[0:00] have the town seals uh painted on them
and that's actually a manual job. I I
[0:06] envisioned like some kind of automated
but it's actually they were actually I
[0:10] was up there today and there were um the
two crafts people actually manually
[0:16] painting the seals based on a uh you
know they must have done like a they
[0:21] tracing is very accurate you know it's
not like a freehand it's uh it's it's
[0:25] very impressive. So, I talked to them
for a few minutes. They're going to be
[0:29] uh done tomorrow. It looks great. And uh
so, they're going to be done with that
[0:33] tomorrow. That's going to be a nice just
additional design feature. So, uh I've
[0:38] got a call set up with the park and rec
chair that we need on Monday morning and
[0:43] uh we don't want to announce a ribbon
cutting until the posts are actually in
[0:48] because we just never know. But, uh we
do expect to be announcing a date for a
[0:53] ribbon cutting sometime. We ideally make
an announcement Monday for a date later
[0:58] next week. Uh we don't need to give a
lot of notice. We're not looking for 50
[1:02] or 100 people there. We just we do want
to do something with Slackboard members
[1:07] and uh department recognition members
and others who have been involved with
[1:11] the with the process. So that's
exciting. Quick question.
[1:13] » Yeah.
>> Can you go to the pictures that you
[1:15] attached?
>> Sure. Um
[1:19] so the second grouping of four
Yeah. Right there. Top right photo. Is
[1:27] that area between the the crush stone
and the woods in the top right photo
[1:32] being is that seated?
>> Yes. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. The lone seat
[1:36] hasn't hasn't taken that, but it's it
is.
[1:40] » That's one of the paths coming in from
>> Yep. And at the time these photos were
[1:45] taken, the the exterior signs hadn't
been placed on the signs but or on the
[1:50] uh fence, but they they had they this
these were photos were from July 6.
[1:56] » Uh I think about a week after that. So
we had separately provided to the
[2:01] planning board photos of the the signs
as installed which which looked terrific
[2:05] and
>> um Caitlyn in DPW was helpful working
[2:10] with me to get the signs designed and
fabricated. So they think the signage
[2:14] looks great. There's a QR code on there
for uh reservation of the courts.
[2:19] Reservation is not required. It's
optional, but if someone does reserve
[2:23] the courts, they can bump someone who
just has not reserved the court. So
[2:27] that's a nice feature. Uh reserve 30
minute increments for up to three 30
[2:33] minute clocks in a row. So someone could
reserve for 90 minutes.
[2:37] » Thanks.
>> The color um selection is great. I think
[2:41] it's really
>> really nice, isn't it? And especially
[2:44] with the town seal, it's it's I know I I
had sent around to the board members
[2:49] earlier today some snapshots with the
town of Seal. It's kind of one here and
[2:54] one there and it really like
>> kind of pops.
[2:57] » Yeah. Ties it all together. So,
[3:04] » Middle Street Bridge, I know it sent
around an update. Uh we had been in
[3:07] touch with SNR on Monday. is, you know,
Monday was the day the
[3:13] uh guard rail was supposed to get
installed. Uh that was pushed back a
[3:17] week. I'm not sure if that was weather
or if that was their subcontractor or
[3:20] what, but we did get um confirmation
this past Monday the 20th that it is now
[3:26] going to happen starting this coming
Monday the 27th. Uh so once the the
[3:30] guardrails are going to be they'll do
the finished paving and the contractor
[3:33] said the uh bridge would be complete by
the end of August. I certainly hope it
[3:38] would be earlier than that but we're not
going to say anything more than what the
[3:42] contractors told us which is the end of
August. I think everybody knows that the
[3:46] trackual completion date is not till
November. So they're still well within
[3:51] the the agreed timeline for completion.
uh what do you think about just sending
[3:55] out an email blast with something
similar to that or do you think best and
[4:00] perfect way to get the word out or
>> Yeah. Yeah. I've done a a number of um
[4:04] you know Facebook posts. I did a couple
of them earlier today because I saw some
[4:07] of the posts that have been on there. U
I posted something I think on Monday,
[4:11] but I posted it as a reply to someone
else, not a standalone post. So I did a
[4:16] standalone post today, but we can do a
news announcement as well because I
[4:20] aware there's a lot of interest in that.
But as you know, I've been just a little
[4:24] leerary of putting anything out because
just like with any major project, you're
[4:28] given a date and then the slides and
then you look bad and it's like all
[4:33] we're doing is talking with the
contractor told us. So, and and they're
[4:36] subject to subs and and all the rest.
So,
[4:40] » I mean, even just an update that the
beans were delayed or whatever.
[4:44] » Yeah.
>> Like they're being installed and then
[4:46] they start X. You don't even have to
say.
[4:48] » Yeah. So pronounce the name of the gargo
that
[4:54] » three three
>> but it's t h r i e
[4:57] » r i e
>> is that like a trade name or a
[5:00] functional name?
>> I'm not so I saw and I thought it was
[5:03] maybe a Well, what was funny in his
email to me, he actually did misspell
[5:08] it. It said t h i r e. Right.
>> So, I Googled that and and then it came
[5:14] up with three phr, which was a correct
word, but I'd never heard it.
[5:20] » So, yeah, if you Google that, you'll see
it's it's uh basically a a three tiered
[5:25] guard rail instead of a two kind of um
>> Yeah. So, uh
[5:32] » learn something new every day.
>> But so, it probably is three, but no one
[5:37] once it got misspelled, they just stuck
it.
[5:39] » Yeah.
I was thinking that
[5:41] » maybe this some proprietary design where
someone you know coins the phrase and
[5:47] has some copyright
>> usually probably something like do you
[5:50] want two or three
[5:59] » amazing
page five state crossing uh the
[6:03] remaining work there is uh to u uh
reconstruct the trench what was what's
[6:08] in there right now is a temporary
trench. So that's got to be a permanent
[6:12] trench. So uh any work on a state road,
the contractor needs to get permission
[6:17] from the state a week ahead of time uh
to to do the work. So they
[6:22] had sent their request to MASDOT last
week to do work today and uh Mat had
[6:30] approved that and we have police details
set up and then we heard from
[6:36] Commonwealth yesterday forwarding
correspondence again from their
[6:39] subcontractor that they couldn't do
today, they could do tomorrow. So then
[6:44] they had to go back to Mascot to see if
tomorrow was approved. So, um, as of
[6:49] late this afternoon, I didn't have
official confirmation, but we do have
[6:53] police details teed up for tomorrow. So,
tomorrow from 9 to 3, they we hope they
[7:00] will be there. If they are not there
tomorrow, because of the status of the
[7:04] contract and the notice that we
previously sent in writing u under the
[7:08] terms of the contract, if it's not done
tomorrow, right, at that point, we're
[7:13] going to be going in a direction of
avoiding the contract, right? So, Uh I
[7:18] hope it won't come to that. I hope
they'll be on site tomorrow and get that
[7:21] done once that trench is constructed. Uh
the only remaining work is the uh at
[7:27] that point they'd be uh painting the
guard rail and removing the paint for
[7:30] the former uh not crosswire and removing
the paint from the existing pre-existing
[7:36] crosswalk.
>> So
[7:40] » So if they cancel tomorrow, they still
have to pay the details, right?
[7:43] » Yes. Well, if if it's canceled shorter
than I I forget what the union contract
[7:48] says in terms of there's a period they
can cancel. U but if it's within that
[7:53] period, yes, they're financially
responsible for the test.
[7:58] » Forget that button done.
>> Oh my goodness. Yes.
[8:02] There's uh uh acco this is nothing new.
You had uh you had approved the form of
[8:08] agreement back in June. Uh the city
council formally approved that earlier
[8:12] this month. and um uh we fully executed
the animal control uh for FY27. As you
[8:19] saw in the correspondence, we did
express an interest in doing a
[8:22] multi-year that didn't happen on that
time frame. So that's something that um
[8:27] you know might be good to uh take up,
you know, late summer, early fall if
[8:32] there is interest, just because
otherwise you're going to be right back
[8:36] there next January, February. Uh so so
it's something I can brief Sean on as
[8:42] part of the transition.
>> So they didn't respond to your request.
[8:46] They just acknowledged that the one
year.
[8:48] » Yeah.
>> So do you know if they're even
[8:50] interested in that or
>> uh I I don't personally know because
[8:55] they have a new there's been a lot of
staffing changes over there. I can tell
[8:58] you of the people we've worked with over
the years, I think they would be very
[9:02] interested because I think they look at
it the same way we do that it's just
[9:06] this kind of paperwork that we spend
hours and to do that every two or three
[9:11] years would be just better from a time
management standpoint
[9:14] » than uh than every year but I haven't
had a specific acknowledgement from
[9:19] their current staff when you are they
were
[9:22] » okay
>> out of field work uh Monday through
[9:26] Wednesday next week And um again he's
been burning midnight oil getting
[9:31] everything ready and uh obviously with
the transition with the treasure
[9:35] collector that came to a tough time but
uh but I think we're going to be like
[9:38] really good shape and I also know that
the auditors will take into account the
[9:43] fact that you know there's been turnover
there and um
[9:46] » Patty's been through audits before.
>> Oh yeah.
[9:49] » Well in fact for the last three years
she's been working for an audit firm.
[9:51] So, she's she's she's a seasoned pro and
uh um but she can't you know she
[9:59] obviously doesn't have direct knowledge
of like you know but she's got I I can
[10:03] tell you from spending some time in the
treasure collector's office the last few
[10:08] days just getting things ready for Patty
all the files in her order all bank
[10:13] statements are are just exactly how you
would expect very organized very tidy
[10:18] and so I think um Patty's going to be in
a good position to pick that up and um
[10:23] you know um in terms of uh certifying
year end values and things like that
[10:28] » is there a specific date by which dealer
completes their report?
[10:33] » No, it's um it's there's not the the U
bond rating agencies
[10:42] look for us to send it to them no later
than like March.
[10:46] » And sometimes the audit it's it's it can
be very late. Uh we've been really
[10:52] fortunate especially in the last few
years since Jenny's been the town
[10:56] accountant. She always gets on the
auditor's schedule to to complete the
[11:00] fieldwork in like in like early to
midepptember. That's really on the early
[11:04] side. A lot of cities and towns haven't
even closed their books yet. So Jany's,
[11:09] you know, she's just like really on the
ball because she knows getting that done
[11:14] then you get the report complete. Yeah.
>> I know why that that March date because
[11:19] I'm always getting letters from my
municipal clients about, you know, do I
[11:24] have any comments on this? Let the
auditor letters come out in February.
[11:28] » Yeah. Now I know why.
>> All right.
[11:31] » Yeah. Yeah. So legally, but but it's
it's much getting it done sooner. So
[11:36] what we've tried to do and has been
successful is get complete the fieldwork
[11:41] in September. That's also by that point
Jenny's done her schedule A which is
[11:46] basically the close out with department
of revenue. Department of revenue has
[11:50] signed off on all those numbers. Getting
all of that done by early to
[11:54] midepptember is a huge lift. Uh there's
not a lot of accounts who do that and
[11:58] auditors love that because their clients
are always, you know, it just gets later
[12:03] in the season. That's when they get
really backed up. So being able to get
[12:06] on their calendar early is a plus. So
historically we've um the tax rate
[12:13] hearing is generally right around
Thanksgiving. It's usually the meeting
[12:16] prior to Thanksgiving. Typically mid
November is when the tax rate for the
[12:19] current fiscal year is set and it's
typically been shortly after that often
[12:25] the first or second meeting of December
where the auditor has come in and
[12:28] present their final um closeup. We often
have the financials closed out ahead of
[12:35] that from the auditor. uh they will send
us their certified financials. Uh what
[12:40] sometimes lacks a little bit is the
management letter because that's more
[12:44] you know some more subjective things.
No. So but you know it's it's
[12:49] » not numeric,
>> right?
[12:51] » Yeah. So uh so I think getting the final
audit presented in December is probably
[12:58] realistic.
>> Uh I think this past year it went to
[13:01] January but that wasn't because of us.
that was because Essex Regional hadn't
[13:05] closed their books and we can't close
our books until Essex Regional closes
[13:09] their books. So there's also times that
we're subject to things outside our
[13:13] control.
