[0:00] All right. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Selectboard meeting.

[0:04] This meeting of the Selectboard is being held virtually in accordance with Chapter

[0:09] 2 of the Acts of 2025, an act extending certain COVID-19 measures adopted during

[0:15] the state of emergency and signed into law on March 28th, 2025.

[0:20] I am Susan May Redinger, Chair of the Selectboard.

[0:22] Joining me from the Selectboard this evening, and I'll just make sure you can hear

[0:26] us and we can hear you, we have Ahmet Trajciulo.

[0:29] Here.

[0:30] Thank you. Eve Wittenberg?

[0:32] Here.

[0:32] Great. Eric Ward?

[0:34] Here.

[0:35] And Cara Minar.

[0:36] Here.

[0:36] Thank you. Dawn Dunbar, our Town Administrator.

[0:42] And Julie Doucette, our Assistant Town Administrator, and Michelle Stockman, our

[0:46] Executive Assistant.

[0:49] I am going to let Dawn give people a little understanding of things being put in

[0:55] place for this meeting in light of recent events. So Dawn, take it away.

[0:59] Thank you. Just real quickly, a couple of our committees, including the public

[1:03] forum that we had on Monday about the DPW, we've had some

[1:08] uninvited guests to our meetings who have been inappropriate.

[1:13] So we may take a little bit of time letting people in from the waiting room this

[1:17] evening as we try and monitor this.

[1:20] And if something does come up, instead of just suspending everybody's services, we

[1:25] are just going to go ahead and close down the meeting and ask that you

[1:31] rejoin if we happen to have to do that, just to keep the inappropriateness out of

[1:38] this meeting tonight. So, just some of the precautions we're taking.

[1:42] Great. Thanks, Dawn. And as a reminder, if you are following along, you can find

[1:46] the agenda posted to the town website, with the link in case you need to go get it

[1:52] again.

[1:53] With that, I will open it up to public communication.

[1:56] If you are here to make a statement, we ask that you either raise your digital or

[2:00] virtual hand, preferably to come on video, and please keep your comments to

[2:06] three minutes. And start by stating your name and address for the record, please.

[2:12] If you are here to make comment, if you could

[2:15] signal to us that you're here for that.

[2:21] Let me give it a minute.

[2:24] Are there people still in the waiting room, Julie?

[2:29] You still trying to-

[2:29] There is-- No, everybody's in.

[2:32] Okay. All right, great. I don't see any hands, so we will move on.

[2:36] We do offer public communication at the end as well.

[2:41] So the first step is to approve the meeting minutes of Sep-- Sorry.

[2:46] Yep, September 10th and September 22nd.

[2:48] Did any members have any corrections or edits to the minutes?

[2:54] Nope.

[2:55] All right. Then, if there are no objections, I'll consider the minutes of September

[3:00] 10th and September 22nd approved as presented. Thank you.

[3:05] All right, next, I officially welcome Michael Sweeney, who's the Vice President of

[3:09] Operations of MassDevelopment, and his, Eric, I don't know your title, but I'm sure

[3:15] you can let us know. But Eric Hokanson from MassDevelopment as well, and they are

[3:20] here to cover a presentation for us about the current state of Vicksburg

[3:26] Square and what's happening with the redevelopment of that.

[3:30] So, Michael, do you want to introduce?

[3:33] Yes. Thank you so much. As you mentioned, Eric Hokanson is joining us tonight.

[3:40] He is a Senior Vice President here at MassDevelopment.

[3:43] He works within the real estate division of MassDevelopment,

[3:49] and has been directly involved for some time now with real estate matters across

[3:54] the Commonwealth, but also more, in particular, with Devens itself.

[4:00] The Vicksburg Assessment Study, which had recently been completed and we've been

[4:06] sharing within the community and immediate community surrounding Devens,

[4:12] in part grew out of the housing working group, in order to examine certain

[4:18] matters related to Devens and the potential for additional growth, specifically

[4:23] also housing. MassDevelopment did initiate that assessment, and

[4:29] Eric's going to walk us through that and answer any questions that we can answer

[4:35] for you tonight. So Eric, I'll turn it over, and feel free, obviously, to add to

[4:41] that preamble as you wish.

[4:44] Thanks, Michael. Madam Chair, members of the board.

[4:47] I do have a presentation if it would be all right to share my screen.

[4:52] I've just submitted the request to do so.

[4:57] It definitely benefits from the visuals. Assuming everybody can see my screen?

[5:03] Yes.

[5:04] Yes, thank you.

[5:05] All right. So again, Eric Hokanson, Senior Vice President of Real Estate for

[5:09] MassDevelopment. Just going to walk through the origins of the study, which Michael

[5:15] alluded to, a summary of the key findings, and then our near-term steps.

[5:21] Happy to answer any questions at the end.

[5:27] But just to give a brief orientation of the area, I think most people are familiar

[5:32] with Devens, and probably Vicksburg Square, which you can see here on the map is

[5:38] the white area in the middle, around Rogers Field.

[5:41] Vicksburg Square is just north of that.

[5:44] And then the larger Innovation Technology Center zoning district is the rest of

[5:49] that red area, around Rogers Field.

[5:54] It's about 90 acres, 20 of which include Vicksburg Square, and it's

[6:00] zoned for office incubator, light industrial, R&D type uses.

[6:05] But prohibitive uses include residential, hotel, and retail.

[6:09] As I mentioned, Vicksburg Square constitutes about 20 acres of that 90.

[6:15] It's probably what most people think about when they're talking about the

[6:19] Innovation Technology Center zoning district.

[6:21] Welcome back, everyone. This is a continuation of the Selectboard meeting of

[6:25] October 6th. So, let's see. I've lost my presenters, though.

[6:32] So hopefully they'll be back.

[6:36] Do you want to knock out some other stuff, like the Loyal Foe Brewing or something,

[6:40] maybe?

[6:45] Sure.

[6:47] We are amending the liquor license with the Loyal Foe Brewing from the wonderful

[6:54] storm weekend to new date of October 25th, 2026.

[7:00] So moved.

[7:01] Thank you. Is there a second?

[7:02] Second.

[7:04] Great. I'll do it by roll call vote. Ahmet?

[7:08] Aye.

[7:09] Eve?

[7:10] Aye.

[7:11] Eric?

[7:11] Aye.

[7:12] Cara?

[7:13] Aye.

[7:14] And I'm an aye. All right.

[7:17] Thank you. I'm going to not do anything else because everything else is fairly

[7:22] involved.

[7:26] What about all board schedule?

[7:31] You'd rather have people know when it is, so if they're--

[7:36] I suppose they'll be watching the video, but

[7:41] we could do that. I think we were going to propose November 5th, the

[7:47] Thursday. Ahmet, I know you're out of town that week, but if you are gracious

[7:52] enough to let that go forward without you being there,

[7:58] that seemed to be a date that might work.

[8:01] I am very much okay with that.

[8:03] Okay. Does that date work, Cara, for you?

[8:07] I am actually traveling that day.

[8:09] Okay.

[8:10] But that's okay. I'll watch them.

[8:12] The other option was the day before it, Wednesday night.

[8:16] That tends to be a little more loaded up with meetings.

[8:19] So why don't we-

[8:20] And so that-

[8:20] We'll see Eric and we'll come back. Yeah?

[8:23] If I may chime in.

[8:25] Yeah.

[8:26] Another date suggested last time was 10/9, the Monday.

[8:31] And you had a good question about it, whether or not we have any school committee

[8:35] meeting the Monday.

[8:37] You don't mean 10/9, you mean-

[8:39] He means November.

[8:40] Yeah.

[8:41] Yep.

[8:41] 11/9.

[8:43] Okay.

[8:43] Those months, yeah.

[8:44] Why don't we come back to it then, since we have Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Hokanson here.

[8:49] I don't want to use up their time for our scheduling. So, welcome back, gentlemen.

[8:53] Sorry for that.

[8:56] No problem. But if you

[9:00] can't keep John Osborn under control, we're going to have to leave.

[9:04] I'm going to tell you that right now.

[9:06] We'll talk to him about that. Thank you.

[9:09] All right, Eric, you were sharing.

[9:11] Do you still have permission to share, or do you need it again? You're good to go?

[9:14] I still have it. Thank you.

[9:15] All right. If you want to take up where you left off, that would be great.

[9:19] Yep.

[9:21] Thank you again. Just a quick little refresher.

[9:27] The Innovation and Technology Center zoning district is there in the pink around

[9:32] Rogers Field, the white area right in the middle of the map, it's about 90 acres.

[9:37] Allowed uses, office, incubator, light industrial R&D, but not allowed uses

[9:43] include residential, hotel, and retail.

[9:48] Vicksburg Square, which is within the Innovation and Technology Center zoning

[9:52] district, constitutes about 20 of the 90 acres within that zoning district.

[9:58] There's seven buildings, four of which form the Vicksburg Square quadrangle.

[10:05] And these four buildings were the subject of the study, Allen, Knox, Revere, and

[10:10] Hale Halls. They're all Georgian revival structures constructed in the late

[10:15] 1920s through the 1930s and contributing resources to the historic district within

[10:21] which they all sit.

[10:23] Public access to these buildings is restricted, given security concerns, that we do

[10:28] use the inner quadrangle for parking.

[10:34] The buildings themselves, just to try to orient people given their various

[10:38] conditions. Allen Hall, which is the one highlighted here, is the largest of the

[10:43] four halls at more than 113,000 square feet, was originally built in 1929 as

[10:49] regiment barracks for 399 soldiers.

[10:52] It sits above Antietam Street, which is just behind it in the rear, and

[10:58] you can see Burbeck Field in the background of it, which is at a slightly lower

[11:03] elevation. The building was mothballed in the mid-1990s when the base closed.

[11:10] Knox Hall is the smallest of the four halls, highlighted here, 72,000 square feet.

[11:16] It was constructed in 1929 as the second Contilmin Hospital and was also mothballed

[11:22] in the mid-1990s.

[11:26] Revere Hall, which fronts Rogers Field and is the one you see in most photos taken

[11:30] of the athletic events occurring on Rogers Field, totals just over

[11:36] 111,000 square feet. It was originally built in 1929 as well

[11:42] as housing for 250 soldiers. Also, the most recently used structure, having been

[11:47] offices for Mass Development and a few others until 2005.

[11:51] It was mothballed in 2006.

[11:56] Hale Hall, it's the newest of the four halls, at a youthful 86 years old, having

[12:02] been finished in 1940. And was supposed to be housing for up to 500 soldiers.

[12:07] It's also been closed since the mid-1990s.

[12:13] The building conditions assessments also included four other structures within the

[12:18] zoning district. Three are the BOQs, the bachelor officer quarters,

[12:25] which are-- There's a collection of three two-story apartment-style buildings

[12:31] at the top of the hill. They range in size from about 10,000 to 17,000 square feet.

[12:37] And then just down the hill in the direction of Vicksburg Square is Washington

[12:41] Hall. It's a slightly older building.

[12:44] It's three stories, dormitory-style residential building, so it has shared

[12:48] bathrooms and kitchenettes between twin rooms.

[12:52] That one was built in in 1955.

[12:56] And it covers about 24,000 square feet of floor area.

[13:00] But the site itself is about four and a half acres.

[13:07] As many of you are familiar with, this work grew out of the Devins Housing Working

[13:10] Group, which was convened in 2025, to consider ways to encourage new housing

[13:16] development, including the potential rezoning of the ITC.

[13:20] Not so much a rezoning, as much as just allowing residential uses within that

[13:26] zoning district. And that was something that was unanimously recommended by the

[13:30] housing working group. And the housing working group also said it would be really

[13:34] helpful to have an understanding of what the building conditions were.

[13:39] The most recent reports that we have on Vicksburg Square were done in 2017, and not

[13:45] reflective of existing conditions, and certainly not reliable cost estimates

[13:50] for any sort of work that would be necessary for them.

[13:54] There were a couple of other studies that were also recommended, some of which are

[13:59] ongoing, including the school needs assessment.

[14:01] The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities provided funding through a

[14:06] grant for some of this work, which is being administered by the town of Ayer.

[14:14] For the study itself, we engaged a consultant team led by Icon Architecture,

[14:20] who completed the previously mentioned 2017 study, and they engaged LIM

[14:25] Consultants, Fuss and O'Neill, and Maya Kota Consulting, just to go over each part

[14:31] of the scope of work. And that include an assessment of the structural systems and

[14:36] stability, looking at the exterior envelopes of each building, hazardous material

[14:41] testing, and also the potential demolition of each structure.

[14:46] This wasn't a study about adaptive reuse or renovation.

[14:49] It didn't get into any mechanical, electrical, plumbing systems.

[14:55] It didn't address accessibility, historic preservation, fire protection, anything

[14:59] else that would be necessary for the actual reuse of the building.

[15:06] In this case, stabilization really only means making the building structurally

[15:09] sound and securing the building envelope.

[15:13] There is a little bit more detail on the slide, but the report, as soon as it is

[15:18] finalized, will also be available.

[15:23] The study's key findings determined that the total estimated abatement and

[15:27] stabilization cost is approximately $44 million.

[15:32] About $9.5 million of that is for the abatement of asbestos and the PCBs that we

[15:37] presume are in the building. And Allen Hall, which I referenced, was the oldest of

[15:42] the structures, accounts for 40% of the total cost.

[15:47] And that building is in imminent danger of further deterioration that will

[15:51] dramatically increase the cost to address those building conditions.

[15:55] Revere and Knox Hall are in slightly better condition, both in similar states, but

[16:01] with advanced levels of deterioration.

