Yeah, let's let's open the meeting. Um, so this is the uh Car Carile Select Board meeting of Tuesday, February 10th. Uh, this meeting is fully remote, was changed from a hybrid meeting due to the winter weather advisory and and chance
of some snowfall tonight. Um, why don't we open the meeting with a roll call? Starting >> Arnold here. >> Modell here. Snell present. >> Riola present. And I see Christine just
joined. We'll wait for Christine. There she is. >> Hey guys. Sorry I'm late. >> No worries. We're just doing roll call. >> Christine. >> Oh, Christine Stevens here. Triola here.
Okay, great. So, all members are present on Zoom. Um, so tonight's agenda, we'll start with community inputs followed by appointments. Um, at 7:15, we will discuss and vote on closing the town meeting warrant and that will include a review of the warrant article requests
by Ryan. Um, and we'll discuss the meeting logistics. At 8:00, we'll discuss uh TA goals. That's part of his evaluation process. We had completed his evaluation, but had not discussed his goals yet. So, we'll do that tonight. 8:15 personnel policies update with
Aubrey. Um, we'll do a discussion of the code of conduct policy. Um, at 9:00, uh, the cemetery committee will be here to provide an update and a review of their town meeting article requests. 9:40 we'll have the town administrator report followed by a review of warrants and
minutes, liaison reports, community input, and adjournment. So, with that, let's open it up for any community input online. A couple folks out there. Okay. If we're not seeing any
hands raised, we'll go ahead and move on to the appointments. And so, the first item is to discuss for um the FY27 appointment process. Um in our planning meeting we discussed the need to set some deadlines by which uh volunteers
can submit their um applications and the uh re to allow for recommendations so that when we begin the appointment process following town meeting we're all set to go. So Ryan, I don't know if you want to speak to this briefly, but we have we've discussed setting two dates which would be May 1st as the deadline
for volunteer applications to be received by the executive assistant. Those applications would be provided to the committees. We give them a month to review, make their recommendations, and we set a June 1st deadline for the committees to submit their recommended recommended slate to the EA so that
ultimately the select board can promptly approve new volunteers. >> This is a request from your um one of your boards, specifically the COS. They like to start their vetting process early and they have a robust process. So setting these deadlines allows boards to
to do their stuff and get their information to you timely. >> And we know from experience these deadlines come up quickly and then usually by the time town meeting happens we're just starting to get in applications. So this hopefully would at least while we wouldn't expect to fill
all the spots should help us make better progress faster. Would we um Ryan when will there be a list of all openings uh published in time for that? People will have no idea what openings are, right?
>> Yes, we will get that out as soon as possible. >> And that would be anybody terms expiring regardless of whether the incumbents um say they want to they would simply apply same. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. Good.
Would you like me to make a motion, Scott? >> Yeah, please. And it's uh in the updated packet. >> Okay. Um I move to set May 1, 2026 is the deadline for FY27 volunteer applications to be received by the
executive assistant. Do >> you have a second? >> Can I add the other one too or do them one by one? >> No, you can do them both. And I move to set June 1st, 2026 is the deadline for boards, committees to submit their recommended slate to the
executive assistant. >> I'll second that. >> Any further discussion or deliberation? >> What happens if they don't make the deadline? You don't let them take volunteers. >> No, we just we decide, right? If we have some
>> Well, I guess they run the risk that you may decide. I mean, if they're late and somebody else puts their ad in, then they run that risk. But if nobody volunteers, the deadline is irrelevant, right? >> Right. >> Yeah. It becomes rolling after that.
>> Yeah. Okay. Is it rolling as in first come first serve? Probably should be clear about that. >> Just that you would consider them as they come in after the deadline, >> right? So if nobody comes in on you know May 1st and somebody raises their hand
like during a say during a select board meeting is that like boom or >> no >> no it has to go through the committee right >> and the process of right filling out the application and yeah going through your committee >> right
it always should come the recommendation should always come from the committee first and then we are the last step Okay, are we ready to take a vote? >> Yep. >> Let's do a roll call. >> Arnold I. >> Vote. >> All I >> L I.
>> Stevens I. >> Triola I. Okay. And then uh Ryan, you had notification of an appointment. You're This was the animal control officer. Sorry, my connection's slow, which I
will fix in a second. But this is Mark Cancy. He's our currently in the academy, a police officer we appointed. He used to be the animal control officer for Chelmsburg. He was not an officer there. So, we've sent him to officer school, and he is
going to be serving in both roles, our acco duty and a patrol officer. We'd like to appoint him now. So, we we've had a few dog incidents recently and he's agreed to work on the weekends and in his off time from the academy to to help us out.
>> So, we like to point him now. We can do that. >> Please. >> Yes. >> The more help with dogs, the better. >> Okay. So, no action item needed from us. That's just a notification. Um, so I think with that there's no
other appointments tonight, correct? Okay. So, let's move on to the item number three, closing of the town meeting warrant. And so, we'll vote on that. But did you want to vote on that first, Ryan, or you want to do your review?
like to do a review if that's possible. >> Sure. Yeah. You have >> we got 45 minutes for this one. And if you need a couple minutes, just let me know and we can um >> do a couple other things. >> Yeah, I need a minute just to tell my
son to get off the Wi-Fi. But I'll be right back. >> Can we get a motion for Ryan's son to get off the Wi-Fi? >> Off the Wi-Fi. >> Very funny. >> All right. looking down. I Let's see.
>> Do we have a something that Ryan can share? >> I believe he does. Yeah, I just want to wait for him to come back on that. >> Yeah. >> Um I'm just looking down the list here. >> I guess we can review the the minutes if we want to do that.
>> There were the minutes were in the packet from January 27th, our last meeting. >> They look good to me. >> They looked good to me, too. I had no corrections or edits.
>> Um I had one comment. I I it's a comment for um Gretchen and I guess she can take it up when she hears this, but it said I abstained from two votes. >> I don't recall. I think I understand why
I might have abstained from the CPA on the boghouse because I'm a member of CAT. Although I don't know why that would cause me to abstain. I think you left the room, David. >> Yeah. >> Oh, >> yeah. >> That was my recollection. >> Okay. All right. Fair enough. That
sounds right. >> My my only comment, and it's just a question, I guess, to the board. I think that the minutes are fine. I noticed that our comments aren't always reflected in there. um if there were public comments, they're always
reflected in there. But for example, when we got done with the discussion u or one of the discussions we all of the LSC and consom each of the members weighed in, but there was no mention of that. >> I I'm fine with that, but it's something
if if as a board we think we should, you know, be quoted so that the record shows what we thought or said. I mean, but otherwise, I mean, our minutes become voluminous, too. So, >> I think that's a good point, Travis, on
particularly on something like that, you know, conversation. I guess it's hard if we're asking sort of for a judgment call on whether to include comments or not. But >> well, maybe it's something that as we we should be conscious of as we do our meetings if there's something we want
printed in the minutes if we just I think state that at the time, >> right? >> Well, that's hard to know in the real time, right? Um it's more >> your opinion on something. >> I thought this or you thought that. you
know, it the minutes don't need to capture every exchange, but I mean, what I would want to see preserved is the color around our decision- making so that um you know, years from now people can understand why we came to a determination that we did. Um so, you
know, maybe we can ask Gretchen to sort of summarize what the the deciding factors were that I don't think that would be too much to ask. >> I agree. I think she should have some editorial flexibility. Yeah, >> maybe bias it a little more toward
>> reporting relevant comments. Or maybe she has already exercised that and determined that our comments >> not relevant. >> Okay. But we don't have any changes to the 20 January 27th minutes. >> Yeah. So, if someone wants to make a
motion to approve those minutes, um, looks like Ryan's getting up. I'll move to approve the minutes from the January 27th, 2026 meeting. >> Second. >> Okay. Uh, let's do a roll call vote. >> Arnold I.
>> Modell. I >> Stevens I. >> I. Okay. How we looking, Ryan? Is he frozen? >> But, you know, just thinking about those minutes again. Um
maybe uh maybe when there's sort of a uh you know like for that particular conversation Scott you went back to the select board to sort of wrap up right and asked each select board member to comment. So maybe when
it's a case like that is when Gretchen could try to look at in particular or listen to those particular comments and see if they you know seem worth including. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Yeah, it was just a question if there there's too much stuff that, you
know, we're trying to balance it and and the reality is are people really going to go back to this when we do save the recordings if if you know >> I don't know, maybe I'm making something out of nothing. >> That's a balance.
Yeah, that topic in particular, you know, we're going to revisit it uh again and um I think it's, you know, it's it's been a it's been a source of some disagreement,
right, from various parties. So >> right >> in that case it seems it's worth adding a little more when when it's a an issue that's been brewing for a while and there different points of view and >> right >> we've had to call you know a joint
meeting to address some concerns >> yeah good to >> yeah well and we we asked that of the other boards in the sense that you know sometimes their minutes aren't very complete and we'd like them more complete So,
>> looks like Ryan's having some technical issues. >> Yep. All right. Why don't we um Let's see. >> Is the warrant. Is the warrant list? I didn't see Oh, here's Is it in the
packet somewhere? I didn't see it. >> No, I didn't see it in the pack. >> Okay. >> Um here it comes. >> Here he goes. He's coming back. Can you guys hear or see that? >> Yes. >> Oh,
>> what is it? >> Was it showing the um spreadsheet? >> Yeah, it is. >> Excel spreadsheet that starts with something articles. Yeah, there it is. >> Okay. Sorry, I'll try to fight through this. U please tell me if you can't hear
me. So, uh, these are the articles that are currently currently proposed as you plan to clo close the warrant tonight. It's it's everything. It doesn't mean that everything here will be included, but this is comprehensive list of what what has been proposed. So, I'm going to run through them quickly. What I'm
asking for is if you if you want to talk anything talk about anything, just stop me. Just say hold for a second. But the idea is not for you to to deliberate about the articles. It's to expose you to the articles and ideally at the end I would hear from you and your chair would
hear from you you know the things that you really think you want more information on or to talk more about as we plan the next six meetings until um until town meetings. >> So you don't want to hold on that you only want to hold if we don't understand
something then we're going to circle back again to talk about the ones we want to deliberate more at subsequent meetings. I think I think that would be a good approach. But >> all right. >> All right. So the first one, you know, is the operating budget which
you the finance committee will be presenting their recommendations to you at at your next meeting. So you'll get a chance to dive into the numbers. The the next article would be a capital equipment article. This is anything that doesn't have to do with buildings. So, the the buildings would be covered under article three, building
maintenance, which would be your classic MFC article. One thing that's still being discussed right now, which is why it's in here unnumbered, is a town hall debt project. This would be for all the items that are being proposed for the repair of town
hall. So, this is attic insulation, the roof, the RTU, painting, fashca. The finance committee is debating whether or not to instead of using free cash for those items individually to do a um large borrowing article in order to accomplish those tasks over the next two
three years. That one's still heavily under discussion and I'm sure you have questions about that. The fire station project is your project. That's the next article. This is for the the full cost of the renovation and and I I'll give you an update during my TA report as
well, but we are still on track to propose this at town meeting. It is very precarious and if anything goes wrong, our design and numbers won't quite match your intent, but as of right now, we are still on track to present a warrant article at town meeting about the fire
station. That will be coming in front of you on March 10th. you will get a projected number before we go out to bid the final design, a presentation from your fire station building renovation committee. So, that one's going to be a big topic.
We're inviting a Butters and the public to that discussion as well because it'll be we're guessing a pretty big topic. >> The next article would be the design cost of the DPW, very similar to what the fire station vote was in the fall.
This is to get the funding necessary to to build out the construction documents and then that would lead you to a set of documents that you could put out to bid for a vote at next annual town meeting in 2027. Then we'd get into the consent agenda
itself and then items that are traditionally in the consent agenda to include the town reports, elected salaries, which is now limited to just the moderator and the assessors, a bianual bill asking for $4,000 each year to conduct the uh your OPED
evaluation and study. The next uh article authorizes you to spend chapter 90 as part of your road maintenance plan. Article 11, which is much larger this year or proposed article 11, I'll try not to say the names, is PEG funding
included in the PEG expenditure expectations are a project at the school to create a small recording studio or audio studio or video studio, whatever you want to call it, a small MMN for the students to use. This is a a school committee project that's coming forward
and could be paid for exclusively through PEG funds, which we think is a good deal. >> Also, there's a a small working group at the school looking to enhance the the auditorium where the town meeting is typically held
to increase the the audio and the visual aspects of that of that theater and space for town meeting specifically, but that'll have community aspects as well. And then the last piece is the community rooms at the police and the fire station. So those will be PEG eligible
because we're hoping to turn them into additional spaces like your Clark room for public meetings which people do um do want and and seek. The next article authorizes the spending limits for the department's revolving
funds. That's followed by the town town bylaws require that you approve the salary and and wage table each year at town meeting. So those are traditionally in the consent agenda. That doesn't mean you can't add more to that, but that is
the ones that we know you typically include. All right, now we're getting into some of the newer articles. First is a a simple bylaw change. We're expecting this one will be moved into the consent agenda as well. It's just changing the name of your celebration and veterans bylaw change. You've already committee,
you've already done that in practice. You just need to do it in in um not theory. You need to do it for your bylaw. The next article is a correction. You had previously uh passed a l ement
street for l an easement for l street. This is uh was never recorded properly, so we need to revote it from several years ago. Okay. GIS costs. We believe this one is coming out.
The town previously approved a plan to to implement GIS costs and then move that the basic annual recurring cost into the operating budget. There is enough money in the old Warren article to continue this for another year while
we build those costs into FY28. This was a FINCOM request, so this one is going to come off as a Warren article. The next one is the safety committee's request for funds to conduct a traffic
study in order to help their efforts and and eventually what will be your efforts to reduce the speed limits in certain areas of town. This was a topic we've discussed with you before. In in order to do that, we need to adopt potential
safety zones, which would help with some slowing of traffic around the schools, which is another article that is being proposed. Plus, they need some traffic and studying of traffic patterns in order to prove that some of these spaces in town need lower uh lower speed
limits. Mass DOT requires those studies. So, they're going to be asking you for a certain amount of money that we don't know the total yet for that. We're supposed to know that next week when our civil engineers meet with the safety committee. You'll notice the next article. We've
been discussing it. It's the lease for the cell tower. We'll be we'll be putting that out to bid the Proctor Road Tower for it adding cell service to it. This needs to be approved by town meeting the lease itself. But we can put an RFP out for the equipment being
added. That'll all be at the cost of the vendor and then they lease that space from you for a fee each year. So increased self-service and increased money in Proctor Road. Hopefully the planning board had additionally asked for two placeholders. One for a
clustered housing bylaw. This would >> address some of the affordable housing zoning and other items that were discussed heavily during the MBTA process. they've decided to push that off until the fall likely because they want to do um more research and more
outreach. So, that's going to come off that clustered housing bylaw. However, the ZBA does want to amend their bylaws and they plan on bringing a proposal to you for consideration and then obviously town consideration as well. So, that one
is coming up. Uh I don't have a lot of information about that one, but that one's going to be a a presentation to you so that you understand what is being proposed and asked. We already talked about the safety zone adoption. The the most likely initial
cause of this article would be adopting a a slower speed limit in the school zones around around Carlile public schools. It's a while ago, but last year you were discussing an issue with the cemetery perpetual fund.
