Both housekeeping items are done. Here are the minutes.

Select Board — Regular Meeting

Town of Swampscott, Massachusetts Tuesday, September 8, 2026 Video ID: ikhhqwEB7rE · Auto-transcript (no speaker tags)

Attribution note. This record is derived from a speaker-tag-free auto-transcript. Attributions rest on self-introductions, being-addressed-by-name, and role cues consistent with the September 2026 roster (Phelan Chair, Leonard Vice Chair, Fletcher, Dooley, Spritz; Nick Connors TA). Where cues are weak, statements are left to a generic role. One name in the transcript (“Ken Shutzer,” the developer’s attorney) is a likely Whisper artifact — the corpus’s professional transcript of this meeting renders it “Pat Schroeder”; see the flag in Section 2.

Section 1: Agenda (inferred)

00:00:05 Call to order; recording notice; Pledge of Allegiance
00:00:29 Town Administrator’s Report (Connors) — MSBA Middle School SOI; Veterans Crossing funding; Patriots-games pilot on Town Hall lawn; 9/11 remembrance
- Board questions on MSBA timeline; Veterans Crossing outreach; CARES/overlay balance-sheet grievance
00:07:56 Public Comment — Bill Demento (in person); James Andrews (written, read into record)
00:13:41 Consent Agenda — minutes; Pomona entertainment license; Kelly Russo appointment; Kristen Lewis to Climate Action & Resiliency
00:15:00 Two Proclamations — National Suicide Prevention Month; National Senior Center Month
00:21:22 Charter Review discussion (partial — begun before 7:00, then tabled to await posted hearing time)
00:28:20 Earth Removal Advisory Committee (ERAC) joint meeting & public hearing — earth-removal permit, 555 Essex Street
00:44:04 Kleinfelder coastal-resilience report (Fisherman’s Beach vulnerability & alternatives)
02:10:13 Charter Review discussion (resumed)
02:25:33 Discussion of Select Board goals and priorities (from June 27 retreat)
02:49:19 Select Board member time / reports
02:54:27 Adjournment

Section 2: Speaking Attendees (Inferred)

Select Board

Likely Katie Phelan (Chair) — chairs the meeting, opens at 00:00:05, reads proclamations, runs the goals segment (“we met on a Saturday… in June”), issues the “don’t blindside us” instruction to staff at 00:07:41. Chairing cues throughout.
Likely Mary Ellen Fletcher — addressed as “Mary Ellen”/“Mariel”/(garbled) “Mary Allen” at 00:04:24, 01:49:56, 02:11:34; self-identifies as former Board of Assessors liaison at 02:14:05; presses the CARES/overlay grievance and the veterans-housing eligibility thread; institutional memory (“we lost it in 2011,” 00:55:52).
Likely Wayne Spritz — addressed as “Wayne” at 01:00:57 (“to Wayne’s point”), 01:46:04, 02:38:31; raises the technical coastal questions (13-ft design elevation, “still water,” king-tide/“sunny day flooding,” scour/pilings); proposes the beachward-seawall alternative 01:53:11; describes the standing veterans committee and the 1991 survey gap 02:31:12.
Likely Ted Dooley — addressed as “Ted” at 00:17:21 (reads the second proclamation) and 00:41:44/02:41:47; self-identifies as former Planning Board chair (“over my last two years as chair,” 02:18:06); raises planning-board alternates; clarifies his prior “transit-oriented” remark and apologizes to Fletcher 02:51:44; reports the performing-arts center opening.
Danielle Leonard (Vice Chair) — present and named by the Chair (“between Danielle, Maryanne, and I,” 02:17:16; “Anybody? Danielle, Ted, Wayne?” 02:51:36). No line is uniquely attributable to her from the transcript; specific statements are left generic.

Town staff

Nick Connors, Town Administrator — gives the TA report; addressed “Thank you, Nick” at 00:02:44; fields the charter-process, coastal-grant, and goals questions.