[16:07] Hale Hall, which is the fourth building of the quadrangle, is in the best condition

[16:13] of the four,

[16:15] and the most structurally sound.

[16:18] For the Sherman Avenue buildings, those are all generally stable, but requires

[16:24] meaningful investment. This is a picture of the unbraced chimney at Washington

[16:28] Hall, just as an example of what that type of work would entail.

[16:37] Here are a few pictures of the conditions in Vicksburg Square, just to show people

[16:43] what it's like inside the buildings.

[16:46] From the top left, going clockwise, there's the deteriorated concrete beams and

[16:51] slabs at Knox. Just to the right of that is the failing frame at the porches in

[16:57] Revere. Below that, the deteriorated roof joists in Hale, and then on the bottom

[17:03] left is the deteriorated beams and exposed slabs in Allen.

[17:13] Sherman Avenue, which not terrific, but markedly better than Vicksburg Square, as

[17:18] you can see. Top left, the wooden trusses in the BOQs, which are generally in good

[17:23] condition. There's a

[17:26] photo of a typical condition of the pipe trench that circulates the BOQs.

[17:33] Below that, the bottom right is the roof of Washington Hall, which is well beyond

[17:38] its useful life.

[17:40] And then to the left there is the exterior wall system at Washington Hall, which is

[17:45] about a four-and-a-half-inch deep gap in the building

[17:51] foundation.

[17:56] This is a summary of the cost for abatement, demolition, and stabilization.

[18:01] I don't need to go through cell by cell, but happy to answer questions on any of

[18:06] the amounts.

[18:08] But just want to be clear, because abatement will be required no matter what

[18:13] happens to the buildings, whether they get reused, whether they get demolished,

[18:18] that

[18:20] amount has to be spent. So we have included that in the demolition and

[18:25] stabilization figures, just so it's not people thinking it's actually 10 million

[18:30] more than what the bottom is. That nine and a half million is already included in

[18:34] that bottom line number

[18:40] So earlier I mentioned that there's the potential for a significant increase in the

[18:44] escalation of these costs, and I think it's helpful to illustrate just how much

[18:50] it's already escalated since 2017.

[18:54] So you'll see the numbers for the 2026 stabilization are less than what I showed on

[18:59] the previous one. We just wanted to make sure we had apples to apples comparison

[19:04] because 2017 didn't look at abatement.

[19:07] So we have these numbers just out, which are comparing the actual stabilization

[19:12] costs. So again, today abatement would be on top of that.

[19:17] But going through the conditions just for comparison, Allen Hall in

[19:22] 2017 was characterized as mostly fair.

[19:24] Structural members were in good or fair condition across all the structures, and

[19:30] the total cost of stabilization was just below $9 million, and that's

[19:35] opposed to $31.3 million today. And that's not just inflation, but again, a

[19:41] significant deterioration of all of the building conditions.

[19:45] And we expect that three and a half percent times increase to only increase

[19:49] further.

[19:55] In terms of next steps, mass development is continuing to restrict public access to

[20:00] these structures, and that includes securing and monitoring them to mitigate risk

[20:04] to the public, first responders, and others.

[20:08] We're working to finalize the report.

[20:10] We asked the consultants to take a fresher look at the demolition costs

[20:16] based upon some recent comparable projects.

[20:18] We expect the numbers for demolition to be a little bit higher, not significantly,

[20:23] but just wanted to make sure we had the best estimates, and early indications are

[20:27] that those will be a little bit more than what we had when we developed this

[20:33] report or this presentation for it.

[20:38] In the meantime, we're working to identify funding sources for abatement and other

[20:42] safety measures, anything we can do to reduce future costs.

[20:47] At the same time, happy to answer questions from the town, other residents and

[20:53] stakeholders, questions about the building conditions, priorities for their future,

[20:58] or concerns.

[21:00] Great. Thank you, Eric.

[21:03] If you could stop, then I can see raised hands, and maybe we return to members

[21:09] or other that do. I'll open it up to members.

[21:13] Questions for Eric on the presentation?

[21:18] Yeah, Cara.

[21:19] Hi. Thanks very much. That was very interesting to see that.

[21:23] Really appreciate that.

[21:26] Half my family was inducted through Devin's, and I'm a big fan of historic

[21:31] preservation generally. But may I ask, I know you mentioned demolition, and I know

[21:35] that's in a historic area, but given the cost and the state of the buildings,

[21:41] is

[21:44] it not permitted at all to consider

[21:48] maybe reconstructing these in a very similar fashion,

[21:53] but not trying to rehabilitate these buildings given the state they're in?

[22:00] Yeah. It's a great question. Don't have the direct connection like you do to Fort

[22:06] Devens, but great appreciation for the historic structures, and would love to

[22:13] see them preserved or honored in some way.

[22:16] I think there are a lot of different options for what that could look like.

[22:21] And it's something that would have to be done in consultation with the deck state

[22:26] historic preservation officer. There is a programmatic plan for anything that

[22:30] happens to it, and by anything, I mean any changes to the façade of these buildings

[22:36] would have to go through that process.

[22:38] So it's a great suggestion of what could potentially be a way

[22:44] towards

[22:45] the redevelopment of a building or all of them while still retaining some of

[22:51] that historic character. It's definitely one of the options, but again, not

[22:55] something that we got into much detail here through this report, which was really

[23:00] about what will it take to abate the buildings and then, depending on the

[23:06] pathway that's chosen, stabilize it for that future use or demolish it.

[23:11] And depending on the pathway that gets chosen, I think we could break that down

[23:16] into further alternatives to determine what will work

[23:21] because at the end of the day, there's also going to be necessary funding for a

[23:27] potential redevelopment or preservation.

[23:29] So I think that's all parts of the formula that we're still working to put

[23:33] together. This is just one key component of that.

[23:38] And when you said the demolition was more, did you mean more than the $44 million

[23:44] outline or-

[23:45] Yeah. Thanks for the opportunity to clarify.

[23:48] I believe the number we have for demolition of all the buildings is $31 million,

[23:53] roughly. I think it'll be a little bit more than the $31 million, closer to 33.

[23:59] Don't hold me to that number.

[24:01] Okay.

[24:01] But it's just the consultants need to do a little bit more addition, so.

[24:06] Okay. And lastly, have you gone any further with you had considered demolition at

[24:11] 33,

[24:14] even if you kept the façades and built alternative structures behind it, like any

[24:19] ballpark ideas?

[24:21] Again, didn't get into that. And I think the other thing to clarify is also it's

[24:26] not necessarily all or nothing in terms of demolition or preservation.

[24:32] There is, I think, futures where some are preserved and

[24:38] some aren't demolished, and maybe there's that façade that gets retained or rebuilt

[24:43] in a similar way. So I think there's still a lot that, and all of that will play

[24:48] then into the funding that's available, what's feasible.

[24:52] So our tax credits, there's a lot to get added into the formula.

[24:58] Great. Thank you.

[24:59] Thanks, Cara. Ahmet?

[25:02] Eric, thanks for the presentation.

[25:06] Just maybe two questions. One is, we talk about depends on the decision,

[25:12] demolish or to stabilize. Whose decision exactly it's going to be?

[25:21] That's a great question. I think it's something that we want to

[25:26] hear from the community about priorities.

[25:31] I think it's also something where

[25:35] what's feasible needs to be factored into it with the potential

[25:41] change in zoning that could allow residential uses.

[25:44] I think that's something that broadening the realm of the possible gives us more

[25:50] options. But I think it's something that whatever happens to these buildings, it

[25:56] will also

[25:58] come down to what funding is available for what use.

[26:03] Okay. Thank you. And if I may, you kind of

[26:08] somewhat, I think, addressed my second question,

[26:12] which was, what if zoning does not pass the super town meeting?

[26:19] Then I think that what I'm hearing, I'll paraphrase you, please correct me, that if

[26:25] zoning doesn't pass, you still need to do something.

[26:29] This is number one, regardless of that.

[26:32] But I understand if zoning doesn't pass, then you have narrower options to pick

[26:37] from. And does it also mean that you will have

[26:44] less option for funding to be available?

[26:49] Will zoning change residential will make more funding available?

[26:55] Because I'm not anticipating this is going to come to us as taxpayers.

[27:00] This is going to be funded without coming to us.

[27:04] We're not going to pay for it.

[27:09] I feel like there were a couple of questions in there.

[27:11] I'll try to get all of them as best I can.

[27:14] I can take a couple.

[27:15] Let me know if I-

[27:16] He's Turkish. He does that sometimes.

[27:19] So

[27:21] I think the work that we're trying to identify funding right now

[27:27] for abatement and certain stabilization measures that we can take

[27:32] Because no matter what happens at the Super Town meeting, that work needs to get

[27:37] done because if something happens to one of the buildings,

[27:41] it becomes a solid waste disposal, which is just going to be so much more expensive

[27:46] than

[27:48] going through now and segmenting those hazardous materials from the non-hazardous

[27:53] building materials. So

[27:55] that's something we want to do now, and then obviously,

[27:59] measures that we can take now to reduce those increases in costs, safety measures,

[28:03] all that sort of thing, I think is something we're looking for funding and

[28:07] pursuing, again, before we even get to Super Town Meeting and regardless of what

[28:12] happens with Super Town Meeting.

[28:15] In terms of funding for different uses depending on Super Town Meeting,

[28:22] I think

[28:24] there's, again, a lot of different factors that would be considered.

[28:31] We at Mass Development, we've had these properties on the market for their allowed

[28:36] uses for quite some time, and we get very few inquiries for the allowed

[28:42] uses.

[28:44] The inquiries we receive are for residential uses, which, again, are not currently

[28:50] allowed.

[28:52] That said, is there

[28:55] historic preservation tax credits for non-residential uses?

[28:59] I'd have to look into that to be sure. There's certainly grant funding.

[29:04] And then if anybody knows anybody, it's a billionaire that really loves these

[29:08] buildings and would like to invest a bit in them, that's certainly an option, too.

[29:14] I don't know any of those people, though, unfortunately.

[29:17] So I think it's something where

[29:21] what's feasible will really dictate what happens to the buildings.

[29:25] And I think, again, narrowing that realm or list of options

[29:32] just makes it more of a challenge. Again, we're not saying that there won't be any

[29:36] commercial uses here because that would still be an allowed use under what would be

[29:40] proposed at Super Town Meeting. So that's still a possible future outcome.

[29:45] Again, I think we're just trying to open up the options.

[29:49] And just to-

[29:50] Yeah, thanks.

[29:52] I was going to say, just two quick points to dovetail off what Eric was talking

[29:56] about. I think it's important to note that Senator Eldridge and Senator Cronin

[30:02] and Rep Siena

[30:04] have all been good champions for trying to assist us in finding

[30:11] funding, at least from the state level.

[30:14] And I know they are actively working on that matter.

[30:18] And just from my own perspective, if I remember correctly, Eric, and correct me if

[30:24] I'm wrong, but I think it's Allen Hall that's in the worst condition.

[30:31] Yes. Yep.

[30:32] It's one of the larger buildings, and it's in extremely poor structural conditions.

[30:37] And,

[30:38] I'm concerned about it from a public safety perspective, both for just your

[30:44] everyday citizens, but particularly for all of our emergency personnel, not just

[30:50] in Devens, but in the surrounding communities that might respond to a problem

[30:55] there.

[30:57] So I know internally at Devens or internally in Mass Development, one of the things

[31:02] that I've been trying to push is if we get

[31:05] the appropriate level of funding, that we try to be aggressive about abating that

[31:11] one. Because as Eric mentioned, if there were to be any type of collapse, a partial

[31:16] collapse, the cost of further cleanup would literally go through the roof and be

[31:21] five times at least higher for that one building.

[31:26] But also, in my opinion, again, just that particular building presents a

[31:30] significant public safety hazard that needs to get addressed sooner rather than

[31:34] later. But there are no easy solutions currently, regardless of the zoning status.

[31:41] It's going to take a lot of money. And then there's also what is normally an

[31:47] illegally--

[31:49] Actually, I can't say that tonight.

[31:51] A long period of time to go through concerning the historical

[31:56] process, right? And getting the authority to demolish it if we end up going down

[32:02] that road. And what goes along

[32:07] with that type of undertaking, including documenting and taking pictures and

[32:13] things of that nature to document the historic aspects of the property potentially.

[32:17] So

[32:20] I'll leave it at that. I see Dawn has a question, too, Chair.

[32:23] Thanks, Michael. Yeah. Dawn, do you want to jump in?

[32:25] Yeah, so just for clarification, there's two buildings that are worse off than

[32:32] the other two right now. If you were to get $10 million today for the abatement of

[32:36] these buildings, would it be safe to go in and abate those buildings that are not

[32:42] structurally sound, like Allen?

[32:46] Would you have to look at

[32:49] stabilizing those buildings to some point in order to be able to go in and do the

[32:54] abatement? Because you talk about a safety issue should first responders need to

[33:00] run in there, but I think you have a safety issue also for any contractor that's

[33:05] going in and performing the abatement work.

[33:08] So it almost seems like with a couple of those halls that you

[33:13] wouldn't be able to go in and abate them without stabilizing them at the same time.

[33:17] So I'm just trying to understand that.

[33:20] I think that's an excellent point, Dawn, and you really hit upon it.

[33:25] I think, again, particularly with Allen Hall, that type of assessment would have to

[33:29] be done with structural engineers and with an appropriate abatement company.