What happened was money was spent from the principal and not the interest which brought that account into deficit for a piece of equipment that the DPW uses at the cemetery. The finance committee recommended to you that we make that account whole because of interest and
and not using it in the last year. We've um recovered about $10,000. So the actual request now is $34,000 to make that fund whole. And then you'll hear tonight the cemetery committee is going to recommend some increases in fees to
help with the cemetery perpetual fund after this correction is made. The next article is from the police department. They had asked this be considered in the fall and we did push it off to the spring in order to make room for for some of the articles that were discussed this fall. It's a
canvasing and solicitation bylaw. This used to be a state law that you had to register with the police department in order to to canvas or solicit. Now, uh, towns need to pass their own laws as the state law no longer applies. So, the police department is looking for another
tool to um at least check on or stop people that are going house to house in town. Okay. The next one is is commonly called the chicken tax. So the assessors is proposing some relief for taxpayers
because of some corrections that are being done in the assessing office. Personal property is being taxed and personal property includes even hobbyist level uh chicken chicken coops and others. So people are receiving bills for things like having chickens and in
some cases the bill is is under a dollar. So it cost us more to process it than we than we take in. This got some attention and the assessors addressed it immediately and they're proposing a five I believe it's $5,000 u limit on
personal property being exempted which would allow for things like chickens and other things to not be taxed. And then the impact of this in terms of not collecting taxes is very minimal under 10,000 a year. So the assessors are going to bring this forward for your consideration and town meeting
consideration. You'll hear two articles from the cemetery committee tonight. One is to study a potential area of expansion. This would be a $16,000 request so that they can look at a piece of property for a recommendation on expansion. And then
your bylaws require that any change in fees go to town meeting directly. So, the cemetery committee will be recommending uh fee increases for the cemetery. All right. And then we get into the currently discussed CPC articles.
They're they're not fully recommended yet. The first one is the actual funding of our CPC accounts. And then it gets into the projects. So the first project is the library renovation, which you're all aware of.
They are seeking somewhere between 300 and $500,000 to finish their renovation project because of increased costs. So, that one I'm sure will be a discussion point. The next one comes from the town clerk to digitize records. These are historically significant
records. The town clerk has done a good job identifying those records that we need to back up, and this is a a attempt to start one of the phases of that project. The amenities building, you'll recognize from last year, is back. the boghouse, which was discussed with
you earlier this spring. The CHT is looking for funds to advance the design for that affordable housing project at the Bog House. Um, this article might be rolled into the last article, but we are looking for
funding to help offset the costs of the article 97 legal investigations. Um, we're it's still unclear to us whether or not this will be a separate article or included in the blog house design article. And then lastly, the COS and the housing
trust is looking for another request for rental assistance. This is a two-year request. Last year it was $50,000. They're asking for $100,000 so they can investigate a more permanent funding solution for this uh popular program.
>> Ryan, two quick things on here. Um the CPC did decide last week to uh delete the boghouse legal um application because that legal expense was already included in the boghouse design, the
200,000. So that can be taken off. And then the other is um just a change of title. the town clerk's um uh project is not to digitize the records because that's actually not eligible for CPA
money. It's to um restore and preserve uh important town records like births, marriages, deaths. >> Great. I also go ahead on the on the rental assistance item.
You know, we haven't done liaison reports, but the town trust fund administration working group has proposed that um you know, we have about $116,000 that is ready to be spent right now. I'd
like to propose taking that 100k off the tax base and using the trust funds. Um, you know, it's a little little premature, but by the time this all happens, we will have squared the trust funds away. Um but we have already as a
committee or as a working group have already voted um to allocate 116K a whole trench of three different funds to the COHS specifically for rental and fuel assistance. Um the only outstanding item
is we've asked Jeffrey for a proposal outlining their allocation process and he assures us that that's in work. Okay. Yep. That that's one of the discussion points I'm sure that the CPC will will take on for the recommendations and then it'll come to
you for your recommendation and consideration or not. It'll come off the warrant, but we're placeholding it now so it can be discussed. >> Okay. Um the details >> before you go on. So, can I stop you now? >> Yep.
>> Okay. So Barney, first of all, if digitizing the records is not CBC, it's preserving, do they need to be digitized before they're preserved or are they being preserved in paper? Yeah, it's these are paper documents that are you
know some of them quite old and they're they need to be u sort of restored and then preserved in physical form and then digitizing them will have to come as a separate projects funded in some other way.
>> That seems sort of ciruitous. Why wouldn't we just digitize and then preserve the digital record? Well, because I think there's some historical benefit or or um importance
to these documents that go back I've forgotten what Ashley said how early they are, but you know, they're well over likeund 150 years old. So, they're physical documents that we would want to
hold on to. Is this kind of like the historical commission of where do you set the deadline of a historical building? Like a 100 years ago record deserves to be analog, but a 50 years ago record is digit. I don't understand that. Like everything should be digitized as far as I
>> it is all going to be digitized, but this is a step that would need to happen no matter what. And Ashley believes she and um her assistant can if they get the materials inhouse this summer that over the c after the elections in the fall
they will gradually just get this done as a course in their regular course of business. The digitizing of it I I don't know how that will happen but that would have to >> So what will they do? They'll just preserve >> we're going to discuss all these articles at a different meeting. So, >> okay. Okay. >> I mean,
>> well, anyway, I want to put a pin on that because I don't I don't think that makes sense or any sense. >> I think I think >> we've done we've done a pass to to kind of lay out a schedule for what what comes before the select board forformational presentation and deliberation. I think
what's useful would be to hear from folks. I mean, the big ones obviously we're gonna we're going to schedule, but to hear which of the ones that Ryan went through are um of particular importance or we want to definitely schedule meetings for, but
like fire station, DPW, all that's already being scheduled. >> Oh, yeah. But I mean, this is not that part. This is the hold part. So, I then want to go on to items articles 14, 15, and 18. Why can't those be part of the
consent agenda? >> They can. >> So, they should be. Speaking on behalf of the town meeting study committee, my recommendation is they should be because the whole idea was to kind of streamline this stuff and we don't need
to be wasting time on that. >> Um, yeah. >> And I I wanted to ask about uh the PEG funding specifically and maybe you can remind me. Do we get compensated for some or all of that through the cable
company or is that our or is the are the taxpayers funding that fully? >> That's all search charge or that's all from your cable bills, your town cable bills and it can only be used for local cable. So these these projects are being
funded by that source and they do not hit the tax base. So it's just allocation that has to be done at town meeting. >> Correct. >> Right. >> Consider it its own little budget. You have to appropriate from that budget an amount of dollars that's eligible for PEG funding. So typically you do
$100,000. This is just tripling it for >> for >> Does that increase does that increase the the taxes? Well, obviously it does, but but directly or do they have like a reserve for that? How does that work? We negotiated, if if you remember, it
was a bit ago now, but we negotiated a contract with them which included this this these fees in them. So these fees are steady. We get the in we get the revenue no matter what and we can only spend it on that. Our our total is 500,000 plus at this point and we're
spending, you know, under 50,000 a year. So, we are actively trying to identify town projects that are that allow for the improvement of these services with that money because it's the only thing we can use it for. >> Yeah.
>> Um Ryan, I have two other questions >> here. >> Is 20 does is 20 going to get folded up into 17? >> They'll be put together closer together. >> Okay. disorder is just some this is how they came in really
>> right but it gives us a sense of how many articles and then uh in 23 I don't think I quite understood they actually saying that if it's under 5,000 there's no property tax >> yes >> something you said is confusing so if I
have a jalopy that's $4,000 I don't pay property tax anymore >> say that again if you have a what >> if I have a jalapy as in old car. >> So only only certain things qualify for for um personal property tax because you
pay real estate tax and you pay excise tax on your car. >> Personal property, you know, the best way to think about it is if you have a business, all of the equipment inside the business is taxed under personal property. >> Okay? >> If you have a farm, you would be taxed
for the chickens, the horses, the barn, the other things use for the farm. So, there's very there's very few personal property tax bills under 5,000 that that you would consider to be legitimate. Like someone having six chickens is not
not legit. I mean, that's up for you to decide, but it's very >> So, vehicles vehicles are not >> correct. That's excise tax that comes in through your local receipts. >> Okay. Okay. All right. I guess I'd want to know how is he
assessing the value of some of those. I mean, those seem very subjective. >> We're going to bring the the board of assessors going to do a whole presentation on this because um I I couldn't answer that question, but they they certainly can. >> Great. And then the um town hall, I
mean, I I don't disagree that we absolutely need some repairs, some maintenance going on there. Uh is the MFC I I would be curious to hear more about what the total amount is. Is that also on the docket for a future meeting? >> Yeah. And I was going to briefly go over
it here unless other questions >> just specific. Just wanted to know the line item detail around and what the total amount is. >> All right. So I I really the fincom is still going through all these, but I but I understand that you know this is good
and helpful for you to see them so you can start to consider what you're going to need for information for your own personal recommendation. But these are not final numbers and these are not final issues but this is what's being discussed. So under the capital plan article two that includes your road and
covert money and then any items that have been requested by the departments that you typically see vehicle for the DPW cruisers for the for the police department. We have taken out any alternate funds and that will be one total free cash
request for capital. um I'm going to send you this list, but if there's an item particularly on the capital plan and the FINCOM's going to make a recommendation to you, they've scrubbed and vetted this list as well. But typically the select board might want information on say why are we buying a container for the transfer
station. So it'd be good for you to look at that stuff uh if you have any questions or concerns and we can get you the information that's already been presented to the working group and the finance committee. For article three, the building maintenance article, that includes all of the items on the capital
plan that have been vetted for buildings under the control of the MFC. Some outstanding items are we are trying to maximize the climate leader grant for four HVAC units, three at the school and one at the town hall. It's a
million-doll grant plus $150,000 in design. We have to pay some money upfront in order to get those costs, some design costs. And um part of this building article will be to finish that design so we can get that 1.1 million in
in uh grant funding, which is guaranteed as long as we do it right. And then the MFC will likely ask you for some type of contingency in that article because they do handle some um as as they show up repairs, but that's still under review and discussion by the FINCOM. So that's
article three. Article uh current article four, we can renumber these. It's just easier to talk about their titles, is the collection of town hall related items that the fincom is trying to bundle up under one project. They did talk about the MFC with this. It
includes the things I mentioned before. Um, paving town hall, doing the entryway and outside, all stuff that was was uncovered when we did an analysis of the building. And the big piece here, you're seeing a number
that I think is underfunded. But for the roof and the RTU, uh, which are being designed right now, that's going to be expensive. So, it could be up to 1.5 million in our estimate. and um there just wasn't a way to keep your town reserves,
handle this under free cash. So they they are recommending bundling it under a debt article. And there's going to be a big presentation too about it and discussion, but just letting you know that's coming because I know you're going to have a lot of questions about it. So that's it. That's your town meeting
in 30 minutes. Each one of these is is a 30-minute conversation. So, I'm looking forward to it. >> Well, the question the question that you know gets to planning is you think we can cram it? I'm not really seeing
contentious articles. I'm thinking it could be one day. We were under the impression it would be two days, but you pushed a few things off. So, that's I'm curious about that. And >> I think that, you know, the demo bylaw
isn't in there. The wetlands bylaw isn't in there. >> It's not in there. Yeah. >> Cluster housing isn't in there. Um, so a lot more >> there is a by there cluster bylaw. >> No, it's a ZBA bylaw zoning amendment
>> bylaw change. >> Got it. >> I mean, there's there substantive warrants, but to your point, David, it's possible this is a one night. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm encouraged because these aren't
people weigh in on, you know, capital items, but we've socialized both building projects pretty well and there's a possibility that fire station is not ready anyway. So, all right. I mean, from a planning
standpoint, I guess we plan for two days, but we're going with a Monday night, right? >> Yeah. >> Six o'clock. >> Mhm. Uh, did we say seven or six? >> I think six. >> Okay, >> six. >> Got it.
>> I mean, it would be good to try to see if that especially that's why I'm interested in pushing more into the consent agenda. I think we can I think we can streamline somewhat and uh I think it's manageable.
>> And we're laying out the topics over the next six meetings to starting with cemetery tonight. so that we make sure we're giving adequate time to to hear from all the all the sponsors of these warrant articles and then have enough time to
deliberate and make our recommendations following those presentations. So Ryan, Barney, and I are working through that. And I think we have I don't think there's I think most of the substantive ones we we have a a tentative spot for. We just need to confirm with the with
the people bringing the warrants. What determines the order in which they appear? >> That's a great question. You do as a select board. You decide what goes on the warrant, what doesn't, in what order. Typically, we'll do the operating budget
earlier. Um, operating kind of bundle some things together like operating capital. We tend to do one then the other. some financial articles first, but it's a little bit of seeing what what's on the menu that night. >> Right. So, we had a town meeting study
committee last night and we're writing our final report and that was one of the subjects we discussed and it is really entirely up to the select board. But the recommendation is going to be
that certainly budget items come up front because that's the most important thing to get done. And then we're probably not going to be very prescriptive in our recommendations, but we think the important articles should go before
the unimportant articles. I mean it's bad to say because everybody feels their article is important but I think the ones that we in which we anticipate extended debate or you know vigorous debate I think our recommendation at least is that
those be moved to the front of the order. We're kind of agnostic as to when the consent gets in there. The consent agenda is nice to have early because you know you clear a lot of >> you feel good right? You got eight articles out of 25. So, >> you're building momentum. I was going to
say, let's put the consent agenda first and, you know, polish off a bunch all at once. >> Yeah. Consent agenda. That's fine. And then, you know, go right to budget. And then, I mean, my personal preference, only speaking for myself, is consent agenda, budget,
important articles that need, you know, full attention, and then everything else. Okay. So, we we'll be having everyone in and again starting with cemetery tonight. Um and then I don't know, Ryan, at what
point do we get into ordering the articles is that that's in March time frame. >> We have to sign and approve the warrant in April at your first meeting in April. So, uh, a good draft prior to that
meeting is your, so late March is is really the time you should be done with the order. >> So, three meetings from now. >> Three meetings. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And when we were looking at it, we thought we got to get the assessors in
front of you. We got to get the safety committee in front of you, the cemetery committee for sure, and then probably two or three meetings with the finance committee. So although it does seem like, you know, less controversial than maybe the fall, there's still a lot to discuss quickly.
