[Music] Well, it's [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. and welcome to the September 2nd, 2025 meeting of the Cadam Select Board. Please note that this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly hereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the
meeting, please notify the chair. Seeing none, pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28th, 2025 signing of chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extending certain COVID 19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting
law. Massachusetts General Laws chapter 3A section 20 until June 30th, 2027. This meeting of the Cadam Select Board is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as
provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 158-945-4410 conference ID 20386491 pound or join the meeting online via
Microsoft Teams through the link in the posted agenda. While this is a live broadcast and simal cast on Chattam TV Exfinity channel 1072, despite our best efforts, we may not be able to to provide real time access. We
will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. First order of business is to establish a quorum. Miss Davis >> present. >> Mr. Dykins, >> present. >> Mr. Matters, >> present. >> Mr. Smith, >> present. >> And the chair is present. We do have a long agenda tonight. Um we'll go into
the business agenda shortly, but I our first item of business is approval of two sets of minutes. The first being um these are two older sets from 2024. First being July 9th, 2024 um which is um joint meeting of the
select board and the affordable housing trust fund board of trustees in part. Uh is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Are there any corrections? I have a couple. from the board. Uh on page six, I wish
to add a sentence in the last paragraph. I'm sorry, the second to last paragraph right at the end after the word was phrase was discussed. There was comment that a financial
analysis should have been done, and that in not accepting the housing assistance corporation proposal for 36 units of ownership housing at the main street property,
a unique a unique opportunity was being lost. I'll repeat that. There was comment that a financial analysis should have been done and that in not in not accepting the housing assistance corporation proposal for 36 units of ownership housing at the main
street property a unique opportunity was being lost. And my next uh is on page 11 just up at the top. The name of Mr. is it Marini Mariani? I spelled two different ways. I think it was Mariani.
That's it. and no others. We'll take a a vote. Um, Miss Davis, >> I >> Mr. Dykins, >> hi. >> Mr. Matters, >> hi. >> Mr. Smith, >> you were >> abstain. >> Abstain and the chair vote size. So
that's 4 01. The next is our minutes of October 8th, 2024. Also a joint meeting with the affordable housing trust fund board of trustees. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. >> Is there a second? Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Um any on any corrections? We're hearing none. I'll call the role. >> Mr. Davis. >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. >> I. >> Um Mr. Dykins. >> I. >> Mr. Smith. >> I'll abstain.
>> And the chair votes I. That's 401. Public announcements and agenda item request. I have um just really one in two parts. The attorney general notified us on Friday, notified the town clerk
that she had approved all bylaws voted at the annual town meeting in 2025 except for article 59 related to the airport for which um she requested and town council agreed to defer um with additional time for response on the 3rd
of November. But included among those that were approved were two. One which is relevant tonight when we vote on the tax committee that has to do with um participation of fincom members on certain non-standing committees. We can talk
about that later. And article 58 that was article 38. Article 58 of the warrant changes to the affordable housing trust board. That was the one which uh limited the number of elected I'm sorry of select board members to just one. So there is a vac there will
be a vacancy. These are going to be posted by the constable tomorrow. They're not officially um uh operative until tomorrow. I guess I wanted to throw this out. I think this is not deliberation but procedurally um we have a vacancy on this committee
which I think we all consider is really important. Do you want to um defer a discussion as to how to fill that vacancy or do you want to just um is there any interest in just advertising to the public that if they're interested they could apply and do we want to
establish a date? I think procedurally we could do that tonight. I don't >> Are you talking about the >> the affordable housing trust? That's what I meant. I'm sorry. >> We could defer discussion on this until our next meeting if you'd like.
We do have some candidates that were interviewed but were not appointed last time. Um if there's any interest we could talk about it at a future meeting, but if you want to have reach a consensus or um vote on it, we'll have
to defer that under the open meeting law. Steuart, you were about to say something. I just think it might be helpful to reach out to to the community and see who might be interested in serving uh and going through that process if that's your question.
>> Yeah, I mean I didn't know whether the sense of the board was to invite new candidates, stick with the candidates that were interviewed. Um do we want to put a deadline? >> Can we do that tonight though, Dean? I'm
>> I sort of think this is a procedural >> I think so too because we have to update the listing um to to officially have that one vacant seat available and if you want to entertain um additional applications we can set a date. I don't know if it's
>> I'd like to attain I'd like to open it to additional applications. >> I I also know that the committee is very anxious to move forward and get reorganized. So, but would like So, can we >> I'd hate to lose a week or two when we >> if we could please put a deadline on it then. I mean, we're meeting technically
we have two meetings a month, but we're usually doing them like the first meeting of the month. So, >> what would you suggest as a deadline? You're on board. >> We're um Octo we're meeting tomorrow uh and then we'll meet again the first Wednesday of October. So if we can get a
deadline that's you know prior to our ne our meeting before that. >> Okay. >> You know like at least get interview and then have a vote taken within that time frame of this month. >> Right. Cy did you had something? >> No I was just going to say procedurally
um now that we have confirmation I think we should open it up to you know to the public. I think that's the proper process to move forward. Putting a date on it to move this things forward as quick as possible is also appropriate. So, >> with a vote being taken by this committee, possibly.
>> Yeah, depending on how many apply, >> right? >> Jeeoff, you had something you wanted to >> No, they can't reorganized until the October meeting. So, we got to we got to get it done this month. >> Well, so >> you guys have we have a meeting the 30th. >> We could give people two weeks.