But uh over the years the 11 years I've
[13:18] been doing it, I've seen times where
audit isn't closed out in February or
[13:22] March. And that's legally fine. Uh but
it's kind of, you know, you just want to
[13:27] close out the year because you're at
that point you're halfway through the
[13:31] current year. So, it's just uh yeah,
it's not a legal thing as much as just
[13:37] getting it off your desk.
[13:42] » Let's see the uh green communities
annual report. I had asked u this was
[13:47] something we put on the work plan to
just kind of um kind of document how
[13:51] this has worked and uh we thought this
would be helpful because this is
[13:56] something that happens every year. It's
something that is filed in uh late fall
[14:01] with the Commonwealth uh because we're a
green community. It's one of the
[14:05] requirements, but it's something that
really is a yearround effort because the
[14:08] the energy usage is posted on a monthly
basis. Uh all the um as you can see from
[14:16] me, all of that data, every uh gallon of
fuel, every unit of energy, that's all
[14:22] done on a year- round basis. And then
that's all pulled together in annual
[14:25] report. I think that's been a really
nice uh kind of partnership over the
[14:30] years between public works and uh the
energy sustainability committee. Uh one
[14:36] of the first, you know, I remember
meeting with Rick Parker in August of
[14:39] 2018 be long before he was on a select
board when he was on the energy
[14:43] committee. I remember he came to me and
he said essentially the volunteers have
[14:46] been always doing that report. He's like
we're happy to do it but this is really
[14:52] something the town needs to take on. And
so over the over the subsequent u you
[14:57] know year or couple of years especially
as we as the public works was uh
[15:02] reorganized and the creation of the
business manager position has allowed us
[15:06] to really largely take that in house. It
is helpful to have u the committee uh we
[15:12] review the data and sometimes they've
identified discrepancies or commodities
[15:17] that have helped us figure out why is
that how it is. Uh, so I think it's a
[15:22] nice uh division of of labor and so I
had asked Caitlyn to kind of document
[15:27] that really as a benefit for the new
interim because uh well, you know, the
[15:32] due date of um kind of um late, you
know, like I think it's normally around
[15:38] November 1st that it's due. Uh that
seems like it's a ways away, but it
[15:42] comes right out. And uh so I think this
will be a benefit to to the Sean to make
[15:46] sure that he understands how it's been
done and
[15:51] I see Chip is on. I just want to see if
he has any work on Chip. Did you uh have
[15:55] a chance to look at this and you have
any input?
[15:58] » I have not seen this before, but it
looks fine.
[16:01] » Okay.
All right. Thanks.
[16:05] » Yeah, it's a lot of data here.
>> Yeah,
[16:08] » you know,
>> it is these are the things that and I
[16:10] think and I'm all for the green
community. I think the town's gains I
[16:13] mean there's no question the town's
gained immeasurably from that. But it is
[16:17] the type of thing with then when the
town opted in many many years ago, it
[16:22] creates
an enormous amount of staff work. And
[16:28] when I started in 2018, there was nobody
on staff who had any assigned
[16:34] responsibility for this. And so it was
this thing. And thankfully, the town had
[16:38] a committee and dedicated volunteers who
put in a ton of time and helped to
[16:43] ensure the town maintained compliance.
But that's where, you know, Rick come to
[16:47] me early in my tenure to say, "Hey,
look, we're happy to do this. We're
[16:50] going to do it this this cycle, but this
is really something from a management
[16:54] standpoint the town needs to take
ownership of. It is a responsibility."
[16:58] And I can I said I couldn't I can't
agree more. uh took some time before we
[17:03] had the bandwidth to be able to do it
and the proper staffing structure, but I
[17:07] think uh it's been a really nice
transition where now the committee is
[17:11] still involved and but isn't expected to
shoulder kind of the share of the burden
[17:18] on the bullet for manually entering the
that long list of fuel usage and
[17:25] deliveries. Is that data that Caitlyn
has to go pursue or are there records
[17:30] that come to her?
>> It's all coming off the invoices.
[17:33] » She has these invoices are all going
through that department and uh and
[17:38] actually there's
>> all of these go through that department.
[17:41] » Um
>> including the page school.
[17:44] » Uh no, there are some that we have to
track down from just a couple of
[17:47] sources.
>> Yeah. Okay.
[17:48] » Yeah. And uh and but also there's a and
Rick and and maybe Chip, but certainly
[17:53] Rick knows a lot more about this
specific thing that I'm about to say
[17:57] than I do, but I know that the green
communities is really in, you know,
[18:02] close sync with National Grid. So I
believe there's a way for like the
[18:07] National Grid data to be like you can
kind of port it over through the system.
[18:12] I'm not sure because I haven't direct
>> it's automated. The bullet says all
[18:17] automatic utility data. That is that
what you're talking about?
[18:21] » Yeah. Yeah. And it sounds like Chip has
has worked with it, I assume.
[18:25] » Thanks.
>> Okay.
[18:27] » But I can remember my first, you know,
there have been times where it's like a
[18:31] big scramble to pull all the data. Now,
at this point, it's caught because it's
[18:36] done every month. So, there's not this
big crunch at the end of the year.
[18:40] » Yeah. But it requires that person whose
job it is to do this methodically every
[18:46] month. And these are the things that
aren't always visible to taxpayers. But
[18:50] but we're operating a much much higher
level than were several years ago.
[18:54] » You mind what what do we get out of
being a green community through this? In
[18:58] doing this, what's the benefit to the
temp?
[19:01] » There's a lot of grant eligibility. Uh
but Chip, I think it goes beyond that.
[19:05] Do you want to speak to that?
>> Uh grant eligibility is the main thing.
[19:09] You know, we've gotten uh some grants
for improving controls on the heating
[19:14] systems and town buildings, things like
that.
[19:17] » Great.
[19:20] » And how long have we been a green
community?
[19:24] » 2013, I believe.
>> 2013.
[19:26] » Okay. Excellent.
>> All right. Thank you for
[19:31] » Yeah, we just wrapped up.
>> Yeah, I think that was a good exercise.
[19:34] Um, and it's it's uh it's always nice to
kind of document how it's how it's gone.
[19:39] I'll just set down a marker. Then uh on
the town manager transition items. I
[19:45] know I just uh handed this out a short
time ahead of the meeting and I
[19:48] certainly am not going to be going
through each of these methodically, but
[19:51] I did uh include updates on everything
where there's new information. Uh so if
[19:57] there's anything you would like me to
speak to, I'm happy to to do that. I
[20:02] think in terms of the top category of uh
everything the board had prioritized I
[20:07] think everything's either you know
complete or on track for completion uh
[20:11] some of the lower priority initiatives
um there has been some work on those
[20:16] just kind of in the normal course of
things for instance on the table license
[20:20] agreements uh it had been my specific uh
direction the town council was that
[20:26] we're kind of tableabling this we're
going to pick you know have the new
[20:29] insurance pick it up but uh and I'd
written that up and sent that along and
[20:33] then she reached out to me on Monday and
basically because they had started the
[20:37] conversations with Verizon and they were
and I guess so Verizon feels some
[20:43] urgency they're actually pushing which
is has never happened normally you have
[20:46] to like clamor to get their attention
but actually because council has started
[20:50] the conversation with them they're
they're kind of like where are we on
[20:54] this so so council was kind of you know
pushing for hey can we have a
[20:58] conversation so I said yeah great of
course So Rebecca and I had a Zoom
[21:02] meeting with U. Nicole Castanzo at PP on
Wednesday. Turned out to be a very
[21:08] substantive meeting. We cover a lot of
ground and um there's actually a there
[21:15] are actually proposals going back and
forth between KP and Comcast or not
[21:20] contest rise not on the material issues
of like the uh PEG funds but some of the
[21:27] you know any agreement that's 10 years
old there's been changes in kind of the
[21:30] best practice for language. So AP's been
doing some of that on our behalf these
[21:35] past several months. And so I sent them
I sent Nicole all the background info I
[21:43] have including the financial analysis
that that we sent you know several
[21:47] months ago of PEG revenues and expenses.
Uh but also some of the more
[21:52] organizational things just to give her
the fuller picture of you know how TAG
[21:57] funds are managed have been managed and
uh so forth. So that gives her what she
[22:03] needs. So she's um in the relatively
near term, in fact, I expect to hear
[22:09] something about the end of tomorrow with
more specific something that you can
[22:14] consider. So I think that's going to put
the board and Sean in a great spot
[22:18] because you'll now have something
tangible. There is a requirement as you
[22:22] know for public hearing as a master
payment process. uh we talked about uh
[22:27] the potential that that be consolidated
between Verizon and Comcast because that
[22:31] license is going up where we go at the
end of the calendar year and uh that
[22:36] sounds very viable that certainly
efficiency in terms of the staff time it
[22:40] will take. So that's an example of
something that we kind of tried to keep
[22:44] at bay but but we couldn't but it's
actually moved forward to positive way.
[22:47] So and it only took less than an hour.
>> Who who holds the public hearing on
[22:52] those?
>> Uh the Slack
[22:53] » we do. Yeah. Yeah, it's basically
inviting public input on what do people
[22:59] need, want, expect, and uh and what kind
of money you need. But but Nicole said
[23:06] there's, you know, she's got a lot of
experience with it. She said she's been
[23:09] to a lot of these hearings where people
were like, "Well, we want essence." No,
[23:13] no, no. There's there's she said it's
very constrained within federal law.
[23:19] » More old movies, you know, like what you
can ask for. you can ask for things, but
[23:23] she said there's like a narrow scope of
what's actually in play in these
[23:28] negotiations. So, some of that hearing
is kind of managing expectations of what
[23:33] is reasonable, realistic that a town can
actually negotiate. What is things that
[23:39] are kind of wishlist items that are
really not even material? Like, you
[23:43] know, people hear public hearing about
service and maybe they say, "Oh, I want
[23:47] I want Neton building or whatever." So,
I want a live person to answer willing
[23:54] to call guns. Thanks. Good
>> luck with that.
[23:57] » Angus, there's several of these that
that can be moved to lower priority. Um
[24:02] like the the bill parking barriers, they
agreed to put that on hold because we
[24:07] decided to go ahead with the um dock.
>> Okay.
[24:10] » So that's not expected to be um
>> which
[24:13] » on next to last on first. We're not
sure.
[24:17] » Yeah. Yeah. Kind of never
>> Yeah. I mean, we the I told them that
[24:22] the only thing going forward would be
the dog.
[24:25] » Okay, good. All right.
>> So, I think we're charging next year for
[24:29] that.
>> Okay, good.
[24:30] » Same thing with the evaluating signage
at Milon. That's
[24:36] » great.
>> Um and the trail markers
[24:40] and the egg committee that doesn't need
to be under
[24:43] » Y.
>> So, those can all just be pushed to a
[24:45] lower priority. We can use schedule on
must.
[24:48] » Great. Perfect. Yeah. Good.
>> Oh, look at that. Four.
[24:56] » Um,
>> so the baseline items. That's um
[25:01] » that starts on page four.
>> Yeah.
[25:04] » So, u we closed up some grants. There's
a couple of others that we're actively
[25:09] working on. Actually, one really one in
particular at town center here, Mark.
[25:13] There's a kind of a closeout report.
It's just a one page uh form that we
[25:17] could fill out.
>> So when the tax set of foreclosure mean
[25:22] we you did that briefing um not in
person but
[25:27] » I think did we talk about having maybe
having some kind of daytime meeting with
[25:31] a board member kind of talking directly
to council but that doesn't happen have
[25:35] have to happen before I leave. In fact,
especially with the change for treasure
[25:39] collector, I think that would be just as
well just to happen sometime in August
[25:43] and that gives Patty that background as
well. I don't think there's any reason
[25:46] to try to shoot one of that in between
the next week.
[25:53] » Anything else on that that you want to
highlight or
[25:59] you have not?
[26:03] » Uh, no. I think I think what I've put
here in writing kind of speaks for
[26:07] itself. Again, you're just getting it
now. So, uh, but we can, you know,
[26:12] follow up offline if if either of you or
Chris has well, of course, he's I'll
[26:17] I'll be gone by the time he's back. So,
but if either of you have questions or
[26:21] want more backgrounds, but I think
everything's uh, you know, pretty well
[26:25] on track all things considered.
We have some number of curve balls per
[26:36] » questions bearing off the first.
[26:43] » All right. Anything else?
>> Uh, no. I think uh Oh.