>> And we have, let's see, we have fire station and DPW on the 10th. Um, safety committee on the 10th. So yeah, I mean, I think we can go through it, Barney, at our planning meeting on on
Friday. Let's we'll we'll go back through this and make sure we have a place for everyone. >> And were there any um I think I Are there others that people tonight are saying they want to make sure we have on
an agenda? >> I think we have >> other warrant items. for example, do you want some kind of want some more in-depth discussion about the um the CPA project applications?
And if so, which ones? I mean, we've seen the amenities building is virtually identical to what it was last time. Um, we have the the bog the CHT has an extensive
presentation now that they gave to the CPC last week and the library also gave us an fairly extensive uh presentation. So, um, >> we have time that's tenatively scheduled in April. Barney CPC recommendations.
>> Okay. So, do you So, are you uh shall we try to get the the CHT and the library lined up for that one of those meetings in April?
>> Do we need the the library or is that someone from CPC presenting their recommendations? >> We could do it either way. Um it'll be faster obviously if you did the ladder. Um, I could certainly share the two presentations to everybody on the board
to look through. I mean, I think having having the the materials for us to review and then meeting with CP, you know, having having you present your recommendations is I mean, because you've done the due diligence, the CPC. So, hearing your assessment and
rationale, I think, is is most useful versus going back to the original presentation you heard. That's kind of duplicating a process, I think, and we don't have a lot of time for that, >> right? But and I assume those I don't know your meetings recorded at all. If
people want to uh go back and >> Yeah, they're if if the chair remembers to record them, which she did last week. >> So we can we should seed out the information for people that want to learn more about a particular project.
They can do that prior to that meeting. >> Yeah. I have a question about the various uh facility projects. Would that be a meeting with the MFC or just with FinTech? >> I I think both because the finance
committee is trying to put the jigsaw puzzle together, but the the actual why you need it and what the priority is would have to come from the MFC. So, they they've made that presentation to the FINCOM, but but I do think having heard it, you you probably want >> So, we should have a joint meeting with
those two, right? Yes. >> I'll say up front and Mark's in the audience here. He's waking up. Okay. Is um my concern is that we front end loaded a lot of capex. If you look at the 10-year plan, you know, and I realize that as you go
forward, more projects come on, but it's got a lot up front, like probably more than we can support, and then it sort of feathers out. So, I would be particularly interested in what expenses we can defer into out years. like how urgently do we have to do those
things I guess is my question. >> Our next meeting on the 24th we do have budget and capital and MFC on our on our thing. So we should be getting into that at our next meeting with with FINCOM and the MFC.
Okay. So given that overview, um certainly more discussion on on all these things to come. Um should we should we move to close the warrant unless anyone wants to offer any new
warrant articles? >> And then this would this would be for the annual town meeting scheduled for May 18th at 6 PM. I move to close the warrant for the annual town meeting scheduled for Monday, May 18th at 6 PM.
>> Second. >> Any further discussion or deliberation? >> I just had a question. We we could still remove articles even though we've closed the warrant. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Y Okay, let's take a roll call vote,
please. Arnold I. >> Modell. >> Ill. >> Stevens. Iola. I. Okay. Excellent. All right. Let's move on to um the town
administrator goals. Um I so coming out of the last evaluation um I think myself and I heard from a couple of other board members about last year's evaluation goals and trying to remember what you know what some of them were what they meant. Um, in meeting
with Ryan, um, I asked him to think about kind of approaching goals from a standpoint of, you know, one his one of his key goals should be supporting us in achieving our goals and making sure there's clear alignment over that. And as ours goal
change, if our goals change, his goals changes in that way. and then also asking him to identify some kind of key goals he has in the areas of um you know his own career development and also in the operations of town government. So trying to kind of
simplify it and make it less task oriented than it was last year I thought would be helpful. So Ryan um drafted that and I think that's what's in the packet um if we want to discuss that and do you want to speak to any of these Ryan?
Uh, sure. So, looking at the packet, I can go through them if you want. And as Scott said, this was my attempt to be responsive to each one of the uh the meetings we had where you wanted them simplified and organized and more aligned with your
goals. So, starting with that, the first goal is to implement and advance your goals. So you would be able to rate me on my ability to help you and assist you in the advancement of your goals which several of you had mentioned during during the review process.
The second goal would be I'm trying out a name here but I'm not wed to it. Um a 2030 organizational readiness plan. So this is something that you you and others continually request a framework for what the town structure specifically its staffing
might look like based on work we've done over the last three years and discussions that are that are being had in terms of sharing services regionalization etc. So I would like to build it's you know halfway built already um a 2030 framework for a date
that that you determined for presentation about our organizational readiness and a roadmap for what we can do in terms of incorporating incorporating many of these things you're asking for. So the the plan would include two major sections. One the work that Aubrey and I are doing on
succession planning. So how we plan to manage turnover our recruitment and retention strategies. um building some comfort with you on how we're building redundancy and then how we're growing our staff in order to fill future goals because that's going to be
important as we we try to retain and recruit. The second thing would be you know commentary on the evaluation of our current organizational design and then how we can effectively move forward with more
shared services. A lot of this is has already been done. Sharing land use staff, sharing administrative staff, trying to evaluate each position, each vacancy as they coming over, as they come open for the ability to share with our our partner towns and and municipalities around us. So, taking um
a swing at this, getting feedback from you, and then publishing a structure that the the town is aware of so that when these vacancies happen, we don't have to be so reactive. we can be more proactive and say when this happens we're going to implement X Y and Z.
So that's goal two um building and presenting a plan. And then my third goal >> you're breaking up a bit Ryan >> very much
what I do with staff as well and personal self-development goals. So my person maintain my professional certifications and to develop a more a more robust professional development plan for staff and department heads and that's very specific. So not just a we will develop them but how we're going to develop each each staff member and a lot
of that will come out of the succession planning analysis. So for me that's maintaining 40 hours of professional education credits. That's so I can keep my certified manager designation. And then we'd like to publish a future-f facing plan for all staff that we would
share with boards and committees that are appointing authorities and you to uh inform the funding decisions we make on that and how we plan to incorporate these trainings so that you know we're sending people the things that that feed into that succession planning and operational structure.
So those are I mean that's not the only thing I'm going to be working on. Um, but those are the three the three big items that that I want to get done this year for you that I think support your goals and needs. And these are uh Ryan, these are somewhat similar to when we look at
goals for other kind of leaders in in town government where it's it's uh some of the like the supporting us and our goals is kind of a a higher level goal that we can evaluate you on and then the other two are there's both the
they're defined, right? So it's it's it's a clear deliverable attached to each of those that that we can confirm um has been done. Correct. >> Yes. This is this is what we're trying to do with everybody is identify
deliverables in three categories. Strategic level or master plan, the department level, department improvement plans, and then self-development and self-development improvement. And that middle goal, that department plan is really my response to
we've done a lot of work the if you want to call it the administration in the last three years, but one of a lot of the themes and comments in in our reviews that we did with each other was well what happens if we lose key personnel or are we too reliant on single points of failure. So
this plan addresses that that concern and that problem. And I think it's the number one issue facing the town in terms of staffing and in staff is you know it's growing great right now. Maybe you maybe you agree that it's going great, but what happens if we lose one
of those key people? Does it does it fall apart? And I don't think it should and I don't want it to. So this is what we're going to do to try and um make sure that we have something that outlasts just people. Yeah, the difficulty of
merging HR concerns with open meeting law is how much can we, you know, socialize publicly. But so let me say this. If this was my organization in the private sector and you were my operations officer, I
would request that you do a gap analysis of each department. if you lose key person X, you know, who's who's up next and what skills gap, you know, is missing and what what are you going to do to fill it? I don't
think that's appropriate in the public, you know, public facing system we're in. So, what is your recommendation? How do you how would you actually identify that in a public meeting kind of setting open
meeting setting about skills gap and you know strategies to address those gaps? >> That's that's what we mean when we say succession planning. So so gap analysis what we've done so far is we took every
position in town and we analyzed it in four ways. So one is emergency replacement, the second is temporary or interim and then a permanent replacement and then whether or not the position is something we should consider for shared services. So once we've done that
analysis then we look at who we picked and we go by the um the staff position not the person to alleviate some of the open law. >> We say what would that person need that interim. So, for example, if if I disappeared one day and you put Aubrey
in as the interim interim town administrator while you decided what to do with that position, what what skills and professional development does she need in order to meet your your standards for both the interim role and then maybe a more permanent selection? And if we go through person by person in
that way and we can build confidence in ourselves that when when we do have a vacancy, we can we can do the party and say thank you for serving here, but we have a plan to implement. And that's also helping us break down some of the some of the fears that have been created
with the siloing of some of these departments that, you know, we're not trying to to change the now. We're trying to make sure we have a plan for when when things fall apart because a lot of these appointing authorities, they don't want to consider um what might be because what they have
right now is great. Um we've talked to library trustees about this. Martha is a tremendous employee and just a great director, but if Martha left, what what would that do to library services? So, we want to have that conversation now with the library trustees so that they can build that gap analysis like like
you're talking about. thoughts on the goals? Like there's there's details within them. Do people support these goals? This these concepts of goals. >> Yes, I do. Um
I I did want to you know what's a little tricky is the select board goals really won't get decided until the summer. Um, is that right? Typically, that's right when the select board
finalizes its goals. >> And so, we've got this, you know, gap right now of uh I don't know what how many months, four or five months. Um, and so how do we
>> we have goals? He's currently he's the timing is such that he's supporting us in our goals now that we have. >> Yeah. Um but so so a specific question then is um I'm thinking about the shared services piece that's mentioned under
the operational structure. Um it talks about identifying opportunities. Um but we as the select board you know already went through looking at the um the study that we had done and we in particular
have discussed uh dispatch and I'm I'm wondering how does that fit in now because we know it's something that we've already asked the
the TA to to research or start investigating. >> So I look at that in two ways. First, I'm supporting your goal of investigating shared services by bringing you information which is already begun. We've already
communicated with the departments that we're doing this. We're going to bring um a discussion in front of you soon that you would be able to analyze that. But there's also the the current as well. And in any type of let's say you
decided to to regionalize dispatch, it's going to take a couple years. So we're really looking at now, too. >> So if if we lose staff now or >> some type of change in leadership, how do we how do we handle that? And there's a chance that you hear presentations and you decide that you don't want to
regionalize. I mean, I think there's a strong chance that that happens. So we need to plan >> for that eventuality as well. So I think I would be evaluated on my support of your investigation but also um how we can secure the now how we can
pivot if necessary or continue um what's already happening for the next 5 to 10 years. So, I wonder if it'd be helpful um to have the current select board goals be listed. I mean, not in great detail,
but under the first goal, just so that it it um it's very clear which what the select board goals are that that um you're you're taking on to support right now.
>> Are you okay with the link? >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Sure. >> I like one page. So, >> yeah. I'm I'm just thinking just for followup, you know, I'm thinking about Benfield and I'm also, you know, thinking about dispatch to help the
select board um and and you but you know, to make sure those um elements are being sort of checked in on or or or updates being provided on those. I don't know if it makes any sense to have
something in your regular TA report. I don't know. But I'm thinking how, you know, Scott, what we just did was, you know, we did sort of a halfyear review, but is there is there a um would would it would would it be
beneficial to have um sort of a more regular way for an update on uh particular things that the town administrator is doing to advance the select board's goals? just just raising the question.
>> I mean, I think the TA report is a is a place for it. If there's specific without overtaking the format of that, like you could certainly use that as a place to call out if you did something in support of a goal, I guess you could do that there,
but that could also become a little ownorous. >> Yeah. I mean, thinking about something like what we're, you know, what we've decided to do around the Benfield, you know, bigger issues. So, we're going
to do the tour and then we're um you know, we've talked about having some kind of a summit meeting. um that that whole sequence um would be useful to sort of keep on the front burner um
along with all the other stuff we're trying to do. >> Let's let's um let's step back a second. The period of performance for you, Ryan, is what? >> So it right now you've aligned me with
other staff. So, it's the calendar year. >> So, maybe he needs to be aligned. I mean, to go where Barney's going, I think he needs to be aligned with select board terms, right? We turn into a pumpkin on May 30th or something, right? June
30th, I guess. So, um there's a new board and they could have new goals. So, he's working under one assumption and then whoop, you know, it changes. So I if we're going to be serious about aligning his select board
oh quiet his select board um uh you know I don't know what the word is uh adherence to our his town administrator uh you know adherence to select board goals then we ought to think about
whether we want to align his period of performance with select board term because what's actually going to happen is he's operating under a set of assumptions right now and to the point raised earlier in the summer there's going to be a different set of things and two new members who by definition
will have zero select board legacy right and they may come up with some other ideas and then it's brand new so it's a little bit disjointed in that regard and I think that's not fair to him or to us so that's one thing uh that I think we
ought to you I what Barney's raising is important, but the way it's framed is not really I think the right way. So, let me turn it off. >> And you don't have David and Barney, you really don't have a say in his
performance evaluation, his next one. >> Right. >> Right. So, it's >> I don't know. I don't know what all the Ryan all the uh ramifications of having your performance evaluation be on the U town calendar.
Um I don't know if that's just too creates too many issues. Um it's kind of a subjective thing though. It's like we when we do our evaluation or you know it's you're evaluating him on a it's one
goal. It's how how did he perform and it's it's not we're not going to have evaluate on every goal like how did he do on this goal and this goal. It's kind of a holistic our evaluation of him on one parameter and among many parameters.