[33:35] Sometimes in situations like that, what I'm hoping is that there may just be

[33:39] particular areas that need a certain level of stabilization that would not

[33:45] match full stabilization if you were trying to do long-term stabilization of a

[33:50] building, right?

[33:52] But obviously, you would have to get to the point where they could safely enter and

[33:58] safely do the type of work that they need to do.

[34:02] And hopefully, it's some level of stability that could be done

[34:07] without the full cost if you were just trying to preserve the entire building.

[34:12] But you're absolutely right. We won't know that with better clarity

[34:18] until we actually go down those roads and have people in the building to do that

[34:23] assessment prior to the work beginning.

[34:26] Thank you.

[34:27] You're welcome.

[34:30] Actually, I'm going to jump on top of that and follow it up with a question.

[34:35] So, I

[34:39] think it's fair to say this happened on Mass Development's watch, these buildings

[34:43] going and deteriorating further, and there's an associated rise in cost to making

[34:48] them whole.

[34:50] So I've got two questions. One is, could you not move forward?

[34:55] I mean,

[34:57] is the only reason that you are looking for the Super Town meeting zoning change is

[35:01] because you feel that, A, you're not going to have enough funding to do the work on

[35:06] the buildings without it, like housing is the only way?

[35:09] And then if it is housing, the presentation that came

[35:15] before Harvard before had them all be affordable rental units, which was not what

[35:20] was desired by the communities surrounding it.

[35:24] And that seems to be the way to drive the most money towards these projects.

[35:28] I think that's what is now in place with the recently approved RFP for Adam Circle.

[35:35] So, how would you address concerns or at least the assumption that

[35:41] this is an unfortunate condition that Mass Development bears some

[35:47] responsibility for?

[35:53] I was waiting to see how fast Eric was going to jump in on that one.

[35:57] I'm sure Eric doesn't want to touch that one.

[35:59] I'm happy to support you, Michael.

[36:01] I mean, I primarily do blame Eric for this, just to be clear.

[36:06] But you're absolutely right, Susan, Mary.

[36:08] I mean, Mass Development, as I've stated in another public meeting, is clearly the

[36:13] owners and steward of these properties.

[36:18] And I can't speak to what came prior or didn't come prior

[36:24] to myself or to Eric. But I know it's something that's trying to be tackled

[36:30] now. And Eric knows the dynamics better than I do.

[36:33] But Eric, correct me if I'm wrong,

[36:36] this property itself is located within a larger section, a

[36:42] larger area that-

[36:44] Potentially, we're asking for rezoning on, right?

[36:48] Correct.

[36:49] The rezoning request, is it fair to say, is not just driven by

[36:56] the potential outcomes for Vicksburg Square?

[36:59] Understood.

[37:00] It's a larger land mass in general.

[37:05] Yeah. Vicksburg Square is about 20 acres out of the 90 acres within the zoning

[37:10] district, so

[37:12] about a quarter of it.

[37:14] Could I follow up?

[37:15] But you don't need it zoned housing in order to move forward with stabilization and

[37:19] abatement, do you? You can start working on the buildings before having it

[37:25] zoned.

[37:26] That is correct. What we need is the money.

[37:30] That's what I-

[37:30] If I were to identify one thing,

[37:33] it would be the funding that Eric alluded to within the presentation.

[37:37] So at least some significant number, in order to do

[37:43] some level of meaningful work.

[37:46] Okay.

[37:46] And so I'm just going to throw something out there, right off the top of my head.

[37:51] If we knew that we were going to get $20 million, then I think the mass development

[37:56] team would try to make the best assessment of how to spend that $20 million,

[38:02] given the current conditions of each building and how to best spend it.

[38:07] We would not be waiting for any type of vote or

[38:13] anything else. We would continue to move the project forward.

[38:16] Okay. Understood. Thank you.

[38:18] You're welcome.

[38:19] Could I follow up on Susan Mary's point?

[38:21] Sure. Go ahead, Cara.

[38:23] Sorry. Thank you. So by SDM, if we're going that route, will you

[38:29] have a redevelopment plan? Because to Susan Mary's point,

[38:33] last time

[38:36] we tried this,

[38:39] at one point way back, we actually passed it for housing and then I think someone

[38:45] else rejected, but we passed it in our town here.

[38:47] But in any case, you needed unanimous.

[38:50] Next time around, because of the maximizing of the tax credits, the

[38:55] feeling was there wasn't a transportation plan.

[38:59] It wasn't really

[39:02] a multimodal situation, but those were the types of tax credits that the developer

[39:07] could have utilized, and it would've basically stranded some under-resourced

[39:12] communities by living there. There was no transportation, and now we're actually

[39:17] even lacking a local hospital. So are you envisioning that

[39:23] we're just changing the zoning potentially to residential without having a

[39:27] redevelopment plan to understand exactly what you're envisioning for that space?

[39:35] Will you let me take this one, Michael, or do you--

[39:40] I think having reviewed the 2009, 2012

[39:46] Super Town meetings and the processes and the feedback,

[39:50] I think, again, this is looking at a larger area than just Vicksburg Square and

[39:57] not letting that be the only potential driver for change.

[40:03] I think given the timeline, I

[40:07] don't expect and we don't have plans to select a developer or development plan

[40:12] before Super Town meeting. I think that as we approach Super Town meeting and begin

[40:17] engaging,

[40:19] in more structured ways, in anticipation of Super Town meeting, hearing from

[40:25] residents about what they would like to see in the zoning.

[40:28] I think, our starting point is what the housing working group recommended,

[40:35] which was just a change in uses, and then that would allow the deck to

[40:40] develop the necessary rules and regulations, which again, is a public process.

[40:45] Those are state regulations, so they have to go through their process, with public

[40:51] engagement and feedback. And that would really dictate what would then be

[40:57] allowed at the Vicksburg Square site and the rest of the ITC.

[41:05] Okay.

[41:07] Thanks.

[41:08] Yeah. Eve?

[41:10] Thank you. So, thank you for the presentation.

[41:14] I apologize if I'm just being dense on this, but what I'm trying to understand is

[41:21] the connection between the Super Town meeting vote that is being requested

[41:28] and Vicksburg Square. I understand perfectly well Vicksburg Square is within the

[41:33] area that the ask is to be rezoned, but why

[41:39] are we talking about them together right now?

[41:42] The one thing I heard that I just want to make sure I understand is I think there

[41:46] was a comment that proposals to redevelop Vicksburg Square or remediate or

[41:51] build new stuff there have been in the residential realm.

[41:56] And because that is not permitted there, there haven't been any promising

[42:02] opportunities to redevelop it. So if it were rezoned, it might help solve the

[42:08] Vicksburg Square problem. Is that the reason why we're talking about them together?

[42:19] Is that a question for-- I'm happy to try and answer.

[42:22] Well, it's one of you. I don't care who.

[42:24] Yeah, no.

[42:26] I think that

[42:28] the connection, like you said, is the future of the buildings and what's possible

[42:33] for funding this work. Again, this study just looked at the

[42:39] abatement, demolition, and stabilization.

[42:43] And that was information that we thought would be helpful for people to understand

[42:48] going into the Super Town meeting based upon the recommendations of the housing

[42:52] working group, which said this would be beneficial information to have.

[42:58] So I think that's the connection there.

[43:01] The study was funded by a grant that came out of some of that work from the

[43:07] state. It's funding some other studies as well.

[43:11] So I think that's the connection. But again, we're pursuing funding

[43:17] for this work

[43:20] before we get to Super Town meeting and regardless of what happens at Super Town

[43:24] meeting.

[43:25] Can I ask a follow-up question?

[43:27] Yeah, go right ahead.

[43:29] So again, this might be obvious, but then why are we not

[43:34] considering Super Town meeting to just rezone Vicksburg Square?

[43:41] In other words, if we're asking to rezone a larger area, then it raises other

[43:47] questions, reasonably so. We might or might not support rezoning a larger area, but

[43:52] if this is in part to kind of help deal with the Vicksburg Square issue, why aren't

[43:56] we just rezoning that?

[44:00] You mean just rezoning Vicksburg Square as opposed to the whole ITC?

[44:04] Yeah.

[44:05] Oh. Hmm.

[44:05] That's it. It might be a dense question.

[44:06] I don't know if you can just-- Well, I guess you can.

[44:08] You can.

[44:09] Well, I'm thinking if it's not permitted, that's the answer.

[44:13] But I guess what I'm-

[44:13] The housing working group identified--

[44:17] Well, so correct me if I'm speaking out of turn, Michael and Eric, but the governor

[44:21] had identified this estate-owned land that could be developed for housing, and the

[44:25] working group supported additional housing in that area.

[44:30] There are other, as you say, the other four buildings that are there.

[44:33] There are other opportunities for building within that district.

[44:37] And I think all three towns agree that housing is a priority.

[44:42] This area is desperately lacking housing.

[44:45] So

[44:46] I think it made sense to consider the whole of the area for housing.

[44:51] And Vicksburg Square was specifically asked to assess those buildings because

[44:55] they're easy targets to add the housing to.

[44:59] Got it. Okay. So it's a focal point within a larger

[45:04] endeavor to add additional area for housing.

[45:10] Yeah. Michael and Eric, correct me if any of that was wrong, but that's what my

[45:13] takeaway was working on the housing group.

[45:15] No, I think you stated it perfectly.

[45:17] Okay.

[45:19] Thank you.

[45:19] Eric, anything for you?

[45:23] No, I think we covered everything.

[45:25] All right.

[45:27] Yeah.

[45:27] Can I ask one other quick question?

[45:31] Is there any thought been given to what the jurisdictional issues are?

[45:35] Miraculously, Ayr and Harvard were in agreement with respect to

[45:41] kind of amending the

[45:44] county line to accommodate

[45:48] some residents. So, for example, as I'm sure you're aware,

[45:52] the vast majority of Vicksburg itself is in Harvard, but one corner of it is in

[45:57] Ayr. And so I think the idea was to-- Sorry, vice versa.

[46:03] One corner was Harvard. The majority of it was Ayr.

[46:06] And to kind of

[46:10] streamline that so that the folks in apartment 3B were going to school in Harvard,

[46:16] and the kids in 3A were not going in Ayer.

[46:20] So it was sort of try to make it have more sense that way.

[46:24] And Ayer and Harvard Selectboard chairs were in agreement on that, and there was a

[46:30] hope that that could be accommodated.

[46:32] But I wonder if you've given any thought to that.

[46:38] So essentially, if I'm understanding you correctly, it would almost be a

[46:45] redrawing of the original jurisdictional lines in one direction or the other.

[46:50] Mm-hmm.

[46:51] Maybe more towards Ayer.

[46:51] And the other part was, I think there's a section of Emerson Green that Harvard

[46:56] said, "Well, we'll take that so we can keep that neighborhood intact as a Harvard

[46:59] neighborhood,"

[47:02] and Ayer was willing to do that with respect to the Vicksburg side.

[47:07] Eric, correct me if I'm wrong.

[47:10] And again, I'm feeling new here, but I'm not aware that there's been internal Mass

[47:15] Development conversations of that nature. Are you?

[47:19] No, and I don't think that's something that can be addressed by a Super Town

[47:23] Meeting either.

[47:27] Well, I'm not sure about that, but, in any case, it was just a way to make it sort

[47:33] of easier way to redraw the map and make it have more sense rather than having a--

[47:38] Literally, it splits a building in two, if I remember correctly.

[47:41] Right. Yeah. No, I understand what you're saying. It's a good point.

[47:46] Great.

[47:49] Michael or Eric, anything you want to wrap up with, or should we move into the

[47:53] special town meeting date itself and what you have heard from Ayer and Shirley

[47:58] already?

[48:00] I have nothing more except to say thank you very much for your time.

[48:03] Yeah. Thank you so much, Eric. It was really helpful to walk through all that and

[48:06] give people an understanding of Vicksburg Square.

[48:11] So Michael, I believe you've already heard from Ayer and

[48:18] Shirley that March 29th that you're proposing for a Super Town Meeting, and I

[48:23] believe those towns are starting at 6:00 PM.

[48:27] 6:30 PM. Yeah.

[48:28] 6:30 PM.

[48:29] March 29th. In conversations with the town managers and some of the town clerks and

[48:34] just trying to figure out all the various dynamics with regular town meetings and

[48:39] other things that go on,

[48:44] as suggested or, don't want to use the word agreed, but we all looked at the

[48:48] calendars, thought March 29th would be a good time.

[48:52] Quite honestly, I randomly sort of chose the 6:30 time period, knowing some

[48:58] places sometimes start at 7:00, some places start at

[49:01] 6:00. It was in no particular order other than

[49:06] the calendar of Selectboard meetings.

[49:10] Both Ayer and Shirley in the last three and a half weeks have reviewed it,

[49:16] and approved that. And next on the calendar, so to speak, was to come in front

[49:22] of your board tonight to see if we can get unanimous agreement on that, and then

[49:28] start building a calendar back for all the

[49:32] procedural matters that have to be addressed, but also obviously for

[49:38] creating a pathway to do more public engagement across all the communities on the

[49:44] matter. And to get warrant language, article language over

[49:50] to all of you, to all the boards, to the town managers and town clerk to get

[49:56] agreement on proposed language.

[49:59] Okay, great. I'm interested in hearing, well, you said you haven't developed it

[50:04] yet, but I do think that outreach and forums, especially for Harvard residents to

[50:10] be able to understand the impact of all this.

[50:12] But, Dawn, have you had a chance to talk to Rose and does March

[50:18] 29th work

[50:21] from your perspective?