[26:48] Oh, yeah. One final update. Uh
the uh Butch and I have a Zoom meeting
[26:55] scheduled for Monday with Matthew P
regarding the Heartsto Bridge just to
[27:00] get a status update of where they are on
the u intent to basically armor the
[27:06] approaches on both sides. Uh we know
they had a survey crew out there earlier
[27:10] this spring and u you know we had hoped
to have some conceptual plans in
[27:17] circulation by now. Obviously that
hadn't happened. Uh, so I wanted to just
[27:20] before I leave kind of find out where
things stand. So I'll send out an email
[27:25] or some kind of update coming out of
that just to let you know where things
[27:28] stand with that.
>> What does that mean?
[27:31] » So the town had looked at different ways
to, you know, rather than signage, which
[27:36] is of, you know, debatable effectiveness
to actually have a uh durable striker
[27:43] bar.
>> So for the heightage
[27:46] » Yeah. So that if an overhead truck was
approaching the bridge, it would
[27:49] actually be damaged. It would actually
stop the truck.
[27:52] » Not the one that's
>> correct. Correct. And this is a big
[27:56] deal. This is something they have for
store drive,
[27:58] » right?
>> They they don't have this anywhere else
[28:00] in the Commonwealth. So this was a big
deal for Mascot to actually embrace
[28:05] this, but they have. is something we've
been talking about for years. But last
[28:09] summer, uh, Edge was very interesting
because this board was having a lot of
[28:14] discussions and had looked at things
like advanced protection with
[28:18] electronic, you know, signals, had
looked at all different options. And
[28:22] this board had arrived at the feeling
that they felt it should be armored. And
[28:28] we had a a call subsequent to that Zoom
meeting Butch and I did with Master T.
[28:34] Turns out they had come to that same
conclusion internally. And so it was
[28:38] this great meeting because it was like
they want this and we want this and
[28:42] everyone wants this. So uh then it
became okay how do we do that? And they
[28:48] needed to um uh so but they they last
last summer and early fall had
[28:54] authorized work from their design
engineer to basically look at how would
[28:59] this work? Where would the footings go?
What would they look like? Um, and this
[29:05] would need to go through Roxville's
historic district commission. There's a
[29:08] lot of permitting that will be this will
be even if it's full speed ahead, I
[29:12] think you're still talking a couple
years away, but you know, you got to
[29:15] start somewhere. So, uh, the policy
direction is to have these striker bars
[29:20] on both sides of the bridge because the
risk of damage to the the bridge is so
[29:27] costly and really catastrophic in terms
of the impact. So, so when a overhead
[29:33] vehicle hits the swinging bar, it can
goes past that, it can then damage
[29:38] something further on.
>> Exactly.
[29:39] » So, the striker bar stops them before
they get to the bridge.
[29:44] » Correct.
>> Got it.
[29:45] » Yeah. So, one of the issues is is on the
West Newbury side, the land, as as
[29:50] you're probably aware, state owned. uh
possibly article 97, but if it's below a
[29:57] certain threshold, you might not need to
go through the article 97 process. But
[30:02] those were some of the things they were
looking at. They had surveyed to see
[30:06] where would the foundations go, how much
land would impact
[30:11] » article 97.
>> Yeah.
[30:14] » Was it recreation
>> on the south side of of Rox Bridge on
[30:19] side?
>> Great.
[30:22] the boat ramp.
>> Yeah. And and
[30:25] » is subject to article language.
>> So some part of this striker bar
[30:29] structure would be on that
>> could be these were the things they had
[30:33] to look at.
>> It's not just within the bridge
[30:35] footprint. It actually would be with
well I think within the right of way I'm
[30:40] not
>> sure but they they talked about article
[30:43] 97. So,
>> oh,
[30:46] » so when we talked to them last summer
and early fall, they thought they might
[30:49] have some kind of conceptual plan even
as soon as like right around the first
[30:55] of the year, right? And and that came
when we've been in continuing
[31:00] correspondence and and so it was
actually a close call of a overhead
[31:05] truck and I saw a Facebook post in I
think it was in June and I did a
[31:11] screenshot. I sent it along for the
bridge. Hey, where are we on this? And
[31:15] so, um, so someone had a photo of the
>> of a of a truck close call. Yeah. So,
[31:23] every time I see that is a reminder
that, hey, where are we?
[31:26] » Um, and I will say the district
engineer, district board, he's they're
[31:30] they're always pretty responsive, but
their backlogs just like so many others.
[31:36] So, but I do believe they're doing the
best they can,
[31:39] » but nothing moves as quickly as as we
would like.
[31:43] » So, at what point would you bring up
Chris's idea about the metal
[31:48] » Oh, I brought that up. Oh, you did?
>> Yeah. Yeah, we we had a Zoom meeting
[31:51] with them probably three or four months
ago. And I I brought that up
[31:55] specifically. I sent along the the link
to the designer and u
[32:00] » uh you know, I think they were
intrigued. Um, I think they were
[32:04] thinking of something possibly more
ornamental to the side because they said
[32:07] once you actually put that on the actual
impact beam that can have issues of
[32:14] structural engineering or so so but they
they were intrigued by the idea
[32:22] » and I I spoke with Mayor Barrett about
it a number of times and she's
[32:25] personally supportive. Obviously, the
Roxto uh historic district commission is
[32:31] a regulatory body and can't speak for
them and I don't I doubt this has
[32:35] probably gotten much attention
behavioral because there's nothing yet
[32:38] specific to respond to but conceptually
she's she's very supportive. She did
[32:43] have a expectation that if something
like this happened that mascot would
[32:47] improve the uh fencing on the behavioral
approach because right now it's just
[32:51] chain of fencing and she says something
more more u you know or metal or like
[32:56] rod iron fencing to adapt some she would
look for that to be part of the deal and
[33:01] I think that's very reasonable
>> investment communicated for
[33:07] » okay good
all right moving on to action items item
[33:12] A is a request for additional part-time
staffing lower grounds and emboss.
[33:16] » Yeah. So, um uh I think you probably
know that our custodian John Savage has
[33:22] been out in and out with health issues.
>> So, I've had to move our current
[33:26] part-time James Deolian from outdoor
maintenance to doing all the custodial
[33:31] work for John when John's out on a
permanent basis full day. So, we've left
[33:37] with a lot of weed whacking and outdoor
maintenance and uh with me on some of
[33:42] the bigger projects. I'm just not able
to get there. And quite frankly, it's
[33:46] getting looking kind of neglectful out
there. Okay.
[33:49] » Uh I I can spend a few days a month
trying to catch things up. Uh but
[33:53] there's so many things to do that uh I
think it's time to get another part-time
[33:59] guy. Um, and I think uh what we were
thinking were 15 hours per week at a
[34:04] rate of uh 2357.
It's kind of in the mid-range. And um
[34:11] » so this is a new position. This
>> the position of the guy that you pulled
[34:16] off to to cover.
>> Well, I I still got to keep him in his
[34:20] position. So this would be a new
position.
[34:23] » An addition.
>> Okay. And is this the same as what he's
[34:27] making? Uh, no. It'd be less certain
than what Jim's made. Okay. Um, and so I
[34:33] know for park and wreck they have two
part-time laborers. Is there an
[34:36] opportunity for either one of them to
>> uh Yeah. You know, quite Yeah. They're
[34:40] just not good at doing any wacking or
doing
[34:44] » I got to have a guy that's kind of
interested in doing some landscaping.
[34:47] » Yeah.
>> And uh to keep up with those things. So
[34:50] I've I've tried some of the pock guys
and they just it's not it's not what
[34:54] we're looking for.
>> Okay.
[34:57] So 15 weeks is
almost four months. So it's
[35:03] » yeah kind of includes like uh yeah like
leave clean up
[35:07] » and then if there's some additional
hours left over I mean we can always use
[35:10] some shovel and snow you like in a big
storm and I didn't want to leave myself
[35:14] too short in case we get something
really big where there's a lot of
[35:17] shoveling to do with the roofs and
things of that nature. or not that we
[35:21] might be some leftover I'm thinking but
I didn't I didn't want to have to try
[35:25] and go get some more money.
>> So this is seasonal then it's not
[35:29] » Yeah seasonal. Absolutely.
>> So it would be 15 weeks and so this is a
[35:34] permanent position or is this just a
>> you know I I think it's needed at this
[35:38] point you know depending on where we get
with my projects. I mean, I can
[35:41] certainly I don't think I'm going to run
out of bigger projects to handle and,
[35:45] you know, with with the uh with all the
protocol that comes with that and the
[35:49] running around, I just don't I want to
get out there and get to that, but I
[35:52] just never seem to and it it wears me
when I drive by these places and they're
[35:56] not weed whacked. You know, they they
mow pretty well. The the uh uh DPW ms
[36:01] them, but um you know, a lot of times
the weed whacking is left and I just I
[36:07] can't look at it.
>> Yeah.
[36:09] So Angus, what um to if we're creating a
position, what what are the implications
[36:14] of that or what's the process that we
just decided or
[36:16] » Well, I think there'd be a couple of
questions I would have. One is or or
[36:20] process-wise you um you know, the
mechanism for that would be the salary
[36:24] week schedule, but uh you know, I wanted
to look at where the money comes from.
[36:28] So if the board's favorable, u you know,
we could run kind of a a projection of
[36:34] what that would cost. Uh would this be
is the land how much of the land is kind
[36:40] of park and wreck as opposed to town
land? And uh because I would think about
[36:44] would would some of the money come from
possibly the park and recol fund as
[36:48] opposed to the operating budget, right?
>> Uh maybe some comes from the operating
[36:52] budget, maybe some comes from park and
wck, but that would I think be driven by
[36:56] where the where the need is. Um and then
and then the actual um I think the you
[37:02] know the vote would be um to change the
um salary w schedule to add that and
[37:09] then uh depending on how much of that's
in the operating budget we would need to
[37:13] look at in the current fiscal year. Can
that be absorbed within what we've
[37:18] carried in the budget? And if not, uh,
we're either to reserve fund transfer or
[37:24] budget in the fall meeting and then make
any, uh, change to the proposed budget
[37:30] for FY28.
>> Okay.
[37:32] » So, I think if it's something for
depending on, you know, because if it's
[37:36] 15 weeks in the course of 52 and we're
already into late July, I think we could
[37:41] be looking at what's the projection
between now and the end of this season,
[37:45] which wouldn't be the full 15 weeks. It
would be a lower number. Yeah,
[37:48] » maybe that's something that can be
absorbed within the operating budget or
[37:52] with
revolving fund,
[37:54] » right? And and this and this uh uh
person that I got in mind to fill this
[37:58] position, you know, if he could do it in
10 hours, he would do that. You know,
[38:02] he's not going to be uh looking for 15
hours a week.
[38:05] » So, we'll have a work schedule. It's
going to take him 15 hours a week for
[38:09] the first two weeks just to get caught
up. And then if things dry out, we don't
[38:13] have a ton of weeds and you know we're
getting caught up, he's more than happy
[38:16] just to give it 10 hours a week.
>> Okay. So if we were starting at the
[38:21] beginning of the season, what would you
see the season running? Like May 15th to
[38:27] » Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Some sometime in
there. As soon as the as soon as they
[38:30] start cutting the lawns,
>> you know, it's going to probably two
[38:33] weeks after that we'll start,
>> you know, so May end of April, beginning
[38:38] of May
>> run through. So 15 weeks would put us
[38:42] into September.
>> Yeah.
[38:44] » Like not long.
>> Yeah. Exactly. But I I think I think you
[38:48] know if if it's kept up if if a person's
there in the beginning and he's keeping
[38:51] up with it, it's probably going to be
more like 10 hours a week.
[38:55] » But so we'll be able to stretch it and
and pay attention to where we're at uh
[38:59] moneywise and within the budget. And
then you know uh I'd like to save some
[39:03] time for the lead pickup is a is a big
deal. You know, a lot of times we end up
[39:07] uh not getting to all of them just
because we're short on men in hours. So,
[39:12] um just have to figure out. I think I
think if I planned on 15 hours a week
[39:18] and most of the time he's going to do
we'll be able to stretch that out.
[39:22] » Okay. So, it' be more like November.
>> Yeah.
[39:25] So, what would you think about
um doing this for this year and then
[39:30] waiting and see what happens with the
rest of the staffing and then
[39:32] reevaluating budget and all of that?
Does that make sense?
[39:36] » Perfect.
>> Yeah. I think rather than making
[39:39] something permanent, do now as needed
and seeing how it goes and it seems like
[39:44] it's necessary with some coming back.