Presenters / public

Joe (Earth Removal Advisory Committee representative) — presents ERAC’s permit recommendation; full name not stated on tape (corpus flags a possible “Markarian,” HUMAN-REVIEW). Also assists with microphone logistics.
Attorney for The Davis Companies — self-introduces at 00:35:35. Rendered “Ken Shutzer” in this auto-transcript; the professional transcript of this meeting renders the same self-introduction as “Pat Schroeder.” Treat the name as unresolved; do not fold into Kenneth Shutzer (Housing Authority) on this transcript alone.
Nick Manino (Menino), Manino/Menino Construction — site-work contractor; self-introduces at 00:36:33.
Mike, of Callahan (construction manager) — speaks to the Japanese-knotweed treatment 00:40:41.
David Peterson (Petersen), Kleinfelder — opening remarks / team introduction 00:45:06.
Seth Bryant, Kleinfelder — facilitates the coastal presentation.
Brandon Raymond, Woods Hole Group (coastal engineer) — self-introduces at 01:01:31; modeling and “still water” explanation.
John McAllister, McAllister Marine Engineering — remote; audio failed early, restored ~01:04:14; presents the parking-lot alternatives.
Bill Demento, 108 Paradise Road — public comment 00:08:29.
James Andrews, 133 Stetson Avenue — written comment read into the record 00:10:42.
Kelly Russo — consent-agenda appointee, present.

Section 3: Meeting Minutes

1. Call to order 00:00:05

The Chair opened the meeting, noted it was being recorded, and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. Town Administrator’s Report 00:00:29

The Town Administrator (Connors) reported:

00:00:37 MSBA Statement of Interest (Middle School). The SOI submitted last fiscal year with the School Committee made the first cut. MSBA staff visited last week for a sit-down session and a building walk-through; a few follow-ups are being assembled. Staff will make recommendations to the MSBA board in early December.
00:01:24 Veterans Crossing. EOHLC announced funding for affordable-housing projects statewide last Thursday, and the project at Veterans Crossing (with B’nai B’rith Housing) was approved — “an important first step… plenty of work ahead.”
00:01:40 Patriots-games pilot. Building on the World Cup showings on the Town Hall lawn, the town will pilot a limited number of Patriots games this fall (roughly 2–4), licensing recently worked out; credited “Charlotte and Christina” for the licensing.
00:02:29 9/11 remembrance Friday at 9:55 a.m. at fire headquarters (~45 minutes).

Board discussion of the report:

00:02:44 A member (likely Fletcher) confirmed the MSBA effort still contemplates either renovation or rebuild at the same location; the TA agreed the designer would determine the best option.
00:03:37 A member asked the MSBA timeline. The TA and a member gave six to seven years as realistic (“five to seven, but not many are done in five”), covering feasibility, design, and financing before construction, with community “on-ramps and off-ramps” (votes and input) throughout.
00:04:24 Veterans housing (Fletcher). A member (likely Fletcher) said Kim Martin Epstein had noted how rare first-round funding of this size is, and urged moving quickly to build an outreach process. She proposed redirecting the ~$2,000/month the town gives the VFW toward mailers/marketing as occupancy approaches, and forming a committee to identify eligible veterans — over 400 in town, plus former residents now in Lynn or Salem who may qualify.
00:05:45 CARES/overlay grievance (Fletcher). The same member said she was “bothered” that the shortfall on the overlay and the additional CARE (COVID testing) funding — “over $200,000 not being covered by the federal government” — was first raised only at last week’s meeting by “Patrick” [Luddy]. She objected that the Select Board and Finance Committee were not kept current, asked that all supporting information be sent to the board, wanted to understand why the town does not qualify for federal testing reimbursement, questioned the size of the overlay before all tax bills are processed, and asked staff to flag any outstanding balance-sheet items immediately. The Chair (likely Phelan) echoed: “if there’s something outstanding on a balance sheet, let us know right away.” The TA agreed (“We’ll do”).
The member also said she wants to look into how ~140 other affected Massachusetts communities are handling the disallowance and to raise it with Senator Markey (and, per member time later, Warren) before any expensive legal action.

3. Public Comment 00:07:56

Public comment set at three minutes.

