7 o'clock. So, we have a packed agenda. So, let's get rolling. >> We live. >> Is that Sean back there? Who's back there tonight? >> Uh, no. >> Christine, can you hear us?
>> Yes, I can. >> All right. We're good. >> So, we are live. So, welcome to the select board meeting of Tuesday, March 10th, 2026. We have a superersized agenda tonight. So, I thank everyone in advance for their brevity. We'll do our best to move
things along. We're going to open with community input followed by appointments. Then, um we're going to hear about a a study for shared services for the communications department with the town of Conquered. Um we're going to get an update on the fire renovation project along with a presentation of the
updated design and project timeline and town meeting logistics. Then we're going to review the safety committee town meeting request, followed by re refer a proposed zoning bylaw amendment to the planning board, a call of the caucus to nominate town officers to stand in the
annual town election. And then we're going to then move to item nine, which is revising the five-year road maintenance plan. We're going to debrief on our Benfield visit and talk about some potential follow-up
steps. the TA report, review of warrants and minutes, and then close with the usual order of leison on reports, community input, and then adjourn. So, lots to get done tonight. I'm going to open it up to community input. Does anyone in the room have any community input they want to provide?
Seeing none, I'll open it online. Does anyone online have any community input? Seeing none, let's move to the community appointments. And we have two appointments in the packet. one for the trails committee and one for the
transfer action transfer station action committee. Um does anyone want to >> make the motion? >> Sure. >> Okay. Uh I move to appoint Patricia Wolf as a full member of the trails committee with a term to end June 30th, 2027.
>> Second. Was there any additional comment or commentary on that? There was information in the packet about our application. So we'll do a roll call vote. >> Arnold I. >> Modell I. >> Snell I. >> Stevens I.
>> Triola I. >> And I move to appoint Julie Klene as a full member of the transfer station action committee for the term to end June 30th, 2027. >> Second. >> Any further discussion or deliberation? Seeing none, we'll do another roll call
vote. >> Arnold I. >> Modell. I. >> Snell I. Stevens I >> Triola I. Excellent. So on to item three, approval of the study shared services for the communications department with the town of conquered.
Um are you prepared? >> I would wait till 7:15. >> 7:15. All right. So what we're going to do is we're going to go ahead to the end of the agenda and why don't we do the review of warrants and minutes. There are warrants or sorry minutes for
our February 24th meeting and our February 25th Benfield site visit. >> I have one small correction. Okay. >> Did anybody else notice it including the chair? >> No. >> You're referred to as Scott Vanderhof who owns the hardware store in
conquered. >> Oh, that's nice. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'd like to keep it as a >> take it. >> Yeah. That's the only >> change. This is the joy of AI. >> I had actually a lot more to discuss on this because I thought the minutes I was
going to find them didn't really reflect all of the comments and I for the site visit. >> No, this is the other set of minutes. Okay. You on the first one only or? >> Yeah, the fir the first one was >> what was not covered that you would like to >> I well I I wanted to find it in here. I
made some notes on it. Um >> hold on. Sorry. Um, but basically I was looking and and we' talked about this before and it's really a question of how much do we want to put in minutes? Do we want to have any member discussion? Um,
>> you know, for the discussion I thought was pretty important when we had the about the organic waste ban >> and and I thought that was an important discussion and I don't think everyone had the same opinion. There was no mention of your comment in there, Scott,
which made it into the mosquito, which I was but but and there was, you know, and for me, the only comment was he praised the committee's thorough work um on the which I did, but there wasn't the my other viewpoint. And so I think either as a board, we need to figure out, you
know, what level of this and and what, you know, comments we if we want to record comments, we can do that. If we want to just say we're not going to record any, maybe we do that. But this was sort of subjective and it got to a point where at one point the comments
were the philosophical tension centered on whether to spend available reserves to address infrastructure needs. >> And and I thought, you know, >> we're getting a little >> we're getting a little esoteric. And so I I don't know. I I think maybe we could revisit these. Maybe not right now
because we have a lot of people going, but but um maybe it >> But okay. So, do you want to amend the specific ones or just say fine and then we'll take it as an issue? >> It's not a new issue. We we reflect on it periodically. I'm more in favor of um
we could table it >> unless unless specifically requested uh less detailed minutes given that the meetings are posted online. And to your point, you get into these subjective what comments to include and not include.
for example, it says the board expressed general support for the concept of this was regarding a ban and I don't know that's a subjective you know and and if we feel that for our minutes that's great but I I just think minutes my view
should be more specific as to we voted on this we did this >> we discussed >> all right but I mean I don't think um uh Gretchen is deviating from prior practice >> this This is not a commentary on her.
She's doing a good job. >> This is the evolution of AI. And >> so we can >> let's say we can do couple things. We can either approve them or punt on the minutes in front of us separately. Though I think we should if we're if
you're if that's an important issue, which it is kind of, I think we should do some survey of what other towns do on you know what is the practice, right? and maybe sit with Gretchen and figure it out. I mean, maybe using AI is not great. Like, maybe just listen to the recording and
>> pick out what you think's important. I mean, there's overreian I don't know if she's using AI or not, but there's clearly over reliance on AI is a is a pitfall. We know that >> when you do get to this point where you have more detail than you'd have from a someone taking minutes and it's,
>> you know, I never use AI. I trust me and I don't trust AI, but I recognize that, >> you know, people use it as a labor savings. >> Yes, >> I kind of agree with Scott. There's a lot out there that >> Go ahead. Sorry. >> Go ahead, Christine. >> Yeah, I just was going to say she uses
AI. It's a huge timesaver for her and then she rereads it afterward. And you know, sometimes the reread afterward, you know, you miss things because it all sounds very legit and whatnot. But maybe a little bit more guidance. I agree. the the discussion on the transportation
action committee. There was a lot of confusion um that uh arose after the mosquito article. I feel like the minutes um themselves were fairly accurate. Could have used a little more detail. Um there the confusion arose
after the mosquito article. >> So with regard to the minutes in front of us, do we want to hold off on approving these minutes? Let's do that. Um why don't we discuss this tomorrow? Yeah, why don't we discuss this tomorrow
>> and have revised minutes >> um and a report out at our next meeting because I >> I tend to >> as someone who wrote minutes for many years on different committees, I tended to
discuss, you know, you go by the agenda, you list out some of the bullet point top like points raised and then it's a vote and you're on on to the next. whereas I think a lot of the minutes now are becoming more narrative and more as you say subjective. Um, and there's I'm
not sure where the right dividing line is on that, >> but there's two different Scott there's overlapping issues. Right. So, the pre- AI minutes were either a meeting was held, a discussion was held >> or you go into detail like that's been a thing forever. Right. >> Right.
>> Now, because AI is helpful and you get all this stuff, >> there's an overlay of also, okay, somebody's telling you what's important, >> right? >> Somebody else has to ar be the arbiter of is that really important, >> right? So it's it's a substantive discussion. It deserves its own thing
which I think might be like a post town meeting next board. >> I mean it's a longer term. >> We're busy. We're busy. I just bring this up because I didn't think it reflected our discussion for the transfer station. >> Right. But that's the pitfall. Right.
>> Right. And and I you know >> can you send your do you have comments that you can send to Gretchen? >> I didn't edit them specifically but I could. Sure. Was it specifically >> when we discussed tomorrow, was it specifically focused on the transfer station or were there other points? Okay, >> that was it. And in the comment I made
about the philosophic, you can see how the language becomes Yeah. You know, >> no, I know. Yeah. >> Flowery >> and how my last name becomes Vanderho. >> All right. So, we will um we will revisit those minutes and let's make that a bullet point for tomorrow's
discussion. We still have uh five minutes. We could vote to Benfield if he's not in objection of the >> Yeah, that set of minutes. >> Yeah. Are we okay with that one? >> I am. >> Yep. >> I wasn't present. So I will >> Okay.
>> Wait, there was uh what was it? Uh >> oh. So I just wanted to clarify that. Um so those minutes, let's see which follow these the list of concerns that are included in those minutes.
Let's see. Yeah, Benfield Farms. Okay. >> The um >> so starting appendix A. Yes. >> I think it would be worth putting >> um just putting a comment at the beginning that says because this is the list that
the the residents had filled out and then handed, you know, on a piece of paper to Aubrey. And that's why they're kind of funky, right? or you know the number one is missing and some of the others you know the numbering >> there's no number one complaint
>> exactly so I that's my only comment on this one is that and and if you want we could just say as amended uh to reflect um that >> I mean was there was that a typo of the minute taker or did the list have no number I mean the point is it says like the
the resident submitted this list >> well it doesn't say that >> well it kind of does I >> we were we were handed this document >> yeah It says uh where does it say select board agreed to review the complaints to include the attached summary. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> So, it kind of infers that.
>> Gotcha. Well, maybe to say this >> appendix A uh list provided by residents, >> right? I think separately, maybe more substantively, we need to curate this list. We're going to talk about separate issue. Yeah. >> And we'll figure that out, right? >> And we'll make sure that
>> that's was list if there was no number one and it's just not American. >> I would just repeat rent. The rent's too damn high. Okay. >> So, we'll amend appendix A to say um list provided by Benfield residents. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. >> Do you want me to do the motion? >> Yep. Sure. >> Do the motion as amended? >> I move to approve the minutes of the February 25th, 2026 select board meeting uh as amended tonight. Uh
>> period. >> Do we have a second, >> David? Okay. Any further discussion or deliberation? Roll call vote. >> Arnold. I >> Snell I. >> Stevens abstain. Triola. I. >> Okay.
7:13. We close enough. >> Go for it. >> Are you ready to >> item? >> All right. So, we're moving on to um item three on the agenda, which is approval to study sheriff services for the communications department with the town of Conquered. And just as a
procedural note is I will open this up to uh public comment after the presentation. However, uh I want to be clear that the scope of tonight's discussion is in regard to our participation in a study on shared services. So uh any comment should be
directed on our participation in the study on shared services, not on the general merits or of shared services in the future. That's down the road. So that's my caveat. And with that, I'll turn it over to you if you could just introduce yourself. Sure. Uh Stephen Johnson. I'm the emergency communication
center manager for the town of conquered. Ryan, do you have the presentation available? I'll have Ryan share that with you and then I can go through that presentation a bit. Uh feel free to interrupt me with questions along the way if you'd like, but I can just go through and then uh hopefully I can answer questions uh as
the material goes through and then uh welcome questions afterwards. So again, my name is Stephen Johnson. I provide uh executive level leadership to the conquered emergency communications including our combined police, fire and emergency communications emergency medical service emergency communication
center, its personnel, its operations and the town's communications infrastructure. I began my career as a frontline public safety dispatcher and I've served at various levels of responsibility within the field of emergency communications uh smalls size midsize and large city centers and I also have in addition to my background
in emergency communications I have a background emergency medical services uh serving in volunteer call and career uh EMS agencies in Connecticut prior to my relocation to Massachusetts uh including service at the shift commander level as well which has provided me with a unique perspective
having worked on both sides of the radio. So I'm here along with uh Chief Tom Mohei of the uh Conquered Police Department and Brian Whitney uh chief of the conquered fire department and on behalf of Conquer's town manager Carrie Laflur to discuss partnership or potential partnership with the town of
Carlilele as conquered moves towards a shared services model exploring what that model would look like potentially. And so tonight I'll share with you what's motivating us a little bit to embrace that to to walk in that direction. uh it may uh be relevant to you and then detail our next steps and
and have some conversation and the next slide would be great. >> Stephen, if I would just for one second. So this was a select board goal to explore regional services communications was one of those. The town of conquer did approach approach us and this presentation is their presentation to
you about that >> for the clarity in the AI era. >> Thank you for the clarity. Slides not made with AI. Okay, Ryan Gosling, town minister. >> Be the new >> I know the new disclaimer you're going to attach right to things. >> AI free.
>> So, so why now? Why is conquered considering this? The reality is the landscape of 911 and emergency communications is changing uh in several important ways both nationally and uh in in the Commonwealth. Uh first, staffing has become a significant challenge
across the country. Massachusetts is now exempt from that. Emergency communications is highly specialized profession requires extensive training and many centers are experiencing uh recruitment and retention challenges. Second, there is an increasing emphasis
on redundancy and resiliency. Like many other communities, we're looking at how uh closely at how we ensure continuity of operations during major incidents, uh technology failures, staffing shortages, and thirdly, the cost and complexity of the technology that supports modern
emergency uh communications continues to increase and often not in direct correlation to the increases in funding and radio infrastructur infrastructure, recording systems, call handling, cyber security requirements, other critical systems require significant investment.
ment and ongoing maintenance while the available technologies including advanced location services, artificial intelligence, nextgen 911, multimedia, internet of things, all those other advancements are revolutionizing the way the work that 911 is done. And uh but the funding is not always there to
support that. And then lastly, the Commonwealth is actively encouraging regional collaboration through state 911 incentive programs and state grants designed to help communities plan and transition to a shared service model. At the most recent meeting of the state 911
commission just uh this past week uh a preliminary report was released by the state 911's chosen uh consultant mission critical partners that demonstrates that regionalization in Massachusetts is effective and working and accomplishing the goals that the the state is seeking
to accomplish. So it it further implores us to consider that as a possibility for us as well. And communities that explore these options earlier have more options. Uh and you'll see in my next slide a little bit about what the what the what it's looking like in the Commonwealth as
uh the narrowing opportunities for partnerships exist. Uh but what is paramount is public safety. All decisions should be made for public safety with public safety public safety in mind. And so uh as as a as a resident of Massachusetts that would be
what I would hope my leaders would would be using as their guide. And I believe that shared services does enhance public safety. So the next slide uh this is the current landscape. This is a smaller scale. It's just a view of what the uh the different
colors represent uh PAPs public safety answering points throughout the Commonwealth. Now uh so if they're the same color that means they're sharing services currently. In 2008 uh they were there were 264 PAPs. Those are uh primary public service answering points.
Those are the primary 911 centers for those jurisdictions. In 2022, there were 212. That's quite a reduction from 264 to 212. And as we started in 2026, there were 194 uh and which reveals an
increase not just in regionalized centers, but at the rate of regionalization. At the most recent commission meeting, uh more partnerships were announced and that 194 number uh continues to decrease. So, >> so Stephen, on the western side of the state, >> yes,
>> these huge huge swaths of towns share >> That's correct. >> One dispatch service. >> They have one dispatch center. That's correct. With the Yes. >> So, with the new study released, uh, the preliminary findings released by state 911 and with the model that we're seeing
in the state, it's regionalization is not going anywhere. It wasn't a trend that was started and is is disappearing. it is going to become I think the longer term model that the state is going to highly incentivize and so >> and how does Massachusetts compare to other states with regard to
>> it's a great question >> east apps and >> my understanding is in a lot of the country it is already regionalized >> yeah so Massachusetts and Connecticut uh in particular both of the states very unique in the sense that most places
each municipality has its own pace except for where you're seeing regionalization throughout the rest of the country and I do have the the privilege to travel and speak in different places and consult. Uh most of them are doing county based uh 911. Now that's because they have
formal county government. There's a structure there that can support a county based service. Uh but even where there's not, you're seeing some reg regionalization happen everywhere and you're starting to see larger cities remain independent, say like a Portland, Oregon or a Boston, you know, here, but
the other communities are starting to share services because it's just not sustainable long term, particularly when uh there's so much disparity between communication centers as to pay, as to requirements, as to training standards. You know, one of the things that uh
Massachusetts does a good job at least of fundamental training, but if you call for a police officer in any town in Massachusetts, you get a police officer that's going to enforce state law, right? There might be some local ordinances, but there's you know what you're getting. Uh same with firefighting, right? You things are
going to change maybe as far as run cards and response plans, but you're getting, you know, the same expectation of service, right? 911's a little bit different. you can call in in one jurisdiction. You get one emergency medical dispatch program. You get one set of policies and procedures. You get
one uh staff that's trained to one level and then you get a different experience as you cross municipal lines. And the state is aware of that and Massachusetts has been a leader in the in the country of trying to standardize at least basic level training. Uh but the rest of the country is not doing that. Uh so that's
why you're seeing these shared services regional models much more effectively and uh uh utilized u because we're recognizing that that disparity exists and so the commonwealth is also trying to minimize that disparity and that's one of the things that the uh regionalization shared services is one
approach to that. As you look at the next slide, you'll start to you'll see a zoomedin uh view of where we are in the Commonwealth and you can kind of see where he exists in what I've uh be been calling the sea of white. Uh so most communities continue to operate
independently. I don't think that will be the picture in 10 years. Uh I think you'll see more and more communities are uh looking to share services and you'll see that uh our communities are surrounded by regional centers and as these uh regional centers are growing
and expanding uh you're I'm anticipating that you're going to see the sea of white slowly become a lake and then maybe become a stream and the options for partnerships are going to narrow as time progresses. Right? You know, each municipality has an opportunity to explore different partnerships that make
sense for them if at all. Uh but starting now, having these conversations a little bit earlier in this uh where we are in kind of the zeitgeist, I think is a little bit is is better because it affords us of more options uh for potential partnerships as opposed to time progressing and now you look to the
left, you look to the right, you look to the north, you look to the south and you're just kind of your options are limited. And so we see this as an opportunity uh and this is why we're kind of looking to do this now at least explore these this these options to uh have a PAP that reflects our our shared values and
priorities and for conquered and for any potential partner communities that includes maintaining a very high standard of service what I've often described as a white glove approach to emergency communications where dispatchers know their communities understand local geography provide a
high level of professional uh service understand the culture culture and they know they're first responders. >> So, Stephen, this is Christine Stevens. I'm a select select board member here in Carile as well. >> Does the emergency communication system
work through Conquer's normal communication infrastructure, which is notably poor. Um I I mean I'm worried about calls being dropped, things not going through. Um tell me you use some other different system. >> Yeah, it's the state 911 system. Uh so
you know the state 911 takes care of their their own infrastructure. So as long as calls can reach a tower wherever it may be the towers and the wireless and then residential is a little bit of a different system. Uh but it's it's the towers are set to uh essentially I I'll
use very watered down I guess language. They're programmed to be to be go to a specific PAP. And so depending upon where you are, uh you hit a tower with your cell phone or if it's your address, your residential address, you go to the PAP assigned to that uh tower or to that
jurisdiction. So it won't rely upon uh say a T-Mobile structure or a Verizon or what have you. Uh it it's it depends upon the network. >> So what's the difference between a PAP and a wreck? >> So a PAP is a is a public service
answering point. That's what that's the the point that 911 uh processes your 911 calls. >> Okay. >> A wreck is a regional emergency communication center. Now, a PAP can double as a wreck, right? So, uh let's just say that you that the municipalities agree, they form a wreck.
