Okay, we're recording now. >> Okay. Good evening. This is a regular meeting of the town council with a few unusual twists. First of all, we're going to start with a reading period for the town manager's
evaluation, which was distributed right around 5:00. Second of all, we will be um then having a hearing at one point during the meeting and we will also be pausing at
7:00 or thereabouts for a uh public forum. So without further ado, um this meeting is loud because open meeting law is extended until June 30th, 2027. It's available on all
kinds of media. I'm not going to waste time with that. Given the that we have a quorum of the council present, I'm calling the regular town council meeting to order at se at 5:00 p.m. I'm going to call on counselors and as
other counselors enter, I'll work with making sure they can hear and be heard, but don't want to disrupt other people. Pat D'Angelus, >> present. Anna Delin Gothier, >> present. Um, >> present. Councelor Hanaki
>> present. >> Bob Hegner is not okay. Uh, councelor Lord >> present. >> Pam Rooney >> here. >> Uh, councelor Ryan, not we don't know. Kathy Shane,
>> I'm here. >> Andy Steinberg, >> present. Jennifer Tob >> here. >> Councelor Walker >> here. >> And we're waiting for councelor Ete who will be absent today. So we're not
waiting for him. Uh Bob Hegner not wait at this point. And councelor Ryan. Okay. You may turn your videos off and your microphones off. and we will resume
at 6:15. >> Thank you. We're going to have about four more minutes and then we're going to move on. Okay. >> Okay. Is that when people can come in in >> No.
Thank you. go. Okay. >> Thank you for what you probably Well, I think that's why they're doing the consent agenda early and then doing
a presentation. >> So, don't clap when they come in. >> Feel like I'll be a weirdo. >> He's shaking all their hands. I'm glad Happy. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> For those of you on Zoom uh or in the
town room, please turn your camera on and we are going to resume our meeting. So, I'm going to make a motion. And the motion is to wave rules of procedure 6 8.6 for agenda item 6.A. Is there a
second? >> Second. Pat D'Angelus. I >> Anna Delin Gothier. >> Councelor Et Lynn Griezmer. Councelor Hanaki. >> I >> Bob Hegner. >> Hi.
>> Here. Anna. >> Anna. >> Hi. >> He dropped off. >> Okay. >> I guess. Did I hear I'm not sure who we've heard vote. >> Anna, did I hear you? >> She's no longer >> Okay. >> Oh, there she is.
>> There she is. Anna. Okay. Uh I uh councelor Hanniki >> I was an I. >> Bob Hegner >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan is not here yet.
Councelor Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker >> here. >> Thank you. I'm going to quickly move to another motion. And this motion is >> Was that 10 or 11 in favor? I'm sorry.
Thank you for asking. Since >> that was 11 in favor and two absent. >> So, councelor Ete voted I. >> He's not here. >> George will be here eventually. >> So, three were absent then. I guess that's You went so fast that we couldn't
tell how many were absent. >> I don't have Anna, please. Thank you. Okay. Absent. And I need to record this because Athena's on the road. Okay, thank you. Okay. Uh, the next is
to adopt the town of Emmeris citation in recognition of exemplary service following the fire at Olympia Place. Um, believe my actual citation. Um, following the fire at 47 and 57 Olympia
Drive. Somebody need to leave. >> I'll I'll second. >> Go for it. Thank you. Uh, is there a second? >> I seconded. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Lyn Griezer is an I. Councelor Hanaki.
>> I. >> Bob Hegner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> Pam. Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes.
>> Pat D'Angelus. >> Hi. >> Anna Delin Gothier. >> I. >> And uh George Ryan. Thank you. And that is 12 in favor and one absent. So
we would like to put the citation on the screen. Paul, can you >> We need your mic. >> We would like to put the citation on the screen. Okay. >> You want me to hold the mic up?
>> That's fine. So, the town council has unanimously passed the following citation with one absent. Whereas on Friday, November 7th, 2025, two significant fires occurred at
the construct construction site at 47 Olympia Drive and the apartment building at 57 Olympia Drive in Ammerst, posing immediate and serious risk to residents, property, public safety, and I'm going to keep passing this.
Whereas members of the town of Ammeris fire and emergency medical services responded immediately with speed, professionalism, expertise, and skill in suppressing and skill in suppressing the fire and conducting life-saving operations, ensuring the safety and
well-being of affected residents. And >> um whereas the fire department leadership coordinated mutual aid of staff and emergency equipment from 32 municipalities in Berkshire, Franklin, Hampshire, Hampton, and Worcester
counties, plus the state and the Red Cross. And this one's yours. Whereas the Amoris Communications Center through its dispatchers on duty was exceptional in handling I'm going to cry. I'm sorry. The overwhelming rush of
incoming emergency calls, transmission to first responder and ongoing calls for mutual aid with two dispatchers handling 29 911 calls, 105 police and fire transmissions, and 11 outgoing calls for
mutual aid in just 22 minutes before additional offduty emergency dispatchers were able to arrive to assist. I'm going to cry because your work is so important and >> and whereas the Ammeris Police
Department provided essential support through emergency response, evacuation of residents in the apartment building, scene security, traffic and crowd management, and notification of residents in adjoining neighborhoods, demonstrating calm leadership during a
dynamic public safety event. Whereas the Department of Public Works staff contributed critical logistical assistance, including increasing access to water, addressing wastewater concerns, and providing electrical infrastructure support, equipment deployment, and enabling effective
operations by all responding agencies. And I mean, we can go while you're passing it the rest of the way around. >> Ah, there we go. Um, I'm sorry. Please. Now we can read it up here and you're next.
>> It's the bottom one. >> It's the bottom section. Whereas the inspection services staff performed timely assessment of structural integrity and habitability, providing authoritative guidance
necessary to safeguard public health and safety. And whereas the town manager's office communications team ensured timely timely, accurate and accessible public information, reducing confusion and
providing reassurance to residents, families, and the broader community. And >> whereas the town manager regularly convened key department heads to coordinate responses and share updates and worked with the University of Massachusetts to guarantee a
well-coordinated and efficient response. And whereas numerous town staff across multiple departments work collaboratively to support displaced residents, coordinate temporary accommodations, manage resource needs, and maintain
continuity of municipal services and Tab, do you want to read one, >> please? Anna, >> I was going to let Jennifer go ahead if she wanted to. Um, but I'm happy to as well. >> That would be I'm happy to read one. Um, >> and we're at whereas
>> the University of Massachusetts, >> yeah, that's what I thought. Whereas the University of Massachusetts responded to the needs of the many students impacted by offering significant assistance, including the creation of the student care and emergency response funds, and
assistance with housing, legal services, academic support, food, and other basic needs and counseling services. And whereas the collective response exemplified the town of Ammerst core values of preparedness, interin
institutional and interdep departmental cooperation, compassion, and commitment to community well-being and whereas the dedication and swift action of these individuals prevented further harm, protected residents, and upheld
the highest standards of public service. Now therefore, the town of the Ammersttown Council hereby extends its deepest appreciation and gratitude to the members of the fire, EMS, police, dispatch, public works, inspection services, and the
communications manager, to the town manager, and to all employees who contributed to the response and recovery efforts. And this is an edit. And all 32 municipalities that responded with mutual aid of staff and emergency
equipment. Be it further resolved that this citation be entered into the public record as an enduring expression of the town's respect, admiration, and gratitude for their exemplary performance on behalf of the residents of Ammerst and that a copy be sent to
all 32 municipalities that came to our aid. Thank you so much. Paul, would you like to say anything? >> Thank you, Lynn. Um, so I'm really glad the town council used this public forum to recognize the first responders and
everyone else who contributed to um, fighting the fire on that day and the uh, everything that happened since then. I would note that in the audience we have representatives from the DPW inspection services, our communications manager as well. Um, first I think it's
really important to recognize that were there were no reported injuries or um and during the course of the event or since subsequent to that and I really think that's a tribute to the training and professionalism and dedication of our firefighters who were there fighting
the fire in real time. Um there are three um basic images I keep thinking about during this and the most important one that I can't get out of my head is firefighters coming out of the burning
building when they were fighting it and just being totally exhausted having spent every ounce of energy and you know they're walking in with all the full equipment air packs masks and a hot building climbing up five sets of stairs carrying equipment and coming out and
just not having another ounce of energy and just so appreciative of what they dedicated on in real time um to our town and to fighting the fire and to making sure all the students who lived in that building were safe. I also think about
the um the the fire chief bringing together um all the other town leaders as we were sort of sorting through this on a you know day you know hourby hour sometimes basis and it was at times like that that I really came to appreciate the quality of the leadership in our
town with DPW inspection services um fire three fire chiefs um police and everybody at assistant town manager communications manager everybody at the table working through the next steps even as the fire was going on.
And third, um I really think um our fire chief distinguished himself especially that day. I mean he he was a a sense of calm and a very chaotic challenging situation where he could not see the entire um the entire field of
battle. basically he had called in um additional resources and we we want to really recognize our mutual aid partners especially the chiefs of those departments who also came to the aid of our town to help manage the fire. Um you but Lindsey Strong just brought a steady
calm he was decisive. He had to make some really important grave decisions on a moment's notice. he was um diligent about consulting with the building commissioner and others in terms of making a dramatic decision to remove to
take down the building which was deemed to be a necessary thing in order to put out the fire. Um, so and I also do so I just think that that was a thing to see um our two Steves and Lindsay just doing
the work and just a calm um capable manner um which I think anybody who would have seen it would have been very very proud of our of our team and to have every firefighter on duty coming whether on duty or off being at the scene for the town of Ammerst. Um it wouldn't have happened without the art
mutual aid partners as well. I do want to give a um credit to the University of Massachusetts who stepped up at the you know to help house the students meet their needs for medical um legal academic support um financial food
immediate shelter long-term shelter. So I think that they deser the university deserves a lot of credit and I hope that Chief Strong would come up and say a few words. >> Yeah, just like to recognize >> Yeah. Thank you. >> We have to make sure the green lights
on. >> Yeah. I just want to for the count benefit or or is here uh just recognize all the people that are here. These are not all Ammeris firefighters. Uh first and foremost, we do have a number of our Amoris firefighters uh both full-time
and student force represented here. We have our Amoris communications center, Chief Ting from the uh police department. Uh we also have a number of mutual aid partners here. Uh apologize if I miss anybody, but I do see Greenfield. I do see Belchtown. I do see somebody from uh West Springfield. So,
like you said earlier, we had 32 different departments from all the surrounding counties respond to help us from the firefighter level up through the chief level. They were a very integral part of what we did. And again, a shout out to everybody who helped us, to all of our amorous firefighters that
were on duty, came from home, our student firefighters, call firefighters, everybody that was there. None of this can happen without a team effort. So, I was proud to be a part of it. >> And thank you. Thank you for your leadership of that team. Be safe.
Thanks. We if we can find Kimu, we're going to proceed. I'm very The next the next item on our agenda is a tax classification hearing and um Kim Yu,
our principal assessor, will be making a presentation and because um we want to make sure we don't keep her here too long tonight, we are then going to move After discussion, we will move to a vote. So, if you could
please proceed with your presentation. >> Thank you for having me and thank you for doing the vote. >> Press the green light. It's on. >> You're just not close enough. Okay. So, thank you for having me tonight and also thank you for moving the vote so that I can go home to my baby.
All righty. So, um tonight's uh hearing is our classification hearing presented by myself and the board. Um, our board members are unfortunately not here to join us. Um, but I will present to you. Next slide, please. So, these are the things that we're going to be voting on.
We're going to be voting on whether or not we want to do a single or split tax rate, the open space discount, the small commercial um, exemption, and the residential exemption. And I will get into detail as to what those are throughout the presentation. Next slide, please.
So the classification um act was passed in 1978 and basically what this is is classifying the property into these four categories and allowing us to potentially shift the tax burden within one of these categories. So we have the residential, commercial, industrial and
personal property. Next slide please. So just a breakdown. I know I've talked to many of you multiple times about these um classes, but just for those who might be listening or those who are here that don't know, um the residential class
includes um basically any sort of residential living unit, any place where a human being can live. Um so that includes uh single families, apartment complexes, um two families, three families, condos. This also includes
vacant land that's classified as residential. So a house could be built on it. Um the commercial class and actually as well as as physical buildings, homes in the residential class, this also can include items such
as garages, sheds, uh pools, you know, anything that that is in someone's yard. Um the commercial class is any place of business um such as offices, storefronts, um so on and so forth. And then it also
includes our farms. So that's a really important thing to remember because when we're talking uh later on about the split tax rate, whatever we do with that would also affect our farms. So we just want to keep that in mind as well. And then with the industrial property, that's any manufacturing. Um we have
very few of these but uh something also to to important part of the the process. And then lastly is our personal property. This is the most confusing and complicated piece. Um this is basically anything that's used in a business to to conduct the business. So it can be
something as simple as desks, chairs, computers, tables. Um in a hairdresser situation, it could be their their hairdressing chairs, their scissors. Um basically anything. if you were to pick up a building and shake it out, uh, anything that fell out is considered personal property. Um, and then also our
utilities. So the, um, the wires, the poles, the conduits that the electric company uses is considered part of our personal property class as well. And if you can do our next slide, please. This will show you a breakdown of what our
classes look like. So, um, our commercial class is about just under 6% of our total, um, properties. This is down a little bit from last year. We were at 6.1% last year. Um, the industrial class is less than one in
that state, about the same. Like I said, we don't have much of that here um, in Ammerst. Our personal property class is also down just a tiny bit from last year at 4.8% versus the 5.2. 2, but as you
can see, we are mostly residential at the 89.1%. Um, and we are up from 88.5% last year. Um, I think I hate to say it, but CO is still playing a role a little bit in the commercial properties. People
are just starting slowly to come back to offices. Um, you know, storefronts are starting to open as we see. So it's still I think recovering from that. So I expect to see that um you know that number fluctuate a little bit continuing
in the in the current the coming years. Um and and as we can see um you know residential properties are still popping up everywhere. So they're doing pretty well. Um next slide please. So going into
whether we want to do a split or single tax rate. This is just an explanation of sort of what this might look like. Um, so the single tax rate would be considered a factor of one. Um, and that just means that all four of those classes that we just talked about would
be paying based upon the same rate. Um, if we wanted to do a split rate, we can do a factor of less than one, which means that the residential class would pay a lower rate and the commercial class will pay a higher rate. And then
oddly, I don't know why we would do that, but factor greater than one would give the commercial class the lower rate and the residential cra. So those are your three options. Next slide, please, will show us the impact
if we were to do a split rate at the max allowable shift. Um, so again, these are just estimated figures, but if we're looking at the average single family home at 588,286, if we were to do a single rate, we would be around $16.86,
giving them an average tax bill of $9,927. If we were to split the rate, as you can see, it would decrease the tax rate to $15.82 82 and decreased the actual tax bill of about $600. Um, giving us a
$9,300 tax bill. Um, however, on the commercial side, we have an average commercial uh value of $682,55. And again, with the single tax rate, same as the residential, they'd have about um $1,150
um,000 bill. And then with the split tax rate, they would have a much higher rate of $25.30, which would give them about $5,700 more in a tax bill based upon the average. So thinking about that again, you're thinking about all the small
businesses that we have right here downtown. Um, and you're thinking about your farms, uh, if we were to do the split split tax rate at the max shift. So um, just some things to think about there. And another note that I wanted to make as well, um I know we all have the
debt exclusion on our mind as well. Um but that adds into the tax rate about 45 cents per thousand which is in included in these calculations here. Next slide please. So the next thing that we will be voting on tonight is the
residential exemption. Um this is basically allowing for a shift within the residential class only of the tax burden. Um, so it it um we can shift up to 35% of the average value of all
residential properties. So it's not a specific number based upon your specific assess assessment. It'll be based upon an average of the residential uh class. Um it does automatically make the tax rate a little higher for the residential
class. So it's something again we also want to think about along with a bunch of other things when it comes to this particular um vote. Um so if you can go to the next slide please. This shows you the qualifications and non uh
qualifications for this particular exemption. So clearly it would help the single family homes, the condos, portions of buildings that are multi- uh residential. So if there were a two
family and you owner occupied one side, you would get a partial exemption there. Same thing with three family and then as well as a mixed use. So if you have a storefront in the bottom of your property and you occupy a unit in the top, maybe you rent one as well. The one unit has there's a calculation that
would create that one unit discount. However, when we're thinking about those things, we need to look at what would not what would exclude someone from getting this exemption. So, non-owner occupied status is very clearly an
exclusion. But inside of that, we're looking at second homes and rentals. We're looking at homes that are owned by a family member, but not necessarily on the person who's living there may not be on the deed. So, that could affect a
number of people. Um, specifically, I know older people tend to deed their house to their children so that if something was to happen to them, it would be an easy transition, those people would not benefit from this exemption. Um, anyone who has their property in a trust and is not a
trustee, which many times happens in that same circumstance, um, they would not qualify for this exemption. Um and so the other ones will be apartment buildings and nursing homes and group uh living situations. Um they they will
negatively affect or potentially could negatively affect from this. Uh we want to think about our renters in that case because it's a possibility that the owner of the building would pass on that raised tax in rent to those folks. So, um, just some things to think about if
we do want to talk about doing the residential exemption. Next slide, please. And this will show you our um, estimated chart of what is owner occupied versus
not. U, we currently have about 68% of owner occupied and 32% of non-owner occupied. With that being said, those who do have their names um their properties in a trust with whether or not they are the trustee or not, this
may be included in the owner occupied piece. So although it does feel like they are the owners and they do occupy their property, when it comes to this particular exemption, that might adjust this figure. Um, another reoccurring question that we have every year when it comes to this
particular exemption that I wanted to just touch on is why can't we value differently for rental properties within the residential class? And if we were to um to value single family homes using
different methods, first of all, the state would go, what are you doing? um they don't they want us to do uniform um uh methods. So they would say, "Okay, show us how your income and expense methods are working." Um we did a short
little study. We looked at a couple of properties that had income and expense versus those that don't. As you can see, in this case, we have more properties that are owner occupied. They're not going to have any income based upon rental for their properties. So our data would be skewed. So our our non-owner
occupied properties, which is much less would be the small amount of information that we're getting our values on, and it's going to lower our values pretty significantly and end up not being very effective. Um, we have plenty of sales,
as you probably know, to actually use the sales method and be effective and value properly. Um, and that would be something that the Department of Revenue would encourage if we did try to to do it another way. Um, generally they they like you to use the method that has the
most uh accurate backup. So that would be in our case for single family homes that would be sales. Um, next slide please. So just a quick summary. Um, the residential exemption is not quite an
exemption. Um it's it's sort of a a play on words almost. Um it's more of just a redistribution of where the taxes would come from within the residential class. Um again, likelihood that it could potentially hurt some of our renters,
which are um some of our lower income um families, which is I think what we absolutely don't want to do. Um, and although it, you know, it may benefit some of our lower valued homes, it may, um, affect some of our higher valued
homes, which are folks who were, you know, not trying to hurt as well. So, um, just some things to think about quickly while we're um, voting on that. And the next slide, please. So, lastly, um, we would be voting
tonight on the small commercial exemption. So, this is really not something we would do if we're going to do a single tax rate. You really only want to do this for a um a split rate. Basically, what this is is it takes all of the small businesses that have 10 or less employees and allows them to pay on
the residential rate rather than the commercial rate. Um, so for us, just thinking about downtown, most of the businesses that we have, I would assume have 10 or or fewer employees. So doing a split rate and and adopting this would
almost be a waste of time. Um you know it would be a lot of work for um not a whole lot of benefit I think. Um so that is that and um next slide please. So our recommendations tonight is to continue with our single tax rate
and to not adopt the um small commercial uh small yes small commercial residential or um the open space. We don't use open space here in Ammerst. we use chapter land instead. So it's it's our farm country which is um you know
what open space essentially is. Um and that's it. Any questions? >> Okay. Thank you. So I'm going to first move to counselors to see if you have questions or comments. Pam Rooney.