I will say David just to comment on on what you were just discussing is that we do have the master plan uh you know five principles that we have used to guide our um goals over the last
I think it's been three years um so there is a a road map um it's not a totally blank slate when >> no there's definitely road map Barney. I agree with you, but we don't make reference to that or he hasn't in his call. So,
>> I mean the fundamental problem is let's not make it personal. If you have an employee and you're evaluating that employee over a period in which that employee is going to change his or her supervisor,
you have to acknowledge that there may be a change in goals. Plain and simple. That's every organization. So I mean again for purpose of thinking about it should we align
his goals with the term of select board people like just make it the fiscal year? Why is it not the fiscal year because we operate to that right? We we basically turn over at the new fiscal year or some version of that. So what u
just to process check day 15 I do want to move on to um the personnel policies because we do have people lined up. >> Um >> I I mean just back to David what you're saying I feel like that could trickle down to all town employees though. So I would say >> sort of sort of but not really. But
>> we've all been in positions where you know we're cruising along on our goals and there's a change in leadership and you know the whole organization doesn't rewrite their goals. Well, that right. >> I did want to ask about another potential goal though is what is our
stance toward transitioning more resident transactions to be available online. >> I would think that this is back to the select board's goals rather than Ryan's goals. >> Okay. >> It's my opinion on that.
I think the board needs to set its priorities and then we delegate those priorities to Ryan or to the town administrator to execute. And the question is at the end of the year or when you do an evaluation, has he ex or has the TA executed on what the select
board has asked to be done? partitioned out in three different goals and the you know I feel like more toward the um you know current design I mean he's got it geared towards shared services and
whatnot but I'm thinking services in town hall so more trans transactions available online data integrated across departments those are kind of what I'm thinking about um in terms of how we accomplish things. Um, not I was not
meaning to comment on the helping the select board get their goals done. >> So, it sounds like this is going to require some more deliberation. Um, so why don't we I'm not sure when we're going to do
that. So, um, and maybe we just Do people have any thoughts? I mean, I'm not I don't know how much time in upcoming we're going to be able to spend parsing. >> I think we should go back and think about the following. I mean, when you give an employee a direction, it's not
really fair that employee to switch in midstream. >> Well, our goals change midstream. >> So, what I mean, we are here today and we set goals for Ryan and he should kind of go do those goals. I feel like
he should be on a path to to follow the um goals we set in our if we're going to not change his period of performance and I disagree with Christine it the town administrators in a different category than the rest of the people but if we're going to not align him
chronologically with our turn then we should in my opinion give him direction and he's free to do that direction and if they want If a future selector wants to change it, change it. But they need to be cognizant that he was on a path to follow instructions that he was given or
provided with, you know, earlier. I I feel like we're kind of dancing around that and and we're not really acknowledging that future a future select board may have a different opinion and that's >> okay.
>> So, let's wrap this up. Um, we'll figure out the next steps on this one. Maybe it's just revisiting the goals and after town meeting. Um and and Ryan, let's talk about changing the the what what's involved with changing the period of your evaluation. Um I'm not sure how
that works or maybe there's a separate evaluation. Um if we feel like there's alignment, I think this is I think we want to simplify his goals. Um this is all feeds into the evaluation process. So I think we want high level goals. I would like to see some deliverables that
are clearly defined. Um, but let's move on to the next topic and we'll just put a pin in this one for now. So, we do have Aubrey online and we're going to talk about personnel policies. Aubrey, are you out there? There you go. So, we've each met with
Aubrey um separately um and and discussed and reviewed the different policies. So, Aubrey, you're going to go through your recommendations and and kind of a debrief on what those conversations were.
>> Sure. And I'll uh share my screen. >> All right. So, as I last presented back in December, um this is the third and final round of uh policy recommendations for the you know the next uh iteration of the personnel policies. This one is
based off of staff staff recommendations that have occurred over the last couple of years um since I was still slowly starting this process. Um and so as I mentioned at the last meeting um I met with every uh each one of you um to
review these to have an understanding give you some general understanding of what um staff is looking at um how that relates to mass law. Um, and so I compiled that information. And so this uh this has my proposed resolutions uh
um based on you know how your feedback and um and then anything that I might want to look for further clarification. So I kept it in the order as I presented it to each individually but um for anything that I have a recommendation
for a change I have that recommended recommended change in these sections. And Aubrey, this is all this this is the same list that we reviewed with you, correct? >> Correct. No surprises. >> Added or removed. Okay. >> Correct. >> So, the first one, there have been, you
know, uh some requests for a potential holiday name change, but uh the recommendation is to keep as is to follow the Commonwealth of Massachusetts uh holidays. If that changes, then we would change along with that. But everything else references uh the the
state as what we're following for observed holidays floating holiday policy. There have been requests for this but um after uh conferring with you all and also other staff uh my recommendation is instead of creating an additional floating holiday
holiday policy uh is to provide a religious accommodation as needed um for individuals who need an accommodation. Is that a does that entail? So will there it be a policy revision or is that just something you can do? >> I should have said retain it as is
without having um any additional policy for that. >> So under our current policy you can provide religious accommodations as needed. Yes, there's there's yeah, there's accommodation uh section for that. For uh this was a request for those who
might not get a holiday because they wouldn't regularly work on that holiday. Um I am recommending to retain the policy as is. If somebody is not working on that holiday, they wouldn't get an extra day paid because it's a happens to be a holiday. Um and I know that I spoke
with you all about that. So, if you have any questions on that, uh, winter holiday closure, there was a request to close between Christmas and New Year's Day, uh, that's just not, um, feasible for public service. We need to
make sure that our departments are open during that time for the end of the calendar year. So, I recommend not having that because that would be very difficult for most of the departments to to serve the public. So again, under holidays and time off,
the only change is to align the holiday names with with the legally observed >> and they already are. So there's really actual no uh change. Um okay, >> because it already references to align with that. >> So sick leave does has changed, but the
more I dug into it, it's actually just following state law. So just updating sick leave and what it what qualifies as sick leave. it is a right you know provided by the state to employees. Um so what I've written in blue uh is that
expansion this is uh straight from the the state website of what employees may use for sick time. Um and this also aligns with what we are doing informally anyways um to support employees but we legally have to actually so this is just
aligning more and there's no like substantive change like it without reading all the specific words it's basically it doesn't change it qualitatively in any way we're just using different >> right we're not increasing sick time or
anything it's just um the uh reasons they can use it. >> So sickly >> this would require a vote the change like this one would require a vote from the selector. >> Correct. Correct. >> Sickly bank. Yeah. So did you want to
vote as you go along or just vote them all in the end? like the other >> I would think unless there's any objections we should just vote the whole thing but we can talk about these individually as we go along unless Scott
you feel or anyone on the board stay >> sickly bank there was a request to consider that um I do recommend for now to just just keep it without having a sick leave bank um I do know that you know the unions have that but I think
that would be a further discussion down the line of how to manage that. Um, I think administratively is manageable, but just how how folks buy in or opt out, there's just a lot more conversation to be had on that if that's of interest.
So the paid medical and family leave uh for part-time employees uh my recommendation is to kind of tie that we I know we have started that conversation about paid parental leave looking at it through the lens of paid family medical leave that the state
offers for almost all other employees in the state and maybe if what seeing what uh part-time employees have the right to under that and maybe potentially align lining that. But this is again a big big financial conversation um like I I know
we talked about uh in 2025. So I think that I recommend looking into this a little further um because it is it would you know cost money to offer this. >> So retain the current policy for now
with a follow-up study. >> Correct. Correct. bereavement leave. Um, just making sure it's clear that it's three days annually. There's just it just says not more than three days and that that's not clear. Is that annually? Is it just your entire employment here? So, just making
sure it says annually. Um, there have been requests to allow accommodations for um folks that aren't just listed in this uh paragraph. Um, so I recommend adding that it can be considered on a case- by case basis because there might
be a situation where somebody was family to someone without it being on that list. But of course, if they already use that 3 days annually for somebody, they'll have to use another type of leave if something else happens within the year.
>> And is the blue text, the proposed language, is that consistent with state law or where is that language from? Has it been vetted? >> It's it was more vetted from by as a recommendation, but I can look and make see if there's any state law with that. I'm not sure if there's any state law
with berement. >> I just mean that how you're defining family members, individuals, close person, you know, some of those words like are those commonly used words. Is this pulled from another policy somewhere or is there anything we should look at? >> Yeah, I think it's you. So, it's it's
I've been working online um to look at that, but I I'll look back to where I originally pulled that from. Um this is this is more my language from conferring with everybody of making sure that we are including anybody that they might have close personal relationship, but I can
make sure I can do some more comps on that. >> I don't have any particular feedback. I just, you know, I know sometimes words have different meanings. So, recruitment, hiring, and employment status. Most of this is just making a little more modernized. Um, there was a,
you know, recommendation to eliminate the 10-day posting requirement, but I actually think that that should still be a requirement. So, there's transparency and an opportunity for folks to apply. Um, my biggest change is to update it to say that the jobs will be posted on the
official town website. uh because right now it's on the bulletin board that doesn't exist anymore. Um so hold on one second. Sorry, >> mom. >> Sorry about that. So um so yeah, so
that's my biggest thing is just making sure it's more modern. Same with promotions. Um, just making sure that promotions are notified. I'm recommending that we uh, sorry, recommending that we notify all staff about qualif, you know, positions
that might be considered a promotion. Um, just so it gives the opportunity to apply. There was a recommendation to say we could give stronger consideration for internal candidates that are qualified, but that's up to you if you want to continue keep that language.
It will be given this. I just want to make sure that there's no kind of legal implication relative to that if we had a, you know, a policy that was inconsistent with state law.
>> Sure. Yeah, that's true. So, I I I'll I can look into that to just make sure that there's no um liability with adding that language. >> Um Aubrey, I can't remember. Did you review these with Donna Brewer, Town Council?
>> I have not yet with these updates yet. >> Okay. >> Do they typically go through Donna? Is that is there like a pass done? So what I've been doing is anything that you do want to move forward with I can I do vet them through all everything goes through
legal counsel and vetting and then once I do have a new version of the personnel policy um I'll be asking legal counsel to vet the entire document to make sure everything um that everything is included and if there's anything that's missing or anything that um I can
revisit with the board. So rather than us, so we're probably not voting to approve. We're probably just saying raising any comments or questions so that you can finalize the language quote unquote then
we would vote on it. Is that correct or >> Yeah, that's actually correct. um is that you would uh look let me know if there's anything that you want me to look further into or vet and then and then I can get that more final language that I vetted through uh Donna on legal counsel
anybody else that helps. So, does that mean Aubrey that tonight um you'd like us to uh say which ones we think need further discussion or further research by you
and then everything else could go to legal for >> correct? Yeah. So, if if something looks good and we can move forward with it, I can add that as to something something for legal review. But if there's anything where we need to, you know, have some more comp reviews, vetting,
um, for other concerns, uh, we would dig into that further before having that reviewed. >> So, other than I haven't been specifically keeping track, but other than the, um, >> the, uh, parental leave and the that one, have there been any others so far
that we've said, let's >> hold off? >> No. No. I think everything else we've approved as we've gone along. Um, this one was just kind of there's just so much contact all uh content across the board with request. So, it's it's just
kind of taking a little more deliberation, I think, because there's a lot of different requests in here >> um from staff and I wanted to present them all, you know, as I promised to staff. Um, but >> yeah, >> it does just need a little few more
passes. uh hiring requirements. This is more related to the physical requirements. Uh it's pretty short right now and it refer refers to police and fire, but I think that it needs to also make sure that we're advising of why, right? and
explaining and so is police, fire, any facilities or custodial that um requires heavy lifting, consistent heavy lifting um and DPW making sure the DPW is included um in this um and then anything
that's required by OSHA or DOT regulations um which is mostly DPW um so basically just taking the short one just expanding it a little bit more um to explain you know safety sensitive physical ally demanding, you know, those
things to explain it a little more. Um, this also makes it so, you know, if there was an administrative assistant for the DPW, they're not having to do a physical, right? Um, so it's just that expansion and obviously CDL licenses require more, which is already outlined
in the personnel policies. >> And is this fairly boilerplate language like what what we're covering here? Is there anything that's specific? >> Um, no. I think um just the standard public safety and facilities in DPW.
So appointing authority and the appointment process obviously that has changed since the last uh version. So just making sure it reflects the town administrator bylaw. So just to say appointing authority shall mean um
>> and that include you know so this paragraph is reflective of the town bylaw explaining what the appointing authority is. Um >> so this yeah this wouldn't go into effect until the bylaws approved. Correct.
>> So we could put language in there. I don't know how much longer that's going to take because it will take some time to update this uh as well. Um but I think that uh we if if this does look
look like it's going to be published uh before the bylaw is finally approved. We could put some sort of language, you know, contingent on the town administrator bylaw approval or that it's >> Aubrey for for section five there. I
just want to make sure that is consistent with the TA bylaw because I thought that that part of the TA bylaw was that the the TA will have the authority to appoint without necessarily our cons you know approval of the select
board. It it the way it reads there shall appoint with the approval of the select board meaning you know for a department head. I thought that the TA could hire a department head. Now, in reality, I think the TA will come to us and say, "Oh, I'm going to hire this
person, but maybe not." And that we were trying to get away from that. >> Sure. So, I'll look back just to make sure. I thought there were some sort of, you know, promise to consult, but I'll make sure that the language is making sure um is consistent. >> No.
So, uh, appointment. Um, I'm just saying, uh, oh, no, actually, I think I meant to take that out, but I'll I'll look back. No, I I think I just wanted to add, um, that the town administrators are appointing authority, copies of the
notice of appointments shall be provided to the select board. Um, which is already a practice that we're doing now. uh employment application. It's just it's vague. Um it sounds like a very physical form and this is actually only until the interview
process. Um what I'd like to do is standardize that which we are going more virtual and so this would make it so it's an online form rather than what sounds like a physical form that somebody would submit for their
interview. workplace standards and benefits administration. So, I noted that we should discuss this at the board meeting. So, everybody's, you know, is legally protected to have 30 minutes of uh lunch. Whether it's paid or not is up
to the employer, right? Um the only reason that I might not recommend putting it in the policy is that standardizes what that looks like for all departments. And the departments vary on how they manage the time of lunch and and what
that you know and so I don't and I think that Brian might also agree as well that that would make it difficult to because you have feel like you'd be spending a lot of time >> um micromanaging I guess I would say how departments um
are are managing their own you know the how department heads are managing their departments. So I'm open to any thoughts about that. >> So this is the is this a problem that we need to fix through a policy or does creating a policy create a new set of
problems? I >> would say overall the latter. So I think that town hall especially we're in a good strong culture where departments can run themselves and make sure they're efficient but also but and also allowing employees to have their lunches as as
they are you know required to have or you know allowed to have. So, um there is an issue. I think that there in the past have been discrepancies that that uh and inconsistencies that cause some friction, but I think that because
we've kind of made it so you uh more cohesive culture in the building, it's not as much of an issue is issue anymore. >> Yeah. To me, this is a management issue. It's not a policy that we want to. >> It's something we can keep our eye on, but I don't know that trying to create
some policy is going to be beneficial to the town and the employees. >> I I would agree, Scott, that this is a management issue. Um the problem with with small town departments is if someone does take a full 30-minute
lunch, which is allowed, if they request it, then that department essentially closes. So we have tried to come up with creative ways to allow people to to rest and reset but also stay open and um the more strict we get
with this the more the less flexibility we have. So I would say we deal with problems when they when they exist and we remain flexible to accomplish the mission when they don't. But I agree it would solve one problem for some people and then it would create a bunch of new problems. So I don't
think you win either way here. So, I'd rather keep it the same unless there's strong disagreement. >> Not for me. >> Yeah. My only issue is that we run a mixed shop, right? You know, we have collective bargaining employees who have
very codified things and non bargaining unit employees who don't. So I mean I I don't have a strong I kind of agree with you know Scott and Ryan that don't create a new problem by solving old problem. It's the question is are
people raising it saying well you know the police have a 30 minute defined lunch or whatever. I mean if if if you're getting that kind of feedback where the non-bargaining unit employees are comparing themselves to the bargaining unit employees and asking for cotification
that's one thing. If they're not, then I would Yeah, I would leave it alone. >> We're getting oneoff scenarios and we're >> right. >> But there's no, you know, if if we had a larger issue, we would bring it to you. >> Okay. So, I would I agree with that with
what you said. So, with dress code, not urgent, but it's just a question that a lot of staff have asked because there isn't one. Um, not a lot of towns have a dress code. Actually, Westford has a really, uh, strong personnel
policy handbook. Um, so, uh, this is far from the first time I've adapted from their policies. Um, just to make it so it's kind of more proactive approach for this. um we haven't really had issues, but in case there were issues, we have something to kind of um support that.