There's a regional communication center that becomes the PAP. There are also arrangements where perhaps a PAP exists in a municipality, but they want to transfer the medical calls to somewhere else and so they can transfer that to the wreck and the PAP still exists within the, you know, the municipality.
So in the next slide you'll see there's two models a hosted versus a district model. Uh as part of this exploration it's important to understand that there are generally two primary models that the state supports and that is the hosted model and the district model. The model conquer is currently exploring is
the hosted model and under that structure one municipality serves as the host for the regional communication center. The employees working in the center are employees of that host municipality. The center operates within the municipality's organizational structure. Uh so administrative
functions such as payroll, human resources, related support are handled by the host community and then through uh any contractual arrangements and government and oversight are established through intermission. >> So in the humongous districts in the western part they which model do they
hue to to >> so they are operated by state 911. So it's a little bit different. Uh, so they have that they are, it's a good question because I'm not sure their exact governance. I'd have to check, but because they're operated by state 911, it's it's arranged a little bit differently.
>> So if you if you live in, you know, I don't know, Northampton, wherever it is, and you call like that person could be 100 miles away or 50 miles away and >> yeah, they're they're going to be in the in that wreck that >> wherever they are and somebody takes care of the HR one town does or do you
think the state? Well, they're gonna be state employees. >> In this case, it would be like you guys, right? >> Right. Correct. >> Yes. >> And by you guys, let me just make sure I I'm understanding this correct. Is this like a joint board with conquered lead municipality or is there some sort of
regional authority that we all >> sure you know >> I think a lot of that is yet to be seen based upon a feasibility structure a study and uh the input from the interested communities. So I be it'd be a bit premature to say exactly how governance would look. Uh but the way
that we are we are imagining a hosted model would be that they would become employees of the town of conquered and that our town would support those as as our personnel but governance and decision-m and operations is a whole other uh subject matter
>> okay >> for understanding so we share a veteran services director with Lexington and Bedford that's a hosted model so that's a Lexington employee who works through us and it's all guided by an intermunicipal agreement that you signed, >> right? >> A district model is more like the high school, right?
>> Where they have their own governance and structure >> and that is the other model that exists uh as well for uh regional emergency communication center is a district model. Uh but conquer's focusing on the hosted model uh mostly because it can provide a more practical and efficient
path uh to regional collaboration while still allowing partner communities to define governance expectations and local uh protocols through formal agreement. Is conquered interested in a hosted model in which they are not the host? >> I would have to confer with my town
manager. I think that would probably to speak to her about that. Uh I think we would look to a feasibility study to kind of guide our thought process. I mean public safety is paramount and that's what that's where we would that's maybe the number one virtue that guides
our decision- making. uh but from my uh conversations with my leadership currently conquered seeking uh to host but a feasibility study would also uh identify other possibilities. So I can go through a little bit and share with you some of the just some of
the benefits of why we're considering uh this move. Uh there's a variety of benefits. Uh and I'll try to make these not redundant for you. Uh just higher level. Uh so staffing benefits. One of the most significant advantages of a regional communications model relates to
staffing and workforce sustainability. By bringing multiple communities together into a shared communications center, it becomes possible uh to maintain dedicated staffing for different aspects of emergency communications, including 911 call handling, non-emergency or business line calls, training functions, and radio
dispatch operations. And regional centers can also help reduce overtime, enforced overtime. It's a growing challenge. in uh in all in many centers across the state and reducing pressure on the workforce can can significantly improve overall employee wellness and help reduce burnout and what is already
a very demanding profession. A larger center allows for stronger supervision and leadership structure as well as improved opportunities for recruitment, retention, and long-term career development within the profession. And finally, regional centers can support more structured and consistent training programs, ensuring
that dispatchers receive ongoing professional development and that training standards remain strong and consistent over time. The next slide covers a little bit of operational benefits. In addition to workforce benefits, regional emergency communication centers can provide several important operational
advantages. Uh, one operational benefit of regional collaboration is the ability to maintain consistent policies and procedures within the communication center itself. uh which helps ensure the that emergency calls are processed in a professional consistent manner. It's important to note that that does not
mean changing how police, fire or EMS agencies operate in the field. Each community continues to maintain its own operational practices, leadership structure, response models. The goal is simply to ensure that the communication side of the operation is handled
consistently uh and professionally while still supporting the unique needs and operational approaches of each participating agency. Uh regionalization can also reduce the need to transfer calls between agencies. This does happen. Uh so let's just say someone is by a town line, they call 911, they
reach our pap at conquered, we say, "Hold on. We get the address. We get the phone number. We confirm the nature of the emergency. We have to get all that before we transfer. Happens to be that I'm in Carlilele. Okay. Please stand on the line. I'm going to transfer you to Carlile. We pray that that call does not get dropped because things happen." And then that call gets transferred to an uh
to your dispatcher, you know, within your PAP. We relay the information. I can imagine that that call transfer takes critical seconds and someone's could be someone's uh you know, worst moments. >> I assume the study would quantify that. >> Yes. And the state has uh done some work
in that as well as as to how regionalization reduces transfers and the uh seconds that it can save and so on. So yes, there's there's data available to support that. Uh from an incident management standpoint, having a larger communication center with multiple
trained personnel on duty can enhance coordination uh during complex high demand uh incidents involving police, fire, EMS, especially when field units are supported by the same emergency communication center. And of course, there's the uh resiliency. uh regional centers can significantly reduce single
points of failure uh and make it possible to maintain operations even during uh potential equipment failures, major incidents, uh other disruptions and it also affords possibility for true backup centers. It's you know a lot of us cannot don't afford the luxury of having a backup 911 center within our
same jurisdiction to operate two 911 centers independently. Regionalization does allow for some redundancy to happen uh there. And then finally, by sharing our infrastructure across multiple communities, regional centers can support more uh robust and modern communication systems that benefit all
participating agencies. And as we kind of round second and get to third base here in this presentation, uh we can talk a little bit about some of the financial benefits. Uh finances of course are a factor and could be they're a serious consideration. Uh but I don't think that finances should be
the only consideration. I'll say that just public safety should be the consideration and efficiency and workforce retention and workforce morale uh and and finances of course are part of that as well. Uh but I so want to I want to hedge any uh concerns that oh
we're just doing this to save money. No, that's it's it's not solely the consideration but it but it is a benefit. Uh so one of the ma the most important is the ability to share the cost of major systems uh and uh infrastructure. Modern 911 operate
operations rely on complex and expansive technology and expensive technology and regional models allow uh those costs to be distributed amongst uh multiple communities rather than being borne by a single municipality. we are all paying for some of uh the same services and
then having different level of services across uh municipal lines. Greater long-term budget predictability is a benefit of regionalization as well as access to additional grant opportunities from state 911 department which has established development incentive
programs specifically designed to fund uh partially fund incentivize centers to embrace these models. And then of course there's just some kind of common sense pooling resources efficiencies and that allows us to open up other opportunities for staff uh training coordination
quality assurance IT support administrative services other roles that may not otherwise exist and that we can reduce the costly system failures or emergency infrastructure replacements that all of us are facing. And then lastly strategic benefits.
There's there's clearly long-term benefits for the sustainability of emergency communication services. As the demands on I1 systems continue to evolve, communities that plan collaboratively are better positioned to maintain strong and reliable service over time. Give us a healthier financial
picture. Uh pro provides the centers with a uh strengthened position within the state and within the broader public safety communications environment. Uh regional centers can support a stronger talent strategy, providing more opportunities for leadership development, professional growth,
long-term continuity of operations, allow us to think more strategically about infrastructure, technology, and risk management, and ultimately uh contribute to maintaining public trust and confidence in our emergency communication system, which is something that every community depends on. So what
are our next steps? Uh our next steps, we just for the sake of time, this I'll cover this in the next slide, too. Uh our next steps are to uh pursue the state 911 development grant. Uh Conquer has identified a partner uh
already, the town of Lincoln, and we intend to apply for the state 911 development grant to fund a feasibility study. Uh that study would allow participating communities to carefully evaluate governance, operational models, financial considerations, and service impacts before any decisions are made.
As part of that process, communities would likely engage in data sharing, site visits, uh the consultation with state 91 department and with a chosen uh consultant and other planning activities that would help inform the feasibility study. And we're hopeful that the town
of Carile may wish to participate in this exploration. If this is something that the board is open to considering, the next step would simply uh to be a letter of attestation, including uh indicating Carlile's interest in partnering with Conquered in studying
the potential formation of a regional emergency communication center as part of the state 911 development grant application. Uh while we remain optimistic about long-term partnership, no commitment is being requested tonight beyond participation in the feasibility study process. The purpose of the study
would be to give all the participating communities the information they need to determine whether a regional collaboration ultimately makes sense. Uh if this exploration moves forward, my commitment is to ensure that the process is transparent, collaborative, and mindful of the needs of the
participating communities. Regional emergency communications works best when it reflects the values and expectations of the communities they serve. And I take that responsibility very seriously. At the end of the day, this conversation is simply about ensuring that emergency communication systems remain strong,
resilient, and sustainable for the future. So, that is the end of my presentation. I welcome uh any comments or questions from the board. >> Yep. Sorry. Without we we've discussed this without any any commentary to Stephen. I I think a lot of this is compelling, right? The
financial, the resilience, the technology, the sustainability. However, I I don't I do want to point out that we have very consistent and professional service delivery now. >> Sure. >> With our highly professional staff. >> Yes. >> So, I'm not sure that that
>> that is a thing that would improve by a regional agreement. >> Yeah. And and don't mean to cut you. If I if at all my presentation applied that, I apologize. Certainly would not think anything that that that is an area that would need improvement. >> I just wanted to point that out that >> Yeah. Thank you. >> We are highly consistent and professional.
>> Good. Can you clarify the the grant funding and you said select a consultant. What is the nature of the actual assessment? I mean is it this this presentation focuses on the benefits? >> Sure. >> My hope if we were to get more information from a feasibility study
would be a fairly objective look at where individual communities look to gain and or lose in such a scenario. So um I would expect that Carile for Carile's piece we would get a a
information specific to Carile about how our services when you say standardized that means services can be brought up or they can be brought down right it's so an assessment of our current service level how it might benefit or be negatively impacted by such an agreement some of the implications for carile
would be most useful so would this study be independent in that respect? Yeah. So it would be uh a third party that would do do this analysis. Typically the way these feasibility studies reads uh read are they take each individual pap they do an analysis of of their operation and
then they look at what are the benefits or the disadvantages of bringing those paps together. Uh so it would be an objective analysis. Uh we certainly would not want to ever lower a standard. uh regionalization should only raise a standard and and and to Ryan's earlier
comments, there may be standards that uh you all are utilizing that would be the bar, right? So, and that would be something that we would identify in a feasibility study. >> What's the time frame for this? I think that I think I read that the deadline was April 15th. >> That's right.
>> And then what looking out from that, how long to study? How long like what's what's the overall >> Yeah. So the deadline is the 15th and then that would be for the next fiscal year's award. So we wouldn't be looking at until after July 1 beginning that study. Uh it depends on the vendor that
is utilized. I mean we there's we've uh we're going to get a budgetary quote to get a grant award. Uh but then we can work collaboratively to figure out what it makes sense as far as the vendor that's selected. Uh and then once the uh vendor selected, it's going to be up to the process. Our hope is that this is
all concluded in the first half or so of the upcoming fiscal year. Uh that's just but that's our hope the study so we can look at making decisions for the next fiscal year and whatever those decisions may be. Uh but we I don't want to put the cart before the horse as to what those decisions would be.
>> And those decisions is that a I don't know how that works in town government. Is that a town meeting decision to enter or not enter agreements or is that a >> It depends on what >> I see. I don't want to punt, but it depends on what the study says, >> right? Okay. There's a lot yet to be
seen. We just want the opportunity to explore it. >> And with Lincoln, they're already on board with this. Are you talking to other communities as well? >> Right. Right now, we're looking to start with our closest neighbors and we think that we'd be the the best suited partners. Uh so we're looking to start
with Carlilele and Lincoln. Uh I say start because who if this becomes something in years to come in five, six, seven, who knows? I just want to that where other communities look to us and we're see the excellence we're providing. Sure. That could be a possibility. >> And who are you working with in if you
were to get the grant? Who are your points of contact within the communities? Is it so with Lincoln? Who who who do you work with to craft the study to to do that? Are you forming like a regional committee to to to do that or >> Well, once we get the approval from the state, we would have the obviously the
town management would have to designate who those folks are. So we have we have liaison in each department you know police and fire and so forth and then the the uh chosen vendor would you know make appointments and come in and whoever whoever talent leadership designates
>> and does the uh is the result of the study uh conclude with any kind of recommendation or is it more factual this is what we found and these are potential benefits or disadvantages. My understanding is that it concludes if it
if it's feasible and it makes sense for those communities if there is to a benefit to be gained. I don't know if they do a recommend highly recommend levels of recommendation but it's just does this make sense to proceed. >> Do you feel um you speak like you will
get the grant? I guess you've been notified you were selected to receive it or you qualify for the reception of the grant. I don't I I speak confidently because I I don't see a reason why we wouldn't. Uh but I I also know we won't know until we apply. It's a competitive
>> apply. No, >> I think everybody gets that that applies. >> We would have to explain to the state the the um the state has a number of priorities that they're considering and that includes >> within this >> within the grants. So you've got existing regionals, newer regionals that
are looking to form. Uh so they're going to go through their priorities. uh you know we've been in conversation with the state uh we have no guarantees uh but we won't know until we apply >> and if you didn't get it would you still do the study or what would you do then >> I think at that point from my
conversations internally the answer is likely yes uh but we would then have to identify funding sources >> so the grant comes to conquer presumably and you do the study of the three towns if everybody agrees right >> right >> and there's not really a cost to us
other than give time to >> precise So I don't know Lincoln situation. You have a all professional fire department or a call or a hybrid? What what do you guys >> We have a full-time fire department >> and and Lincoln has
>> Lincoln has chief >> a combination >> combination. We're like us sort of or we're >> chief >> Soros. >> Yeah. So they're uh much more of a career department than a it's in a career model. Yeah, >> they're call people sitting in the
station waiting for the call. >> So that's one of the nuances. Have you scoped this study then? I mean >> there's more work in that. >> There's there's a lot of factors that are yet to be reviewed, right? And so I think this is the very beginning of the conversation
>> uh to say we this is the path we see ourselves. >> But I mean if we raised our hand and said we we'd like to be part of it. Sure. Then you're embracing studying us as us, right? >> Yeah. Yes. No, I understand your question, but >> that's part of the stuff. Yeah, you have to look at all aspects.
>> Yeah. >> And can I ask our dispatch department >> just on a very rough sense of the number of calls, how many like on a percentage basis, EMT, fire, and police? How does it break down? Typically,
you answer that. police calls and fire and EMS. But >> I mean, does it break down like is it mostly what's it mostly? I'm just curious. The nature of the calls are more work. >> How do you get a dump sticker?
>> Daytime call, right? >> It's true. >> They're all over the place. We're the only 247 operation, so everybody calls us for >> for everything. Okay. >> So, they get they get some uh DPW as well. They get some
animal control. They get some. So there there's kind of a full range >> full range. Right. >> But but obviously the police are called much more often. >> The police are the right >> and then then there'd be EMS and the fire. >> Is that also your experience?
>> I would say I mean I share their experience. I mean I echo their sentiment. >> People call about >> garbage and Yeah. I mean we the only 247 department people are calling about everything and anything. Um you know and we do get a higher volume of medical calls so our fire department's busy in
that regard but we also service a lot of police business line calls as well. >> Stephen are you looking at any other towns besides Lincoln and Carlile? >> Not at this time. Uh but you know we would be open to other partnerships in the future if they would become feasible.
Are there any comments um from >> a question here, Scott? Go ahead. So, Stephen, as you look to compile these various aspects that you guys are considering, um can we email you with comments, questions, suggestions that you can take into consideration when
you're shaping your study? >> Sure. >> Um and if so, uh where do we send those? >> Yeah, sure. So, um I can share my contact information. Uh, I can leave my card here with M. How do you think it's investigated? >> I'm assuming that we'd have significant representation in any scope.
>> Well, so yeah, I would say I would not say that I'm shaping the study. I I just want to try to respectfully kind of push back on that a little bit. Uh, just to say because each each person is going to be a participant in the study. We're all going to shape the study and we're all going to take a look at what works best for our, you know, our municipalities
and our in our in our teams and our departments and so forth. Uh so I would say that everybody would have a voice in in you know uh directing the way this work goes but I also would imagine that these you know these consultants have a format that they follow and they're experienced in how they approach these
matters and so >> paying for consultants. >> Right. That's exactly right. So we're going to trust their expertise. >> I don't want to get Carrie in trouble but her favorite restaurant is Ferns. So I'm sure we would figure it out there. >> Still going to be called Ferns.