>> Thank you. Uh I did have a question. Um, so it's interesting the state allows a residential exemption which is based on ownership. Um, but it's not keen on a differential rate based on ownership um,
for income generating properties. That seems like a little bit of a >> I think that the difference is when it comes to valuation, the assessors only value structures that are on the
property. Whereas with the exemption, it's more specific to who lives there and who occupies the property. Um so that's why I think the method is not allowed to you know they frown upon it to to use in the single family class and
you know just the fact that we have so many sales of single family homes. Um we do have another method which is a little bit more in this in the case of of single family homes. The sales method would be much more accurate than trying
to get income from those who live in their home. >> Yeah. more concerned with those who are who are gathering income based on the properties they own. Okay. Um the other thing you don't address but but at some
point in the in the year we talk about exemptions based on um like veteran status, seniors, people who are have disabilities. Do we that do we address that tonight or is that a separate topic? >> That would be a separate topic. Yes. And I do just want to put in a little plug.
At some point in the month of January, we will be having a presentation at the senior center explaining all of those. So, um, we can I mean, if you have a question, I can most certainly answer tonight if if Okay. Are there any other questions from counselors?
>> Yes, Jennifer. >> Um, yes. I just had a question um for Kim. When you said other exemptions, you said for small commercial, which is most of our businesses, it's a lot of work for minimum benefit. And that's because
of the number of employees, the average number of employees our businesses in town tend to have. >> So what would happen is we would have um because we have such a small amount of commercial properties, we would be basically giving most of them the
residential rate. So the work that it would take to split the tax rate and then readjust and give most of the commercial properties the exemption, it wouldn't necessarily benefit um the residential class or the
commercial class to be honest. It would just be a lot of shuffling papers really and and deciding who has less than 10. um which is a report that the um do mail to us but um essentially it's it's just a lot of shuffling papers to come to a
pretty pretty much the same spot that we're at now. >> Okay, Pam, you have an additional question. >> I did. Thank you. Um I forgot to ask. So, as in your assessment methods, if a property is vacant, is it still not
taxable um at at the going rate? like a commercial property for instance. >> So a commercial property we every year in January we send out the income and expense request form. So what we're looking for is to find out if you have vacancy you know what is the income of the building what is the expenses of the
building and we use a method that helps us to figure out a valuation based upon that. Um, if there is a building that has long-term vacancies, that's absolutely something that, you know, we would need to know for the income method. Um, because it could potentially
affect the valuation of the property. Um, you know, is there a reason that there's long-term vacancy? Is the building dilapitated? Is it a bad location? You know, what's the situation? Um, and depending upon the situation, it could very negatively affect the value.
>> I have a quick quick followup. Um we were it was has been mentioned a couple times that with because of the fire we have lost some um value in our tax base. Um I am asking so if a building no
longer exists but um the land is still there we still have a land value that should be taxed. Is that not right? Okay. >> Yes absolutely. >> Is there any u Andy? Yeah, real quick question. Um, you reported on recommendations from you and the town
manager. Uh, did the board of assessors have an a recommendation? >> Yes, same recommendation. I apologize. I meant to say that. >> Okay. Are there any questions from um people in the town room or in on Zoom?
This is regarding the tax classification hearing. Okay, seeing none, I'll go back to any other questions from the council. Then I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing. Seek a second. >> Second. >> Thank you. Uh, we're going to begin with
councelor Hani. >> I. >> Bob Hegner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> Hi. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. Andy Steinberg, >> hi. >> Jennifer Tob, >> yes. >> Councelor Walker, >> yes.
>> Patanggeles. Anna Delin Gothner, >> I. >> Council Et is absent and Lynn Griezmer is an I. It's unanimous of all present. That's 12 in favor and one absent. We're going to actually move at this point immediately to a couple of votes related
to tax classification. The first is to adopt a minimum residential factor of one equal tax rate for all classes of properties for fiscal year 2026 and that no open space discount be granted. Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Any other questions or comments? Seeing none, I'm going to move to a vote. Bob Hegner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> Hi. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. Andy Steinberg, >> hi. >> Jennifer Tob,
>> yes. >> Councelor Walker, >> yes. >> Pat D'Angelus, >> hi. >> Anna Delin Gothier, >> hi. >> Lynn Griemer is an I. Councelor Hanick. >> Hi. >> It's unanimous for those attending. 12 in favor, one absent. The next motion is
to not adopt a residential exception for the fiscal year 2026. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Are there any questions or comments? Then I'm going to move to Councelor Lord. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney.
>> Yes. >> Cath uh councelor Ryan. >> Hi. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Hi. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Uh Patanggeles. >> Hi. >> Anna Develin Gothier.
>> Hi. >> Councelor. I'm sorry. Absent. Uh Lynn Griezmer is an I. Councelor Hani. >> Hi. >> Bob Hegner. I >> it's unanimous with one absent. >> Um thank you very much. And >> one more.
>> One more. I'm sorry. To not adopt a small commercial exemp exemption for fiscal year 2026. Is there a second? >> Second. >> And are there any questions or comments? Seeing none, I'm moving to Pam Rooney. >> I.
>> Councelor Ryan. >> I. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Hi. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Pat D'Angelus. >> Hi. >> Anna Deon Gothier. >> Hi. >> Lyn Gremer Merson. I councelor Hani.
>> Hi. >> Bob Hegner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> I. >> It's unanimous with 12 in favor and one absent. Kim. Thank you so much. Thanks. We're going to take a um five minute
break and then we're going to begin with our uh public forum on the FY27 budget. >> So in essence, we're recessing till 7:00. No, actually we we are recessing the regular meeting of the council and
when we reconvene at 7:00, we will call to order the special meeting of the town council. We will also call to order the finance committee meeting. Okay. Please be back at your seats at 7:00. Turn your mics off. Turn your pictures
off. Sorry. I don't I think we accidentally turned the lights off back there. >> You choose your battles, don't you? >> Sometimes, right? Oh, >> you choose your
respons. >> As long as they don't block anything, I can have it. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> All right. Uh, good evening. >> We're going to begin this as a public forum. It is a requirement of the
charter that every year we do a public forum regarding the upcoming budget which will not begin until July 1st, 2027. So 26. Thank you. It will be the FY27
budget. It will begin on July 1st, 2026. Did I get that one right? Thank you. Okay. Um we are allowed to hold this meeting uh virtually. based on the law. So we actually have a combination of counselors in the room and on Zoom.
There are 12 counselors totally present for the meeting. Uh we I would therefore I would like to call um the fact that we have a quorum present. I'm calling the November 17th special meeting of the town council and the finance committee
to order at 6 at 7:02. And I'm going to call on each counselor. Ask that they indicate they are present and can hear and be heard. Pat D'Angelus >> present.
>> Anna Davlin Gothier >> present. >> Uh councelor Ete is absent. Lyn Griezmer's present. Councelor Hanny >> present. >> Bob Hagner >> present. >> Councelor Lord >> present. >> Pam Rooney >> here. >> Councelor Ryan
>> present. >> Kathy Shane >> I'm here. Andy Steinberg >> present. >> Jennifer Tob >> here. >> Councelor Walker >> here. >> There's no chat room for this. If you would like to make comments from the um
council that we'll use the raised hand button, I want to ask now as we're moving into the presentation that if you would like to make public comment and you are in the room, please make sure you have signed up with Athena who's over here.
Later on, I will be asking for those people who are on Zoom who would like to make public comment to raise their hands, but not yet. We're going to begin tonight's presentation uh with a um brief overview of the FY27
budget information presented by a combination of our town manager and Sean Mongano, our dire finance director. Sean Paul. >> Thank you, Lynn. So, I just want to remind counselors, if you want your cameras on, this is the time to turn them on. Uh, thank you for the
opportunity to present this. This is a very brief presentation that we have pre that we presented uh at the um financial indicators pro uh session. This is an opportunity for the public to weigh in before we even begin the budget process in a in a serious way. So, we wanted to
the public forum is a requirement of the town charter where we get to listen to the public and their values, their priorities, things where they'd like to see the town uh the town through its uh town manager and town council prioritize their funds. Next slide.
So, tonight's takeaways is that we have some major challenges facing us. Um it's the we want to fund all of our budgets fairly um and responsibly and that includes our town budgets, library budgets, the regional school district
and the elementary schools. We are faced with significant increases or we anticipate significant increases in health insurance. We anticipate our health insurance increase will be equivalent to or more than what we had last year which we had to manage through
uh um plan design changes. We have other fixed costs that are increasing as well such as um you know retirement expenses. Um we have we're have been started the process of trying to build better relationships with our stakeholders which are the other elected officials in
our four regions our four towns in the region plus our um you know library trustees and our school committee. And we also are really focused on maintaining our long-term fiscal sustainability. It's really important for the town to accomplish its goals to
have our finances in good condition. And we and we've also identified constructing four our four major capital projects as a high priority. We've got two under construction. We have two that we can't lose focus. We need to be uh driving towards get those two addressed
as well. We also recognize um the pressure on taxpayers. We heard a minute ago the tax classification hearing. uh taxes are are a big part of why um we're able to do what we can do and we have to maintain the trust with our taxpayers. We have some good news and that we have
reaffirmed the town's double A+ bond rating and we talk a lot about this and people say why do you talk about it and it's important because we are borrowing a lot of money now and we will in the near future for major capital projects. If you have a the better bond rating you have, the less money you pay to the
banks for interest. And that's why it's important for us to maintain our double A+ bond rating. We have a strong financial position and that's been purposeful. It's been built up over the last 10 years. Bas basically so we can take on these major capital projects.
We have a balanced budget for FY26 and we will we're going to be strained to ma maintain that balanced budget especially after the um impact of the um of the fire at Olympia Drive. Uh this has caused additional expenses and also
taken some properties offline and we've been very successful in securing grants and we have new staff who are coming on board which we're really excited with a new planning director, new comproller, a new finance director who's who's been here for a while um all coming on board.
So in terms of where we are, we look at what the radiance agencies have said about us. We have excellent fiscal management. We have forward-looking planning. We have fi strong financial systems. The audit has come in. You we've reviewed the audit with the town council uh finance committee and it is
it's excellent. Um we we continue to work as a team and we look to have steady managed growth over time. We're not going to see a big increase in income for the town. We basically get 3 to 4% increase of revenue a year and
then we have to manage every all the needs of the town within that 3 to 4%. Now, we're going to spend a little bit of time getting into the details, but not too much time. Sean, >> thank you. So, on the screen, you'll see our initial revenue projections for FY26
or 27, sorry, Lynn, spread to me. Um, so we've already started working through these projections with the finance committee. So, these are our very initial projections that we shared at the financial indicators presentation. Um, we started working through these and there's already been some updates. nothing really material that's impacts
the budget gap at this point. Um, but I just want to be clear that these are are starting projections and that these will evolve throughout the budget process. Um, so we break it down into four major categories. Property taxes, local receipts, state aid, and other financing sources. In property taxes, we're
projecting a 3.4% increase um, which is based on the 2.5% allowable increase in property taxes plus new growth. and it also includes our estimate for our debt exclusion payment for next year for the school project. In local receipts, we're projecting a 13.1% increase. This
reflects year, you know, the past year of higher receipts than what we budgeted. Um, and we've heard from the council and from the finance committee. And so, we've made some adjustments there. And so, you'll see a larger than typical um increase in that revenue source. In state aid, it's uh right now
we're projecting it to be flat. the FY26 budget was finalized before the state budget was finalized. And so the number you see in the the blue column there wasn't the actual final state budget. So when I put in the final state budget for FY27, there's a small decrease of 74,000. Um but the number that's in
there for 27 is level funded with FY26. And then with other financing sources, these are transfers in from other funds. Uh we're projecting this more or less level. In the ambulance fund, we're projecting a little bit of a decrease because we're not uh anticipating buying a new ambulance this year. Um and then
in community preservation act, that's based on the debt that we have for that year, but other than that, it's uh more or less the same. Miscellaneous, the 75,000 for is based on a agreement we have with Comcast, which ends at the end of next calendar year. So, we don't know what that will look like. And then the free cash uh contribution was a one-time
uh contribution for the schools. Next slide. So, that was the revenue side. On the expense side, we start with our operating budget. So, those are the uh one for the elementary schools, the regional schools, the town, and the Jones library. Uh we are projecting a
little bit of a higher increase to start than we have in the past at 3 and a half%. It does not assume carrying over the one-time contribution for the school district. And I'll clarify that's for the elementary schools in FY uh 26 that we're not projecting carrying over for FY27. Um so the net impact for the
elementary schools will be a little bit less than the 3.5%. Um and then below that is our capital budget which we're assuming 10 and a half% of the levy for um capital because we're starting to pay the debt for the new um for our building projects, the elementary schools and the library.
We're going to see the amount of uh capital available for non-building projects start to go down a little bit. And you see that here. You'll see cash capital um going down to 3.7 million uh where it was higher in the year before. Um but that that was expected as we start to take these building projects
online and pay back the debt for them. Miscellaneous the major cost there is our pension uh assessment from the retirement system. Uh we have not got an exact number yet but that's one of those things that will be updated when we get the exact number in the next week or so. And then unappropriated uses. So these
are state assessments whatever we get um you know charter tuition choice tuition things like that. um reserve for bayments and exemptions, which kind of ties into the question about the the property that we um lost. And then other amounts we raised are just a couple um like tax title things we have to do. Um
so all in all, based on our projected expenses for next year, very early and our revenue estimates for next year, we have about a $230,000 gap. Next slide. So a couple charts that we thought were important. This is our economic growth revenue. So these bars represent the
portion of our total operating revenue um that is comprised of what we call economic growth revenues. And those economic growth revenues are new growth in our property values, uh meals tax, occupancy um tax, uh motor vehicle
excise tax, things like that. Um so we look at those uh set of revenues to say is that growing as a portion of our overall revenue picture or is it shrinking? Uh you saw during COVID that it started to shrink when there was less economic activity going on downtown and that it started to bounce uh bounce back
after COVID. Next slide. This chart looks at uh three of the major revenue sources, property taxes, local receipts, and state aid. And it looks at it on a per capita basis over the last 10 years or so. And then it adjusts it for inflation. So property tax um has been the one that's grown the
most because of the 2.5% automatic increase in property taxes. And then we've had the new growth on top of that. So that one's increased the most, but with inflation, you can see that the buying power has only increased slightly. With state aid, that's our second highest one. That has not increased as much over that time period.