And and I think that also makes sense
[39:49] because uh I mentioned earlier in the
meeting we recently hired a vacancy with
[39:53] BPW which is great but we're still down
a full-time person DPW because of a
[39:58] workers comp issue and and have been
down for actually coming up on five or
[40:03] six flights. So Butch has been working
with a short staff. I don't think people
[40:08] know that or notice that because they do
such a great job, but they're really
[40:12] stretched labor wise and have been. So,
I think doing something for this season
[40:17] and once we're ideally full staffing
with highway, I don't know if uh once
[40:22] they're at their full strength if
there's if there's more that we might or
[40:25] if that's just not that they could do or
if that's just not really something that
[40:30] I would I would do.
>> So, then we would need to figure out
[40:35] where the money's coming from, right?
So that was my next question is how long
[40:40] will it take to figure that out before
Brian needs this first?
[40:44] » Oh, I could run those numbers and I mean
that would take a few minutes
[40:48] » and where it would come from and
>> well where it comes from I think so so
[40:51] you have a sense of between so I would
think of uh
[40:54] » well Angus I'm saying we give you the
okay and you just go deal with it.
[40:59] » Yeah,
>> you you're comfortable. You can find out
[41:02] where parks and wreck and facilities can
budget it. You'll find a way.
[41:08] » Wait, that's not No, I can find out. I
could estimate your costs very quickly.
[41:12] » Yeah. $5,400.
>> Yeah. Bucks an hour, 15 hours, 15 weeks,
[41:18] 5400 bucks. What do you you were saying
where it might
[41:21] » Yeah. So, how how would it allocate
between park and racks?
[41:25] » But is that something happen in the next
week?
[41:28] » Uh the calculation could the issue
>> have to advertise for it and everything.
[41:33] Well, but also like like if any of it
>> even though he has a gun.
[41:37] » Yeah. We can't just hire somebody
without posting the job.
[41:40] » If there was any uh for instance any
expectation the parking rack was going
[41:45] to be funding some of the other
revolving fund, they need to vote that.
[41:49] So they need to post a meeting, you
know, so it ends up being, you know,
[41:53] » he doesn't get a person until October.
>> Well, no. Well, I I think there's I
[41:57] think that that's more like if we're
trying to if if it's a permanent thing,
[42:01] you have a set of more expedient
>> and we're paying it out of the operating
[42:06] budget which is under BPW's oversight
and it's can be absorbed within the
[42:10] current budget.
>> That's that's going to be much quicker.
[42:14] » And that's that's what I was planning to
do this kind of absorb it within my
[42:19] budget.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[42:21] » Then I can hire. So yeah, I'm seeing it
as something quick, something temporary
[42:27] and then re-evaluate.
>> Yeah, with part with the demand really
[42:31] driven by a kind of a
>> current issue of being short staff. I
[42:36] think that makes a lot of sense.
>> That's good.
[42:38] » Last year we had a pocket rent uh
additional employee, Tyler Evans, and
[42:45] that worked out perfect. he was able to
keep up with everything, but it seemed
[42:49] how he was paid by the park and wreck.
He was kind of just doing ball fields
[42:53] and all their property. So, so it was
tough to
[42:56] » This is just
>> get him to come over and do hourly raise
[42:59] but no benefits or
>> correct. Yeah. Anything under 20 hours
[43:02] is a benefit position. Correct.
>> So, is it correct that it has to be
[43:05] posted?
>> It's not a legal requirement. We do we
[43:08] do generally I mean we do we do
generally post jobs every now and then
[43:13] if you know let's say there's an
existing employee that wanted more hours
[43:16] that's something different because that
would be like an internal hire there is
[43:20] no legal requirement to post um and I
think you know we use judgment but uh
[43:26] and I think
>> is this person interested in being a
[43:29] contractor
>> well actually he uh you know I I he's
[43:33] not quite a friend of mine but I talked
to him quite often in the food and
[43:37] whatnot. And uh he heard me saying that
there was a lot of uh you know um
[43:43] landscaping that needed to be done. He
came in and put his I didn't even ask
[43:46] him. He just put an application in to
have it on file here. And then uh as
[43:50] John became uh having his health issues
and me having to pull with Jimmy and
[43:54] things not looking that well. I'm like,
"Okay, this might fit right in. Just
[43:57] happened." So um he's interested.
>> Does he do that work otherwise?
[44:01] » He did. He's retired.
>> Oh, it's a retired. So he did a lot of
[44:05] construction work but now
>> you res.
[44:08] » Yes.
>> I mean if he was willing to work as a
[44:11] contractor that would certainly be
cleaner.
[44:13] » That is
>> Yeah. It's it's Yeah. He's not
[44:16] interested in doing that. There's a lot.
Yeah. It's not he won't work as a uh he
[44:20] was never self-employed.
>> So uh you know it that becomes a lot of
[44:25] tax issues for him. Okay.
>> Yeah. He's looking for a partner
[44:30] » season.
Okay. So the only thing I'm not clear on
[44:35] is the the total 15 weeks you're
planning on starting next week or the
[44:38] week after for 15 weeks going into
November, not what it would have been in
[44:43] April and then just the like half of it.
>> Right.
[44:46] » Okay.
>> Right. Exactly. And like I said, it's a
[44:49] trial thing and I think Baron summed it
up pretty good. It's a trial thing.
[44:52] We'll see how it works and see if it's
needed and then pursue something a
[44:56] little bit more permanent if if things
start to look great.
[44:59] » Is that part of the budget process?
>> Yeah. for next year.
[45:03] » Yeah,
>> that sounds good.
[45:07] » Look good.
>> Yeah.
[45:08] » So then who makes the call about posting
in just that?
[45:12] » Uh yeah, I mean I think uh ultimately I
I would
[45:16] » Okay.
>> in terms of post Well, I would make the
[45:20] calling. I think uh
>> yeah, I think it's No, no, I I'd be
[45:26] honest. I mean, if we have a person and
it's like such a short time I'm inclined
[45:32] since it's right now it's just temporary
if we don't need to post there.
[45:37] » Yeah. I'm not saying he's just saying
who's going to make the decision.
[45:40] » I think we should with the with the town
manager.
[45:44] » It's town manager's job, not our job.
>> No, no, no. But my then my input would
[45:48] be if you don't feel you need to do it,
I'm fine with that.
[45:53] » Yeah. And I think if if it's a if it's
an overall temporary position, which is
[45:57] what we're talking about, that makes it
a lot I think more defensible to just
[46:02] hire someone rather than, you know, if
it's a permanent position.
[46:06] » I mean, plus this is a particular
individual who's expressed an interest.
[46:11] If Brian's here saying, I want to go
find somebody.
[46:14] » Yeah.
>> And we didn't know who it was. Is that
[46:16] be a different
>> You've opened yourself up though if
[46:20] there's somebody else in the community
that said, "Oh, I would have liked to
[46:23] done that and I didn't get a chance to
apply. So that's that's the only cap.
[46:26] » That's
it. It is kind of difficult to find
[46:30] somebody that's interested in weed
whacking, you know, a lot, you know, and
[46:34] then there's a lot of like, you know,
high school kids this and that, they
[46:38] just don't work out. Even the guys that
say they want to come in, oh gez, I'd
[46:41] love to do that. They don't love to do
that.
[46:45] » And then you end up
Yeah. They don't like to do that. has
[46:50] are you going to do weed whack or not?
>> They just don't like to do it. And he
[46:54] stressed several times to me because you
know a lot of people say that and I'm
[46:58] like okay you know and then but he said
it several times that he would love to
[47:02] do that and he's you know I I got the
feeling that he's interested in doing
[47:05] it. So we'll see. That's why I'm saying
let's try it
[47:08] » and we'll see how it goes.
>> And you're confident you have enough
[47:11] money in your budget to
>> Yeah, we're talking 5,000.
[47:14] » Okay. 500 bucks. So I think uh I talked
to Caitlyn already. She said we should
[47:19] be able to switch subjects.
>> Awesome. Okay. So, do we need to vote
[47:22] then?
>> What is the motion?
[47:25] » Uh I I think it would be to add to the
uh FY27 salary wage schedule a uh you
[47:33] know part part-time temporary position.
Um you know 15 hours per week for no
[47:39] more than 15 weeks or 357.
That's a very clear parameter and that's
[47:46] » and with my motion I say and with the
decision about posting at the discretion
[47:52] » second that any further discussion all
in favor
[47:55] » I thank you Brian
>> thanks to all appreciate it
[48:00] » be looking to run soon
[48:07] to consider request from the video tech
rep for an advisory vote regarding two
[48:12] potential compromise formulas.
>> All right. And I I know there's a lot of
[48:16] written material. I did want to just
show you and I'll let me do a screen
[48:19] share for those who are watching home.
Uh there's kind of a neat little model
[48:24] that uh
uh uh Bernie Cohen and uh Rowley had put
[48:32] together and then I made I uh kind of
worked with it. He done different
[48:39] uh Excel worksheets for the different
scenarios in Neil's uh memo. What I put
[48:45] in was I kind of integrated it all
together. So
[48:48] » which page do you want there?
>> Well, so so in Neil's memo
[48:52] » the packet. Yeah, it it basically is
talking about this hybrid of Alpin
[48:57] capital cost through a combination of
the current formula which is based on
[49:02] » table in my packet.
>> Uh the substantively yes but but no the
[49:08] numbers are
>> correctly on the screen. No, not not
[49:10] yet. No. So, so the current allocation
of capital is based on total sto school
[49:16] age population
K. No, not K. 1 through 12. Rated 1
[49:21] through 12. So, the allocation is
proportional to how many
[49:27] kids live in your city or town.
>> And is that the as of October issue?
[49:32] » No, that's that's been
>> that's been less than. Okay. Good.
[49:35] Right. So, so and this is you know
broadly seen I believe as by many other
[49:40] communities as inequitable because that
has no relationship to how many students
[49:45] are actually sending. So this has been
where the kind of discussion has has
[49:50] landed. There are some communities
saying it should be entirely based on
[49:53] how they are rolled at Whittier and
there are others namely behavioral
[49:58] saying it should be how they like it how
it is because that current formula
[50:03] benefits behavioral because they have um
you know proportionally more students
[50:08] attending than they do this low
population. Neil in the spirit of
[50:12] compromise came up with well how about
if we did this blending of the two and
[50:17] in his memo he looked at 50/50 we're 50%
based on 1 through 12 50% based on
[50:24] enrollment or 3070 or 7030 or some
difference
[50:29] » right and he's he's and and I think some
of the discussions at the rack meetings
[50:34] have have been I think can be simplified
to the point of u Neil kind of saying is
[50:40] we don't want the perfect to be the
enemy of the good. So even if everyone
[50:44] even if most people could agree that a
per pupil
[50:49] might be the optimal way to do it per
enrolled per enrolled pupil uh because
[50:54] that's very clearly position rally and
the court and perhaps others
[51:00] I there's a recognition that you need an
11 nothing vote to amend this agreement.
[51:06] So if the city of payroll is simply not
going to open the agreement, you can be
[51:12] on the side of virtue all you want, but
you're then at a stale and you're then
[51:18] at a position.
>> Correct. Correct. And you're then at a
[51:22] position where you're with the current
agreement 1967 for the foreseeable
[51:27] future. So at that point the scenario
becomes the capital costs that are
[51:33] brought forward are under the current
formula. So that's where there's just
[51:37] been this real question of what can can
we find some middle ground. Everyone's
[51:41] going to have to move. April's going to
have to move because they're going to
[51:44] they would lose relative to the current
formula and others might might gain they
[51:50] might not gain as much as they would
like to in terms of financially but
[51:55] we're trying to find the middle ground.
So, so maybe it's premature to put put
[51:58] this up on the screen, but but what this
does just so so you know kind of as the
[52:03] discussion goes, we can so if I go share
based on grade
[52:07] » well before you go into the numbers.
>> Yes.
[52:10] » So, we've talked we talked about this
previously and
[52:15] » there was this question about April
wanting to be if they were willing to
[52:18] agree to some other allocation they
would want to be indemnified. Is that
[52:24] this as well? No, they want to be well
harmless. The term they were using
[52:29] to be clear introduced that never said
that. Neil introduced that whole
[52:35] harmless concept.