>> All right. We're I know we have a lot of business to get to. Um this is an important topic. >> So the question >> one I wanted to see if there are any comments about Carile's participation in the study and then two we need to decide if we want to um as a select board uh
say that we're >> vote this letter of addestation or whatever. >> That was my question. >> So is there any comment about our participation in the study? Obviously, this is a complex issue that will um yeah, chief, >> just from the uh police standpoint, I
just want to make sure like that it's just not a basic feasibility study that comes back with generic facts and data like I want it really to be specific to Carile, >> right? >> And to also consider things like speaking to other chiefs that have entered, you know, regional dispatch centers and what whatnot, um you know,
they're now staffing the front of the station with civilian people, which is now an additional cost to the town. So >> inside of the study, I would like for those things to be considered as well. >> I'm not clear on that last point. >> So dispatchers also play a role in being
the front of the station. When somebody comes in, they meet and greet, >> right? Okay. But you wouldn't have that in >> dispatch centers that have gone regional and now hiring civilians. >> I see. >> To to staff that, which is also an additional cost, >> the untold cost of Yeah. >> But are there different That's a
question that came to my mind. Are there like we were talking about in a different context a superintendence union or in other times a police union where there's a precinct model where the communication center is still there physically is there but there's you know
shared labor I mean one of the big the tyranny of small you know numbers in any organization as the chiefs know very well is how do you staff for everything if you're very small right so there's a advantage to having a bigger footprint you can move some people around you can
send them up to Carlile but there would still be like a precinct dispatch is that at all a consideration or this is a pure consolidation >> typically >> sorry was that to me or >> well it's really to Stephen I guess >> G did you want to add a further comment that >> no I was just going to say uh you know
in regards to study like looking at a house model if you're entertaining it also understanding what the district model brings to the table as well and getting the whole picture >> and I think there's variety of solutions that PAPs have embraced throughout the commonwealth. >> There are other issues. >> There's examples of both,
>> right? >> There's capital concerns there too, but I'm sure the study will >> Sure. Yeah, of course. >> So, as a select board, I mean, >> data is more data is always better. You know what I mean? >> Yeah. I mean, I don't object to participating in a study. I I the chief's point, I want to make sure that
Carile has the appropriate representation and the output of that study is >> well, yeah. To the chief's >> that's for us to manage. >> Yeah. I mean there's two comp maybe more than two but there's certainly two components. There's what's feasible, right? Given our different natures and on call versus professional fire, blah
blah blah. And then what money would it save if you first have to see what's feasible? Like is it even feasible? And if it's feasible, what economic and other advantages that Stephen identified can acrue from that, right? >> So I'm sure why not study.
>> We talked about the it's not just about the economic impact, it's about service level and so forth. But we have very good services now. So, >> and getting back to our goals, looking at shared services is one of our goals and this is one of the items that that we at least
>> should uh consider. Um what what do you is there a motion in the um >> there is >> Mr. Chair? Uh Chief Soros has >> Sorry, >> Chief Soros. Chief Chief Soros, >> one of the things that they will need to be looking at is exactly what you
brought up and that is we dispatch for fire very differently than anybody around us. It's one of the reasons we remain cal is because we do it differently. And so we wanted that to be part of what they look at is is preserving that. Mhm. >> Um I think the other thing to consider
and just be thinking about in terms of this is we have good people >> and you're going to want to keep them until something happens until until you made a decision. And that's a hard thing to do. And we need to be thinking about
that as well that we want to keep our good people and keep our dispatch center and not give them the idea that something's going to happen when we haven't made a decision. >> So that's going to be we need to be careful about that. >> Yep. I agree.
>> Um I mean again I think a study could could also reinforce a decision to to maintain the model we have. So I just want to be clear about that. I think this is really an opportunity to get some information um some outside thinking and that's you know
>> it's always good >> don't be afraid of data >> and we're not making any decision >> no no >> to move ahead >> no and our and I would say I would go even further to say our participation in the feasibility study doesn't necessarily indicate a predisposition to any particular outcome just an opportunity that's
>> but it informs >> there's nothing lost right it informs the landscape and both for them and us for the future. >> Would you like me to put this motion on the floor? >> If you would be willing. >> I move to approve joining a shared
services study for the communications department with the town of conquered. And is that an adequate um motion for for your um needs? >> It's for me. >> Describe it that way. Does that work? Okay. >> Second. >> Any further discussion or deliberation?
We'll do a roll call vote. Arnold, I >> Snell I. >> Stevens, I >> Triel I. Okay, >> thank you very much. >> Thank you for your time and consideration. Okay, >> great. And staying on the theme of public safety, we have the fire station
>> daily >> renovation project >> public safety >> presentation. So, just to I'm not going to I know they have a a full presentation um prepared to go over all the kind of
key points and timelines, but just to just to set the context really what we're what's being asked to the select board tonight is kind of a is essentially a a go no-go on uh the bidding process. So to bring this
potentially to town meeting, the bidding process, the bids need to go out Wednesday of next week and the the committee is looking for uh any um stop lightss or red lights that the select board would say don't do
that. Um so just to just to set the expectations of what we're discussing tonight, I think we would we would take a position on any Warren article if we do proceed um once we have the actual bid numbers in. But with that, I'll turn it over to the committee if you could just introduce
yourselves. >> Can I start start with a just call to order and and >> please? Oh, you're okay. You're doing a joint meeting. Okay. >> So, we have enough we have a quorum. Um, so calling the to order a meeting of the fire station building renovation committee at 1955 which is participating in a joint meeting with the select board. We have members present by roll
callis. Dave >> uh present. >> I'm not. David >> David >> Ish >> hi >> Jerry >> hi >> Suzanne >> here >> and Greg >> hi
>> non voting members Ryan >> and the chief >> here >> so with that um thanks everyone for joining good evening uh the committee's here along with the town's architect Tecton and owners project manager CMS to
provide the select board with an update on our progress to date key aspects of the design and the current project estimated cost. At the end of this discussion, we'll hear information from the committee, the architect, and the OPM after which we will specifically be looking for, and Scott's already mentioned this, and we need to hear
this, the select board's concurrence or not on continuing forward to the conclusion phase two, which will provide the basis for the appropriation request that we would use at the May town meeting. The committees picked up the work um at the conceptual design phase and its associated estimate that was
completed last October and was presented to the select board on the October 14th. The committee was constituted after that. We were provided a charge um by the select board to finalize that design and we were given some very specific guideline which guidelines which are on the screen and you'll remember what they
were. Um we have done this we have taken it to um the design through the design development phase. We're now uh at the point of developing construction drawings suitable for going off the bid and um we would uh at the
end of this meeting and and at the end of this discussion uh look forward to hearing your concurrence on continuing. So at this point I'd like to turn the presentation over to Matt from Tecton the architect and uh we'll take it from there.
>> Thank you. Good evening everybody. >> Happy to be here. Welcome back. Hi. >> We skipped the whole cold part of the year. We got right back to when it was warm again. So, >> it's good stuff. Um, I do I I may need some juice at some point. Just >> Okay. >> Just letting everybody know that. Um, so
we're going to start out a little bit with the with the project schedule. And this is just a brief overview. Um, there's two slides here. I'm just going to breeze through some of this stuff. But um I I I think the the the goal is since November 24th when we received the notes to proceed to move into the
production of this project and working with the committee, a lot of work has gone on in an extremely short amount of time. And so you can see here uh from January 5th when we kicked off the building committee meeting uh we moved right into development of the schematic design package. Um within two weeks we
were into design development uh at starting our estimate uh for that phase on January 16th. uh in between the the the establishment of that cost estimate, we were meeting regularly with the fire department, the building committee and members of the building committee
independently to make sure that we were making that we were really putting together a robust package that we were meeting all the needs of the fire department uh and that we were detailing a project that was within the vision and goals given to the the uh the building committee themselves. So this is this is
a whole bunch of meetings just over the course of of January and February and then we've continued that on into March uh as well. And so here we are on March 10th with an anticipation of bid documents being issued uh next Wednesday to biders. Um and then we will follow
with the uh the bidding scheduled here up to uh town meeting and I will >> end this presentation with a with a snapshot of what the next few weeks look like as well. Um, in concurrence with this, uh, I wanted to give the board an update on the
status of the permitting efforts because there are there are several. Um, in addition to meeting with the, uh, the the, um, department head group uh, uh, regularly to to update them on the project. We've also met with the board of health as early as January 14th to
approve the design flow for the new septic system. and we have a meeting with them tomorrow night in which we are hoping to have a design approval on that septic system. So, we are seeking that approval tomorrow night. We also had a a hearing with the planning board uh last night um as as as one can imagine as
we're rapidly producing a project at this speed that uh there could be some hiccups and some some information missing. So, we had some additional information that needed to be provided to them. uh we were continued to a special meeting on March 30th in which that material will be provided and we
are hoping that we can either seek an approval at that or um if not at their next regularly scheduled hearing on April 13th. Uh, additionally, the conservation commission. Um, so we've been working with them. Uh, one of the bigger
challenges with the conservation commission thus far is has been having them conduct what's called the confir uh a delineation confirmation. So, they need to go out there with our wetland scientist augur areas around where we delineated the wetlands last year to
confirm that that is in fact where the line should stand. So, they need to do their own confirmation on that. can't do that when the ground's frozen or covered in snow. So, we filed an ANRAD early in uh February, which was sort of a a a pre-submission
ahead of the notice of intent to get them on board to request a waiver because uh it's it's town policy that they do not do that confirmation during the the winter months. Um but said that they would be open to a waiver on that. And so, we we filed an ANRAD to to start
and initiate that process. Then, we got two feet of snow. Um anyway, the ground is thawed and and and the snow was melting. So, we're hoping that maybe next week that we'd be able to get out and get that underway. In addition to that, uh concurrently with that, we filed our notice of intent with them.
Our first hearing was on February 26th. We will continue to to March 12th, obviously, until we have that confirmation. They can't close the hearing. Um but no major concerns were noted. Uh we are awaiting peer review comments. Um and again, awaiting for the snow to cross the toilet so we can do
that. What's in red? >> Um on the actual term of the um >> what is it? >> Um >> approval not required but something >> it's yeah it's a I can follow up with
>> a wavering. Yeah, >> but there's one question that I have which is >> don't they themselves are in the middle of whether the wetlands is 150 ft or there's some other thing going on with them about where you delineate wetlands, right?
>> Well, that you mean the the potential wetlands bylaw. >> That that would be at fall town meetings. >> That would not undo this. Whatever they decide now is grandfathered in. It would be if >> we can only Yeah, we can only be
permitted through an approval process on what's currently on the books for Right. So, they couldn't come back later and say, "Oh, we changed our mind." >> No, >> it's more that is there something that could come up that you haven't, you know, if the the wetland is closer to the station that's still a variable.
>> You need to know that this they need the spring thought to figure that out. >> Yeah. as it's designed now and as we've as the design team and our wetland scientists have delineated the wetland, we are in compliance with the regulations within town. Uh but it's a matter of confirmation of where those extends. >> Stands for abbreviated notice of
resource area delineation. >> There you go. >> Chris didn't remember that >> just rolls off the tongue. >> Okay. Um so last uh late last year we presented an initial design and initial budget to this board. Um, so just to
refresh everybody's memory, what we had looked at was a was a uh two sort of additions to the north of the fire station to the left was a a series of the new apparatus bays and and to the side of that and above it we were building the new living and work spaces
and in and decontamination spaces. Uh, one of the challenges we had outlined at that meeting was that because we're building over the apparatus tanks, the building was is very tall. um that'll come into play further on in the presentation. And then an outuilding um off to the uh to the west. Um and then
trying to maintain the developable area of the site sort of between the new addition and the existing radio tower. Um, after that presentation, after that design, after we had received some more investigatory information and after the
chief and I reviewed the site in more detail, he actually went out there and walked it, wheeled off where the dimensions are, and started to plan how his vehicles were going to start to maneuver around the site. We realized very quickly that this plan was not going to be the most practical uh
implementation for the project. Um, and so between November and December, we worked together to develop an alternative plan, which is which is what we've been developing over the past couple of months. And and just as a reminder, this was this was what the addition had looked like. Um, sort of a a lobby entry off to
the bottom right. This facing town hall and uh and then sort of an insulated metal panel um volume up above that with some ribbon windows and then a uh a ground face block. um stair tower in the back. So, this is sort of the
architectural aesthetic of that time. So, now for the current design. Um I'm gonna we're gonna have a lot of conversation, so I'm going to try to keep as much of this brief as I can. So, this is the the latest site plan. Um as you can as you can see, sort of the
the square box down to the south of the site is is the existing building. Uh we are still developing the site to the north of the existing building for the addition, but we are now more or less on a level um twotory addition. So we've brought the entire scale of the building
down a little bit. Um the the sort of leg to the right that of of what you might call the L, those are the new apparatus bays. So those are flanking the side of the station. And then off to the left are if you can see my cursor, there we go. Over here are the new live
and work uh areas. Our building is still off to the side here where it was originally shown. Um the radio tower is here. Uh and now we're developing the site to circulate around the radio tower as well as an outcropping of ledge that's there. Um
which is providing better circulation flow for the fire department. Uh safer circulation flow for the for the fire apparatus vehicles. provided opportunities for additional parking that weren't able that weren't realized in the initial design. Um, and this also works with the complex network of
utilities that that are going to be crisscrossing this this site that just we needed to develop more site in order to put all the things in the ground. Um, >> the kind of light gray boxes are the additional parking. >> Yes.
>> Two, one on each side of the existing building and then one in the back. >> These right here? >> Yeah. These are designating the the sort of heavy duty apron uh uh for the the vehicle. So there's a there's a reinforced crosssection of the ground there. >> Um so the parking there's a couple of
there's some parking spaces by the out building over here. >> Um these are we're formalizing where they are existing currently. Yeah, >> we're reconfiguring the retaining wall that's here that to grab a few extra parking spaces >> and then we have a whole series of them sort of around the back
>> with a few handicap spaces here >> next to what is now the new um public entry. So, the building sort of flipped. The entry is no longer facing town hall. It's now facing the west. >> Is that increased or decreased for parking or remain the same >> from existing >> from No, from your from the previous
scheme is an increase in parking. >> Yeah. >> And the um I'm not fully up on my wetland delineation, but I know that when in the conceptual design, we were constrained by the radio tower. We were trying to So, in this version, obviously, there's
more development behind the radio tower. >> Correct. Okay. >> Yeah, that seems to be feasible within the wetland delineation. >> It is. So, you can see the the line of the edge of wetlands here. Um, right now on the books, it's a it's a 25 foot
setback to an area of of disturb uh non-disturbance. And so we're we're we're complying with that setback. We're also improving the storm water management on site. Right now all the storm water essentially sheet flows into the wetland. We're capturing, treating,
and and discharging that back into the groundwater. The So there's underneath the paving there's a number of large chambers that are going to be going underground to capture all that storm water and allow it to slowly discharge. And then any overflow of that would be would be treated within the system. and
then and then discharged uh here and then back out to the wetland where the flows would be controlled and slowed so there wouldn't be any erosion and the water that would be discharging back into the wetland would be treated and cleaned versus just sheet flowing off of
the paving as it currently does. >> And is that well you'll get to it but is this structure similar square footage just reconfigured? >> Uh it's a couple hundred square feet smaller than the original design. Um the building is about 12 ft shorter overall.
Um it was a more we were able to provide a more efficient layout and within that reduction of square footage actually get the fire department more program space that we had cut previously. So we were able to to add in a little bit more living space, a little bit more more um
room. Everything's not as sort of crammed as it was in the previous design. So on the floor plans themselves. Um so this is that uh the new lobby off to the west. Um we have got our elevator and elevator machine room um and a
public restroom. Moving into the administrative portion of the building. Uh to the left is the chief's admin with a transaction window to receive anybody that does come into the lobby seeking service or or there for a training or something like that. uh chief's office, deputy chief's
office, and then we have a shared fire prevention EMS office. This is a fairly similar arrangement to the previous design. And then our stair upstairs, this back stair here is an egress stair, but is also a combined training stair. Um so it's designed a little bit differently on its interior. It has
operable doors up on the upper levels as well as a tieoff rail on the roof so that a fire fire department can bring the ladder truck over or put a ladder up against the building and do rescue training off of that as well as is training off of the roof so they can simulate real life scenarios within
their existing facility. Now, right in the middle of the building is their fitness uh fitness room. >> This is first floor, correct? >> This is all on the ground floor. Um and then we have our new apparatus bays here. So there's two double deep apparatus bays serving that. Um as well
as uh EMS supply room, EMS drug storage and the report writing space. Between the existing apparatus space, the new and the rest of the station is the turnout gear locker room. So this is accessed from the outside by call firefighters coming into the scene and
sort of acts as the hub of distribution for firefighters out to the trucks for whenever they need to to get to a call. Next to that is a mechanical room and then a fire gear storage room south of the plan. These are some of the existing spaces. Um, so the existing
apparatus bay is it's labeled as outdoor equipment, but this is a combination of outdoor equipment like lawnmowers and snowblowers, but also a work room for for doing any uh repairs and servicing of of any of the firematic equipment or trucks. Um, and as additional storage,
we've repurposed the locker room space into the new decontamination space. We've left as many of the plumbing fixtures and things like that as we can to to limit slab removal and and rework of any utilities. Um, and then the
existing kitchen area has been subdivided to provide a room for the SCDA compressor and air packs and air bottles and face masks as well as expand the electrical room and provide them the emergency electric room. So, we tried to keep all those as close to that side of
the building because that's where the transformer and generator is is ultimately going to go. >> Similar concept to what was in the conceptual design. >> Similar concept, but um we we've actually paired back the renovation a little bit more and this tried to reuse as much of the existing utilities as we
could. >> You know, on that note, I do have a question and this is not just for Matt, but it could be for anybody on the committee or for the chief. I mean, talk to us about where you have economized. I'm getting I have had a couple of pings just in the last week from our various
neighbors saying this sounds like a lot. This is all very deluxe and you know while you know it's it's a nice step up. It's where we need to be from the current fire station. Where have we made the choice the deliberate choice to say we need to economize?