[50:22] Yeah, that's a good time, because we should be just about wrapped up on the budget

[50:27] at that point. We won't have our town meeting until sometime late April, very early

[50:32] May. And the town election won't be until sometime in May.

[50:36] So, it's actually a good time for us.

[50:40] And, I know Ayer and Shirley agreed also, because we did look at all of our

[50:44] calendars when all proposed town meetings and elections in all three towns would

[50:49] be, and it was a good agreed-upon timeframe, the end of March.

[50:53] Okay. All right. Good. Members have comments or questions? Yeah, Eve?

[50:59] Have we already coordinated with school vacation week because it's sort of around

[51:03] Easter?

[51:05] I think generally it's April, right? April. School vacation is February and April.

[51:09] February and April. Okay. So we're well, yeah, we're okay with that. Okay.

[51:14] And it's no religious holidays or anything, so

[51:18] okay.

[51:19] I think-

[51:19] Any other feedback on the 29th from members?

[51:23] All right.

[51:24] I think it's as good as it's going to be at this point.

[51:27] A busy time of year. All right. So,

[51:30] do you need a vote from the committee at this point to approve that date for a

[51:35] special town meeting, I think? Yeah? Okay.

[51:38] Yeah. It'd be great to get a vote. The other two-

[51:40] Sure

[51:41] ... you said-

[51:41] I agree. Cara?

[51:42] Can I just add one other question? Will there be forums and charrettes and stuff

[51:45] before the 29th and that you'll be holding, or how does that work for our public?

[51:51] I think that he said that there would be public outreach, yeah.

[51:54] Yeah. Absolutely. And I've committed Mass Development a number of times publicly-

[51:59] And then, but afterwards

[52:00] ...

[52:03] that any location requesting a meeting and sort of a walkthrough,

[52:09] if you will, of the issues or the thought patterns, somebody and some buddies from

[52:15] Mass Development will go.

[52:18] I'm sorry, Cara. I think your video sort of jammed up a little bit there.

[52:22] Are you asking after the 29th?

[52:25] No. Well, no, the 29th is we're getting to-- I have no problem with the zoning at

[52:31] all. I have concerns about how the actual development goes, but I'm wondering how

[52:35] we first tell our folks how the zoning is going to go and what your expectations

[52:40] are. And then, of course, afterwards, to have that robust public input so we get

[52:44] sort of a balance of the things that fit and help produce housing, but also make

[52:50] the community work as well.

[52:53] Yeah, great question.

[52:54] Thank you.

[52:55] Yeah. Thank you.

[52:58] All right. Then I would entertain a motion to schedule a Super Town Meeting on

[53:02] March 29th at 6:30 PM.

[53:04] So moved.

[53:06] Thank you.

[53:07] Second.

[53:07] All right. Motion's been seconded. Any further discussion? Amit?

[53:11] Aye.

[53:13] Eric?

[53:13] Aye.

[53:14] Eve?

[53:15] Aye.

[53:16] And Cara.

[53:16] Aye.

[53:17] And Amit, all right. All right, Michael, you got your marching orders.

[53:23] I'm a good marcher, so I really appreciate everyone's time and communication.

[53:26] And, thank you for making my, whatever this is, Tuesday night still?

[53:32] A little more exciting than I expected, so.

[53:35] Yeah, sorry for the grilling. But there's going to be those questions out in our

[53:40] community, so.

[53:41] Oh, absolutely.

[53:42] Yeah.

[53:43] Listen, I wish I could say it in Latin. I think I could write it in Latin.

[53:47] "I fear not the republic." So it's always good to have these spirited

[53:51] conversations.

[53:52] Very good. Thank you so much.

[53:54] Thank you for coming.

[53:54] And Eric, thank you.

[53:55] Take care. Bye-bye.

[53:56] You too.

[53:58] All right. With that,

[54:01] next is to let people, I think most select board members already know, but

[54:07] at our special town meeting on October 20th at

[54:14] 6:00 PM in the Cronin Auditorium at Bromfield, we are going to be trying something

[54:20] new, and this was a joint effort based on feedback that we

[54:25] received. Eric and I met with the town moderator, Bill Barton, with Dawn

[54:32] and Julie, and

[54:35] Bill would like to implement a two-minute speaker time limit,

[54:42] which he has been working with his tech team to project the time allotted and have

[54:47] it count down on a screen up above so people are aware of their time

[54:53] limit.

[54:56] I believe he also will be asking people to

[55:02] either keep your comments to a question or to a new comment so that

[55:08] we are hearing as many different points of view or different

[55:13] expressions as possible. But,

[55:16] the other thing that we will be doing, which we pretty much always do, but it's a

[55:21] Tuesday night, obviously, and if people need a ride, there is a van will be

[55:27] running from the Council on Aging.

[55:28] You need to call the Council on Aging's office to ask for that transportation.

[55:33] If you let them know ahead of time, it's a lot easier.

[55:37] In the springtime, we agreed to continue the childcare

[55:44] option, so we will be working that in and having time to set that up beforehand.

[55:49] And all this really is to See if we can make town meeting more efficient,

[55:55] perhaps more shorter, so that we're really respectful of people's time and

[56:01] the attendance by doing it on Tuesday night will allow us to set the spring town

[56:07] meeting date. If it is a blowout and we have a lot of people come in the evening

[56:11] that we weren't getting on a Saturday, we'll be able to set that time based on

[56:17] attendance. I know it'll work for some people that didn't work before, and I know

[56:20] it won't work for others, so it's really a balance.

[56:23] I know everything's been tried, but we thought we would try the Tuesday night

[56:26] again.

[56:28] So that is the update on what's going to be happening a little differently

[56:35] at the special town meeting. Any questions?

[56:40] Eric, did I miss anything? Yeah, Ahmet?

[56:44] No, these are great changes. And one of the ideas I know that has been

[56:50] floating around potentially having

[56:54] separation of queuing, pros versus cons to a given amendment,

[57:01] and kind of embed to the handicap access.

[57:05] So,

[57:07] I assume that it's not going to happen, at least this coming special town meeting.

[57:12] We did have that conversation with Bill.

[57:14] He felt that it would cause more of a problem for people having to go back and

[57:19] forth to different lines. So he wasn't in agreement with that.

[57:23] But,

[57:25] let's see how this goes, and if you feel that's a good idea, certainly you can

[57:29] reach out to Bill individually.

[57:32] Okay.

[57:33] But we did float the idea, and he wasn't ready to adopt it.

[57:38] Thank you.

[57:38] Yeah. Thank you. All right. Yeah, Eve?

[57:42] Just a quick comment. When we debrief about it, I think we need to be cautious in

[57:48] drawing conclusions from attendance and duration of this one because it's

[57:54] a very different set of articles that might not engender too much either

[57:59] excitement-- Well, I think excitement, honestly.

[58:04] Yeah. Understood. It really is about the articles themselves sometimes, but maybe

[58:09] we keep the fall meeting to a Tuesday. I think we'll see how many people come.

[58:14] Yeah.

[58:15] Yeah.

[58:17] A good word of caution there, though. Eric, did I miss anything?

[58:22] No, I don't think so. We talked about a number of different ideas, but that's what

[58:25] we landed on.

[58:26] Yeah. Those are the ones that we will be implementing. All right.

[58:33] We did the liquor license. Next up is, I think members have all been

[58:38] briefed on this, but, as you all know, the MVP grant for the

[58:44] Keep the Light On initiative, for the microgrid came in at a million dollars that

[58:50] Harvard will be administrating. And the state

[58:55] awarding team has been waiting on us to submit a revised budget.

[59:00] We've been working with NexGen back and forth, and the town administrators have

[59:04] done a lot of work with each other to come up with a revised proposed budget

[59:10] that they are requesting, or Dawn is requesting that we vote on this evening.

[59:15] It was included in the packet, but I'm going to turn it over to Dawn to walk us

[59:18] through. I also know that Ahmet and Cara are fully briefed on this, so they can

[59:24] chime in as we go through.

[59:28] Yep. Do you mind if I share my screen?

[59:30] Please go right ahead.

[59:38] Let me know when you can see that.

[59:44] All right. So we've

[59:49] taken the original budget.

[59:52] Remember, the budget started out as $5 million, and that was based on what was

[59:56] submitted for the MVP grant. The state came back and cut our $5 million request

[1:00:01] down to a million, so that's what we're working with right now.

[1:00:05] So

[1:00:06] we've had the town manager and the town administrator, and Shirley and I have had

[1:00:12] about five meetings now with NexGen Energy.

[1:00:17] Our last one was last week where I presented this budget to the group,

[1:00:23] trying to phase things out a little bit, and making it so that

[1:00:29] at each phase, the town has a decision to make and whether that's to continue on

[1:00:34] with this process or not. What we've found in these discussions that we've had

[1:00:40] with NexGen and the state is we have a lot of legal questions and

[1:00:45] we have a lot of procurement questions as it relates to this project.

[1:00:51] And this is a procurement process that none of my fellow town administrators and

[1:00:57] town managers have been through yet, an energy project and an energy project of

[1:01:02] this scale. So we have proposed this budget, and we had a good

[1:01:07] conversation with NexGen last week, and they fully support this concept, which is

[1:01:13] great. But it is to phase things out into

[1:01:19] four different groups. The first phase, which we're calling phase

[1:01:24] zero, in the budget that we are submitting to the state because they have their own

[1:01:30] form in which they want things, they're calling it task one.

[1:01:33] So just so you know, if I talk about each interchangeably it's our phase zero, but

[1:01:39] it's really task one according to the state.

[1:01:43] We are proposing to allot $130,000 of the $1 million to

[1:01:49] just look at legal implications and the procurement pathway for this.

[1:01:55] I've talked to Robert Pompriant and Brian Sawyer about this, and Erin

[1:02:01] Shirley, and we all use KP Law as our legal firm.

[1:02:06] There may be a document that the boards need to sign off on to allow us to use a

[1:02:11] single counsel for this process. But we would like to engage the services of

[1:02:17] KP Law to help us look at what it means for us to be a limited

[1:02:23] partner in the Keep the Lights On fund, what liabilities the town may have for

[1:02:28] entering into such an agreement on a project of this scale, and what the

[1:02:33] procurement process looks like. Because as I mentioned, it's not the usual chapter

[1:02:38] 30B or chapter 149 that we're most often using as far as procuring supplies

[1:02:44] and services or even construction-related matters.

[1:02:48] Because this is an energy-related project, it falls under Chapter

[1:02:54] 25A of the procurement laws. And again, it's not something that we've had to work

[1:02:58] with any one of us just yet.

[1:03:02] Once we get all our questions answered and see a pathway forward, it

[1:03:08] would be our intent to bring this portion back to all of our towns for

[1:03:15] a go, no-go vote, we're calling it.

[1:03:17] And that is we would need consensus to continue moving forward with this.

[1:03:23] We don't necessarily need consensus from all towns.

[1:03:27] If somebody does want to

[1:03:30] remove themselves from the process at that point, that is an option, certainly.

[1:03:36] But as we've been told from the beginning, the best way to move this project

[1:03:41] forward is to have at least five towns in on this, so that we can

[1:03:47] generate the megawattage that we need in order for this to be a

[1:03:53] viable project for all of us. So again, our phase one or task one is

[1:03:58] to put $130,000 aside and just work on that phase of the project.

[1:04:06] If it's decided that we continue, that we can become a limited partner In the KLO

[1:04:11] fund, and that we understand what the procurement path looks like, and we get a

[1:04:17] yes vote from the boards to continue moving on.

[1:04:20] Phase one or task two would be to

[1:04:26] assign another $130,000 of the one million to this stage of the process.

[1:04:32] This stage would include a site and land availability check.

[1:04:37] So the towns would each supply, whoever the consultant is, whether that's

[1:04:42] NextGen or whether or not we do have to go out to a formal bid process and hire a

[1:04:48] consultant to do the feasibility study,

[1:04:53] we would provide site and land availability.

[1:04:58] Harvard has already, for the most part, completed this process, as part of

[1:05:05] open space

[1:05:07] lists that we have. We have already identified some of our critical infrastructure,

[1:05:13] but those are the things that the consultant would be looking for in order to see

[1:05:18] if we have the required

[1:05:21] sites necessary for something like this to work.

[1:05:25] This phase also has $95,000 put aside for grant administration,

[1:05:32] and six town governance management structure.

[1:05:36] One thing I did want to bring up as part of this, Bolton has already signed an MOU,

[1:05:42] but they signed the MOU after the application for the MVP grant was

[1:05:48] submitted. And that's why Harvard, Ayer, and Shirley are the only three towns

[1:05:52] listed on the grant. Bolton did sign, and I found out today that Lancaster

[1:05:59] Board of Selectmen voted last night to sign the MOU.

[1:06:03] So they are also interested in this process and seeing what it brings.

[1:06:08] Northborough would make the sixth town that is interested, and they're waiting to

[1:06:13] see about this discussion tonight.

[1:06:17] I do think it might be in our best interest to include, even though it's only

[1:06:23] three towns included in the grant, I do think it would be in our best interest to

[1:06:27] include towns four, five, and/or six in on this process, and I'll talk about

[1:06:33] that a little bit further down. But again, at the end of phase one, it would be

[1:06:38] another go, no-go vote. And, again, we wouldn't move forward on phase two or task

[1:06:44] three, unless we had that favorable vote.

[1:06:50] Phase two or task three, we've allocated $740,000 for

[1:06:56] this phase of the process. This would be feasibility for

[1:07:02] vendor procurement in whatever shape that looks like based on our legal

[1:07:07] research in the earlier phase. It would also be the execution of the

[1:07:13] feasibility study in which that we would be looking at six towns and 36 sites.