And this is just making sure, you know, making sure you're dressed appropriately for your job. Um and if there's any issue, then we can address it. And then just saying reasonable accommodations will be made as required by law. That's more like religious or anything. So if
there's a some reason we have an unreasonable department head, you know, we're making sure that employee is protected. Yeah, I think dress codes are tricky because you even have it in quotes, business, casual, and usually in quotes you define it and there's no real
definition. I mean, I think it's good to have the definition of clothing that is torn, stained, or otherwise. And again, inappropriate is somewhat subjective, but you know, having something in there is is valuable.
>> Um, but it it is it's tough. I mean if a you know if there's functionally something that needs to be done if a for example a DPW worker needed to wear steeltoed boots and didn't come with you know appropriate attire couldn't perform
his job or then had a you know safety or you know had has an injury based on that. I mean we just want to cover ourselves too. So I don't know >> and I know that we have uh part of that in the DPW section. Um, so I think that
that's where this also was a followup from a question of, well, what about the rest of the town, right? If the DBW has this dress code, what does that look like for the rest of the town? Um, I do agree business casual is very vague what that means. Um, so I u might not even
really be necessary to have that sentence in there, >> the business casual sentence. >> Yeah. I mean, you don't really need it. That's probably the one. >> Maybe. >> What do you mean by business casual?
>> Yeah, maybe you just take that sentence out >> and then continue including the sentence about clothing that's torn, stained, or otherwise inappropriate for professional workplace shall not be worn. >> Leave that in.
You know, the other thing I I don't know if other people have this reaction, but when you read the two words dress code, it somehow conveys, well, maybe it's because of my Catholic school upbringing and having to wear a school uniform, you
know, very restricted and specific. Um, I don't know if appropriate dress would is I don't this sounds like it even I mean if you when you read the policy it's
very I think it's appropriate but that title is kind of begets my backup a little. >> I was hoping maybe we could just hide it somewhere so it's not doesn't feel like it's own it needs its own section so it's not >> Yeah. Yeah. It's just work attire or
something. >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. There you go. >> Dress code. >> Sure. Sure. >> Dress code >> sounds ominous. So there was uh more from the finance administration and a request to consider
um having a waiting period for benefits uh just because uh especially in the school end when new teachers or subs start and they go leave really quickly. Um it's a lot administratively to manage you know to get somebody into the insurance system and then out of the
insurance system sometimes within the same day. So somebody came and went within one day. So you know this would be a request to make sure that making making sure there's a waiting period before somebody qualifies. I don't even though administratively that would save
us a bit. I don't recommend it because I do know employees lose their coverage from their former employer often like on their last day at that employment. So, I would never want an employee to start stressing out that they have to wait till the rest of the month for insurance
to kick in. Um, I think it's just that's a very difficult thing to to start a job with. And so, um, yes, administratively it takes extra time, but I think to support employees, I think they should be able to start the insurance on day
one. And then this is just uh revisiting I know that we had approved uh updating the uh overtime calculation. >> Um we had some really great conversations with that team. They were
really um they were very open and honest about you know how this would affect them. Um, and so, um, I know I connected with all of you during your meetings about retracting this amendment and keeping the overtime, uh, to be
calculated as it has been for the DPW. Financially, it doesn't, um, have a heavy impact. I think the biggest thing is just a management concern and just making sure that if anybody's abusing sick time that that's getting addressed and um Jim Hall has been phenomenal in
and being a partner in that and working on that and I you know making sure that he has a solid team. So I I I do recommend um not adding this change in the calculation and keeping it as it was
and has been in the personnel policies. And Ryan, I assume you're you're on board with that. >> I am. We talked about this a lot. We we met with the department and we we think it makes sense. We we also talked about how to control what
this was trying to um to think about in the future, which is which is any abuses or or things that would negatively impact the town. And we feel like we have a good plan to control it. Okay.
All right. So, high level. Um, I mean it I didn't hear too many and people can raise them now. Any kind of disagreements about the overall changes or lack of changes. I think these things, you know, we had some feedback.
They do need to go through, you know, most of my comments are is is this wording correct? Is this >> is the meaning correct? So doing um you know a a legal pass knowing that at least and again if anyone wants to object you have this the select board
support so that you can you can kind of finalize the language and and and bring that back to us. >> Sure. >> That would be great. >> Absolutely. and and yeah, everybody was sorry, >> I was going to ask Aubrey, you know, we had personal meetings with you which I
thought were really helpful and and I appreciate the way this this unfolded because it is really challenging to get all this stuff done, you know, in a in a short period of time in a meeting. So, I think you've done a a good job at that. But I wanted to ask you also, are these
all of the issues that we talked about? But I didn't cross reference from our our meeting. Um, did you you didn't eliminate any any of the items? >> I condensed some some of the headlines, but I didn't eliminate any of them. >> Okay. From a process standpoint, I think
it's important because um going through them individually with you is really helpful. I think it's beneficial though and it's needed to go through all of these with the select board, which you've done tonight. um as far as a
policy goes or process that would be my preferred process because you know if you can eliminate some because one or two members said that you know that wouldn't be fair to all the other members not knowing. So I think that as long as you've done that that's I'm
totally on board. >> Yeah. and and you don't have to go by me, but every folks were pretty much all on the same page with everything, which made it pretty easy to cross reference and see where every, you know, how to update this. But yeah, I made sure everything was in because maybe somebody
has thought about it since then and decided, you know, they actually want to keep something or remove something. So, I appreciate that. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we won't vote on anything tonight. I think we should just >> get the language finalized and do a,
you know, one big vote. Hopefully, we can get that done fairly quickly. >> But are we free to release Aubrey to go to council to just make sure everything's >> Yeah. >> Yep. And then we had a couple we had a couple specific points of feedback on the dress code attire. Um, and you can
certainly circle back with with me if you have any questions, Aubrey. >> Sure. All right. Thank you all so much for your patience. Thank you, Aubrey. >> Great work. Thank you. >> So, we had a late ad to the agenda just because we had some agenda items shift
around. So, we we we put 15 minutes for the code of conduct policy discussion on there. Um, and we don't need to finalize this tonight, but what Gretchen drafted was or what what she provided in the packet was essentially um very similar
to the or almost taken from the um what is it? MI I want to say MIAA, but that's the sport the sports league the MA whatever. Um at our last meeting we talked about working off of um off of that to do that. Uh Barney and I uh
separately reviewed it and just provided some comments. Um they're not reflected in this this document. I can go through those. Um but otherwise it's it's pretty consistent with what we had seen before.
The one comment I had was uh under conduct section B bullet point 4 there's this statement recognize that action at meetings is binding and that you alone cannot bind the public body outside of
such meetings. I didn't quite know what that meant. action meanings is binding. And Donna Brewer uh reviewed that and she provided alternate text to that one. Um that isn't in here, but I can read it.
Um and that is recognize that actions and votes taken at meetings represent the will of the public body as a whole and that you alone cannot represent the public body outside of such meetings unless authorized by the public body to do so. So that was her alternate
version that I think makes a little more sense, >> Scott. But that it's hard to just react hearing it, but >> does it the the the phrase that about um outside of the meeting?
It sounds like it's saying they the the person can't uh can't is the intent to say the person cannot uh make a statement about what the that
off that requires the committee to follow through on something that the committee hasn't voted on. Is that the Okay, >> there are two different I feel like there's two different things. So elsewhere in the policy I think it's
clear that the an individual member does not speak for the committee right that's somewhere else >> unless authorized to yeah >> unless authorized then there's separately the issue if if a vote or whatever decision is taken in a public
meeting of a public body then that is the will of the people and that can't be counter manned so I feel like that's been coingled and not a helpful way. I think to me the I have to go back to the text here, but I think that
it's we should make it clear that individuals as we always do, individuals do not speak for the committee unless so authorized by the chair. uh and then separately there's the issue if a uh public body if they if we take
if a decision is taken in that public meeting by that public body that's the decision and that's it every nobody should do anything to undercut that >> and that's I think Donna's language >> I know but I don't think she's
addressing it right so I think that highlighted section is not Right. It's not that you alone cannot represent. It's just that no actions and votes taken in meetings represent the will of the public body as a whole and
there shall be no separate whatever taken in aftermath of that. I mean there I don't want to word smith it here but that the second half of that sentence is not correct in my opinion and separately somewhere else I think it is pretty
clearly spelled out that you know you are not to represent yourself or whatever your own opinions and I have to look at it now but I think it's trying to co-mingle two things and not to the advantage of those two things I guess is what I'm saying >> you can break it down into two different
points >> yeah God, I I had a lot of comments on this document. Um, some were some were just language specific. Um, some were conceptual. And I don't know how how
much time you have. I don't need to get into the specifics, but I I think that I I do have some some concerns or, you know, really kind of bigger questions about a few concepts in here. One is under C, the conduct in relation to the
town administrator. I didn't quite understand with the first bullet recognize and support the time chain of command and refuse to act on complaints as an individual outside of the administration. Um I mean we're giving up our ability to
act on complaints. Um if if we receive a lot of complaints we we can't you know do that I guess outside of the chain. But I I just think that needs we need to really work through that. Um I wasn't sure what the next bullet means where
give the town minister full responsibility for discharging their disposition andor solutions. Um that that seems so broad. I mean I don't know. I I think as you read through these in that whole section, it just I
want to better understand it to to um you know having guidance you know about the direction of the TA and um ultimately I don't know I I think those are those are concepts in in D I thought that the bottom of that all elected and
appoint officials this is what Dave was talking who interact with town staff must do so in a respectful manner and understand employees should not be expected to take direction from any individual official on the matter on any matter. I think that's great. That probably should
be, you know, the highlight that sums up the three bullets above it. So, there were there were a lot of of things in here and I I I could every one of them I could go into and so how do you want to do you want to draft this? Do you want me to send comments? What do you think?
>> Well, we're going to need to review and deliberate them. Um, and so yeah, I think you should, you know, you can send your comments. Gretchen's been kind of uh quarterbacking this, so you
could probably send your comments to Gretchen. Um, I'm not sure what the process is as us as a committee to re, you know, review, digest, and go through this. This is likely going to take um a significant amount of time.
So it might just end up being something we do closer to town meeting or after town meeting. >> Okay. Well, I I mean again to give examples like in D conduct in relation to town staff, there's a bullet says refrain from giving instructions to or
requesting assistance from town staff, but rather channel all such activities through the town administrator. Well, if this is going to be my understanding is this code of conduct has to be signed off by every member of every board committee, everyone. So, it's not just
the select board. So, that's saying everything has to go through the town administrator, which may not be what you know, a planning board says, well, we're going to run it through the planning director and not the town administrator. And I'm just using >> I'm using that as an example of saying
we need to really kind of deeply vet this just so that it applies appropriately to everyone. >> Did this come out of largely out of the MIAA or whatever the >> AC? That's basically what it was. Yeah. >> All right. So I think I mean we looked at those examples last time, right? And
we said, well that looks pretty good. Like why mess with that, you know? But maybe we do need to mess with that. So I I I I feel like The way Aubrey conducted the personnel policy process was pretty good, right? She met one-on-one with everybody and
kind of got their feeling and in, you know, G again given the constraints of open meeting law and it's not that we don't want to do it in public, but it would take like four meetings, right? So, I think >> maybe that's the best process. Is does she own this? Who owns this? Right.
>> Well, well, Gretchen is the one that has been working on this, >> right? So maybe it's Gretchen that we should sit >> and each of us give our opinions and let her synthesize those >> cuz I think what Travis is saying is absolutely correct and I don't think that I want to separate I mean now that
he's raised it that it shouldn't be so prescriptive per these conduct policies are very high level like don't you know what is that Google used to say before they went to the dark side
don't be bad what was thing that they said don't be evil. I mean they had something and then they changed their mind because they are that but you know >> well and to be fair to Gretchen and this was kind of I there wasn't an intent to put this on this agenda but we had an old thing and so >> but I mean having looked at it and
thinking about it then I would say you know has a lot of >> maybe one ones would be more efficient to let her get a sense of >> that thing and let her she's very good at synthesizing you know people's opinions and maybe we can get a work product that's more reflective of our
collective opinion. um to present uh you know the next time. >> Okay. >> Well, can I offer maybe a slight modification of that? Um I if I think it would probably be helpful
because this is you know at a sort of higher level than say the personnel policies which are more specific. um if people have concerns about particular sections to to send that information to
Gretchen so that >> then then the parts of it that people are comfortable with can just stay you know you're not asking Gretchen to go back and revisit every single thing in it with each select board member. Let me I'll talk to Gretch and let let's put a
process together to do that kind of like what we did for the personnel policy and and a timeline and then I can send out an email to folks to say what the expectations are in terms of your do you meet with Gretchen? Do you want feedback? And we'll put some dates on it and then we'll we'll go from there. And
even and even to to determine is Gretchen the right person. I mean she was just helping out. Um, but let let's I'd I'd like to discuss that a little bit offline with with Ryan and her and see what makes sense. Like how do we and do we you know I
assume let's let's assume we're going to work off of a starting point but we're going to need some heavy customization. What's the best way to get that done? >> Fair. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So follow up on that. >> I think it's fair, Scott. I just to my point on the last thing with Aubrey, you
know, I thought that process was really good, but as long as everything is shared because you can't have a situation where, you know, they they condense these things and then your my opinions or your opinions or whatever aren't somehow reflected, you know, even
if it's that we get every draft and if you take the time to look through every draft. But >> well, I mean, she'll she'll I Yeah, but look, I mean, you have a choice, right? You can do it in full open meeting law where we just bash it around, you know, and tie everybody's time up, >> right?