>> A list of several things. One of them we have no conference room. I think most people would choose to do that. There a number of places where um instead of making changes we reused the space as as economically as we could um you know without tearing up floors and all that.
So we tried to leave our district our old building as as unchanged as possible. Um we also reduced a lot of cubic foot space. So not necessarily square foot but cubic foot by moving from three a threetory building in
height to twotory building in height. So those are some some basic things. I think everywhere we've been through I think Matt will concur that we have always looked at how we can economize when we've looked at any of these
changes. >> You go through some of the value engineering >> work that the the committee has done. >> That's covered at the end. >> Yeah. No, there's there's been a lot of value engineering under undertaken by the committee over the past few months, but I think even before that, uh we were
looking uh conceptually uh with this board last year at a much larger program. You know, we were we were we were looking at the the original recommendation of all the space that the fire department was looking to to produce um in this facility was was another 10,000 square feet of space and
that had all been removed prior to this uh phase of the project. And I would add we we did put a call out for community comments and I think we got one >> we have multiple >> two comments. >> Yeah, we had multiple and then I had
someone call me. Okay. Just a so yeah I just you know point taken. They're concerned about costs. We are >> so up on the second floor. Um so as we had noted minimizing the the the rework
of the existing building. So essentially we're not reconfiguring any of the spaces uh planned south here. We are adding a storage mezzanine because we're infilling some space down below. It's very cost effective to just put a simple floor over that and use it for additional storage. The only other thing
we're doing on the second floor is putting some frosted film over the front door so it doesn't look like a front door anymore. >> Um, as for the rest of the second floor, it's really just this box here. So, as you come up the elevator from the public, um, or or the the the back
training stair. This is the the training room. Um, it's got a this is the building IT closet. We've got a furniture storage space, a sublectric room here. um five bunk rooms, so four four uh standard bunks and then an
officer's bunk. These double as uh hoteling workspace as well. So um this is one of the big big components of the recruitment and retention requirements uh that we had gone through uh last year. making sure that the the department can can recruit from a wider
radius, give some amenity space to those folks so that they're able to be in the station rather than taking 20 minutes to respond to the station before then getting on a on a truck and responding to a call for service. Um, we've got a housekeeping space here. So, this is sort of janitorial and
laundry services uh for the building. Um, we've got three restroom showers. uh one is uh is publicly addressed for the training room um and the other two are are dedicated just for firefighters. Um we and then we've got our living quarters here with a with a day room
area um which also doubles as a secondary training space um and then a kitchen and dining space for the department. Um this is a rendering from the west elevation of what it could look like. Um so this is the existing building to the
right. Um our new addition is off to the back. Uh we're using a combination of split face and ground face block cladding for the exterior. I know uh last year we had shown insulated metal panels when we were going through our cost exercises. That was substantially
more expensive than if we were to do it out of masonry. Um and so one of the value engineering items that we that we had worked through with the committee was reducing the insulated metal panel down. Um and then using masonry which is inherently a more durable robust
material and reduce cost significantly. Um, and then off to the left you see the pre-engineered metal building which is which is using a cost-effective construction method um that wouldn't be suitable for for the main fire station per se as as a as a long-term solution
um but provides cost effective overflow for for some of the smaller vehicles and storage and things like that. >> This replaces the tents. >> That's right. >> And you got that all up on the same level, too. >> Yes. Yeah. So it's all at the same grade.
>> Yeah. >> The sistern is that >> the sistern. So the sist um >> so the sistern is actually underneath the outuilding. >> Yeah. >> So yeah. So the out building is structured over top of the sistns. There's two 20,000gallon systems underneath that. And then there's also a
fire pump assembly that actually takes up a large portion of of the out building. And we'll get into that as we get into the details of the budget. Uh and then this is the view around towards town hall. Um, so, uh, the apparatus bay itself, uh, we're
providing a little bit more contrast with with a lighter colored, uh, split face and and ground face block. A lot of the building carries through this existing pre-cast band and wraps that around. Um, and then the gray block infills between the two to separate those masses and provide a little bit of
contrast. And then you can see on the left here, this is the old ambulance bay that we're infilling. Uh, and then where we're redoing the um the retaining wall that now comes across like this, >> we're cutting that back because we no
longer need to provide that access up to the existing entry. Um, and so we can use that to take advantage of additional parking spaces. >> Just go back for a second. >> Yep. >> And then just I'm I'm seeing that little thing in the to the left of the tower.
That's the to let in the natural light. I know there's some discussion in the meeting I attended. >> I'm glad you brought that up, Scott. Yeah. So, one of the disadvantages of having the addition built right up against the existing building is that we end up with an entire facade with no windows.
>> And two of the the spaces that are that are directly in that section of the building is the training room and the day room, the living area. So, there is some windows off to the west of the training room and then there is a window here into the dining room. But in order
to bring more natural light in, we did put a monitor roof up that spans between those two spaces to bring some natural daylight down below. And then in the day room, we also did add a couple of windows down into the apparatus space. So from that living area, there's windows into both apparatus space. So
they have a good situational awareness for anybody that's up there to anybody that's working down on the trucks or down on the fire floor. So the project budget, this is what we had presented last October uh to the board. Um we were looking at um at the
time uh 13.6 million for uh construction costs. Um we were suggesting uh construction contingency contingency of $680,000. Soft costs in the budget were running around $2.4 $4 million
and we had another $120,000 of additional contingency for project development costs on top of that 2.4 million. Um with a total projected project cost between 16.75 and 17.2 million. Um so I'll go through the the current uh
project costs. Um so we're running a little bit higher. Um so the hard cost the all-in for construction is based on our design development estimate uh with a number of value engineering options uh is running at 15.15
million. Um with that we would suggest a construction contingency of $757,000. Our soft costs are uh $1.5 million. Um, some of that is is it has it's gone down since last October
because some of those services have already been appropriated and spent. Um, and then a soft cost contingency remain the same with a total projected project cost of 17.5 million. >> Something you can identify that is the
bulk of that or is it just all little components? Oh, you're >> we'll get to that. A little bit of both. So, I I do want to note that that 17.5 is is a couple hundred,000 above the number that we had presented in October, but I do want to note that this budget does not include the 1.4 million from
the last appropriations. And that's the that's the true delta. >> Uh you have to add 1.4 projected cost >> for the for the for the total total project cost of of all monies. >> That would been previously approved the design. >> Oh,
>> right. Also for context, this is B this is the internal cost estimate. This is not >> the the bid number. Correct. So we have not bid this project. The bid number is what we would take to town meeting. Right. >> And and currently the market is very favorable to municipalities bidding projects right now. >> What does that mean favorable?
>> Tell them. >> So we have we in order to uh qualify for bidding on a project in the Commonwealth over 10 million in value, you have to go through a pre-qualification process. We're just concluding that process. Um,
on our project, we had over 150 contractors express an interest to submit a bid on our project. There were 18 general contractors and 131 filed submitters in various categories of work. Um, throughout the project, that
is an extraordinary high >> looking for work. >> Everybody is looking for work. We're seeing very aggressive bid pricing in the market. >> Yeah. >> Um to have 18 general contractors interested in pursuing the work. Now, we
can't guarantee that all 18 will submit bids, >> but that creates a very aggressive atmosphere to be a successful low bidder. So, I think it bodess very well for the town that >> and when they they bid, they bid a fixed
price. They have contingency. That's correct. >> So just let me understand >> in in contrast we're going through the same process in another community right now. They had five general contractors >> slightly larger job $30 million job but
was >> big difference >> the 1.4 we already aortioned to do the >> CDs or for these >> you're saying the total cost half but that's done that's a sum cost. This is
the total go forward cost >> the go forward. So the allin cost is 189 >> based on 19. >> Okay. Y >> and and your guidelines >> contingency looks like in the >> So you have certain percentage
guidelines on construction contingency. >> It's the same percentage Dave on both models. It's 5% right >> construction cost and 5% of soft cost. >> But the other the 119 what's that last contingency? That's the That's the 5% of the 1.5 million.
>> Okay. So, it's the same 5%. Okay. >> Okay. But the biders would be bidding on the the hard cost plus the first two >> just the hard cost. The contingency is what the owner would keep >> as reserve funding for unforeseen conditions. >> Don't they also bid that? No.
>> No. The contingency is is like so if you do a kitchen renovation of your house, >> carry 10 15%. Yeah. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Um, so I just wanted to sort of um break down some of those costs. Um, so the new
addition um was running at 8.3 million. The the renovation was uh $800,000 of work. Um, and the outbuilding was $890,000. Um, in that we also have a $20,000 line item for hazmat. Um, we did do a
hazardous materials uh observation. That report is coming due. Uh but there was some asbesus containing materials within the building that are impacted by our work. Um and then 2.3 million in site development. So then all that net construction gets
marked up. Um these are the typical line items. The general contractor will mark up the project. Um at the point in which we had did the estimate, there was an additional 5% in design and pricing contingency. That's saying the estimator took off our drawings and they weren't done. And so they put a contingency in
because they need to sort of make up for the difference of things that haven't yet been developed at the time of the estimate. Um escalation is prices continue to increase over time and so we need to carry an allowance for that. Um general conditions and general requirements that's the the needs of the
contractor to do the work. So that's that's the requirements within the contract that they need to adhere to. Temporary facilities, project management, oversight, scheduling, those sort of things. um bonds and insurance. Um they have to bond the project. They have to have insurance. And then overhead and fee is
is effectively the general contractor's profit. That's what constitutes a total construction cost of 15,729,000. And I'll get into why that's different than the number you saw prior to this. >> Does this all take into account the uh
utilization of the fire department while this is being undertaken? >> Yeah. So phasing is part of the construction plan. without having to >> relocate any of the services. >> Yes. >> Yeah. It will not be easy for them or
the contractor. Um but so so for for example in this one uh on a larger project where we might have a clean site where there's nobody occupying it, that general conditions number may be a would like to be a lower percentage. It's a higher percentage on this project because we anticipate a longer duration
schedule than typically required. >> And are you going to get to that or what is the duration? What is the length of >> 15 months is what we're anticipating. >> 15 months. >> There's no new well. It's just the septic. >> There is a new well. >> There is a new well.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Right now, right now the well is uh the existing well isn't producing quality water. It has a good flow rate, doesn't produce quality water, and it would be within the setbacks of our new septic system. So, we need to replace
that. Um, this is a summary of major deviations between the conceptual estimate that we presented to you last year and the current estimate. So, I wanted to go over some of the big large item deltas to sort of tell you the story of why the budget has increased. One, the outuilding has increased in
size from the initial study by 640 square feet. Um, the reason being the site constraints were so tight that we were hoping at one time when we were developing this that the fire pump could be constructed outside of the out
building and and structured separately from it. Because the site is so tight, we don't have anywhere else to put it. Has to go inside the out building. and the chief needed every square foot of that program area to do what he needed to do based on the MRI report last year um and their operations. Um so we needed
to increase the size of that out building in order to do so. That's sort of a fixed module to do it. Um and and that's that's sort of like the next the next size up effectively what we're looking to do. >> You get some economies there because you're not doing two separate heating two separate structures.
>> That's correct. Yeah. Instead of doing three buildings as part of this project, we'd only be doing two. I would note the increased pro the projected delta in cost of $360,000. That's based on the estimated cost per square foot. We're not adding new systems to that building
by making it bigger. So realistically, that's a high conservative ceiling for what that increase would be >> because you had it was what 560? It was only $100 less than the new addition for the the out building. So >> yeah, >> maybe that's high. the the other
bitters. >> Yeah. Well, the other part of that is the next piece which is uh deep foundations. So, we were we were trying to get it in a way where we were utilizing site fill to sort of bring up the area of the site around the outbuilding so that we didn't have to do
deep foundations. It wasn't feasible or practical as we got into the details of it. So, we need 12 foot deep foundations in order to bring that up to the right grade. Um and so that work that's required to do so um has has an increased cost over what was carried in
the initial conceptual designate the systems under >> and to accommodate like now we're putting the systems underneath that as well. We couldn't structure them elsewhere on site because there's just not enough room >> and there's currently no fire suppression system in the fire station. Correct. >> That's correct.
>> This is required to bring it one way or the other. >> Establish children go back. That's right. >> Um the the the site north of the radio tower has ledge. Chief can attest to when they put the radio tower in, they had to do some
blasting. So we did have to carry we did have to carry some some additional costs in there for um taking out ledge in order to do the site development that we need to do. So >> and they were doing some testing there recently, right? Is that >> we're trying to quantify exactly how much that is. >> So that's still a bit of an unknown.
Yeah, right now in the in the budget we're carrying sort of >> the worst >> typically you take two feet down is top soil from undisturbed land like that and we're taking from that two feet down to bottom of excavation as all ledge. Um based on the initial observations by our
uh geotechnical engineer, it didn't seem that the ledge was as invasive as we thought it would be. So we're hoping that comes down as well. Um they were also hindered by snow and equipment and um they they've since been back out and I'm just waiting on a report on that.
>> And you you need all that information prior to putting it out to bid. Correct. >> We we don't because we're we're carrying the ceiling in the contract. It only helps the budget is we can refine that. But the way we're structuring that line item is through what's called a unit cost. So, basically, we put a scope
together and say, uh, the contractor needs to take out one cubic yard of of rock, and they're going to submit with their bid, this is how much it costs for me to to rock hammer out that one cubic yard of rock. >> And then we're going to tell them in
their price to carry 150 cubic yards of rock. And that gets rolled into their bid. If they only encounter 50 cubic yards, we get a credit back for the Delta. No negotiation on it. It's just they they submit the price and it is what it is.
>> When we go to meeting, we have to sort of factor all that. >> You want to be low on that number. >> You don't want a lot of people >> or or it can come out of contingency. I guess more >> but will you have a pretty good sense of the ledge coming out of these tests?
>> Yes. >> Um so electrical and HBAC were both high numbers uh from conceptual design. And I'll and I'll I'll note that that two things happened there. one, when we do these conceptual design estimates that are based on a couple of
plans and a brief narrative, right? There's not a lot of detail for the estimator to go off. So some of these major lines, they're using their best guess at saying over these 30 fire stations of all these different scales, it costs about this much per square foot
to do electrical system. This estimate was then based on us going through detailed meetings with the chief and his in his department, engineering that system and coordinating that around all of the other site constraints in and out of the existing building and on site. Um
the system sizing, the distribution of of all the cabling and things like that. Um security system that that is in in the design now. You know, all of those components equal the net increase in the electrical system of 420,000.
Um on the HVAC side um similarly we were trying to keep a very bare bones very simplified HVAC system in it when we got into you know the intricacies of of the code in which you're you're you're under for the optimal stretch code what the
what the fire department needs for their operations and how those systems all integrate and come together. It was more complicated than what was able to be taken off at conceptual design. And so again, when those systems were engineered and detailed and fully taken
off, it was more expensive then or now than it was when we had made some assumptions back then. Um, one thing that we did put into the project, and this is a resiliency piece for the fire department, um, the new apparatus bay will utilize a radiant heated slab. Um,
this is sort of the best option for a fire department to heat an apparatus bay, uh, for two reasons. one, uh, a radiant slab dries the floor out faster. And so when those trucks are coming in and out for multiple calls for service on the same day and they're coming back in the winter with snow and ice on them,
and that melts down on the floor, it could get slippery and it could get dangerous. And so that helps dry that out. It also helps thaw out the trucks a lot faster. And you know from the MRI study, you know how much the fire department relies on pipe and hose to
deliver service to a structure fire because they're drafting long distances in lots of water. So if they go out for a structure fire call in the morning, come back to the station that's 20° out. If we can't warm that equipment up and thaw it out quickly and and adequately
and another structure fire call comes in, they're dead in the water and and aren't able to respond adequately and effectively. So, so it allows all that all those all those systems to sort of reheat themselves, warm up and and be ready for the next call, for the next response. So, in order to do that, uh,
heat pumps, electric heat pumps, which this whole building is structured around an electric heat pump heating system, they don't work great when it's 10 degrees out or negative 10 degrees out like we experienced this winter. And so, we did put in a backup gas fired boiler
to supplement that one system, which is allowable under the optin stretch code. U, we did review this with uh, Sarah Wasserman in detail. The caveat with it is is when you introduce gas into the building under the code that you need to provide a prescriptive amount of solar
PV on the roof on day one. And so we have an additional we have a 30 kilowatt uh uh hour rooftop solar PV system that is now part of the bid package and it's in the project. So these were some of the bigger lines.
There is certainly more detail within the estimates. Any questions on this? This is sort of a big piece of the puzzle. >> Can I just quickly ask or summarize? So the things that you still aside from the cost which we've estimated, but things that you don't know for sure are the
septic system, board of health, you're going to have to get you're going to have to have the planning board sign off this and you have to have the conservation commission. If those things were to change the wetland boundaries, that would be an impact to this. You have the ledge and the ledge is just for
the building or is it also for under the the um septic the new or >> we've only encountered we so we've done a geotechnical assessment of the whole site and the only ledge that was that was encountered is north of the radio tower. So it only really affects that portion of the new apparatus bay and
dry. >> You did geop fro or some something >> they went back there with back hose and dug cuspits. >> Right. And then you have a well. So the well could if you don't find water you could have to relocate that. >> You could but it wouldn't be a
substantial cost in terms of the overall project budget >> as long as there's a place for it. >> Yeah. >> Just trying I'm asking because I just want to understand all the things because a lot of things can happen in construction project. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Anything else?