>> There you go. >> September 16th as a deadline. Mhm. >> And those were already >> we already have candidates >> some candidates they would be considered as as well. Right. >> Okay. So, let's put that on the website and we'll announce it tonight that
anyone interested in serving on the affordable housing trust. Um, you should probably take a look at the the bylaw language just to see what qualifications folks are look the the backgrounds that the bylaw is talking
about um have to uh submit to uh the executive assistant uh or online by September 16th. Okay, those are the my two announcements. Any other announcements from the select board? Any
announcements? Yes, Brian Phillips. I had another one, but I'll >> Phillips 374 lanes Road. Um, I guess this is my first agenda request. Uh, it's about the roofing and siding on the elementary school. Um, I've been by it
and it's in total disrepair. Um, probably needed work about five years ago. Um, it's not just me. I brought a roofer over there to make sure I wasn't crazy. Um, and it's just kind of I feel like, you know, the prevention to do preventive maintenance on it would be much better than having to build a whole
new building. Thanks. >> I just want to mention, you know, that project is has that's been approved >> by the elementary or >> Oh, you're saying the elementary school. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I I thought you meant the middle school. >> It's they're built about the same time. So, it's about the same, you know, thing. You see the raw the uh
>> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you. Any others from the public or online? I did receive um a communication in writing today from um Miss Hannah Smith who could not be here this evening but
asked if I I I'll read the pertinent portion. She has an agenda item request. I had I had planned to request this issue during agenda items request period at tonight's meeting September 2nd but I am now unable to attend. I'm requesting that the date for which the FY26 water
rates were effective, July 1st, be ex be examined due to the fact that residents were charged for water that was consumed prior to the July 1st increase. She does uh I won't read the whole email. She does give some um basis which she believes supports that
request. And then she says that um this is her language. Since since the select board voted based on information that has turned out to be incorrect, I feel that this needs to be addressed on the on an agenda item in the near future, especially considering many have either
already paid their bills or about to pay their bills. So um I want to acknowledge receipt of that request and that will be taken into consideration. Okay. Uh the next item on the agenda is a public hearing uh from Verizon on poll
um installations but um and the butters were notified uh of this but uh this even though it was published and that's why it's on the agenda it is being withdrawn due to a need for a redesign by Verizon New England Inc. The abuters
have been notified of the u withdrawal so that item is withdrawn. The next item is a public hearing uh that the board consider as water and sewer commissioners the request of additional sewer flow at 16 Squans Road West Chadam. And I'll ask the clerk to read
the public hearing notice. >> Water and sewer commissioners public hearing notice. The Cadam Select Board acting as water and sewer commissioners commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. in the town hall annex large
meeting room 261 George Ryder Road to consider a request for increased sewer flow of 907 decimal 925 gallons per day for the property located at 16 Squanset Road West Chattam to
accommodate a change in use to 256 square ft of retail 12 80 GPD
50 FAF 50 fast food seats 1,000 gallons per day for a total of 1,00012 decimal 80 gallons per day. All interested parties are encouraged to attend either in person or remotely
using the team's meeting link in the posted agenda. >> Thank you. Uh, so we'll open the public hearing. Um, the applicant, Dre Towi, was advised of the hearing. Is she here? I don't see her on. Is she here? Dre, are you there? >> Miss Doey?
>> Yes, I'm here. >> Yes, this is your application. Do you want to speak to it? I know we have the public works director here as well. >> Yeah, nice to see you again. Um, I'm Dre Tawi. I'm the owner of 16 Squanset. Um we've been approved for change of use uh
both by the building department and by planning and zoning and um applied to the sewer department and it was to my knowledge that they also approved the change of use of the sewage flow um
and that I'm to come before you and for approval. >> Okay. Um, >> and I think right now it's um it it it affects my seating. So, right now we're um limited to 15 seats within the coffee
house and have applied for 49 seats. >> Okay, that would be the total. 49 or 50? It says 50 on the >> uh 49. >> Okay, those are all indoor. >> Uh yes, they are. >> Okay. Um,
Rob Philly, director of public works, do you want to speak to this or what's >> uh Yeah. Uh, one thing I wanted to know is that Rob Failey, director of public works, uh, there was a mathematical error in this memo. Um, it should actually be the increase in flow should be 707.925
gallons per day. So that's 200 gallons per day less than what we show it on here, which is actually um 220 gallons less than what the water and sewer advisory committee approved because we weren't we didn't realize there was a change in use of the property in 2013.
Okay. >> Building commissioner notified of that. When we made the correction, we reduced it 20 gallons instead of 220 gallons. >> So the bottom line is 707 gallons per day. >> Yeah. 707.925 gallons per day. That's the request.
Okay. And this has been recommended by the water and sewer advisory committee. That's correct. And and uh Okay. Are there any questions or comments from the board? >> Yes, Jeff. >> Yeah. I'd like to make a motion. >> We're Well, we have to hear from the public. >> Okay. Okay.
>> Okay. Any members of the public want to speak to this? >> Okay. Back to you. I move that we support the request for 16 Squanset Road for an increase in sewer flow of 77.925 gallons per day. >> Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Okay, we'll call the role. Miss Davis >> I. >> Mr. Dykins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> Mr. Chair Votes. I You have it. Thank you. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next, we have uh the annual classification hearing under the
Massachusetts general laws for the 2000 fiscal year 2026 tax rate. And um I'll ask the clerk to read the public hearing notice and then we'll open the hearing. Select board public hearing according to
Massachusetts General Laws chapter 50 section 50 of the acts of 1982 and chapter 91 of the acts of 1983. The select board is annually charged with determining the allocation of local
property taxes by the adoption of a residential factor open space discount residential exemption and/or adopting a small commercial exemption. All interested parties are encouraged to participate in person or remotely via
the link in the posted agenda. >> Thank you. So, we'll open the hearing and um our dire assistant assessor Candace Cook is going to make the presentation for the assessing department and the board of assessors. >> Good evening, select board members. As
mentioned, I'm Candace Cook. I'm the assistant assessor and we are here tonight as we do every year annually after our values are approved by the Department of Revenue to present to you the four options for setting the tax rate. Before we get into those different
options, let's discuss the values. So, the Department of Revenue approved our values as of August 26, 2025. As you can see in your agenda packet, we have a tenative tax rate of $367 for fiscal year 2026,
which is a 20 cent increase from last year, which was $347. Now we have a 4.3% increase in the average of all the property values and we can see that the values are still increasing um slightly
over the years. Now you might question why did the tax rate increase that 20%. Well, let me explain. Per our finance director, the tax rate reflects the amount of the revenue raised for every $1,000 of assessed property values. It
increases when the town spends spending needs outpace growth in overall property valuation. When appropriation such as the operating budget, debt service or approved articles exceeds can be covered by new growth or other revenues. The
difference must be raised through the tax rate. So for fiscal 2026, although Chattam's total property valuation rose by 4.27%, authorized spending increased at a higher rate. Now, the board of assessors
at their meeting of August 28th, 2025 voted unanimously to make the following recommendation to the select board for the fiscal year 2026 classification hearing to be held on September 2nd, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. On the matter of tax
classifying the tax rate to vote a residential factor of one so that each class maintains 100% of its full value tax share and not to shift the tax burden from the residential and open class open space classes to the commercial, industrial and personal
property classes on the matter of the open space discount. not to grant an open space discount which would shift the tax burden from the open space properties to the residential property class on the matter of the residential exemption not to grant a residential
exemption which would shift that tax burden within the residential class from residents to part-time residents. Now on the matter of the commercial small commercial exemption, not to grant a small business exemption which would shift the tax burden within
