. But if we have things that are in design phase and you want to know where they're at with design, that'd be a more pointed question. I'd have to go to the person working with the design team.

[Speaker 1] (18:00 - 18:00)
Yeah.

[Speaker 6] (18:00 - 18:02)
But I can get that for you.

[Speaker 1] (18:02 - 18:05)
Maybe you could keep that as a rolling document just to send out.

[Speaker 6] (18:05 - 18:05)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (18:05 - 18:06)
That'd be great.

[Speaker 6] (18:06 - 18:07)
That's a good idea. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (18:08 - 18:17)
But on the Clark School renovation, can you find out? Just find out what direction we're going in there?

[Speaker 6] (18:18 - 18:23)
Yes. Yeah. Obviously there have been changes.

I'll get updated information on that.

[Speaker 1] (18:24 - 18:43)
And then I just, on the EV charging stations, is there anybody that can comment on those at the new school? As far as, or maybe Max? Because we're getting some, I have received a couple calls that they're not working.

[Speaker 5] (18:45 - 19:10)
The stations at the new school were installed as part of the construction, not through a separate capital line. There have been some challenges with the activation of them. We're still working with the electricians who installed them to get them activated.

We anticipate it be quite soon, but there have been some some issues.

[Speaker 1] (19:10 - 19:12)
Okay. Great. Okay.

[Speaker 3] (19:13 - 19:16)
You want it actually working, EV charging stations?

[Speaker 2] (19:16 - 19:21)
Well, apparently they appear on some of the Tesla maps that they are active, so people have been accessing them.

[Speaker 3] (19:22 - 19:22)
Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (19:23 - 19:25)
I know, but I was just saying. Okay.

[Speaker 6] (19:27 - 20:26)
Okay. Looking forward to updating the plan for town meeting in May. I've been working with the Capital Improvement Committee.

They've met a few times this fiscal year. Two new members were appointed to the committee this year, so we took a little time to get them up to speed. The request forms were approved at their meeting on October 29th, and those were distributed to departments and the select board, the Finance Committee, yesterday.

So the memo went out and the link for the electronic form. There were some updates to the form, but largely the same format as last year. And once we get data back at the end of the month, we're going to work on review with the town administration team and vetting what department heads have submitted, and then with that information we'll be able to update the debt management plan and reserve analysis so that when we get to the point that Finance Committee is looking at these projects or requests, they have an idea of what our resources are available.

[Speaker 1] (20:26 - 20:27)
So what is your closing date?

[Speaker 6] (20:28 - 20:30)
That's on another slide.

[Speaker 1] (20:31 - 20:36)
Okay, and also do the schools, the schools are under the same calendar?

[Speaker 6] (20:37 - 21:14)
The same information I sent out yesterday went to the schools. They're on the same calendar. Okay, these are some projects that were included in the last iteration of the capital plan that was published in the town meeting warrant in May.

So these are just some of the bigger ones that we were anticipating last year to be doing in FY 26. So we'll be looking at these closely to update or remove or push out projects, reprioritize once we get all the information back at the end of the month to see how things have changed since May. If there are any questions, let me know.

[Speaker 3] (21:15 - 21:22)
No, but just back a couple slides. What you showed us there, Patrick, that's not a comprehensive, that stuff that was in design or?

[Speaker 6] (21:23 - 21:29)
That's just cherry-picked. There is a whole report. I think it was sent out to you recently.

[Speaker 3] (21:29 - 21:30)
Just for people that are watching.

[Speaker 6] (21:31 - 21:34)
Yeah, it's not all inclusive. I'm just trying to highlight some of the bigger projects.

[Speaker 2] (21:36 - 21:45)
Patrick, on this slide, the high school auditorium upgrades, are some of them, is that dollar amount now offset at all by the grants or is that in addition to?

[Speaker 6] (21:46 - 22:03)
So that's still in flux. There's kind of three different phases to that project. We've been trying to phase that project.

So there is a significant request out there that addresses more work that hasn't already been approved. So that'll come up.

[Speaker 1] (22:04 - 22:08)
How did we leave that? Joe, maybe you could help out. How did we leave that?

We've talked about it.

[Speaker 2] (22:09 - 22:14)
I think we have to swing back around after we have more time from National Grid.

[Speaker 4] (22:16 - 22:17)
It wasn't December.

[Speaker 2] (22:17 - 22:26)
I hear that Joe can't get a microphone right now. I'm just trying, where we left the National Grid grant.

[Speaker 10] (22:27 - 22:28)
High school auditorium upgrades.

[Speaker 14] (22:28 - 23:11)
Oh, so the National Grid, they had to reevaluate because of some internal process and then they came back with a another offer which was originally at $240,000. When they reevaluated the project, it came to $199,000. So they're still ready to give us $199,000, but they extended the timeline for us so we don't have to have the project finished until the end of March.

So Max and I are preparing a warrant article for the special town meeting to get that approved. So it cuts the project in half by almost 50% still. And they were, because they kind of took a little bit off, they gave us some more time to get it done.

[Speaker 2] (23:12 - 23:17)
So that is part of this, I don't know.

[Speaker 6] (23:17 - 23:26)
Yeah, that's what was plugged in the plan for FY26 at annual town meeting. Obviously since then everything has happened, so.

[Speaker 15] (23:29 - 23:34)
Any other questions on this slide?

[Speaker 1] (23:37 - 23:44)
Wait, I do have one question on the cemetery surplus fill removal. Gina, are we still looking, we punched this out.

[Speaker 11] (23:45 - 23:48)
Yeah, that number is probably gonna be cut in half to wrap that up.

[Speaker 1] (23:49 - 23:51)
And then will that finish it up?

[Speaker 11] (23:51 - 23:52)
We'll finish it up.

[Speaker 6] (23:54 - 25:04)
So that's all information too we'll get with department heads this month. We'll say this is what was in the plan for the coming year, now where are we before we bring it to town meeting for vote. So stuff like what we're bringing up now is what we're gonna go through.

Next slide. It's just a highlight of some policy decisions and financial considerations that the Finance Committee and the Select Board will probably consider once CIC does their review. This would be programming board and committee priorities into the capital plan, recommendations to town meeting, reviewing grant opportunities, looking at borrowing versus expending current resources to pay for some of these projects as the cost of borrowing has changed.

I want to highlight our credit rating was reaffirmed in October at AAA, so that is good. The rating criteria, as I mentioned last time I was before you for the note approval, has changed. So they're gonna be weighing things differently as they evaluate municipalities credit going forward.

So that's just something we're gonna keep in mind as we make decisions like what we do with the capital plan.

[Speaker 1] (25:05 - 25:07)
What is it they're weighing in our debt?

[Speaker 6] (25:07 - 26:31)
Yeah, they're weighing debt and liabilities heavier, and they're giving us less credit for the strong economy that we benefit from being in the Metro Boston area. So that's just a it's a change, but it doesn't mean we have, you know, concern at this point. We just have need to use that to inform our behavior going forward.

And also, like every year, we look at deferring projects where appropriate and financially necessary or accelerating projects when it's advantageous and financially prudent. So that's just another part of the exercise we're gonna do. And lastly, I'll just recap the timeline.

This is included in the budget timeline that Amy sent out last month, but these are all the key dates for the capital plan. Obviously, I said this month we're gathering data, and then we're gonna take a week or two to review as a team internally, and then we will move on to Capital Improvement Committee review in December, and from there we'll go to Finance Committee in January, and obviously we'll bring that to the Select Board as well to get that input before everything is finalized for town meeting. So those are just the dates that I pulled out of that master budget timeline for you.

And that's all I have.

[Speaker 1] (26:32 - 27:16)
Do you have some more questions? Okay, so the only question I have is Joe and Max, can you just have a conversation with Patrick tomorrow about what your needs are, just to see what we can do to take care of that possibility of getting a plant? All right, so moving on, we will now have a discussion about the signage and changing parking restrictions on Mason Road and Orchard Road.

Max Casper?

[Speaker 5] (27:22 - 31:13)
So I don't think we're actually going to be looking for a vote tonight. There have been some changing situations at the intersection of Orchard Road and Mason Road. All in all, the rollout with the opening of the new school has been been very good.

The traffic flows have been difficult in some particular locations, but you know with drastic sort of changes in the one-way flow and different traffic maneuvers through the through the UU and out into Forest Ave and the new school being so close to the middle school, to not have, you know, chaos is actually a success. And it's really gotten better and better since the first day of school. There was some some real hiccups the first day of school that were operational.

What we were going to talk about tonight is the intersection of Mason and Orchard Road. The first couple of weeks of school we were we were having some real congestion at that intersection. The engineers did some analysis at the intersection, brought forward some recommendations to improve that intersection.

What's interesting is the intersection has has morphed a little bit on its own and a little bit as a result of the parking changes on Mason Road that made it resident only. Those parking changes weren't intended to impact the intersection, but in fact they did because there's so few cars on Mason Road that it's created this makeshift lane that the parents are backing up on and has led to less congestion at the intersection. So the the recommendations that are that are in your packet at this point are actually a little bit outdated and we're going to be taking a closer look.

And there's no there's no emergent situation there. The intersection day in and day out is is safe and and not congested and and cars are not getting backed up that aren't waiting to get into the school traffic. There still may be some tweaks we can make to make sure the the flows are consistent day in and day out and like one parked car that's a resident parked car doesn't doesn't mess mess things up.

But we're going to continue to look at that and additionally we are going to have a follow-up probably final neighborhood meeting. We had a number of those over the course of the summer and leading up to the opening of the new school and the intention was always to have have another one once things were open and we saw how things were going. So we had an internal meeting this week with the PD with Gino and myself and we talked about the content of that what that might look like and it's not confirmed but right now we're looking at Monday November 18th.

We're considering having it at the police department just because there's a lot of activity here at the high school that day but that's not that's not set in stone so if if if we feel like that the PD room might not work for any reason depending on what we're kind of anticipating for how many people are going to show up we could we can look at that but that's where we are right now that's a quick update and we'll talk more about that intersection at that meeting and then it you know there's a I think there's a probability that there will be something brought forth eventually probably pretty minor parking changes at that intersection just to allow for the traffic flow okay

[Speaker 1] (31:13 - 31:24)
great so when we'll just make decisions you'll make recommendations following that's correct. Does anybody have any questions?

[Speaker 2] (31:26 - 31:30)
Max has there been any conversation about the intersection coming out of the UU?