>> I also Yeah. I I had a question on why did the Okay. I my mind wasn't drawing the connection between backup gas boiler. Got it. Why does that drive the need for solar? Is that what I heard? It was kind of broke up a little bit when you were talking through that part. >> Because when we introduce when we introduce gas into the project under the
opt-in stretch code, it requires a offset of a prescriptive amount of solar PV on the roof on day one. >> And what is the OP? Can you remind us what the stretch >> code is? The it's the code. It's a building code that
was adopted at town meeting uh in the fall of 2023. >> So that's a building code that that applies and if you're putting natural gas in new construction, that's the way that building code handles that.
>> So the half a million bucks >> for using that >> is the half a million bucks of the last two line items. an insurance policy that if it's really cold and you have multiple events in a day, you can do multiple events. >> Yes. >> And there's an offsetting insurance policy, you just call a different fire
department. I mean, it's a lot of money for a, you know, less frequent fire department. >> We don't have it today, right? You don't have that capacity today. What happens when >> Well, we have gas here.
>> Yeah. So you are able to get through that. >> Yeah, we heat it up. And and so that's one >> one thing about the heat pump is we don't heat it much unless it's really cold out. The colder it is outside, the warmer it needs to be inside. When you leave the station, you need to be warm enough that you can get there and set up
without it freezing. And so unfortunately that's the opposite of what heat pumps do well. >> Yeah. >> And so this is a way to to take care of that. The other thing that that the backup boiler does is reduces because you need a generator to back up on a
fire station anything you have that's working uh that greatly increases the size of that generator. So in terms of the costs, you know, Peter or Paul, which do you want to pay? And this just seemed like the best. >> If you went with the system, the method
you have now, the n natural gas, it wouldn't be green. It wouldn't stretch. it well it wouldn't be yeah it wouldn't fit the the building code and it can't build that anymore >> and it also >> the efficiency isn't what the gas heaters we have now are not efficient at all
>> but the this one would be but >> no >> but it means that so for instance whenever it's on generator power >> the heat pump just doesn't doesn't run it runs to natural gas because obviously making using diesel to make electricity
would just be and to the chief's point we as part of this by just just by putting the backup and this backup boiler is only serving the radiant flooring. It's not serving any other part of the building. We're able to reduce the size of the generator by 100 kilowatt 100 KW. >> Another way of asking what you're asking
too is are there incentives through the state. I know we're getting a million dollars, but we've already allocated that to the bill. >> So, yeah, we've been working with Mass Saves and and Sarah uh Watson on that. And um and so yeah, when you have when
you bring gas into the building, it you are you are there was legislation passed last year that dis incentivizes you. So you aren't eligible for those massive rebates. There are other rebates that are available and we are working with her currently through Enrid and
Eversource on those. So that so >> they're not in here though. >> They're not in here. Right. That's right. >> And all rebates are not in here yet. And the the total value of the potential rebates that we lost was in the order of magnitude of of a couple tens of thousands of dollars. It was it was very small.
>> It was it was less than the cost savings of reducing the size of the diesel generator. >> Are are any of these components or any component not just those subject to tariffs as far as you know >> the only the only thing I have seen in the past year that has been hit by tariffs is structural steel.
>> What? >> That's a big one. >> Structural steel. Steel. And is that factored into the cost analysis >> that'll So the biders at the time that they bid the project will have to account for any tariff. >> Yeah. Nobody knows if 10 months from now
there's a 100% tariff put on everything. >> They'll slap that. >> They'll there'll be a change order and we'll have to figure that. >> So that will have to be contingently flat. And in then the other one which is a new one is the you know global cost of energy which is going up and up and
every energies and everything. So when you go to bid let's assuming you go to bid now they're going to what are they going to do with that? >> So they have to anticipate that and they have they have to honor it within their within their contract price. Um they >> there's no escalation clause to check
the 149 for fluctuations in energy cost or anything like that. They may bid higher and you made the point >> and they may not if they bid too high they may not get the >> No, I know. So >> competition is better than no competition, right? >> I mean it's a very difficult
you said like whenever the project you cited earlier went to bid and five people bid and now 18 people are bidding because gee nobody's b building. Well the ones who are going to go in are like it's a nerve-wracking time. So I if I were them I would not want to wrap money
around it. I mean if I lose I lose but I got to make sure that if I am selected I have enough content. So I guess I expect my line of questioning is along the lines of I think it's going to go north of the number we see. >> I bet you. >> So the point of bidding before town meeting is so we know that and then
there's another decision point once we know the number. >> Right. >> Y okay. Good point. >> But right now we're just speculating. So we need to get it out to >> Yeah. So, just a brief uh value engineering summary. So, here's a here's a series of items that the the building
committee has reviewed and approved and are incorporated into the bid documents. Um, again, as I noted, we had insulated metal panels and changed that to masonry and this was only in a couple of areas of the building that resulted in 150,000 in estimated savings. Uh, we had structured the building originally out
of uh out of out of loadbearing masonry. Uh it made a lot of sense early in the design but as we developed it further didn't seem to make a lot of sense. >> We did a good job. Let's keep I mean spent five minutes on they save us half a million. >> There's an important one in there though. It's the replacement of the existing roof move to alternate.
>> Yep. Yeah. So if we jump to that one. So one of the one of the items that we had considered which was actually not part of the conceptual design budget was a quarter of a million dollars for replacing the existing roof. It's about 20 years old. It's a builtup asphalt roof. Um, so we removed $230,000 out of
the budget by making that an alternate. So we'll get an independent price for that. I would note that since we had the estimate done in this that that did come back as as potential asbestous containing materials in felts and mastics under the existing roofing layer.
>> So we're working on seeing if we can do an encapsulation of that or if we have to abate it. But but ultimately we're going to be carrying that in the bid as hazardous containing materials in the roof. Uh, but it'll be a separate price outside of the base bid. >> But you're not going to have the old
roof. You're going to re-roof the old. >> Well, we are pricing it as an alternate as an old. >> How old is it? >> 20 years old. >> Plus, >> plus we're going to pay either Yeah. Either NFC is going to pay it later or we're going to pay it now.
>> Well, the ad the advantage of having it as an alternate is we can make an informed decision about that one specific item. >> Okay. Um, and there were various other small line item reductions. Um, I I put a note here. There were 30 over 30 major building systems that were reviewed in
in detail over three weeks of intense meetings, long meetings, making sure that we were right sizing every single line item within the estimate. So, when we get that estimate, it's a 50-page document of not just things that are nice to look at that get to a bottom
line. That's a tool that we use to evaluate every single building system to make sure that we were delivering the best value to the town of Carile. And I think the building committee and the fire department went through a very concerted effort making sure that we were doing so. >> And I sat in on the last three meetings
and it was bordering on painful at times, but they weren't going through about that. >> No, I expect them to do that. >> It's my favorite part of the job because I like spreadsheets and numbers. That's their job. >> Most people hate it. >> That's why we hired them because they do that. So, we did identify uh $577,000
in savings. That's in that first rollup number that we had shown and that's why that was different than my >> that's above and beyond the ones above. >> That's the summary. So 577 is >> ones above are 600 and something already. So >> I mean the previous slide >> that's all baked into that first number already.
>> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. Okay. >> You reuse lockers. Is that you eliminated the lockers? >> We reduced the number of lockers. just reduced. >> So we we we design the the estimate carried the total capacity of the locker room. We reduced it down to the number of lockers needed for current
membership. >> I think these we can probably unless anyone has any specific questions. >> Those those lockers, Travis, are they're a catalog item. >> Okay. >> Buy them right out of the state contract that >> if you had five of five new
firefighters, there's plenty of space and you could buy five more. >> Great. >> Next week. >> All right. So, >> so we have we broke up four separate alternates. They're pretty self-explanatory, but I can get into more detail on them if you if you like.
>> And is this the order that is that just >> the order of >> in which we have to take them? Correct. >> Okay. >> Um, so the walk-off system, so these are these are where you depress a slab and put a walk-off mat in that you can then take out and clean >> like the town hall.
>> Yeah. instead for as the base we're just going to put down walk-off carpeting which will still work. Um we removed some security cameras so we have an alternate in to add those back. Um and then we have an upgrade to the curbing. So base uh curbing around the site and this will get into the planning board
presentation later this month is a 4-in exposure granite curb with a slope top. It's a little bit lower cost and then an integrated um concrete curb at sidewalks. And then we have an upgrade to do six inch straight granite curbing like you do in the town center here,
>> which is very robust. >> Yeah, that's the most durable. >> The one that takes out your tires. >> The one that takes out your tires. >> Yeah. >> Uh and then number four is the roof. >> Yeah. >> Um this is a summary of the soft costs. I you know, we went through this last
year, so the effort of time change. >> Yeah. Very few changes here. Um and then again um the the the the summary here. So the 15729 as the as the total less 577 value engineering bringing the
revised construction estimate to 15.152 million uh with a $757,000 construction contingency. uh the 1.5 million in soft costs for a total uh future appropriation anticipated at 17.5
contingent on bid numbers. So the one number that would adjust will be the top number depending on the bids. >> That's right. But I mean they the biders are going to know all this too, right? They know this is your estimate of what they you think it should cost. >> Yeah. It'll be published with the bid.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. then time. >> Oh, sorry. >> Get into the There we go. >> Yeah. So, the so the the look ahead moving forward. So, uh we are finishing 100% construction documents this Friday.
Those are going out to biders on Wednesday. Filed sub bids are due. So, it's a two-step bidding process for chapter 149. So, filed sub bids, which are there's 15 trades that we've pre-qualified. 15. Um they will all be all those bids will be received on April
9th. General bids will be received on February, April 23rd. Um, and that'll give us a couple of weeks ahead of Springtown meeting to update the line. >> So, so the GC doesn't control the sub. You pick the sub. You pick >> the GC picks the subs. Pick them.
>> No, the GC is eligible to pick any of the subsid process. >> But does who gives the who's responsible for the $15 million? GC. So he >> you'll have the town will have one contract >> with the GC
will be responsible >> but he doesn't subbid you guys sub >> no >> he does sub >> he does >> but his bids are due okay and and so you've got at least two maybe three committee approvals to go right order of
health cons and plber and that's all after could be after these certainly the CD date right >> our our anticipation in our in our hope as we've been working through the project schedule is that we built in internal contingency within the schedule
to to extend some of these permitting hearings so that they run concurrently with the bid. So we have milestones within these bid deliverable dates >> where we're coordinating agenda and and sort of tracking any of those changes. So we'll be any changes they'll be
requesting we expect as many if not all of them will be incorporated into the big package of >> that's okay if they say well you know tweak this or tweet that what if they say no >> it just happened with a certain board I didn't want to mention then what >> we're not at Springtown meeting
>> what >> we're not a Springtown meeting with a warrant article >> okay >> right um >> all the boards have been pretty receptive they give you a no probably not something you can overcome. >> And then did you want to provide your
recommendations? >> So, Eric, you want >> Absolutely. So, um as you've heard, there's a lot of uh very collaborative work between the committee and the uh the architect and the OPM. Um at our last meeting, the fire station building
renovation committee voted unanimously to support going continue to go forward um with this to get the uh bids back to develop the the hard cost for possible warrant article and I believe
the architect has the same you can say. >> Oh yeah, absolutely recommend this. And yes, >> so I asked a question at the meeting like sanity check. We're we're moving rapidly because we we felt like this is from a timing standpoint, from a project standpoint, it's >> not going to get better.
>> It's not going to get better, but in light of where we are now, are we cutting any corners? Are we doing anything that's counterproductive? And they all responded that >> yeah, it doesn't appear that way. It looks very thorough. Um uh you mentioned 15 months of
construction or so if town meeting if we get the number town meeting approves it when does that clock start in 15 months >> once a contract is executed >> when is that after town meeting >> June or July >> June or July so let's say July so July
26 to the end of calendar 27th >> 60 days July one but yeah same same >> roughly the end 27. We're finishing up in the early winter, I guess, which is not terrible. Um,
>> I mean, the cutting I don't think there's any cutting corners. I think my biggest concern in them was not understanding the wetlands delineation and it's still possible that >> when the thaw comes, they find water and some fraud or something. >> Well, there was also just a concern of all the work that had to get done, the
design and all that time. So that's that is the biggest existential threat that >> that design actually can't be will not be approved because of some >> condition that we can't alter but >> it's not going to get better.
>> But you did you say that um the wetlands delineation should be completed before town meeting? >> Yes. Therefore, it will we'll know >> the I mean the delineation has been was completed last year. It's the confirmation by the conservation commission which
>> um they said as soon as as soon as the ground is thought and we can get in augur into the ground that they're willing to work with us to do so. And so our wetland scientists will meet them >> tomorrow. It could be tomorrow. they >> and and and they they they said that in in their experience as you know I don't
want to speak for for the um conservation commission agent that we've been working with or our wetland scientists but there there was some some concurrence that historically these lines don't change much when they go in augurate and this wetland has been delineated several times in in it over
its history and it has been pretty consistent on where it is. So, we're we're hopeful, but that doesn't mean that there's no >> right >> possibility that something may not come up. So, >> yeah. >> Okay. >> We need a motion.
>> Um, do we need a motion or do we just say >> I think we should. >> Okay. >> So, you did invite public feedback. >> Yep. >> Public feedback. Is >> there anybody on Ben? >> Ben is raising his hand. Yeah. Ben, go ahead. Ben, just say your name and
address, please. Yep. Ben Herder, 517 Bedford Road. Uh, can you hear hear me all? >> Yep. Yep. >> Okay. Uh, well, thanks for sharing the updates to the design. I wasn't able to attend the uh planning board meeting uh last night and uh apologies. I wasn't
able to submit public comment um by the due date. So, um I do have a couple questions and comments for you. So, hopefully I can just run through a few of those that'll hopefully provide some clarity on the design.
Um so I guess firstly um as you all know this is one of the main entrances into town center. Um and so uh and and adjacent to Rockland Road too which is a scenic road. And so I think it's just worth noting that this is, you know,
while an important project, it's also a great opportunity for the town uh to create a streetscape that is inviting and and approachable um and at scale and sensitive with the wooded residential context.
Um I haven't seen I hadn't seen any of the drawings since town meeting uh this past fall uh where we saw that rendered view um which was shared again tonight. Um, and I guess I'm wondering one, uh,
will additional drawings, design development drawings be shared with the public, uh, moving forward >> and, uh, I'll just keep going and then and then you can respond. Um, and then I guess one thing that I was noticing in
the site plan was that there are various items in the uh in the site plan that are kind of located in the front yard, if you will. the metal out building. Um, at least in the fall at Special Town
meeting, the plans that were shared there, there was a septic mound that was also at the end of Rockland Road that I assume would require a lot of tree clearing, which based on this plan right here, looks like that the location of where the septic mound was is all treed.
So, I don't know where the septic mound is going in this plan. Um, and then there's transformer generator pads with ballards, lots of pavement. So, I I I think it would just be helpful to understand uh from an elevation, a
streetscape elevation, uh what the town's getting. Um, and I guess lastly would be the question of whether or not um this landscape plan also includes
uh specific plantings for screening um uh and uh any notion of lighting, you know, is the lighting going to be specified as dark sky compliant or um minimal to be uh in context with the neighborhood.