And so with inflation, it's maybe a little bit lower than it was in terms of buying power back in 2016. And then with local receipts, that one has really gone up and down, especially with COVID. Um, so it's about even. And again, with buying power, it's a little bit lower than it was back in 2016. So all it's just trying to show is that inflation
has really eaten into the the revenue growth that we have had. Next slide. So some challenges um and some highlights. So uh we had robust discussion my understanding I wasn't part of it. Uh but we had robust discussion among library schools in town
in FY26 or FY25 planning for FY26. Uh the result was about a 5% increase for school budgets and a 4% increase for town and library. Um and we were able to continue making investment in capital. um and sustainability initiatives. In terms of ongoing challenges, a big one that we hear from departments all the
time is just maintaining level services. Um most of our new money goes to benefits and after that it goes into personnel. And so there's really little money that goes into just the cost of software and equipment and supplies. And so that's a challenge that we definitely
see for next year. uh roads as we all know um our relationship with the region and and kind of managing that complex relationship with other towns, health insurance as you heard earlier and just continuing to grow the tax base to um meet the demand for new services
concerns. So expansion of the tax base um you know our new growth will take a hit likely next year because of the loss of the property that was under construction depending on how you know what happens with that property going forward. Um, we want to continue continue trying to reduce the town's carbon footprint while at the same time maintaining fiscal discipline. Um, not
with just with that one, but with all the new initiatives that uh we'd like to do. We've got to continue our plan for funding the four building projects. We started two of them, but we still have two more um that we've got to get going. Um, and then just managing that needs generally are outweighing resources. And
all this has a big impact on taxpayers. Strategies. We'll continue to manage resources as as frugally as we can. um maintain our fiscal discipline, continue to look for grants. We had good luck with uh the MBLC and with the MSBA getting additional grants to make those projects more affordable for taxpayers
um and we'll continue looking for ways to do that. Um and to continue sustainable development. Next slide. So this is the budget process. Uh we are on the second square tonight. Uh public forum on the budget. The next step uh the finance committee is going to meet
sometime and discuss budget guidelines or finalize budget guidelines. You've had your initial discussion on the on those budget guidelines. Um once the finance committee votes their recommendation, it will come to the council and in December the council would likely adopt uh budget guidelines
for the manager along with goals. Um after that we go into the capital planning season which would be in the spring of 2026 with joint capital planning committee. Our school and library budgets are due April 1st. The town manager's budget is due May 1st. Uh the finance committee will then review
every department in detail uh beginning in May going into to late May, early June. We'll hold another public hearing on a specific budget proposal uh in May and June on the town manager budget proposal in May and June. Um we'll have a hearing on the capital plan and then
at some point the council will vote on the budget in June. Next slide. So these are uh just when uh where to engage and when to get involved. So the public forum now uh budget guidelines development now with with this meeting tonight. Um the finance committee I
think is called to order. Uh so the finance committee is here and they're drafting those budget guidelines as we speak. Um town manager goal development now. You can email the town council or the town manager with feedback. Um and then we'll have a public hearing in May
of 2026. And then if uh feedback on capital will be the joint capital planning committee they take public comment at all their their meetings which are public uh and then there will be a public forum on the capital plan. That's it. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Um so if you
have are in the room and you want to make public comment please make sure you have signed up with Athena. If you are online at and you would like to make public comment please raise your hand at this time. Uh, Councelor Walker, you have a comment.
>> Yeah, I'm just wondering, did we actually call the finance committee meeting to order? >> Thank you. We did not. Kathy, thank you, Alicia. I call the finance committee to order. And all five members of the finance committee, Kathy Shane,
Alicia Walk, Bob Hegner, Andy Steinberg, and Mandy Johanni are here tonight. And they've already been called to order. And I don't see our two resident members in the audience. So, we are called to order. >> Okay. Thank you so much.
Um, I see one person in the audience with their hand up. Is are there any other people on Zoom? Please raise your hand now because I'm going to use that as my final count. I see four hands on Zoom. Athena, how many?
>> 12. >> 12. Okay. Um, so we're going to take public comment. I'm going to ask that you keep it to three minutes. Normally, I would go to two, but this is a very important time for us
to have com comment. Um, please make sure you stay to the issues of the upcoming budget and uh, make sure you also consult the clock. It's a tiny little thing, but it's there and it will go off at some point when you have
reached your three minutes. So, um, with that, uh, Thea, let's begin with people in the room. Sarah Foresight, >> please make sure the green light's on. State your name and where you live. Green lights on. Thank you. My name is
Sarah Fors. I am the president of the Ammeris Firefighters Local 1764. I work for the town residents, counselors, town manager Bachelman. Good evening again. My name is Sarah Forsight, president of the Ammeris Firefighters Local 1764. and I
am here tonight to speak on behalf of the union. The recent recent tragedy at Olympia Drive and the events that unfolded on Halloween have yet again illustrated a stark reality that the firefighters of Ammerst have been voicing for decades. The staffing levels of the Ammerst Fire Department are
dangerously low. On any given day, these brave men and women are expected to provide the highest level of care and service to the 39,000 plus residents of Ammerst and the more than 34,000 students attending the multiple colleges in our town with a minimum of only seven
or eight firefighters on duty at any given time. These firefighters are tasked with staffing at least three ALS ambulances and two engines, an amount of apparatus that by standard would require at least 14 firefighters to staff.
Instead, Ammerst has chosen time and time again to run with fewer staff and risk the safety of its residents and firefighters by allowing engines to remain in service and respond to calls with as few as two and sometimes one firefighter on board. This practice is
downright dangerous, not only to the firefighters, but to the citizens that they have sworn to protect. Ammeris is relying too heavily on mutual aid resources to come into our town to staff our daily calls. Calls which would be better covered by a higher number on of
minimum firefighters on shift. This practice of running with fewer onduty staff and relying on mutual aid is a drain on regional resources and is detrimental to the towns our mutual aid partners are responsible for. Our ask once again is that the town council and
town manager prioritize public safety by increasing fire department staffing. We recognize that in fiscal year 23, as part of the town's strategic partnership with UMass Ammerst, four positions were added to our roster. In this fiscal year, the town froze one of our
positions. Another detrimental blow to the department. counselors, town manager Bachelman. Local 1764 is not asking for an immediate full-scale hiring spree. We are asking for a concrete multi-year staffing plan. Commit to adding
positions annually until Ammerst reaches the national firefighter per capita average. That plan will show residents that you prioritize their safety. Local 1764 is committed to the safety of Ammeris residents and visitors. Councilors and town manager Bachelman,
we look forward to working with you to increase the Ammeris Fire Department staffing and demonstrate our shared commitment to public safety. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for joining us, Sarah. I'm going to go to Rabbi Esther. Please enter the room. State your full name and
where you live. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Esther Azar and I live on on Henry Street in Ammerst. Um, last week, sorry, I didn't expect to be called. I want to tell you that I feel frust
frustrated. Um, I took a deep dive running for the school committee and learned so much through this process. And I recognize that there are many responsibilities that the town has, but it seems that our schools are seen as an enemy to the sustainability of our town.
As a parent and an educator, it's painful to watch, and I hope that we can find a new way forward. Last week, I watched the BCG meeting and heard the library speak of their endowment, and I wondered how our schools could be provided with a similar
safety net. And while I recognize that our schools cannot have an endowment, we can have a more robust stabilization fund. And I would like to request that money from this year's surplus be put towards that stabilization fund.
And I'd also like to request that the town council understand the huge transition that's happening um in the elementary school and the sixth grade academy and that money is put aside specifically for that transition
because although the narrative is that this is going to cost less money definitely now it's not going to cost less money. this kind of transition is going to be um is going to
require a lot of support for our for our students and for our staff. And I can um I'm tired of of um I'm tired of talking about all the
suffering that's going on in our schools right now and all the students that are not getting their needs met. So, I'm going to end here. Thanks. >> Thank you for joining us, Rabbi Esther. Uh, please go to the town room. Tom
Valley. >> Good evening. Uh, my name is Tom. I, uh, am a member of Amoris Firefighters Local 1764. Um and December 5th coming up in just a few weeks marks 20 years that I've been a firefighter in this town. Um I just
wanted to reiterate what Sarah said and urge uh everyone to prioritize uh staffing of the fire department. Uh this year we're on track to respond to roughly 7,200 emergency calls
um in Amoris and other areas that we cover. Um, if you look around Massachusetts, there are a lot of fire departments responding to half of that with the same staffing and they are begging for more help. Um,
and if you look at the NFPA standards, they're doing it rightfully so. Uh, we're responding to 7,200 calls a year with sometimes seven or eight firefighters on duty and we are regularly sending fire apparatus uh with one or two people to life and death
emergencies. And by regularly I mean every day. Um, sorry. I want you to think about the crowd of firefighters that were standing in the
back of the room not 45 minutes ago. I can count on one hand how many of them live in this town and still have hands left over. when we're asking you for help, it's not to protect my family and my stuff. It's to protect yours.
And I think sometimes that gets lost. We're not looking. It's not because I want to hire my buddies. It's because we want to do our job and we want to provide for this community that I've grown to love over the last 20 years and I consider myself a part of. Thank you.
>> Thank you for joining us. We're going to go back to um Alex Lopez. Please enter the room, state your name and where you live. >> Uh so I'm Alex Lopez. I live on Pot Wine
Lane in South Ammerst. Um I until very recently was standing out front holding a sign saying worst annual tradition. Um because it seems that we have this annual tradition uh where we all get together, we celebrate our
reliability to standards and poor. Uh we celebrate how our capital fund is doing and the ongoing construction projects around town. And then we lament the fact that we don't have staff in our schools or our fire departments in order to do
the basic services that our residents require. Um the fact that we are steady building new structures but can't adequately staff a fire department when they're burning down um is telling
and I think it's extremely revealing given the state of the schools um that have been yelling this for years now as we see the same trends. We sit in the shadow of major endowments. Um, people who call themselves
partners in our town. And yet it seems that the people who do not want to have the conversation about what a more appropriate partnership would look like are those who claim to be leading us from the town council chambers themselves.
And so as a parent, when I was walking over tonight, I had my three kids with me and they asked, "Why is the fire department here?" And I said, 'Well, because they need to come beg for money, too. It's the same reason why your friends
are here. We live in a town that regularly not only can't staff, but the staff that we do have can't pay enough to live in town. And we wonder why it's unsustainable as we continue to
invest money into buildings, but not the people inside of them. I hope that there will be a drastic change in our relationship to our residents. um to our employees in this
upcoming budget. Um unfortunately, I don't have much faith in that. And I don't because I've continued to see the way that we celebrate these construction projects, the way that we can celebrate a town manager as successful while we continue to have the same problems year
after year. And this is becoming the worst annual tradition in Ammerst. So, I'm hoping to see different. I'm hoping to see accountability because right now the only thing I see different is that it keeps getting
worse. >> Thank you for joining us. Go back to the town room. >> Angelica Bernell. Uh good evening, Angelica Bernal, uh district 2. So I am here today as the mother of two students, one in Fort River Commantantes
program and another in the ESP program in the middle school. And I'm here to ask you to support a strong budget for our schools. Year after year, parents like myself have been coming to ask you to give our schools the budgets they need to avert cuts. And year after year, town council is not ensuring a robust b
budget. I really hope this year will be different. It has to be because our schools continue to remain in crisis and decline. Let me be specific about what that decline and crisis looks like for my family. When my daughter, who's here, started in the communant program in
kindergarten in 2021, the program was robust and it had plans for growth. She had a full year bilingual education, including communantes during the summer from 8:30 a.m. to 300 p.m. each day for
free. Now, as a fourth grader, she and others have experienced teachers and coordinators leave the program, had her summer bilingual education cut first to less hours, then to asking parents to pay out of pocket over $1,000, creating
a huge, you know, uh, imbalance between who could pay and who could not to last summer not having kamanti summer at all. And now, as she's preparing for her final year, her and her classmates are worried that they just won't have a bilingual program in the middle school.
Now, for students with special needs like my son, concerns have centered on high teacher turnover, insufficient paraprofessional supports, and lack of full-time staff positions that continue to remain unfilled. For instance, this year, my son's program didn't have enough paraprofessionals to support a
class of high support needs. So, the special education teacher often had to step in and become a one-on-one. And this meant leaving her over work and unable to even eat her lunch. let alone do planning. Other staff positions like
a full-time BCBA for the middle and high school remain as yet unfilled. I worry in the face of all this that we are no longer an attractive school district. Year after year, our educators face uncertainty as they face the possibility of losing their jobs because of our budgets. This climate of austerity that
I have had to see for the last four years is one that's left us wondering whether this town really cares about schools and providing our town's children with a quality education. But this year, my worries are even more intensified. One year ago, we still had an intact Department of Education. Now
we don't. So, for the first time in four years, I want to make a different request, not just for strong budgets, but to actually invest in our schools. Last week with CPAC, we talked to school
committee about the need for a mind shift. I'm calling for that now. A mind shift of how we think about budgeting to think first and foremost about correcting years of austerity that have led us to a crumbling school system and more and more students opting to choice
out charter schools and out of district placements. For instance, consider that we can't need you to wrap up. >> So continue that we can't continue to save money year after year for a rainy day fund with millions of dollars in surpluses to be spent on capital projects alone. We need to shift our
budgeting mindset to reflect what is happening on the ground. That the rainy day is not in the future. It's now and that our schools need those funds today or consider what we're saying that we need to not just have that it's not about giving all municipal departments the same. It's not equitable.
>> Angela, >> um I'll say one last thing. In the present, our fire department and our schools are the type priorities in need. So, it would be smart to provide them with percentages that reflect the these needs. So, thank you. >> Thank you for your comment. Thank you for joining us. Uh
Ellen JG, please enter the room. State your full name and where you live. >> Uh hello, I'm Ellen Jedrier. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> I live on Bay Road and I am a parent of
two kids at Crocker Farm. Um soon to be middle schooler for one. And I'm asking for you all um as you set the budget guidelines for the year, please, please prioritize our schools. Our children
really cannot take any more cuts to teachers to special education co-teers, paraprofessionals, specialist staff, world languages, arts, band, orchestra, the list goes on. Libraries, um our class sizes have grown. I think my own
child started in a class of maybe 14 or 15 and now the two classes in that grade are 24 and 26. Our numbers of general education and special education teachers have been reduced at the elementary and regional levels. The needs of our
students have increased significantly even with declining enrollment. the needs have increased especially in our preschool and all across um all across our schools and especially since co
um we've mentioned in the past and we'll say it again that we have a sizable surplus each year and we continue to put money into that surplus I guess as a rainy day fund you know to fund capital
projects but why does why do we have to put as much as we do into those funds. What is the plan for them? And why can't we put some of it into what's most needed in our community rather than buildings like our schools or like our fire department? We
have an aging middle school, an aging high school. Crocker Farm is aging. You you all have heard so many of us say this before, but our budget reflects our values and our schools are a priority for so many in this town. So please,
please make them a priority in this budget for the year. Thank you for listening. >> Thank you for joining us, Ellen. Back to the room. >> Kathleen Mitchell. Hi, my name is Kathleen Mitchell. I'm a
District 5 resident and parent to two children in the schools. I'm concerned about the future of our schools and whether we are meeting our legal and moral obligations to our youngest residents right now. Given the situation in the schools, I would encourage you to
consider whether the percentage of the tax levy reserved for capital could be reduced to make more operating funds available to all departments. Um, it is my understanding that the financial management policy sets 10% as
a goal and so the 10 and a half% amount exceeds that. And unlike free cash, this money is not one-time money. It is recurring money and could just as easily be used for operating as for capital. But once it's sequestered, that is no longer possible. Our schools do access
some of these capital funds, but the different needs of the schools versus the town means that the vast majority of these funds go to support municipal expenses and projects. Our schools have capital needs, of course, but what they really need are educators in classrooms.
Recognizing this difference and shifting budgeting practices accordingly would be a more equitable approach. Finally, given that the percent of tax levies sequestered for capital is now over six million annually, I would urge the council to request more transparency in
terms of how these funds are ultimately spent once allocated in the capital improvement plan. At a time of fiscal scarcity, it is so important that we have increased transparency and accountability in terms of all public spending. And I know that you have
difficult decisions ahead of you. and I hope that you'll keep in mind the fundamental difference between equity and equality and be willing to challenge the way that things have been done in the past. Thank you, >> Kathleen. Thank you for joining us. Uh
Pat Onaku, please enter the room, state your name and where you live. >> Good evening, Pat. Can people hear me? >> We can. >> Okay. Good evening. Uh my name is Patanbaco district 2. So I'm a resident
of Ames for more than 40 years. I'm a senior citizen. My husband is retired. It's getting really difficult to live in this town due to unaffordability. Taxes are high. And
yet, as a woman of color, I feel that every year during the budget season, we're told our taxpayers are told this year uh budget is going to be really tight, challenges, this and that.