>> Or do like, you know, this way, which is sort of like town administrator evaluation style where you deputize somebody to synthesize and trust her judgment that >> where there's honest debate, she'll flag it in the thing she presents and say,
"Here are two, you know, opinions on this." >> I'm fine with that. >> Yeah. So, that's what I would say. I think she's smart enough to figure that. >> All right. >> I think there's like 80% of it is fine and then there's 20% that we'll need to focus in on >> or take out completely. Right. Like
>> Right. >> Okay. So action I have an action item on that and so I'll be following up on on a process to to move this forward. Um but with that I know uh Gordon's been on the line for >> since beginning from the beginning. So,
uh, >> that's love. >> Let's move on to the this is the first of our kind of town meeting, uh, debriefs here. So, we're going to hear from Gordon on the cemetery committee update and town meeting articles. Good evening, Gordon. And do you need uh,
co-hosting responsibilities to share or is Ryan, you gonna run the slides? >> I think I can share from here. >> Okay. >> Uh, let me know if this works. Um, okay.
Can you see that? >> No. >> No. Darn. Oh, it's okay. And they try again. Done. I I'm not very Zoom literate right now. So, how do I share? From the green arrow. >> You press the green arrow.
>> Yeah. >> Oh, now I get the sharing is not enabled. You should get an a menu of items that you you can share. One of which it may show a screen or a document list. >> All right. Yeah.
>> Okay. Hold on. I'm the co-host now. So, yeah. So, you hit that. There should be a screens um tab on the top when you press the green dot. There you go. >> Cool. >> You good? >> I am. >> All right. >> Okay. Great. Thank you very much. Sorry
it took a little bit to get going here. So, um I'm on with the rest of the cemetery committee, Susan Richardson and Nave Lobo. That's that's we are the entire team. So, as such, we are a quorum. And I must
say as the chair, I'm calling this meeting to order at 9:03. So we have two things we want to bring to your attention tonight. Fee fee adjustments and this the site eval site expansion evaluation. The fee
adjustments just as a headline. Um in the past it's been sort of irregular and and incremental increases and we're not going to deviate a lot from that. we're really going to go with CPI, but since it's been about 5 years, it will look like there's an increase. Uh, and we
want to talk about the perpetual care fund, which we think needs some sort of special attention. And the second topic will be the cemetery expansion site evaluation because at some point, Green Cemetery is going to run out of space, and we gauge it to be about 6 and 1/2 years, and we need to determine if we're
going to look for additional space or not. So, let's go right on to the first one. You've seen this kind of uh slide before. Luke Escalo, if I'm pronouncing his name correctly,
um in 2021 did the same uh presentation kind of thing. You look at these towns joining us or or our peer towns. We are the lowest in terms of what we uh charge for the services. What I did on this chart was put together all the burials,
both full burial, earned burial, deed, perpetual care, because it gives a better rounded picture of all the costs that are in. You're going to use three out of the four of them anyway. So, this tells you that air, little air, by the way, is way up there. And as always, we're down below.
Um, this is put together from this set of towns which I'm calling the primary comparison list. And the only reason I'm telling you that is because there's a different list coming up. So here we go to the next one. The reason we feel perpetual care fund is different is that
you know we're all learning here too. I mean this is our second year as a committee and everything's a learning uh experience but is vastly underfunded and you know the situation where some of the funds were used. I went back through the uh annual reports
and the it it didn't segregate I don't think the principal and interest. So the entire perpetual care fund was used to buy some equipment. Now we're paying it back or the intent is to pay it back, but the perpetual care fund is split into principal and interest. There's
very little interest that's going to be left over. So we're sort of start starting from scratch, which is water under the bridge. But where we need to be is a perpetual care fund. The interest to spend should cover both current and future needs. We see it as
the use of cemetery specific equipment. We think it's fair if percent of the equipment that's used in the cemetery but not used elsewhere is also uh available to use. In other words, if there's a $100,000 piece of equipment
that needs to be purchased and it's a a big mower or whatever and 10% of the time they use it in the cemetery, then that 10% from perpetual care fund should be applicable for that that purchase. There are also a lot of repairs to
structures that we would anticipate. Wilson Chapel especially. There's a bird colony in the roof at this point and the columns really need work. There are gates and um other structures that need to be worked on. So future costs, not
just next year, need to be considered too. So, we're putting together a capital plan that will look out 5 years and it's in the appendix if you want to see it. But we're we're getting there. We understand this need. But the perpetual care fund is the engine that
runs the cemetery and the fuel is the fund itself and we would like dearly to be part of the expenditure decision- making as we go forward with a perpetual care fund. Should I pause there? is roar ahead.
>> Let's keep rolling. >> Okay. So, here's where we make our recommendation. So, what I did on the um columns, vertical columns, that primary comparison list is the same one you saw on the prior screen. The second one is a
little bit different. It just changes up some of the towns. So, you're going to see instead of uh let's see Lunenburgg, we swapped out Harvard. and we have Bolton and Weston. So we just did a different mix to give some kind of a different viewpoint.
On the left hand side in white you see the comparison list on the right you see green cemetery today and then proposed. So what we're saying going horizontally is a full interament a full burial. The median fee of our neighbor cemeteries is
$825. Our current fee is 500. I'll point out that we did a comparison of median household incomes of these towns. Carlile's at the top. So, it's not a money problem. It's a historical problem
in a sense. >> What What are your data sources here for both the income and I mean, did you just call these towns individually and get these data points? >> It's on their websites. Oh,
>> almost all towns publish their fees. >> And then but income is also >> Oh, do I um Google give me that. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Sure. Uh in the full report, you can look in the U appendex, you can see all
that data. Um we didn't want to go to the median although it's sort of where we belong. You know, there a lot of pressure is on people. budgets these days and also there's historically you know we are at where we are but we felt that going from
500 to 650 was reasonable in that it is uh from the original 220 uh 2021 uh numbers to 2026 adding on an estimated 3% for 26 since we don't know it yet but that's where it is currently
we come to near 600 and something the 50 rounds it off the reason interment is harder than cremations is it's 6 ft down. You've got a vault. Some cemeteries have a vault fee. As a matter of fact, you have ropes and slings and
ro roots and water and it's just so much more complicated. Every other cemetery we've talked to, we've talked to quite a few. Put in a buffer for those things. There's no average burial for for full interament. There's always something that goes on. cremations. You see the
median at 325 for the first list and 300 for the next. We're at 250. The CPI that I use comes up to 300 for our proposed number there. And on those two, we recommend a weekend
or after 3 p.m. fee as almost every other cemetery does. And we don't we don't compensate for overtime or those people coming out on the weekends. And we think it's a reasonable thing to ask. So now we get to the deed and the perpetual care which are bundled. So
today we're charging 300. It gets split. So 150 goes into perpetual care. We're looking at a median of 900 and 800 in our comp comparative lists. We feel that 600 being under that is still a a
valid number. It's a increase for sure from where we are today. It's a step in the right direction. We have a lot of things we need to accomplish and this is where this is where it comes from. >> So Gordon, when are these fees due exactly? Like what's due at signing and
what's due when? >> When you buy the deed when you buy the or or sign up for the deed for the um lot, that's when you pay the deed and PC fee. >> Okay.
you would pay the interament and other fees at that time or a family member would >> when those take place. >> Yes. >> Got it. Okay. >> Yeah. It's an interesting u situation.
You you don't really know it until you go through it, but you have to pay for the monument base, you have to pay for the monument fee, then you have to pay for the incription. You know, everything has a fee associated with it. So this is really just part of it. This is our part of it.
Okay, we done with that one. Want to ask more on the fees? No, >> keep going, Gordon. I just would point out that, you know, the goal tonight is for you to present this information as a select board. Like we won't be taking a position, but this is more educational
chance for us to ask questions and get more information. Okay, so next topic, cemetery expansion. So we did some math. We know the number of graves remaining. We got the number of graves sold annually for the past 5
years and averaged it. It's 54, which is high, which comes to 6.57 years remaining in Green Cemetery. It's not an exact number. It's not like you're looking at one, you know, this one to that one in and out. The lots are
since they were put together, arranged in sizes of six, even six or four or whatever. Not everyone's buying all that. Sometimes they want two and all we have left is a three kind of or six kind of thing. We've done some utilization
that's very creative. Uh, and that's something we can we can send to you on how we did that. But it's I'm just saying that this isn't, you know, a hard number. This is a pretty approximate number, but it's a pretty good number. Fortunately, there's a Levit parcel that the Levit
family left to the town in 1938 for the exact purpose of using it for Green Cemetery. It's 5 acres. It slopes up from Spalding Field, comes up to the cemetery of Budset. Part of it is actually being used by the DPW as a brush pile
repository. We've walked it with Jim Hall. It's it's it's a nice piece of land, I can say. Um, and it's it's a gift and I thank Susan for finding it in the archives. So
Google again I cited my source here uh gives an average of 100 a thousand graves per acre which depending on the layout and other um data points would give us anywhere
from 20 to maybe 55 years. And that is a a wide range because I went from the lowest year we sold graves to the last five which were high actually. But 20 to 55 years is a pretty good slice of time. That's one acre and there are five there
probably, you know, it would need some topographical studies, but two acres would seem to be viable. We don't have any um you know plans for any kind of layout, but you know that that would be sort of your standard
standard number. So Stampsky and McNary very kindly gave us a quote and here are the numbers. It's in the in the full packet, but I just put them in a simple table. I took the high end of all of these. So, this is, you know, if they say it would be between 600 and 800,
whatever. I took the high number, high number all the way down. I added on a contingency. I added on a back haul even though it wasn't in there. So, I came to a grand number of 16,000. And that would be a big number for site, you know, the big number for site
evaluation. That's that's that. >> And and Gordon, this would be one of the Warren articles would be requesting funding for this study. Correct. >> That's correct. >> And Gordon's presenting information for
two articles. The fee increase also needs to be approved by town meeting. So it's the fee increase is one article and this study would be a second article. And yes, from your standpoint, Gordon, are the you were presenting the fee information and now this information,
are you expect is this final information or are there still numbers to be refined? >> I would consider this final. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> good. You're early. I appreciate that. >> I like that. I like that.
>> Yeah. >> It's it's it's really it's a sensitive topic for a lot of people. We know that and we try to take it all into account. But we the good news is we have answers and the good news is we have a little bit of planning and and can see the
future a little bit. And I think you know we in the year we've been really tackling this. We understand a whole lot more about the whole life if you will of Green Cemetery. And I think this is good news.
>> Agreed. you're going to get maybe you're going to get into this, but the the you spend the money on the study. What's the actual rough idea of what the expansion would cost? Because I know from earlier in the project, it's a pretty large
number. >> I don't know. Um >> Okay. >> Yeah, I wouldn't even hazard a guess. Just large. So why I guess given the huge disparity in our fee structure and comparable towns and
the also very sizable income gap, you know, we're like upside down, right? The most income and the cheapest fee. And you said it would be controversial, but >> I'm not clear why we don't get to market, you know, and just build up revenue for all the other stuff that's going to come. I just as a you know rule
of thumb if if you simply took the 16k and I realize that's the beginning and and said we got to pay for that inside one year and you divide that by the 50 you know 50 or so plots you're going to get in the year that's 300 bucks and by the way 300 bucks is almost exactly how
much we're undercharging compared with median like why don't we just go to 300 bucks like go to 800 bucks or whatever the thing is what what's the reason why we wouldn't do that Well, that's a good question. Uh, my feeling on that was
we want it to pass and there are so many expenses and everyone's very sensitive about all the budget increases that I don't know if we put that in there it would pass. >> I mean, what you're banking on is that the minority of people who think they
might need a plot might vote against it. And the majority of people who don't need a plot like they're like, "Well, yeah, pay for it with fees." I I don't really I guess I don't agree. I mean I think we got to get to market. We have a scarce resource in the scheme of things. If you pay five
300 or 800 or 500 800 it's for the rest of your, you know, afterlife. I mean it doesn't seem like a lot to me. >> No. Just bring it up to par and be done with it. We're right at median, you know, done. And we need it if we're
going to preserve the cemetery and for future generations. We have had the median talk. Yeah, we we've discussed that too. Well, we we just bring this to you and we look for feedback. So, that's good feedback. And
>> I mean, the downside if they vote it down is we'll run out of plots and we won't fund the expansion. And then you're told, you know, five and a half years from now it's over. Go somewhere else. So, I mean, I don't to me it seems like a no-brainer actually, but we may
be simplifying it. >> Gordon, can the fund be used for a study like this or does the study have to be funded through a warrant article? I mean, I know we don't have money to do this in the fund, but could we use fund? Is that an allowable use in the future?
>> It's vague. I' I've tried to research this, but it's vague. It really depends on the commission which is you >> in terms of does it meet the definition of how the fund can be used. >> Yes. >> I see. >> But you don't have to Scott. I don't
think you have to go one to one. >> You just curious cash and then you have money to spend it on the other side. I I look at it and I've I've mentioned this before on other cemetery things, but Gordon, with this expansion, is it
it's contiguous? It's adjacent to the existing. Would it be incorporated into the existing or would it be considered a separate cemetery? >> We envision it being incorporated into Green. It is really part of as you come
up Church Street and take a right into the cemetery. On the left you say, "Oh, that's Green Cemetery." On the right, that's the Levit land. So, it's right there. >> Isn't I think Isn't there some sort of like
wash or um I don't know. I I don't know what the body of water is, but there's always a standing body of water behind a chain link fence over there. >> There is. the uh the trails committee has a boardwalk down there and and that's part of the uh the lowlands, but
it does rise up. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, I'm I'm with David. I think this is all very reasonable. It looks like you've done your homework. Um I don't think it's going to be controversial, but you never know. >> You mean as is. But I would ask Yeah. I'll take David's viewpoint. Should we
just go with the median? >> Well, you're also not going to a a fee change requires a town vote, right? you're not going to be coming back to town every every year, every other year. So, the price should work for the next few years anyway. So, I'd be looking to
the future as well. >> Yeah. I >> So, you >> I would support going to the media also. >> You're all voting media. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't and I don't think it's a you know everybody's going to die but
it's being in Green Cemetery is you know something you should pay to be in right so it's not just automatic you know that everyone's there you have to you have to pay for that >> it's well as David say it's it's a scarce resource
>> it is and we should charge the users the people who want to use it should pay for it >> and we we also need to recognize that it it needs to be maintained and so and that's going to go on for you know how many hundreds of years right but we have
to >> right >> get that established uh so there's ability >> that's right when it's closed you still need to mow the grass >> right um I you know I I will note that um
the last time we had this discussion you know when I mean seriously when Booth brought something to town meeting was that five years ago Yeah, >> you think, yeah, well, we had a real rush on uh requests for for um plots
leading up to the vote. So, we may see that again. >> Oh, we have. As soon as there was an article in the mosquito, we had another rush of votes. So, that's why the the the average is so high for, you know, number of graves sold in the past five years. >> So, we need to get Yeah.