the commercial and industrial personal property classes from certain small commercial properties to other commercial and industrial properties. Now our value percentage in those classes have not changed. we're still at for our residential of 9450%
and then it's going to be 550% for commercial industrial personal property. Now on the four options. So your decision is whether or not to vote the residential factor one. By doing so that means each class remain 100% of its value tax share and not to shift that
tax burden from the residential class to commercial industrial personal property class. On the matter of the open space discount, the town of Chadam does not have any properties classified as open space. There's only one community out of 351 that does have open space
designation. That town is Bedford. So, historically, the Cadam Conservation has handled those open space properties. So, it would have no effect if the select board were to vote an open space discount on the matter of the residential exemption. Now, the select board voted on August 19th, 2025 to
grant the residential exemption with the discount of 35% for the fiscal year 2027. as stated at that meeting from our director of assessing Dale Kelly or our Dale Kelly, however you'd like to call her. Um she did note and she's noted at previous um tax classification hearing
that this does need to be voted yearly uh at the tax classification hearing because it is one of your options and also the average residential value changes yearly. Now the residential exemption grants an exemption of up to 35% of the average residential property
value for all residential owners who are here year round. Now, we do have seasonally designated communities that can go up to 50%. The burden basically shifts within the residential class with the year- round residents having paying lower taxes than the seasonally and
higherend home tax rates would increase. Now, in your packet or a handout, um you should have a couple examples of those 35% of the residential exemption using that 2026 fiscal year. And then just please note that that changes yearly the
average residential value. Now on to the matter of the small commercial exemption. Well, the result of legislation that occurred in 1994. This exemption allows the select board to exempt up to 10% of the assessed value of the commercial properties that are
assessed at less than 1 million and occupied by businesses with less than 10 employees. The weakness of this small business exemption is that it does not benefit the small businesses. In fact, it actually benefits the landlord. So,
in conclusion, we had our values approved by the Department of Revenue on August 26, 2025. Attached in your handout, you'll see the LA4 form, which indicates the total value by classes of parcels in Chadam. You'll also see the
LA5 that indicates the amount of the excess levy capacity of 1,265,460.73. And then lastly is those examples of the 35% residential exemption. Any questions? >> Thank you, Candace. Um, so what we're dealing with tonight is the tax
classification and these various exemptions uh to be considered for FY2026, the current tax year as you mentioned and as is in the memo. And as um the director noted last week, the vote that was taken last week relative
to a 35% has to be voted again. >> Yes. uh in October um of next in September of next year, >> the next meeting. Correct. >> So I uh I do have some comments or questions and then I'll open it to the
rest of the board. >> Um so my first has to do with the implement I want to focus on the residential tax exemption and I'm talking 2026. >> Okay. So, uh, we've heard multiple times that in order to implement this, um,
there would be additional staff hiring necessary. That's certainly the opinion of the current director of assessing from what I've heard. Um, there's a potential for um, additional internal staff time as
well as a new employee, I guess. Um and town council services would be needed to evaluate >> those trust >> various trust documents. Absolutely. >> How many trusts we have? About 700 or so, >> I believe. So, yes. >> And we have 3,300
potential applicants. >> 3,300 potential properties that would have to be that would be >> candidates for this exemption. But there's also an additional feature of implementation that I think gets lost in the shuffle and frankly I didn't
understand it until I had further conversation with the assessing department over the past week and that has to do with the overlay. >> So can you explain what the overlay is in general, how it relates to the residential tax exemption and then I want to ask you about a particular town
on the Cape. So just for a definition on the overlay account, it's the municipal finance account designated to fund abatements and exemptions of committed real and personal property taxes for any fiscal year. So what can happen is is we're telling you that we're going to be raising this amount of money to be paid
for those real estate taxes and now we're going to take in consideration that those exemptions are going to reduce that amount. So it's important that we have a substantial amount on our overlay. >> We have overlay every year. It's part of the budget. What's about $700,000? >> Yep. And that's used to pay um for
abatements. >> Our current exemptions that we have are statutory exemptions which is our seniors, our blinds. >> Yeah. >> And then also any other real estate or personal property abatements, motor vehicles. So those are already taken care of with >> part of the budget that the town manager presents that the select board
recommends the town meeting and the town meeting approves and for which taxes are raised to pay. Okay. >> No, actually that's that's not the case. No, we don't we don't present a budget for overlay. It's something that the assessor uh the board of assessors
determines and if there's a certain amount that the assessors are comfortable with, we would transfer that to either stabilization or OPEC. So, we don't use it to balance our operating budget. >> There's no taxation on that.
>> I guess the tax rate >> it's our finance director, Carrie Maserel. Sorry, Carrie Maserel, finance director. The overlay is actually calculated after we do the tax rate. It just comes in and flows in as a calculation based on what we have for
figures in there. So, typically it's around um I'll say like $200,000 or 250 that we get on our overlay. And right now in our overlay, we have a balance of around $750,000
from previous years that we haven't used. So each year um the town of Chadam votes to take out 150,000 of that overlay to use towards OPED is usually what we use it towards. Um >> but but to pay forget about the
residential tax exemption to pay for abatements y currently that comes out of overlay >> that comes up. >> Isn't that tax money? >> Was it raised by taxation at some point? >> Um I don't I don't >> it's part of the
>> it is okay. Okay. It is it's part of the tax rate recap, but it's not it's like a calculation that comes in from it. >> Well, what I'm trying to establish is whether the more money you put in overlay, the more the tax burden is on the public. >> We can't put more money into it than
what was calculated by the department of revenue. So, it's a calculation that they determine. >> Does it have >> You have to come to the mic. >> Okay. it would increase um currently that calculation that the assessors put
together would increase for that fiscal year of 27 which could be outstanding depending if people file late. It usually occurs most often when the overlays have to go up when the towns are not quarterly because it's just the
timing of an exemption. So our bills get set in September and October and they have the right under the law to file until April. So that's why I was saying prior to this that the campaign
to get out there in January and let people know they should file early before April so we can get them on that first half and not have to do an abatement. Obviously the second year, you know, right now like say with the
seniors and the veterans, we have you on a schedule. We get you in early. We send you out applications early so that doesn't happen and affect the overlay as much as it could. >> Who determines the amount of overlay?
>> Um well, it's it's our usage from prior years as well as what is outstanding. So what I mean what's outstanding? It could be you know receivables are involved in that outstanding receivables as well as abatements. Right now we have two
appellet tax board cases outstanding. We have to account for those with the department of revenue. So we would that would show up in that fiscal year in FY27 and we they would like I was saying earlier to someone East Tam and Orleans
who are currently going in at 5% are looking to increase their overlays at 5% anywhere from 2 to $300,000 just at the five just to give you an idea what other towns are looking at. >> But who makes that determination here?
the town manager, the finance director, the director of assessing, the board of assessors, who makes the determination of how much you're going to put in the overlay. >> Well, that'll be again, we'll we'll put in what we think, you know, depending on, you know, even like East Tam at that
2 to 300 was based on 50% of people being late. That's what they were basing it on. I'm hoping if you have a really good campaign and you're out there and telling the people about it that it's going to be a lot less than that, maybe 25%. >> We have 700,000 to play around with
right now. >> Mhm. >> How is that added to? >> How what do you mean? How is that added? >> If you use 150,000 of the 700,000 for >> now you're down to five 550. What if you
what if the determination is made that you need $1 million for Olay to cover this residential tax? >> It'll be made in that tax year of fiscal year 27. >> Where's that money coming from? >> That will be a good question. >> What's the source of the funds, Dale?