[Speaker 5] (31:32 - 32:38)
At Forrest and Laurel? Yeah we actually yes there has been so there was two trees have been taken down and at the intersection we did three ADA pedestrian ramps they were they were late there were some of the last ones that were done so if you actually look at that intersection today versus you know two weeks before school started it's drastically different the the sidewalks are better the GPG and the DPW did a lot of sidewalk work up and down Laurel both sides of Forrest some of that intersection you know lagged a little bit into the school year but it but it actually is really come together quite nicely just just recently and I don't know if you're referring to the like traffic flows there but we we did notice very recently that it was a little bit of an awkward situation with cars coming out of the UU into Forrest Ave and Laurel and it seemed like it should be a stop and we added a stop

[Speaker 2] (32:38 - 33:47)
sign there at the at the end of the UU to make that safer having taken that route often it the pedestrian probably pedestrians make that traffic worse right because there's both parents crossing to the opposite side of the street from me onto Forrest and then a crossing the street from Laurel to the opposite side of Forrest right so we're walking up both sides of the street and the crossing guard is doing her darndest to keep traffic moving but also keeping everybody crossing safely so I just want to make sure if we added a stop sign fantastic just making sure that it's in front of behind the crosswalk so that the crossing guard has a clear view of those crossing and that we're not crossing behind a car to get to the other side of Forrest Ave so in case

[Speaker 1] (33:47 - 34:00)
anybody's gonna have a question on what's happening with Humphrey and Atlantic I know we're waiting to see what the outcome is on a grant that Margie had applied for so we'll be able to update that as we go a little bit

[Speaker 5] (34:00 - 34:24)
further yeah we can I think we can talk to that at the neighborhood meeting as well Margie and I have been having a lot of conversations about that and we're definitely heading in a good direction it's a you know with federal funded grants especially with these DOT grants there the timelines are pretty lengthy but we have to get we have to get into the into the process to even fully

[Speaker 1] (34:24 - 34:27)
understand the timeline which we're in the process now right yep yeah just

[Speaker 5] (34:27 - 34:45)
waiting on an answer that's there's multiple grant grants in play just to be clear but there's one grant that she has applied for that we are waiting on and there's one that just opened up like last week that is actually the larger tips tips program right that we will be entering into yes

[Speaker 2] (34:47 - 35:18)
is there also any consideration to wait until snow falls to make a recommendation about traffic patterns only because we have been blessed with the weather and so many families are still walking and biking to school that obviously once the snow falls we'll see it I think a pretty significant change in the amount of cars that are coming in and out of the pickup line I think the

[Speaker 5] (35:18 - 35:59)
the way to think of it is no decision we make or recommendation we make is the final and that it's fluid so I don't think we necessarily need to wait to make what is not necessarily a significant change just with the understanding that we may need additional changes or you know to modify some things we've done in the past but we have the we have the ability to do that so I think it's a it's a it's definitely a valid point and once we have more weather we haven't even had much rain like with the school open which is unbelievable but rainy and snowy days are the hardest days for drop off and pick up and and the and the traffic so we do we do have to see what

[Speaker 1] (35:59 - 36:53)
those days look like ultimately yes okay any other questions all right what's moving along here we'll go to this Clark school memorandum of understanding I am lose that you have yours max do you have yours I have electronically okay so do you want to go over that memorandum max sure so I think a little

[Speaker 5] (36:53 - 39:28)
context is necessary to understand this document and it was referenced earlier about the Clark school capital projects and there were sort of plans in place for a while for the Clark building to be continually used by the school district as preschool and administration or some some formal some form of that or mix of that or one or the other and as that as things have developed as the new school is open as the you know the the planning is happening for the sort of future of the school district in the school buildings internally at the school department the decision was made that in the short term one to three years there's essentially no planned use of the Clark school building by the school district and that is across departments within the school district we've we've met multiple times and talked it out and we've really all kind of come to that that it's not an efficient and necessary use for us right now it very likely will be in the future when at some point you know a middle school project starts to crystallize and we will need swing space that's that's in the future and the details aren't there but as we know what the new school space becomes at an absolute premium when you are doing a school project in a small town especially so we think it's really important that that asset sort of stays stays there for as a chip for the school district and for the town but what that means in the short term is it creates opportunity the the worst thing you can really have is just an empty building that sits and has expenses we've seen this with other buildings in this town in the past so through some different discussions there's been an idea about you know having some limited town use of the building in the in the short term so this memorandum is anticipating that it's I think you should think of this one as like a pilot it's just to kind of get through this fiscal year to understand the obligations of the school district in the town with the anticipated recreation uses at the at the Clark school for this year and hopefully senior center uses and in community uses I think it's it's in many ways it's like a blank slate and we get to kind of fill it in and there's a lot of opportunity there it's a it's a big

[Speaker 10] (39:28 - 39:59)
building just a quick question so I'm just I'm just reading off of the MOU number four talks about utilities maintenance repair and replacement town will pay for all utility costs associated with the main Clark school building and surrounding grounds so any idea I'm sure you know what the utility costs and basic maintenance would be I mean what are we what exactly are we signing up for yeah also we incurring and shifting from school so you know we

[Speaker 5] (39:59 - 42:09)
we do know what it costs to operate Clark as a school building right we have historic data on that and then we anticipated in the school district on what it would cost to operate Clark as a vacant building for a year we really don't know what it will cost to operate Clark as a semi-occupied building heat especially you know a steam system we don't have like total control we have the ability to to be more efficient but we don't have the ability to really tune it in where we're working on that now I can tell you that the school department budgeted around $30,000 for the Clark school building this year so it's definitely north north of that for all the expenses that we were anticipating at Clark but but this agreement sort of splits it up and keep some obligations with the school district keep some obligations with the town and I think this is a it's it's a big part of the reason why doing this on a short-term basis and getting through this year I think is a really good idea because then we can see real data and real numbers on what it looks like over the course of the next eight months and then you know to it to then know what what the following years they definitely have some programming that they're like ready to go like there will be basketball programs in December for the recreation and then you know meeting with Jackie and Danielle you know that you can just see their minds going and and all the possibilities of you know moving programs from recharge and new potential programs so I don't want to speak for them but I definitely know that you know it's it's a developing thing no no certainly a lot

[Speaker 10] (42:09 - 42:31)
of opportunity I just I just want to make sure that we're that we give them the opportunity to talk to this and to make sure that they are able to cover these costs because it does seem that we're taking this from from the school and and burdening potentially burdening and I would I would hate to you know bust somebody's budget because we're because we're doing this with good

[Speaker 1] (42:31 - 42:43)
intentions so I had a conversation with Sean during this process and we have funding in the revolving account that that would cover would cover the 30,000

[Speaker 10] (42:44 - 42:49)
okay so funding in the revolving account we have the rec revolving yes for

[Speaker 1] (42:49 - 43:06)
recreation and what about the seniors we don't have anything we just talked about the revolving account so I think and if the revolving account could cover utilities right off the bat and it can I mean I mean again I would just hate to

[Speaker 10] (43:06 - 43:12)
burden the Recreation Department with you know and and just use their revolving

[Speaker 1] (43:12 - 43:37)
account yeah Mike I'm sorry no that no that my conversation with Sean was there was absolutely no burden whatsoever that was my conversation with him so I don't you know we can go back and double-check that but after looking at that recreation account and looking at what the potential is for being able to run activities there over the next six months there didn't seem to be any okay

[Speaker 10] (43:38 - 44:11)
if there's the ability to to offset those to offset those costs I have I have no issue but I certainly would want to hear from the recreation director before we're moving forward with something with something like this because I I do think that there I just want to be able to hear from her that yes that we're that we're able to do this we're able to sustain this and this is this is within our within our plan otherwise it could just be a surprise and then the recreation revolving account is is charged thirty forty

[Speaker 1] (44:11 - 44:34)
thousand or more at the last financial update that we had the recreation revolving account had three hundred sixty thousand dollars in it yep and the liability associated with that account was pretty minimal so I think that's why Sean is saying we're not going to have any issues there whatsoever but we can

[Speaker 3] (44:34 - 44:41)
yeah just to clarify three hundred sixty thousand yes but I think what

[Speaker 2] (44:41 - 45:43)
David's getting at and I agree is just because they have the ability to pay for it doesn't mean they should have to pay for it if it's a shared space between oh yes senior center and the rec figure out some sort of way to split costs are based on usage and also to David's point if they're hope if they're hosting events at that space they want to at least be making back what it costs to keep that place heated and then some right because that's you know some of the purpose of their community engagement is to further community engagement so so yeah I think it's important just to make sure that that everybody has the same expectations going eyes wide open into this it's a great opportunity and I hope that they that that's understood but finances can be tough when you have a budget already figured out and then you're sort of getting this opportunity midway through the year max or Patrick can we find out

[Speaker 1] (45:43 - 46:06)
what it costs and whether or not it's even feasible to if somebody wanted to like have a birthday party there on a Saturday or even in the you know something in the evening how do we cover that insurance wise and what are the opportunities there for the community that's a facility rental through the

[Speaker 4] (46:06 - 46:08)
schools isn't it that's how they currently do it well that's how it's

[Speaker 2] (46:08 - 46:23)
currently done now so then it becomes a facility right through the rec department yeah but it could be done directly through the rec department instead of I would assume it would go through a similar process like a PTO on form yeah school we fill out a form we have to have certain off we have

[Speaker 4] (46:23 - 46:29)
certain pricing scales for depending on if they're in town we have to yeah so

[Speaker 10] (46:30 - 46:38)
I'm not saying this isn't an opportunity it certainly it certainly is I just want to make sure that the financial component is is thought out no that's a

[Speaker 4] (46:38 - 47:27)
that's a great point I agree with you and I think that looking from a recreation perspective I think that we probably should move towards paying more attention to what programs are profitable or making money so we understand really what we're running what it's costing to run certain things whether they're a plus or maybe a negative in really evaluating what people want to see right where we could potentially maybe make other revenue or create other revenue through the rec department but I think you know getting an understanding of what exactly we're looking to to run and what the senior center is actually looking to do with it also and understanding what their costs are associated with what events they want there or whatnot so I think we need a deeper dive really into both of those pieces to understand it so would they be

[Speaker 2] (47:27 - 47:33)
releasing the building I'm sorry I don't have the MOU in front of us today it sounds like for two years maybe releasing the building to us

[Speaker 3] (47:34 - 47:39)
they still ultimately have responsibility but we're renting it

[Speaker 2] (47:39 - 47:58)
leasing it from them do are the janitors pay through the school system or pay through there's no janitors working at the clock now only because I know that's an issue now when you go to it won't be an issue here because it's it's not

[Speaker 4] (47:58 - 48:08)
because it would be really more so there's some custodial staff that's required right though right even in town buildings we have a so we would bring in

[Speaker 1] (48:08 - 48:21)
it because we wouldn't have the restrictions on custodial staff that you find in the schools so we would still bring in custodial staff but it's it would be different like here there's more restrictions on right but for

[Speaker 4] (48:21 - 48:43)
example if we're having recreation programs run out of there mm-hmm and you know who's gonna clean it when somebody's done like how does that work you know say if the rec is running like I don't know breakfast with Santa let's say yeah all right who's gonna go in I mean we don't we're not gonna expect Danielle and Jackie to no no no no no no no no we would have so that's what I'm thinking like from a cost perspective we're somehow custodial staff even

[Speaker 1] (48:43 - 48:56)
running basketball right or whatever they're gonna those would all have to get factored into similar to when they're running a program here they factor in a cost for custodial here and there from the Senior Center certainly

[Speaker 4] (48:56 - 49:01)
even more so if they're going to be using I just want to go back to the

[Speaker 3] (49:01 - 49:35)
first thing that I'm so happy to hear is this always kind of bugged me that there was this plan that I never really saw that all the space was going to be used for some kind of programming that wasn't really clear so mysteriously this entire building that was going to be used somehow we found a way to have all that stuff happen elsewhere is that because the school the new school is basically we've got capacity there so we can run those things in the new school

[Speaker 5] (49:35 - 50:29)
for now so I mean I think the the concept was always to move the superintendent's office the student services the business office in the preschool program which are all at the middle school now over to Clark that's that's what for a long time the idea was and I don't think it was a bad idea I mean I think it could have worked but just with the it's so it's not like those those programs haven't moved to other spaces they are where they currently are when the middle school project happens like they will meet likely to move at that point to somewhere maybe Clark maybe two different buildings that you know it's not figured out yet doesn't doesn't need to be figured out yet does that answer the question so you're saying that what