>> But now, so what? They get in under the wire. I mean, it's not the worst. You have to give >> No, I'm not saying you shouldn't do that. I'm just saying that that's even more reason to get the price up. >> Just get it right. >> Just amaze you need a town vote to change the fee. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I will point out if it's any comfort. I
was listening to marketplace just before this meeting and on the radio and and Google has just come out with a I think it's Google or Meta has come out with a hundredyear bond because they want to build um uh these data centers and they re recognize it's you
know gazillion dollars and so >> they're putting out hundred-year bonds so you know hey people are taking the long >> so you know take the long you want to be in >> for the perpetuity it's pretty cheap I agree. It's the best value >> years from now that 800 bucks will
>> You've already got yours, Travis. >> I do. I do. I'm a value hunter. >> Okay. Well, that's great feedback. Um, I think we're leaning towards your recommendation, your advice. Obviously, you are the committee and the
commission. >> Good. >> Good. Uh, anything from uh Susan or May if you want to comment on anything? >> Gordon, I I one thing I would encourage if there's, you know, again, you're you're paying for a study, it's good to
know what might be on the other side of that study. And so having some idea of even if it's a broad range of of what an expansion would cost. I mean we have a lot of capital projects
>> on the docket in town. And you know it I think you don't want to you know if people are going to spend 16,000 of the of taxpayer money on us. You want to know is this something that's going to even be achievable or or something that um is practical. So, if if you can
provide some information or context on on what that might look like, I think that would be helpful for for this board and for the for the residents. >> Ryan, we'll do >> Ryan, can any of our um house doctors provide any
um estimates for us? >> Yeah, that's a pretty good idea. I can ask them. >> Who? >> I would go >> say house doctors. >> Yeah, I would go with niche. So house doctor is a mass general law term for um
procured engineering firms. >> It's under house. >> I'll I'll put you in touch with them Gordon tomorrow. >> Okay. >> And if this is down the line, but is there I'm I'm gonna assume no, but like
can CPC funds be used for this or a future expansion or is that just not at all in the equation? No, they can't be. >> But you know, uh, Gordon, I was reading your full report and, um,
if there's, you know, if if the, um, what do you call the chapel there that was, we have used, um, CPA money for that in the past because it's a sort of a historic structure. Um, but expansion of the cemetery wouldn't wouldn't
qualify. But if if also if there are um know in the way we did with the central burying ground right up here by the uh rotary. >> Yes. >> You know we if there are um I don't know what the right term is. if
they're sort of historic markers, uh, you know, that needed to be restored or, you know, straightened up or, you know, the same kind of work that was done in the central burying ground. That is some if
if it could be considered historic, that's something that could be you we could use CPA money for. >> Excellent. Yes. Uh, we uh we admired the work that they did in the central burial ground. we thought was very good and we're uh looking forward to talking with
Chrissy about that. So, you also said Wilson would be eligible, you think? >> Yeah, depending on what you're doing there. But yes, I I'm pretty sure we use CPA funds uh for some kind of restoration work. It
was before I was on the committee, but uh I'm pretty sure we've done that in the past. I could double check. Excellent. Thank you, >> Scott. Your questioning is the intention, maybe
Scott and Gordon both. Is the intention that if we propose the 16k at this springtime meeting that we have some ROM estimate of the subsequent cost if the study you know
well let me ask you will the study then come up with an engineering estimate for the project cost and is that something we want to handicap to get the 16k? >> It's a two-part question I guess. My understanding is the proposal would
give you a cost, but I guess my question is, is this a a a million to5 million project? Is it a hundred to $500,000? You know what I mean? Like what's the what's the magnitude of this?
Um, so you know, if it was m the bottom line was like $5 million, you'd say, "Well, geez, do we, you know, is this even on the on the docket of things we'd support given our other priorities, right?" Like, that's kind of what I'm getting at. >> I think that's excellent advice to get
some kind of ballpark. Uh, we've tried actually talked to a couple of cemeteries that have done expansions, Bill Ricka and Westford, and I couldn't get any good data. Westford actually just owned the land that they expanded onto. So it was and it was already flat and everything else. So
that didn't work out very well. Bill Ra didn't give me any any good information. >> We have to acquire the land or we own the land. We just have to >> we own this land. >> Okay. So we don't have that, >> right? But it's probably, you know, seven
figures and it's it's >> You think I Well, I heard I heard a number like way in the past of like what it might cost and it's it's a lot like >> to do what though? >> Well, >> so the main work is clearing the clearing the site and then you have to
sort of predig the soil and make sure that there isn't any ledge or or anything that goes in when you're doing excavation. So, >> isn't that what the GPR is for? So that finds it, but then you have to clear out boulders and other other significant just don't you just don't use that part,
right? Why do you have to do that? >> Well, you can't sell it then if you don't if you can't bury someone there if it's a big pile of >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. No, you don't sell it. You just don't sell that plot. Like, don't sell that where there's a boulder. That's why you have GPR. You just you deal with the plots you have. I mean, I
think we might be overengineering that. Maybe they are, too. I I I think the point is to get more land to have more expansion. Doesn't mean you have to use every inch. >> You're right, David. You could go in phases.
>> Yeah, >> maybe uh you know, Highland could be a cre. >> Oh, Colarium, >> whatever. Yeah, >> those are clever. Kill two birds with one stone, so to speak.
>> Harry Lynn, please do not publish that. >> Oh, I know. That's a >> not the worst idea I've heard from >> No, there you go. We'll preserve a historic structure and use it as it's great. But seriously though, I think getting back to the point, do we want is
the intention of the article, not the intention, but is it is it important in the pitching of the article to give a ROM of the subsequent cost of the result like we do with these other building
projects? >> Who are you asking? Well, maybe the selective because that's kind of >> I think it's in keeping with what we've talked about all along is that we don't just kind of do one thing. We're talking about a plan going forward and educating
the public on why this plan makes sense. And so having a longer term plan with costs associated and you know working towards it makes sense. >> So maybe it's the house talk because you can't we have a chicken and egg issue, right? You can't get that answer without
the 16k. So is there maybe it's a Ryan question now. Do you think the house doctor could give us a ROM idea of what what that looks like so we can contextualize the 16K? >> I do. I think we can get you a very
rough number of magnitude >> right and I would say from what I heard just now it's not to remove every boulder study. It's like, you know, make it usable for make a usable space out of that land for
further burial expansion. Keep it pretty generic. >> Anything else for Gordon and the committee? Gordon, I thought this was really a thorough pre not only the presentation but the backup data and what your committee has done is really impressive
here. >> Oh, thanks. >> Great. Thank you, Gordon. >> Yeah, thank you. Thank you everyone from the >> Thank you guys for the feedback >> and don't forget to close your meeting. >> Thank you very much. Uh do we hear a motion to adjurnn?
>> So moved. might have they might have already left. >> All right. All in favor? I. Thank you very much. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Okay. Very good. Okay. We're on to the TA
report. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to It's already was said by the board, but the cemetery committee has far exceeded any expectations I had in terms of the work. Um, and it's such a great thing to identify a future problem now and to start to work on it without
without the the drama and the rush. So, I I don't think I can thank Gordon enough for and team for what they've done. >> It's a small team, too. >> Yes. And and Gretchen staffs that. We affectionately call her the uh crypt keeper. She does.
>> So, she also deserves some credit for helping staff that committee. But on to my report. as I'm sure we all want to get through this meeting tonight. First, I would like to just reintroduce the idea of my February coffee hour being hosted at the Gleon
Public Library. I encourage people to come and see what will now be a Warren article about funding for the renovation or talk to me about any of the Warren articles that were discussed tonight to include the budget. That'll be February 17th, next week. And as I have some
special guests, my kids will be with me because it is uh school vacation week. So, you can also ask them about me, I guess. For following up on that, with with all of the town meeting information coming out, we do encourage people to sign up for email alerts, the
newsletter, and our podcasts in order to stay up to date with the Warren articles. We'll be pushing tons of information per the marketing plans that the town meeting study committee has put out about all of these Warren articles, and the more people come informed, the better the conversation is at town
meeting. At the time of publishing this report, I didn't have an HR report. However, you you do know that we appointed Mark CNC as the uh acco the animal control officer for the town. Important to just make sure we're continuing to update you on any appointments that are made given
the change in the TA bylaw and the appointment process. for department updates and information, and this is something that I don't expect to decide tonight, but we should decide very soon, is considering all the bylaw changes that are being proposed for the fall, at
least three that I know of right now. The wetland bylaw, the historical demo delay bylaw, and the bylaw you heard about tonight, the clustered housing. The potential for those three would require significant planning and
spacing of public meetings and outreach etc. much like last fall town meeting. So identifying that date as soon as possible would really help those boards back plan as they'll be doing a lot of the fall town meeting prep before we even begin the annual town meeting.
>> Could I could I just add to that? Um, we also want to we would want to specify a deadline by which the bylaw needs to be finalized because coming out of the summer, if you recall last time, people are on hiatus. They come back, it's right around the corner,
>> it's not enough time. So, you need to set an early September deadline to have that bylaw finalized, which means people are working over the summer. We're recommend us dates for the town meeting to consider. >> We can we're we're recommending either
the the week after Halloween or the week before. So, we're targeting late late October, early November, >> but we'll send you dates. Well, and it's the um it's the consensus of the town study committee that we understand the reasons why we went to
Monday for the spring because we were late. But um we remain supportive of the Sunday town meeting and then the and it'll be reflected in our report. the um
the question will be if it's a longer there were several alternatives proposed for a longer town meeting. One is you start in the afternoon, you take a break and you come back after dinner, which I'm personally not very sanguin about
making that work. The um uh the other suggestion is that you you know your Monday night is your backup after the Sunday but you try to of course get as much done as you can on Sunday. And then the third one which also people don't think is very good is you have it Sunday
and then the following Sunday you can't get it done. So just to put that in everybody's mind. I mean if we're if we're contemplating it's longer than one me you know one session then we have to think about that as well. All right.
>> Thank you. This will this will come up again until until we get you to set a date. I'd like to talk next about a grant we received. This is the hard work of of Gretchen. Um she does a lot of hard work. But as previously reported, we received an ADA improvement grant and
she completed the procurement process as she is MCPPO trained and awarded a contract to the Institute for Human Center Design. This firm is going to evaluate our facilities, our website, and other public facing resources to develop recommendations on accessibility in making sure we're compliant with with
the ADA law. So, this will add a um a layer to the the capital plan. I I don't expect it to add necessarily a ton of new projects. Just things to consider much in the way we consider sustainability as we look at capital investments.
You will get a full presentation about this when the when the report is ready. We don't think it'll take that long. A couple a couple months. The main focus really is the website. As we've told you before, that is where we are the least compliant with with the ADA and it is the most likely to to be a liability for
us when uh the law changes next year. So, we're we're trying to get ahead on the on the website for sure. Got a couple of bike rides for you to to approve. The motion is in your packet. We have the National Brain Tumor Society ride. They're requesting permission to
use the Carlile roads for their their event. This is on Sunday, May 17th. They would travel along a portion of the town streets and they've coordinated this activity with the police department. And similarly, the conquered museum is holding its second annual Paul River bike ride. This will be Saturday, May
16th. So just a weekend of biking and they expect 600 cyclists going through Carlile at one point. They've also coordinated with the police department and Chief Amundola is recommending approval of both. If you're willing to approve those, that would be great.
>> I have no problem with either, but I, you know, in in addition to coordinating with the police department, can we coordinate with the DPW just to make sure we have safe bicycling? Can they fill any potholes? I mean, I mean, it seems like some of these holes around
here could really throw off a bicyclist. Just some patchwork. If I'm being honest, Christine, I would say that we could probably identify potholes. Um, but filling them would require an analysis of resources. I mean, we fill potholes.
>> Okay. Yep. But I don't have any problem with the bike rides themselves. It's quite a coincidence that there's two right in a row, though. >> Yeah. >> We're not we're not closing any streets. >> If it's necessary, the police will. And if there's a cost associated to that,
the rides pay for it. So they're working to not do that if possible. >> But the police do a good job of coordinating this. So you barely notice unless you're on the route itself for that particular time. >> And do we have a sense of how big these
rides are? Like how many participants? I don't think they're all the Yeah, >> the Paul Rivere had 600 cyclists last year and I believe the the Brain Tumor Society ride is is about is similar in size, maybe even a little larger.
>> Those are >> Okay. Does that Does someone want to make a motion on those? >> Number eight in the packet. >> Yeah. finding it. >> Yeah. >> Let's see.
I move to appoint the request of the Conquered Museum for the use of the town roadways for their Paul River's bike ride event on Saturday, May 16th, 2026. >> Second discussion or deliberation. We've had
the comment regarding the conditions of the roads. Um, and I would just say we want to minimize any inconvenience to to residents on on on all these. Um, okay. Take a roll call vote, please.
>> Arnold, I >> Stevens I. >> I. >> The next item in this report is >> You want to do the other You want me do that one? I'll move to approve the request of the National Brain Tumor
Society for the use of Town Roadways for their charity bike ride event on Sunday, May 17th, 2026. >> Second. >> Further discussion or deliberation. Do another roll call, please. >> Arnold, I.
>> Modell, I. >> Snell, I. >> Stevens, I >> Okay, then. Thank you. For the next part of this report, we're looking to report out on our volunteer training plan, and this is part of your select board goals. So, we think it's important to let you
know what's going on with with Gretchen on the lead. She is now the point person for all boards and committees, taking over the all board meetings and the volunteer training. So, we're trying to combine those two and make the the commitment for volunteers to be limited.