>> Hard hold meaning that in the future if
[52:39] the
if the their share were to go up that it
[52:44] wouldn't that the whole
>> No, no. what what he's what is the whole
[52:48] » Yeah. What the point he's trying to make
is that um to paraphrase is I think he's
[52:55] saying
be because it's really like it's either
[52:58] like a 9 to2 or 10 to one like it's very
much you know most people I think would
[53:04] go to for a pupil if it was just about
kind of what's right.
[53:08] » Sure. But but I think he's he's trying
to be kind of politically shrewd and
[53:14] acknowledge that look
>> the mayor's got to sell this to the
[53:17] council
>> and they all then have to get thrown out
[53:22] of office over this. So he's trying to
find like what can the mayor sell?
[53:27] » No, I'm with you. That is the whole
story.
[53:29] » So the whole Parl's idea is that under
the former proposal uh the former school
[53:34] proposal at the current capital
allocation April would have been on the
[53:40] hook if that had passed for a certain
amount of money. So Neil is saying that
[53:46] if this project goes forward and if it
ends up at Northern Essex and if being
[53:52] at Northern Essex results in a
significant reduction of some costs for
[54:00] instance there are certain things that
in the MSBA's process we'll go into
[54:04] that. If it if it results in a lower
cost
[54:07] » Yeah.
>> then then
[54:10] there is a path for habil to accept a
formula that is less favorable than the
[54:17] current one if their dollar exposure is
comparable to what it would have been
[54:24] with the old project
>> if it's capped with that.
[54:27] » Yeah. And it's not it's not like a legal
>> No. Yeah. Right. But it's more political
[54:32] » an agreement to for the other towns and
cities to eat what would have been a
[54:36] larger share
>> and cost offsets and ideally a major
[54:43] infusion of state money. That's where
Chris has correctly pointed out that's a
[54:47] big assumption. I mean that's a big
>> is that part of his hold harmless meals
[54:51] that it doesn't have state money.
>> Yeah. His model is showing Oh god.
[54:55] » Yeah. option it the op did do the
options reflect the whole harmless
[55:01] option one or two because they're both
50%.
[55:03] » Uh they're both 50%. One is showing uh
it should the variable there is how much
[55:10] is it getting
>> state
[55:11] » from the state but the formula is the
same
[55:14] » so that this reflects the whole harmless
ideal
[55:17] » ideal and does it work without the state
infusion
[55:21] is there a hold harmless mechanism no
way
[55:24] » no because inflation's happening and the
project that was voted down early 2024
[55:30] by the time this comes back to the
voters in a couple of years you'll have
[55:34] that much more inflation. So the same
project going forward would be more
[55:38] costly and and even if it goes to NCC
and you can reduce some cost on
[55:44] administrative offices or ball fields or
parking or different things where
[55:47] there's some synergies and and reducing
some of the cost. This is going to be a
[55:51] very expensive project in add
[55:57] I would have no patience for a
discussion around something that isn't
[56:01] going to happen. You know what I mean? I
mean, good on Neil for bringing it up,
[56:06] but it it seems so uncertain.
And how often is there do these meetings
[56:12] happen?
>> Well, they've been happening more often
[56:15] as we've gotten toward the finish line.
>> Not every week.
[56:19] » No, no, no, but like uh roughly monthly.
We We had two in June and we'd have two
[56:24] in July. So, as we
>> trying to get to a resolution,
[56:28] » is anything getting closer?
>> Yeah.
[56:30] » Oh,
>> yeah. Yeah. what the capital funding
[56:34] because there's a hundred other or not a
hundred but there's a you know probably
[56:37] 15 other policy issues in this region
but this is really the one that's the
[56:43] one this has been the one right along
and and
[56:47] um
[56:50] I think there's I mean
>> how far from a resolution is it
[56:54] » well we will find out when the committee
meets next week but I will tell you that
[56:58] when this process started Mayor Barrett
was absolutely adamant that she would
[57:05] not open the agreement if there is any
change to the capital funding formula.
[57:11] Period. That was an absolute
>> That was the starting point.
[57:13] » Yeah, that was the starting point. And
then on the other side, you have rally
[57:16] saying we are not going to agree to
anything but per pupil. So there has
[57:20] been movement
>> plan is bringing things closer.
[57:25] » Yes.
>> So do we have any do you need anything
[57:28] from last?
>> Well, so but what about the rally plan
[57:31] though? How does that work?
>> That's um
[57:34] » you had a chance to digest that?
>> Not fully digest it now. And I think
[57:39] » the uh competi
>> not just that's just the pure per
[57:44] people.
>> It's pure.
[57:46] » It's all it's completely different.
>> Oh, there's another one from Rally.
[57:51] » Yeah, this is
>> it's the one in the packet, but it's the
[57:54] one that was said I received it Monday
afternoon. However,
[57:57] » so so the other issue is how many people
need to agree. So one of Chris's
[58:02] criteria is that that 50/50 would have
to be accompanied by 2/3.
[58:06] » Yes. Rather than
>> so what Mr. Colin from Rally is
[58:12] proposing is that each community has a a
weighted vote.
[58:16] » Oh,
>> based on, you know,
[58:19] » their assessment, which kind of gets it
for twothirds, but um
[58:23] » but it doesn't not twothirds of the
communities, but twothirds of the
[58:27] weight, right?
>> Right.
[58:29] » Well, that is something there.
>> Yeah. But it's just it's a lot to take
[58:33] in. You know, how how are you going to
compare those two options? I think new
[58:37] report and rally are expecting this to
get equal. Um
[58:41] » and the weight is based on
enrollment
[58:46] » the percent of the way your operating
cost assessment. Yeah. Seats
[58:51] you know less strikes.
Well,
[58:56] and a change to the
agreement will require legislative town.
[59:04] Yes. Not
>> all 12.
[59:08] » But could it be changed by the state
legislature at all?
[59:12] » Legally,
yes. But politically, yeah.
[59:17] » If there's not consensus among the
cities and towns through their their
[59:21] local legislative process, Yeah. I think
it puts the legislators in a tough spot
[59:26] as to why would they then overturn what
their constituents have voted for town
[59:32] meeting our city council
[59:37] show some leadership and brave influence
it's tough
[59:40] » and it may come to that
>> I mean Bruce Tarant
[59:50] no percent district though is
representation.
[59:55] » So, can you put that chart back up? I
just want to compare
[59:58] » from from
>> Yeah.
[1:00:01] » or the one you did that
>> Yeah.
[1:00:04] Just want to compare it to the
[1:00:09] » You can pull that bar.
>> Yeah. And Yeah. How do I uh this bar?
[1:00:17] either I just kind of pull it off to the
side and disappear and drag it over to
[1:00:21] the side. Right click and pull way up
top. Oh, there. That's better. That's
[1:00:27] much better. And then it disappear. So,
what I what I try to do here is this.
[1:00:34] This is more of a dynamic model where
you can change your the two cells shaded
[1:00:40] in bright yellow are kind of the
editable cells. So right now it's 100%
[1:00:45] based on the uh on 1 through 12 0% based
on enrollment. So what this does is if I
[1:00:52] change this to say 50
then it goes and then this uh far right
[1:00:58] column with the yellow, red and green is
the conditional formatting. So that kind
[1:01:03] of immediately draws your attention to
what's the relative impact
[1:01:08] compared to the current formula. So
under the current formula
[1:01:14] um uh behavioral got for example
you know 43% of the student population
[1:01:24] 68% of enrollment
and so if we go to you know 100% based
[1:01:31] on that then then they have 43% of the
capital so it's unchanged obviously but
[1:01:38] if you go to say you know if If it was
90% based on that and 10% based on
[1:01:44] enrollment, they would uh you know they
would be you know two and a half% worse
[1:01:51] off and other communities would be uh
somewhat better off in terms of their
[1:02:00] their their share. So this so who under
the 50/50 that that shows they're
[1:02:07] basically you know 12 and a half% worse
off um you know Newberg po would be
[1:02:13] about four four and a half% better off
and and others have some variation and I
[1:02:19] think it's much more
appropriate to focus on percent than
[1:02:24] dollar because we have no idea what kind
of cost and what the revenues are but
[1:02:28] but you can toggle so this carries 200
million if it was, you know, 400 million
[1:02:35] um that's 40 which uh but that's I mean
you can run and have the same thing on
[1:02:42] dollars. I think that's that's can be
very easily misunderstood because we
[1:02:48] don't know what the dollars are going to
be if really we're talking about the
[1:02:50] percentages.
>> So
[1:02:53] » so is part of Neil's proposal the two/3
>> I mean is that part
[1:02:58] » to amend the agreement? Yes, that's been
separately addressed and there is uh
[1:03:05] there was a 10 to one vote
to support going to a with two/3
[1:03:10] threshold to amend the agreement with
the one
[1:03:15] » so and and I think that's something that
you know in my opinion mayor Barrett
[1:03:20] took that position because she had to
but I do believe I don't know this but
[1:03:26] she certainly haven't told me this but I
believe that as it goes forward she
[1:03:30] understands that is going to need to be
compromised. And so I think that's, you
[1:03:34] know, kind of her laying down marker.
But I think she knows that in order to
[1:03:39] get this amendment, this agreement
amended,
[1:03:42] » it's going to need no one's going to
support
[1:03:45] » doing this again.
>> Yeah.
[1:03:46] » Yeah. Right.
>> All right. Um,
[1:03:52] so will two/3 be part of the motion or
is that a sub?
[1:03:56] » Uh, well, you know, it could be and if
that's conditional on for
[1:04:00] » I think that's what Chris was saying
last week that you would consider this
[1:04:03] and that's 2/3. Is that your
>> No, I think that's right. I'm I'm
[1:04:08] equally interested in the weighted 2/3
as the actual 23.
[1:04:13] » Yeah. So I'm looking at that and he's
looking at the operating cost assessment
[1:04:18] versus and that rather than the capital.
So I'm a little bit confused by but I
[1:04:23] guess you're not really ready to speak
to it.
[1:04:26] » No, I have capitalism. Sorry.
Um
[1:04:33] so there's been email correspondence
that rally and new report will not roll
[1:04:38] this. Um, I don't know if that means
that they only want what is proposing or
[1:04:44] what's happening. I think we just have
to decide.
[1:04:47] » How does Rowley's
How do they compare to us scientists in
[1:04:52] terms of share?
They have 3.7%
[1:04:59] compared to 3.1.
>> Yeah.
[1:05:02] » In terms of the student population,
>> uh, they're at 19 students. were 11
[1:05:08] students.
>> We're the two small.
[1:05:10] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[1:05:11] » How is Raleigh just
[1:05:15] support
calling shots if you will?
[1:05:19] » I think Newbury reports enrollment is
fairly low compared to their population
[1:05:24] of students,
>> right? 2% of the enrollment.
[1:05:29] » Yeah.
saying very
[1:05:35] » it's just interesting to me that Raleigh
is
[1:05:40] » it's almost like having North Dakota as
senators sort of running things in the
[1:05:44] US Senate.
You know, we got the population of
[1:05:48] Manchester and New Hampshire.
>> Well, I think it's the whole thing about
[1:05:51] it being unanimous. even small players
but I have them making so many you know
[1:05:58] those demands and this is they're here
they are vetoing the same way the
[1:06:04] largest thing that it seems odd they
would not want the
[1:06:11] twoirds
they don't want two
[1:06:14] » it's not that I I don't fully understand
the proposal I mean is he going to
[1:06:18] present it at the meeting I guess or
>> well like I said in my and I you know I
[1:06:22] got this kind of Monday and
>> no.
[1:06:28] » Yeah. I and you know the way I kind of
try to thread the needle in in my
[1:06:32] transmitt memo because I kind of felt
compelled to send around what I
[1:06:36] received. I
>> I think if this was not the last meeting
[1:06:40] coming up, I would have handled it
differently.
[1:06:42] » Yeah.
>> Uh but it is the last meeting and so I
[1:06:45] felt compelled to circulate it. And then
what I said is I you know if if the
[1:06:51] committee wants to put it to a vote,
we'll put it to a vote. If the majority
[1:06:56] of the committee says we don't even want
to put the round of things to a vote,
[1:06:59] I'm not going to put it to a vote. Um
>> so that would be the vote first.