[Speaker 1] (50:29 - 50:48)
was planned for there is now just changing plans originally the plan was to move administration and the preschool yeah into the car but that's not what I

[Speaker 5] (50:48 - 50:51)
mean no it's not ever planned to be permanently moved there okay no no not

[Speaker 2] (50:51 - 51:17)
permanently but you said you'd like to keep the building flexible could be a grade level there it could be these things we don't know I just think it's pretty clear that there will be a need or renovations at the middle school will be a need for something to move out of the middle school so that renovations can be done sort of yes it's temporary as a temporary thing yeah the other

[Speaker 3] (51:17 - 51:35)
things being talked about though where it looks like there was a permanent need these are things that you and I kind of bugged us glad to hear that we have been more efficient it sounds like with the space yeah I always thought when we

[Speaker 2] (51:35 - 51:53)
were having discussions prior I maybe I'm not missing a data point that you had but I always thought that that was a temporary swing space while the project was happening at the middle school and then once the middle school project was finished but there was no land to have them all say no it wasn't mine no it was

[Speaker 3] (51:53 - 51:59)
gonna be right away with the preschool was gonna go there Edmund was gonna go there and then right away it wasn't just when the middle school project was

[Speaker 1] (51:59 - 52:11)
happening right that's the distinction here there's a six million dollar line item right yeah right that's gone yeah yeah okay that was point one point two

[Speaker 3] (52:11 - 52:21)
is I'm struggling a little bit like why do we need to go through all this what why if we're gonna run a program and we haven't talked about big blue bargains

[Speaker 1] (52:21 - 52:33)
isn't that part of this concept too big big blue bargains is under a separate agreement okay that they're working out with max right now yeah and that's the

[Speaker 3] (52:33 - 53:04)
portable yep that's why the portables excluded here correct correct okay but if we wanted to run a senior program or a rec program or whatever why do we have to go through all these gymnastics why don't we just keep it all with the schools and then just do a rental thing like you talked about that they have a form for already and well just keep the utilities like we are all this machination we're gonna go through to like what about the janitors what about utilities what about the Wi-Fi what about all these different things now we got

[Speaker 5] (53:04 - 53:20)
to flip them all over well the school department you know it's a vacant building for the school department so I don't think that there's an opportunity to rent the clock like right now there's not so it's it's no but they could run it

[Speaker 3] (53:20 - 53:25)
out to the senior center or to the rec department just do a but it's it's an

[Speaker 5] (53:25 - 54:08)
un it's unstaffed right so it's unstaffed the heat is is is as low as we can get it where the school department is operating has been planned to operate it as a vacant building right not as a fully rental unit functioning building to be rented out and the school department doesn't doesn't make a killing off of you know renting to town programs it's if you look at the school department's rental schedule any anything anytime they're renting to a school to a recreation program they're they're only ever offsetting costs like

[Speaker 3] (54:08 - 54:21)
of the I don't think anyone here is looking to make a big killing on it I'm just talking about we're all under the same umbrella money's all ultimately the town's money about administratively it just seems like understanding from the

[Speaker 1] (54:21 - 54:44)
meetings that we've had the school is not interested in running a running a rental facility with the town the school is interested in saying listen if we want it we can we can have it and we can use it and see how things work and then we just move from there so I think I would think to your point that it might be

[Speaker 2] (54:44 - 55:15)
difficult to gauge an interest level to understand what is a reasonable rental fee because they might not know how much over the course of the year that they are going to be able to rent it so how much they can offset so if it's $40,000 for utilities and cleaning and all that for them to run it as we would need it run for it to be available for rental like there's no way for them to gauge like should they be charging $1,000 should they be charging $5,000

[Speaker 3] (55:15 - 55:27)
should they be like maybe it is a risk shift right I mean back to the earlier yeah you know someone's gonna have to pay the $30,000 or whatever it is basically and someone's gonna have to program it such that you actually cover

[Speaker 1] (55:27 - 56:04)
that cost mm-hmm all right great opportunity Danielle do you does anybody have any more questions or opinions I just want to take some type of a straw poll here because tomorrow night the school committee is going to be meeting to discuss their opinion on this so I just you know I'm completely excited about something like this I'm in favor of having this happen and I'd like to send that message to the school committee and I just like to know what

[Speaker 2] (56:04 - 56:30)
everybody else feels I'm excited for the opportunity to open more space up to the public and I know rec and seniors both the rec and the Senior Center have been needing more space that is my opinion but I would like to hear their opinion before I would like to hear Senior Center and rec say yes we understand and we want it before we just say here you go you can have it yeah and burden them

[Speaker 10] (56:30 - 56:34)
with the potentially burden them with the cost I'm in the same I'm in this I

[Speaker 2] (56:34 - 56:54)
mean I think I think it sounds great I think it sounds wonderful and if Danielle and Heidi collectively think that's a manageable dollar amount and they can program out the space fantastic that's what they've been asking for I can't imagine they wouldn't right but I think they deserve a voice here I'm not as

[Speaker 1] (56:54 - 57:33)
inclined I mean I would definitely like their input however I I I do think when I hear Sean say this is a great idea we can definitely make this work and this definitely checks a couple of our boxes for needing a new facility I'm more inclined to say let's let's make this happen this is there's minimal risk here and I think it's a really great opportunity especially with hearing both of those directors saying how badly they need more space yeah no I think that I

[Speaker 4] (57:33 - 58:23)
see both sides I think Katie makes complete sense is you know I I didn't have a conversation with Sean right so I'm not aware that he you know felt like that was doable but he knows his department heads and he is saying that that is something that they're comfortable with and I would trust that at the same time I you know the REC committee is meeting in two weeks and I'm happy to speak to Danielle about it and talk to her about what the expectation is from a you know fiscal financial standpoint I don't know about Heidi but you know I think they deserve to know what they would be responsible for right if they are being held accountable for their budgets and in they should be because their department heads then they should certainly be aware of what full circle what they're required of you know managing so that sounds reasonable

[Speaker 3] (58:23 - 58:28)
to me is there any driving need time wise that we couldn't wait two weeks so no

[Speaker 1] (58:28 - 58:40)
no we're only doing a straw poll here to send the message but it is a great we're just sending a message to the school committee that's all we're not taking a vote we're just sending a message so you know hopefully we can get this wrapped

[Speaker 4] (58:40 - 59:17)
up within a month and I think that we should really find out what programs they're looking to run there so we know and they we can maybe Amy or Patrick and give us an idea of what you know for each of the department heads to understand what it's gonna cost them respectively you know they would need to let Amy or Patrick know what programs are gonna run out of that building then we can put together this is what you're gonna be responsible for it do you still are you okay with it right and if they're not then I'm not really gonna want to listen to more concerns about them needing space because this is your option either you're gonna make it work or you're not right so that's how I see

[Speaker 1] (59:17 - 59:25)
it okay so I'm sure the school committee's watching this tonight I do

[Speaker 2] (59:25 - 59:34)
also point out but Max did say that rec is already programming the space for

[Speaker 5] (59:34 - 59:41)
December right yeah they are anticipating basketball programs in

[Speaker 2] (59:41 - 59:53)
there in December yes okay so I don't care about the details of whether or not they can like the programs are running there whatever I just care about that they understand bottom line this is what they're responsible for how

[Speaker 1] (59:53 - 1:01:12)
they get themselves there okay so moving on from our Clark school memorandum now we go to my favorite part of the evening our discussion and vote on the Hadley school land development agreement and before we even start this I just want to say thank you to select select board member Peter Spellios Peter was very very active in getting us to this agreement laying it out doing really hard work making sure that we had good advisors to come in and it's just much appreciated he got us where we are today and then Katie you did yeoman's work throughout in these meetings dealing with the lawyers and our friends with Clearview and we are finally where we need to be to get to this next step and Katie's gonna go through what this land agreement is going to be she's gonna break it down for us in layman's terms I'm an attorney

[Speaker 2] (1:01:12 - 1:06:10)
so if I'm not using layman's terms somebody tell me okay so I just want to start by mentioning that the LTA is really just like the beginning of our contractual relationship with Delamar they we have obviously had since the RFP came in and we chose them as the forerunners of the RFP process we have been working very diligently with them to negotiate the land development agreement and attach there to the ground lease the ground the land development agreement is what we're voting on it would be it passes it would be signed tonight and then it sort of sets off the chain reaction for all these other date triggers to begin there is a very long road between tonight and anybody sleeping at Hadley so I just want to be really frank about that so we're not sort of sending mixed signals here to the public I'll give you sort of a breakdown of the timeline the effective date it voted successfully tonight would be this evening there would be a due diligence period which is 90 days long that would be for both the town and Delamar to do some due diligence regarding the building regarding you know if we wanted to look into anything additional on our side with the parties that were involved once the 90 days ends they begin a design schematic process where they submit draft schematic design documents that's a 60-day period there's another six month period they're at beginning at the end of the diligence period where they submit construction drawings and specifications during that period we have asked them and they have committed to do public participation where you know these are all this is an open process they're going to be the schematic designs are going to be available and the public will be able to comment on them with concern same thing obviously we're not all in the construction business but they have agreed and throughout this process have been willing and able to take feedback change course direction or take into account that we've said this before this is a marriage and the lease attached to this marriage is a lease for 99 years so it's long term and you know we want what's best for our community and I think they truly feel like what's best for them is parallel to what's best for our community they have 15 months from the end of the due diligence period to obtain their permits and their financing again the permitting process the design process it comes to select board approval but it is also going through the normal channels of permitting and design planning board review and things of that nature at the end of 15 months the exhibit lease to the LDA will be signed it's a 99 year lease we feel like it is very fair for both parties there the rent structure is similar to what they proposed in the RFP see what else can we say about the lease 99 years well anyways we I can talk a little bit more about that but just to get to the end of the milestone schedule they'll be coming in 50% completion within 12 months of the execution of the lease and then substantial completion is about two years from the execution of the lease so you're looking at a 24 month period from the execution of lease to final completion and then there's a 90-day period for from the certificate of occupancy when rent begins and there's a ramp-up period before their pilot begins which is a payment in lieu of taxes so like I said I think we all worked very hard to get to this point and I'm excited that we have this opportunity to work with Del Mar they're a fantastic brand they're very reputable and I think there will be a great

[Speaker 1] (1:06:10 - 1:06:18)
addition does anybody have any questions Katie I was looking through the

[Speaker 3] (1:06:18 - 1:06:29)
documents so you may have mentioned this did you note kind of the time period in which there would be more kind of so from anyone publicly yeah so I think so

[Speaker 2] (1:06:29 - 1:06:58)
obviously there's a permit period so there's as the permits are come before whatever boards they come before there would be public comments but but but Delamar has also agreed to have public feedback during the design period so we have asked and we've held them to that and they have no issue with that they've done that before in other cities and towns that they've built hotels and

[Speaker 1] (1:06:58 - 1:07:03)
those will be well advertised and there'll be a few of them and recorded

[Speaker 3] (1:07:03 - 1:07:56)
yes and we'll make sure more is here speaking of Maura she reminded me she thankfully does so she brought two things about Lin Scott about community space so can we just comment I was actually I don't think there's really any issue with Lin Scott whatsoever in terms of what's been agreed to here consisting with what they you know proposed to begin with that was not it was not one of the options where you're having anything connecting into or running into Lin Scott or anything like that the community space thing as part of the town meeting vote I'm trying to remember the nuance here I'm sure someone could remind us where does that what exactly was that how did that land