So uh a quarterly check-in and meeting chair training sessions from um in July and September that that are required and we can't make anybody come to them but we will we will advertise them as required. We're updating the volunteer resources to make sure that they're
clear and easy to use and this is happening in conjunction with the town clerk. We're developing AI based templates to support volunteer work and we'll roll that out to you um in the future. But essentially the way the I AI tool we're working with would work is a
chair would be able to say here is my agenda items and it would spit out a agenda based on a template we've submitted. So it takes away a lot of the the formatting etc and just focuses on what we want with the chair which is the content of the meetings. We'll show you
this more. There's a lot of detail here uh the same same way it would work with minutes etc. So, we're trying to add technology to help volunteers as well, and we'll train it. We want to create presentations to include the potential for short educational videos that people can watch or listen to that would allow
them to, you know, work out or go for a walk and learn how to be a great volunteer in town. >> So, the challenge for this is implementing the program. We can build all the tools we want, but you need to make sure that your volunteers are following through. And I would tell you
that the the people that you really want us to train are the ones who are the least likely to go to these volunteer programs. So we should be thinking about how to make sure people are taking advantage of these resources because I I think almost all I do think all the volunteers want to to do a good job and
this training helps them focus on the policy and stuff and not necessarily some of the problems that can come with volunteerism. So, we're really working on that program and taking your goals seriously and we'll continue to report out on that. >> Is it possible to offer any sort of incentive like food or I don't know a
fun raffle or I don't know what but anything to get people to want to come. >> We're willing to try it all. And you have some volunteers that go to everything that we put out, right? >> Yeah. >> They're all trained. So, we need to make sure we're training everybody. >> Focusing on the chairs would help, too.
The chair is a significant job. And >> yeah, >> the stronger the chair, the stronger they're more the likely to to get all members to go to things. Okay, my next item is an updated organizational chart. This is not quite in effect yet because the TA bylaw
hasn't passed. But if you're looking in your your packets, you'll see the overall town structure, but more importantly, the second the second chart, which is the employee and staffing structure, and it's colorcoded so that you can see who who appoints who
and who reports to who. That was the intent of of this one. So in red, you see the fire chief is responsible for all fire personnel. Anybody in dark green, the Carile green is a appointing body that is not the select board or me.
Your appointments are in the light green and then mine are in the blue. So just a quick chart to see to see how the TA bylaw has changed things or clarified things. >> Yeah, I like the approach. Um, but I have do have some questions for you,
Ryan. So one is on the fire chief like why are you separating that out as compared with the library trustee or the I mean library director or the police chief don't they all appoint their or own organizational people? >> So the library trustees appoint any
library of personnel you appoint the fire chief but the fire chief appoints his if it's a she their people. You cannot tell the fire chief who to hire. you only have appointment authority over the fire chief according to this.
>> So that's one comment. Um I didn't understand why conservation commission and land stewardship were not under land use and why agricultural committee also was not under land use. It seems like they should all go that way.
>> Is this the town structure chart? >> Yeah, I'll take a look at it. I believe it's because they're mass general law or statutory courts. >> It's all MGL. It's all under the MGL. So anyway, take a look. And then on the
department level, I think it's very confusing the hard lines from select board NTA to all these departments on the center line. And then on the right side, there's definitely not a hard line
from select order TA to the CPS superintendent or the CC RSD superintendent. So, okay. Yeah, I think the intent was to show the school as departments, but they are are
certainly their own entities, which is why we put them off there to the right. But it is a very flat organization because of your structures. Okay. Uh assuming there's no more questions, I'll continue on.
>> I thought that was excellent. I appreciate you doing all that >> and we'll continue to update it. Again, it doesn't go in. We have agreements with most boards and to implement the TA bylaw uh prior to its implementation or at
least delegate the authority, but it doesn't really come into effect the special act is passed. >> Sorry, I think I muted out at some point in this, but >> did did you did I talk about the solid line dotted line stuff? >> Yeah, we heard. So, please please look at that. All right. Thank you. Yep, we
got that. You're right. >> All right. As we told you earlier, the finance committee is coming to talk to you at your next meeting and that'll be a significant significant chunk of the town meeting stuff that you can walk through with them. Their intent is to recommend a budget solution to you per
the guidance you gave them. And then the next version of the budget would be any guidance they receive from you based off that second draft or what we're calling draft two. We've also in budgetarily submitted three significant grants over the past month and we're awaiting
results. The first would offset the cost of the design for the connected car car sidewalk project. This is what what's called a complete streets design grant. We also applied for the to accelerate the digitization of our land use departments through the community
compact IT grant. And then the third was design funding for the town hall RTU replacement project. This was Sarah's work on the climate leader design grant. So, all three were significant efforts and we're hoping to get all three. It would be great and help with the capital plan.
As always, I tell people all of the latest budget information is on my website, town administrator, on the left navigation under budget information. We're putting everything right there. For capital project updates, there is no update to the elevator. We are working through submills and that will not start
until the school year is over, but we are continuing to track progress there. The town hall bathroom renovation for anyone who's been in town hall is ongoing. They expect to be complete in the next week. Um and then we'll have four functional bathrooms again and a lot less complaints uh about going down
to two. You would not if you if you don't come to town hall every day and you're you're listening to this um you would be surprised how many people are in town hall all day. So going from four bathrooms to two is a big deal and we can't wait to have them all back and complete. You heard about the cemetery. All of
that is on pause because it's buried under two feet of snow right now, but we'll get back to it when the spring begins. For Cranberry, um, moving on to to CPA projects for Cranberry Bog Dam number one, SMCO presented their results of their ground penetrating radar survey to
the CNSCOM. Before approving any additional work, the Consom requested that these findings be reviewed by an independent engineering firm. This is because Sumco found stuff that they needed to analyze. Basically they asked where do you want us to repair and they they're not engineers. So there's a
engineer coming to say um how much of the results of the ground penetrating radar should be addressed in an emergency manner before we put out the next phase of the repair project which is phase one. And that is an RFP to complete a full rehabilitation minus the
spillway which would be phase two. and the spillway discussion. I'm calling it the spillway because that was what it was originally called, but some type of relief for the dam is phase two and that will be uh decided once the hydraology studies are complete, which they almost
are. You will receive a significant briefing from the CHT about their work to advance the schematic design phase of the B boghouse affordability housing project. Uh, I expect you'd have lots of
questions about this, so we're going to try and send you as as much information as possible, but the general premise is to have an architect work through the schematic design and site review with some u site surveyors and civil engineers so that we can understand the
full scope of this project before putting it out to bid. for building construction projects. The biggest update from the library. Um I I did attend a meeting about the library. The the MFC met with the library trustees on Friday. That was after I
wrote this. The big re the big reveal from there is the need to go for additional funding at town meeting which was known but is now official. Additionally, we coordinated the mechanical room expansion and the library coil project, which are both MFC projects with the architects and the
library trustees. The MFC is happy with the coordination of those efforts and they will continue to fund them with their funds, but they've turned over operational control to the to the renovation project under the guidance of our OPM. So the MFC has is going to
continue to track those project but they have moved it into the library project which makes it one more coordinated project which I think is a good thing for the police station renovation construction is ongoing outdoor work is stopped because of the snow. They continue to do indoor work and we do we
did receive today the full result of the uh soil that was moved off offsite. We'll have a full financial analysis, but what we thought was happening is happening. So, we're still on budget. We're using contingency for that, but not not concerned about the overall cost
yet. There's still more dirt to go, but we we still think the contingency is going to hold and that project can be considered on time and on budget. The fire station renovation, the F FSBRC met last week to discuss the design of
the fire station. A big discussion point last week was the the the HVAC requirements on the floor. So the radiant heat of the big open apparatus apparatus bays. They wanted to make sure that we're meeting climate leader
eligibility, stretch code eligibility, but also meeting your intent for controlling cost and and using the most cost-effective methods possible. So, there's going to be a proposal for a hybrid solution or design for a hybrid solution that will bring gas as a
backup, but uh heat pumps to heat that floor as a as a as a first option. And they think it'll be costneutral because of um because of savings, etc., but it doesn't change the overall cost of the project. So, still meets your intent. Lots more to come on the fire station
when they present to you on May 10th. They're also working with the planning board on May 9th. And we've tried through Julie to coordinate all the efforts with the board of health and the conscom so that this project can move forward to town meeting. I keep telling everybody if there's a red flag that
this needs to stop, we need to know immediately, but we have not seen a red flag yet. So, we're driving forward hoping that this can can happen. the late March um bidding process that'll lead us to a solid number to bring to town meeting which if it happens I think is a tremendous credit to the architect
the OPM and your town staff. Then DPW we meet tomorrow for the u the DPWRBC meets tomorrow for their first meeting to talk about soliciting a project designer. So lots going on lots of little committees meeting and doing
big things. some upcoming discussion topics. You'll continue to work through your personnel policies. Senator Barrett's coming on March 24th to do a similar Q&A as Representative Catalo. Budget and town meeting stuff as we talked about all night. And we have u
finalized draft agreements with the police and fire chief that we'll bring in front of you for a formal vote. and you'll get that information prior to the vote in case you want to have any executive sessions to understand or finalize any of the negotiations.
Lastly, in terms of department information, we approved a sign for the Rotary, the Town Common, and a transfer station for Carile's race amity day. They hold this every year. The signs will be displayed from June 7th to June 14th, which is the day of the event,
June 14th. They've also asked for the approval of town common land use, which is a motion in your packet if you're willing to do this. This is something you have supported before. So, we've given you the information you've received in the past.
>> Oh, you're muted, Travis. >> Okay. Sorry about that. I move to approve the request of Gina Fox for the use of the town common for the Carile race amity day potluck picnic. >> We don't have a date on that though.
>> June 14th, right? >> June 14th. >> June. It's not on the motion. June 14th, 2026. >> I'll second. >> Further discussion or deliberation? Seeing none, let's do a roll call vote.
>> Arnold I. >> Modell. I >> Snell I >> Stevens I >> I >> Thank you. >> Okay. For staff recognition, I would like to recognize James Powderly now that he's officially announced his
retirement. John Mativier, who's gave a lot of this information and is still still very much part of our our team despite um moving on to Lincoln. wanted to share some information about Jim and thank him for his service to Massachusetts communities and and specifically Carlile. So Jim has been a
licensed plumber and gas fitter for more than 50 years before becoming an inspector. He worked as a plumber alongside his brother and later went on his own operating his own plumbing and heating company. After serving as the interim plumbing and gas inspector in Bill Ricka, he accepted a permanent position with the town of Bedford. And
in 2008, he became the plumbing and gas inspector for the town of Carile. For the past 18 years, he's proudly served both communities, consistently looking out for the best interest of our residents and never hesitating to hold plumbers to the highest professional standards. So, though he'll be greatly missed. We have about a month left with
him. We wish him the best for a well-deserved retirement. He is leaving us because he plans to move closer to his family, specifically his daughters, and he wants to spend more time with his grandchildren. So, thank you to Jim for all of his work. If you have done plumbing work in town, you have met Jim
and know he is a true professional. >> Some dates of interest coming up. You have meetings on the uh regular meetings. The only the only oddity is fee remember February 25th. You're meeting at Benfield to do a tour and that is a public meeting.
>> Did we confirm that time? I know we did but I've forgotten when >> 9:00 a.m. Okay. The plan is there a calendar notice for for that one? >> I didn't see one. >> I'll make sure. >> No. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> The plan is to tour the building for 30 minutes and then the residents who are interested in meeting with you will will ask questions or provide information for the last 30 minutes. >> And I just wanted to mention um that the
COHS talked about Benfield in the rental assistance program and a number of things. And anyway, some of them would like to come on the tour as well, which I can't remember who I asked about this, but that seemed to be fine. So, just wanted to let you know there'll be some COS
board people, too. And they know uh it's not for their deliberation, so they're not going to post it. >> All right, that is my report, Mr. Chair. You're on me. you. Thank you, Ryan. Um, moving on
>> in the packet, I just wanted to note, I apologize, that the fire station work plan is in there if you're curious about dates. Uh, I thought that was a helpful document. And then we're continuing to provide the police station budget as the numbers run down so you can be
comfortable with the numbers. That that'll also be included in my packet every time we get one. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh, liaison reports. Um, I'll open I just have a two brief ones and I don't know Barney if you want to comment on one of them. One
is I went to the finance committee meeting um last week and and most of this discussion was around capital and budget as you would expect and we'll hear more about that. They did um spend a good amount of time talking about um the board of health budget and you know
getting updated from Ryan on on terms of their hiring process. And they did send a letter to the to the um board of health last week essentially asking, you know, requesting that the board of health follow uh
be that their hiring process be in line with hiring practices townwide. and they requested that they work collaboratively with the board of health to find a candidate who would both add additional value to town services as well as be at a lower step. And so they also expressed support for hiring an
interim director um to ensure there's no gaps in services. So essentially um their their guidance is they they will not um support a budgetary increase over what's been requested and there was some discussion around you know following the
process to understand where that's going but I don't know if there was any follow-up on that and as you know the board of health is meeting tomorrow night to discuss um that position but it was a good good discussion um and
more to come on In addition, um, from a consom and LSC standpoint, uh, Navi has taken kind of the taken charge to to draft, uh, a new, um, LSSE charter that's been distributed
that they will be discussing on Thursday. Is that is that when the meeting is, Barney? >> Yes. >> Um, and I can distribute that. it I think it's in their current packet but you know on on first read it addresses a lot of the concerns in terms of
returning them to more of an advisory role taking a lot of the recommendations around voting and non- voting members um and really putting kind of putting some more parameters around the process uh so I think it was a a really good first step and I'm curious to see how how
those discussions go but things that's progressing fairly quickly And just a little bit to add on that is that um so Thursday night is is the is when the KNCOM will discuss it for the first time
as a group and they're not planning to vote on it Thursday night, but they they they're going to I think discuss NAVNET's draft and and see if generally if they have any changes um or generally
seems like a good working draft and then the plan is to um get specific uh committees and boards, give them the opportunity to weigh in on it, particularly the LSC, but also others like the agricultural committee and
trails committee, people that might have a direct interest and then um bring get that feedback and bring it back to the KNCOM and have the opportunity then for just also general community input um before they before KNSCOM takes a final vote on a new
charter. Any other updates from around the horn? >> Seeing none, we can take a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call. >> Arnold. I
>> David's on mute. He's already >> just give us like it Dave give us a thumbs up. Uh yeah, Modell eye. Watch that. >> Snell eye, >> Steven's eye, >> I. Thank you everyone. I appreciate you tonight.
>> Thanks. You