>> Great. Those are my questions and comments. Thanks very much for hearing me out. >> Yeah, >> thank you, Ben. >> Great questions. Happy to address them. Um, so in terms of uh additional design documents and drawings being made available, have those been all updated onto the project? >> I don't believe so, but I also wanted to
comment that there's a plan to provide some additional outreach to town residents uh before town meeting. Um and so that's a that's a something that we start to engage in roughly now um to basically educate the the residents as
to where we are with the design. Um it hasn't started yet, but there is outreach plan in in terms of uh uh so there's another planning board meeting on the the 30th. So there'll be additional drawings as well as some of the ones you saw tonight. Um, I think a
streetscape elevation of what this looks like from the road is is a great idea and I'd be happy to provide that for that presentation. So, happy to do do so. I think this is this is more of a rendered architectural site plan. It's not fully indicative of the full landscape plan. Uh, and so at that
meeting, you'll you'll see a little bit more of a streetscape in and what that would would imply because there's there's a little bit more sort of softening of the edge at the at the street. Um, you know, a lot of the site development is sort of off to the back, so it'd be a bit out of your view once
we show that rendering. Um, the leeching field is going to be down here. It's already in an area that's been previously cleared, so we're not going to be really removing any trees in order to in order to install that. Um, and then and then with the landscape plan, you would that with all the
species that are being specified, that will all be shared uh at that planning board meeting as well. >> Lighting, he had a question about that. in lighting. Uh so there's minimal lighting. We're we're going to have a couple of decorative fixtures around the front entry. U more so less a uh sort of
a red globe so that you can identify this as a fire station from from from the street. Very traditional fixture. Uh we have I believe seven light fixture uh polemounted light fixtures around the parking area sort of around the site as well as a couple of building uh light
fixtures around entryways. uh they were all uh full cut off and dark sky compliant fixtures. So kind of was a question I had to we spent a reasonable amount of time down selecting some architectural views of
the first design and remember it was this color and treatment and now not like here it is right so >> it's a little blockier I understand why but did you yourselves did the building committee then do all that we that's why we're not doing all that
>> so so they reviewed it the so rapid development um right So we we we value engineered two weeks ago out the insulated metal panel vacum ball system and all that changed to the uh to the to the block walls. >> They saw that at the last meeting had
some comments. We revised that and I say last meeting as in yesterday >> but I mean >> we revised that. So we have we we have right now the scope we can play with the pallet. We can change some colors and things like that. >> I mean but it's the purview of the
>> RBC. Right. Right. >> Yeah. So that's fine. You guys are taking it. >> Yeah, >> they don't need us. >> They don't need us. Okay, great. That's fine. >> Christine Christina >> Christina has a comment. We'll start with Christina. >> Excuse me. Hi. Thank you. Christina
Christill Road and I'm also the co-chair of the environmental sustainability committee. Um, I just since there is some discussion about landscaping, I just wanted to uh make everyone aware that there is a municipal landscaping native
plant policy um for municipal um properties um which requires 70% straight native species, 20% uh a maximum of 20% um cultivars of native species and a maximum of 10% uh
non-invasive ornamentals. And so just wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of that. So that's it. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Christina. >> Additional comment. >> Does the select board want to
>> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. I can't >> Bob Zag. >> Yes. Hi, Bob Zog of 923 North Road. Um could you just clarify a bit more about the heat pump system envisioned? Um if I
understood correctly, the radiant floor heating is only in the new bay or is that also uh in the old bay? Um sounds like it's just the new bay. And would that radiant floor heating system
actually be supplied by a a heat pump? >> That's correct. So, it' be an air to water heat pump for the radiant floor heating system and then air source heat pumps for the rest of the station. >> Um,
>> yes, that's correct. Yeah. >> Okay. Well, I I'm not an expert on fire station design by any means, but my I guess um radiant floor heating is pretty expensive. We don't have it in the old
bay. we're not going to have it in the old existing bay. Um, so we have to have a a way to deal with thawing the trucks without it. Um, so it's just a question. Um, we're putting in a boiler just for
that and an air to water heat pump. If we're doing that, that's a lot of money. >> The the heating system is is meant to be electrical. So it's meant to be heat pumps. Radiant floor heating is and and
others can speak more authoritatively to this, but common and I say potentially preferred in fire stations. It's also from the the limited research that I've done personally uh a common choice in large open space
buildings. Now it does, you know, given heat pump air source heat pump technology, you do get have a challenge. you get to very low temperatures the radiant floor provides a huge thermal mass. So the response
time is is that issue here as well. So that is one of the reasons why the committee we looked at this very carefully and unanimously again decided that the hybrid system was the appropriate compromise for the
operational considerations that um the fire department is most worried about. And those aren't hypotheticals. Uh, if I remember correctly, Brian, was it a fire station in Connecticut, fire department in Connecticut that actually had that problem this a few weeks ago? Oh, sorry. >> I'm not sure I
>> thought I thought there was one where Well, >> I'm sure there was. >> And so, it's it's Yeah. Again, it's just not it's not a hypothetical. something where the issue of of frozen equipment if if you go out on a second call um
that I mean again it's operational considerations that we were trying to address in the best way possible given the decarbonization commitment resolution that the select board had made the specialized building code all those things taken into consideration um
this is where the committee ended up with the resource we had available which included the experience that we get from other fire departments, the experience that the architect and the OPM have from doing other other fire stations and um you know again the the resources that
individually members of the committee can bring to the this decision-m process. So it wasn't done lightly. Um I I I would be uh I I would be disingenuous if I said a ton of research and a ton of analysis was done but it
was it was done thoughtfully. How much is the incremental cost of that >> radio? What >> the uh >> I think the radian >> the the the system for the for the apparatus stays about a $80,000 line item. >> All right.
Thank you. Thank you for the question. Thank you for the response. Okay. We're >> well over our time. So, if the select board's ready, do we want to make a motion to support the fire station building renovation committee moving forward with the bidding process?
>> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Any further deliberation? Seeing none, let's do a roll call vote. All in favor? >> Arnold, I >> Snell I. >> Stevens, I >> Triola I.
>> Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for all the hard work that's gone into this in a very short amount of time to all the committee members. >> I'd like to call the meeting. I'd like to a motion to move. >> Seconded by >> Can you send me
>> and uh roll call Balis? I >> uh >> Dave, are you still on? >> Hi. >> Uh I >> thank you. David, >> yes. I >> I >> Jerry. >> Hi. >> Suzanne. Hi
>> and Greg. >> Hi. >> Thanks everyone. >> Thank you all your work. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we are moving on to the um agenda item of number >> safety committee >> five the review of the safety committee
town meeting request and I believe niche engineering is here um to speak with us and I thank you for your patience. I know we're running a bit late. >> Just to set this one up for the select board, the traffic safety or the safety committee couldn't be here tonight for
administrative reasons, but they are they are putting before you two warrant articles. One is to allow to have town meeting approve the adoption of safety zones if possible around the school. >> Yep. >> And the other one is to conduct a traffic study. So this has been called a
study of a study, right? Right. The study is really uh a lowcost investment to make sure we're not wasting money on a larger study because the the bar to lower um speed limits is very high and needs a lot of data. So if it's not feasible then then niche is
>> so is the 114 the low cost study or the high cost or the thing we're trying to avoid spending >> low cost. It's um so the the 16,000 will get you the answer on whether or not to do the 100. >> So that's one and two is on the >> So do we really have to go through all this stuff? All we need to do is say yeah.
>> So I just wanted Jason our engineer. >> I don't really want us tonight to go through this. >> No, we don't need to go through it. If we could just give a executive summary of where we're at and um and we can even take a position tonight. >> Yeah, I think so. So, uh, Jason, if you could if you could
address why we need the, uh, safety zone as option and and what the traffic study would try to accomplish. >> The 16,000. >> Yeah. Phase one and two. >> Phase one and two. >> Sorry, >> we can't hear you. Yeah, >> we cannot hear. >> You can hear us, Jason?
>> Yes, I can hear you. And >> now we hear you. We got you. >> Oh, great. Sorry about that. I've been on mute for a long time, so I just forgot to unmute. Um, thank you for having me here. I'm Jason Soil from uh Nich Engineering. I'm the director of transportation.
Um so safety zones and and why the the the meeting warrant is is in front of you is that before um any municipality can adopt a safety zone speed limited 20 mph safety zone
speed limit um on any specific street they first need to vote to adopt essentially it's uh chapter 90 section 18B I believe um to allow the you know uh adopt that portion of of state law
and then uh and then at that point the town is able to implement safety zone speed limits um independent of mass dot. Um safety zone speed limits establish a 20 mph speed limit. Um, and they're
intended for use in areas such as, you know, parks or preschools or places of worship or really any place that might attract vulnerable road users, uh, such as pedestrians and cyclists and in areas
that, uh, that there's a conflict between vehicles and those vulnerable road users. >> And so, just a quick question. And so in in in what's being proposed the scope of services um the safety zones establishing the safety zones are those the three safety zones we would look to
establish or are there additional safety zones you said around the school that we can do without doing all the study just >> two separate things. >> Okay. So where >> so I if I may clarify um so the
once the town adopts um section 18B to to implement safety zones um I said that the town can adopt and and implement safety zones on streets that they're choosing without input from masot. Um,
under state law, the the the town is still required to follow, of course, the Federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, the MUTCD. And in the MUTCD, one of the requirements for establishing a regulatory speed
limit is conducting an engineering traffic study. Um so in our proposal um phase one uh would look at the the three safety zones that were
uh uh really two backto-back segments on Bedford Road and one on East Street. Um and that's really phase one looking at all three of those locations uh as requested by the safety committee um and and Ryan. Um,
and so to do a quick I say quick uh engineering study to establish those because of that federal requirement in the MUTCD, you still need to have that engineering study to to justify
um and show that those conditions exist and that a safety zone is is warranted and appropriate for that location. Um, so that's really what what phase one is in our proposal. Um, and once the town, you know, if the
town adopts section 18B, uh, you know, that could be th those locations identified and requested by the safety committee could be the first locations looked at, but but certainly then the door would be open if there's other appropriate locations that the town
wishes to evaluate in the future. And each of those safety zones would require a similar investment subsequently. >> So we're not talking about making the school area a safety zone, right? We're this am I reading this correctly that
we're talking about 225 Bedford Road, both >> parts of the roundabout and then East Street, >> right? So there's nothing related to the school. >> Church Street. >> Church Street as a school. You can do it just because there's a school, right? You don't have to do anything.
>> I just wanted to clarify. Yeah. What >> you can say the school is 20 miles hour. That's it. Right. Boom. >> Do we Jason? What's the answer? >> In our proposal and and what I had
discussed with the safety committee uh was those locations on 225 and on East Street, right? >> Um and and not specifically Church Street. But is it not true, Jason, that you don't need a study if you actually are in front of a school? Like that is your study, right?
>> Correct. So I if there's uh the town could implement a school zone, which is very similar to a safety zone, but again specifically for schools. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, so the phase one and two, you you would not do phase two unless phase one
said it was doable. >> No. So, so let me clarify a bit. So phase one is just for the safety zones. Um and that initial cost in phase one um would cover our fee for for all three
locations or or really again the the two backto-back locations on Route 225 plus East Street. Um, what the safety committee also requested was looking at lowering or or changing the regulatory
posted speed limit >> on a few other roads. >> Yeah, but that's phase three and four. I'm I'm still on >> Well, well, that's really what phase two is is the beginning of that. So there's a lot of data collection and a a very
in-depth study uh for you know to change the regulatory speed limit and what phase two is in those areas. Let's collect some initial preliminary data and then we can have a discussion with the town. Is it worthwhile to pursue
that much more in-depth study? Um, so I if the town was only interested in in pursuing the safety zones, it would just be phase one. >> Ah, okay. So why don't we start with that? >> But the safety zones don't achieve the
goal of reducing the speed limit. You just create a safety zone. >> Every single place you add, you have to do another, you know, expensive study. >> Right. >> Right. So the the safety zones do lower the speed limit and override any existing regulatory speed limit on the
on the roadway. >> What's the minimum speed we can implement without doing the study of the study >> phase? If we were to do phase one and implement the safety zones, what would the speed limit become in those safety zones? It's currently 35, correct? >> It would become a 20 mile hour safety
zone. >> No, no. We're not we're not communicating >> right >> today without a study. What can we do? >> We can't do anything. >> The lowest we can go is 35. >> That's correct. >> That's why we have >> Even if it's a safety zone. >> If it's a safe zone, >> except for the school. Except for I get it for the school.
>> But the safety zone has to be created. >> Any regular road, not in front of a school, >> the without spending money, we can only do 35. >> Yes. >> Okay. And if we spend the money, there's we can go as low as 20, I guess. Right.
>> In those safety zones. >> In those safety zones. But like how big of a can we make the town a safety zone? Like I cuz I see Bedford Road like two different segments. Like why just it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I
guess >> what problem are we trying to solve? People go too fast. Right. >> Right. >> So how do we get them the next even taking one step further be back from there is like I know we have a safety committee and they're not here tonight but what what is the problem? Like, do
we have a higher fatality rate? Do we have I mean, where are we? >> Can we put speed bumps in? Just put speed bumps everywhere. We're allowed to do that. >> No, but but are we >> So, before the >> my time here, this has received the third most >> public comment and interest and all of
it's been funneled to the safety committee. So, they're being responsive to public's request for when we put those speed limit signs up. I I haven't received besides MBTA and maybe the LSC more comments about anything but speed. >> People didn't like it or they like >> did not like it when it was increased
>> but they want trade >> when it was increased. They were happy to make it slow. >> Correct. So in order to make it slower, this is all the things we >> What if we just make it slow? What what can the state do to us? >> We did do that. >> I know. So we did make it So I'm the liazison for the safety committee,
David. And we did lower it right to 25 say along Yeah. Route 225. >> And it turns out some folks when they get a ticket, they fight the ticket and they're winning because we didn't do this. >> But mostly people go slow, right? >> Still might it?
>> Mostly they go slow. But it turns out we've we've not followed the proper procedures to lower our speed limit. So that 25 miles per hour was done illegally. >> But what will the Commonwealth do if we just put it back up 25? I What will they actually do? A few people won't they won't get a ticket. So what? But people
will mostly go slower, won't they? >> Why not just put the signs back up? I mean, it this is like the most ridiculous bureaucratic thing I've ever seen. You have to like measure and do an analysis for $100,000 so you can know learn what you already know, which is
people go too fast. Can we put speed bumps in? Are we allowed to do that >> if you do a study? >> No, without a study. >> You cannot state highway. >> Well, not on the state road, but not all the roads are >> Yeah. So, so like Curve Street, which I live off of, has a 20 mph speed limit.
That's not a problem because it's not >> that's we can do that >> 225 we could do, right? That one. >> So, technically it's 35 >> should be. Yeah. >> Sweet. >> I get it. The state road. Maybe we have to do the study on the state road. >> Yeah. >> I don't know why we can't just put up
>> Well, we do. It sounds like we do in most of town. >> My curve street is 20 miles per hour, but it's not 20 miles per hour. >> All right. So I think what I think my recommendation would be that the safety committee needs to come talk to you because it I think it would be much more compelling from your committee than and easier to
>> dismiss. We've tked them to do >> and we're we're looking to take a position on a warrant article. >> Yes. >> I wouldn't do it this year. >> So we really need them. >> We're tight. This is like you got to be kidding me. There's got to be more creative ways to do this honestly. >> So I have a question for Jason while you're still on the line. So these
towns, you know, when you enter some towns, it says, you know, townwide speed limit is 20 miles per hour unless otherwise marked. You're saying they have >> gone through all of these studies and whatnot. And we can we just post a sign at the beginning of our town borders
saying >> it's 20 miles, >> you know, that's it. >> Models. >> So watching it. those those signs that you see on town borders uh that they're typically townwide uh speed limit 25 unless posted otherwise.
>> That's a statutory speed limit that uh some towns have adopted and I believe Carile is one of them. Uh section 17C perfect >> uh which lowered the statutory speed limit from 30 to 25 miles hour. Um,
>> so we could have that sign posted on. >> So we did that and that's why the signs came down and mas dot said >> did somebody because mas dot said what you can't do that >> that's not actually how you do it. >> You have but to Christine's question then you have to run a study of every artery and road in the town.
>> Correct. >> No, but they nobody did that. Come on. >> In order to lower the speed limit from the >> they do every road >> in the towns that have done it. >> No, they they're just also doing >> posting whatever they want. That's awesome. >> Yeah. And you can see it, right? >> I'm not I'm never voting for this in my
10. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. >> Just put the the to your point, the challenge though is if you're not in compliance, it limits our everybody's if they're doing 65, they can they don't get a ticket.
>> No, they can be >> you can have reckless driving. there. >> They can contest a ticket if they're going 60 even whether or not it's posted correctly at 35 or 25. >> So again, I'm recommending we bring in the the chief of police and the safety
committee so you fully understand the issue. >> Okay. >> Does anyone on the select board though want to even look back further for more data? I I brought that up and I don't know. >> I mean is there data we already have that we could >> Yeah. Or or I mean >> did we have data when we relative Doug? We have an, you know, unusually high
number of traffic incidents. >> I assume the safety committee would have that info. >> I mean, are we just >> Sure. Sure. >> I I'm asking I have >> Christine, do you have any sense of whether um the >> I have I have not personally seen any
data collected. Um it seems that we are that I have seen that we are responding to um uh neighbors >> resident >> resident concerns. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> But I haven't seen a presentation of statistics. Um it might be that that has
happened before I started >> this position in June. >> My sense is that >> you're going too fast. And yes, we can all collectively say that. But let's get some data. You know, if we don't have any of that, how do we know we're in? >> I love data. You know, I just love I'm
guessing we have that data and it just, you know, >> the volunteers out there with speed guns. I mean, >> yeah, >> just I don't know. I think it rude. >> Well, let's I agree with Ryan. We need to get the safety committee. We can't something on the warrant article at a formal. >> Let's um let's push this to a subsequent
meeting. >> This is an April meeting >> and get the right folks here. But yes, there has been a lot of public feedback on raising of the speed limits and it's Yeah. >> Um >> Okay. All right. So, >> Jason >> Jason, >> thank you. Thank you, Jason.
>> Thank you a for for attending. Thank you for the information in the packet. We're gonna probably bring in the the safety committee just so we can get get their perspective on this. >> Sure. Thank you for uh for your time this evening. >> Great. Thanks Jason. Appreciate it.
>> Thank you. >> So we will not be taking a position on this but David will >> Well to your point like when you look at it's like a $16,000 study. You go okay but then it's then >> there's something we don't understand
because other towns are doing it and they aren't doing every road in creation. There's got to be maybe we have to have Simon like can't you just like >> like people want to go slower that MGL should like that. Right. Well, I Anyway, >> well, maybe
>> let's let's move on. Um, and we'll we'll schedule the the safety committee to come in and speak with us. >> Absolutely. >> Julie, >> item six. Now, this is >> Come on up, Julie. >> Um, this is, my understanding, a fairly
procedural request, >> correct? >> So, you're looking for us to refer >> Try not to give you a hard time >> so we can keep this as simple and brief as it needs to be. Exactly. >> Um, you're looking for us to simply refer an article to the planning board. >> Yep. >> Yes.
>> Or refer a proposed amendment to the planning board, not take a position on it. >> Right. Exactly. No position required. It's really procedural. >> Yes. >> Um, we've done this a few times in the last couple years where the planning board submits a zoning bylaw amendment to the select board and ask the select
board to refer it back to them to have the hearing and bring it to town meeting. So, that's what they're asking for. >> Okay. related to zoning bylaw section 6.3. Um I can go into a little detail if you want. Um >> but we're not taking a position on the
proposed amendment. >> Um would we do that in a at another meeting or are we looking >> So they have to go through their process? >> Yes. So we have language town council um wrote for us. Basically, this came up at
a zoning board meeting and the zoning board um requested that the planning board take it up and fix it. Um >> I'm familiar with it of doing this. >> This is a C change in what the zoning board has done though
>> of sorts. >> A C change. >> C a C meaning like a major >> this is a major change. This is a is a major thing that we had been part of the bylaw that we had >> we had adjudicated for years in a certain way and then the attorneys have
looked at it differently now and said we don't think you can do it. I will let you I don't mean >> Yeah. So I I knew you were on the zoning board so I thought you might have some thoughts about it. Um it is a essentially the the language that's on the screen that's um read and like
struck out doesn't align with this statute the zoning statute. So it um the zoning statute which is also known as Mass General Law Chapter 48 section 6 sets the floor on how
non-conforming structures and uses are supposed to be treated by zoning boards. And so we can't be stricter than that and this bylaw is stricter than that. And so town council has said we can't enforce it and we should fix it. >> Okay. >> So this amendment is to bring it into compliance with >> correct.