[Speaker 10] (1:07:56 - 1:08:08)
and how does that land here it was article 15 of the May 15 2023 annual

[Speaker 2] (1:08:08 - 1:08:25)
town which is we don't have actually I don't have the verbiage yeah yeah we absolutely have it and I can find out and I can send yes no yeah no we totally

[Speaker 3] (1:08:25 - 1:09:00)
have it just gotten but maybe you can there was a thing about was that not an amendment that got in but community space right and so I'm just trying to remember through all this long process is that something that that level of detail has been discussed or was reflected somewhere in here or that would be something that would come in during design process yeah and just kind of reassuring people that that you know definitely we understand we got to abide by what was in what was passed and that has to be part of this yeah it's I can

[Speaker 2] (1:09:00 - 1:09:44)
tell you right now there isn't a line in the lease that says this is what the meeting or an article was amended to and this is what you're obligated to but post this meeting we will make sure that their attorney understands the language of the vote that was taken and their obligations we have we have talked to them about that but I mean it's like like Doug is saying there's not a line we can point you to say this is well I mean there's an attachment for the vote I mean so yeah yeah clearly it's got to be in there right yep but they have committed to abide by the vote and to maintain the public process that was discussed at great lengths with them yeah

[Speaker 8] (1:09:48 - 1:10:29)
any other questions my understanding at some previous juncture with Pete Kane was that that what was in the warrant and the addendum to the warrant was added in not in the RFP but in the agreement some it probably is called something different but whatever was signed the Peters said was in there it

[Speaker 2] (1:10:29 - 1:10:38)
is an attachment just you know the it says right here it says whereas it's exhibit a is the attached town meeting vote sorry go ahead no you got it I was

[Speaker 3] (1:10:38 - 1:10:50)
just reading right the very first part of the agreement whereas the town by vote on article 15 of the May 15 2023 annual town meeting a copy of which is attached here too is exhibit a and incorporated herein so so it's signing

[Speaker 2] (1:10:50 - 1:10:55)
the LVA they are obligating themselves to the exact language of town meeting

[Speaker 8] (1:10:55 - 1:11:26)
vote great there and I use the language Jared just to make sure like that it was recorded his recording had one word different he changed it became changed it it got changed right I understand it yes then we will go to the clerk and the clerk will have it okay okay thank you any other questions real quick that night that was not at all what was the plan to do the plan was that there would be a conversation about that warrant okay thank you more I just on the fly

[Speaker 1] (1:11:26 - 1:11:44)
thank you okay so with that can we have a motion to accept to accept the land

[Speaker 2] (1:11:44 - 1:12:38)
development agreement I make a motion to accept the land development agreement as accepted and that we would be signing the LVA this evening if the motion prevails second David second Daniel yes do we need to reference the ground lease at all that's just it's a ground in their exhibit we wouldn't be signing that until a time certain under the LVA because there's still a due diligence period and they obviously things could happen between now and then deal like I said no deal is done until it's done so there's a lot of time between today and even the signing of the lease we're at 18 months between signing this document and signing the lease and so you know a lot can happen hopefully in our favor

[Speaker 1] (1:12:39 - 1:13:35)
okay so all in favor thank you thank you thank you all right so now we will move to the warrant one change so we will be having a special town meeting on December 9th tonight we're just looking at the warrant at our next meeting we will be opening and closing the warrant so all these references to will be changed tonight correct so if we Patrick you want to start with page one article

[Speaker 6] (1:13:35 - 1:13:57)
one okay do you want me to share the warrant or we're just gonna verbally go

[Speaker 2] (1:13:57 - 1:14:03)
for it I think we haven't opened it so I think just verbally verbally mm-hmm okay

[Speaker 6] (1:14:05 - 1:14:51)
so article one is a route relatively routine article to approve bills of prior fiscal years there's four bills listed here for legal services shredding processing of beach passes and some professional services at the school department these are bills from fiscal 24 and one very small bill from 2020 that came up and those total eleven thousand seven hundred and sixty four dollars and eighty eight cents I am gonna confirm with the assistant town accountant that no other bills have come in before the warrant is closed if we get any more that have come in since this version we'll just plug them in and discuss them and that's gonna require a nine-tenths vote to pass that special

[Speaker 1] (1:14:51 - 1:14:57)
town meeting is it normal that we have a school bill in here yeah that can happen

[Speaker 6] (1:14:57 - 1:15:15)
from time to time any department I just don't ever remember the school having a bill yeah they're usually pretty good they're on their bills that's unusual it's it's very minimal it's a bill that we owe from a vendor that we use every

[Speaker 1] (1:15:15 - 1:15:52)
year so we want to make sure we honor it can can you just put a note there can you go back and find out under vendor two five six eight why that bill those professional services why that bill is coming in so late and the line item because I'm just wondering if we can move that move that to a different fund I'll call you on that one if you could just find out who that was yep I have it okay okay so article two there you go all right article two is to amend

[Speaker 6] (1:15:52 - 1:16:24)
appropriations for the fiscal year 25 operating budget the purpose of this article is to fund the new collective bargaining agreement with the administrative professionals union and Amy has provided the specific line items that will be amended at special town meeting and the amounts that are necessary to fund the agreement the total of the funding changes is to be

[Speaker 1] (1:16:24 - 1:16:29)
about $5,000 and we're not just we're just not we're not taking that just

[Speaker 6] (1:16:29 - 1:17:25)
strictly out of the salary reserve yep it is it's a so it's a budget line item transfer from salary reserve to the individual departments and the reason it's on a town meeting Warren is because outside of the year-round shuffle process it would have to be in a minute from town meeting okay okay okay article three is to approve transfer of free cash for homeless and foster care transportation and the purpose of this article is to transfer funds that were received for costs that the school department incurred last year for foster care and transportation the costs are variable and the reimbursement comes in after the fiscal year closes so we want to make sure that we credit them with the monies that they've already expended and we have done this in the

[Speaker 1] (1:17:25 - 1:17:37)
past it's a routine article this does that does that money then go into their their operating or does that go into their goes into their operating budget

[Speaker 6] (1:17:37 - 1:17:53)
okay which they've already explained yeah they incurred the expense last year I believe it says in the article comment that it was about $80,000 and they get reimbursed only a percentage of it from the state we're crediting them with what the town has received from the state

[Speaker 10] (1:17:53 - 1:17:59)
madam chair should we put the articles

[Speaker 6] (1:18:09 - 1:19:02)
okay okay article four is a settlement final settlement for eminent domain this is related to the UU church easement for the new school and that would be to either transfer from available funds or borrow some of money to pay that settlement okay we jumped to number six yep article six is to approve transfer of free cash to adjust the tax rate that's a routine article that we do at special town meeting the last few years we've done this and that would be to take free cash which was recently certified I believe you all are aware of that to the extent that it's available we could use that to offset the tax rate this year

[Speaker 2] (1:19:05 - 1:19:10)
oh no came from who did it come from directly from the state to all of you if

[Speaker 6] (1:19:10 - 1:19:15)
you don't have it I can recirculate it and Patrick was the was the number that

[Speaker 10] (1:19:15 - 1:19:20)
was received in free cash was that was that above or below I projected I think

[Speaker 6] (1:19:20 - 1:19:37)
it was slightly above our projections it came in about 3.9 million I think we were expecting like 3.6 I think Amy was forecasting so that's that's good it's not like earth-shattering amount different than our expectation but it's

[Speaker 10] (1:19:37 - 1:19:51)
in the right direction and then do we have a recommendation from the finance team as to what as to what that to what that number would be not at this time at this time but we'll get that soon yep awesome and that brings us to the end of

[Speaker 1] (1:19:51 - 1:20:57)
the warrant so we do have a couple of things that we've got a double check in case we have to make some adjustments into capital yeah it's just a couple of things you have to just take a peek at and then so we'll have something we'll have something a little bit more substantial and then we can just get it ready to go okay does anybody have any questions on this okay so moving along we will now discuss the climate resiliency plan update I just have a question did you want to discuss this because I didn't get any information until late today and I know that that was a big issue in the past for its select board members I'm good with it but I just want to make sure you're okay with it okay all right

[Speaker 3] (1:20:57 - 1:25:36)
so Doug is gonna walk us through that well I'm not the expert here and Dave Peterson from Kleinfelder is on so I mean I can read stuff out but you know if you really want to understand what's involved in this I think we should leverage their expertise and asking questions at least but I can you know I can just you know give the framework and to pull back for a second this is pursuant to the conversations we've had for months we applied for two grants we didn't get either of them and but we did put money in ARPA $200,000 to address this we hope that was just going to be a match now it looks like you know if we also decide that we would need to use that and proceed on this without a grant at this point the total and you can put up the slides the total scope for both of those proposals was in the 350 to $400,000 range in discussions with let's see Harbor and Water Advisory Committee chair some discussion back and forth with Danielle and I with the climate action resiliency chair with water and sewer advisory chair with the CIC chair so a lot of chairs so there's been ongoing discussion to try to kind of work through this whole process from different vantage points and so you know what we have in front of us what you see on the screen here is the different you know high-level components of what we feel is a you know significant investment for sure state that clearly but also you know something that pick a storm pick a place and over the last three months six months nine months twelve months unfortunately could be coming to you know our shores here at any point so I think at least some of us maybe all of us feel some urgency and proceeding with some really solid planning leveraging the expertise of Kleinfelder and other subsidiary groups that they would be partnering with to do this we have to think through the procurement and you know all all those aspects of the the process here but they've you know put forward these proposals and so there's a just a project administration piece community engagement you can see on the screen very significant amount of money for community engagement you know this would be primarily focused on the kind of Fisherman's Beach area maybe up to Eisman's all the way back to Phillips Park because there's flooding issues you know obviously coming off the water but there's inland flooding we all saw that in North Carolina you know it's not just from the ocean side here so in addition to the community engagement there's the vulnerability analysis on the coastal side there's a whole host of alternatives that are part of this like 12 or 14 different options everything from managed retreat to larger seawalls to moving the fish house to a living reef to etc etc etc and so you know there's that analysis in general kind of the flood protection approach and then the recommendations so that's kind of the core is they're proposing it which is two hundred ninety one thousand and then you can go much deeper on some of these specific elements and frankly I would really want Dave to comment if that's acceptable on you know what we would be giving up by not doing some of these or if they can be decided on later if you do the core and then you decide on whether or not you need to do some of the add-ons how the interplay of that works because frankly we never really got into that with the proposals because we were actually hoping we could do all of this.

[Speaker 1] (1:25:36 - 1:25:44)
Is the chair of the resiliency committee here?

[Speaker 3] (1:25:45 - 1:25:48)
Martha Schmidt I don't see her name there.