00:08:29 Bill Demento, 108 Paradise Road. Spoke to celebrate the Veterans Crossing funding, calling it the biggest housing project since Doraty Circle (1971) and the largest since the 38-unit Michon school conversion. He announced he would form an ad hoc veterans committee of five to work with the Veterans Agent to canvass every town veteran on eligibility, and credited “Mary Allen [Fletcher]” for the committee idea. He noted 41 units and thanked the three board members involved in the granting, the two new members, the new TA, and the new town planner.
00:10:42 James Andrews, 133 Stetson Avenue (written, read by the Chair). Objected that at the August 27 meeting, Captain Cable’s parking proposal repeatedly referenced the Westcott (Wescot) property, which a board member described as “not a transit property.” Andrews cited MassHousing financing (per 8/8/23 minutes) approving the development as transit-oriented (within 0.3 miles of the commuter-rail station, plus Essex Street bus service). He recited the parking history: the developer’s own study showed a ~75% shortfall (109 spaces for 128 units, 0.85/unit vs. a strict-zoning 192); 2021–22 negotiations reduced the project from 120 to 114 units and raised on-site parking from 109 to 130 (1.08/unit) plus a Pitman-to-rail-trail easement. He warned that backtracking would put 60–70 additional vehicles onto congested streets and questioned whether residents should trust the town on future rezoning if it cannot manage the Westcott permit conditions. (Chair noted his links would appear in the minutes.)

Taken out of order to release appointee Kelly Russo. The consent agenda comprised: minutes; a Pomona entertainment license; the appointment of Kelly Russo; and the appointment of Kristen Lewis to the Climate Action & Resiliency Committee.

00:14:13 Motion to approve; seconded.
00:14:24 A member (likely Fletcher) noted she had considered pulling the Russo appointment because such a hardworking volunteer’s appointment “shouldn’t just be in a consent agenda,” and praised her, but did not pull it.
00:14:44 The consent agenda was approved on a voice vote (“all in favor” — ayes). Russo thanked the board and departed.

5. Proclamations 00:15:00

00:15:00 National Suicide Prevention Month. The Chair read the proclamation designating September 2026 as National Suicide Prevention Month in Swampscott, closing with a call to “check in with our neighbors… friends.”
00:18:09 National Senior Center Month. Read by a member (addressed “Thank you, Ted” at 00:21:05 — likely Dooley), designating September 2026 as National Senior Center Month; the Chair thanked director emeritus Heidi Weir and the current director.

6. Charter Review — opening discussion 00:21:22

Begun before 7:00 p.m. because the ERAC hearing was posted for 7:00 (the agenda showed 6:30 but the newspaper notice said 7:00, so the Chair waited for the posted time). The TA (Connors) summarized:

00:22:11 Purpose: review whether the authorities, roles, appointments, structure, and budget/capital process last set in 2016 still fit. The 2001–02 draft called for a five-year look-back; that was removed in 2016, so “here we are 10 years later.”
00:22:44 He consulted Jerry Perry (involved in prior Swampscott drafting; worked at Mass DLS and on a recent Beverly revision).
00:23:16 Typical process: a charter review committee created by a Town Meeting article setting its charge and composition — usually five to seven members (at five: one each from Select Board, School Committee, and Finance, plus two moderator appointments, historically from elected Town Meeting members). A ~12-month process; if going to a December Town Meeting, recommendations would return the following December.
00:24:36 Two legal paths: minor changes can pass as a home-rule petition through Town Meeting; significant changes also need a referendum (Town Meeting → legislature → referendum). Decision deferred until scope is clearer.
00:25:08 Many communities use outside consultants; he had contacted the Collins Center for a draft scope and budget (“no commitment”), and noted their public-engagement tools (surveys beyond who shows up).
00:26:12 Asked about grants, he pointed to the Community Compact as a possibility. On committee vs. elected commission: an appointed committee lets elected bodies name qualified people and is less political than an elected commission; better to start with a committee to identify the breadth of changes before deciding whether a full commission (e.g., a change to a mayor-council form) is warranted. He noted the spring’s questions were mainly about appointment authority, not wholesale structural change.
00:28:19 The item was tabled to open the ERAC hearing at the posted time.