And yet, we put tax dollars money into infrastructure. We take out loans that we cannot afford and then ignore people. I hope that people will reflect on the recent
election. Voters are tired of white supremacy in this town. They want our tax dollar to go to people. So I'm here to advocate for fully funding all the
recommendations made by CSWG including Crest DEI youth empowerment program our public schools b uh bipok cultural uh center
and um I'm also very concerned about having only two opportunities for public uh forum or comment for budget process Yes, especially during this fall when we're when that is you know soon that will be holiday season perhaps people
are not paying attention I feel that there should be more uh public forum maybe like around February March including the one around May and I want I want to conclude by saying that
if we really value people we need to put our money where it belongs. I'm not impressed about being told we don't have money and yet we have money in the free cash. Take the money out of free cash and you know use it for pe you
know on people that will benefit um families and residents of this town. Thank you. >> Thanks for joining us Miss Pat. We're going to stay now with the people in the town room. Algra Clark. >> Hi, my name is Algra Clark. I live in
District 2. Um, first I wanted to say thank you to all the firefighters who are still here in the room. Um, it was really astounding to see the fire last Friday. Um, and the response was
I just I don't have words for it. I'm so grateful that no lives were lost, no firefighters were injured. Um, but it it was the second week in a row that multiple towns were called in for mutual
aid. Um, the first being Halloween and the celebrations leading to multiple transports to Kulie Dickinson. Um, so I had an incident in 2023 with my son. He went into anaphylactic shock. It was over the
summer and I just remember being so grateful that it was um that we a live so close to the north fire station and that the firefighters were able to come within 5 minutes. And that would not have been the case if if my son went into crisis on Halloween or on November
7th. And so we really need to look at how we're staffing the fire department. Um I think that we need to go back to UMass. Um because I do think that there is a significant impact from them being in this town to our usage of the fire
department. And I think we need to ask for an increase in what they're providing um to the department specifically staffing and equipment wise. perhaps even ponying up for part of the new location, whatever that might
look like. Um, so I also just wanted to echo what other parents have said. I have two children in the public schools. I am a graduate of Ammerst Regional High School myself and I was looking at the list of all the
programs that are no longer there over the last 20 years um since I graduated including the childlife development, the you know shop programs, the culinary program, the um like clothing program
and so many of the offerings that have just been cut every year um in terms of what is offered at the high school, in terms of what is offered at our elementary schools. And I know that we have this great opportunity with two
buildings merging into one to hopefully save some in operating costs, but again, as Rabbi Esther said, it also costs money to have a transition plan. So, we need to be investing in our schools to make sure that in the long run things
are sustainable and that our children have the best education that we can provide them. We have great resources in this town and we need to be utilizing them appropriately. Thank you. >> Thanks for joining us, Lra. Next, Laura Jane Hunter.
>> Good evening. I'm Laura Jane Hunter. My pronouns are she, her. I am the parent of two high school students and I am the spouse of someone who has been a teacher at the middle school for 18 years. Um I want to echo what Allegra just said and
say thank you so much to the fire department for all of their work and their efforts and um also to advocate for everything that they said about adequately funding the town services that are needed. I'm also here to talk about the schools.
Um it is critical that we align our community priorities with the priorities that support the students. Um, one of the critical issues that keeps
coming up is uh the demand on the schools, the inadequate staffing, the lack of trained paraprofessionals, the lack of adequate pay for paraprofessionals, the lack of a um pathway to certification for par
profofessionals who want to become educator, certified educators. And um a lot of the issues I think could be solved or at least mitigated with smaller class sizes. Um with smaller class sizes, students who need extra
supports can receive them. Um educators can provide the kind of um teaching instruction that they are so good at doing and not have to be just managing giant classrooms. And I have watched the classrooms that my children have been
in, that my husband has been teaching in get larger and larger and um with less and less support. We as a community value our students, we value our schools. We value our educators. It is time for the town
council to prioritize the funding for the schools and to make up the deficits that we've been living under for such a long time. I've seen it go. The the reputation of our schools is
declining along with the lack of funding for them. And if we want to continue to become to be a community where people want to come to live, where families want to live, that they can afford to live, we need to make our schools back to where they were
way before COVID. Um although of course the trauma of COVID continues as a an issue. Um so I'm just going to say again please please please prioritize the schools, prioritize the city services that provide safety and
community justice and um stop putting money into vanity projects. Thank you. >> Thank you for joining us Rachel Hall. Hi everyone. My name is Rachel Hall. Uh I'm in district 2 and I have two kids in
the public schools. Um I also want to thank the firefighters tonight. Um it brought tears to my eyes listening to some of them speak and um the idea that people are begging to help other people is really all they're asking for. Um
really reminds me of the plea that I'm going to talk about with our schools. But I do want to say that I hope we can go to Amoris College and UMass and also fight for more funds to keep our town safe. Um no firefighters deserve to feel scared or unsupported or not have
adequate funding to fight for all of our lives. um hearing about people begging for money and supporting students. I also sit here tonight and listen to your overview of the budget talk about our amazing financial standing, our
surplus, our free cash, and our fancy capital projects. It's quite devastating to hear this as a parent of a public school kid. In 2020, I was told that Ammer schools were the best. That's why we moved here for the schools. Now we can't stay out of the papers for
negative preventable incidents. Administration is constantly quitting because they are not supported and they do don't have livable working conditions. Pipes are now filled with lead in our schools. We were informed today teachers are constantly fleeing the district.
Kids are being unnecessarily physically restrained due to lack of oversight, lack of certified pair of professionals. IEPs are not being met. constant threat of the programs that bring our kids peace. Our kids that have been through COVID and want to now get lost in a
world of learning and imagination in language in music programs constantly getting cut. There's zero designated specific funds for the sixth grade academy which of course is going to have unforeseeable costs and there's no designated funds that we've seen to
support that meaningful and yet terrifying transition without the funds. I know that you do have a hard task. I know you have a budget to manage. But unlike some of the people who have spoken here tonight, I do have hope. I hope that you can imagine looking into
the eyes of our children when you deliver this budget. Thank you. >> Thank you for joining us. Next, Sharon Ralph. >> Hi, my name is Sharon Ruth and I'm speaking tonight on behalf of Ammer CPAC. this special education parent
advisory committee. We would like to encourage the town council to consider measures that would grow the overall town budget of Ammerst with a specific focus on directing new revenue towards providing higher quality education, especially improved special education services. Our current budget often feels
like a zero- sum game where critical needs must compete against one another. Relying solely on cutting existing services or redistributing limited funds is a strategy that inherently limits our potential. To achieve the highquality education and comprehensive special
education services that every student in Ammeris deserves, we need to generate new sustainable revenue. Investing in education is an investment in our collective future and a core driver of our property values and community appeal. Let's shift the conversation
from dividing a small pie to strategically growing a larger one that can adequ ad adequately support all municipal functions, particularly the crucial needs of our children's education and special education services. Thanks for your time and consideration. >> Thank you for joining us, Sharon. Next,
>> Steven Sings. >> Hi, thank you. Uh my name is Steven Sangush. I live on Cottage Street. I am also a firefighter and paramedic for the town of Beluretown. And I wanted to come here tonight and support voice my support for the Emmers Fire Department in their quest to increase their
staffing. As union President Forsythe mentioned, the department regularly has between six and eight members covering well over 7,000 calls for service. As I said, I work for the Beluretown Fire Department. We staff six firefighters and run about half that number. I want to say something about
why this matters. It's easy to call for staffing, but um maybe I can help provide some clarity. Staffing is probably the number one challenge for any department, but it's also an opportunity. It's a small industry and everyone knows which departments are providing the best quality of life for
their employees and the best care for their community. Ammerst has a reputation. They have a reputation for devoted service and excellent care, but we all know that they are understaffed and that they are operating out of buildings that have stretched far past their end of life. I know personally
that working while understaffed is incredibly mentally, physically, and emotionally draining and as time goes on, it becomes actively damaging. When a firefighter is forced out due to physical or mental injury, it is a tremendous loss to the department and the community. It is a loss of money uh
up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in time and training that takes years to recover from. And it's a loss that puts even more stress on the peers who remain. A wellstaffed fire department will attract new firefighters who are knowledgeable and motivated. It reduces
overtime and injury costs and it represents substantial improvements in the services to the town. It's my belief that the sum is more than its parts. I understand that every town is struggling to meet its budget requirements and you have difficult decisions ahead, but I hope you will consider their request seriously. I know they care for the town
and I am extremely proud to have these folks protecting me and my family. Thank you, >> Stephen. Thanks for joining us. Next, Elijah Norman. >> Hi, my name's Life Norman. I'm a town resident and an Ammerst firefighter. Uh, what I want to say is that this fire
>> closer to the mic. >> Thanks. >> This fire that we had was not a fluke. Uh, this town has a massive fire load and it keeps getting bigger every year. Yet, our staffing is not adequate to even handle our daily call volume. We are overwhelmed on a daily basis.
Um, if this problem isn't fixed, I don't know if this has been made clear, people are going to die. Um, and that should be terrifying to every single person that lives in this town. That's all I got. Thank you. >> Thank you for joining us.
>> Jesus Savo. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Jesus Oavo. I live on East Hadley Road in Ammerst. Um, firstly, thank you guys for having the ability for the public to comment. Um, this is my first time here, so I'm grateful to be standing up for the town
that I grown up in and love with all my heart. Um, I >> love >> Yeah. Um, I was going to speak on three distinct issues. Uh, I was going to speak on the staffing of the fire department, but I
believe firefighters themselves has said a wonderful statement and I just want to echo their sentiments um that I believe that if our town does not adequately staff uh the fire department and our the rest of our
emergency services that like the young firefighter said before me, people will die. Um, I know it's it's difficult balancing, you know, town budget with the needs of the people, but I believe that if we don't prioritize the needs of
the people within the town, what are we actually fighting for? Um, in terms of education, I live with the teachers, so I hear on a day-to-day basis the trouble that they have within the school department with adequate staffing, with the pair of
professionals, with uh certification. And we have a bunch of resources within our town with the surrounding colleges that I believe that we should be asking for partnerships with to help these pair of professionals and people get the certifications and stuff that they need
to better serve our communities. Um, in terms of other emergency personnel outside of the fire department, um, it's recently come to my attention that the town of Amos only has one police officer who is in able to help with crimes of a
a sexual nature. Um, and I believe that that is very it's just wrong with the amount of people in our community that could be exposed to primarily dangerous nature. Uh we as towns people and people who
believe in the institutions that we are trying to uphold deserve better. Um I ask for all your help in coming to meet the needs of the community and this won't be the last time you see me but
the next time I will be better prepared. >> Thank you for joining us and we look forward to having you come back. Deb Leonard. >> Hi. Uh my name is Deb Leonard, uh District 5. I'm speaking on my own behalf. Um in BCG last week, we heard
that the library is drawing from its endowment to support its operating budget. First responders were here sounding the alarm. Municipal draws from cap from capital for operating expenses and the schools have cut millions of
dollars from its services for the past two years. This is not an issue of funding one department at the expense of another. This is not roads versus schools. I guess I forgot to mention the DPW, but this is an issue of
marginalizing operating to fund capital. Overall, Ammersttown's operating budget share of the total budget dropped from 85% in 2010 to 77% in 2026. Meanwhile, the capital budget share went
from 2 million6 in 2012 to 9 million6 in 2026. That's over 300%. You have a capital stabilization fund and as far as I'm aware, you have not resolved any of the questions from the financial planning for the four major
building projects from last November, a year ago. Now, I've often heard that growing capital has long been part of the plan. Can somebody please tell us what the plan was for the rest of us? Please give operating a relief by reconsidering the
10 and a half% for capital. Thank you for your time and service. Thanks for joining us, David. >> There are no other names on the register. >> Thank you. That concludes public comment and uh that also concludes the public
forum on the budget uh for FY27. >> We have a motion on the motion sheet to actually move to adjourn it. Should we be doing that? >> Yes, I will. Uh so I'm making a motion to adjourn the public forum. Is there a second? Second.
>> Thank you. I'll move immediately to the vote. And I believe in this case I begin with councelor Ryan. >> I >> Kathy um sorry Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Hi.
>> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Pat D'Angelus. >> Hi. >> Anna Delvin Gothier. >> Hi. >> Lynn Griezmer. I councelor Hannaki. >> I >> Bob Hegner. >> I >> councelor Lord. >> I >> Pam Rooney.
>> Yes. >> It's unanimous with one absent. We're going to take a five minute break. >> Return at >> is finance committee adjourned too. >> Oh yes, Kathy. >> Finance committee is adjourned. >> Thank you. Uh we'll be we'll return at
8:05. Everyone hear me? It's 8:05. We're returning to meeting. >> Maybe you're not that gathering up. >> Okay. This is the council meeting that we recessed earlier and so we have already been called to order. We are
going to pick up with action item 8B. This is the proposed zoning amendment. This is the second reading and vote. And I while I do understand that we have some amendments um that have been shared with us and I want to thank you for doing that in advance. I'm going to read the motion,
seek a second, and then we'll go to the amendments. Um the motion is to resin zoning bylaw 5.011 011 accessory dwelling units are replace it with the language shown on page 9 to 12 of the motion sheet. Is
there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you. Uh Anna, you have an amendment. >> I know. And my email is loading so that I can pull it up. Um sorry, I am Hang
on. If anyone else has anything else they'd like to discuss while I find the correct email. >> Actually, uh Pam and Jennifer, you have an amendment. >> Yeah, please go ahead. >> You two go first. I'll go second. >> Jennifer, Jennifer, do you want to
address that or >> Please make the motion and then speak to the mo seek a second and speak to the motion. >> Um I'm sorry. I have to pull up mine as well because I don't think I saw it in the packet. >> Okay, I have the
>> questions. Oh, you got it. >> Okay, I do have it. I think um so thank you. I think I will read it. Just read the motion and then discuss it because it's pretty straightforward. >> We'll read the motion, seek a second, and then get
>> right. We can discuss it. Okay. So, the motion is in section 5.0113 0113I to change the wording from quote there'll be there shall be no more than two on-site parking spaces provided for
any ADU unquote to read in the general residence RG zoning districts no more than one additional parking space shall be permitted for protected use ADU view. In all other residential districts and
for local ADUs, there shall be no more than two on-site parking spaces provided for any ADU. And again, the two spaces is what is already in the proposed bylaw. So, it's only making a change for
protected use ADUs in the general residence districts. Thank you. >> So, it's Are you striking any words? No, you're adding two words. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. Um, if >> was that a motion?
>> That was a motion. It's on this. >> No, I'm seeking a second. >> Second. >> Point of clarification. That motion seems to be striking all of I and replacing it with what's in bold >> or adding a whole cl I guess adding a
whole clause in front of what's in bold. Is that what it's doing? It's adding a a sentence in front of there shall be no more than two on-site parking spaces provided for any ADU.