[Speaker 1] (1:25:50 - 1:28:20)
So one question I have here is when I looked at what you had sent earlier when I look at it I sit and I say to my I was just saying what well what is what is the overall plan what is the committee advising here what are we looking at as far as long-term planning here and I'm not really hearing what the committee is saying what the long-term planning is here and I would like I would really like to hear that I'm like looking at all these numbers these seem a little bit overwhelming of course but without having like which way are we going like we have here fishermen's and how did the committee come up with fishermen's versus Kings Kings Beach or any other any other place and what is it we're really trying to accomplish the other thing is we had a meeting I think a year ago of the the secretaries a new secretary that had been appointed by administration the climate czar and the climate czar is very clear that there was going to be a significant amount of grant opportunity for resiliency not just the coastal zone management funding but resiliency and I'm looking at this at spending ARPA money when we were told that there was going to be quite a lot of money for grant funding the other thing that I really would like to get a great understanding about is the CZM grant that we didn't get and what was the name of the other grant MVP and it appears that we have missed out on these grants for the last few years and I would really like to know what is the analysis from the resiliency committee to understanding why we're not getting these grants and what are we going to do to get get these grants those are the things that I really want to hear versus on Kleinfelder giving us a breakdown of what these things are I was hoping tonight we would hear that in Kleinfelder come back at a later time and explain the features and benefits of these different programs so that's where I'm coming from as far as an overall plan that really can get a little clarity to where we're going yeah I guess I'm not

[Speaker 3] (1:28:20 - 1:31:01)
sure if I have anything really terribly different to say but I think maybe what you're what I'm hopefully you're missing is that this scope is the product of not just the climate but all these other committees as well meeting together with Marsy in the process of putting together these proposals so it's the cumulative not just one person or one committee's perspective but trying to get kind of the whole kaleidoscope together so that we weren't just picking and choosing because the the semi circular fire firing squad that we were in was you know trying to say no I know what the right answer is no I know what the right answer is no I know what the right answer is and kind of doing this and so we all kind of got on the same page to say what the totality of the scope is so that we keep you know look at people as we talked about community engagement here are all the different alternatives we weren't picking just this one or just that one to look at we were looking at the whole menu everyone got on board with that not to say that everyone felt like they meant every single one of those alternatives they had decided was okay but just that should be the menu and we should look at that menu and analyze it and that's what this process was that we went through with Kleinfelder and so really nothing's changed except for the fact unfortunately we didn't win what are incredibly competitive grants but you know nothing's stopping in terms of climate change or flooding or anything else so you know we're left in the position to say you know we could have people come in next time and say yes I agree this was a scope but we've done that unfortunately Margie's not here to you know say that as well but that is the truth and so my hope is that we can you know ask Leinfelder if we have some questions of clarification here about what's incorporated here what could easily be taken out what could be pushed off it's not to say that another grant comes along we'll apply for another grant you know if we're going halfway down this process and we feel like oh now because we got another six months in you know maybe we didn't we we had too many options on the board maybe if we got more focus after six months of this and then another another cycle comes around for MVP or CZM or anything else definitely can apply for that but the point is I I don't feel great I certainly don't feel comfortable just sitting by and saying we're just gonna wait till the next grant comes along to do anything right but I think what I'm

[Speaker 1] (1:31:01 - 1:31:21)
still trying to get is what I see this is so this is like a menu and then we go out and look at all this menu and then like I feel like there's no there's no plan here as far as which direction should we really attack first that's

[Speaker 3] (1:31:21 - 1:32:02)
exactly the point because no one knows that you have to do the analysis to figure out you know and if you maybe if I'm misinterpreting you but like with specific intervention strategies that's exactly the problem we have is we do not have the facts to know which one to pursue that's what this process is about it's an analytical process with all the latest data about flooding or about rainfall or sea level rise or whatever it is to understand which of those things is actually going to be effective in addressing the issue okay so I have a

[Speaker 4] (1:32:02 - 1:32:36)
couple of questions so did you say we had 200,000 air marked and ARPA money for a portion of this okay it was too much yeah for grants that we didn't get right so the Climate and Resiliency Committee has existed for how long okay so in the two in the two years that they've existed they haven't come up with any type of hierarchy list of what we need to accomplish what we need to attack what what our priorities are or have they we've done oh there's been a

[Speaker 3] (1:32:36 - 1:33:06)
lot done on more the greenhouse gas emissions side of things has been a larger I'd say progress piece and we continually get caught up in not having the facts you know we don't have the models that you know these outside groups do to actually model and figure out what the interventions need to be that we've been caught up in like applying for the grants and you know figuring out our strategy or how far we can get on our own which is what's in

[Speaker 4] (1:33:06 - 1:33:11)
front of us okay and Harbor Waterfront also hasn't attacked any of these things

[Speaker 3] (1:33:11 - 1:33:47)
or have they well I mean this there's been the pursuit of a grant way back when for the Living Reef right and so which was not successful I mean that was the piece that was in the harbor water plan which was approved by the select board before I was here and but you know I think that you know definitely has questions and people need to have answers to that and that's a many questions and many dollars and so but you know maybe maybe there's no way around having that that's one of the fundamental things here that needs to be

[Speaker 4] (1:33:47 - 1:34:15)
figured out so it's almost to me it seems to me like there's overlapping responsibility or interest right close to this climate and coastal resiliency there's Harbor Waterfront you know there's capital there's all these various committees water and sewer and it's like everybody's kind of going in their own direction with no cohesive hierarchy plan when they all kind of touch similar things I think that's what this is that's exactly what this is

[Speaker 2] (1:34:15 - 1:34:22)
because you guys didn't like make the sausage but I think that's well my

[Speaker 4] (1:34:22 - 1:35:44)
concern is I've been going to Harbor Waterfront meetings for the past two months and I've never seen anything about anything that's on here and I've talked to people I've talked to Martha Schmidt Suzanne how I've talked to various people that have expressed concerns with the way Harbor Waterfront operates and it's all again it's like everybody's operating independently so I feel like we need to have almost one committee that is you know various representation from all of these different committees compiled so that we can have one plan and this could be it and attack it but at least we know who we're divvying this stuff out to and that they're actually following through on what we want them to follow through on if that makes sense I just want to make sure we're doing what yeah we give them a task that they can accomplish and it's going to be something that you know where we need them to do right and it's something that we're concerned with and this is I'm right with you I have huge concerns about all of this stuff resiliency wise but I just am concerned that so many people are operating in different different directions that we're applying for grants all over the place we're getting none and you know it's not like a cohesive concerted effort right I feel like we might have more luck if we're attacking it from one central piece yeah I just I guess I'm not

[Speaker 3] (1:35:44 - 1:37:01)
sure how I can say this any differently but they're up there obviously are kind of it's like a three-piece vent overlapping Venn diagram right you know climate harboring water CIC water through of course they all touch the coast right but climate resiliency goes way beyond the coast right for example right water through is I mean I don't know if we really need to kind of get into like why we have different committees maybe we do but nonetheless we do have them and all of these people all the chairs and I know you know we've talked about input into this in climate resiliency committee meetings I can't speak to you know literally what conversations were had in other meetings but at least the chairs of all those have come together I don't know half a dozen times in this process of coming up with what we should put in the grant proposals and how we bring all these different perspectives together because you know Martha you know or Suzanne may have perspective of their own but it's not like we took a vote of the climate plan and said that we should do X intervention because nobody knows what the right no but they definitely have

[Speaker 4] (1:37:01 - 1:37:05)
voice concerns about how the other committees affect theirs to me anyway so

[Speaker 3] (1:37:05 - 1:37:29)
which again I was so sick and tired of hearing like this person of this committee saying this is definitely the solution or they have a concern with this over here that I kind of rallied and brought all of them together in order to make sure we had everyone's perspective incorporated again it's not but but don't

[Speaker 4] (1:37:29 - 1:38:13)
you think it's important to hear from them then I'd like to kind of have them here saying that right because I mean I'm hearing different things I'm hearing you know things from people in isolation right or you know different conversations that are I mean I was at that August meeting at Harbor waterfront and you know Suzanne Hale spoke up and everybody had a lot of concerns and issues about the way Harbor waterfront was operating their lack of transparency their inaccurate stuff their potential falsehood I mean there's there's stuff that people have real concerns about so I kind of would want to hear from all of those committee chairs together in one room to say this is what's going on this we kind of heard that in August I mean I did anyway I don't know I think we all

[Speaker 3] (1:38:13 - 1:38:53)
were at that meeting yeah that's totally fine totally fine I think we're conflating a couple things so this isn't a proposal about the the way the Harbor and waterfront Advisory Committee operates right this is about us trying to get out of this squabbling and people thinking that they have the answer without having done the analysis and I'm trying to actually move past that you know kind of opinion into more of a fact-based approach to what the

[Speaker 2] (1:38:53 - 1:40:14)
solution I get it that makes us I think my understanding is Doug I think is trying to convey you just said this but like we're trying to get out of a personal struggle between chairs and committees and get the facts so that we can say this is the direction we're going on not because a particular chair or even a particular committee feel like this is the direction we should go on but actually back that opinion with some factual analysis as best we can because obviously we understand climate is changing every single day and what we know yesterday is not what we're gonna know tomorrow but in order to inform the financial decisions that we're making because no committee that we've named tonight has the ability to spend any money unless they get a grant and we approve it so we can task them with all these things but unless we empower them economically to do them I mean that parts on us to do that so I understand your hesitation because if ten people got in a room and you're not sure how that conversation when you want to hear from those ten people we should hear from them however what we are trying I think what is trying to be done here is that regardless of what those ten people say we're trying to get some fact-based

[Speaker 4] (1:40:14 - 1:40:33)
evidence to go forward I'm all for that I'm all for the fact-based evidence but either we're gonna take into consideration what the committee's say or not right so for we're contemplating going around them and just creating our own list I want to make sure that that's the intent do you know what I'm saying

[Speaker 2] (1:40:33 - 1:40:36)
like it well I guess how could you make a list if you don't have the facts yet I

[Speaker 3] (1:40:36 - 1:40:46)
think that's the part that I'm confused about so I don't have that same opinion

[Speaker 4] (1:40:46 - 1:40:51)
I don't have that same feeling I don't know what you've done to be quite honest

[Speaker 3] (1:40:51 - 1:40:58)
I just know that we have a list of maybe we should just invite what do we

[Speaker 2] (1:40:58 - 1:41:08)
invite yeah I'd like our Z's back we can invite the folks who participated other than Doug and we can have this conversation again with everybody I mean

[Speaker 4] (1:41:08 - 1:41:48)
I'm we're talking about a lot of money so I think that and I am all for it I'm not for here's my other piece where did this this came from did you say Dan Peterson I don't even I don't know who that is but I'm kind of Kleinfelder right so how do we automatically is Kleinfeld Kleinfelder just the default do we consider other companies or is it automatically this town uses Kleinfelder how do we come to that conclusion and then how do we come to these numbers do you know what I'm saying like where is the vetting process how does that happen do we always have to use Kleinfelder because we've used them for other things

[Speaker 3] (1:41:48 - 1:42:00)
have we considered others that are not yes okay and what why did we go with

[Speaker 4] (1:42:00 - 1:42:20)
Kleinfelder why didn't we go why didn't we utilize another why if Kleinfelder is constantly applying for grants or helping us apply for grants that we're not getting why aren't we considering other people that might be more effective in getting us grants is that the problem is it the way we're writing them is it that we don't have a grants manager I don't know like I'm what about

[Speaker 1] (1:42:20 - 1:43:08)
if we let me just hold on let me just throw this out there what about if we were to have a meeting and have Margie give us the update on what our historical historical what historically have done with these these larger grants how we're missing out what the recommendation is I do know that people from CZM will tell us you know what our shortfall shortfalls are with recommend with recommendations and what about if we have Margie in here and we do have some of these committee heads in here and get a little bit bigger picture on what their opinions are to and I mean it's we're a coastal community this is