7. ERAC Joint Meeting & Public Hearing — Earth Removal Permit, 555 Essex Street 00:28:20

00:28:35 Confirmed the hearing was new (never opened). The Select Board voted to open the public hearing (motion, second, voice vote — ayes); ERAC then opened its own meeting.
00:29:08 ERAC presentation (Joe). At the prior meeting ERAC asked the board to postpone approval because the draft permit neither included nor explained most of the ~18 conditions required under the earth-removal bylaw (Article 13, §4, “General Limitations”). The only change from the prior draft is a new fourth paragraph on the first page explaining why many conditions were omitted — because they are inapplicable, impractical, impossible, or redundant with (or in conflict with) planning/zoning/building authority (e.g., “type and location of structures,” “area and depth of excavation”). He noted the bylaw’s provisions suit standalone projects with a beginning and end but not the quarry, and that ERAC intends to bring bylaw amendments to spring Town Meeting to separate the two and reduce vagueness. He said the Select Board — not ERAC — is the permitting authority and may add conditions; he recommended approving the permit as recommended.
00:34:14 Asked how contaminated-soil monitoring (4D) works, he acknowledged the bylaw has no enforcement mechanism or penalties and deferred detail to the project team.
00:35:35 Project overview. The developer’s attorney (rendered “Ken Shutzer”/“Pat Schroeder” — see attribution note) appeared for The Davis Companies (owner), with Callahan as construction manager on the 161–163 residential unit project, and Nick Manino/Menino (Manino Construction) doing site work. The trigger was removing more than 400 cubic yards of soil.
00:36:33 Manino described the site (555 Essex, a relatively flat former parking lot) as generating little export because cut and fill nearly balance — about 1,000 cubic yards leaving the site (for comparison, ~30,000 yards left for the recent elementary school). Most of the existing lot material (aggregate hauled in ~30 years ago) will be reused, approved by Callahan’s geotechnical engineers.
00:38:14 Dust / dirt pile near Stop & Shop. A member (likely Fletcher) relayed resident health concerns about the large dirt pile. The team said a water truck sprays the pile regularly during digging/loading (not typically weekends, when it isn’t disturbed); the loam pile was hydroseeded and the reused earth pile is kept wet.
00:39:52 Japanese knotweed. A member (likely Dooley) asked for an update. Mike (Callahan) said the loam pile that was hydroseeded is the one where knotweed grew; a hired consultant has a rough treatment plan; the pile was tarped that day to limit fall spread; the plan is to cut and spray with pesticide late September/early October, then cut in June and spray again in September next year. Asked about drainage to the ocean, the team said the consultant is still finalizing which pesticide to avoid environmental harm — prompting a member’s observation, “So you really don’t have a plan.” ERAC’s presenter added that concentrating the knotweed in one pile makes treatment easier than when it was spread along Essex Street.
00:43:10 Public comment (part of the hearing): none in the room or online.
00:43:20 Motion to close the public hearing; seconded (Ted); voice vote — ayes.
00:43:47 Motion to approve the permit (555 Essex Street); seconded; voice vote — ayes. Permit approved.

8. Kleinfelder Coastal-Resilience Report 00:44:04

(After microphone/audio troubleshooting; a public email had asked speakers to be audible online.)