>> It's not a subjective strategic. It's >> no it's simply it's really just to align with state law. Um I those are all the things I basically just said. The zoning board um wants to address it sooner than later. Um, we they probably I'm I'm
working to quantify this, but >> I would say at least half if not more of the applications that I've seen come before them have been under this section of the zoning bylaw. Um, >> and so what have they been doing? >> This is the >> a lot of math, a lot of calculations.
>> But are they enforcing something that's not >> Yes, for years >> years. And we didn't know it. Or I shouldn't say we. I didn't know. >> I'm surprised. I love how much you know about this. It's like so good. >> So, we got to make 6.3. Come on. >> Well, it's it's like one of the few things that the zoning board of appeals
does. If you have a non-conforming lot and people will then want to expand their non-conforming structure or their home, even I guess the structure could be conforming within it, but it's on non-conforming lot over 50%. >> Um, they couldn't do that. And so, we
would have to, you know, evaluate that. that we'd have to we spent a lot of time about measurements and what the size of the home is and what's included, what's not. And so this is is a whole new way of approaching this because it basically says you can't do that anymore.
>> And if the town doesn't approve, >> that's right. That's exactly right. So basically like the advice we've been given from town council is to not enforce it, >> right? So if the town doesn't approve it at town meeting, it's just in the bylaw, but we're not enforcing it. But the planning board may ultimately
want to have some or the town really may want to have some constraints on this because there was in the 70s this past or 60s 1960s. >> Yeah. Do you want to go to the history slide? You're doing the presentation for me. >> Um so yeah, so it went I did a little
research. It looks like it was added in 1962. Um and then in 1975 the zoning statute changed. Um, so >> it's only been 50 years. >> It It's possible. I I have obviously
can't confirm that. Um, town council might be able to that it's been about 50 years that it's really not been something that we should have been enforcing. >> Um, but the zoning board had an application earlier this year that they were grappling with like what to do about it. And so I suggested we get a
legal opinion and then this is this is why we're here. So if if we're going to prove that you look at it and you look at it and you present it at a town meeting and it gets passed, >> then you have something that can be enforced. >> Yeah. Then we have language that basically aligns with the zoning
statute, >> which means you could in the Travis example. >> No, you can't. >> If it passes, then you you're done. You're grandfathered in for what you have, but you can't extend it. Is that what you were saying? >> No, I'm not saying >> it's complicated.
>> Yeah, it's more complicated. I mean, is it a good thing to have this? >> I know we have to follow the law. You have to follow the law, right? And so that's what this corrects. But then what I'm saying is that it going forward creates other we know. We may want to have other
>> bylaws that that because I think I I don't know for sure, but the thought in 1962, Carlile said, "If you're on a non-conforming lot, we don't want you to expand more than 50%." you know, and so there must have been a sentiment that we
don't want this. So we'd adhere to that. So the question is, does Carile want that going forward because we're about to say it's against the law, what we've been doing, we can't. >> So if I if I live on a non-conforming lot or whatever >> in in this passes or what that's all I
can I can't expand or whatever >> beyond 50%. Because the how we've currently >> sounds good to me. Okay. >> Well, but you you can't do that going forward. >> But we're taking that away, David. Right. >> So you can do whatever you want or >> No, I can I have some graphic examples if you want to see what you can do
>> regardless all we need to do tonight. >> No, I know. But I mean curious about Okay. >> meeting new nonconformity. >> So I can explain the slide a little bit. So basically the in this on this slide
both of these examples contemplate like a oneacre lot and a twoacre zoning district, right? So the lot's non-conforming, but the structure, the brown structure that's there in both cases is conforming. So in the case on the left, the proposed addition is
within the setback area. So it doesn't create any new nonconformities, right? So it doesn't matter what size it is, if it's 50%, 60%, whatever. >> So that would be okay in any of >> this is okay. This could get a building permit, right? Um, in the example on the
right, that addition like infringes on the setback that has to go to the zoning board. >> That's the today version or that's what would be if we pass >> that's what's been in the zoning statute since 1975. >> So what's the then >> and and that's what we would be aligning our language with. So the zoning board
would only be weighing in on the example on the right. >> Okay, sounds good to me. >> Yeah. And then there's a lot of different ways this can play out. So I just I have another slide with a couple other examples but so so basically if you have a non-conforming structure on a non-conforming lot right so in this case
again like a oneacre lot and a twoacre zone and then you have the brown existing house infringing on the setback in both examples on the left the proposed addition doesn't extend the non-conforming condition or exactly >> so you don't make things worse >> so you can do that >> right
>> on the right if you extend that non-conforming setback you need to go to the zoning >> makes perfect sense to me. >> So that's how that's how it works. >> Great. >> Does that make sense to you? >> And is the planning board the warrant the language that you >> re is that what they're going to present
at town meeting or do they are they still have having discussions around what they're going to present at town meeting? >> Yeah. So that language is from town council. It's the language the zoning board prefers. It's the cleanest. Um the planning board also agre prefers that language. They still have to have their
public hearing so it might change slightly. and they're also going to bring in town council to kind of talk them through it because it is it is a big change and there's even members on the planning board that made decisions about their properties based on this section of the zoning bylaw. So >> um they're trying to wrap their minds
around it and make sure they fully understand it. So there's still more work to be done. >> One of the biggest things that people came to the zoning boards for was that provision, right? And and here we'd enforced it for years and it'll be interesting. I mean, what if you I guess
you could just do it now if you had a non-conforming structure. You were denied before or we >> and are there other avenues to mitigate this or no? Like do you have to pass a bylaw or how do you
>> Right. So, the first step is just cleaning up the bylaw, right? The second step, the planning board talked about this last night, might be to like put in some different parameters in a different section of the zoning fil because we have other ways of regulating structures. We just can't have it tied
to the section 6.3 special permit non-conforming use section. >> I I don't it would be a future, >> right? So, they could put this language in somewhere else in the bylaw. They could put in language restricting floor area ratio. They could there's a whole bunch of different things like you can
have standards and regulations in your zoning, right? >> They're not going to have that for town meeting. They're not going to just this one. >> No, just this for now. Just to like make the bylaw a little neater and tidier. >> All right. Well, I'd like to move to
refer the proposed amendment to Carlile zoning bylaw section 6.3 to the planning board. >> Second. >> Any further discussion? Seeing none, let's do a roll call. Arnold I. >> I. >> Snell I. >> Stevens I.
>> Triola I. Very good. >> You refer it back to the planning board. >> Great. And the planning board hearing will be on April 13th. >> April 13th. Mark on my calendar. Example. >> I'm so glad you got to see every slide I made. I wasn't sure. I was like, it's procedural. It might be
>> to me. >> Thanks for being here in person. Yeah, >> I I'll save that for my homework. I'm assuming it's like when you don't when you're not in line with a setback or something. >> All right. Item seven, call of the caucus to nominate town officers to stand in the annual town election.
>> Uh our town clerk Ashley Cody is on on the line. >> Welcome Ashley. >> Hello Ashley. >> Hi everybody. Good evening. >> And so we need to accept this notice. Is that correct? >> Yes. This is um just a piece of routine
business. Um this is the call of the caucus um where nominations are made for the annual town election offices and um this just has to be signed off um by the select board and posted um by the constable in accordance with uh state law.
>> Great. Okay. >> Okay. >> Great. Does want to make >> anything else we should know, >> Ashley? just that um this uh shows the open offices that um will be up for election this year. Um there are some, you know,
routine um terms that are expired and there's a couple one-year terms on there because those are um appointed um unexpired terms that somebody will was appointed to uh due to a resignation. So that's why there's just a couple of those one-year terms in there as well as
the three years. >> Right. >> Okay. They're not appointed. They're elected for one. >> Well, I move to accept the notice of town caucus as included in the packet. >> Second for discussion. Seeing none,
we'll do a roll call vote. >> Arnold, I >> Snell I. >> Stevens I. >> Triola. I. >> Very good. >> And then do we have something we need to sign tonight? >> Just Scott. >> Just Scott. That's >> just Scott.
>> Bedazzled folder. Okay, >> wait. Thank you, Ashley. >> Thanks, Ashley. >> Wonderful. Thank you very much, everybody. >> Thanks, Ashley. Yeah. Um, we are going to move item eight, the employee contract renew renewal for police chief emandola to the March 24th for your
request. >> Yes, we have um a bit of contract language to make sure that you understand, assuming the board agrees and please review it. Let me know if there's anything you want to talk about. If you there is anything you want to talk about, just tell me and we'll schedule an executive session. If you're
good with the language, then we can move it to a public meeting. I just didn't want to negotiate in public. >> Got it. Okay. So, that one we will be revisiting at our next meeting. Now, we're on to the five-year road maintenance plan. And so, um, as a bit of context, um, one
of the one of the items that, uh, finance committee is looking for our input on is the road maintenance spend for fiscal 27. There's 800,000 budgeted. We've, as a select board, have suggested that that might be an area that we evaluate. I
think um and I see Mark here, but my understanding in talking to James is that the select board is basically looking for our direction on this. That >> finance committee, >> sorry. Yeah, the finance committee is looking for our direction on this that >> um they're not opposed to the $800,000
spend, but they're certainly open to us if if um if we wanted to reduce that spend. They're not familiar with all the particulars of it. So, it's up it's up to us. Well, you indicated last time you seemed favorable to maybe clip a 100k off of that this year with all this. >> Well, yeah. I mean, I and so this is all
funded out of free cash. So, um it doesn't affect at the end of the day the the the tax rate on the taxpayer. It would allow us to maintain a reserve level a little bit over 12% if we reduce 100k. I the thinking around the 100k was if we're if we if we have a five-year
road maintenance plan, one of the larger roads will be funded. We can just recalculate that spend based on the new total and that would reduce 100k. >> I I'm favorable for that. You can always use it for your traffic study. >> Say that. I was going to say that.
>> You notice it's now become your traffic study. >> Well, the here's what would make me here's what would give me more favorably. If the study showed that slower speeds made the quality of the roads longer >> or mitigated the need to re how about
potholes slow people down so maybe the answer is don't repair the speed limit. >> It's a reverse speed. >> There you go. >> Right. >> That is >> much more dangerous. >> Anyway, I Yeah, I'm I'm in I would be in favor of just
>> making it 700,000 this year. Ryan, do you have any I mean I know you and um Jim >> Jim are Yeah, sorry. Jim are uh you know, you have the plan and all that. I think this would just be rejiggering it and kind of leveling out the years.
>> We would bring this back to you, but we would take the DPW priority roads and the parody roads and we would move them back a year and move everything back until you hit 20 28, which would be fiscal 29 where Bedford Road has been paid for by the state. So you'd bump a
couple of roads >> and and kind of fill that hole, fill that pothole, so to speak, in the >> Okay. >> Do we have to vote this or is it just sense of the >> If your guidance is good, then um
essentially the budget is done assuming all of the other recommendations hold. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So they're just looking for our direction on this and I can certainly >> let James know. Christine and Travis. Well, everybody should say >> I think it sounds reasonable. I mean,
fits what we're our goals what we're trying to do. >> Yeah, >> it's fine with me. >> Okay, good. >> And Barney had a question. I just want to make sure the whole board >> Yeah. >> Um about coverts. So, there was about $470,000 in covert money in the plan.
We've cut that down to 30,000. The idea is we would do a $250,000 study of and design of four coverts so that we had >> right four the big four >> much more uh clarity on costs. If we are going to seek a grant for that if we get the grant then we would use that whole
300 to repair one of them >> and get that off the books. If we don't get the grant then at least we're ready for the future. >> So the the coverts was already reduced down from 470 to 300. >> Okay, great. Okay. >> Okay.
>> We're also going to write the capital article to be road maintenance and culverts and culverts and road maintenance >> so that we can have flexibility >> together. Yeah. >> And you can do that. That's allowable. >> We can call it whatever we want. It's Yeah. As long as the town agrees.
>> Y that but that's within the capital items article. It'll say coverts and road maintenance and it'll say road maintenance and coverts. >> It'll be two different articles, >> two different lines in the capital plan. >> Okay. So either way you can you have
flexibility. >> I don't know. >> Well, so you wouldn't want like if a culvert came up and it was 400,000 maybe we take a from the road plan to do that covert. So you just want some flexibility. >> Why do you need two Can't you just lump it under one >> line item that says road maintenance and culverts?
>> We can. I mean, I would do that rather than having a road maintenance road m like >> it'll just confuse >> if you can do it just put it in one bucket. >> I find that either way it'll confuse but we will >> Why are you spending so much in road maintenance? It's it's
>> the only reason Scott for not doing that is historical tracking. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, I don't care. >> But we'll do whatever you want. >> You to your point it would end up being over a million dollars if you did it as one. >> Maybe there's that reason too. >> Okay. Yeah, point taken.
>> All right. Um Okay. >> And then the So then the final budget will come back to us >> at our next meeting. >> At our next meeting to be a for a vote >> if you're ready. >> If we're ready. Okay. And what's it
going to show in terms of how much cash reserve we're applying to the budget? Because that was the >> that'll be a lot of concern. So the cash that'll go down 100k. >> It'll be 100k less than it was before. >> Like 1.8 roughly, which is still high,
>> but we're also ending the year with over 12% reserve, which is high. So >> yeah, >> it's it's okay. >> It's a nice compromise. Um >> Okay. >> And yeah, so the a good portion of our next meeting will be with the with um on
the budget. Okay. Okay. Great. Um, let's move on to the Benfield Farm tour followup and discussion. So, we did a tour of Benfield two weeks ago. >> I think it was just last Wednesday, wasn't it?
>> It was the Wednesday after our last meeting. Um, >> so two weeks weeks ago. >> Yeah, almost two weeks ago. Um so we had a chance to tour the facility and also meet with residents and and hear some of the um issues that they had raised which
is in in the in the minutes. >> Um so this is a chance to kind of debrief on that. >> Um I mean for my part I think you know the the building itself is nice. However, it's pretty clear that
there are some basic aspects of of service and maintenance that the residents feel like they're not getting. Um in addition the larger concerns to you know making sure that the building is properly maintained not only with the little things we saw but the larger
issues that as it what 15 years old >> roughly >> um it's going to require capital investment and improvement from Noah >> and I think it's important that you know we we confirm with them that those plans
are in place. I think Ryan's suggestion is is one that we is interesting is that, you know, we work with Noah to understand the long-term capital plan as a and as a town, is there a way that we can provide not only like like we do with the COS doing services there, is there a way that that we can support a
defined level of uh maintenance in some areas to help residents >> maintenance focused on quality of life. >> Yeah. >> But the concern there is you don't want to do Noah's work. Well, well, we are doing Noah's work even in that, but it would be okay with me
>> to say to Noah if they, you know, Yeah, we've told them they've agreed before and not done it. >> Yeah. >> But it's like, no kidding. Okay, you guys said you're not doing the little things because you're trying to save your money for the big things. So, let's get a schedule of the big things. Let's get your commitment to do them. And I
tell you what, we'll help you out and do some of the small things. And then we'll see if they do what they're supposed to do. That's like >> a step before the lawsuit. >> The problem is what's the consequence if they don't do it? >> I think they have to sue them. I mean, at some point
>> who has legalism >> the residents >> they have to and >> one of the real challenges. >> Well, we need to do what we can do to try to make that not happen. >> Well, it's and it's how do we you know, we have Senator Barrett coming in next week
>> and we ask you can ask the right question. And I think part of part of the question that I don't know is is Noah getting state funding to support the operation and if so >> what's up with that? >> What's up with that? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um and is there are there is there >> influence that can be brought from a
state level? >> I mean they are I don't know this. I don't want let me not say that it appears that they're taking advantage of a vulnerable population because my sense in listening to the people there are certain people who are you know more
vocal and maybe more militant who might rally around a escrowing of rent you know a more decisive action but there's a lot of people who are like I'm old and I don't want to be kicked out and I'm okay leave me alone just I'm okay and and I think
>> to some degree they're taking the situation is taking advantage of their >> vulnerability. >> Vulnerability and that's not fair and that's why we have to I think do something. >> No. And for the I don't know for whoever's left from the public. I mean things like washing the windows at some
point. There's a microwave oven that broke common room that has >> I like that idea. We could do some simple stuff even if that should be an agreement and defined with Noah. >> So let's try to >> as is someone. So when would we like who would approach Noah and we would try to
get them in then right >> we'd have to have a meeting with them not maybe >> I don't know if it would be the entire blackboard >> it doesn't need to be you're right >> no we could designate >> you know >> Scott I mean I would take it I would actually >> no I mean I think we have to some of
that logistics we have to we have to figure out the best way forward and do we involve can we get like a someone from the state or someone who's involved in this that can exert a little more influence influence than just Carlile. >> Yeah. >> Because it doesn't sound like our past conversations with them have yielded
much change of behavior. >> Right. >> Right. So what what changes >> and there may have been some turnover of on their side. I know that the site manager is the same guy, but I don't know about leadership. It might have changed. I don't know. >> Well, Phil Gyy's still the CEO, but
>> it's a nice building. I mean, it's in theory if it's properly maintained. And >> Okay. And >> so what's the action then? So the action is one we'll we'll have a we'll have a question or line of conversation with Mike Barrett next week. >> Yeah. >> And then >> in two weeks, right? >> Two weeks. And then Ryan, we'll figure
out the right contact at Noah and see who like let's think about who who that gathering should be of and what we want to ask of them. I mean, I think we can put that together in a >> we had that meeting a year ago. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, how do we change? So, we change our
tactic. So, let's understand that. Well, one thing I'm wondering, I don't know how much work this would involve, Ryan, if to have um somebody on staff try to figure out whether there is a state agency that has some leverage with Noah
um whether it's um you know approvals or it's grant funding or whatever it is >> so that we know if there's any like can Senator Barrett you know can we so we'd know that ahead. ahead of time in talking with him. >> I like the idea of finding out where their funding sources
>> and even let the you know let his staff know ahead of time that we this is a problem and we're going to we want to ask him about it. So they maybe they do the research. I don't know. But right um I I don't know what's I don't know what we're talking about in terms of time or
who would do that on our staff. Um when we met with them, did we talk about providing some service like we bring something to the table or was it more we want to know the your capital plan? >> So like most issues if they were sitting
here they would have a counter story. >> Yeah. Right. that you may or may not find compelling >> about their financial situation and about how they believe they're handling things and it's not it's not what you heard >> right >> from the >> that's okay I think at the end of the
day they can't do nothing financial hardship or not they're collecting rent and doing nothing so it's time to get a schedule hammered out now their schedule may be stretched and they may say this project's not necessary but there are certain things
we saw, >> right? Right. And you maybe you have to agree to get an independent third assessor in there to you know determine really instead of he said she said like yes this system this HVAC system is not complying not working or something right I mean there needs to be like in any
dispute you're right both sides are going to have their position but if there's any will to reach a settlement then there are mechanisms like third parties that maybe we pay for that consulting,
>> you know, something like that. And >> I'll put it >> a different way. >> They don't think they're they think they're meeting the basic standards. >> So, there's nothing the staff can do to compel them otherwise unless you're willing to do more, >> like hold them accountable. So, you're
the land owner. >> Isn't there some state office that's like a housing when you when you're in a dispute with your landlord, there places you can go, right? statewide that say the guy's the landlord's not doing what he's supposed to do.