He's trying to get at. So, are we taxing in order to get an overlay or is that >> Well, it goes into the tax recap. >> So, that is a part of the budgeting process. So you would have >> question is if you don't have enough money you would have to yes
>> you'd have to raise taxes >> that >> that I would have to look at in a little detail how it affects yes I would assume that that would affect >> because yes >> the town of >> wealthle >> uh for 5%
>> exemption not 35% and has a hund has approximately a thousand properties eligible >> put in what for overlay a million dollars Um, I'm not sure. Did you? Oh, >> I don't know if she quoted us what she put in her overlay of Wellfleet. I don't
think Nancy did. >> Well, I just I just raised this as as a consideration that's going to have to be taken account because we have 3,300 properties. >> Yes. >> And we have only 700,000 in overlay. Maybe that's going to be enough. Maybe people will apply on time. >> I wanted to ask about the town of
Nantucket. >> Candace, >> I can take. So, they adopted the residential tax exemption in 1981. They've had it in place for 44 years. >> Correct. I actually have an email from our director, the director of assessing,
Rob Rainey, and I'll read exactly what he said. He said, "Nucket adopted the residential exemption in 1990, 1981 or 1982, which was shortly after the state enacted the provision in 1979. I don't have a good legible records from 1980s,
but from the 1990s began with a split at 10% year round and 90% seasonally, or at least that was what was based on the residential exemption as a percentage of the total residential parcels. By the 2000, the year- round portion grew to
about 20% year round and 80% seasonally and has remained more or less consistent with that up to date. And then with 2025 being at 21% year round and 79% seasonal. >> So by that information
when you consider that one of the arguments put in favor of put forward in favor of a residential tax exemption is that it's going to make it possible easier for people to remain in ownership of their homes and perhaps even attract people to be able to buy homes. But in the town of
>> Nantucket, they started out in 1981 >> and in the 1990s because he didn't have records going or information going back prior to the 90s. It was the split between seasonal residents and year round was 80. It was 9010.
>> 9010. Yep. >> And now it's in the early 20s. It sounds 79. >> It's it's 90. It's um 8020. So in what do you want to say 15 20 years it's gone down one notch. >> Correct. >> I I think that's instructive.
Um I want to one final point. Um I got an email last week from someone who thanked me for my vote last week in opposition to 2027. And I this was from a seasonal resident who has a house. And I went and looked
on the assessing records. It's it's valued by the assessors at $1 million. >> Um, if we were to implement a 35% exemption in 2026, how much additional tax approximately is that person going to have to pay? I know you gave us an example for
>> Yeah. So the 1 million, we don't have it exactly at 1 million, but to give you a rough estimate, if the um assessment was 1,642,816, you'd get that reduction, as you can see in the packet, of $574,986.
So that means that the nonqualified taxpayer would pay 1,101 less in taxes, excuse me, more in taxes, and the qualified taxpayer would pay 1,395 less. So it would be probably less than a,000 for the
>> So the f the fellow who has the house who's not year round, it's valued at a million dollars, is going to pay something under $1,000 additional tax >> presumably, >> maybe $800, I don't know. I asked you to calculate um the the the discount that a
year-round resident would pay if um their house were valued at $2.5 million because you can get the discount all the way up to the exemption all the way up to 3.6 whatever it is. >> Again, we're talking 2026, >> correct? >> And you say that the
qualified taxpayer pays $820 less. >> Correct. >> And whether they need it or not. >> Correct. because this is not a need-based system. >> Correct. Everybody gets it correct. >> Okay. So, >> I guess I I just want to say uh rhetorically, does any of this make any
sense? I think not. Um, I think as an elected member of this board, my responsibility is to represent everybody in this town, whether they voted for me or not, whether they are voters or not, whether they own a home
or not, whether they are year-round homeowners or seasonal residents and taxpayers. And I think sound tax policy should be premised on real numbers and empirical data. I don't think you make tax policy on a lick and a prayer.
uh town meeting has rejected the residential tax exemption twice. So, as the finance committee, I think unanimously, and I I continue to believe that the residential tax exemption is a bad idea, and I intend to vote to honor the recommendation of the board of
assessors in full tonight. Those are my comments. Are there any other comments from the board? This is a public hearing. Any comments from the public? Elaine Gibbs. >> Uh, yes. Thank you. Uh I had I think I
had two questions. One was my understanding is it would be kind of automatic, but you've also talked about filing your tax returns early. So what kind of financial information? What are you looking for from the IRS? And
I mean, do we submit that kind of data to you? So yes, the information we would be looking for would be your both federal and state tax returns to pro prove you know residency and then um we would need
an application be filled out but all that information would have to be determined by the new assessor how they want to implement that. >> So even though it's automatic if if we choose not to send in our deter >> it's not automatic. You'd have to apply
for either an application to prove that your residence your residency. >> So what do you are they always on file in a computer somewhere? >> No. That would be something that you would have to provide to us >> in that first initial year.
>> When I send it to you, what do you do with it? Is it there on the computer forever? >> Oh no, no, no. We would make sure as with any of our confidential information that they are um stored in a proper place like we have our other exemptions that we have confidential information. It's not open to the public.
>> Is it returned back to them or remain in the system? >> That again it would have to be what the determination of if they want to do that the new assessor if they wanted to those are all questions that have >> Am I correct? Isn't it department of revenue guidelines that you have to get that information? >> We do need to get it. Yes. To prove
residency. >> Okay. I'm sorry, Elaine. I intervened, but go ahead. >> That's all. That's all right. Um I can't remember. I had a second question, but it's escaped me at this point. Oh, yeah. Um you know, I I I don't know how you're going to manage this. There are some a
lot of sophisticated um financial planning and estate planning that goes on. You're going to have a lot of blind trusts >> and you may find the person applying, you know, maybe somebody who's got a life estate or whatever. I mean there there are so many possibilities. How are
who's going to review those >> to determine >> the ownership? Well, that's why we say we would definitely need another position in addition to having town council review those documents because that's a little bit above our privy if you're dealing with trust documents because one of the requirements is you
have to be not only a trustee but also a beneficiary and we would have to review those documents, you know, thoroughly to make sure that they would apply uh be eligible under the trust docs. See, I I can't imagine how you can even administrate something like that with
3,300 properties and go through that and make the right determination in case there's an error, you know, and then the the owner beneficiary finds out that grandma had applied for it and actually it's not her house. Um, those are my
concerns uh with that kind of financial information and personal information being recorded somewhere. But those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you, Elaine. Any other comments from the public? >> Okay, I see none. So, we'll go back to the board, please.
>> Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Dave, for recognizing me. Uh, for with the tax return submitted, uh, is the financial information redacted? Are you just looking for the actual >> Oh, yes. Redact it. >> Okay. So, we're just going to mostly So, let's be clear here. We're not Everybody's not giving their their tax returns with numbers. You're looking for
the address on that tax return, you know, >> just like we would with our >> And to another earlier another earlier point, Candace, you've done a very very professional job this evening. I'm delighted to meet you and hear you speak. You did a very good job and I will look forward to continuing to working with you. Um but but another
point, the financial information is redacted and it is going to be noisy in year one. We know that and we've known that for decades that it's going to be noisy year one. We're going to need additional resources. We've been told by other towns on the Cape, Ptown um and others that wealthy that they've added
staff and we'll do that. We'll add staff to get it done. But but this board 4 to1 decided that it was a a a significant enough number for year round residents to save them money so that they can exist in this town. This board heard them and we've heard been hearing this
for years and I voted for years to not have a residential tax exemption. And you know what? I I I my again I voted for it this year. It's time. It's time we gave the locals a break. And you know, I I quite don't understand where the chairman was coming from this evening, but this votes vote voted. This
board has voted for the RTE a year hence. Not this year, but a year hence. I want to be real clear. Real clear. Okay. Um we'll keep it at one for the for a dollar this year, but next year we did we voted for it and we're going to implement it. And if it's noisy, it's
going to be it's going to be a little noisy, but we'll get there. other towns have done it and Chadam can do it too. Thank you. >> Any other comments from the board? >> One one thing just to make sure you're aware just to revote it at that time again because it is part of your four options. >> We'll have to revote it next year in
September. >> You'll have to revote it. >> Yeah, we will. >> And um people can change their minds too, but I point out what's on the agenda tonight is 2026, including the residential tax exemption. So that's why I'm talking about it tonight. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Um, I'm ready for a motion. If
anyone has a motion to offer, there is a recommendation from the board of assessors. I'll read that again. Um, I think it's in the packet. Here it is. The board of assessors recommended on August 28th, 2025 that the town of
Chadam continue all tax classes of property at a single rate and to reject the open space discount residential and small commercial exemptions for fiscal year 2026. Is there a motion to support that recommendation? >> So moved.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. >> We'll call the role. Miss Davis. >> Hi. >> Mr. Dykins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. Hi. >> Mr. Smith. I >> and the chair votes I. Thank you, Candace. >> Nice job. >> Next, we have um
public comments on the business agenda. I'll go over the business agenda very briefly. Um, we have a proclamation for suicide prevention, awareness, and acceptance of a shellfish donation, request to use town property by the police department,
um, approval of a final version of a conservation restriction that we've already endorsed, um, a review of the draft request for proposals for affordable and attainable housing, uh, development at Stepping Stones Road,
and, uh, the public comment will be accepted contemporaneously with that one. Review of an the expired town council contract discussion on returning to a weekly meeting schedule starting September 9th and consider amending uh the select
board meeting participation policy and we'll have public comment uh contemporaneously accepted on that and we have several committee appointments. So I will ask at this time are there any com uh public comments on the business agenda? none in person, none online. We'll
proceed then. First is to consider a proclamation of suicide prevention awareness month 2025. And um we have invited um >> Mr. Chair, we have Mora Weir and she's with us remotely. >> Okay. She's from the Cape Island Suicide
Provinvential Prevention Council. Mora, can you address this please? >> Hi, good evening. Thank you for having me. My name is Mara Weir. Dr. Mara Weir. I am the um one of the co-chairs of the Cape Island Suicide Prevention Coalition. Uh each year we send out
proclamations to all uh towns in Barnsville County to help us recognize suicide prevention month which is in September. Uh, I'm not I don't know if you want me to read the whole proclamation or just explain a little bit about why we do it, but I did want
to be here today because I've been with the coalition for a long time now. And as you know, uh, suicide is a concern of ours on the Cape and Islands and each town has their own rates. Um, but Barnesville County as a whole is 1.5
times higher than the rest of the state. So that that is concerning for us. >> Yeah, I I think it probably would make sense uh ordinarily would have the clerk read it, but um since it does lay out the rationale for this, I'm going to ask you if you would read it with the
whereases and and the conclusion and then we can consider taking a vote on it. Doctor. >> Okay. Me, sir. Dr. Okay. Yep. So, uh, it just says, "Whereas with September being recognized as suicide prevention awareness month, the Cape and Island Suicide Prevention Coalition invites our
communities mental health advocates, prevention organizations, survivors, and allies to join us in helping to destigmatize mental health and take proactive action towards suicide prevention. We seek to raise awareness and visibility of mental
health and suicide prevention resources in our communities and help connect individuals with the appropriate support services. Also, whereas according to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, suicide is the second leading cause of
death among individuals between 10 and 34 with around 48,000 people dying annually in the US. Uh that works out whereas to about an average of 132 suicides each day. And
each one of those suicides impact at least 100 individuals. That includes friends, uh service members, family, social media connections, neighbors. And so we know a significant number of these individuals have been
impacted by suicide. So whereas Bible County suicide rate is 1.5 times higher standing at 14.2 per 100,000 versus the rest of the state of Massachusetts they're at 9.5 per 100,000
we recognize the need to create hope through action here locally. So whereas the CE Island Suicide Prevention Coalition works hard to spread the word about prevention, awareness, education, and action, uh I would ask the town of Chadam to
consider putting their full support behind those of us that work in the field of mental health, education, and law enforcement. And we would encourage all residents to take time to understand their mental health through education and recognize that we need to take care
of our mental health while we take care of each other. Thank you. So um there is a resolve that the select board hereby proclaim the month of September 2025 as national suicide prevention awareness month in Chadam. Is there a motion for that
effect? >> Mr. Chairman, I move to proclaim the month of September 2025 as National Suicide Prevention Awareness Month in the town of Cadam, Massachusetts. This is a vote we think we've taken annually for quite some time. >> Yes. Is there a second? >> Second. >> So, it's been moved and seconded. I will
call the role. Miss Davis, >> I. >> Mr. Dykins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Meadows. Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. It is adopted. Uh, we will sign it and u post it. And thank you, doctor, for your good work. >> Thank you. May I make one more comment,
please? >> Pardon me? One more comment. >> Can I make one more comment? >> Yes. >> Um, on September 12th at Cape Cod Community College, we're having our annual suicide prevention summit. We have internationally worldrenowned speakers coming if any and all of the people of Chattam would like to come. I
can send out the flyer, but it's at Cape Cod Community College September 12th and we have some great speakers lined up. So, come out and learn about suicide and help how to help in your neighborhood. >> Thank you. And I think we do have the flyer attached to our materials, but public has heard you.
>> Public has heard you. Thank you. >> Thanks again. >> Next item on on the agenda is to consider the acceptance of a shellfish seed donation from the Chattam Shellfish Company. And I'll call on Renee Gagny, our shellfish constable. >> Uh good evening. And um I'm here tonight
Oh, Renee Gagny, shellfish constable. here tonight to see if you would graciously accept a donation from the Chattam Shellfish Company and that is Steven Wright and John Richards of 17 approximately 17,000 oysters for next
year's harvest. >> Okay, any comments or motion? >> No, I have. >> Yes, Jeff. >> Well, um how many of the 17,000 survive? Do we have >> We have excellent survival rates with our oysters. um um that they get fairly
uh to a very good size before we sink them over winter. And I would think that the mortality is maybe 1%. I mean, we really have great survival rate with our with our oysters. >> They're hardy. >> You sink them in Oyster River, Renee. >> Right off the swimming beach of Oyster Pond.