>> So it's adding the text in bold >> and the clause then. So a sentence and a clause. >> This is the existing sentence >> and this is the amendment. Is there any other question about the motion? I was just clarifying I didn't
want to confuse that we were the two for people who are have not been you know focusing on that closely haven't been on one of the committees that has reviewed the ADU bylaw that the two spaces is what's current I mean that was not a change in
language it's only changing the requirement for the general residence districts Okay. Would you like to speak to the motion? >> Uh, yes. Again, I think it was on um the
information pro provided in the packet at least for the last council meeting. We didn't get to this to the ADU bylaw as one of the action items. So the context is that the community resources committee's proposed amendment
to zoning bylaw section 5.011 accessory dwelling unit dwelling units that we um voted on at our at the CRC's September 25th, 2025 meeting recommends that no more than two on-site parking
spaces be provided for any protected use ADU. And again, the state wanted to ensure that local municipalities did not impose excessive number of what they would say
parking spaces. They did not want because they want as many ADUs, the protected use to be built as possible to make it as easy as possible to build them. They didn't want municipalities putting up obstacles by requiring too
many parking spaces. So, um the so the CRC voted that we would not allow more than two on-site parking spaces, which should actually alleviate what the
state perceived as a burden, help reduce the burden on those wanting to build a protected use. So the motion that Pam and I the are um proposing is that only for protected you
only applies to reduce to one parking space to protected ADUs in the general residence districts. So both of the general residence districts, there's only two in Ammerst. Um, most of the two districts are contained within council
district 4 and both general residence districts are within half a mile of public transportation and within walking distance to downtown and the University of Massachusetts campus. The protected use ADUs in the general residence
district are largely built as a and are being built as accessory units to houses that already provide parking for up to four vehicles. Adding a fifth parking space is really as much as the smaller
parcels in the general residence districts can accommodate. So, we're this is we're not asking for only one parking space on the property, but for just one additional parking space. Um
our thinking is and we've heard from residents in our district to this effect that five parking spaces on the small parcels in the general residence district is really um as much as those
parcels uh can can realistically um not realistically but can comfortably handle. and we want to encourage um walking and use of public transportation. And we're talking about
ADUs that are for the most part being built um adjacent to houses again that already have forward parking spaces, but also the general residence districts are where you can walk to the university and
walk into downtown. Uh and you know we're also for the most part speaking of you know younger people who we would like to um you know again invi just encourage to walk to ride bikes to use
public transportation if you live close to downtown and the university and to not have to sacrifice you know the um really all the green space on small parcels. So that's the context I'm providing Pam. you might
certainly want to add in. >> Thank you. Pam, you're the other sponsor. Did you have something to say? >> Thank you. Um, I just wanted to add the point that with the protected use ADU that the state is promulgating,
it does state in the in the state recommendation that only one parking space be required or be allowed in fact uh within a half mile if you're outside a half mile of a U public transit or
your destination. And given that much of the RG is is well within a half mile of public transport and much of it is well within a half mile of uh the campus itself that we felt that the uh
adherence to the state's recommendation of only one parking space being required uh with uh in the RG would be more appropriate than the two that are generally being recommended
um across town. >> Okay. Um Councelor Hani, >> so I appreciate that um Jennifer and Pam have modified this from what we talked about a couple weeks ago where they were going to suggest changing it for
everywhere across town. So, I I I do want to say I appreciate and recognize that that you heard those concerns and and looked at a different wording. Um I'm still concerned with this wording. Uh and a couple of reasons. Um the planning board actually suggested that
it instead of two, it be no more than three and CRC already reduced it from three to two throughout town as we can't put more than two per ADU. So, um, going even farther even in one part of
town, um, really concerns me given that the planning board was even higher than what what we at CRC recommended. Um, the RG is a district that in many locations the council and prior to the
council's existence, the select board has already restricted on street parking. Um, if you remember, we've completely eliminated on street parking during the day in on Lincoln. Um, um, we it's already eliminated during the day
on High Street and I believe some other areas around town around the high school. Um, and so there isn't a lot of room to move cars out of parcels and onto street because we've already sort of eliminated that ability in much of
the RG to begin with. Um Pam and Jennifer talked about uh as a reason small parcels in the RG. Uh they don't define small or large, but there are a number of parcels that are well above 20,000 square ft in the RG. Um
that's the same, you know, actually that's the same size as the RN requirement for minimum lot size. Um there's some that are even larger. So it if if it's a concern about lot coverage, well, we've already got requirements for
lot coverage depending on the size of the lot. And so if it's the small lots that are concerning, it's likely that they might not be able to add more than one anyway. And because they'd bump up against the maximum lot coverages based on the size of the lot. Um but we
shouldn't be restricting parking um con on con for all parcels when you're concerned about solely the quote small parcels. And finally, the history of the the reason that the state regulations have a statement that
says the ADU bylaws or towns cannot require more than one parking spot. require more than one parking spot per ADU. It just says nothing about allowing
more than one per ADU. It says requiring more than one. And the concern about that was there have been towns that have required two, three, four parking lot parking spaces per ADU. And the for the sole reason of essentially saying,
"Oops, you can't fit those parking spots in. You're not allowed an ADU." And the state was concerned about using the towns using required parking spots spaces to basically not allow ADUs in their town. Um, which
is not what this mot this amendment or the no more than is looking at. Um, it's sort of the opposite. I I agree. We're looking to encourage public transportation and all. Um, but I I
still don't think this is the way to go. So, I'm I'm listening to others, but I'm leaning towards not supporting it. Okay. Uh, Kathy Shane, >> I have a question rather than a comment on this. Um,
when we're talking about the uh lot coverage and the building coverage on in terms of the RG zone or any of them, does lot coverage include a parking lot? In other words, because the lot
coverage, what what constitutes it? Because I think the concern here is in the smaller square footage areas, you'll end up having pavement for cars and buildings taking up much of the land and then you
get a where does the water go? Where does the green grass go? So I don't know whether the parking space if it's permeable impermeable counts as part of the lot coverage. In which case would our coverage
provisions be protective? So in other words, got a building, I got another building, I've got a parking lot, and you say you can't have that big a parking lot because then you've covered too much of the land. So it's it's a question on the smaller lots. Are are you protected against the addition
of too many parking spaces because of the coverage provisions? It's it's a pure question. >> Did you want to answer that? Sure. Um the the short answer is yes. Um parking lots do count as part of the
coverage uh formula. >> Kathy, was that sufficient? >> Yeah, I have a response though. Sorry. >> Yeah, I I I think it does answer my question. So, I'm looking at how protective is it already? We can't
require it. as as Pam read, the way the state law says the town couldn't require more than one. It can't actuallyly even require one if it's your within a half mile of a bus stop and probably all of RG is within a half mile of some sort of
bus stop. Uh so normally we wouldn't be able to require it and this is a permission. Yeah. So I I did get an answer to my question. Okay, Jennifer, did you have further comment on that? Yeah, but what they can also do is if they don't, you can put gravel or you
can create parking spaces that are not necessarily on cement and that does not count toward lot coverage. So some of it is you can have, you know, six cars in a
very small space where, you know, neighbors are looking out on parking lots and bright lights at night. Um, so that's a way of getting around the impervious uh I shouldn't say getting around, but
people I mean I have a parking space. It's just because I prefer the the gravel, but um you know that is not it's a parking space but it's not cement or concrete. >> Nate Malloy has joined us. Nate, thank
you. Would you like to add clarity clarity to this? >> Sure. So in, you know, all zoning districts, we have building coverage and then lot coverage. So building coverage is what's covered by a structure. You know, it could be the principal dwelling in this case and any accessory structures. And lot coverage is the
addition of that plus any impervious or you know improved surface. So a gravel parking area is actually part of lot coverage. And a parking space by definition or zoning bylaw would be an improved surface like gravel or pavement. So it would count towards lot
coverage. In the RG it's 40% of a lot is the maximum lot coverage. So you know you have your building coverage then you have your lot coverage. So essentially 40% of a property could be considered lot coverage. And that's, you know, anything including buildings, sidewalks,
uh, gravel areas, you know, parking areas, patios, um, you know, we even consider, um, you know, solar panels depending on how they are mounted, if they're ground mounted. So, a bunch of things count towards lot coverage, >> but it should be noted that with the
very narrow lots, you're you have parking for you could still have parking for six, you're saying, and it could be right up against very close to the house next door. The lot might be deeper. >> Sure. Yeah. We don't So, the >> I have eight cars on the other side of
my backyard fence. It's 50 feet away, >> right? The setbacks are something different. So we don't, you know, we parking can be really close to a property line. Um, you know, it's a structure has a setback. Typically a parking area does not.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh, councelor Ryan. >> So in order to support this, I just need to understand better what the problem is that this amendment is trying to address. if you could help me get a better sense of what it is that you see
this is uh going to make better. Um I've just learned uh from councelor Hani that at least it sounds like the planning board and I assume planning staff didn't see an issue but you apparently do. So could you help me understand better what
it is that you think this is going to the problem it is that this is going to address this amendment? Jennifer, >> let me let Pam go first. >> Okay, Pam. >> Um, thanks. Um, I'm sorry. Could you say
your question again? >> He wants to know what what is what problem are you trying to solve? >> Okay. Thank you. Yes. Uh the state recommended in its in its bylaw that there be as as councelor Hani
explained very well um the state did not want us putting burdens on developers to um to require too many parking spaces so that it would be too expensive to build ADUs. The state recommended that within a half
mile of any transit stop or a destination, major destination, that there be in fact no parking spaces required at all. Um I don't think any of us thought that was great. Um but we
also weren't excited about having um too many parking spaces required across town. And as noted, not every parcel is the same size in every zone, but across town, the ability for a parcel to
accommodate two two parking spaces for an ADU seems reasonable. um out but outside of the inside the RG which you live in as well, the the
apparent need for extra parking seems unnecessary there. People live so close to to bus lines. They live so close to the university. Why are we why are we asking them to do two parking spaces for a
protected use ADU? So the recommendation within the RG is to drop that to one requirement rather than two spaces. >> They're not required to provide two, but they're they can pro they can have up to
two. What you're saying, if I understand it, is you can only have one. >> Is that correct? And you're saying that because you think, you know, the RG is a more dense >> uh zoning area and houses at least in
certain areas are much closer to each other. And you feel that if they were allowed to have up to two and they did choose to have two, this would do what terrible thing, >> Jennifer.
Um so this this we heard from several residents came to us. So, so this is what it is in response to and what they are seeing is they're not objecting to the ADU being
built, you know, adjacent to the house. But in the cases that have happened so far and I think it's fair to say this will it is how it will happen in a lot of the RG because the general residence
districts are so close to the university that thus far in every case where protected use ADU is being built, it is adjacent to a house that is already rented to four residents
that are unrelated and they each have cars. So there's four cars parked now and residents are seen because it wouldn't I guess be if you've already been received your building permit for
an ADU then you already have because right now we haven't passed any bylaw. So, you know, they so ADUs are going up where they're adding parking spaces on small lots and lots that are very close to their next door neighbors where
there's already space for four cars. And now they're so we're not talking about just or they're not these residents that have come to us are not talking about only wanting one space on the adjacent properties but limiting
it to five spaces because there's already four for the four unrelated residents that are living there and then the ADUs are also being built for unrelated really in every case um so far and I would expect that to a lot for the
the majority to continue of talking about having basically six parking spaces, you know, feet away from their residence on a small lot versus the four that are already there. So, the thinking was they
said, could you add could we limit it to a fifth space instead of six? And I don't think it even came up in the planning board. And again, it was brought to Pam and I because we are the counselors from district 4, which contains most of the
only two general residents districts where there's already a lot of, you know, or there's a there's activity um ad protected use AGUs already being built and again they're always on properties where there's currently at
least four parking spaces and there may be more because we haven't restricted it in the past. So that's so the the issue we're trying to address is being residents who are concerned
about basically having many parking lots and the lights and the activity, you know, that are cuz the three at least three of the residents I've heard from these are small lots. They are literally
feet away from the parking lots. George, did that respond to your question? >> Yeah. >> Thank you. Uh, Pam Rooney. Oh, okay. Councelor Hani, it's my understanding that the zoning
bylaw doesn't limit how many parking spaces can be built into a unit for a residential dwelling or a single family dwelling. Um, I was just looking I have an old copy. It's 3 years old, but um I don't think we have a
maximum number of parking spots for single residential dwellings. Um the maximum in some sense would be based upon lot coverage requirements, maximum lot coverage. Um so I guess my question to Nate is,
is there anything stopping someone who applies to build a protected use ADU from when they submit their parking plan designating six or seven spots? I'm just making up a really large number um to go to the main house and then one to the
protective use ADU say if this passed um such that this doesn't actually as Jennifer and Pam have been saying limit the number of parking spots on a lot to five. Nate,
>> sure. >> Point out that Rob Mororrow's in the a in the um audience, too. >> Yeah. To clarify, you know, we in the in the bylaw, we talk about driveways and drive aisles and then parking spaces. So, if you had a driveway to your property, you can park cars in your
driveway. And so, a parking space, you know, would be something that is, you know, adjacent to or, you know, not part of the drive aisle or driveway. So, really, it's a separate space. You know, you can see it, right? You might angle your cars off the driveway. So, if someone were to have a driveway that could accommodate seven cars, that's
just the driveway that has seven cars, you know, you could stack cars or whatever. Maybe it's six cars. You stack two two, you know, it's a double wide driveway and you can stack three cars deep. So, that's a six that you can park six cars in that driveway and there's no parking spaces. So, this really the parking space is this, you know, an
additional paved area to accommodate, you know, cars that it's not part of the drive aisle. the we typically don't you know five or more requires a permit and so typically what we found is that's in the zoning bylaw and usually a bigger project will trigger that. So for some
of these projects if someone were to improve you know increase the paved area on their property there really isn't a permit or you know a threshold that is triggered unless it is a bigger project. So, a land use permit isn't required for someone to, you know, pave a bit more
with an accessory dwelling unit. Because of the permit and other requirements in the bylaw, we're asking for a parking plan and a management plan. So, staff would see that, you know, it could be captured. But, you know, in terms of how many spaces on a single family home, that is really just the dimensional
standards. That's your lot coverage and your building coverage. So, if you know, if I owned a single family home and I have four kids and I, you know, I want to have a big parking area because I have an extra car or two, I could essentially create a a big parking area
just for myself, you know, my my pro my single family home. Um, you know, and you're guided by the, you know, what's in the zoning bylaw. So, if it's five or more spaces, you would need a permit. And then there's law coverages. So there's no I'm not sure, Mandy, to your
question, you know, if it's part of the driveway and you just have a big driveway, you don't really have separate parking spaces, there's really no permit or review for that. It's only when you're creating the separate kind of parking area does it become subject to
review, >> Anna? >> Okay, so I thought I had a grasp on it and then Nate, you gave me a lot more information. Um, so to clarify, the house could have, we're talking about a
house in the RG, it could have four up to four parking spots depending on the lot size and the lot coverage, but let's hypothetically say four. Uh, the ADU could have under this proposed amendment one. So, there could be five cars still in this small lot, right?
>> My concern is a little bit that we keep shrinking and shrinking the number of cars and I just am trying to understand the rationale. I'm not necessarily opposed to it conceptually. Um, but I think I looked at the version the planning board sent and it had three. CRC dropped it to two. Now, in certain
districts, we want to drop it to one. Um, and I'm just I I'm trying to understand this the shrinkage. And I think that Jennifer and Pam, you've explained that decently well. But my concern is that I hear Jennifer what you're saying and that we have a lot of
students who live in our neighborhoods and that the ADUs you've seen go up have been rented to students. Um, but we talk a lot about wanting to attract families and while this district is near to UMass and is near to public transit, those lines may not serve families who live
here who don't happen to work in town or at UMass. And what I'm worried about is an accidental impact of this of creating a zoning that essentially limits this to students or staff and faculty at the university. Right? So, as we think about
making our dwellings appeal to the broader uh a broader audience than just affiliated with UMass, is this helping or hurting that kind of cause? And I it could just be that that's in your
mind worth the kind of the juice is worth the squeeze there of if it you're not convinced that this would be attractive to single families in the first place and so it's worth putting that restriction in. But that is my concern with restricting it as I think about you know there there are plenty of
single like couples for example who could live in an ADU and who would need two separate vehicles to get where they're going if it's not served by public transit. Well PVTA is great. it doesn't serve everything that we need. Um, so that that is my that is my concern with this is that we are
essentially kind of putting some bounds on it that will make it only accessible to folks that are affiliated within walking distance in that ways. And I'd love to hear your your response to me because I I think that's what my concern is with this. Um, my concern is alleviated a little bit by what Mandy is
saying, which is that these houses in and of themselves can have a a ton of parking anyway. um in which case I'm not really sure this is making that much of an impact. I do have a separate question um that is tangentially related to this
amendment and I'd like to pose it and then if if I hear that this is too far away, you know, I think it's actually it's more related to the to the bylaw at large. It's about permitting. So I will I'll ask it later. >> Thank you. >> It's more that's my comment, Jennifer and Pam. It's not necessarily a question, but I that's what is sticking
with me right now. >> Okay. Jennifer or Pam, do you want to respond to that? >> I'd like I'd like to. Um, I actually want to ask Nate to clarify for everyone that our zoning bylaw does state that there should be no more than two cars
parked typically in the front setback of a property. That means that the house with four unrelated people in it, and we're assuming that there are only going to be four unrelated people in it, the extra
two cars are a either parked on the street or if they create some parking space, that parking space needs to be behind the house or adjacent to the house, not in front. So, by the time you look at a a parcel in the RG that may
have an 80 to 90 to 100 foot um um front property line frontage, um you're getting pretty pretty tight with your parking and you're getting a lot of a lot of disruption. Um I did want so that
was the one point u and I just want to clarify with Nate that I'm correct, >> Nate. >> Right. So the zoning bylaw, you know, limits the number of cars parked in the front setback to two. So, you know, typically you can't, you know, stack cars along your, you know, have five
cars parked in the front. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, Jennifer, you had your hand up. >> Yeah. Well, the first thing I'd say there are four cars and five cars parked in front of houses in the RG
neighborhoods all over. I I mean I guess you know neighbors don't report I I don't think people know but there's and the I mean I we always we we can't seem to be able to address the situations that
are in I would venture to say 98% of I I you know but I guess I can't put a percentage but there are a lot of houses in the RGs that are rented to four unrelated people. They make a lot of
money. It's very close to campus. The ADUs are being built to house and there's there's no limit. You know, we can't oppose impose an occupancy limit. So they are being the same investors who
own the houses that are currently now being rented to foreign related can add an ADU which they've started to do to double the number of the amount of rent that they're making.