00:45:06 Team & origin (David Peterson, Kleinfelder). Consultant team: Kleinfelder (Peterson, Seth Bryant), Woods Hole Group (Brandon Raymond, modeling), and McAllister Marine Engineering (John McAllister, remote). Town working group named: Marcy Golaska, Tim Milliken, Gino Cresta, Martha Schmitt, Liz Smith, Jackson Schultz, and a Dooley reference. Doug Thompson credited as the original Select Board force. A grant application was unsuccessful, so the town proceeded with a reduced scope funded by ARPA — hence no real public-outreach component, which the team repeatedly flagged as essential for any next steps.
00:48:03 Vulnerability assessment (Seth Bryant). Scenarios for 2030/2050/2070 with sea-level rise. The town-wide vulnerability was updated; mitigation was scoped only to Fisherman’s Beach (town-chosen priority). Highest flood probability shown near Kings Beach on the Lynn border; Fisherman’s Beach is a low, narrow coastline segment whose flood pathways reach past Puritan Road and Humphrey Street. Town assets at risk highlighted: the fish house, police station, and Humphrey Street pump station. Compound risk (coastal + extreme rainfall/25-year event at high tide) also modeled; the 1% (100-year) event risk rises substantially by 2070.
00:51:33 “Which report / most vulnerable” exchange (Fletcher). A member (likely Fletcher) asked whether this update changes the earlier study’s finding that the Humphrey Street / police-station / pump-station area is most vulnerable. Bryant said the police station and pump station still rank highest; the fish house is a low point/flood pathway; the Kings Beach area (Phillips Park / Pearl Street vicinity) now shows an expanded future flood area, newly cataloged. She stressed the pump station as the critical asset (“we lost it in 2011”) and that vulnerability is greatest there.
00:54:47 The board and team established the mechanism: flooding enters at a few finite points (Fisherman’s, Eisman’s, Wales beaches) and spreads inland; mitigating the pathways protects the whole area.
00:56:24 Alternatives analysis. Criteria weighted with the town committee; top weights were effectiveness, capital cost, and stakeholder acceptance. Coastline broken into three segments plus “other” (living breakwater, tide gates, pump stations). Early eliminations: elevating Humphrey Street/Puritan Road (infeasible), and the living breakwater (cost). Design flood elevation: 13 ft still-water (ground ~10 ft).
00:59:53 The “why 13 ft” line (Spritz). A member (likely Spritz) asked whether 13 ft is statutory or best practice. Bryant cited Resilient Mass / EEA guidance — the 2050 0.2% (500-year) event. The member pressed on wave-driven storms; Brandon Raymond (Woods Hole) 01:01:31 explained “still water” = tides + wind-driven surge + wave setup, excluding wave run-up/overtopping (handled via drainage).
01:03:09 Weighting provenance. In response to a member, Bryant confirmed the criteria weights came from a town committee workshop, not the consultants, and match what other communities prioritize.
01:04:14 Zone A — Humphrey Street / fish-house parking lot (John McAllister, audio restored). Four options: (1) raised permanent seawall on the beach/south side with deployable barriers at three openings; (3) similar wall on the back/north side (Humphrey Street) with only two closures (entrance/exit); (2) raise the parking lot to elevation 13 (creates a boat-launch pinch point); (4) remove parking for a dune / nature-based solution. Lot elevation ranges 9.8 ft (east, by fish house) to ~11.2 ft (west); Cassidy Park to the west is already above 13 ft. Recommended: the north-side (Humphrey Street) barrier — highest-scoring despite highest cost, because it minimally affects circulation and the fish house and carries lower maintenance than a beach-edge wall.
01:16:59 Cost/benefit challenge. A member questioned why the recommended solution is preferred over the ~$100,000-cheaper beach-edge wall when the listed benefits/drawbacks look identical. McAllister explained the beach-edge wall has a higher life-cycle/maintenance cost (sealing deployable barriers on shifting sand is harder than on asphalt); the table should have listed that O&M drawback.
01:20:57 Zone C — Fish house. Four broad options: floodproofing (wet — FEMA-recommended but poor for a historic structure with first-floor fishermen’s storage lockers; dry — impractical given openings and wave action; temporary drop-in flood planks — workable, cheap, preserves historic status); relocate (loses National Register listing, tied to location; costly; not recommended by stakeholders); replace (challenging for historic status); elevate 3 ft on a new flood-barrier foundation (preserves National Register listing, feasible, most costly). Cost estimates: ~$560K–$650K temporary floodproofing vs. ~$2.4M to raise the fish house. Commercial users (Ted; John Engles) consulted — elevating would broaden the footprint and lose one of two boat ramps, but only one ramp is currently used.
01:28:19 Public-process caveat (Spritz). A member (likely Spritz) argued that spending $2.4M to protect a small number of commercial fishermen needs the broader public process the study lacked; the team agreed the technical recommendation is theirs but stakeholder alignment is the town’s, and noted a protective barrier behind the fish house can protect the town regardless of which fish-house option is chosen.