>> Oh, should I not say that? >> No, just a joke. >> Yeah, I think it's great. And they they've done this for a few years now. I mean, it's >> every year we get a great a gracious donation from them. >> Yes. >> Great. >> Are you going to offer a motion, Mr. Dyers?
>> I recommend the select board vote in favor of accepting donated seed oysters from the Chattam Shellfish Company. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Moved and seconded. Miss Davis. >> I. >> Mr. Dyens. >> Hi. >> Mr. Meadows. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> Hi.
>> Chair votes I. >> Thank you. Renee. >> Next. Consider request to use town property. Chattam Police Monoy Regional Middle School back to school party at Hardings Beach Friday, September 5th, 2025. And we have representative from
the police department. >> We have >> Officer Sheper >> Shapperellis. And then we have the um the chief Mike Anderson also online. >> Hi, Charlie Chales, student resource officer, town of Chadam. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, board members.
Thank you for coming. Uh, so this is something you've done in the past. >> Yes, it is. >> And um I I'm certainly supportive. I suspect all my colleagues are. Are there any questions from the board or comments? A motion or whatever. Cory Meters, >> I'll just offer a motion if you don't
mind. >> Yep. >> All right. I move to approve the use of town property at Harding Beach on Friday, September 5th, 2025 from 400 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. for the annual Monoy Regional Middle School back to school party. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Okay. Moved and seconded. M. Miss Davis. >> I. >> Mr. Dyikens. >> Hi. >> Mr. Meadows. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> Hi. >> And the chair uh chair votes eye. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you, officer.
>> Congratulations on your new job. >> Mr. Chair, are you taking public comments uh on the ones that were not supposed to speak to during the agenda item? already. >> I'm I'm a little confused because I did
offer offer public comment for for the non-contemporaneous ones. Are you Did you want to comment on one we've already voted for or what? I'm sorry. >> Uh, no, they were coming up, but I didn't realize you were I thought we were just talking about that one particular item. So, I have two that I just wanted to comment on.
>> And those are the those are the ones that say public comment will be accepted, namely the stepping stones road and the public participation policy. Is that what you wanted to talk to? >> No, I it was on the summer calendar in the town council's contract, which you don't have for public comment.
>> No, but I did invite comment earlier. Um um I I didn't hear you. I didn't see your hand raised at that point. Which ones did you want to talk about? The town council contract and I'll I'll accept the comments at this time. >> Okay. I really apologize. I didn't realize that. Yes. In terms of the town
uh council's contract, it was signed June 27th, 2024, and it does state that reappointment annually acting by and through the select board. So, I would hope that you would do that. Um, a vote should be taken by you. Um, as an
aside, in reading the packet, I noticed that we were asking town council for his opinion on his own contract, which I think is a little odd. Um, and he did say, "I'd be happy to sign a multipleyear contract and would do so tomorrow, but you wouldn't have to keep
me around for that time." I would urge you to keep it as the contract states annual reappoint because I think history shows that once we have contractual commitments, they are less likely to be revisited. >> And then on the similar >> before you go on before you go on to the
second one, I the reason I asked him the question, I wasn't asking for him to appine on his own contract. I wanted to him to explain what he was referring to in one of the sentences in the contract. I didn't know what was behind it. That's all. Go ahead, >> please.
>> And the other is a summer calendar. Um, you know, October 15th is a summer. Uh, I think, um, it results in long agendas. Uh, the meetings as we move forward every other week tend to be two to three hours with 15 to 20 agenda items. Um,
and as of October 22nd, that's last year when you had the budget summit. And once that starts, it's, you know, a full calendar with upwards of 207 documents or pages in the packets uh all the way through March when we close the warrant.
So, um, I would hope that you would go uh back to fulltime on September 9th as requested. Thank you. >> All right, Elaine. Thank you. Okay, we'll resume with the next um business agenda item, which is to consider the vote to approve the final version of the conservation restriction for Chattam
drinking water well 10 and to vote to authorize the chair to act as dual representative of both the select board and the water and sewer commissioners and signing the conservation restriction for Chattam drinking water well 10. This is essentially a um pro-form
bureaucratic thing because the state apparently um wants us to take certain votes. We've already approved this. Mr. Fail, director of public works, please. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I do apologize. I thought we were closer to the finish line last time. Um, but here we are again. Um, really it comes down
to to two issues. One, uh, the original vote the select board had taken was on March 4th, 2024 prior to the finalization of the conservation easement. So, they want an updated vote on that. There were some changes. They were very minor. they were
almost grammatical in nature. So, um we didn't bring it back to the board for the vote because it really didn't change the the language or the um the intent of the contract of the conservation restriction, I'm sorry. And then finally was the select board chair was signing on behalf of both the select board and
the water and sewer commissioners. And even though our our town charter indicates that he can do that, that the select board uh can vote uh can sign and as the wers commissioner, but it's unclear that what authority the chair has to sign on
behalf of both uh the full board of both committees. So, so it's just another formality to try to clear this up. >> Okay. So, there are two motions and Mr. Dykens is going to offer them. >> Uh with a drum roll, Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the final conservation restriction document as presented and
also I move to authorize the chair of the select board to act as a dual representative for both the select board and the water and sewer commission in signing the conservation restriction. Amen. >> Is there a second to these? There's a second. I will call the role. I will say that when it comes time for the chair to
sign, I'm going to follow the patent of my fellow Quinseyite was born in Quinsey, John Hancock, and write a big >> DPN on there. >> I'll call the role. Mr. Mr. Ms. Davis, >> I >> Mr. Dykins,
>> I Mr. Matters. >> Hi, >> Mr. Smith. >> I >> And the chair votes I. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Rob. Next is um a review of the draft request
for proposals the RFP for affordable and attainable housing development of at Stepping Stones Road. This was an agenda item requested by board member Davis and by Cadam resident Carolyn Mlen. We will accept public comment uh on this item as
well. Our presenter will be Gloria McFersonen, our director of housing and sustainability. Welcome, Gloria. Good evening and thank you. Um I'll do a brief review of the agenda report. Um back in at the end of 2024, the select
board had asked the affordable housing trust to take a first stab at developing a draft RFP for the Stepping Stones Road property. Um, we actually started with town council who took the Main Street RFP draft. Um, not draft, the actual
proposal. She went through, she edited a few things, added a few things. We used that as the base for the Stepping Stones Road RFP. And through um, several meetings of back and forth discussion with the Affordable Housing Trust, um,
they developed and voted to um, submit to the select board the draft that you have in front of you today. You might notice that there are some highlighted sections in the draft RFP. Um, some of those as they relate to dates and things like that are for me so that I know when
we issue it. Um, those are the places that I need to fill in with the dates so that we make certain deadlines. But other things are um kind of those decision points that you can look at to um craft the RFP in a way that that you
would like to see it. Right now it's um asking for ownership housing. It's um requiring 25% affordable units which would be required under a 40B to get the density that um you know we want because
anything over I think it's four units will require a 40B. So 25% have to be affordable. The other 75% are um in here being asked for uh being a range of attainable units from 90% to
200% AMI. Um and then there are various other things highlighted um that uh talk about you know the building type, the development style, um public open space, like those kinds of things um that you can choose to ask a developer to provide
or not if it's not one of your priorities. Um, and I I think that um if there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them. >> Okay, I will uh I have some questions and comments, but I'm going to defer until heard from others. Are there any comments or questions from the board?