[1:07:04] » Yeah. So so I would look for a majority
vote of you know there six or more. So
[1:07:10] there could be a majority vote to put it
to a vote and then you know the outcome
[1:07:14] of the vote could be but um
I don't know if it will be put to a vote
[1:07:21] if if there's only two communities that
want to put it to a vote. I'm not going
[1:07:24] to put it to a vote. I think that in
itself will speak volumes but uh
[1:07:30] you know I don't know you know this this
was sent out I think you you probably
[1:07:34] saw one of them the distribution list.
This is going to select board members,
[1:07:38] town managers, town administrators,
mayors, um the busiest people in these
[1:07:44] communities. Are they going to absorb
this by next week's meeting and confer
[1:07:50] with their leadership to know what their
community, you know, to give their best
[1:07:56] guess as to what they think their
community might be willing to accept in
[1:07:59] in a in a short amount of time. Neil had
put his proposals on the table back in
[1:08:04] June
>> in a lengthy in a very detailed memo. He
[1:08:08] he supplemented that with an additional
two-page analysis maybe a week or two
[1:08:12] later that's now going to be before the
committee a couple of meetings. So so
[1:08:17] when that comes to a vote next week
that's not a surprise. That's something
[1:08:20] people have been chewing on for
>> you know at that point six or seven
[1:08:24] weeks. So, I think it's kind of asking a
lot
[1:08:28] » to absorb it and be able to vote on it
>> in a way that you think is fairly
[1:08:33] representative of what your community's
position might be. Yeah.
[1:08:41] » So, are we are you looking for a vote
from us on this or
[1:08:44] » Well, you you will be at the rack game
next week on behalf of the town. Uh I
[1:08:50] will be there as well. Um, right now I'm
the voting member for West Newbury.
[1:08:54] Chris has been the non- voting member or
the backup.
[1:08:57] » Uh, what I would strongly recommend is
that I
[1:09:01] » take myself out of that. I'm not going
to be here.
[1:09:04] » And uh, so I think you should be
prepared to cast a vote
[1:09:09] » as uh, although
>> if it's a honestly like Chris was
[1:09:16] appointed. We'll have to talk about that
or tell me how how you want me to vote.
[1:09:20] » Okay.
>> If if it comes to that uh but you know
[1:09:24] I'll be looking to you for guidance if
you want a vote from Barry to
[1:09:31] » what's going to be voted on.
>> What's going to be voted on is whether
[1:09:36] question of the uh 5050 split between
the you know whether that's something
[1:09:42] that that
>> proposal vote.
[1:09:45] » Yeah. And the vote is also whether to
consider rallies for I I would think
[1:09:50] that that's going to be a vote as well.
>> I will ask I will ask the committee to
[1:09:54] take that out. I don't know how well
we'll see is is
[1:09:59] I see the letter from Mayor Reed to
Raleigh Select Board saying we think it
[1:10:05] should be based only on enrollment but
that's just their posture. You think new
[1:10:10] reports behind a 5050?
>> No, I don't. Yeah. No, I
[1:10:16] » I don't think they will vote against it.
>> Yeah. And and I think the fact that that
[1:10:20] letter was sent several days ahead of
rally select board taking this up um is
[1:10:26] indicated to me that they've been kind
of working together for some amount of
[1:10:31] time.
[1:10:34] » So it's
>> I mean I think I I would vote to allow
[1:10:40] Bradley to present their idea.
>> Yeah. Um, I think that's reasonable.
[1:10:45] » Yeah. Yeah. I don't think there there
should be there should be any
[1:10:49] concern about just putting something to
a vote other than the fact that I've
[1:10:52] been very meticulous with this committee
of doing straw and then a subsequent
[1:10:58] meeting because I I wanted to make sure
that by the time we're taking a vote
[1:11:02] knowing it's a high-profile situation
and the press is covering it, I didn't
[1:11:06] want anyone to feel like backed into a
corner of wait a second, you're asking
[1:11:09] me to vote something I've just seen for
the first time in this meeting, you
[1:11:12] know. So, I've been very meticulous
about let's let's chew on it, have a
[1:11:16] straw hole, and then put it to a vote at
a subsequent meeting because we only
[1:11:21] received rallies a couple of days ago. I
just think that's that. But if the
[1:11:26] committee wants to if they're
comfortable taking a vote, we'll take a
[1:11:30] vote on our
>> I just want to have it presented so that
[1:11:34] I can more fully understand it.
>> Yeah, sure.
[1:11:40] I don't think I can fully evaluate them
against each other and which one is
[1:11:44] better.
[1:11:48] It's 1.3% for capital with 1.7 for
operating. How does that compare meals?
[1:11:58] So it's a little bit higher.
[1:12:02] I mean, I'm looking at it for the first
time, but from the viewpoint of it's not
[1:12:06] so much,
you know, we're going to end up slightly
[1:12:11] different, right? It's almost like
what's fair,
[1:12:13] » right? What makes the most sense and
reasonable going forward? And the two
[1:12:18] components are
>> I think a more substantial even if it's
[1:12:23] not 100% a more substantial portion of
the allocation should be for actual
[1:12:28] money. And that just
>> yeah,
[1:12:30] » it seems opposite, right? I mean, Mayor
Reen's letter was
[1:12:36] schools across the Commonwealth have all
moved towards actual norm based
[1:12:41] allocations because that's because it
makes sense.
[1:12:44] » Yeah.
>> Why pay based on your students who
[1:12:46] aren't going there?
>> And then the other piece is finding a
[1:12:49] compromise that waits or otherwise
eliminates the 100% voting. So, however
[1:12:56] you want to get there,
not taxpayers western not that it's like
[1:13:02] let's shoot for the least number. I I
wouldn't want to just be that parochial
[1:13:07] » because that will land like with a thud
every town could do that when April sort
[1:13:14] of do
I don't think we should.
[1:13:17] » That's my input.
>> And if I could just speak briefly about
[1:13:22] about philosophically why
I think some u consideration of both
[1:13:29] enrollment and school age population
that arguably makes sense
[1:13:35] » and that's that obvious the enrollment
speaks for itself but the school age
[1:13:38] population I I think there's an argument
to be made that a community that is
[1:13:43] within the within the district
they and their population and their
[1:13:49] students have a benefit in the district
and those students having an option to
[1:13:54] go to that school whether their students
choose to or not. There is a benefit to
[1:14:00] being in the district. And so that's
where I think when you're dealing with a
[1:14:03] capital cost that's paid off over 30
years and not just who's there that
[1:14:08] year, but a generational or
multi-generational impact. I think, you
[1:14:13] know, for instance, in the town of
Rowley, I think that residents of
[1:14:16] Rowley, taxpayers of Rowley benefit by
their students having that option in a
[1:14:23] more of a like longer term than just a
single school year
[1:14:27] » on capital specifically as opposed to
operators.
[1:14:30] » They do two different formulas, capital
and operating.
[1:14:33] » Well, it is right. So, the oper the
operating is based on enrollment and
[1:14:37] ever it's an agreement.
>> Oh, that's awesome.
[1:14:39] » And that's how it's been since 1967.
>> Oh, I see that. And that's never been an
[1:14:42] issue.
>> That's never been the issue.
[1:14:44] » Just the capital.
>> Just the capital. And I think
[1:14:45] philosophically there is a how much of
that benefit
[1:14:49] » but I do think there's like a legitimate
philosophical pace of why you would have
[1:14:54] » it should be something other than 100%.
Based on enrollment
[1:14:58] » I think so as a as a resident not as
West Newber but as a as a
[1:15:04] » but I guess the challenging thing is you
have the opportunity but there's no
[1:15:07] guarantee you'll get in. I mean the
acceptance rates for other towns are
[1:15:10] vastly different.
>> Correct.
[1:15:12] » So um that's that's another issue.
>> Yeah. Now now with the new lottery
[1:15:16] system that's uh kind of introduced some
new variables there because they and
[1:15:21] they've had um
>> applications growing up quite a bit from
[1:15:26] many different communities.
>> Would it enrollment
[1:15:29] expand with the new facility? So the
MSBA's approval for the project to to
[1:15:36] get into advantage of the feasibility
which was the vote taken on June 24th by
[1:15:40] the MSBA
is covering a range of 1280 which is the
[1:15:45] current design enrollment up to 1500. So
that's part of the decision that the
[1:15:50] school building committee will be making
through feasibility is to they design
[1:15:54] something for the current headcount up
to 1500. It will be any more than that.
[1:15:59] And there's mixed feelings in the
communities about that because some of
[1:16:02] the communities are concerned about
declining enrollment in their regular
[1:16:06] schools. So the idea of having for
instance in Georgetown more students go
[1:16:10] under Whittier. They have very real
concerns about the financial impact that
[1:16:15] would have on Georgetown's high school.
Yeah.
[1:16:21] » All right. I feel like they understand.
>> Yeah. Really help.
[1:16:25] » Yeah.
>> Um so you're saying that they may not
[1:16:29] let me vote.
>> They pro honestly they probably won't
[1:16:32] because the everyone who's on the
committee was appointed by the school
[1:16:35] committee. It's a subcommittee of the
school committee and they were all voted
[1:16:39] in a school committee meeting and
appointed and uh so for instance we had
[1:16:44] uh in in Marramac uh it was Chris Manny
and then his term ended so it was Wayne
[1:16:50] Adams Wayne came to a meeting but he
actually couldn't vote because he hadn't
[1:16:54] been formally appointed by the school
committee. Uh and there same thing in
[1:17:00] one of the other communities where
someone came to a meeting but they
[1:17:03] weren't yet formally appointed. So, you
have not been appointed by the week.
[1:17:06] » So, I mean, so why is it critical for me
to go?
[1:17:11] I mean, I thought I was like filling in
for Chris because he couldn't be there.
[1:17:14] » Uh,
I suppose it's not critical. If you want
[1:17:18] to tell me how Well, I mean, it's
there's more business we'll cover at the
[1:17:22] meeting than than this. And, okay, you
know, he's been at every meeting. West's
[1:17:26] had, you know, two representatives
there. So, and I think if nothing else,
[1:17:30] it'll definitely give you some some
insight. And they're they're pretty
[1:17:32] they're good meetings. We have, you
know, typically 25 or 30 people there,
[1:17:37] including, you know, people observers.
Uh, so they're pretty dynamic. I think
[1:17:42] you'll enjoy it.
>> No, but in terms of the vote, um,
[1:17:45] » I was under the impression that I had to
vote for.
[1:17:47] » It wasn't until the last few minutes
that it occurred to me that I'm like,
[1:17:50] "Oh, wait a second. Okay.
>> Hey, you can't cast the vote because
[1:17:53] you're not actually the committee."
>> But you But you just said you aren't
[1:17:57] going to be allowed to vote.
>> No, I am the voting.
[1:17:59] » So, you can vote.
>> I just say the right thing to do is to
[1:18:03] somebody that you know because I'm
>> a short time.
[1:18:07] » I mean, you're still in the spot and
you're still the one authorized by the
[1:18:10] » Yeah, but I'm so I could say what I
think and you could just vote that.
[1:18:14] » That's exactly what
>> Yeah.
[1:18:17] » Are you comfortable with that?
>> Very comfortable.
[1:18:19] » I'm comfortable with it.
>> Very sorted that out.
[1:18:22] » Good.
>> All right. And and to be honest, that's
[1:18:24] kind of out with Chris. He he he and I
we were largely aligned than anything
[1:18:28] but it was
>> and that was where one of the folks back
[1:18:31] in June I had put a abstension because I
think he had to leave the meeting early
[1:18:36] and I didn't know where he stood and I
didn't want to pour to
[1:18:41] » speak on behalf of West Newbury. You
know I want to make sure everything I'm
[1:18:44] saying in a voting path is in sync with
what he felt which is appropriate. So
[1:18:50] very
>> all right Mary, did you have a chance to
[1:18:53] look at the minutes that were emailed
out today?
[1:18:56] » Yes,
>> you did.
[1:18:58] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah, those reflected he had sent.
[1:19:00] » Oh, yeah.
>> Um any How about July 2nd? Any changes
[1:19:07] to those?
>> No, I I move you.
[1:19:11] » You can move.
>> I move that the minutes of July 2nd
[1:19:15] select board meeting be adopted as
distributed.
[1:19:19] Second. Um, I just wanted to I said this
to Rebecca already. I think she did an
[1:19:24] amazing job that I was thinking how is
somebody gonna write minutes for those
[1:19:29] interviews and she did a really great
job.
[1:19:32] » All in favor?
>> I
[1:19:34] » I All right. And July 9th, any changes?