[1:07:19] And when I say 36 sites, we are potentially looking at five critical

[1:07:24] infrastructure sites per town. So whether that be town halls, schools, public

[1:07:29] safety buildings, those types, who knows, a grocery store.

[1:07:33] Maybe even something like the general store in Harvard as just an example.

[1:07:37] Something that we would want powered up should we lose power for a substantial

[1:07:41] amount of time. But it also, in order for this to work, we probably are going to

[1:07:47] need to look at a larger site, and possibly one per town,

[1:07:53] depending upon acreage and how much room we have to put in a larger

[1:07:59] facility. So that would be the major part of phase two, and that's why there's

[1:08:04] 600,000 of the one million that's allocated for that.

[1:08:08] We've also allocated $80,000 for community engagement for the six towns, and that's

[1:08:14] for educational materials, community outreach forums, everything, just so we can

[1:08:20] get the communities

[1:08:22] up to speed on everything that's going on and as informed as possible.

[1:08:28] Then there's also another 35,000 that's for ongoing grant administration through

[1:08:32] the completion of this. Again, we also have

[1:08:39] a go, no-go at the end of this, which would bring us to the million dollars.

[1:08:45] That phase-- I changed something, and I apologize.

[1:08:49] The ongoing grant administration, I did make that its own separate task, and that's

[1:08:54] based on some guidance from the state, because that really could run from when we

[1:09:00] sign the contract documents, through June of 2027, and that's when we have to spend

[1:09:05] the million dollars.

[1:09:08] So going back to what I was saying about Bolton and Lancaster,

[1:09:13] everything that we've seen as far as this budget has tied us to six towns and

[1:09:19] 36 sites. And my question to NextGen as we've been going through this process all

[1:09:24] along is, the way I look at it is I don't think we had a choice but to include

[1:09:30] these other towns, and I think it's the right thing to do.

[1:09:35] Again, this doesn't work if we don't have at least five towns, and we've heard that

[1:09:39] over and over again since this was brought to us back earlier this calendar year.

[1:09:45] But if we don't include them, it potentially means that it might not work for

[1:09:51] Ayer, Harvard, and Shirley because we don't have enough sites.

[1:09:55] We're not able to generate potentially as much power as we could.

[1:10:00] But also, those other towns would then have to come up with money to do a

[1:10:04] feasibility study like we were looking to have to do, if we continue down this

[1:10:09] process before we had received the grant money from the Commonwealth.

[1:10:14] So I think it's in the best interest for us to include Bolton and Lancaster, and if

[1:10:18] Northborough does sign on to the MOU, to include them also so that we can,

[1:10:25] as we continue, have a full feasibility study, and be able to make an informed

[1:10:29] decision as to whether or not this works, and if it works for all of our

[1:10:34] communities. So I welcome any questions on this.

[1:10:39] I would love the board's support with this tonight.

[1:10:43] And if that's a vote, I'd be happy to accept that.

[1:10:47] Robert, Bryan, and I do have another call with

[1:10:53] the state tomorrow to review this and for me to provide the feedback that they're

[1:10:59] looking for as far as submitting this so we can get the contract going.

[1:11:04] But I would love a vote to proceed on this path if you're all in agreement, and I

[1:11:09] would love to hear from you as to your thoughts and feelings on including those

[1:11:13] other three towns in this process.

[1:11:17] The legal work costs us any more than--

[1:11:23] I'm going to say I hope we've allocated enough, and I don't think it'll cost us

[1:11:28] more money in the long run because it's going to be the same question no matter how

[1:11:32] many communities we have

[1:11:35] engaged in this process. We're all going to be needing the same legal

[1:11:41] opinion and procurement pathway as a group.

[1:11:44] So, I will stop sharing and turn it back over to the chair.

[1:11:49] Thanks, Dawn. Just two quick questions for me, and then I'm going to turn it over

[1:11:54] to you.

[1:11:56] You said that this phase of the grant money, the one million, has an expiration

[1:12:01] date. Is that right? Does it need to be spent by, you said,

[1:12:04] July 27th?

[1:12:06] June of 2027.

[1:12:07] June of '27. Okay. And then if we do this and we are in it all the way through to

[1:12:13] the end of this $1 million, are we shovel-ready kind of thing?

[1:12:17] Because that was sort of the requirement for applying for more money, right?

[1:12:22] Right. We will be closer.

[1:12:24] Okay. We're not there yet.

[1:12:25] Our goal is to be shovel-ready. I don't know if we will be ready to apply for the

[1:12:31] grants at the same time we did last year.

[1:12:34] Okay.

[1:12:34] Because we have put the brakes on this a little bit as we try and get our ducks in

[1:12:38] a line.

[1:12:39] Okay.

[1:12:41] All right, great. Thanks. And we have Gina on if there's any questions that you

[1:12:47] guys can't answer, but Eve, go ahead.

[1:12:50] Thanks. So Dawn, I'm really in supportive of all the work that you've done, and so

[1:12:56] in principle, I think that this is

[1:13:01] looking good at this point for our interests.

[1:13:07] And I understand that is similarly so for Ayer and Shirley.

[1:13:11] My question is about the six-town issue.

[1:13:15] So-

[1:13:17] My understanding from way back was that we had to get to 50 megawatts,

[1:13:24] and that was 10 per town for five towns.

[1:13:28] But what I don't understand is, first of all, if we have six towns, then we could

[1:13:33] certainly exceed 50, but we could also have fewer megawatts per town, and it's

[1:13:39] quite reasonable to assume that there will be different sort of capacity for that

[1:13:43] level of production by town. So why is it the case that we have to have the six?

[1:13:48] Because we could have four if each of them produced, I think, 12 and a half

[1:13:53] megawatts, if I'm doing the math right.

[1:13:56] And it also, if we have this

[1:14:00] lower limit on the number of towns, it means a town can't drop off along the way.

[1:14:05] And the beginning of the conversation was, well, there's something that isn't quite

[1:14:09] sort of satisfactory to a town at the early stages, they could drop off.

[1:14:15] That would mean the remaining ones need to kind of produce more because we have to

[1:14:19] get to 50. We could exceed 50, and I'm using very broad terms here.

[1:14:24] But it's really just about the math and the six, five, fewer than five.

[1:14:29] I think it's proof of concept for the investors, right?

[1:14:32] Part of it is making sure you have that covered.

[1:14:34] And the sixth town will give us a buffer, so should somebody not be able to

[1:14:39] contribute. I'm going to use Shirley as an example.

[1:14:43] Most of Shirley's critical infrastructure sites, their public safety building,

[1:14:47] their library, their town hall, are not national-grade customers, and I know

[1:14:53] those are the communities that we're looking at.

[1:14:55] They are currently serviced by Devon's electric power.

[1:15:00] So somebody like Shirley may not be able to come up with the

[1:15:05] allocated or the hopeful number of sites that

[1:15:11] each town is looking to come up with, whereas Harvard, maybe we come up with six

[1:15:17] critical infrastructure sites, and we could pick up one from another community.

[1:15:21] Gina, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but it gives us flexibility.

[1:15:26] And should somebody, one of the communities, decide that this isn't in their best

[1:15:30] interest, we have that one town buffer in which-

[1:15:35] Now, Eve

[1:15:36] ... to work with.

[1:15:37] In general, each municipality can build up to 10 megawatts.

[1:15:42] By bringing in six towns, think 60 megawatts.

[1:15:46] So by definition, it would be a 60-megawatt plant.

[1:15:52] The reason that we would plan for that, having gotten to know all of the towns, is

[1:15:57] that if it turns out that, as Don was describing, there's not a good

[1:16:03] site for some unforeseen reason in a town and they decide to not move forward, we

[1:16:07] still have a minimum of 50 megawatts, which is what we need, sort of a

[1:16:13] critical threshold, minimum threshold, Eve, for us to gain the funding that we've

[1:16:19] been describing since last March.

[1:16:23] And also too, if we had two towns, say Shirley and another town that really only

[1:16:29] has-

[1:16:29] Can you just-

[1:16:29] ... five megawatt.

[1:16:32] What?

[1:16:34] I'm sorry, who was interrupting?

[1:16:37] I thought somebody needed to say something. Sorry.

[1:16:39] No, I heard something too. Go ahead, Gina.

[1:16:41] Yeah. No, so what this allows us to do is some towns may be able to use a

[1:16:47] capacity up to 10 megawatts, others may only be able to use five.

[1:16:50] But as long as we get to that minimum of 50, then we're really in great shape as a

[1:16:55] total project. And wanting to give the towns as much

[1:17:00] flexibility and freedom and ability to move forward or not, we wanted to build in a

[1:17:05] little bit of insulation as we've gotten to know each of the towns.

[1:17:11] And I think when we describe critical infrastructure sites too, those do not need

[1:17:16] to necessarily be fire stations, police stations.

[1:17:20] They can be a grocery store, a church, corporate office parks like they have in

[1:17:26] Bolton, as well as buildings that we would typically think of as critical

[1:17:31] infrastructure. So I just wanted to make sure that you all know we're going to be

[1:17:34] thinking very creatively and broadly on this.

[1:17:39] And one other quick thing, I don't know if you want to address it, but Northborough

[1:17:43] Selectboard, from Gina, has said that they're interested in seeing our vote tonight

[1:17:47] before they sign on, and that will-- Is that your-

[1:17:51] Yes, they indicated this morning that they are very excited to move forward.

[1:17:55] They did not want to expend legal

[1:17:58] resources, pay for legal counsel, unless they knew there was an opportunity for

[1:18:03] them to join in with us. So that's what they're waiting for. Eve?

[1:18:09] I just need to go back to what we were talking about for a moment.

[1:18:12] So I understand perfectly well the idea of having some buffer with six versus five,

[1:18:19] but it's not really what my question was.

[1:18:20] My question was, we can--

[1:18:25] Whatever the right terminology, Ahmet, help me if I'm getting it wrong.

[1:18:28] There's a 10-megawatt limit per town, and that, if I'm understanding correctly, is

[1:18:33] set by the state for some sort of metering, net metering, whatever kind of metering

[1:18:38] limit.

[1:18:39] Eve, let me help you on that, if I may.

[1:18:41] You are talking about the net metering

[1:18:44] limit. But on this project, not all the generation will be net metered.

[1:18:50] Some of-

[1:18:51] That's true

[1:18:51] ... it will be behind the meter.

[1:18:53] Behind the meter. And some can be wholesale as well.

[1:18:56] Wholesale.

[1:18:56] And so we can go over that. And if it turns out that that's something that any or

[1:19:01] all of the towns want to do, there will be behind-the-meter community solar, and

[1:19:07] then potential to sell excess energy into the wholesale market, and that will be

[1:19:11] what is studied during the feasibility study.

[1:19:14] And the idea is to come back to each town with a

[1:19:20] recommended configuration, what the components would look like, what the megawatts

[1:19:24] would total, and what the sort of financial and technical profile would be for each

[1:19:29] town.

[1:19:30] I think I'm probably not explaining myself correctly.

[1:19:33] If there are fewer than five, that means

[1:19:37] likely a town would have to exceed 10.

[1:19:40] Is that possible

[1:19:43] in order to get to 50 total?

[1:19:46] If a couple of towns backed out. We believe what I've been told is that it could

[1:19:51] work with four. Three, that's very tough.

[1:19:55] It could work with four because it would be 12 and a half per town.

[1:19:58] In other words, can there be fewer towns, each of which produces more?

[1:20:04] I think it's going to be depend on the towns, Eve, and what the potential capacity

[1:20:08] is for each of the towns. I honestly don't have that information.

[1:20:12] That's what we're hoping to get from the study.

[1:20:16] Okay.

[1:20:18] If there's-- If you'd like me to-

[1:20:19] If the thing was all even and everybody had the same amount of space, you could

[1:20:23] sort of do that, but everybody has a different amount of space and need kind of

[1:20:26] thing. So I think it's what Gina's saying is that we have to study it more to

[1:20:31] determine maybe Ayor does 11, and we do eight, and Northborough does 15,

[1:20:37] and somebody does four, right? So that we don't-

[1:20:39] Is that possible? That model that you just said, if that were the case.

[1:20:43] Exactly how you just described it. Is that possible?

[1:20:49] I believe so. I

[1:20:52] don't have the answer to that. I will get the answer to that from our technical

[1:20:55] team. I believe that's possible, but given the configurations that

[1:21:01] we've been discussing, I just want to verify that that can be the case, and I would

[1:21:04] be happy to provide an email first thing in the morning about that.

[1:21:09] I believe that's true. I've heard that discussed.

[1:21:14] That's the question that you're getting at, Eve, right?

[1:21:17] A different allocation per town.

[1:21:18] Yep.

[1:21:18] Okay. All right.

[1:21:19] Yep.

[1:21:19] Thanks.

[1:21:19] I've also heard discussed that we could co-locate some of the generation because

[1:21:23] all of our towns abut each other. It's a really beautiful, tight configuration of

[1:21:28] towns, and we may be able to co-locate some of them together as well and benefit

[1:21:34] from it that way.

[1:21:35] Great. All right. Thanks. Any other questions? Yeah, Ahmet?

[1:21:41] If I may,

[1:21:43] less of a question-

[1:21:45] Yeah

[1:21:45] ... but just a summary is

[1:21:48] we have been working on it collectively

[1:21:53] for a while now, and we look at this as for sure

[1:21:58] reliability, resilience development, but also for

[1:22:04] additional revenue generation. So, this project, if we can make it happen

[1:22:09] together with NextGen, it has these features.