The houses that have four unrelated all have four cars parked in front of them. And so yes, they could say we're going to add we're going to have two more for the main house and just one for the protected use, but I guess so then you'd
have seven, but some limitation cuz you will have basically parking lots whether they're on impervious surface or not. Now again that there are two there's a little tiny flag lot behind me. There are two houses
as long as I've lived there. Every September, eight new residents move in between the two houses. There are always eight park cars parked there. You can come look. I mean, it's just it's fine. We every year, you know, the
residents meet with the neighbors, the people who live there. I'm not looking for any change in that. That's grandfathered in. It's fine. I'm just saying to I brought that example up once in CRC and I was told, well, you know, you could have two families living there and they'd each have a car. I would
venture to say if two families were living on these two little houses that I'm talking about on this little flag lot, they probably would not have eight cars between them. But so if there's already so that is what residents have said to
us that they are seeing just a lot of cars and and the people who have spoken with us they're are the ADUs are already in process of being built. So, that's the concern. And again, if if we're saying that we don't allow four cars in
a driveway, I I you know, I don't know how we, you know, even if anyone's going to call to enforce that, but I would say it's a given in a lot of the RG that there are four cars in many many driveways. And I would say all the driveways rented to
four unrelated people. And I'm always amazed because it's so close to campus, but you know, every resident seems to have a car. >> Um, if if an if a um ADU is already in process, that means it's already been
permitted, that means that the parking has already been allowed. So, this would not impact those. This would only impact future ADUs. >> Call the question. >> Thank you. The question's been called.
I I will second that call. >> Second the call. It's there. Um we have a question that's been called and I'm going to move to a motion to vote. Um clarify the vote. This is a calling the question. That's all it is.
>> It's the vote to end debate. >> Vote. Right. Right. >> Uh Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Pat D'Angelus.
>> Hi. >> Anna Delan Gothier. >> Hi. >> Councelor Ete. I'm sorry. Lynn Griezmmer is an I. Councelor Hani. >> Councelor Hani. >> I. >> Bob. Hagner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Hi.
>> Pam Rooney. >> Sure. >> Councelor Ryan. >> I. >> Okay. The question that's been called is on the motion to amend. The motion to amend is what we have seen on the screen. Would the clerk please place that on the screen again? Okay.
There any further questions about what we're voting on? >> Okay. Then in that case, we're going to begin with Andy Steinberg. >> No. >> Jennifer Tob.
>> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. Abstainous. >> No. >> Anna Davin Gothier. >> Um, no. >> Lynn Griezmer is an I. Councelor Hanaki.
>> No. Bob Hegner, >> abstain. >> Councelor Lord, >> nay. >> Pam Rooney, >> yes. >> Councelor Ryan, >> no.
>> Kathy Shane, >> yes. >> Four in favor, two, six nazs and two abstensions and one absent. The motion fails. We move on to the next. Uh, Anna, could you please
introduce your motion with a motion and seek a second? >> Absolutely. Thank you. Um, I did send it to Athena if you're able to pull it up. Um, but I move to replace uh section, let's see, 5.0115B
with the following text. A detached local ADU shall be clearly accessory to the principal dwelling in terms of scale, massing, and layout on the site. Uh, and the reason why Oh, sorry. I'll say the motion then. >> Excuse me. There's Is there a second?
>> Why stop? >> Second. >> Thank you. >> So, uh, the reason why I made this motion was the initial language here felt like it was putting the town in a bit of a position of being an HOA. Uh, this felt more like it was limiting our
opportunities. I mean, it sounds a little fluffy in in the grand scheme of this, but it was limiting opportunities for creativity and and design. We also already have design standards that would be applied to this project, so it felt secondary. Initially, I wanted to strike this completely and so I want to give
credit to Mr. Nate Mallaloy for kind of helping me pump the brakes on that a little bit and thinking about the initial I think intention of this wording which was basically saying you know you shouldn't have something that's wildly out of s out of scale in terms of
like massive comparative to the principal dwelling. um our standard designs uh or our design standards, excuse me, would still apply to this, but I felt that the initial language was too constricting and uh it it felt
overreaching to me. So, this is my proposed amendment. >> Motion's been made and seconded. Comments Kathy Shane. >> Anna, thank you. I do like your language. Um I just have a comment. the
because the local ADU can be as big as 1,200 feet without reference to the size of the principal. It can be bigger. >> I know. >> So, so I had asked how is a local ADU an accessory if it's bigger than the
principal. And the answer I got in the casual discussion is well whether maybe the ADU becomes principal and the other becomes accessory because something that's bigger than the first won't in scale won't look accessory. So I'm fine
with your language. I'm just saying that we've got a disconnect here with the size. One of the potential amendments to the way this was written was no more than 90% of the size no of the what
however we count the size and instead it was uh seen as attractive to allow an ADU to be larger the local ADU so that you could um have this owner occupancy requirement. So that's the only thing I want to point out. It
doesn't mean I don't think yours is a clearer language, but it's not going to look as like an accessory if it's bigger is my comment. >> Okay. Um, councelor Hanaki. >> Yeah, I was going to make the same
comment. So, I'd like to hear from Nate on how that would work if someone proposes, you know, if someone's got a thousand square foot house on a lot, which I know or or smaller, which I know there are some houses, residences in our
town that are that small, single family residences that are that small. Um, and they propose a 12,200 foot quote ADU. Um, how does that work? Would would would it automatically be swapped sort of? You're now proposing to build a principal dwelling with the other one in
ADU like like how does that work? Um >> Nate, how does it work? >> I got another question though. Um I noticed the change from it applies to all local ADUs to just a detached ADU. So my other question is um there can be
attached ADUs. Um what does attached what does detached mean? Can a open breezeway count as attached, not detached? Sort of. So like are there are there ways to that would typically be a detached that
a builder might make it attached by like a quick breezeway so that it this section wouldn't apply to it. >> Nate, >> sure. Yeah, I think to your first question, Mindy, it's a good one. And so staff was um thought it would be fine to
remove this in its entirety. So we don't even need the proposed second statement um you know through an administrative approval. So a local ADU has two permitting paths. One is administrative approval and it could be by special permit. In either instance either the
building commissioner staff or the ZBA can use the design review principles and you know other criteria in the bylaw to review you know the size and massing of a structure. So the um I agree that if it's you know depending on the size of the ADU and the principal dwelling you
know someone could say well what does it really mean to be accessory if the gross square feet is bigger on the accessory dwelling and that becomes say a design we call it a design challenge I'm not sure staff will you know really look at
that and say well you know you know move the roof line a few feet if really that's the design and it seems to work Right. We're when I I gave an example saying you like a two and a half story accessory dwelling unit on a singlestory building because you know you have certain height requirements in in your in the bylaw. So you could have
something that seems really easy to discern. I think in your example Mandy it's it could be difficult to say you know really what does it mean to be accessory in terms of detached a a connection like an open air breezeway does not would not um have it be
considered detached or attached. And so that would be, you know, essentially like, you know, a separate um building. So to be attached has to have, you know, a shared wall or common space. It can't be, you know, something that is a, you know, connected through something that
isn't living space or isn't, you know, enclosed in that way. >> Okay. Um, Councelor Haniki, anything else? Pam Renie, >> thanks. Um, I appreciate the the trying
to be flexible. I think that's I think that's good, but I guess I I am the way I'm reading the proposed uh replacement doesn't seem to work. Um, simply because what we've been talking about, there is
a there's a very good chance that the the accessory might be equal in size or maybe larger in size than the existing building. So I would have to I would have to vote off the words shall be clearly accessory. Um
the the existing statement can be designed so the appearance and scale of the structures compatible with the principal dwelling to me is is very wide open. I I see examples of architecture in town that probably even went through the design
review board because they they have to review duplexes, I believe. Um I I actually don't have a problem with the existing language, but I would have a problem with the wording of being clearly accessory because I don't think
it will hold. Thank you, >> George. I mean, councelor Rain >> kind of having the same issue that councelor Rooney is having. Um, and especially hearing what's just been discussed, it seems like the proposed
language is just going to run up against reality and that's going to create even more problems. If I understood Nate correctly, and maybe I didn't, it sounded like staff was even proposing just eliminating B in its entirety. Is that right? Did I understand that? and
that just sort of relying on design review standards. >> That was my initial proposal and and Nate did say that staff would support that. Uh I selected this this language which Nate also gave me a couple options of of things I might consider. Uh cuz I
thought that more people would be interested in this versus removing it in its entirety. I would be very happy if this motion fails to present that as a a secondary motion. Yeah. Um
I mean I like the spirit of be and in a sense what it's saying if it's left in the language that's there right now if it's left in and not stricken gives probably pretty clear or at least gives guidance to staff um as to what
we're trying to accomplish which is we'd like whatever is built to be in appearance and scale uh compatible with the principal dwelling. and we would leave that up to the judgment of staff guided by the design review uh
standards. Um so yeah, I'm kind of leaning to leaving the language as it is and trusting the judgment of staff. I think the language that's proposed, as we've already said now, seems to create some other problems
that that we don't really need. So yeah, I guess I'm leaning to not supporting this. Thank you. Um, I don't understand why B seemed to apply to all local ADUs and
all of a sudden in the new language we're only talking about detached ADUs. Why wouldn't we just say a local ADU uh so that whether it's attached or not attached? >> I don't necessarily have a great answer
for you on that and I would uh see if Nate has any insights. I think the idea is really that the the risk of a detached ADU being significantly different might be higher, but I don't uh I have no problem with an
amendment to just say a local ADU. Um if that uh is something that the council would like to see shifted in this? >> Um if we delete that, does the person who seconded the motion agree?
Yes, delete that. Thank you. Uh we're back to councelor Hani. So if I had to choose, I would choose to delete B completely. Um, and I know it's a little bit out of the amendment, but
I'm not sure I can support an amendment that requires the local to be clearly accessible when accessory when we know in in fact that there are some that
sizewise scale um can't be. Uh yet I've got a real problem with requiring the appearance of a of an ADU to be compatible with the principal dwelling because I do agree with Anna um
that that gets a little more into HOA sort of overregulation of what we like to look at and we shouldn't be doing that. If someone has, and I'm going to go on extremes here, you know, if someone has a colonial or pre-colonial
saltbox dwelling on their property and they want to put an ADU that is a um a mid-century modern Franklidd Wright inspired design ADU, they should be able to, but those appearances don't look anything alike, and some would say
they're not compatible, but they're the ones living in it. Um, and they should be able to build what they want to look at and live in. >> Um, so I I don't like either one. I'd rather see them both deleted
>> on it. One final comment and we're going to move to the vote. >> Well, before we get to that vote, uh, if you don't mind, my my final comment is, yeah, Mandy, I agree. If I wanted to build a ADU that looks like a pirate ship, I should be able to do that. But um if Mandy Joe was my second on this,
am I allowed to amend the motion to simply strike all of the words? >> No, we this let's stay with this motion and then we'll move to >> I'm asking sorry I'm asking policy-wise what the what is allowable in terms of amending my current motion as the motion
maker if my second agrees. >> I think the best thing to do would be to withdraw your motion. >> I I understand that you think that's the best thing. I'm asking if policy-wise I'm allowed to change my motion to strike it. I think it would be called withdraw.
>> No, because I'm not. I'm still moving to strike the initial motion literally is replace this with and it would just be replace with nothing blank. >> Right. That's >> I believe that is an order. So, I would like to make an amendment to my initial motion to >> Okay.
>> remove the from the word a to the period at the end. >> Mandy Joe, you seconded. >> Yes. >> Okay. The motion's been mo removed. We're now back to the original. And the original is >> not the original. >> No, the original is crossed out. So, the
original should not be crossed out at this point. >> Nope. The original should be crossed out. My initial motion was to delete that and replace it with the second text. I've now taken it to say delete that and replace it with nothing. >> All right, Lyn, I'm It was a procedural thing. This
isn't >> It's fine. It's fine. >> I know. >> The motion now is to delete the B entirely. Is And Mandy, you're the second. >> Yes. And I'm >> Okay, fine. Pam Rooney,
>> I would actually like to hear from Nate Mallaloy. What is helpful to staff since they will be administering permits for this type of of building? And is it helpful for them to have some sort of
compatibility uh uh clause in here, Nate? >> Yeah. So, you know, some of the conditions that are in the proposed amendment are carryovers from what's in the existing bylaw. So, there is something that's similar. I think honor
brought up a good point and you know, when it's administratively approved, what does compatibility mean? And so, I had suggested language trying you know, looking at the design review standards and principles and you know, and came up with a few suggestions and you know, we shared an email or two. I think the
easiest thing would be to remove it and rely on what's already in the bylaw. So we're not trying to paraphrase standards or conditions that are already clearly written. So you know 3.325 or you know section 3 and the 10.38 and the administrative approval process already
have conditions and criteria. And so rather than try to paraphrase it here, you know, it's already built into the bylaw and the review process. And so to me that would be easier than trying to figure out how do we, you know, come up with what we think is the right kind of terminology in terms of what's
compatible or massing or scale. And so I I understand what the the motion is and what we're trying to get at and I think it's a really difficult thing to achieve. You know, um I think sometimes it's a set of standards that might be applied appropriately and that's what we have in our bylaw and the other
sections. So relying on the design review principles, the administrative approval criteria can guide decisions as well as you know this could or couldn't. Thank you. The motion on the floor is to re is to strike B. A local ADU shall be
designed so that the appearance and scale of the structure is compatible with the principal dwelling. Uh Kathy, one final comment, please. Let's >> It is a final comment. I like this clause a lot because I I don't think it restricts completely the way Mandy just
said. I think you we would like uh some of these to be compatible. Remember, there could be under this new bylaw, there could be three where there is only one. You could have a protected, a local, and a principal. So, I think some concern about scale and compatibility is
important. So, I'm going to be voting against this. >> Okay, Andy, we're starting the vote with you. me. >> Yes. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Jennifer Tob, I'll start with you.
>> No. >> Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Pat D'Angelus, >> no. >> Anna Delin Gothier, >> yes. Council Lynn Griezmer is a no. Councelor Hani
>> I. >> Bob Hegner. >> Nay. >> Councelor Lord. >> I. >> Pam Rooney. >> Um, no. >> Councelor Ryan, >> I >> Kathy Shane. >> No.
>> Andy Steinberg. >> No. >> The motion fails. The section stays. We're back to the original motion. The original motion, as I voiced it earlier, is to rescend zoning bylaw 5.001
accessory dwelling units, and replace it with the language shown on page 9 to 12 on the motion sheet. And let me just point out that's been made and seconded, and there's been no successful amendments. We're moving immediately to the vote. >> Point of order. There hasn't been any
discussion on the whole thing. You should at least ask. >> All right. Let me just mention however there has been some and it it happened at an earlier meeting and we've had both the CRC meeting um CRC report and we've had the go report. Councelor Hanaki,
please continue. >> I'm not saying I want to discuss it. I just think it was inappropriate to say basically there is no discussion without asking if there was discussion. >> Thank you. Uh Anna, >> do you need a second? No, the second's
been the motion's been made and seconded. Thank you, Anna. >> I'm curious about um the permitting with ADUs if this is considered a and I and I apologize. I did read through and and if I missed it, I'm sorry, but if this is a
entirely separate rental permit um and if it's include or if it's included in a rental permit for a primary dwelling and if so, how the number of uh unrelated persons is impacted by that? I didn't think I thought it was a separate one, but I just wanted to confirm.
>> Thank you. >> Rob Mororrow, you have your hand up. Please go ahead. >> Uh hi everyone. Uh yeah. So the rental permit is issued for the property. >> Please speak to your mic. >> I can hear. >> Uh yes. So the rental permit is issued
per property. Uh so it would increase the number of units uh but still be the same rental permit. Uh there is no uh uh restriction on the number of occupants. that is a prohibited use uh standard uh
according to the in the protected uh uh ADU uh situation. Uh but the the local ADU would have the uh carry the same uh foreign related or uh same limit as uh our bylaw provides but not for the
protected use. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other questions or comments? Okay, then we're going to move to the vote. Um, and yes, >> can you point of order? You're
clarifying that this is a vote for this >> for the amendment, >> the actual bylaw. It is to resend zoning bylaw 5.011, accessory dwelling units, and replace it with the language shown on page 9 to 12
of the motion sheet. Okay. Any other questions or comments then? Councelor Walker. >> Yes. >> Pat D'Angelus. >> I. >> Anna Delin Gothier. >> Hi.
>> Lyn Griemmerson. I councelor Hannik. >> Hi. >> Bob Hegner. >> I. >> Councelor Lord. >> Hi. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. I >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes. >> Andy Steinberg. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes.