Are we all set?
[1:19:39] » Motion.
>> Move the minutes of July 9th, 2026 board
[1:19:43] meeting be adopted as circulated.
>> Right. A second. All in favor? I
[1:19:50] » Okay, moving on to general discussion.
Um update on the organizational
[1:19:55] assessment. The committee met with the
consultant uh last week uh to give them
[1:20:00] feedback on the interim findings. So now
they're going to take that feedback,
[1:20:04] come up with recommendations and they're
expecting to get us a report by mid
[1:20:08] August maybe. Um, on the town manager
search end of things, um, uh, John
[1:20:15] Peter, the consultant, and I met with a,
I think I mentioned this last time, the
[1:20:19] PR firm that's writing, they're writing
a a statement that will be part of the
[1:20:23] posting for the permanent town manager
position. So, I provided her a bunch of
[1:20:28] information. Um, so they're looking to
post that in mid August with responses
[1:20:33] due by midepptember
with the end goal of having the decision
[1:20:38] by the end of that.
So depending on notice requirements, I
[1:20:44] think first of the year is probably a
reasonable start date, but
[1:20:47] » yeah.
>> Um, next step is post meeting in August.
[1:20:54] Um, I guess was there any uh discussion
on with at the employee meeting about
[1:21:00] » uh no I think you know we we kept kept
that very general but kind of just along
[1:21:05] I didn't have th those details on the
posting but I I said you know a draft
[1:21:09] report expected u this summer
report expected to be finalized in
[1:21:14] September and that at that point uh some
of the kind of open positions uh or
[1:21:20] where we're kind of holding off on
posting things to finance partner or
[1:21:24] whatever that we expected that there
will be clarity to look forward coming
[1:21:28] out of that final report. So they
counted pretty
[1:21:33] » uh let's see item B is status of hunting
Montana on tenner land mission program.
[1:21:39] So Barry this is something we're working
on I think you know from
[1:21:43] » so uh the intent was to have a program
in place for this hunting season but
[1:21:47] just with everything else going on I
don't see that happening. We have had a
[1:21:51] couple inquiries about hunting. Um, one
of which is the gentleman that we
[1:21:57] grandfathered in last year because he
hunted that property um, historically.
[1:22:02] So, he's already reached out and
answered the commission. Um,
[1:22:07] so just wanted to make you aware of
that. Um, Rebecca is telling the other
[1:22:11] people that are asking that that's
probably not going to happen this year.
[1:22:16] any um
>> um this is just for deer or is it for
[1:22:21] all the seasons
turkey and
[1:22:25] » um it's the the request that we had was
for deer bow hunting that's what we
[1:22:30] heard last year Justin summer broke that
person
[1:22:34] » do we know what the other requests were
for was it for any specific properties
[1:22:38] » um she didn't say it was a she
>> and when does that season start
[1:22:44] » a deer starts October 1st, I think for
Sweden.
[1:22:47] » So, we'll have a new chance to indicate
it done by
[1:22:50] » I I can't see a path. I mean, it's going
to be, you know, we have um
[1:22:55] conservation commissioners responsible
for some property, so they'll need to be
[1:22:58] in line with select.
>> Were they inclined or was it included
[1:23:05] since
>> No, I mean, we we developed the
[1:23:07] application at least and we had Mr.
Groitis fill that out which required on
[1:23:13] part of it. Um, but that was just for
that one property. You know, we have to
[1:23:18] look at all the properties and with
Snoopy figure out where we're going to
[1:23:21] have them do.
>> I mean, I'm happy to
[1:23:25] look at it, see if there's any chance to
move on, you know,
[1:23:30] » think there'd be significant staff
involvement, which I'm not sure. Yeah,
[1:23:35] » I guess. Do you agree with that?
>> Yeah, I Well, I I guess it depends how
[1:23:40] you handle it. I I I I've been I haven't
been that involved with this. So, um I
[1:23:46] mean other than observing it. Uh but I
think you you're familiar with the kind
[1:23:51] of report that was presented in May of
2025,
[1:23:55] » right? So that's kind of the pandemic
progress made since then.
[1:24:00] » I mean, I like deer, but there are too
many of them. And I think from a just
[1:24:05] public safety standpoint,
vehicles and ticks, I'm I'm in favor of
[1:24:12] appropriate hunting. So if we can
facilitate it, I'd like to try a plan.
[1:24:17] » Yeah, it's just it's a big project.
>> So I think right now the select board
[1:24:21] could under the town bylaw, I believe,
could approve hunting on a specific
[1:24:27] property under your care and custody. I
think part of where it becomes a lot
[1:24:32] bigger issue is on what basis do you
make those approvals or not and how do
[1:24:37] you get administer that where it's
consistent.
[1:24:40] » Yeah. But who would who would is the
form of the approval would not be a
[1:24:45] license or anything would be for an
individual
[1:24:48] » be permission permission for an
individual or for anyone.
[1:24:52] » So even if we had a town program it
would still be individual applications.
[1:24:56] » Yes. We have to make sure they have the
correct license and all of that. So,
[1:25:01] » why don't I forward you the application
we developed and we can take this up at
[1:25:05] another meeting if it's something
>> and if it would be more than just the
[1:25:09] compound doing it.
>> Well, the select board is the entity
[1:25:13] that has to grant approval
>> even if it the compound then has to
[1:25:17] » but we're saying if it's on improper
they should require.
[1:25:20] » Yeah. I mean, if you don't mind rather
than just shelving it up, I can send you
[1:25:23] that. I'll take a look. From I
understand your point, there are other
[1:25:26] priorities, but you know, if there is a
way to get it done.
[1:25:29] » Yeah.
>> And it's something we can take up with
[1:25:31] the interim time manager
in the midst of everything else he's
[1:25:36] going to be dealing with. But
>> yeah, I I kind of just feel like, you
[1:25:41] know, we'll probably entertain the
application for Mr. Tra
[1:25:46] again, but whether it goes on that can
look.
[1:25:49] » Okay. Thanks.
>> All right. Um item C, continue
[1:25:53] discussion of the cost allocation form.
This is the uh October. Now we're to
[1:25:59] January, right? Is that the current
number?
[1:26:03] » Uh yeah, basically the numbers that are
submitted in October and then and then
[1:26:08] validated in January, but it's it's uh
it's still the October 1st numbers. So
[1:26:14] that got clarified.
>> I I I would like to see a letter that
[1:26:19] everybody agrees to. Yeah. everybody
mostly being in.
[1:26:23] » Yeah.
>> So since since the meeting we had on
[1:26:26] Tuesday, um uh Rebecca Olden took a stab
at changing the former letter to reflect
[1:26:33] that.
>> Okay.
[1:26:34] » She did send a draft of that to me in
peril late Tuesday. It was actually
[1:26:39] while I was putting this packet, but I
wasn't going to put that in because I
[1:26:44] wanted to make sure. And and so my
response back to her was, "It looks good
[1:26:48] to me." and Carol subsequently got back.
I think on Wednesday she sent a note so
[1:26:52] she could but I said to Rebecca Olden
what's going to be most important is
[1:26:57] that Kentucky finds that language clear
and I believe they will.
[1:27:02] » Okay. Uh so that's uh so so that is uh I
think gonna be something she's reviewing
[1:27:10] with Justin and Suzanne and then that's
going to go to you or to to Rebecca and
[1:27:15] Sean and uh presumably come up at a
meeting in in August. Okay.
[1:27:19] » Because it's already drafted. It's just
I didn't want to put it in there until
[1:27:22] kind of like till everyone's viewed it.
>> Yeah. So they are moving adjusted into
[1:27:27] this top.
>> Oh yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. This Yeah. We
[1:27:30] This was a major focus. So the the
finance scheme meeting we had October
[1:27:34] this week
>> and everybody was in uh
[1:27:38] » uh I actually I actually used Rob's
term. I said pile agreement and and uh
[1:27:45] it's very effective. So
>> any other updates from that meeting?
[1:27:49] » I do actually. I have a couple of pages
of notes and I won't go into every every
[1:27:52] detail but uh we covered a lot of a lot
of issues. Uh one thing just on this uh
[1:27:59] a portion the method
uh part of what everybody would like and
[1:28:05] everybody agreed. So it's just a matter
can we get the words on the page to say
[1:28:09] yeah
>> so do we have we voted on the letter
[1:28:16] before you yeah there was a draft before
you in June it was table
[1:28:20] clarity of process and now it's going to
come back to you
[1:28:25] » um and and then yeah you would be asked
to vote in a letter and then I just I
[1:28:30] wrote down in my notes
>> the objective is to memorialize this in
[1:28:34] their budget book so that when they send
their budget book it's very clear this
[1:28:38] is how it and that way it's just and
then it's done. So
[1:28:43] » sorry.
>> Uh let's see. So a lot of the discussion
[1:28:48] was on
uh Jonathan Seymour gave uh an update on
[1:28:53] all of the many many capital projects
that they're doing in all of the
[1:28:58] district schools. It is a lot. Uh so you
know in page there's the sewer line
[1:29:04] replacement uh or repairs that's that's
turned out a big project uh but that's
[1:29:08] on track. Bag now. They're doing paving
out front with granite curbing, new
[1:29:13] cameras, new door fobs, playground
improvements, phone upgrades, a couple
[1:29:18] of plums. We have some hazardous
materials abated in Marramac. There's
[1:29:24] some floor abatement. Uh page uh the
elevator work. Uh there's a u
[1:29:32] uh the the gym floor. uh and there was
some discussion of that that the uh
[1:29:37] insurance uh adjuster then said that
there was water underneath the floor. So
[1:29:43] even though only a portion of the floor
was affected, that's why they basically
[1:29:48] declared it a whole loss and so they
just got to replace the whole floor
[1:29:51] because there was so but that's on
track. Um
[1:29:56] middle high school we talked about the
auditorium. Uh he said they're 95% done.
[1:30:01] It's going to be ready for the opening
of school in September. Uh some of the
[1:30:06] details you talked about there's new
projection screen that was unordered
[1:30:09] because the projection screen was
damaged. There were some sound system
[1:30:13] items that were damaged as part of the
smoke. I mean it's just mind how how
[1:30:18] destructive this small fire was. U but
he did say it will be online for the
[1:30:23] school year. Another thing they were
working on that way building high school
[1:30:28] the administration building as you know
that was as part of the school building
[1:30:32] project that was uh it was agreed that
the former a portion of former middle
[1:30:38] school u which still remains next to the
football field is going to be the
[1:30:42] administration building. All these years
they're still housed up in Marinac. Uh
[1:30:48] so uh they said they started framing
that out uh as part of the partial
[1:30:54] building demo of the middle school. All
of the electrical wire had been pulled
[1:30:59] out of that building. So they've got a
they're putting out a bid for the
[1:31:04] electrical to rewire the entire
building. Uh there's a the demo company
[1:31:09] for the middle high school pulled out
all the wire. I don't think they were
[1:31:12] supposed to. They did. Um and they're
working with Whittier actually uh
[1:31:19] students on doing some of the sheetrock
and HVAC. So, but I was like, "Wow,
[1:31:23] Jonathan, like they are busy." So, it
was just really interesting because this
[1:31:28] was by far the most comprehensive
briefing on some of the kind of physical
[1:31:32] projects they're doing. And then there
was some discussion of this letter I put
[1:31:35] in from the governor on the uh student
um the additional money.
[1:31:43] So uh uh basically this proposed
additional per student uh $1212 per
[1:31:52] student uh that this would come to the
district as a grant uh not as part of
[1:31:57] the chapter 70
and that there is potential that because
[1:32:04] this is additional money coming in it
could reduce what they actually need to
[1:32:09] have charged charge the towns through
the assessments and and so there is a
[1:32:13] potential that they would be uh actually
reducing the assessments which could
[1:32:19] allow the three towns to go back to the
fall town meeting reduce the approved
[1:32:24] budget prior to setting the tax rate.
>> Oh, nice.
[1:32:27] » And so the advice particularly from
Mayor Mack and Broman was if you can do
[1:32:31] that that would obviously help them with
their tax rate but it would be a real
[1:32:35] show of good faith. Yeah. um rather than
just having that go into excess and
[1:32:40] deficiency. So that's not in any way
guaranteed, but they are actively
[1:32:45] working on that. So there's a scenario
where you hear from Kentucky, you know,
[1:32:49] in in the next, you know, four to six
weeks to say, oh, because of this
[1:32:53] additional state money, the local
assessments have gone down a bit, not a
[1:32:58] lot, but a bit, and you could choose to
put that on a fall town meeting as part
[1:33:02] of budget. So that could be coming. So
any idea of the scale?