Jeff, >> thank you, Mr. Chairman. I you know you mentioned that timing is your deal but uh if we if we need a vote at town meeting can we back up from when we'd like some votes at town meeting and then back up to when the RFP is you think is going to be distributed and what the
response >> so time and the responses would be expected and so we're so if we have an ask from the town we're we're prepared. So, the the ask from the town would be um supplemental funds probably from the
short-term rental tax um special revenue account. And we won't know how much money we'll need until we actually get proposals in. So, there's no town meeting vote required to actually issue the RFP and get proposals. It's once we
get proposals in and you evaluate them um and if they have an ask for a certain amount of money to cover that um gap for the attainable units, that's when you would go to town meeting. >> So, are we targeting next May >> 2026? That that would be a really
ambitious schedule, but but I I think it's within the realm of possibility. >> That's kind of what I'm asking. >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh Mr. Chair Glor, what's the duration so that if we put or the timing for the RFP, do we usually have it out for 30 days or is it
>> It has to be a minimum of 30 days at the central register. So, we usually issue it like the week before it goes in the central register. So, t typically we'll have it out for like um five weeks minimum, but the last two RFPs that were issued, we actually had them out for six
weeks. And I did hear a little bit from developers saying that that was kind of a tight schedule and that eight weeks would be ideal. So I would say that there's the central register requirement, but realistically we should plan on six to eight weeks having the RFPs out. And I think that I think the
evaluation this time around will probably be like more streamlined because everyone's already gone through the process already. So I think that whereas we spent I don't know how many we spent at least a month doing evaluations I think that realistically
if we get proposals in and if I you know do a summary sheet for all of them we can probably review them fairly quickly >> and I think if you if you don't mind >> yeah I'll have others but go ahead >> that would involve uh the town manager
naming a review committee I think outside that would be representative of the select board hopefully a a member of the affordable housing trust and uh you know at large members um to look at the RFPs and >> last time she had both boards in full but right
>> thinking it could be something smaller than >> smaller and more in her >> that's her as the yeah >> so I'd actually like to see the evaluation committee nominated before the RFP is issued so we can ask for the appropriate number of copies of the
proposal which we did not have last time >> Corey thank you Mr. Sure. No, it is clear this entire board recognizes the need for housing. No arguments there and we know home ownership is a desired um op offering. Um I there's a lot of
support for that. The one thing that I think we always get a lot of focus on and I'd like to have a little bit of discussion on is the appropriate of density. Density is always like the tricky word. It's it's the one thing that kind of, you know, pushes people one way or another. um because we did come up with some test fits and we had
some preliminary, you know, concept of what we might be doing with the property. Um and the 12 to 20 that is highlighted here seems a little bit higher than what I remember. So you want to speak to that and kind of just see where we landed here.
>> So the the trust um you know considered the test fits that were done. I think that the most number of units on the test fits was 10. there were some parameters put on those test fits that we don't necessarily want to impose on a
developer. So, we asked for either single family or duplex units each on its individual lot, which is going to give you um you know, fewer units overall. So, we felt like that was probably um potentially the lower end of
it. Um how we went up to 20 units, I can't really say, but that was what was um voted on. But you'll notice that that's highlighted in here as something that you can um discuss and scale back if you see fit. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um Stuart, did you have anything at this
point? I have some, but I'll wait until you you're >> Well, I guess my comment go and thank you for meeting last week or the week when whenever we met. You were very helpful. Um you know, density is to follow up on
Corey's comments. density is a hot button issue and it's um kind of rearing its head in uh both projects in West Cadam and South Chattam. So um I have real concern about the density of this project and the
effect on the neighborhood and um somewhat new to this process. Gloria, have we the town done any sort of meetings or outreach with the with the folks in the area to get input? Will
that come later? >> I think that would I think that would probably come during um I I mean it would come later. I can't imagine um putting it out there to the general public saying how do you what do you think we should do for an RFP when people typically don't have that kind of
expertise. And I have to say, as someone who's actually done private sector land development in the Amoris Northampton area, I've never approached a parcel and said, "What do I think is the ideal density for this?" I mean, there are so many factors that influence the number
of units that can be built on a property. It could be the topography. It could be wetlands. It could be the shape of the parcel like a nice square parcel like um the Main Street property. Much easier to get units on than a piece like
Stepping Stones Road for instance. So, I think that a few of you have asked me and I've given my opinion. So, I think I think it's unrealistic that anyone's going to get 20 units on this site. When I look at this parcel, it's an odd shape, right? because the corners
because of the arch the corners uh go down to points which is you know undevelopable land. There's a steep slope in the back that leads to the rail trail so you have to offset buildings off of that a little bit. Um it's long
and thin. Um but you can't have a number of curb cuts going out onto Stepping Stones Road. It's just um you know potentially dangerous. So that's part of the reason that the test fits had that kind of circular common driveway that
individual driveways were off. So when you think about the undevelopable really narrow portion of the site at either end, when you think of the undevelopable steep slope in the back, when you think about the undevelopable portion um
between the common drive and the street because it actually is a pretty pretty narrow close to the road common drive. It's not like you're putting It's not like you'd ever have room to put units on both sides of that. When you think about that undevelopable part, it really
does reduce and I'm not going to say the word density because we're just looking at the number of units. It's really going to reduce the number of units that you could physically fit on the site. I mean, you could overcome that by putting, you know, an apartment building, but if you look at the draft
in front of you, that's not anything that the Affordable Housing Trust proposed, and it's not anything that would make sense in a neighborhood. That said, the neighborhood has really small small lots. You know, it's a it's a fairly dense neighborhood across the street.
>> Well, I'm just trying to avoid where, you know, >> small lots >> where some of us find ourselves in in these two projects that are ongoing. And um I think 20 for 2 acres is far too dense. I use the word density because that's what I am familiar with. So um
I'm not going to support the uh the uh the density of this if if we want to scale that back to something that's more appropriate for what I believe for the neighborhood. Um I'm very happy to see the we're going with home ownership. That's very I think the right direction.