>> I think we have more leverage than we've exercised. I think we just kind of also political leverage than you think maybe more financial said we own the land. True. But I think they have a 99-year lease or whatever. So they're kind of insulated relative to
>> But if we as a town go to whatever state board is in charge of bad landlords >> politically. That's right. But I think >> we can make more trouble for them than they can make for us. Telling you, you're right. >> Be the approach. >> Well, and >> but it may not have to be as adversarial as need to be.
>> And and we tried sitting with them asking them for a capital plan. We haven't seen that. >> Right. >> Right. >> Yeah. They're >> And so it's going to continue until I think until there's some amount of leverage compelling them to do
something. I'm just trying to convey this isn't a situation where they're they like know they're doing something wrong and they're >> sure they're like they believe that they are doing the right thing. >> That's not true. >> But having seen with our eyes the things that are that are happening in the
building uh >> I agree with you but they don't is is my point. >> They're going to say they don't but they actually believe that. So >> I don't think we need to debate it. >> No, but I guess >> I'm very clear in my mind about how >> I mean what do they're going to say what
do you have to offer? What are >> No, we're going to say let's No, no, no. We're going to say we have to agree on the scope of the problem. We realize that you have your point of view. The residents have theirs. So come with us. You let's go through the list. Let's bring a third party assessor. Let's do
something arbit that an ar not arbitrary >> arbitrator arbitr like an arbitrage like let's agree on the list of things that some independent authority agrees these must be fixed then we can sit down and talk about who should fix them and who should contribute and what over what
schedule but let's get like data right let's just do it the right way and they say you know okay I'll go to the state I mean we have other means to make their life miserable I guarantee you I if we I don't want to start with that but we
would may get there. >> It wouldn't be that hard. >> You sound like just the person. >> I'm happy to do it. I think they're I think that group >> and I'm on the CHT and maybe that's the role for it, you know? I mean it is that. So >> yeah. >> Anyway, they annoy me. So I would be
happy to what do you what do you hell out of this? >> No, it was really just a debrief and then I think we got to >> take it offline and figure out our next steps. We I we do want to bring it up to Senator Barrett. >> Start with that. And then has Simon weighed in at all?
>> No, I don't think has he >> you previously talked to him? >> Have we heard I mean I guess we we have met with them, but does it when you're >> to talk about Benfield? >> Yeah, we have we had met not with Senator >> I mean we met with Noah. I'm saying does
it make sense? I mean typically when we evaluate these things we get both sides. We have only had, >> you know, we had a select board meeting at the site with one with the constituents that >> was Noah aware we were there. Did we notice them? >> Did we invite them to attend?
>> We did not. >> Okay. >> Well, and to me it's partly what you're asking is I'm not take accusations off the floor. Like we, you know, there are concerns about the building maintenance and sustainability long term,
>> right? requesting what the capital plan is is a reasonable request. >> I mean, you can't look at a ceiling that has evidence of water and say that problem doesn't exist. You cannot say that. >> I'm not defending them. I'm saying the process I'm just saying what think about
what our process is because you're all process David. But the the you know we we've done one thing. Do we need to the next >> I think we can't operate in a vac I mean I believe that it would be I guess it's Phil. He's the CEO. >> Say, "We want to come visit you. We go
to your We'll come to your office. >> Let's just sit down and chat about what we think we've seen. You tell us your side. I think do it friendly, right?" I mean, >> and I think we're willing to We're saying >> let's see if we can reach some kind of some path forward. There's been bad blood.
>> Admittedly, both sides maybe. We're not here to take a side on that. >> Trying to solve problem. >> We want to solve the problem. That's all we want to do. And we want to know that you're, you know, you have the plan, right, plans in place and we're willing to as a town, I mean, assuming it was approved >> to do quality of life to support quality
of life improvements. >> So, I'm I'm with you and I'll do whatever whatever you say, but that this will be the fourth time that I do that. >> They do not care about the individual meeting with me and another member. >> No, you you get I mean, it's a
preliminary eventually. There's a legal document needed. you get to a legal document that both parties sign that they agree >> if they unagree they're in breach >> and you have a pretty clear >> meet with Noah >> right >> well the other thing is we reach out to
board >> right he has a board >> and uh we reach out to the board >> no I was I was going to go the other way we reach out to the you know we write something to the his board to say we are concerned about the >> well then we could call for a board to
board meeting if you want to do that. But that's that's kind of a escalation step. >> Yes. >> Above, right? All right. Let's start with Mike Barrett. >> With what? >> Mike Bar. >> Well, that Yeah. I mean, I think we got
to think about the tactics and we we should offer the we we met with the residents. >> We we should have a request a meeting with Noah at Benfield to talk walk us through the building. Yeah. >> I'd be curious to hear their perspective. when we ask about >> that's what I'm suggesting.
>> You know, what about those like uh leak stains and how often do you wash these windows? Like just >> and the light bulbs not being changed. Um I want to see the fourth meeting you've had. >> So are you able to like timeline those meeting like just for us to say
>> once a year? >> I know, but can you say you know in 2024 we met and they said this and they didn't do that. I mean do you have that data? >> Travis was at one of them too. >> Okay. And Kate was doing it, right? >> Kate was at one of them. She was in >> Did um did did he come out to Benfield
or where'd you meet? >> At Ferns. >> Oh, >> it should be at it should be. I agree. >> Benfield. >> Meet at Benfield. >> Yeah. I I think that's a great idea. >> Same coffee and donut. >> That one room too that >> board an off another off-site board meeting at Benfield with
>> Counterpoint. Counterpoint. I think that's the appropriate way of >> Okay. >> You know, because we're >> okay. >> Okay. refrigering away your time and damage. >> Hey, Eric. >> Sorry. Did I leave a mug? >> I don't think so. >> No, but what? Uh, no.
>> All right. Sorry about you. >> Okay. >> You're welcome to stay. >> Okay. So, we'll have follow-up points on that one. Let's move on to the TA report. >> Yep. >> Ryan, hit it. >> All right. Here's my TA report for March 10th. The uh next coffee hour will be
March 24th, 10 a.m. here at Town Hall. I'm sure that everyone's going to want to talk about the fire station design. What else did we talk about tonight? It's been a long night. >> Speed limits. >> Speed limits for sure. Uh come in, talk about the budget and all other items. Speaking of the budget and town meeting
warrant article items, we will be putting out a podcast series in April. Um a lot of the warrant article submitters are following the marketing plan that our town meeting study committee has has told them would be a good idea. So, you should be on the lookout for all of that information on
our social media and podcasting and of course schedule a meeting with us anytime to go over the details. Many of those we talked about tonight. For department updates, Gretchen and the town clerk office organized a comprehensive training seminar for town volunteers. It was very well attended.
Uh I was able to come in virtually from drill and uh the training was very good. We're following up with uh we're starting a we don't know the cadence yet, but a monthly communication to volunteers on um training items of interest and of course we'll invite
chairs in and new volunteers in the summer. So this is the select board's goal to continue to beef up the knowledge of our volunteers civil engineers and and host doctors. So, unbelievably, it's been three years since the town appointed its house
doctor firms, and we um we think that was a worthwhile investment, and we're going to be putting that out to bid again. In the last time, we looked for architecture, building envelope, civil engineer, and MEP and FP. A lot of those have come in front of you in various things, definitely the MFC and other
items. So, we're recommending that the board reappoint Nich and Gale, which are two of our civil engineering house doctor firms. And then another one that's used quite a bit by planning board that we like which is uh landc. So because it's horizontal engineering we don't need to put it out to bid. So
we're hoping that you'll allow us to appoint those as our uh on call civil engineers and then the other three disciplines will be put out to bid and that should be finalized in April. All the contracts that we have existing even the ones that we think we're going to do are still binding until that time. So
there's no gap in coverage. Uh should we go ahead and do that motion then right now? >> Yeah, you will. >> Okay. I move to reappoint Nich Gale and Lantech to continue serving as the town's quote house doctor unquote civil engineering firms.
>> Second. Any discussion or deliberation? Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. >> Arnold, I. >> Stevens, I >> Triola I. >> All right. doing a ton of procurement and one of them is the Proctor Road Tower cellular lease that is out to bid
right now. That information will be coming to you in April prior to town meeting and then town meeting must approve any lease that's that's done. We did have one firm come out and evaluate the area. We let them in. So, we do know at least one provider is set to bid. For budget updates, your next meeting will
be your major decisions on expenditures, revenue, tax impact, the capital plan, which we discussed a little bit tonight, and those reserve levels. I will tell you that uh it has not changed much from the last presentation except for the inclusion of the 2.5% COLA which is a half percent increase on COLA about
$25,000 and now uh with the decisions you've made on capital the reserve levels are above 12%. So I do feel you've hit most of your budget goals the finance committee >> and Brian will the will the um you included the information about the uh
state's budget and the recommendation for um chapter transportation funds the highway >> 90 what's the um is the is the lower number going to be in the revenue side of the budget >> for chapter 90. >> Yeah.
>> So that really just offsets the 800,000. So, you're really going to be authorizing 680,000 in road maintenance after the $100,000 reduction tonight. >> Okay. >> So, that's a a good segue. We're projected to receive $434,000 in chapter 90. >> There it is.
>> Um this is pending approval of the governor's $300 million proposal, which is is almost a given. This is below the $450,000 we projected, but um on par with with past allocations. You could talk to Senator Barrett next week, ne in two weeks about chapter 90
and continued funding of infrastructure. As you know, it's making up the bulk of your capital plan >> and it's way more impactful than something like state aid, which only goes up 5 to 10,000 a year. >> For capital projects, the elevator modernization project is set to begin
when school ends. We've um watched as our project architect vets all the submitts and we're on track and on budget for that. We're also collaborating with our police and communications department to install the new CAD system. It's complex integration, a lot of IT coordination.
So, thanks to the um communications department for their work there. Town hall bathrooms just need a final touch and that'll be done in the next week. So, overall pretty good project. Just need the the final touches in there. Still snow covering the cemetery. So, no
update. Diamond Park continues to move along. I'm watching that uh subcommittee with their evaluation of a potential new park. They're they're on pace to present something next year, but that study continues to move. And then um Megan has
found and has almost finalized an engineering firm to oversee our dam project. As as you know, that dam project keeps keeps uh holding us up. So, we're looking to see what we're going to do. emergency repair, basic repair, final repair and and all together we're help having a dam
engineer help us understand that and the conservation commission is all over this and and following it closely. All right, building construction projects. The library is out to bid. It's out to bid right now. So, we'll have numbers in midappril which is very
exciting. The fire station renovation you talked about a lot about tonight. you've given the go-ahehead to continue designing it and putting that one out to bid as well pending some of the permitting discussions. So, you'll have numbers next month as well there. And then the DPW renovation. So, your building committee finalized the uh
request for proposals to identify its design team. That'll go out this week and that timeline will allow the DPW renovation building committee to serve as the uh designer selection for that process. So, I'll keep you updated on that in case you want to follow along.
That should select a designer and then give you a number for the design part of the DPW. Some upcoming discussion topics. Uh Aubry is still planning on finishing personnel policies with you and getting those final revisions to you by the end of the year. Senator Barrett's meeting
with you has been discussed many times tonight. So you will be getting a note from me tomorrow sending your questions so we can put those together for the senator. And then uh you have a budget and town meeting coming up if you couldn't tell. So, we are for approval notifications. I
do have something that we need to run by you. So, the staff is seeking a board's decision about the placement of Rotary signs and the use of the town common by a group called the CC action team. So, this group of Carile residents promotes community engagement around social justice issues.
>> Their signage and activity are intended to publicize a Carile rally scheduled for March 28th, a no kings day. staff believes this request would need board approval as it exceeds our approval authority >> because it's quasi political or >> it could be conceived as political. We're not saying it is or it isn't. We
just wanted you to weigh in. >> Sure. >> And just to clarify, use of Town Common, does it require select board approval in general? >> If you want to give explicit approval, they >> I was just surprised on the form it says requires select board approval. So, we
should >> Yeah, it does. >> It does. select board it always >> we delegated to or to >> but I mean we we would not interfere with anyone's first amendment rights if they just wanted to use the non comment but for explicit use approved use then
we do request that they submit it >> what do you need from us >> so you just uh are we okay with it >> if you have no issues with it we'll approve it >> the question was was it polit you've said David was it political and and is that >> well I was asking why not let me
rephrase not Is it political? Is the reason it's not just being handled by our administrator because it and the answer because it could be construed as >> but but we have haven't we allowed the Republican and Democrat >> signs up there. So >> I have no issue. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. I don't have an issue with it. >> I don't either. >> Christine, >> no. No issue. I think we would be uh you know I can see how it' be construed as political. I think you know we give equal air time to
uh other similarly situated parties. So >> yeah. >> Great. >> Okay. Great. We flag the things when we think we need to talk about >> I appreciate that. >> Um we used to do a lot of work on that when you were chair. So the we've also approved >> you don't flag as many now.
>> We've also approved the placement of pride flags on the town common and Rotary. To be clear, nothing is allowed inside the actual monument area per our discussions last year. So when it says the Rotary, it is in the designated areas >> and it's not Memorial Day. >> It is not Memorial Day
>> and it's not political. >> Yeah. Right. >> All right. For staff recognition, uh this is a name that you may not fully recognize, but Bill Lahan served as a veteran service officer in our in our regional district. Uh he works for Karen, our veteran director, and steps
in from time to time helping with Carile veterans. He served in government for 50 years to include um serving in veteran services for the last 13. I knew him from my previous job. He's a Vietnam era Navy veteran who assists families with accessing federal, state, and local
benefits. And he tells me he's going to continue to be present at uh the Patriot Course at the VA. So just helping veterans play golf, just in a different way. >> Oh. Oh, I got you. Um, I hope he enjoys his retirement. I'd like to thank him for spending time helping veterans. >> Great.
>> Yes. Thank you, Bill. >> You got a lot of dates coming up >> and a lot to talk about. And that is my report unless you have any questions of me. >> You got everything you needed from votes, correct? >> Yep. >> Yes. >> Very good. >> All right. We'll quickly and briefly
move on to liaison reports. Um it's not really a leazison report, but there was an invitation from Lexington to attend their um Patriot Day festivities. If you're interested, just let me know and I will let them know. >> When is it? >> Um Patriots Day >> open.
>> I forget the letters in the packet. >> It's the April >> April that Monday. >> I'd be interested. That's a fun thing. Actually, >> I can I can RSVP on behalf of whoever's interested. I will unfortunately be traveling to the uh London. So maybe I'll do my own little parade there.
>> Day, >> little reverse patrons day. >> That's right. >> Yeah. >> Um >> wait, they've they invited the whether the select asked if our select board wanted to participate. >> They invited Travis who was the chair. I'm taking that as an invitation to our select board. So I'll reply to
>> with you know if you send me if you're interested >> available. You're on you're on >> there's a letter here. >> Is it in the packet? I didn't see it. >> I thought Gretchen said it was in the P. It's in the I'll send it around. I'll forward it around. Just let me know in the next like >> Well, what's the >> I'll give you a deadline. >> What date are they?
>> But it' be a fun event. Is con doing? >> No, >> but that's usually the Monday, right? >> Yeah, I would have gone last year. >> Is that April something or >> Yeah. Isn't it the f Monday of the uh school vacation? >> Well, they invited us. >> Any other liaison reports as people are looking at their
>> No. No. trying to figure out >> figure out when Patriots Day is. >> Nothing for me. >> Um >> nope. Just to um well just a quick uh update that the um conservation commission is having their first
discussion about the revised LSC charter this coming Thursday. >> Okay. And um and then they are going to have one more they're going to you know encourage input and then they're going to have one more discussion before they vote. >> Okay. Good
>> on it. >> No I appreciate cons for taking that up. >> Yeah. >> All right. Community input Christina Lynn. >> All right. Hearing none. Uh we can take a motion to adjurnn. So >> moved.
>> All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi. Hope you feel better, Christine. >> Great. >> Thank you, everyone.