[Speaker 4] (1:43:08 - 1:43:45)
gonna be the tip of the iceberg about what we need to spend to make sure this community is safe from coastal concerns and we know that the state right or if I've heard correctly the state has tons of grants and tons of money available so why aren't we trying to figure out who can get us that money and how best to go about that I don't know that's just I'm I'm just throwing it out there we're gonna spend however much here but this is just the beginning right so we need grants and we need to get some grant money so how do we best do that I'm just throwing stuff out there I'm not saying there's this isn't logical warranted stuff not at all I just don't understand the process that's why I'm

[Speaker 2] (1:43:45 - 1:45:22)
asking I think that there are things running in parallel here like we can't yes we should be talking about grants we should be talking about grants why we didn't get grants we should be talking about is there a refined process to get grants I think Doug's done a lot of legwork to figure out are there ways we could be writing our grants better in conjunction with other groups in town so that we are more unified in the way that we're talking about grant writing I think Margie's been a player in that conversation very much so and they that we have been pushing towards some of that I think there is a limitation there because we don't have a grant writer on and Margie does a lot of this and the committee chairs our committees do a lot of this as well but that runs in parallel to future coastal resiliency projects and we have applied for multiple grants we have not gotten them I'm not denying that information but at some point we have to decide what do we go forward on to obtain some additional information on so that we have better information when we're writing grants we have a clearer direction we have a more narrow scope maybe like maybe that I love to hear from Margie but maybe that's some of the feedback we're getting like our scope is too broad we don't have a direction maybe we don't have a shovel ready project I mean Margie said multiple times in front of us shovel ready projects are great for grant writing right because they know it's gonna happen and they feel good about backing it so maybe that's some of the issue that we're having here I I'm just making it is that is the problem

[Speaker 3] (1:45:22 - 1:45:25)
and so we don't know what the project should be right right if we haven't done

[Speaker 2] (1:45:25 - 1:45:32)
the analysis we're like to theoretical and not I get it we're late to the game

[Speaker 4] (1:45:32 - 1:45:51)
we I mean we have to act now I really don't think we can afford to wait any more are we were we was there consideration for a resiliency manager at one point did I make that up or am I yes hearing yep yep I mean where does that okay so where does that stand do we not is that not something we're still

[Speaker 3] (1:45:51 - 1:46:01)
considering absolutely every grant that comes along or even even as just another one yeah a regular budgeted position you better believe I'll be suggesting that

[Speaker 4] (1:46:01 - 1:46:10)
as we go through the budget because I mean wouldn't that then like you know have someone with the scope and then I don't know I'm just I just that's just

[Speaker 2] (1:46:10 - 1:46:35)
I'm just throwing it out there Doug is there feedback from Kleinfelder or the committee chairs that that priority that maybe that should be a priority over this that to have somebody on staff sort of that that is their sole purpose managing what maybe what this spend might be going forward because right now who would be managing this Kleinfelder right well the project administrative what

[Speaker 3] (1:46:35 - 1:46:53)
project project yeah that's their internal stuff yeah yeah yeah I mean right but not stuff that we employ it'd be margin for now right ideally yeah this I mean it's not an either-or really it's an end but I think I'll

[Speaker 1] (1:46:53 - 1:47:10)
project left I wanted to know what I forget what the rules Juni I don't know if you would know this what are the rules around spending ARPA money on a consultant there's very specific there's actually specific I'll email more

[Speaker 3] (1:47:10 - 1:47:14)
of the issue was hiring us yeah exactly right that's what you can't do yeah yeah

[Speaker 2] (1:47:14 - 1:47:47)
I would be curious to know on the optional things I know you mentioned this when you first started and the cost of these things are like time and place in when other other worker research is being done and that's why the cost is would it increase if we didn't do it as an add-on it like do you know what I mean like does it fall into a spot in the process where we have a cost savings because we're in that part of the process or can we literally add them on at any time at this dollar amount

[Speaker 3] (1:47:50 - 1:48:14)
I don't think I thought at least answer that question is a basic one yeah Dave is the add-on something that needs to be known basically in the beginning of the process or is that something that can be decided as you move along can't hear you

[Speaker 7] (1:48:14 - 1:50:14)
Dave we're checking in now too all right yeah okay also just so everyone's aware I invited Kyle Johnson and Seth from Kleinfelder as well Kyle's our East practice leader in climate resiliency on the East division of Kleinfelder so he's he's got a lot more chops on this than I do so he can fill in anywhere that I miss on this but just to answer your question on optional add-on services so the I think the the question that was asked of us was the the budget the scope that was submitted to the MVP and CZM programs you know was in the proximal area of like four hundred thousand you know given that we still want to do something you know there's there's a minimal amount of work that we want to push along what does that what does that base amount of work look like and what can we potentially put off to the side so the stuff off to the side either they give us better science or information on some of the assessment of alternatives on vulnerability or there are things that are sort of a different animal altogether and they're related but can be done separately okay so by way of a example I guess was this like rainfall flood model is something that there's a real concern about just coastal inundation from the ocean but at the same time there can be rainfall flooding happen at the same time so those two things together what does that look like so you don't have to study those together you can add a flood model from rainfall like after the fact so that's why we kind of pulled that out as sort of an optional sort of add-on service

[Speaker 3] (1:50:14 - 1:50:27)
for example but but Dave just to make sure it's clear like if you you don't do a rainfall model at the same time and then you're evaluating the alternatives without that additional information you may be designing your intervention

[Speaker 7] (1:50:31 - 1:51:04)
inappropriately yes or no so the the coastal flood is going to give you sort of a key elevation that you want to design around we'll call it the design flood elevation and that's and that's going to create sort of like your physical barrier once you've established that you're going to create a inability or difficulty for like rainfall to get out you know if it's like a hard infrastructure on the backside of it so that's something that you're going to want to know it's going to happen once you install something like that Kyle's going to add on to what I'm talking about. Hey Kyle.

[Speaker 9] (1:51:04 - 1:54:42)
Yeah can folks hear me? Yeah I think just a little bit of background information here too I mean the there has been a study back in 2016 there was a coastal vulnerability analysis that was performed using the Boston Harbor flood risk model data and other data available at that time that baseline vulnerability assessment you know hasn't been updated since and in the time since there's been significant advances in coastal modeling the Massachusetts coastal flood risk model by Woods Hole group and others has kind of shown increased vulnerability and risk at earlier time frames the vulnerability assessment that was done in 2016 did not consider you know the compound flood risk from rainfall and sea-level rise together it didn't look at you know nuisance tidal flooding in a significant degree too so there were limitations in the 2016 analysis it was robust at the time and actually predated the MVP program the town got grandfathered into the MVP program at that time but there's been a lot of you know advancements in the data since then so I think just in terms of you know screening and prioritization it's worth noting that the 2016 study did not you know put forward a course of you know align this project with this great funding source align this one with this one it wasn't necessarily like a capital plan to do this at this time frame it was a vulnerability assessment so in the time since there have been specific projects that have moved forward but I think part of this is exactly that it's revisiting the prioritization piece of what to do when and you know part of you know the base scope presented here on the left is really that it's it's it's the study component that's going to inform the rest and one thing that you know is you know something that's worth pointing out is like the different groups that have been involved in this process on the town side you know there isn't a standing like coastal resilience or climate resilience committee there's you know the climate action committee that speaks you know a lot to greenhouse gases and climate action generally there's the harbor and waterfront group that you know has multiple lenses beyond just like resiliency too so I think you know on our side I mean all in favor of you know having you know more of a dedicated program manager or somebody on the town side that's helping steward this and steward decisions about which grants to apply for and through that process all in favor of that I think part of what the challenge has been is even getting the grant funding to do study and bring the study up to present like the conditions now with new modeling which is you know a lot of the feedback has been you know that a lot of the projects being prioritized by these very competitive very competitive grant programs are much more established projects that are further along and closer to shoveling ground or there's other priorities that I won't get into them today but there's a lot of focus on environmental justice disadvantaged populations their input in these processes and regional projects so there's a lot of good feedback that we have gotten from from these these grant applications but I think a big piece here is the need to revisit the 2016 study and prioritization and also understand these other compounding climate risks that weren't the focus is

[Speaker 1] (1:54:42 - 1:54:51)
there is there a line item here on the cost to update the 2016 am I not I don't

[Speaker 3] (1:54:51 - 1:55:01)
see it but maybe I'm not I think that gets you to all depending on how you want to do it I mean they could probably answer more but just to try to be succinct about it I think that's primarily coastal vulnerability

[Speaker 7] (1:55:01 - 1:55:14)
analysis mine yes I think that's but that's it I just want to say that's not

[Speaker 3] (1:55:14 - 1:55:19)
I mean that's like getting back to the starting line of 10 10 years ago like he

[Speaker 1] (1:55:19 - 1:55:37)
just he just said that it's significantly different so I'm just asking I'm asking if it's significantly different is there a line item here to update that plan that's that's my question and if that's line item number three that answers my question coastal vulnerability update that's what that is

[Speaker 2] (1:55:42 - 1:55:50)
but then we just have a report that we don't have a way to do anything about it

[Speaker 4] (1:55:50 - 1:56:14)
I think but that could that be step one couldn't that be step one and then step two is hiring a resiliency manager that's that that is their sole focus and they can then guide us towards what projects take what precedence and work with these guys to tailor an approach that's current and applicable to us no

[Speaker 2] (1:56:14 - 1:56:33)
does that not I I hear the need to be incremental in our approach however when we had tried that last so much time lapsed at the data becomes stale sure it's not useful so I understand the need to be thoughtful about how we spend our

[Speaker 4] (1:56:33 - 1:56:38)
money and or maybe not update the study but maybe the key piece is getting the

[Speaker 2] (1:56:38 - 1:57:12)
person yeah that's why I had asked the question like is this cart before the horse like is it is it more important we get the person in and the person facilitates this so that when the person whoever the person is and there's a line item for that person that it continues on and on and on right and that there's actual incremental progress happening or do we feel like if we spend this these funds and we get this data and then we have the data then the person actually has something to do because because what else would the person be

[Speaker 4] (1:57:12 - 1:57:24)
doing right well I mean I think they could do a lot right they could be well we don't have any we don't have any but don't we have a study on 2016 operationalize

[Speaker 3] (1:57:24 - 1:57:29)
that because there's either you you're using outdated data but isn't that how

[Speaker 4] (1:57:29 - 1:57:38)
they gave us this isn't that what he just said that he you that they used part of 2016 to give us how we progress to the next step or where did we get this

[Speaker 2] (1:57:38 - 1:57:44)
then where did this come from no part of this is updating that data yeah that's

[Speaker 3] (1:57:44 - 1:58:44)
the third line that Mary Ellen asked about the rest of it it was is builds on you got to update all the data the baseline data that's the first step then you start looking at all the different alternatives to address the problem that's Fisherman's Beach alternatives analysis right and then you I mean we have to go into all the detail to kind of drive down through it but we also have to realize that with the ARPA money we need a contract in place by December 31st okay and so it seems to me that we've been waiting and waiting for a grant and we could keep waiting and also wait and hope that we have a person in the budget or wherever else it comes from and so that means you're waiting till July to even start and then you post and then maybe you hire someone and now we're a year from now we're at the starting line again without any more

[Speaker 1] (1:58:44 - 1:59:03)
information so let's make an offset I'm just wondering in the ARPA funds Amy had said something about I just want to talk to Amy but if we have 200,000 that