01:30:12 Zone B — Puritan Road (Brandon Raymond). All private property with existing private seawalls at varying elevations. Options: steel-sheet-pile wall, concrete seawall, or beach/dune (30-ft or 10-ft berm). Recommended: raised concrete seawall to a consistent 13 ft, following the existing alignment; requires buy-in from private owners.
01:34:32 Legal/ownership questions. A member (likely Spritz) asked whether the town can build on private seawalls without owner permission (no), and who bears maintenance and liability. The team and members discussed eminent domain / agreeable takings, that some owners also own the beach in front, and that the project is mutually beneficial (a member offered a quid-pro-quo framing). A member noted personal experience that most owners already maintain their own walls; the “weakest link” principle means one low point exposes the whole area. A member wanted to understand “KP’s [KP Law’s] position.”
01:37:13 Scour/pilings (Spritz). In response, Raymond explained scour at the wall toe and the rule of thumb (foundation depth ≈ design wave height plus margin); a concrete wall needs a wide footing with a keyway, not necessarily piles to bedrock. McAllister concurred bedrock (needed for vertical loads) isn’t required here (horizontal loads).
01:40:59 Performance modeling. Alternatives run against three storm scenarios (1% 2030, 1% 2070, 2% 2070). Peak elevations ~10 ft, ~13 ft, ~13.9 ft. Alternatives: (1) fish house/parking lot only; (2) + Puritan Road seawall; (3) + raising Wales and Eisman’s Beach roads (~17 ft, a conservative placeholder outside scope). Key finding: Alternatives 1 and 2 produce virtually the same flooding as existing conditions because water reroutes through Wales/Eisman’s and back up Humphrey Street; only Alternative 3 (blocking that pathway) essentially eliminates flooding. Conclusion: the whole corridor must be addressed — including Wales/Eisman’s — or the pump station is not saved.
01:46:04 13-ft-vs-17-ft exchange (Spritz). A member (likely Spritz) probed why Wales/Eisman’s was modeled at 17 ft rather than 13; the team said 17 ft was a conservative placeholder to test viability (Wales/Eisman’s is more exposed to open ocean), not a design recommendation, and they didn’t want to spend budget deriving the exact elevation.
01:49:56 Pump station / scope (Fletcher). A member (likely Fletcher) reiterated that the original study identified Phillips Park / Wales as most vulnerable, so protecting the corridor “and plus some” requires doing the whole corridor. Bryant noted the pump station alone could be protected relatively easily with temporary barriers, but the project’s charter was a comprehensive coastline approach.
01:52:23 Beachward-barrier alternative (Spritz). A member (likely Spritz) pressed the idea of putting the seawall on the beach side and using temporary barriers seaward of the fish house, keeping the fish house out of the flood zone and forming a contiguous protected line. The team acknowledged the efficacy is similar but the maintenance/deploy difficulty and day-to-day reliability are worse on the beach (sand fouls the seals; deployment requires expertise that may not be on hand during a storm).
02:06:41 Deployable barriers. In response to a member, the team identified Aquafence (and Aqua Gate) as established products used at the Aquarium MBTA stop, hospitals, and Massport facilities; founded ~1999, notable Mount Vernon deployment ~2008. Estimated ~4 hours to ring the fish house with a two-person crew.
Process and next steps. The report is an advanced draft, provided to the Select Board and working committees but not public (not yet public-comment-invited). A debate followed:
- 01:57:20 A member (likely Fletcher) asked the target date; the TA said they are awaiting the final report after committee comments (Martha Schmitt’s Climate committee has commented; awaiting DPW/Harbor & Waterfront), which Marcy Golaska will pass to the consultant.
- 01:58:11 A member (likely Spritz/Godfrey line — “Wayne”) pushed to post the draft publicly for comment; another member (likely Phelan) and the TA said public comment hasn’t been invited and the draft isn’t final, but agreed a form for public comment and future public hearings would be welcome; a member asked at minimum that Harbor & Waterfront and Climate Action vote to advise whether the report is complete.
- 02:01:12 A member (likely Fletcher) stressed the multi-year history (ARPA-funded, ~2.5 years, “Doug Thompson’s magic markers”) and wanted a target date to apply for new grant money (noting Governor Healey funding).
- 02:02:03 A member (likely Dooley) cautioned against letting public input override scientific recommendation while respecting community weighting, and warned against “doing what we did with the pier” — chasing funding without a supported, finalizable plan.
- 02:03:43 Debate over the role of advisory committees: a member (likely Fletcher) and another (likely Phelan) argued the committees advise the Select Board, not Kleinfelder, and should not directly shape the consultant’s report; the finding is that these are “four white arrows pointing at the same thing.”
- 02:05:54 Resolution. Harbor & Waterfront and Climate Action will discuss the report with their committees; Golaska and the TA will synthesize the feedback so the board can move to a final report; the item resumes at the first Select Board meeting in October. The TA was urged to attend the Sept 15, 11 a.m. EEA one-stop grant webinar (merged CZM/MVP program) for grant next steps.