[1:22:13] So, six town, five town, whether or not we are okay, my view

[1:22:19] is, as we discussed, the project financial viability, having a six town and

[1:22:24] including them, it will be a smart thing to do from the project viability point of

[1:22:30] view. The other part of it is- Also, I'm looking at regional value

[1:22:36] creation. We're not just necessarily creating value for our town, but we are

[1:22:42] expanding that value creation across six towns.

[1:22:46] So from that point, I'm for sure supporting six towns.

[1:22:52] But we are still early on whether or not we can go beyond the phase zero that

[1:22:57] Don indicated. So I really support the way that you structured that, Don, how we

[1:23:03] are going to go.

[1:23:06] And if I may say one more thing, and since Gina also is here.

[1:23:13] The question was, is it going to be shelled ready after the $1 million?

[1:23:18] My current understanding is no way.

[1:23:22] It's not going to be shelled ready because we need to do multiple things.

[1:23:32] As we are doing this $1 million worth of feasibility study, everything,

[1:23:38] NextGen needs to continue to attract investors

[1:23:44] and start building the KLO fund. Because without that

[1:23:50] fund, this $1 million is nothing. The projects will cost lots of

[1:23:56] money, and the way that, for me, attraction to this structure

[1:24:02] is that fund will be available, and we are going to be, legally if we can, be

[1:24:10] a limited partner to that fund. So then,

[1:24:15] are we going to apply for another $4 million potential funding?

[1:24:20] The answer is probably we'll try that.

[1:24:22] But those monies will not take us to the end game.

[1:24:26] The investor money has to be in place.

[1:24:29] So while we are doing all this work, also NextGen is going to be working

[1:24:35] on

[1:24:36] getting those investors excited and sign up. Gina, am I correct on that?

[1:24:42] No, I think that's a beautiful summary.

[1:24:45] Assuming we get through the three gates that Don has described,

[1:24:50] and we've worked out procurement, we've worked out the best path for towns to join

[1:24:56] in the Keep Lights On Fund, and that may be as a limited partner, we may need here

[1:25:00] in Massachusetts to structure that a bit differently.

[1:25:04] Once we get there, and we would get through

[1:25:09] the go gates for the third round, then what would kick in are the

[1:25:15] rest of the elements that were in the initial grant.

[1:25:18] The other $4 million, which are all the pre-construction costs, all the final

[1:25:23] engineering designs,

[1:25:27] hiring in our engineering, procurement, and construction partners.

[1:25:32] All of that will happen. The second part of that grant would be what we

[1:25:38] would use to fund that piece of it, and then that would also be used as the equity

[1:25:44] that the towns would be bringing into the project.

[1:25:47] So the intent is that the towns will not need to outlay any cash.

[1:25:51] So given that, am I hearing that if you cannot get the second part of

[1:25:57] the grant-

[1:25:59] Mm-hmm

[1:25:59] ... project will be dead on arrival?

[1:26:02] No, absolutely not. We could roll those into pre-construction costs in project

[1:26:07] finance. We can achieve other grants.

[1:26:11] I think if we are as diligent and

[1:26:18] organized and coordinated as we have been to date, I feel that it would be

[1:26:24] promising for the state to continue to fund this project.

[1:26:28] It is one of the top priorities of the state to bring distributed energy resources

[1:26:33] to municipalities across our state.

[1:26:36] I think we will be a demonstration project that will be

[1:26:41] well-supported, and they're going to want to continue.

[1:26:44] So I feel

[1:26:48] confident that this is a promising opportunity for us.

[1:26:51] If not, there's other grants we could get, and we would be simultaneously applying

[1:26:55] for those, Amit.

[1:26:56] So until after the second set of financing or

[1:27:02] the grants-

[1:27:03] Mm-hmm

[1:27:04] ... we will not have visibility who those potential investors would be,

[1:27:10] or-

[1:27:11] So the potential investors, and we did just provide-- I think our chief financial

[1:27:14] officer provided some answers to the town administrators.

[1:27:17] They were asking that specifically.

[1:27:20] They are a series of green banks and tax equity investors

[1:27:26] that invest in infrastructure projects like this all the time, that our team has

[1:27:30] worked with in the past. Specifically which partners we will select at the

[1:27:35] time will depend on who gives us the best deal.

[1:27:40] And, that's going to be part of the process.

[1:27:43] We have quite a lot of interest in this project because we have

[1:27:49] several municipalities that will be part of it, which de-risks the whole project

[1:27:53] for them. The towns are the customers, so we are our own customers in the fund.

[1:27:59] That also de-risks the project. It's also well-supported.

[1:28:03] We will have equity in the deal already. We have been very thoroughly studied.

[1:28:08] We will have top-notch engineering, procurement, and construction partners.

[1:28:14] All of that is what weighs in. And we also have a track record already with several

[1:28:18] of these potential partners. So we have not locked that in yet because we don't

[1:28:22] have the project completed yet. Once we get through the feasibility study, and

[1:28:28] we'll know exactly which towns are moving forward with which configurations of

[1:28:33] their hero hubs, then we'll know exactly what the project is. It can be priced.

[1:28:38] It will be somewhere between $150 and $180 million, and then we will get that

[1:28:42] financed. And I just want to underscore that this happens all the time in industry.

[1:28:49] We have not been able to participate in this because we've been too small.

[1:28:54] And this is

[1:28:57] an important innovation that we are bringing our towns together to do this because

[1:29:02] it gives us critical mass to have access to the same kind of financing that private

[1:29:07] entities get.

[1:29:10] Thanks, Gina.

[1:29:11] Yeah, Eve?

[1:29:13] Can I go back to the mention about towns' equity?

[1:29:16] Yeah.

[1:29:17] So there was, in the midst of all of that, there was a comment

[1:29:23] that the

[1:29:25] potential second grant award, which is underscore potential at this point, that $4

[1:29:30] million would be what is

[1:29:35] needed in order for the towns not to contribute equity.

[1:29:38] So that would be the town's equity. Am I understanding that correctly?

[1:29:42] Is that how it was explained? Okay, so all grants are uncertain.

[1:29:47] And I understand you're very confident, and I'm not

[1:29:51] disputing that. However, it's not 100%.

[1:29:54] What if it doesn't come through, or what if we get $2 instead of $4 million?

[1:29:58] What does that mean for town equity?

[1:30:00] Because, as we all know, we don't have that money.

[1:30:04] I understand that, and I,

[1:30:08] having worked with Harvard as long as I have and living in Harvard and getting to

[1:30:14] know our surrounding towns, we're all in the same boat.

[1:30:18] My company has committed to finding that funding.

[1:30:22] We're not going to put that on the towns, not any of the towns.

[1:30:25] So we will find that funding. We are excited about the potential of continuing to

[1:30:31] work with the EEA on this MVP action grant.

[1:30:36] If that turns out not to be the right path, we will find a path.

[1:30:39] We have great support from Senator Eldridge, Senator Cronin, Representative

[1:30:45] Sina, from Hogan, from Kennedy. The list goes on.

[1:30:50] They're all aware of this project.

[1:30:53] Susan, Mary, and Don joined me at the awards ceremony with Lieutenant Governor

[1:30:59] Driscoll,

[1:31:01] who high-fived me because they're very excited about this project.

[1:31:05] So I think

[1:31:08] if we progress with the same diligence and,

[1:31:14] God willing, we don't have some major external macro force that changes the path

[1:31:19] that we're on, we will find the funding.

[1:31:22] At this stage, we're really looking to get the study done and just sort of time box

[1:31:28] it, task box it around this study, and have everybody feeling really good about

[1:31:33] what we learn coming out of it. And I hope it'll really

[1:31:38] bring value to all of our towns, whether we go forward with the project or not, to

[1:31:42] really know what our potential is.

[1:31:44] Thanks, Gina. Dawn, do you have something to add to that?

[1:31:47] I just want to bring this discussion a little bit back in-

[1:31:50] Yeah

[1:31:50] ... because I think we're getting a little bit ahead of ourselves.

[1:31:53] I appreciate the questions, but I really do want to focus just on this million

[1:31:58] dollars and really right now just focus on phase zero.

[1:32:02] Because again, we have so many legal questions that are still unanswered as well as

[1:32:06] the procurement process. I think we really need to start there.

[1:32:11] And continue to have these larger discussions about what-

[1:32:14] Mm-hmm

[1:32:14] ... the future of this project looks like.

[1:32:17] But really our number one question right now is what does our participation in this

[1:32:22] fund look like, and can we legally and without liability do the town

[1:32:28] and portion of six towns?

[1:32:32] Great. Thanks, Dawn. I do have one question about the budget then, the $1 million.

[1:32:36] If we have under or over-budgeted any particular line, is Hillary willing to work

[1:32:41] with us to reallocate? Can you do line item transfers kind of thing?

[1:32:45] Okay.

[1:32:46] Okay.

[1:32:47] Scope as needed. If we only spent 100,000 of the 130, we can take that 30 and

[1:32:52] allocate it somewhere else, and do that throughout the process.

[1:32:56] Wonderful.

[1:32:57] Okay.

[1:32:57] Any questions about the million-dollar budget that we are approving or not this

[1:33:02] evening?

[1:33:04] Those sequential votes, those are select board votes from us or from all three

[1:33:09] select boards or, there's a go, no-go at each phase?

[1:33:13] Who would-

[1:33:15] Our intention is that it would be each community would vote at those go, no-go.

[1:33:20] Right now because Harvard is the leader on this, even though Ayer and Shirley have

[1:33:25] also signed onto the grant, they're looking to this board for the

[1:33:31] vote on this budget and on whether or not to incorporate up

[1:33:36] to the six towns on the study.

[1:33:42] When we get to that phase?

[1:33:45] Yeah.

[1:33:45] I'm sorry, when are we incorporating the six towns?

[1:33:49] Well,

[1:33:50] really from day one, because when we look at even the legal aspect, we would be

[1:33:57] not just speaking about Harvard, we would be speaking about each community, and it

[1:34:00] would be my intention to, if the board is supportive of bringing those other three

[1:34:05] towns who aren't on the grant application, to have a meeting of all the town

[1:34:10] administrators and town managers to make sure that all six communities are on the

[1:34:14] same page. Harvard, Ayer, Shirley, we've all had the opportunity to have these

[1:34:19] conversations and have our questions answered by Gina and her colleagues,

[1:34:25] but we would want to bring the other town administrators in the loop on all this,

[1:34:29] too.

[1:34:30] So is the vote then contingent upon the full six-town complement?

[1:34:37] Is that what you're recommending is that, yes, we approve the budget, but it's

[1:34:42] contingent upon six towns move forward with a signed MOU on this?

[1:34:47] Well, we've got five towns as of right now-

[1:34:49] Yeah

[1:34:49] ... because Bolton and Lancaster have signed on, and according to Gina,

[1:34:53] Northborough is ready to sign on also.

[1:34:56] Okay.

[1:34:57] So I would think that because the way that the grant was written and it included

[1:35:01] for

[1:35:04] 36 sites overall, that I think we do incorporate all six communities, whether or

[1:35:09] not Northborough signs on or not. I think that we have to proceed that way.

[1:35:14] Okay. Ahmet?

[1:35:15] Susan Mary, if I may put a little twist to that,

[1:35:21] which is

[1:35:24] I would like to say a motion that, number one, approving the

[1:35:30] budget as presented by Dawn. The second thing, which is answering to your

[1:35:35] question,

[1:35:38] we would want to include up to six towns,

[1:35:44] but

[1:35:46] for us to apply to grant, having immediately six towns is not a condition.

[1:35:51] Okay.

[1:35:52] So we can come-

[1:35:52] So it's conditional on having at least five towns?

[1:35:56] That's the thing is we've said it needs to have a certain number of towns to work,

[1:36:00] right?

[1:36:00] We have four towns signed the MOU.

[1:36:04] I'm clear about that, yeah.

[1:36:05] And then two other are waiting our vote.

[1:36:10] But I'm trying not to make it conditional that we'll have the six towns

[1:36:16] immediately today, tomorrow, because I'd like to be able to-

[1:36:19] Oh, I see what you're saying

[1:36:20] ...

[1:36:21] push the risk of budget to the state so they could go in.

[1:36:26] Got it.

[1:36:27] Other towns could come in line in two weeks, three weeks, four weeks, depends on

[1:36:31] their schedule.

[1:36:33] So the six towns could be part of the no-go after the first phase is over,

[1:36:38] potentially?

[1:36:38] Oh, absolutely. Because-

[1:36:39] Okay.

[1:36:40] Yeah.

[1:36:40] Okay. I'm trying to sort of take Eve's question and make sure we have the

[1:36:45] appropriate measures in place to move forward and whether we needed to have the six

[1:36:50] or not.

[1:36:51] Yeah.

[1:36:51] Could I ask a question? And I don't know if this, I might have missed it.

[1:36:57] At each thing we have the go, no-go, and there's a vote.

[1:37:00] How does that work if one says, "You know what?

[1:37:02] I'm not ready to go here yet." How do we resolve that?

[1:37:05] It's just a majority vote and the other because they signed on, if someone's in the

[1:37:10] minority and says, "Well, I said no-go, but I got to go."

[1:37:13] They drop.

[1:37:15] They're out, right?

[1:37:17] Yeah, and anybody could pull out at really any point.

[1:37:20] I mean, it's a non-binding MOU, so there isn't anything that says

[1:37:25] you're tied to it through the whole process, so.

[1:37:29] Okay. But the deeper you go in with the different phases, right?