In my estimation, in order to have this meeting end in a timely manner, which for me is 10:00 and for others might even be before that, uh I am going to move C, which is the establishment of transportation and parking commission
and the um uh policy related to the control of the public way to a future meeting probably next week on the 24th. Um, I'm going to take up the public urination and defecation bylaw. It's a
first reading. I would like to ask um town services and outreach to just give me their report. Basically, I think that uh we know that the bylaw started with um a proposal
from Council Hanaki who presented it um after hearing at a uh meeting of I believe CRC. She can speak to it if I'm wrong on that. um in which uh talking
about um another bylaw or another another policy and um he was lamenting the fact that there is no um bylaw that um just allows a fine. So that when and
this is really pertaining mostly to students or probably in his mind um the intent is uh even without the word mostly in it. Um
that would uh allow behavior that is um frequently complained about by um a lot of residents um who live uh either near party houses or on walking routes from
the center of town uh to res to to residences occupied by students or campus where there is public urination taking place on private property and uh that they have uh no
alternative other than either do nothing um other than um speak to the student or what whoever it may be or um what is essentially a criminal violation and
that they would like to have the opportunity to have something that is like an open keg um or um an open container violation where there's a fine but
there's no criminal violation involved. The student who's uh um got a future ahead of them doesn't have to then graduate from school with a criminal violation on their record. So that was
the basis of um his recommendation that we enact a bylaw of this type. It was referred to TSO. Uh TSI went through several processes because one after
hearing from the chief and what his intent was in making sure that um there was support from the university dean of students which there was. She was very appreciative of the fact that uh police
department is thinking about the future of students and pointing out that even if it's just a violation as they do with open container, it still could be subject to additional u action on campus
for additional uh uh sanctions on campus for uh the violation that occurred. heard because a citation was issued but it would not leave the student with a criminal record that would affect their
future. So that was the basis of it and uh we first uh drafted a bylaw that was based upon two municipalities in Massachusetts, East Hampton and Lel that
have uh and tried to uh be compatible with that but be fitting for Ammerst and uh then when uh it was sent to KP Law And because that's part of the uh
practice then before it uh for go's assistance um it's sent immediately and uh KP law um came back with the suggestion that it really could be much simpler and it
could be a single sentence which is what's before you. Uh we considered it a TSO. We consulted Chief Ting and based upon uh Chief Ting's advice uh that it was fine that he was totally supportive
of what um Lauren Goldberg at KP Law suggested. That is the version that is before you today and it has gone to go for review. >> Anna, can you give us the go report
please? The O found the single sentence bylaw clear, consistent, and actionable. >> Councelor Hani, did you have anything you wanted to add since you introduced this? >> Uh, no. I think Andy pretty much covered it all. >> Thank you. Uh, are there any questions
or comments, Anna? >> So, I want to start by saying that I understand, appreciate, and support the intent of this bylaw. I appreciate Mandy for bringing it forward and working with Chief Ting. And I appreciate Chief Ting taking the time to do that. And I see
this as absolutely making as a way of making our policies more supportive of our community by allowing for a fine instead of a criminal violation. The version of the bylaw proposed by KP Law is far too broad and allows for far
too much discretion in my opinion. While I certainly hope that our officers would never ever allow any biases to come into play in enforcement of this bylaw, I am concerned that this broad language allows for it. I'm also concerned about enacting this when we have so few public
restrooms available, especially downtown. While I still had some concerns with it, I much preferred the original language which TSO had worked on uh which specified that the violation is when someone urinates in or defecates in view of the public. Hence the public
urination part. The current bylaw just says whenever they do that, not in a facility designated as such. Uh technically uh making it illegal to pee in a pool. Just noting that. I can't believe that I'm saying this in a public meeting, but I someone should be able to
pee in their own backyard if they're not in view of someone else. Um, while we have the word of the chief of police that they would never issue a citation to say a parent with a child who's potty training or someone else who's not brazenly and intentionally violating the
the bylaw, and I trust that word. It's not what is written on paper. And at the end of the day, it's what written on it's what is written on paper that matters. I would prefer the council use the language initially proposed by TSO. And while I'd love to hear other perspectives and discussions, I am prepared to make a motion to substitute
that language. >> Hammer. >> Thank you. And thank you, Anna. Um, do we have the language? I don't think I've ever seen the greater language >> that would be brought in as a motion to amend, which would be on the second reading. So, I actually wanted to speak
to the the public part of it and ask the uh town manager if there has been any discussion about relieving some of the need for bylaw like this. I mean this may be very appropriate but um can we relieve
the need for this by requiring bars in the downtown um to provide portable porta portaotties um Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Um
uh I have you know there are stories that are shared by some of the people that that I speak with and they basically said well you know we kind of go around and clean up behind the the Yuyu church um on on
evenings because students are defecating back there. So, I'd like to ask why not get the uh the bars on board. I think it'd be a great requirement. Paul, did you have any comment on that?
>> I don't know if you could make a requirement. We certainly request um placement. >> Okay. Pat D'Angelus, >> thank you. I have uh a lot of concerns about this uh on multiple levels. Um,
originally I was totally opposed. I'm not completely opposed to having something like this. Uh, some questions I have. What uh not everybody who pees or poops in a public place uh in the bushes of a
church which I have seen etc is a student. There are many homeless people and uh people with u some health issues that the state recognizes like uh Crohn's disease and other things which gives them
kind of permission if they needed to. The other thing is that we're saying you can only pee and poop in a designated spot and when are they open? You're talking about having uh portaotties, but when are they open? There are
restaurants I go into and because I'm a customer, I can pee there, but I can't pee there if I'm not a customer. So, we're setting up a situation where people who are in a variety of situations could be charged with a $300
fine. That brings me to something else that bothers me. There are no options to mitigate this situation going on in this bylaw. So we have keg license and nuisance house violation of wetlands protection, open
burning. These are things that are really important and it costs $300 if you violate them. If you violate uh the false alarm bylaw, there are options.
Uh oh, I want to say this before I get to those options. Discharging your firearm in public only costs $200. So, go do it, folks. But don't pee. False response responses in a 12-month
period. one the first the third response you get a warning from the police on the fourth response you're charged $50 on the fifth 75 6 100 7th 150 8th $200
now it does seem to me that turning on an alarm could be very dangerous and people could get injured even if I step and poop I'm not usually injured I just don't like what my shoe is like after >> this bylaw
>> Pat I lost your mic. >> I'm trying. My finger's there. >> I know. Thank you. >> Um uh this bylaw needs to have something like the false alarms where you're warned if you pee in that bush again where Pam
can see you or Pat can see you, you're gonna be fined if you do it again this month or whatever. There's this is just another instance where we're going to put rules down for people because we're
tired of students. And if it had come through with some realistic ways of dealing with the situation such as warnings, etc., I wouldn't feel so vehemently opposed to
it. And I'm not a I will vote for a bylaw if the fines are reasonable. That it costs more to pee in a bush than it costs to discharge a firearm.
That really bothers the pee out of me. Counselor Lord, top that one. Don't challenge me now. Um, >> I know I spoke to this when it first came out about um 10 months ago or
something, so I'm not going to get into all those details, but um in 2010 I was a public urinator. I was unhoused, living on the streets, Craig stores that the church didn't open till 9:30. And I was a discreet one, but I would have to
pee in public. And so I have a lot of issues with this. I know we're trying to get drunk college students to stop, but there's a lot of unhoused people and it's just going to get worse for a while in this country with the number of unhoused. And we say nationwide they're
being criminalized. And I know this is a noncriminal offense, but when you can't pay the $300, it then becomes a criminal offense. So, um, my heart breaks a little. I'm sorry I'm a little crackly in my voice, but I'm just hurting for the people. And I know Chief Tang has come. He's like, "Well, we're not going
to target those people." I understand that attention, but you will have some officers who are tired of the mouth given to, you know, like sometimes people piss us off. I'm just going to say that. And they're human. So this person who may be on the house always comes for me is giving me an attitude
and I'm seeing them peeing. You know, I'm just saying it, like Anna said, if it's on paper, we can't prevent certain populations being harmed by this and then criminalized and then so that's all I have to say for now about this, but um
yeah, thank you. Just a reminder, this is a first read. It has to come up for a second read and potentially amendments. Andy, >> I had originally suggested we invite Chief Ting to the meeting of the first reading, but I think that in the end um
we sort of came to the conclusion to invite him to the meeting where we would do the second reading for to he could speak to any issues that came up. I have uh you know we have heard from the chief
about most of the issues that have been raised and I'll try and summarize what his responses were on those issues but um I don't think that it's a substitute for inviting the chief to come and speak
directly um to them. One thing is that he's very um clear that we can't have a bylaw that um is uh multi-level. It has to be a single bylaw
that's applicable to all. So you can't have a bylaw that's for that's aimed at one group and uh another bylaw that's aimed at another group. Um and uh so
that that does require that uh we have a bylaw that serves the purpose that is intended in his request for a bylaw and trusts the department for discretion. And he
talked very um personally and deeply about his concern and respect and support for um proper um approach to people who are
homeless. And uh that um saying that the department is always very careful with people who are either homeless or have some other reason for action. um is uh has been referred to either
because of age, disability or um anything else and uh that um that is the ethic of the department and he believes will be the ethic going forward. Um so
it was a combination of the need for a single bylaw that's applicable to all. As far as the $300 fine question that came up, um it it is the same amount as
an open container bylaw that already exists. So if somebody's walking down the street with a can of beer and um they police feel it's appropriate to um take action and issue a citation on that.
It's a $300 fine. And uh that is so it in of course if it's somebody who um they feel it's inappropriate to issue a citation to they choose not to issue a citation. Um and I think that that sort
of paraphrases what his comment is on um the issues that have been raised tonight. But um as I said, I hope that the town manager will uh invite the chief to be at the second reading so
that he can answer your questions directly. >> I think it's important to hear from him. >> Thank you, councelor Hanniki. >> I will be quick. Um, I would support going back to and returning to the draft
um that TSO sent to KP Law before KP Law came back with a one sentence um >> make sure >> proposal. Hold on. Um, so I'm happy to work with Anna to to make that happen um as an amendment, but I would also
support taring. Um, I know my original memo proposed 300, but it also stated I went with the maximum on everything so that people could see what the possibilities were and that I
never expected the maximum on every single possibility to be there. Um, in fact, I actually if I had been asked back when they proposed this, um, I probably would have said I think tyrine is more appropriate. Um but um yeah, so I would also support some sort of taring
too. >> Thank you, Anna. >> Uh I agree with what councelor Hani just said about the taring. I think that it's important that that is important and would be wonderful. Uh wonderful, that's not quite the right word, but that would be better. Um, I do want to remind the
council that we're not starting from a base of zero here and that this bylaw was introduced for a really important reason. Um, the and that reason is not that public urination is an issue. That's actually well maybe that's part of the reason, but in my mind that's not the the important piece of this. I want
to remind folks that public urination is currently illegal under state law. It falls under the I think it's under public nuisance or indecent exposure. Um, and so what this is trying to do is give us an avenue of not charging people with a criminal complaint. I'm firmly in
the camp of passing something at the local level because that's helping us help our community members who would otherwise be charged with that criminal violation. So while folks while uh the APD always have the option to give a warning uh verbal warning, this gives
them a level two versus them having to go just right to level three uh which is what they currently have to do. And we cannot change that aspect of it because it's state law. So voting no on the on this idea, not necessarily this bylaw,
which I don't support in its current iteration, but the concept of this bylaw is voting no on that would mean keeping that current state of affairs and not allowing them to find a middle ground before that criminal compliation. Um, and I don't want to I I would like
to give them that middle ground. um knowing that a warning will always exist, but I I would just urge folks to remember that voting no on any idea about public urination at a local level is not going to help our community. Uh so I would have urge folks to bear that
in mind and I don't like this one. >> Uh councelor Ryan. So again, I think Chief Ting will speak to this much better than I can, but again, um, one of the points he made before TSO was the fact that something like this, he
didn't, he wasn't wedded to any particular language, um, but something like this would be a very helpful tool for his officers who right now whose hands are somewhat really tied by the existing u laws. So um, I just had a
question for u the sponsors. Um, it sounds like what might happen at the second reading is we will get a proposal to go back to the original language and there will be some kind of tearing >> is what we're thinking. >> And could you could someone describe what that or maybe I'll just wait and
see what what they >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Andy, uh, you still have your hand up. I assume you're done. >> Okay. Please go ahead. Did you have some? You can go ahead and speak even though your video is not on.
>> Okay. Um as far as the taring is concerned, um I think that the u way it was um phrased in the original proposal from councelor Hani was
um as indicated, first offense, second offense, third offense. And um what um I believe was the concern expressed by the chief about that and again I think he's better spokesperson for himself was that
u with students um which is what this is aimed at u that the chances are they'll never um get past a first offense not because somebody wouldn't do it more than once but they wouldn't catch catch
that same person more than once um in the act and and they have to be able actually to see them in order to make a citation stand. They can't do it based upon somebody saying I saw this student
do this in my backyard and that isn't an sufficient basis. Uh so he was concerned that u having a $50 fine would be a joke level to the student and uh that you had
to that it was important to have a fine as it is now for the open container bylaw. Um and uh that that was at least equivalent so that people would take it
as something that the town really takes seriously um for the art for this for the uh population that it's geared at. And so that was uh the basis of that. I do have
the uh obviously the original bylaw and uh I can uh send that to the um clerk of the council or the council president to circulate to everyone so they can see what it was because uh the chief was uh
supportive of that version and uh it is what we originally voted to propose at TSO and we only agreed agreed to the substitution after it was offered to us which was when it was sent to go when it
was going to be sent to go. So was uh it went to KP Law first. So uh the uh chief supported it once and TSO supported it once. So I think that either one um
serves the purpose and uh I could I'll leave it to the president and the clerk of the council as to what to do with the draft. Thank you, Anna. >> Yeah. So, to kind of continue on with what Andy was saying, I just want to note uh Chief Ting hadn't viewed hadn't
gotten a chance to discuss this new version with TSO. Um I asked him a couple questions about it and he hadn't seen it prior to my sending it to him and he did say that he did not have issues uh necessarily have issues with it. Um, generally though, I just do want
to comment that this has raised a couple concerns with me with how drastically KP Law amended what we sent them to review for legal issues. Uh, and I'd like to note that in the future, we should be more clear with what our expectation is of their work. This was a complete redo
when we asked them to look and see if we had legal issues with the wordings wording that we had written. Um, and this is the second time that they have gone above and be I see this just because I'm chair of go. the second time that they've gone above and beyond what was initially requested. So I do think that as we're sending things for for
legal review, which we've now shifted to be the work of the committees, we need to be much more explicit and clear about what we are asking from our legal review. And if I am mistaken and the expectation is that our legal review rewrites our bylaws, then I am mistaken. But I just I do think that that
clarification needs to be made in the future because I I do think this mixup is causing us to spend a little more time on this than we initially uh intended to. >> Thank you, Pam. Thank you. I just wanted to address the the fee part of it. Um
and I understand that having a tier of first offense, second offense does not work. Um, so I would suggest as you rethink this that there may be a slightly less um large fee, but
something that's scary enough but not the same equivalent of firing discharging a rifle or something like that in town. >> Thank you. This is the first reading. We're going to conclude this conversation. Uh we are going to take a
little bit of time for your feedback on the town manager evaluation and if you will allow me since I had to author this thing. Um I'm I am not wed to anything I wrote. It is open season. However, all I
can say is I tried to take what people gave me and go back and give it some form so that it sounded like an evaluation. And instead of giving you
each of the individual forms, I did not do that. And the reason I did not do that is because it would take a little bit of time for another person to go back and reconstruct them because in order for me to even get to you for
tonight for this, I had to start doing analysis before I had everybody's response. And once I started doing analysis, it had to go into the form I was using. So the floor is open. If it's edits, I would prefer that you just send
me those edits. If it's an overall general observation u about style or anything else, please go ahead. Pam Rooney. >> Thank you. My comment is about general approach and um in reading the draft
that you started and thank you very much for doing that. Um, it occurred to me that there were many, many instances of where, quote, the majority of the council either voted that they that the town manager had met and or had
partially met a particular goal. Um it would it would be more meaningful to me to say, you know, uh a majority of council agreed that the town manager met
on these particular items, partially met the following particular items and did not meet whatever is left. Um, lumping lumping met and partially met to
me doesn't doesn't do it for me cuz >> in being in being nice, you might not give a three, but you give a two, but you really didn't want it to be lumped with one. >> If you would like to write me a sample sentence, that would be great.