9. Charter Review — resumed 02:10:13

02:10:30 A member (likely Phelan) asked the TA (Connors) to route committee/report information to the board before it goes public/to the press, noting some committees had the coastal report first.
02:11:34 A member (likely Fletcher) asked whether the board ever received “David[‘s]” compilation of committee charter-review recommendations from ~2–3 years ago; the TA said no (possibly held by “Diane”). She recalled the last charter review used three people (Peter Spellios, Jeff Beerman, and “Mary,” the first female commodore of the Swampscott [club]), meeting in public, and questioned whether the town needs five to seven members now if much of the work is done. Her stated top concern: the Moderator appoints the Finance Committee and Capital Improvement Committee — and currently chairs Capital Improvement — which she called poor governance and wants addressed quickly.
02:14:05 She recalled that when she was Board of Assessors liaison, the assessors had only minor tweaks and no committee raised anything major.
02:16:29 Legal opinion on the Moderator. In response to a member (likely Leonard), it was stated that a legal opinion right after the Moderator’s election found no statutory conflict in the Moderator serving as chair and member of committees he appoints.
02:17:32 Other targeted concerns (Dooley). A member (likely Dooley) raised Board of Health structure (its influence over its own director) and, as former Planning Board chair, planning-board alternates — because the five-member board often has members conflicted by proximity, jeopardizing the four-of-five vote needed for site-plan/special-permit approvals. He and others noted alternates are permissible under state law for some boards.
Consensus / process [02:15:10–02:24:30]. The board established it can file a Town Meeting warrant article directly for a targeted change (e.g., the moderator/appointment issue) and run the comprehensive review in parallel. Historically the committee was created via a Town Meeting article (composition and appointment power approved by Town Meeting), which builds consensus, but that is not legally required. The comprehensive review timeline (start this fall → December 2027 Town Meeting, ~15 months) was felt by several members (Dooley, Fletcher, and the Chair “hinting”) to be long for urgent items. Warrant timing: warrant opens at the next meeting (late September/early October) and closes end of October. Action: retrieve and distribute the 2015/16 warrant article that created the last committee, gather board feedback, and put it on the next agenda.

10. Select Board Goals & Priorities 02:25:33

The Chair (likely Phelan) walked through the goals from the June 27 open-meeting retreat (transcript “tab four”), to be distributed to boards and committees so their work aligns with board priorities. Buckets summarized:

Financial: long-term financial policy review; overtime management; health-insurance costs; OPEB/retirement; financial forecasting/sustainability; tri-chair (SB/FinCom/School) coordination; legal-review cost control.
Operational/organizational: charter review (underway); internal/external communications; committee coordination; labor relations; board/committee orientation & training (a Wayne idea — noting some bodies train, e.g., Assessors, FinCom, Planning/ZBA optional; the goal is basic leadership/how-to-run-meetings/minutes-posting training); community/committee governance improvements; HDC/Historic Commission coordination (possibly a charter item — its scope, appropriateness, necessity); veterans committee.
Public safety/enforcement: parking, traffic, pedestrian safety; fire/ambulance response and road widths; illegal dumping.
Infrastructure: water/harbor/waterfront; beach concessions; harbor management; parking management and its financial impacts.
Economic development: Hawthorne and Hadley redevelopment; St. John’s Church parking lot; a possible economic development committee; long-term ED plan; redevelopment of unused town properties; historic-property preservation.
Community: engagement, trust, communication; charter/committee communications; annual reports (which have lapsed for many boards — a member, likely Dooley, asked whether they’re filed with the clerk yearly; the Chair said they’re supposed to be and the current clerk is remedying a backlog); website improvements; better public engagement.
Action items: charter review; long-term financial plan; Hawthorne and church-lot opportunities; OPEB analysis; health-insurance review; parking-management strategy; ED framework; committee structure/orientation; infrastructure planning (per Kleinfelder); codifying maintenance/safeguarding of recent improvements (especially beaches); community-communication improvements.

Veterans committee clarification [02:30:40–02:38:46]. Two (arguably three) distinct efforts were distinguished:

Fletcher’s temporary housing-eligibility task group — work with the Veterans Agent and BBH to translate AMI/asset eligibility rules into guidance, with Kim Martin Epstein’s help, so veterans (e.g., someone with a home asset but low income) can legally reposition assets in advance and apply confidently. Explicitly motivated by the Michon precedent, where heavy outreach still produced low Swampscott-resident enrollment. Emphasis that this is marketing/advocacy, not access to confidential income data.
Spritz’s proposed standing Veterans Advisory Committee — ongoing, to represent veterans’ evolving needs; noted no town veterans survey since 1991; sees it as a grassroots, bottom-up effort.
(Demento’s ad hoc committee, from public comment.)

“What does success look like?” 02:44:31. A member (likely Dooley) pushed back that the list is a “large laundry list” needing success metrics and short/medium/long-term sequencing and department-head assignments; others agreed there is duplication and some items (annual reports, website) aren’t directly in the board’s control. The TA (Connors) noted all items require staff and offered to bucket them by department/topic and template feedback, or meet with members individually. Consensus: members will give Connors detailed feedback (individually or via template); he will consolidate and return it. The Chair framed the exercise as signaling the will of the board to staff, rather than individual members pursuing separate priorities.

11. Select Board Member Time 02:49:19

02:49:35 (likely Phelan). Thanked “Nate, Ameiliano, Joe, and Ethan” for running the meeting through the evening’s technical problems. Announced the Swampscott Center for the Performing Arts (“aka the old farm/Orpheum”) opened Saturday and expects daily hours. Raised a resident email about first-day-of-school seniors driving/hanging out of vehicles unsafely; asked the TA to have the superintendent and police chief consider an organized parade on the first day to keep the tradition safe. (The reference to the performing-arts opening and the school-safety ask reads as Dooley’s per the corpus; attribution here is uncertain between the two.)
02:51:44 (likely Dooley). Clarified his prior-meeting remark on transit-oriented developments — it concerned 40B permitting, not MBTA-3A, 161A, or financing — and apologized to Fletcher for any confusion. Renewed his request for information on the ~140 other communities also denied the ~$200K+ CARES reimbursement, supporting approaching Markey and Warren before expensive legal action.
02:53:20 (likely Phelan). Announced tri-chair meets Friday, Sept 11, 8 a.m. at Town Hall (before the 9:55 remembrance) to align MOUs / pre-budget questions in a recorded joint format; TA and Patrick [Luddy] to join.

12. Adjournment 02:54:27

Motion to adjourn; seconded; voice vote — ayes. Meeting adjourned.

Prepared from auto-transcript ikhhqwEB7rE. Diarization was unavailable; attributions follow self-introduction, direct address, and role cues consistent with the September 2026 roster. Unresolved: the ERAC presenter’s full name (“Joe”); the developer’s attorney’s name (“Ken Shutzer” here vs. “Pat Schroeder” in the professional transcript). James Andrews’s written comment referenced hyperlinks to be incorporated into the official minutes.

2026-09-08: Select Board_ikhhqw