[1:37:34] I mean, at a certain point,

[1:37:36] maybe you shouldn't be able to get out of it, right?

[1:37:40] I mean, you don't want to get to phase whatever, almost the final phase and then

[1:37:44] have somebody-

[1:37:47] Yeah.

[1:37:48] I don't think we'll reach to that point until after this million dollars, so again-

[1:37:54] Yeah

[1:37:54] ... I'll address it after that.

[1:37:56] Yeah.

[1:37:56] Okay. Just wanted to ask. Thanks.

[1:37:58] So, Ahmet, can you restate your motion then? Because we don't have a second on it.

[1:38:05] Okay. I'll try to do it in plain Turkish this time.

[1:38:10] So, I'd like to make a motion to approve the revised MEP Action Grant

[1:38:16] budget as submitted,

[1:38:19] and including up to six towns into this study.

[1:38:26] Great.

[1:38:26] Second.

[1:38:26] Is there a second?

[1:38:27] Second.

[1:38:29] Any further discussion?

[1:38:31] Ah, Ahmet, can you just clarify the second part of that motion, and including up to

[1:38:35] six?

[1:38:35] Towns into this study is covered by the

[1:38:41] $1 million.

[1:38:44] So we're approving the budget and permitting up to three additional towns to join

[1:38:49] into the study. Got it.

[1:38:51] That's a better translation. Thank you.

[1:38:54] Okay. Good luck, Michelle, with that motion.

[1:39:02] All right. Any further discussion?

[1:39:05] All right. Roll call vote. Ahmet?

[1:39:07] Aye.

[1:39:08] Eric?

[1:39:09] Aye.

[1:39:10] Eve?

[1:39:10] Aye.

[1:39:11] Cara?

[1:39:12] Aye.

[1:39:13] And I'm an aye. All right.

[1:39:14] Thank you, board. I appreciate the time-

[1:39:16] Ahmet, thank you for your work. Please extend our thank yous to Brian and Robert as

[1:39:21] well. You guys have been great in putting all this together.

[1:39:23] Gina, thank you for coming, and we look forward to-

[1:39:25] Pleasure

[1:39:25] ... working with you further on this.

[1:39:27] Me too. Have a great night.

[1:39:28] Thanks, everyone. Thank you.

[1:39:31] All right. We already did that. Next is-

[1:39:36] Susan Mary, if I could just, we need to talk about the all boards meeting still.

[1:39:40] Oh, did I miss one? Thank you so much for catching me.

[1:39:42] Sure.

[1:39:43] All right. All boards meeting.

[1:39:47] Ugh. I'm starting to fade a little bit. What did we propose?

[1:39:51] Talked about November 5th, but then both Ahmet and I, I think may not be available-

[1:39:56] Oh, right. That's right. Okay. Eve, do you have a proposal date?

[1:40:01] No, I was going to say that I thought it was important for as much of the select

[1:40:06] board to be present as possible, given that it is all boards and we want to show

[1:40:11] our endorsement of

[1:40:13] all the committees and so on. So I was leaning against a date when two of the five

[1:40:18] of us were not going to be available.

[1:40:20] And I concur. So does someone want to propose an alternative date?

[1:40:26] We had floated November 10th, but that puts us quite a bit of ways in between our

[1:40:31] last meeting and the next meeting after that, so.

[1:40:34] I think we also said November 9th. The 10th is before the Veterans Day.

[1:40:39] I'm not sure if people go away or do whatever, but November 9th.

[1:40:44] I guess we had to figure out whether there was a conflict with some other board.

[1:40:47] Is that right?

[1:40:48] Yeah. That would be-

[1:40:48] That was school committee meeting

[1:40:49] ... the regular school committee, yeah.

[1:40:51] Oh, I see. Gotcha.

[1:40:55] Um,

[1:40:57] so

[1:40:58] from the next, I think that a little complicated.

[1:41:00] Most nights there's some other committee that meets.

[1:41:02] What?

[1:41:02] I said most nights there's some other committee that meets.

[1:41:05] I'm not sure we're going to be able to avoid every single one.

[1:41:07] No, I agree, but I think Monday nights are also a little tough, and the school

[1:41:11] committee is one of our larger committees.

[1:41:15] What about Thursday the 12th? If Thursday seemed to work best for most, it just was

[1:41:20] in the first week of the month.

[1:41:23] I can do that.

[1:41:25] Housing trust, but they're not as important. We can do without them.

[1:41:28] They'll be at the meeting.

[1:41:31] They can pose for both. All right.

[1:41:34] They probably are the ones willing.

[1:41:36] And then member select board members make it to the 12th.

[1:41:39] 12th.

[1:41:39] Anyone not able to? Yes.

[1:41:41] I will be out of town on that day.

[1:41:43] Okay, let's pick a different day then, because now we really have to have everybody

[1:41:47] there.

[1:41:48] 18th.

[1:41:54] 18th, the Wednesday after our select board meeting?

[1:41:56] Yeah.

[1:41:57] Yeah.

[1:41:57] Yeah, the 18th.

[1:42:01] I'm okay with that.

[1:42:03] I'm just going through the calendar.

[1:42:04] All right, that's fine. You can throw out anything you want at this point, but it's

[1:42:07] like herding cats here, so.

[1:42:09] Yeah.

[1:42:10] Well, did anyone oppose the 18th?

[1:42:14] 18th?

[1:42:14] No.

[1:42:17] What did we say about the 17th?

[1:42:19] We have a select board meeting that night.

[1:42:21] Oh, that night. Okay. Right. Mm-hmm.

[1:42:25] 18th is fine for me.

[1:42:27] Okay.

[1:42:27] And then we do the 18th or the 19th, either one.

[1:42:30] I'm okay with 18th or 19th, both.

[1:42:33] Me too.

[1:42:34] Yes.

[1:42:34] I prefer the 19th just a wee bit, but

[1:42:38] I'll do whatever.

[1:42:38] Okay. November 19th. Is that a go for everyone then?

[1:42:43] We can talk, swap Thanksgiving recipes as well.

[1:42:47] All right. November 19th is the all boards meeting.

[1:42:51] We have done it at both Volunteers Hall and Upper Town Hall.

[1:42:55] Don was going to reach out to Mary. Does anyone have a reason why we shouldn't

[1:43:00] consider either one? I think we can run a broadcast meeting from either one.

[1:43:06] Well, the acoustics are a little better, and elevator at the library.

[1:43:11] Okay. Yep, that's a great point. So Don, if you'll let us know if Volunteers Hall

[1:43:17] is available on the 19th. As a backup, we can always do it at Upper Town Hall.

[1:43:25] Okay.

[1:43:25] And I'm sorry, did you say a time, like 6:00?

[1:43:27] No, I didn't. So that was the last one.

[1:43:31] Do we want to do

[1:43:33] it earlier than 7:00, or does 7:00 let people get home and then have dinner and

[1:43:37] then go out?

[1:43:40] Thoughts?

[1:43:42] My recollection is it was a little bit long, so we might want to start earlier just

[1:43:46] so we don't hit 10:00.

[1:43:48] Okay. How about 6:30?

[1:43:52] Yeah.

[1:43:53] Okay. 6:30, Volunteers Hall is a preference on

[1:43:58] Thursday, November 19th.

[1:44:02] And what would we want people to prepare prior to the meeting so that it is

[1:44:07] everybody presenting the same idea as the board's goals for the year?

[1:44:13] Yeah, we could recycle that memo, Don, from last year, I think.

[1:44:17] Okay.

[1:44:17] It was pretty succinct, and it just-

[1:44:20] Great

[1:44:20] ... laid out three things.

[1:44:22] Okay. And also, I think, Don...

[1:44:26] I'm sorry, what?

[1:44:27] I think it was one slide that was limited to-

[1:44:30] Yeah

[1:44:30] ... their three goals for the year.

[1:44:32] Okay. And then Don,

[1:44:34] there is something in the

[1:44:40] charter or some timeline or something that says that we're supposed to do somewhat

[1:44:45] of a financial overview, I think, no? To all the boards.

[1:44:52] I cannot remember off the top of my head where I've seen it, but it would just be

[1:44:56] good to maybe give people a picture.

[1:44:57] I know that we've done it in the

[1:45:00] memo that went out, but...

[1:45:04] Okay. All right.

[1:45:07] And Eric, you looked a little skeptical on that, so if you can find where it was

[1:45:12] and say we don't have to do it, that would be great.

[1:45:14] Yeah. Not skeptical, I just couldn't remember where that would be in here.

[1:45:18] Oh, okay.

[1:45:18] So I was just going to pull it up and look for you.

[1:45:20] Yeah. It's a me.

[1:45:20] But I'll verify that and let you all know.

[1:45:23] All right, great. All right. Sorry.

[1:45:26] Don, you're up with the TA report next.

[1:45:30] Great. Let me share my screen again.

[1:45:43] Sorry, I just have to find it.

[1:45:44] No worries.

[1:45:49] And someone's continually checking the waiting room, right?

[1:45:51] To see if there's anybody. Okay, great.

[1:45:54] Yeah.

[1:45:54] Thank you.

[1:46:04] There you go.

[1:46:08] Let me know if that comes up on your end.

[1:46:10] I can see it, yeah.

[1:46:11] Yep. So a brief report this week, because we just met a week ago.

[1:46:17] The Aero tip project, we had our first pre-construction meeting yesterday.

[1:46:23] Eric and Liz and Chief Baboo attended for the town.

[1:46:29] And at that meeting, it was discussed that National Grid may begin some work on

[1:46:34] their pole relocations, as soon as the notice to proceed has been issued by

[1:46:39] MassDOT. But as of right now, there's no other mobilization plan for the winter

[1:46:44] months. So we won't see a lot going on on Aero.

[1:46:48] It will be in the spring, once all the snow has melted.

[1:46:52] If anything changes, I will keep you updated on that.

[1:46:55] I have no updates on the pump station or the culvert replacement for this meeting.

[1:47:02] McCarty Track and Field is coming along.

[1:47:04] I would encourage you all to go take a look if you want to drive by, go sit in the

[1:47:08] parking lot. But it's really coming along great.

[1:47:13] At this point, it does not look like any of the fall sports will be able to utilize

[1:47:18] it. They are still running a few weeks behind schedule.

[1:47:22] But Ian has accounted for that and is using other field locations.

[1:47:25] So, if you can take a drive by. No update on the Bear Hill Pond dam.

[1:47:32] But the library BMS system, this project is almost complete.

[1:47:37] But there are two change orders that came in for work required.

[1:47:42] But these change orders will put the project over budget.

[1:47:47] If I recall, it's by about 10,000 or so dollars.

[1:47:52] Mary Wilson and I are working to resolve this, because this was a town meeting

[1:47:56] vote, and town meeting appropriated $200,000 for the project.

[1:48:01] And without these change orders, the project came in at $198,000.

[1:48:05] So I physically can't spend more than what was appropriated at town meeting.

[1:48:10] So we're working to determine what the best path is for being able to approve this

[1:48:15] work, whether we have to go to the finance committee for a potential reserve fund

[1:48:20] transfer for it, or if between maybe library

[1:48:26] budget or the library trustees, that they can cover the work.

[1:48:30] So Mary and I are working through this, and I'll bring you back an update just as

[1:48:33] soon as I have one.

[1:48:36] I don't have any personnel updates for you this week.

[1:48:40] Operations-wise, budget guidance was distributed to all departments, boards, and

[1:48:43] committees last Wednesday. I've set the deadline for department budgets to be due

[1:48:48] to me by October 26th. That gave them a good solid three, three and a

[1:48:54] half weeks to get the budgets to me.

[1:48:58] And I'm working on a schedule right now for bringing in departments.

[1:49:03] And I will let you all know when those meetings are, as well as the finance

[1:49:06] committee, so that you can sit in and listen to the discussions that are had

[1:49:11] between myself, Jared, Julie, and the departments themselves.

[1:49:17] The warrant for the special town meeting has been completed, and postcards will

[1:49:21] hopefully be mailed out tomorrow to all residents with a QR code that will bring

[1:49:26] you right to the warrant on the town website.

[1:49:29] The warrant lives, just so the public knows, under the town clerk's page with all

[1:49:34] other town meeting warrants and minutes for town meeting.

[1:49:38] But we have also put an announcement on the homepage that will also bring you to

[1:49:41] that same location. The warrant has been officially posted on the town website in

[1:49:46] accordance with the law and bylaws, so we are ready to have a town meeting.

[1:49:51] That's always what I'm worried about is making sure that that's posted so we don't

[1:49:55] have to cancel. But that is all done.

[1:49:59] One other thing I wanted to, I have no other announcements, notifications, but I

[1:50:03] was very fortunate to be able to, this afternoon, go over to the new

[1:50:09] satellite emergency facility over in Groton.

[1:50:13] The governor came out as well. Senator Trahan was there, and

[1:50:19] our local delegation was there also.

[1:50:24] But we heard a nice press conference in which the governor and Lori Trahan spoke.

[1:50:30] We heard from the president or CEO, whatever his title is, I apologize, for

[1:50:36] the UMass Memorial Healthcare system.

[1:50:40] And we were able to get a tour of the facility.

[1:50:42] So Chief Sicard and I went over there, and were able to see that.

[1:50:46] The facility is absolutely gorgeous.

[1:50:49] They have literally thought of anything, and it's going to be a great asset to our

[1:50:54] communities in the absence of having Nashoba Valley Hospital.

[1:51:00] They are slated to open sometime in February.

[1:51:04] They're about 90% through their hiring process and do expect

[1:51:10] for the professionals to be on board in December.