[Speaker 4] (1:59:03 - 1:59:41)
we were planning to spend for this why can't we find what we can do in here for 200,000 to at least like it's not gonna do everything but it's no at least gonna start the process and then we're gonna look that was the point for July just to put this person I mean I really do think that you that a coastal community town needs somebody that that is their sole focus I think that's that's my belief I know maybe you know it's not something that that everybody buys into but I really I think that's I think we should look at an 80 degree day today

[Speaker 1] (1:59:41 - 2:00:09)
well yeah so I have to buy into it so I I work I think this is this is a conversation we have to continue to have I just think I do want to hear from Martha and any of the other chairs in here and I do want to find out from Amy what our flexibility is we do have until the end of December to sign off on a contract we do have a little bit of time here yes I would like to hear from

[Speaker 4] (2:00:09 - 2:00:31)
Kleinfelder what could you tell me on the left side I'm assuming on the left side what you would prioritize for us to utilize this 200,000 that we were going to previously allocate are there certain things that we could do there or maybe it's coupled with things on the right as well but is there are there things that you can point to that we would to kick this off if we were able

[Speaker 7] (2:00:31 - 2:02:56)
to use that 200,000 yeah so the I mean the base services is from my understanding it's kind of that amalgamation of the various chairs and you know where they see their priorities that's sort of what the ask does of us was to take the MVC ZM grants and pull out what kind of the bare minimum was so Fisherman's Beach kind of rose to the top because that's of some interest to the the chairs so that includes you know the the fish house the Fisherman's Beach the pier that also includes the assessment of the living reef concept concept yeah so so those were all ideas that were like pretty important I think that but like hearing this conversation is really helpful because of like to Katie's point really just trying to understand what's the baseline data where we are right so that coastal vulnerability analysis really to me is the updates that we've all been kind of waiting to do for quite a long time every time we run we run into us a CCM or an MVP grant application we're always including this piece in there because you can't really do anything until you at least do do that update okay the second piece to that I might throw out there for consideration would be whether or not pulling from the right-hand side you pair in the rainfall based flooding as well so you can come you can see those two things together so that's the rainfall based flood model yeah so yep so that's the model there's the flow metering program is something that would allow you to get empirical data to calibrate the model or have some confidence in the model you know those numbers can be massaged and things like that so if you were to take all of these little pieces and stick them together you know we're getting to that like hundred to like hundred twenty thousand range ish without adding in you know some of those other optional pieces so but that would take that would take out all the fishermen's beach focus stuff right so that's so again that's something where if you get Martha and the other chairs in in a room have that conversation with them you know you could maybe come to a consensus as to what the appropriate base starting point is so

[Speaker 4] (2:02:56 - 2:03:04)
that that effect that effectively handles fishermen's beach though but what about the rest of the coast well so the coastal the coastal vulnerability

[Speaker 7] (2:03:04 - 2:03:12)
analysis and the rainfall watch the rainfall is based on fishermen's actually yeah that I have to remember that point but the coastal vulnerability

[Speaker 1] (2:03:12 - 2:03:35)
analysis is the entire coast entire okay all right so it is getting a little bit late can we say we're gonna put this back onto a agenda and why don't you want to talk about how you want to put it back on the agenda yeah I mean I would

[Speaker 2] (2:03:35 - 2:04:39)
love I guess anybody who came to those meetings should just be invited to participate with us but I would just like to know a sort of a little refined scope like if we only had $200,000 where would where should we focus because we have committed ARPA funds in the regardless of whether we got a grant or not we committed ARPA funds to climate resiliency and that was earmarked for $200,000 so we should be thinking about the most efficient way to spend those funds so that we have real as best we can have real data so that we can do something with it and then we should understand hopefully from the data the cost of how to use the data going forward and then maybe trying to get some of some if not all those things into the capital improvement plan so that we can start stop looking at how we have data and start looking at how we use data

[Speaker 1] (2:04:39 - 2:05:28)
okay got it so we will wrap that up and we'll move on please so next we're going to I have an old agenda here did we move the the boards and commissions into consent or is it a line item okay so all right so now we're moving to the consent agenda can I have a motion to approve the consent agenda I first I

[Speaker 4] (2:05:28 - 2:05:35)
just want to address if I could through you chairwoman my appointments my

[Speaker 1] (2:05:35 - 2:06:09)
choices for however waterfront but sure so why don't we pull that out can we pull that out and then can we approve yes so we're gonna pull out the councils and then can we have a motion to approve the consent agenda minus the two that we

[Speaker 15] (2:06:10 - 2:06:17)
minutes for just one minute okay so motion to approve agenda taking out one

[Speaker 1] (2:06:17 - 2:06:43)
minus the minutes minus the committee appointments so clean up all in favor okay so now you want to hit the minutes real quick we do that one last okay let's go to Cultural Council yep Hannah Sharpless and Alexandra Bigley

[Speaker 3] (2:06:46 - 2:07:16)
Cultural Council is as we know it's kind of suffered from lack of interest but maybe our discussion at the last meeting helped to surface more interest and so I actually worked more with Diane to kind of assess the various candidates and you know obviously propose the two that are in front of us Diane does a tremendous

[Speaker 10] (2:07:16 - 2:07:29)
amount of work around the Cultural Council so David so Doug did you work in conjunction with the chair there is no chair for this that's why I was not it

[Speaker 3] (2:07:29 - 2:07:42)
is the hope that they'll appoint a chair once they have more yes we're

[Speaker 1] (2:07:42 - 2:08:14)
about to miss out on funding okay so could we have a motion to approve Hannah Sharpless and Alexandra Bigley to the Cultural Council so moved so now let's go to the Harbor and Waterfront Advisory Committee Ted Dooley Scott McBurney Amy Winger Michael Gombali and John Ingalls yes Danielle so Diane thank

[Speaker 4] (2:08:14 - 2:12:03)
you for your work on this one because we had so many applicants and some of them dated back two years from when they first applied this committee had an open position on it that oddly enough was not full I don't know why I did reach out to the chair this is you know this was concerning to me from the very beginning from the first meeting I went to in August I felt like that meeting was so incredibly divisive and people had some real concerns about the way that Harbor Waterfront operates and I felt from my perspective that we needed to have a more balanced approach to the committee itself so when I reached out to the chair as I have done in the past with zoning and the other boards that I'm a liaison to I wanted to set up a time to meet on zoom or to meet on team so we could go over the the applications I sent them to him Diane sent them to him so we had them all and he did not want to meet with me on zoom or teams I said okay well do you want to call me you know do you want to send me your recommendations via email and he said no I want you to come to the fish house and sit down and discuss it with me and I said well I'm not gonna do that that's not really comfortable doing that and then he said well you know I think you should come over my house and hear what I have to say and I quite honestly didn't really like the tone in the direction that was going in so I wasn't able to consult with him as much as I would have liked I did offer numerous times to meet over zoom over teams on the phone via email and you never take me up on any of that so I think that I'm I'm thinking we might have gotten off to the wrong on the wrong foot and I think that's partly because the August meeting I voice concerns about the makeup of that committee I was approached by four members four existing members of that committee with their own concerns with how things were being handled I have also spoken to people on other committees that are concerned with the way the chair conducts the committee meetings in various various issues that they have I sat here and listened to the fishermen come and have their say I went to that meeting and heard them and I felt like for some reason they weren't being represented so I thought that I'm proposing reappointing two people that are on the committee in replacing two others there on the committee with two of the fishermen and an independent person Amy linger who really has no affiliation to kind of balance out what I feel like is the appearance of a stacked committee and I think it's important that we try to engage as many new people to get involved and have their voices heard and I think it was really clear after listening to people at that August meeting that that was not what was happening on harbor waterfront and I think that it's a tough call you know I did speak to the two people that that I didn't suggest for reappointment I emailed both of them I offered to have personal conversations with them one did not respond to me at all one said no need that's fine and it's not to say that I don't value their service and the input and the work that they've put in because it's a lot of work I can see that they've done a lot of work but I do think it's important to have committees that represent a wide diverse cross-section of this town and I don't feel like this one was made up that way so I think that you know it it's something we need to address and it's not fun and it's not maybe a popular thing but I think it's the right thing to do in this case so that is

[Speaker 2] (2:12:03 - 2:12:26)
thank you I just have a quick follow-up question Jackson had mentioned that one of the folks who did not get reappointed was a prior EPA employee and things of that nature yes and when you were evaluating who was up and who should short or should not stay on the committee were those things taken into

[Speaker 4] (2:12:26 - 2:13:57)
consideration they were and what also was taken into consideration was our new focus that we prefer people that actually live in town to be on the committee and this particular person does not so that was a consideration for me as well so yeah I did I did take that into consideration it's a very valid point I could probably make the case for any single one of those 21 people that they all have valuable things that they can contribute but honestly like you know some of them had applied almost three years ago so I mean I had two people that didn't even respond to me for to talk to me at all right so I think yeah there there are 20-something people but you know some of them quite honestly had absolutely no experience and Harvard Waterfront was one of five committees they checked off and didn't even submit a resume so there were various degrees of qualification so to speak and that's not to say that anyone isn't qualified but I just I think that that board needs a little bit more balance and I am also really concerned with the fact that we've had the same chair of that board for I think it's close to seven years and I think that I think it says in our charter somewhere that you know every two years you're supposed to consider a change of the chair you know and I think that I don't feel like he's really collaborative and I think that's important and I think it's a big it's a big important board in this town and I think we really need to be a little bit more cognizant of how we're putting people on there.

[Speaker 10] (2:13:57 - 2:14:50)
No I agree I think it is a it is a big important board you know I think that the change in the process at the select board level through our you know through our change in policy where you know where the liaison was going to work in conjunction with the chair is incredibly important so I feel I feel uncomfortable accepting any recommendations today I would ask that you figure out how to how to collaborate with Mr. Schultz and communicate with him so that way you can work together because I mean you can you can say hey I you know I I tried but I would I would want I would expect I would expect you know us as liaisons to not make the selection for the for the committee but to work in conjunction and to hear from

[Speaker 4] (2:14:50 - 2:15:10)
the chair who and I asked for the chairs input many times David but I won't be told where I'm gonna meet and how I'm gonna do it I won't be told that that's that's not his role and that's not appropriate okay well I mean I gave him many options and he declined he is a volunteer as well it's all my so am I understood and I deserve a certain level of respect and I didn't get it and it's

[Speaker 1] (2:15:10 - 2:15:26)
not appropriate that's how I feel yeah okay so can we have a motion to approve Ted Dooley Scott McBurney Amy Linger Michael Gombali and John Ingalls so I

[Speaker 2] (2:15:26 - 2:15:58)
will motion to table this discussion I motion I urge the chair of the committee to reach out to their select board liaison I think this can come up on next week's meeting I think there's plenty of time or what what do we have two weeks from now there's plenty of time now and then have this conversation and if we can't have this conversation by then for whatever reason we can take it up then

[Speaker 1] (2:15:59 - 2:16:47)
so I have a comment I think that's a real slap in the face to Daniel I think Danielle has done the work I think she has reached out to the chair I think for the chair to turn around and not jump on a call when it was viable not to make room to work halfway and then to turn around and to say to a select board member oh you go back and you work with the chair I think some of these chairs I hate to see have a chair including myself as a chair think that they have this ultimate authority just supposed to work together and there's a lot of work put in the into this making calls interviewing people reaching out to people who weren't going to be selected and I think tonight we should be making a call and to turn around and ask Danielle go back and try to work it out