[1:33:08] » Uh not.
>> So 200 million in all?
[1:33:12] » Yeah. So it's $12 per student.
>> Yeah.
[1:33:17] » I'm I'm talking about the Wong state.
>> Yeah, that's okay.
[1:33:21] » Right. That would be that's what I guess
that's what the number that's been
[1:33:25] talked about.
>> Okay.
[1:33:26] » That that comprises that 200 million. So
this is one time revenue. So if they do
[1:33:31] that, it's going to set the communities
up next year for a bigger hit. And
[1:33:36] Jonathan was really clear about that.
Even if the assessment goes down, the
[1:33:40] overall operating budget, you know, that
is going to make it. So So is that the
[1:33:44] governor's letter? 200 million.
>> Correct.
[1:33:46] » So 100 million's transportation and
infrastructure. Another 100 million is
[1:33:51] schools.
>> So it's the 112 per student 100 million.
[1:33:55] » Yeah, I think that's what comprises that
that amount. So, so I just wanted to to
[1:34:01] bring that up because that, you know,
that I don't think that makes a big a
[1:34:05] difference in West Newbury u where
there's more levy limit, but it it does
[1:34:10] uh make a difference in the other two
times,
[1:34:14] but it would also contribute to the FY28
budget side of a greater increase.
[1:34:22] So, it's
it's you know, it's onetime revenues.
[1:34:29] And and so the the you know uh Carol
Mloud was saying you know I wish they
[1:34:34] just give the money to us to the cops to
pay our school bill and jobs said and I
[1:34:40] 100% believe him. He said he's been
advocating that for years that you
[1:34:45] should just if you have this give it to
the towns
[1:34:49] but that's not and everyone said the
state's never going to do that like
[1:34:52] because they want politically they want
oh we gave the schools but it would
[1:34:56] actually administrators would work a lot
better if they gave it to the towns to
[1:34:59] help us pay our bills to the school but
that's just not how it is that because
[1:35:04] they don't think the fund would go to
the school maybe they couldn't earmark
[1:35:09] it and require it to go to the school
I'm not Sure. I I mean well there have
[1:35:13] been instances where
uh where towns or cities have received
[1:35:20] additional money from the state
earmarked for education and then have
[1:35:26] reduced their appropriation so that the
schools aren't actually getting more
[1:35:31] money. They're just reducing local money
because it's over. So I think there is
[1:35:37] some kind of paternalistic
>> Yep.
[1:35:44] Okay. Um, we got a correspondence. We
have the TEC report
[1:35:49] » and due to the size that was posted a
separate packet. So,
[1:35:54] » and KP noticed about the GL48 amendments
>> significant changes in there.
[1:36:00] » Yeah.
>> Very significant.
[1:36:02] » So, but we kind of have to wait for
regulations to come out, right?
[1:36:06] » Yeah.
>> But this is retroactive to July one. So
[1:36:10] what what do towns do in the meantime?
Like you're supposed to be following
[1:36:13] this, but they don't tell you how to do
it.
[1:36:15] » I think Sam's
>> I bet.
[1:36:19] » Have you followed this at all or is
zoning not really in your
[1:36:22] » No, it is, but I haven't sort of taken a
deep dive yet.
[1:36:26] » Yeah.
>> Um
[1:36:31] I mean it actually loosened up some
requirements as of right.
[1:36:36] » I think that's the idea.
>> Yeah. And I think that just to get more
[1:36:39] housing,
>> yeah,
[1:36:40] » that's not a bad thing, but it does
affect how Sam's going to have to do
[1:36:49] » Okay. Anything
on the um PC report or
[1:36:57] » Oh, we had a presentation of the last
couple weeks ago.
[1:37:04] » Oh, and you said the TDC.
>> Yeah. the traffic.
[1:37:08] » Yeah. No, I
>> All right.
[1:37:12] » Yeah.
>> Okay. Um items for future meeting
[1:37:16] agendas. So, we talked about having like
a workshop meeting with Sean on August
[1:37:22] 7th. Uh any things you want to include
on there?
[1:37:28] » Well, just confirming. So,
you have a contract or I'm entering
[1:37:37] Yeah.
>> Yeah. It got the things were resolved
[1:37:41] and signed. I guess they had
>> Yeah. Did you Are you not on the town
[1:37:44] email? We get the the notice that
>> must not be
[1:37:48] » Yeah, we crafted him statement.
>> Oh, I I missed that.
[1:37:52] » Yeah. Are you you're not on town email?
>> Could you please pull up the homepage
[1:37:57] and show Barry for
I have trouble keeping up with the
[1:38:02] emails I get now.
see right there.
[1:38:06] » Oh, I mean I can go to the town website,
which I should one I'm done, but I don't
[1:38:12] need to. So good.
>> So I I sent that email out that next day
[1:38:16] after our meeting now.
>> Yeah.
[1:38:19] » So it's all good.
>> Wonderful.
[1:38:20] » Yeah. So
>> yes. So back to the item is
[1:38:24] » Yeah. So I thought we would talk about
meeting structure. I think we should
[1:38:27] touch on public comment because that has
been such a hot item lately. Um
[1:38:33] maybe uh let's see talk about the work
plan. I mean typically we meet in the
[1:38:39] summer and we revisit the work plan and
establish priorities for the next year.
[1:38:43] So I don't know if that's too much to do
in this meeting with Sean first meeting
[1:38:47] but
>> so we would typically do that and then
[1:38:50] we would invite board committee chairs
in to talk about what our priorities are
[1:38:54] and get feedback from them. So that's
usually what we do in the summer. So
[1:38:58] some are all that I would cover. Yeah.
>> In that meeting, um, we talked about
[1:39:03] working on the mission statement for the
town.
[1:39:08] » Um, I mean, that's quite enough in that.
>> Well, yeah. And I just I mean, Ian's got
[1:39:14] your
>> Well,
[1:39:16] » transition planning document the best.
>> Yeah. I mean, I haven't been provided,
[1:39:20] but I'm going to meet on Thursday. I'm
going to be going through
[1:39:23] » like to hear his input on what he would
prioritize in there. Well, so usually
[1:39:28] what we do is as a board define what our
top priorities are for the year, just
[1:39:32] not like specific projects, but last
year it was regionalization of services
[1:39:36] where possible, you know, water supply.
>> Yeah. No, I get that, but I'm with the
[1:39:42] first discussion with him, we want to go
that far or is the first one like he's
[1:39:47] got to hit the ground running a little
bit too, right?
[1:39:50] » So, what I'm talking about is the select
board deciding what our
[1:39:53] » yes
>> priorities are. So I think we can still
[1:39:55] have that discussion maybe along with
the mission statement for the town.
[1:40:00] Um
but but I think the work
[1:40:04] » so just so this would be at the meeting
Chris will be back.
[1:40:07] » Yep. August 7th 4:00.
>> Well, this is the argument that 7.
[1:40:14] So at that meeting
that's a regular meeting. It's not a
[1:40:18] special. It's not an added one. So
that's going to happen. No, it's in
[1:40:22] place of the August,
>> right? So that's going to have the
[1:40:25] regular agenda anyway.
>> No, it's just going to be it's just a
[1:40:30] workshop like
>> just the workshop.
[1:40:32] » Yeah, just for these items to kind of
>> So there won't be any other items on
[1:40:37] there for discussion. Okay.
>> No, then now I I didn't know that it was
[1:40:42] just the workshop.
>> Yeah. So we usually do that in July and
[1:40:47] chart our course for the next year. So
if the timing works out well, I think
[1:40:51] that you can get Sean.
>> So um to that end, is there a working
[1:40:57] list of
future priorities that you and Chris may
[1:41:02] have been
>> I can last year?
[1:41:04] » Yeah, I can send you the packet that we
presented to the boards and committees
[1:41:07] from last year.
>> Yeah, I would appreciate that.
[1:41:19] And
>> and where are we on mission statement?
[1:41:24] » We didn't start. Chris left his possible
versions, but
[1:41:27] » these were the five options.
>> Well, that those are ones he
[1:41:30] » Yeah.
>> or claw generated whatever
[1:41:34] that'll be part of the work
>> if we have time. I think this is an
[1:41:38] ambitious agenda.
>> Need to focus on passing. Okay.
[1:41:45] Um, I guess anything you think we should
highlight to get started?
[1:41:50] » Uh, no, not not that isn't reflected in
the transition plan.
[1:41:54] » Okay.
>> So, your meeting on Thursday.
[1:41:57] » Thursday. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, maybe you and I can come here
[1:42:02] to what you're covering with them and I
hope they're
[1:42:07] good. Okay.
>> All right. Anything else? Any other
[1:42:11] future agenda items for Eric?
potentially hunting once you take a look
[1:42:16] at
>> Yeah.
[1:42:22] » Hi.
>> And one just brief thing for our future
[1:42:25] agenda. We we talked about a little bit,
but I do know that uh Charlie Roza would
[1:42:29] love to get a special event for next
summer's concert series done sooner than
[1:42:33] later because even though I told him 100
times it's not.
[1:42:37] » I thought he was going to do a facility
use.
[1:42:39] » Oh, was that what was
>> Yeah, that's what we decided. Oh, okay.
[1:42:42] Good.
>> Had confidence that was
[1:42:44] » Oh, good. Okay, good. I just didn't want
cuz he he he expressed some some concern
[1:42:49] that he put a he starts booking next
year's shows in like September and he
[1:42:53] has something and I told him this is not
a you they're not going to put it down.
[1:42:58] But but I just want to make sure he can
proceed with with uh confidence and not
[1:43:03] he he because it was a new requirement.
He was a little stabilized.
[1:43:07] » Actually, I'm pretty sure I corresponded
him with
[1:43:09] » Oh, good. Okay. Good. Good. The special
event is more like are there conflicts
[1:43:13] with other areas? How do we, you know,
plan for that?
[1:43:16] » I think that one I
>> Yeah.
[1:43:18] » And
I it's not our decision obviously, but
[1:43:22] that reups
five issue with the church.
[1:43:27] » Yeah. I'm I'm curious and I'm wondering
whether we I would just for information
[1:43:32] purposes I would like to hear from the
organization that's hoping to place
[1:43:38] people in that residential setting a
little bit more about what the period of
[1:43:44] occupancy would be for this first group
setting aside
[1:43:50] for a health community what's the maybe
it's been something I haven't read but
[1:43:55] what's the plan to is this for these 24
families or whatever the number was.
[1:44:00] » It's it's four units
>> or 24 people. There's like a number I've
[1:44:05] seen.
>> Yeah.
[1:44:06] » But is that
>> are they going to be in there long term
[1:44:12] or is it a transition?
>> It's permanent. Not permanent, but it's
[1:44:15] meant to be where they live. And then
and then if that if a family that was
[1:44:21] there for some period of time were to
move on
[1:44:25] » they that organization will be the only
one that could bring in another
[1:44:30] have we seen a document that describes
that
[1:44:33] » there's not really
>> not the long
[1:44:38] » so I'm just sort of curious if if it
depending on where it went at some point
[1:44:42] if the I don't know when the board of
health is going to have an actual
[1:44:45] application where it
I think August their August meeting.
[1:44:50] » So their August meeting they're going to
actually take the court.
[1:44:52] » That's what they said.
>> Well, depending on where it goes, if
[1:44:55] they prove it, I'd be interested in
learning more about the long
[1:45:00] » how it's going to be managed.
>> So I guess we can wait to see what
[1:45:04] happens.
>> Yeah. Because if it's not approved, then
[1:45:06] it's Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[1:45:08] » And then but there's still zoning issues
to be dealt with. Board still
[1:45:15] » from just an overall I'm curious if it
goes that far.
[1:45:22] » Okay.
Um,
[1:45:26] » she is. Although, actually, we're going
to set up a separate
[1:45:29] » Oh, okay.
>> But all right. I move that we go into
[1:45:33] executive session for MGL chapter 30A,
section 21A, 3 and 7.
[1:45:40] » Second.
>> All in favor, please.
[1:45:44] Okay, we will return to open session for
the sole purpose of adjournment
[1:45:49] following executive session.
Thank you very much.