Councelor Hanaki. >> Um I found the whole letter very confusing and unclear. >> Yeah. >> Um because partially for what what Pam just said. Um but you know I I think it's also frankly
a little more positive than what the counselors actually rated. Um, and my draft changes are extensive, Lynn. You're going to get it all. Um, I'm just going to say that. But, but there were also things that you said had that that this draft said had a majority as
partially meeting or making progress or meeting that didn't like there were errors like that that where there was no majority where the majority was a three was not met at all. um er you know just
a number of errors or errors where the majority was 3 plus two so partially to unmet not partially to met. I I think it bounced everything more positive than it was. Um
so my thank you my one is a big draft. Um, the appendix I I didn't even have time to read the whole thing, but I'm not sure the way appendix A is even necessary. I think it would actually be clearer for the public and for the
manager if the chart were appendix A, not rehashing everything and then trying to do what frankly the letter did or tried to do itself. just just attach the numbers cuz
that's fairly clear. Um, and get rid of those those paragraphs there. Um, I also thought the one section was fairly repetitive and so I I wasn't sure what the point was. The section that started charter requirements and then it went
down to se So that was I think section two and then section three was town manager areas of strength. basically rehashed the exact same paragraph and I'm not sure why. Um so I I um would
would do different there. Okay. Any other comments? Let me suggest that you send me and just me uh any edits and any suggestions. And uh my plan is not to bring this back
until December 1st. even though we have a meeting next week because next week we will focus on all of those things that we have delayed during the last two meetings of November 3rd and
tonight. Okay. Any other questions or comments? Thank you. Uh we uh have no appointments with regard to uh committee and liaison reports. I just want to mention for BCG that we are
meeting again on December 3rd from noon to 2:00. We did meet already. Uh we had a very good exchange, but at this next meeting is when we will discuss um input to budget guidelines. Uh community
resources committee. Pam, thank you. Um this is a report for our um November 13 meeting. Um, but as sort of a a wrap-up, the uh on November 13, CRC received an
overview um done primarily by councelor Hani of what the state's model solar bylaw might look like and what materials were contained in it, questions that may want to be pursued, and a table of uh
provide that she provided that compared side by side our draft bylaw and the state's proposed compon components. Um, committee member Shane is also reviewing portions of the state draft as well.
This week, November 20th, uh, in addition to work in the solar bylaw, we will be holding a public hearing on the planning department proposal for reszoning three parcels on Main Street from RG to BN.
Also, uh CRC has rescheduled December meetings. We are going to be meeting on December 4th and 18th. Thank you. Okay. Elementary school building committee. Kathy,
>> we we met on Friday and the building continues continues to be built on schedule. It's about to be completely um enclosed. So, beginning to work on the walls and they're mocked up a classroom. Pictures have been posted in the um the
packet. Uh one thing I'm checking on um that we will be allowing the group is allowing us to do a tour of the building on December 9th. The school committee has asked if they could be part of it and I'm checking to see whether I could
extend an invitation to any member of the council that might want to come. And it's a question on how many people can be walking around a construction site at the same time without hurting themselves or somebody else. So, um, what I'll do is try to if I find out a headcount on
what we can do, I'll just send out a note on who might want to come. And these tend to happen at 3:30 or 4 in the afternoon. That's a Tuesday, so it's after the school is out and the building crew has cleaned up most of the site. The other thing that's about to happen,
and I'm not sure if it will have happened by the 9th, is putting in a driveway that it will actually uh start to cover up the site and have it look like it will need to look a year from now. >> Okay. Uh finance committee,
>> finance committee meets tomorrow at 10 in the morning and the focus is on guidelines. Uh, so one of the things I wanted to know, Lynn, on your planning of council agendas is when do you have guidelines on the agenda? We're going to
hope to get to a draft by the end of tomorrow morning. I don't know how successful we will in that. And then when would it first come up to the council? >> Right now it's on December 1st. December 1st. Okay. Trying to take it up next
time on the 24th is just >> No. No. We would No, we better not. I mean, if if we have to, we'll add another committee meeting, so it might not be available till the 8th. Um, but we'll we'll aim for the first. Thanks. >> Right. >> Anna, you have a question?
>> I do. Um, Lynn, could you talk a little bit more? I'm just I and I know that calendar Jenga is messing with everything here, but you had talked about BCG meeting on the 3, us discussing uh finance finishing their budget guidelines, and then us
discussing them as a council on the 1st. I'm curious how you see BCG uh and their input being incorporated in the discussion of the of the council's finance guidelines, financial guidelines, excuse me. One of the reasons we set the meeting for the third
so that there would be a draft and they I I don't believe that we were trying to come up with one unified set of guidelines. It may be that BCG has its own guidelines but that they should at least look at what finance committee has. If you have
other thoughts, I'm open to those. >> I don't know how else it would work with with calendars being what they are. I think I have I have plenty of thoughts for next year. Thank you. I I mean again I given the timing I don't see any way to
we will meet in December 3rd. We probably will meet one more time in this calendar year and try to come up with a set of guidelines from BCG and they may not be identical.
Okay. Um, >> I think it's my turn. >> Yes, it is. Go. >> So, go. Uh, I forgot that we are we're not allowed to meet on, uh, the 11th
because it was Veterans Day and, um, that's on me for not remembering that that meant we couldn't meet. Um, and so, G is meeting on the 25th and we will be tackling the goals for most of that meeting. Um, we do have to have a report back to the council regarding the
resident oversight board by the 15th. Um, we will do our best to move that uh proposal to get back to the council by the 15th, but the goals um last year it took till February. We can't let that happen again. So, um, this really needs to the
goals really need to get to the to the town manager so he can start planning for the year. So, we will be spending the bulk of our time uh on those. Um and then uh we will be meeting again on the 9th. So we will have two meetings before that
deadline for the um resident oversight board report. Um that said, counselors, I only heard I did not hear from a majority of you regarding goals. If you got your goals to me by roughly the deadline, I appreciate you. I will make you cookies.
Uh the rest of you, you got to get them to me by Friday. Um, that is your deadline. Friday, 400 p.m. hard cut off. Um, otherwise we're going to have to add them in later and it will make it harder for everybody else. Nobody wants that. So, please send them to me by by Friday.
Even if they're in rough shape, we'll at least get them in and and have them there for discussion. And basically what go is doing is kind of looking at the areas um that the goal areas that we had and or that folks are are saying they would like to see in there. Um, and then
we're looking at the action items that folks are saying they'd like to see in there. So, it can be pulled over from last year's goals, but we are not automatically pulling everything over and then removing. So, if there's something from last year's goals that you'd like to see accomplished, email that to me uh if it didn't get done this
year. And I'm happy to field any questions on this, but Friday at 4 p.m. is your deadline for uh goals. Please email those. And I'm I've got a big chart that I'm putting together for G to discuss on Tuesday. Uh, next Tuesday, not tomorrow.
>> Councilor Ryan, you had your hand up. >> Yes. >> No. >> Okay. >> Now it's down. Okay. Uh, Jones Library Building Committee. Councelor Ryan >> committee met um on November 10th and
the building is actually actually somewhat ahead of schedule and uh everything is copacetic and the committee will be meeting again on December 8th. >> Okay.
Question. Were there any financial updates given to the plan of the building committee? >> Financial updates from >> from the friends of who are who are >> out there shaking the bushes.
>> No, there were not >> fundraising. In other words, I building committee. Did you But you are looking at financials for payments. Yeah. >> Uh Kathy, that was actually my question. And
George, are you seeing any the extent to which the roof cost more than we'd budgeted for any other change orders from the original budget? >> There have been a few change orders early on, but at the moment there have been none and so we are looking at those very closely and there were any of
substance you would be hearing about it. >> Are are those all in the are they all in the packet so we be able to see them? >> I'm sorry. Which packet are you speaking of? You're speaking of the our packet. the packet for the library meeting. >> The packet for the library just building
at least the way we see them on the school is there's a an amount budgeted and how much has been spent. So to the extent something had to be budgeted higher, we see that amount as well. >> Okay. >> Is there >> um Jennifer?
>> So then I guess that this would be a question to the town manager. Uh, can will we can we get a capital campaign report before the end of the year? >> Sure. I think we gave you one a few weeks ago, but I can get get an updated
one. Um, there's an attached to the town manager report. Um, I think it was request I can I can resend that for you. I think it was October 1 or whatever date it was. update, >> you know, information like money received versus pledges and
>> yes, >> money spent on fundraising. >> Uh I can came from the capital campaign. I can send you what they sent to me which I already gave to council, but I can get send it to you again. Happy to do that.
>> Yeah, I'll I'll come in further questions. >> I'm sorry, Jennifer. Did you have further questions? Okay. Um TSO, >> well TSO um met on November 6 and the
major discussion was about uh returning to the Southeast Street question and uh the school and what happens uh when the school opens and uh safety both traffic
and safety for pedestrians. and for bicyclists focusing on children but recognizing that it's uh not just children but that being the major focus. The meeting was a very um worthwhile
discussion. We had um Michael uh Gallo uh Okonnell who's the facilities director for the schools um Chief Ting uh Guilford Boring and Kathy Chain from
the elementary school building committee. um meeting, talking with the committee and really just thinking through what are the issues and what are the options for dealing with the issues both in the
short term meaning uh what can we do between now and when the school opens and um what long-term solutions because the four roundabouts um proposal that DPW
um originally came up with was really the long-term proposal and uh it did not get the support of the transportation advisory committee or the disability access advisory committee because it was
focused entirely on traffic and did not deal with um safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. And uh there was that was the hesitation that caused TSO to not u feel
comfortable recommending going forward with the um proposal for the four roundabouts as it was originally presented. There are a couple other options out there for the long range. So after um very important discussion in
which I think there was a a universal recognition and concern that the issue needs to be addressed. We recognize that a long-term solution is not going to be completed before the school um opens.
And therefore, we divided uh the tasks of thinking of long-term solutions and short-term solutions into two pieces. Um, in the long-term solution, we realize that if the council finally
makes a decision on the transportation advisor and parking commission, uh that it would become something that was just a natural that would be um sent to them to make a recommendation
to the council. If uh the decision is otherwise then it has then it has to go back to TSO. Uh but that's a subject for apparently discussion next week. Um, as far as the
short term, uh, we passed a motion and the motion is is as follows. To recommend that the town manager give high priority to creating a working group with appropriate staff from
schools and the town to work together to address traffic, parking, and safety issues when the new school opens. And um that uh has been presented um to the
town manager and I also forwarded to go uh to exercise its judgment as to whether it should be proposed as a town manager goal. Right now it sits as a recommendation of a council committee
but not a recommendation of the council. um if it goes to the goal stage um then it obviously is going to be in a situation where the council is going to be making a decision that it's adopting
it as its goal. But in any event uh we think that it's very important that that uh happen so that u the appropriate people most of whom are at the meeting with us take it to the next stage
because it really needs an analysis not just of the ideas presented but what is uh practical and affordable. uh what what are the costs and what is most likely to be effective and uh that
working group is really the way to address it. Uh other things that are going on in TSO is we cancelled the meeting that's scheduled um was originally going to be Thursday of this week simply because we're not ready to
deal with any significant agenda items. Um but we have the following agenda items in addition that we do need to take up with. Um, one is that if the u
decision is made to create the transportation parking commission as we recommended, then um we decided that there needs to be some changes to the TSO committee charge and we want to
spend some time on that and not let that hold over um longer than necessary. uh we decided that u changes to the council rules of procedure are not
necessary and not appropriate. Second thing is ways taller. Um, as uh time manager has uh reported, he now has a consultant from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission that is going to be
uh working on the waist taller RFP and uh we're trying to arrange u to have the committee um that has spent a lot of time on the issue meet with the uh consultant and uh then um
of Of course, we'll handle anything referred by the council or the council president to us and uh otherwise our remaining task is carryover memo >> which um I'm going to call on Kathy and
then Anna Kathy. >> Yeah, I just have a couple quick comments to add to what Andy said. Um during the meeting actually we got an email um urging us to move to the complete streets level two priority plan
because if we submitted that as a town it opens up access to millions of dollars of grants through safe routes to schools and that period will open in September 2026. So anything major in these intersections other than fixing the lights or adding a light might be
well beyond our means. But there was a discussion of a temporary light, not meaning just a mo a mobile one helping with the buses get in and out. But I'm just worried, Paul, it's a larger issue of applying in a grant for one so that
we get access to grants for another um getting to a stage on the complete streets level two. I know we achieved level one. Thanks, >> Anna. Andy, you mentioned um TSO seeking
to change some things in their charge once the commission is created. Um and I that will come to G, I assume, as G is responsible for making recommendations regarding town council standing committees and charges and the like. Do you have a timeline for when TSO will be
done with what they'd like GO to discuss and recommend to the town to the council just so I can plan future agendas? I guess we should uh have a conversation about that. Um I think that the question
that um TSO has to decide is uh whether we should go ahead and create a draft of what um the chart should look like if the change is made. Um, we can't, you
know, we originally had been holding off and saying we wouldn't take formal action until we knew that the changes being made and uh we're getting to a calendar squeeze. Uh, so we may have to
go to the uh first, but uh that's something that we should discuss so we can work together, make sure that that it all gets done. >> Absolutely. I'm I'm brainstorming my carryover memo and I'm trying to figure out if this should be in it or not. Thank you.
>> Um, speaking of carryover memos, you need to be prepared to at least have a draft of what items will be in it for December 1st and that is um right around the corner. Uh, are there any liaison reports?
the um there is one and that's human rights commission will be with us next Monday. Uh they have their annual report. They also have a bylaw and it's a determination of the council as to whether they refer the bylaw to go.
Um the uh there are no minutes in our packet. So the approval of minutes for November 3rd is not on this agenda. Town manager report. Paul, you gave us a brief report on the fire. >> Yes. So this report, you'll have a regular town manager report. I felt this
was most important to have give you a summary of where we were on the fire at this moment in time. So we sort of memorialize that in your minutes and I appreciate that the council recognized all the first responders and everyone else who participated in that event. It's been it was a real major event for
the town. So thank you for doing that. >> Are there any questions of the town manager? Okay. Um on the president's report, it's not a written report. It's not required this meeting. Uh we did have a four towns meeting. It was attended by a quorum of the council. Um that was an
exchange between the um sustainability group which is a subcommittee of the regional school committee and the informal four towns meeting. The decision was made at that that there would be a joint group moving
forward. And I and as was correctly pointed out back in the spring as we prepared for a meeting with the superintendent that never happened. Uh the council did at that point identify for counselors that would be part of a
future group of that nature. So that is unless there's any other question or comment. That's the advice I will go with since it's already been voted. Okay. On future meeting agendas, we meet next week at 6:30. We also meet on the
1st. We are going to be meeting on December 8th and we will be meeting on December 15th. Are there any other counselor comments? Councelor Hani. >> So, I'm curious on future agenda items.
Um, when is the housing production plan scheduled for? When is the U drive easement? the Py Village Place, the council committee charges, I think you just mentioned the human rights commission bylaw is next week, but I'm not sure you said whether it was next week. And the TPC that we just
postponed. Can we get ideas of dates so that we don't lose track of any of these that we've been postponing the last weeks? >> Well, believe me, I'm working hard not to lose track. Uh, let me just mention what I have on the agenda for next week. the Human Rights Commission annual report and bylaw Paley Village if it's
ready. University Drive easement which is referral to TSO Heather Stone Roundabout with a motion and vote. The motion's already been made. Um and we Pat and I have a district 2 meeting on
th Wednesday at 7:00. uh the VFW property surplus which is a motion and vote to release the property so that it can go be you go out to bid uh for somebody to actually go forward with the project that we've thought we have hoped
would be there the housing production plan motion and vote that's a recommendation coming out of CRC the transportation and parking commission would be the first read and vote I'm Sorry, that's not going to happen. I'm just
telling you that's is where we are. >> I guess what I'm trying to figure out is what is scheduled for next week versus December 1st. >> Uh I don't know about Paley Village because I'm we're waiting for uh
additional information from the town. We were trying to couple that with University Drive easements so that we'd have the same people. Heatherstone roundabout could be postponed. VFW property, I think we'll go ahead with a vote. Housing production plan, we should go ahead with a vote. Transportation and
parking, we should go ahead with that vote. Public urination is second reading. That would be my take. >> So, not the human rights commission bylaw next week. No, it is the human rights commission bylaw would be a
referral >> next week. >> Next week. >> Um, council committee charges. >> Uh, we can delay that until the 1st. I have it listed under the 24th, but
that's not going to happen. And then we also have to adopt the calendar. And then we have financial guidelines. I'm just listing everything that we have to get done before the end of the year. Um Main Street
uh BN reszoning uh town manager evaluation uh carryover memos. Any appointments left uh and goals?
>> Um that's it. At least that's What am I missing, George? >> Okay. Trying to balance it out and make sure we have time for first and second readings. If you have a request for something
you'd like to either delay or move forward or carry over till next year, please let me know. Okay. >> Could I ask a further question about agendas? We've had a lot of presentation
type items on our agendas. Do we have any more of those? You know, presentations, public forums and all. Um, do we have any more of those coming up on any of the agendas? >> Only human rights commission. And I they're it's we're asking that be very
short. We already have their report. >> Okay. George just mumbled state of the town. >> Town. >> Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. State of the town. That's on December 1st. >> Okay. We can make that as brief as people want. I will be glad to send you this next
round of agenda items so that people can see it. Are there any other questions or comments? Then I move to ajourn. Is there a second? >> Second. Okay, we're going to move to vote.
>> Patanggeles. >> I >> Anna Delan Gothier. >> I >> Lyn Grie. I councelor Hanick. >> Hi. >> Bob Hegner. >> Hi. >> Councelor Lord. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Councelor Ryan. >> Hi. >> Kathy Shane. >> Yes.
>> Andy Steinberg. >> Hi. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Councelor Walker. Yes, >> it's unanimous with one person absent. Thank you.