[Speaker 2] (2:16:47 - 2:17:03)
again I have a real problem with that well if you noted the way I phrased it I wasn't asking Danielle to do anything affirmatively there I was asking the chair of the Harbor and Waterfront to reach out and do something it is a tough

[Speaker 3] (2:17:03 - 2:18:16)
call I appreciate everyone's perspective here you know some people have different ways of like wanting to talk and all that stuff you know I don't I don't you know fundamentally quibble with any of you know where you came out on this I think you know it's almost like what I'm taking from Katie maybe this isn't exactly what you're saying but it's almost like but let's be let's be the an even bigger person here let's give it like one more try to try to kind of you know have that conversation you know maybe maybe it's it's a good thing for so everyone you know since we're now talking about this to at least make sure that conversations had maybe there's some useful information that's shared it's not that you haven't tried I hear what what you've done and it's not it sounds like you know there was communication but it just kind of didn't really sync up and it does it does feel as though it is hard to you know feel great about you know saying yes when there hasn't even been in the

[Speaker 4] (2:18:17 - 2:19:50)
I'm happy to have the conversation but I'm gonna tell you right now that I am not going to go back on the fact that I think fishermen need to be on that board and I also think that there needs to be diversity and how we put people on committees and I'm happy to have a conversation with Jackson Schultz but if he is not going to be collaborative and open to that the conversation is going to go nowhere I'm gonna be completely honest I'm not pulling any punches yeah I sat at that same meeting that you sat at Katie right next to you and it was clear that we have a problem right and I'm happy to be the bad guy to go ahead and approach it I tried to go about this as best as I could you know I gave him a lot of options but I will not be addressed the way that I was and I will not be told where I have to meet somebody especially when I feel like you're trying to use your influence at the fish house in that environment to make me do something that I'm not comfortable with okay when I campaigned for the seat I went to the fish house and I met with a whole lot of people over there that wanted to talk to me and have my ear about certain things okay and I gave everybody an open open conversation but I'm not going to be pigeonholed into doing something that makes me uncomfortable or that gives any implication of anything unethical right so I'm going to put that out there right now I don't think anything in this

[Speaker 2] (2:19:50 - 2:20:11)
process that has happened up to now has a reflection on you Danielle and I don't either that very clear I know Mary Ellen said it feels like a slap in the face that's not what I didn't send did you feel like however Jackson is the chair of a whole committee that committee he probably shouldn't be quite honestly but that committee has that committee suffers the repercussions of his actions

[Speaker 4] (2:20:11 - 2:20:15)
so and they have voiced that committee members have voiced that I'm hoping

[Speaker 2] (2:20:15 - 2:20:19)
that the membership will voice that now that we've had this discussion publicly

[Speaker 4] (2:20:19 - 2:20:32)
but who are these but they did voice that to me Katie I've spoken to four members that have concerns about him what else are they supposed to do what do we expect them to do what else I am the liaison to the committee these are

[Speaker 1] (2:20:32 - 2:20:47)
these are committees they're not clubs these are committees I don't need to explain that so and I think that these are advisory committees to the select board if there's been a process we have a process we have a recommendation I just feel that we should be taking the recommendation of the select board

[Speaker 4] (2:20:47 - 2:21:38)
member I mean I do trust the people sitting here when they make recommendations I haven't ever sat here and told anybody that they should go back to the drawing board and try again or maybe even when I think that other people could be appointed to the committees that are different than what they recommend I also put it out to this whole board what I was going to do a couple weeks ago and the only one who had feedback was was Doug valuable feedback that I certainly took into consideration but now when we get here all of a sudden it's different right so that's that's what feels disingenuous to me and I'll be completely frank all right I trust you for as adults to go ahead and handle your committees mine is a little bit more difficult this committee I think Diane said it best to me that you know good luck dealing with Harbor waterfront right okay well I will but you know to say that I haven't

[Speaker 2] (2:21:38 - 2:22:35)
gone the distance and done what I think the part here that I did not consider originally was that the consultation between chair and select board member is a new process it is you know right and it's not exactly perfect yet and it needs to be fine-tuned and both select board liaisons and chairs need to figure out how that process works absolutely and I am NOT saying that there was any malfeasance or any lack of effort on in any of the way that was described and I'm not saying that any of this is going to change by next week I'm just saying allow the chair to reflect on the conversation that was had here tonight mm-hmm in the hope that that conversation might change something and

[Speaker 1] (2:22:38 - 2:24:00)
if it doesn't it doesn't so I had a motion and nobody is anybody so I asked is there a motion to to accept these these nominations so so Katie's made a motion to table we have a vote to table this how many eyes to table Daniel no I'm a no so that's three to two it'll be tabled that vote is three to two yes all right okay now we're at the minutes Doug I you're good with the minutes sure okay so can I have a motion to approve the minutes second second all in favor aye okay so that ends our select board meeting oh geez sorry yes select board time I'm so sorry about that all right so we'll start select board time

[Speaker 4] (2:24:04 - 2:26:04)
Danielle oh yeah so I just want to say to the school committee I want to applaud them for their recommendation of Jason Kalishman and I was able to attend the community conversation with him the other night as well as the interview that he had with him a week or so ago and I know it's a tough decision to not go and have a national executive level search but I do think even if they did open that up he would be head in shoulders the best candidate and I think it's to our benefit that he lives here he's from here there is no learning curve getting to know the population and the kids which is on average about a year and a half for an incoming superintendent from somewhere else so that is one of the many pluses to him and I'm really glad that they saw that they have that within and they were able to you know even deal with the feedback that some people aren't happy with it I understand that but don't penalize a really good candidate so I was happy to see that very sad to see the passing of Arthur O'Neill a giant in this community who spent 35 years coaching soccer girls soccer girls basketball in teaching so much more than X's and O's to so many kids in this town a real beacon for what a coach parent human being should be and I just I was so encouraged to see so many people from town attending his services I will say it made me incredibly proud to be a resident of Swamp Scott to see that this community does show up when things like that happen and that was very encouraging I'll be it very sad and I just want to thank his family for sharing him with us for a number of years and that's all. Well said. Doug?

[Speaker 3] (2:26:05 - 2:26:15)
Two things. Financial summit. Any updates?

[Speaker 1] (2:26:16 - 2:26:17)
We'll get that to you next week.

[Speaker 3] (2:26:19 - 2:26:28)
Okay I mean we said we were gonna do this in September right so I don't quite understand.

[Speaker 1] (2:26:30 - 2:26:36)
We don't have an answer for you tonight. I hear your frustration we don't have an answer for you tonight.

[Speaker 3] (2:26:36 - 2:26:46)
Do you would you be able to do we know if the schools have been directly engaged in formulating a plan to have a joint conversation?

[Speaker 1] (2:26:47 - 2:26:52)
Schools have been notified that we don't have a date as of this time.

[Speaker 3] (2:26:57 - 2:27:14)
Is there anything that we can do to be helpful in making this come to fruition like is the data being prepared is that yeah I'm sorry I'm not I'm not saying it's a responsibility and you know you may just be the one that may know more you've had Congress to try chair or whatever it is just to.

[Speaker 1] (2:27:14 - 2:27:21)
We haven't had a chair. I will look into it for you tomorrow and I'll email you tomorrow and I'll bring that back to the board.

[Speaker 3] (2:27:21 - 2:28:52)
I hope it's not just me that's like interested and I just feel like we made a very significant pledge at town meeting that we're gonna have this process and now we're getting deeper and deeper into when the budgets like have to start snapping and we haven't even started this conversation so it's just a difficult situation. So hopefully a mostly positive note most people probably maybe know CPA passed yesterday and so the next step in that process is that at May town meeting there will be a bylaw proposed to formulate the Community Preservation Committee and there are certain required people that have to be on that committee and we have a choice about some additional people that could also be on that committee so just so people are aware that's not going to go into effect until FY 26 tax cycle so you know it's a long process basically for all this to come to fruition that would be like the tax implications maybe wouldn't even have until 2027 and the committee would have to be seated and you know actually kind of figuring out what they're going to do and you know all that so it's a it's a long process from here to there.

[Speaker 1] (2:28:54 - 2:28:57)
Katie. Katie.

[Speaker 2] (2:28:58 - 2:30:00)
Yes I would actually like to acknowledge and thank Diane Mary Ellen and Mike and Sarah Sweeney for the wonderful contributions to our seaside landscape of the veterans banners that have been hung down DPW of the DPW for hanging them I saw them the other day it was quite a lovely experience to walk down with my kids and find their great-grandfather and a dad two friends of ours who was from town they posed they took pictures they were so excited it's great to see to have a place where families can go outside of you know a memorial or a cemetery where they can sort of feel connected to their family members who served for our country so I just want to thank everybody who participated I think it's a wonderful addition and I hope to that we will

[Speaker 1] (2:30:00 - 2:30:22)
continue it and Diane is keeping the list for next year to add more so yeah maybe we can we currently have 400 veterans in town right now and you know majority of those banners are from our past veterans so hopefully we'll have

[Speaker 2] (2:30:22 - 2:31:19)
this whole town covered and I just have a quick follow-up question very excited the CPA passed a lot of work went into that I want to acknowledge Doug and David's contributions to that because it was significant and I just want to find out when the community might be able to submit names to be considered for the I know there's a bylaw and the bylaw dictates a lot of it but is can we start that process sooner rather than later to understand interest and who might want to sit on that to understand how big because there is a little bit of flexibility about the size of the committee so maybe understanding what the interest is might help us make a better decision about size so just wondering sort of that thought process maybe I'll consult with the statewide

[Speaker 3] (2:31:19 - 2:31:28)
organization that's done this now 200 times to get their input about the kind of the sequencing of things what's the best size committee to what's that what's

[Speaker 1] (2:31:28 - 2:34:09)
the best size committee yeah okay all right so I just want to thank Nate Beisheim Steve Mastrione Aidan Bruno and Joe Dillette for bringing us the select board meeting tonight I also want to thank the police department Swanscot Police Department and the Marblehead Police Department for assisting with the O'Neill funeral it was such a large funeral that they had to call in Marblehead support to help as people were leaving it was some very very impressive the other thing I want to update I think relatively soon we should as a committee give our opinions on what we feel about Kings Beach and how to work what are our priorities we have a list of priorities from Kleinfelder I had a meeting this week with Gino with the mayor of Lynn with Jenny Armini and with Brendan Crichton they they asked to meet with us and they are in the Lynn is in the process of applying for a grant that we do not need to approve but we would be the recipient of a substantial amount of money from a federal grant I think it's a 20 million dollar grant you know 20 million dollar grant so and they are discussing the possibility of doing a pilot program of a UV station at the beach so there are a lot of variables involved in this and I explained to the mayor that we have a committee a water and sewer infrastructure committee and as soon as they give us an opinion on what's what's in the best interest of Swanscott then we can get back to them so I did speak to the chair of the committee and Liz Smith and she and her committee are going to start working on that the mayor is sending over the grant information and I can't think of anything else from there but the big issue here is I just want to make sure that everybody at this board is vocal on what's important to them so I've heard from Doug a couple times but I I think it's important that we're we're up front about it okay so that'll come on a future and other than that thank you and good night motion to adjourn all in favor

[Speaker 16] (2:34:15 - 2:34:15)
you