[1:51:15] So they're going to actually be in there a couple of months before official

[1:51:18] opening, get themselves comfortable with the facility, all the equipment and

[1:51:22] whatnot. But I'm really excited that I got to go.

[1:51:28] I heard about it last minute and glad I did.

[1:51:31] But I'm really excited for the community to be able to utilize that, and for

[1:51:34] another

[1:51:36] place for our emergency personnel to be able to bring patients without having the

[1:51:43] extended long periods of wait time at our local hospitals.

[1:51:47] So just having this is great. So,

[1:51:50] that is all the updates I have for you tonight.

[1:51:53] Great. Thanks, Dawn. Any questions for Dawn on items she covered?

[1:51:59] No, thank you.

[1:52:00] Great. It's great to hear on that event. All right.

[1:52:05] I think we are up to select board reports. Anybody want to jump in?

[1:52:11] Yeah, Eve.

[1:52:13] Well, the most exciting thing is the Conservation Commission approved the

[1:52:19] pond drawdown to begin on the 15th of October at a

[1:52:24] depth consistent with the existing order of conditions, which is a six-foot

[1:52:28] drawdown. The current level of the pond being somewhat lower than

[1:52:35] usual at this time of year means that in fact, five feet of water will be removed

[1:52:40] from the pond because it's already down somewhat.

[1:52:44] So that issue is settled, at least for the time being.

[1:52:47] They will revisit the

[1:52:50] state of the pond, if you will, in January, and if any tweaks need to be made, they

[1:52:56] will do it at that time. That's what they do every year anyway, so that's no

[1:53:00] different than it has been in the past.

[1:53:03] I don't have anything else that is worthy of our time for now.

[1:53:07] Thank you, Eve. Anybody else?

[1:53:11] I don't have anything.

[1:53:11] Everyone's busy on current agenda items. But yeah, Ahmet?

[1:53:16] Just a couple of updates.

[1:53:19] HEAC will have an information session October 15th,

[1:53:25] 7:00 PM via Zoom, about the SoLEc Energy solar

[1:53:31] project site selection,

[1:53:34] how it has been evaluated, and what is the state of the affair and

[1:53:40] which sites are in the running.

[1:53:47] And associated with that,

[1:53:51] the SoLEc credit purchase agreement has been agreed by all the

[1:53:57] parties. So the next step is just to go through the execution.

[1:54:02] So

[1:54:03] we already voted to give Don authority to execute that. So it's in the work.

[1:54:11] The Commission on Disability,

[1:54:15] during last week's meeting, the main topic was Minister's Pass, and they

[1:54:20] invited key stakeholders, school committee superintendent, director of

[1:54:27] people affairs, and a couple of others as well.

[1:54:32] That was a good, healthy discussion, let me put it that way.

[1:54:36] The outcome of it that,

[1:54:40] and thanks to Don and Eric, they're going to go get some cost

[1:54:46] information,

[1:54:48] what it will take to do the survey and the initial design.

[1:54:53] And once it's done,

[1:54:57] then we'll figure out how the funding is going to work for that work.

[1:55:03] And also, COD agreed to work on some grant

[1:55:08] options. So that is, I think there is a good support to really make that pass

[1:55:14] accessible. And

[1:55:17] we are moving with that

[1:55:20] goal in mind. The FinCom had their meeting last week, selected, again, Mike is the

[1:55:26] chair and vice chair, Vikram. And they approved two financial articles

[1:55:32] or supported them, not approved, and they passed the CPIC because typically they

[1:55:38] don't

[1:55:41] give opinion on the CPIC articles.

[1:55:47] I had a chance to review the budget guidance we provided.

[1:55:51] There were some questions about

[1:55:54] why the guidance is 3.25, all right versus not all

[1:56:00] right.

[1:56:02] So I think that

[1:56:04] conversation will continue and

[1:56:08] as a board, we know why we came up with those numbers, but rightful

[1:56:13] questions. And Jared also presented a couple of things.

[1:56:19] One of them was the free cash flow approval.

[1:56:22] So looks like we approved a little more than we anticipated, I think in tune of

[1:56:26] $1.5 million.

[1:56:29] So these are the-- Yeah, that's it for me.

[1:56:34] Thanks, Ahmet. Anybody, anything else? Eric?

[1:56:39] So charter review met last week,

[1:56:43] and we've switched to an every other week schedule now, so every other Thursday.

[1:56:49] I will be reaching out to each of the select board members to get feedback,

[1:56:55] particularly on article three, but just in general, for the charter soon.

[1:57:01] And personnel board met this morning, to vote on the non-union

[1:57:06] personnel COLA, which was, Julie, correct me if I'm wrong, it was 3.66?

[1:57:12] Yes, that's correct.

[1:57:13] Yep. So again, using the average of the

[1:57:20] Northeast regional CPI for the last 12 months.

[1:57:23] So it's a lot of caveats in that name, but that was it.

[1:57:28] And so that's how we get to that number.

[1:57:31] And then also, not really liaison exactly, but we had our first DPW info session

[1:57:37] yesterday. We had a few people, a couple of good questions.

[1:57:42] And the next one is Thursday at 7:00 at the COA?

[1:57:46] That's correct.

[1:57:48] So hopefully we'll have folks at that one as well.

[1:57:51] Great. Thanks, Eric.

[1:57:55] I will say, let's see,

[1:57:58] Don and Eric Reider and I met with the chair of the

[1:58:03] Permanent Building Committee. We do have a couple members, I think, if we can

[1:58:09] confirm,

[1:58:10] that we didn't know about their participation, but we are still missing some people

[1:58:16] to fill some slots. So if people in town have an interest in serving

[1:58:22] on the Permanent Building Committee to help direct the work on the DPW

[1:58:28] rebuild, that would be wonderful.

[1:58:31] I did put a notice out on Nextdoor Harvard of urging people to participate.

[1:58:36] We have quite a few openings. We still have an opening on capital planning and

[1:58:40] investment. We actually have an opening on almost every board at the moment,

[1:58:44] every appointed board. So,

[1:58:47] feel free to take out an application.

[1:58:50] CPIC is meeting this week to start our review.

[1:58:56] Many of the departments turned in our request for money.

[1:59:00] They will start reviewing them by meeting with the police chief, and

[1:59:06] I don't think there were any with the facilities director, so I think it's just the

[1:59:09] police chief, this coming Thursday.

[1:59:14] It's amazing, but the MSBA paperwork has finally all been submitted for the

[1:59:19] reconciliation of the Hildreth Elementary School.

[1:59:22] They will be voting on it at a board meeting this month.

[1:59:25] Unfortunately, it's too late to go to the free cash for this year, but it will be

[1:59:30] somewhere just under 800,000, I believe, that the town is expecting back.

[1:59:35] So that will go towards free cash certification for next year, but that's a major

[1:59:40] miracle that the school building has been up there for seven years or something,

[1:59:46] and we're finally getting money back. But it's all good.

[1:59:54] The Harvard Devins, the Framework Committee...

[1:59:56] Sorry, I'm a little fried at the moment.

[1:59:58] But the Framework Committee

[2:00:02] had a subset of people to review a new way of looking at the matrix that makes it a

[2:00:07] little more objective, and we will be rolling that out at the next Framework

[2:00:12] Committee meeting, which is next week. And that's all I have.

[2:00:18] All right. If there are no other select board updates, then

[2:00:24] I will open it up to any public comment.

[2:00:27] If you'd like to make public comment, I see someone coming on screen. That is Mr.

[2:00:32] Victor Norman. Victor, if you could give us your name and address for the record,

[2:00:38] take it away.

[2:00:39] My name is Victor Norman, and I live at 214 Stow Road.

[2:00:43] And this is the first time in a long time that I've sat through an entire select

[2:00:48] board meeting, and all I can say is kudos to all of you for your hard work.

[2:00:53] This is really quite a job, which in a former life I did something similar in the

[2:00:58] city of Lowell. Anyway, I just wanted to stick around, just make a comment on Super

[2:01:03] Town Meeting, which is a big event, an unusual event.

[2:01:08] I want to support Cara in her statement that it's not just a zone change,

[2:01:14] it's a development plan that Mass Development needs to do.

[2:01:20] And Eric was incorrect. The working group did not just

[2:01:26] suggest a zone change. They really produced a prescriptive plan

[2:01:32] for future types of housing that should be included in this district.

[2:01:36] And I think absent an enforceable plan from Mass Development,

[2:01:42] you can expect the unexpected, and that has been their track record.

[2:01:49] And most recently, the development that they approved for Adams

[2:01:55] Circle

[2:01:56] that the size of the development exceeded their RFP by 25%.

[2:02:03] It's all rental and it's all affordable.

[2:02:07] That is not consistent with the history of

[2:02:13] housing development that citizens have proposed to Mass Development.

[2:02:17] And I think, again, absent an enforceable plan from Mass Development, I think it

[2:02:22] would be a mistake merely to rezone

[2:02:27] ITC,

[2:02:29] particularly with respect to the fact that Vicksburg Square may end up being

[2:02:33] demolished. And now you have a 20-acre parcel that

[2:02:39] would be zoned residential without any guidance to Mass Development in terms of

[2:02:43] what to do there. And so,

[2:02:47] as we move forward in this process moving towards Super Town Meeting, I think

[2:02:53] it would be wise to hold Mass Development's feet to the fire.

[2:02:56] And it's something they're certainly capable of doing.

[2:03:00] And I hope that the select board agrees with that, and I hope it

[2:03:05] does happen.

[2:03:07] That's my story.

[2:03:10] Thank you, Victor. Thanks, Victor.

[2:03:12] Right.

[2:03:13] Paul?

[2:03:14] Yeah, I just want to second. Paul Green.

[2:03:16] Give an address, please.

[2:03:17] Paul Green, 288 Old Littleton Road, Harvard, Mass.

[2:03:21] Thanks.

[2:03:24] I just want to second what Victor just said.

[2:03:28] I also serve on the HCJC, and I want to add one comment, and

[2:03:34] Cara may remember saying something along these lines at one of the previous

[2:03:39] Vicksburg Square votes.

[2:03:41] Mass Development frequently just adds

[2:03:47] permissive zoning to these various districts.

[2:03:50] They never take anything away, and that is clearly a developer's dream

[2:03:57] to be able to do anything they want with it.

[2:03:59] But if we're going to add housing to that zone, fine, but let's think about what

[2:04:05] should be taken away at the same time.

[2:04:07] If you remember my summary that I produced this summer, the first attempt to

[2:04:13] rezone Vicksburg Square would've allowed 19 uses.

[2:04:18] The second attempt was 14 uses. I don't have the list offhand, but it starts at

[2:04:24] eight or nine uses even today. And so, I think we really want to be

[2:04:30] deeply engaged in this process and not simply wait for Mass Development to come

[2:04:34] back to the table with a fully worked-out proposal. Thanks very much.

[2:04:39] Thank you, Paul. Any other public comment?

[2:04:44] Okay. Agenda items

[2:04:47] for our next meeting. I do know that we still need to cover OSC,

[2:04:54] something about the OSC, their constitution.

[2:04:57] So Eve, I'll work with you on seeing how we move that forward.

[2:05:02] And

[2:05:05] Michelle has a list of open items from previous meetings, but does anybody want

[2:05:09] something on an agenda that you haven't brought forward before? Yeah, Ahmet?

[2:05:14] I'm not sure if we captured it last time, but

[2:05:18] climate initiative, and he would like to present the state of the affair against

[2:05:23] the decarbonization plan.

[2:05:25] Okay.

[2:05:27] So at one point, we would like to schedule them.

[2:05:30] It's also timely because we are doing a bunch of projects, so make sure that we

[2:05:35] keep that in mind.

[2:05:36] Great. Thank you.

[2:05:39] All right, if anything else comes up... Oh, yeah, Eve?

[2:05:41] I don't have an agenda item. I have a question.

[2:05:44] Sure.

[2:05:45] Have we assigned who's presenting which article at special town meeting on the

[2:05:50] 20th? Do we already know that?

[2:05:52] Did I just get that email, or did you just send it to everybody, Dawn?

[2:05:56] I just sent it to you to take that off your plate.

[2:05:58] Okay. Yeah, we assigned everything.

[2:06:00] Okay, fine. As long as we assigned it.

[2:06:03] Ana assigned it mostly along liaison. She's been flat out today.

[2:06:07] I thought it looked good, but Dawn can send that out to you.

[2:06:11] No need for explanation. I just want to know if I'm supposed to be doing anything.

[2:06:14] Yep, you do have something to do but-

[2:06:17] I nominate Eve for all the articles.

[2:06:20] If I remember correctly, I went off of your liaison assignments and stuff that

[2:06:25] you've been working on. So if I remember correctly, you each have two motions, and

[2:06:28] Ahmet, I think you just have one. But I will send out an email.

[2:06:35] All right, so we will be posted for a special town meeting.

[2:06:41] If we need to add something in front of it, we'll post for 5:30 or so, but we're

[2:06:45] scheduled to start at 6:00. And Cronin on October 20th, which is our next meeting,

[2:06:51] if anything else comes up for an agenda item for the meeting following that, which

[2:06:56] is

[2:06:58] November 10th.

[2:07:01] We are meeting on the 10th and the 17th, correct?

[2:07:04] Yes. And the 17th. Yep. Because of the election day, we had to move it.

[2:07:08] I understand.

[2:07:09] All right.

[2:07:11] If there's no other business or objections, then I would consider us adjourned.

[2:07:16] Thank you, everyone.

Select Board 10-06-26

Transcript