But I think it's too many too many units on this um this piece of property. >> Thank you. Um I'm just going to offer a couple of comments um with respect to the home ownership. I'm happy that this is home home ownership directed uh and
um because um the home ownership option was with respect to the previous RFPs on the two properties that are currently in front of the zoning board. um really was a secondary consideration. Um it was in
the in the RFPs, but that's not you were doing. That's what the effectively the trust recommended to us at the time. Um I I did go back and look um and I remember distinctly there were two
presentations regarding the test fits by UTIL. One was in December at the select board and says there was also a November 6 meeting. I not sure that's the correct date. I couldn't find that, but I did find the information. It
looks like the number of units that we were looking at was something be in the order of 8 to 12. Uh it wasn't 12 to 20. And I don't know where I come down on on the number of units. And I I hear two of my colleagues expressing some concern about
that. I don't know whether that's too much to 12 to 20 is too much or not enough. I guess I'm just I'm I'm not puzzled, but you know, this was referred to the AHT on a split vote
and now there's a provision in the RFP that says basically discard discount the Utah um test fit scenarios regarding um the parameters. they're no longer requirements and that's what came back
to us. Um, I assume and I respect the work of the trust. I assume they discussed this, looked at the property, looked at the topography and all the considerations that you just articulated, Gloria, and that's what they came up with. But that's what we have in front of us. As I
recall, in the RFPs for Main Street and Meeting House Road, there was no upper limit recited. Yeah, we just >> was talked about, but there was none ultimately put. So, this one does have an upper limit, and I >> I think that's probably helpful. Um
there's talk here about um local preference. If you go 40B, you can get up to what, 70% local preference. If the state approves it, >> you can get 70% local preference of the 40B units of the 80% AMI and below. So
25% of the units on the site can have a 70% local preference. >> What about the attainable units? >> Nope. >> We can't have any kind of low or be discrimination, I guess, under housing laws. >> I think that with seasonal communities coming out, we could do something where
we um you know, target some for teachers or um you know, municipal employees. like we haven't gotten our final guidance on that so I'm not really sure how all that's going to fall out but I think it's possible that we can wrap some of that in too.
>> Okay. Um the reason to go 40B is to what? Be able to tap into the AHT fund monies for the >> No. So the reason to go um 40B is because that parcel would only allow like four units without a 40B to
override the the density requirements under zoning. Okay. Um, see if I have anything else here. >> But it doesn't hurt to tap into the affordable housing. >> Well, yeah. Um, and and with respect to
Jeff's initial question going to town meeting, that's for money. >> That's what it for. >> It would be so the trust funds can be used for anything for all of the 80% units. And when I say use, it would be to close a gap for the developers. So, we're not going to we're not going to
pay $650,000 per unit. We're going to have the developer build it, know that they're going to get some money back, and we're going to close that gap between what they could get and what they, you know, can sell it for affordably. So, the affordable housing trust funds could cover all of those 25%
uh units at 80% AMI and below. It could also cover any units up to 100% AMI. And then between 100 and 200% that's when you have to potentially use um the attainable um housing funds. >> Okay. Um this goes out to qualified
developers. Who determines the qualifications? >> The the evaluation committee. >> Okay. >> I mean and if you look in the evaluation criteria which is attachment A, it talks about you know X number of projects at this scale working with municipalities.
So >> it's the same essentially the same criteria we looked at last time. >> Yeah. I mean, you've tailored it a little bit to this particular project. Okay. Um, if there are no more questions from the board at the present time, >> I have some comments if you >> go ahead, Shireen. I'm sorry.
>> It's okay. Um, I just want to speak to the 1220 um, density. I think it was to provide a better opportunity for people to look at the project >> and then seeing it. I think as Gloria had explained the topography would
probably limit that but it would not dislim you know an opportunity. Um and the reason for density is is about is somewhat about the the financing aspect of a project too. But it also um we are
getting if we're talking about density it's you know in that particular neighborhood where there are are all the houses on this um heritage lane and and the other they're all in very small lots. So it's very fitting. Um and the
townhouse design is a nice design. I I think I've seen several examples in other towns and communities, particularly I saw one in Plymouth. Um uh that were duplex town houses that were really quite charming and fitting for for um the town. Um there's the cost
effectiveness to everything too to have it a little more dense. Um so I I'm not I'm not as concerned. Um but I get it. 20 I I feel was it was brought up by one of the members who felt that we should maximize as much opportunity as a group,
you know, as on a project as possible um to get the most that we can out of what we're trying to do for the community. Um that that being said, um you know, I'd really hate to see this be really scaled down to next to nothing because I think
that that would it just it wouldn't be a useful piece of the property. Can I ask you a a conceptual question or to Gloria because I did read in here the options for the design included the the phrase stacked flats in order to
get 20 units is the only way you can get that with a stacked flat or do you think you did you consider the trust board consider um reaching 20 units with these other options like town houses and >> so we didn't we didn't drill down on
actual building styles and how many units could be could could fit in. I think part of the reason we mentioned stacked flats is because stacked flats and town houses, even though one has units that are vertical and the other has units that are hor horizontal, basically look the same. And both of
those building types could be designed in a way that could be compatible with Chattam style architecture. Um, it wasn't a question of how many units can we pack in. I mean, if you want a lot of units, then ask for more one-bedrooms, for instance. That's a good way to to up
your unit count. I mean, everything is everything is so constrained on this site. I if I were doing this just myself, I would put a minimum number and I would I would let a developer just come back and show us what they what they can do. >> Okay. Shireen, did you have anything more?
>> No. >> Okay. Carolyn, did you Mlen, you were one of the requesters of the sponsors of this article, this item? Can I ask Gloria a question? >> Yes, please. >> All right. What What would that minimum
number be, Gloria? >> I mean, I think so. I think 10 is a really reasonable minimum number because I think it's likely that we'll get more than 10. And I don't think I'd want less than 10. And we know that we can get 10 based on those UTIL plans. And like I
said, if you took away the constraints that we put on Util, which was individual lots, I think that they could get a couple of more. I think that realistically, you're talking 10, 12 units. I mean, I can't imagine more than
12 or 13. I But who knows? I mean, I don't know what kind of clever solution a developer could come up with, especially if they're small units. Just for just quick clarification, >> under current zoning, we could do four units
>> on that parcel, >> correct? >> I mean, technically, you'd have to reszone it to something not municipal first, but in keeping with the neighborhood, yes, you would be able to get four. >> So, eight units would be twice the density. 12 units would be three times the density. Just just trying to put in
perspective what we are talking about. Um, potentially. So, okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Anything more, Shireen? >> No. >> Okay. Carolyn >> Carolyn McClullen, South Chattam. Yes. Um, so just in speaking to um obviously you we want you folks to move forward
and get this in motion and the questions you have about the density. I obviously uh I appreciate uh Gloria's opinion about a minimum and then leaving it open, but I understand not everybody's agreeable to that. Uh my my comments about density would also be to not get
so hung up on the actual number of units, but consider the massing. And you could have a building that could be a small two-bedroom and a onebedroom and it might just look like a, you know, a small house. So the number of units in of itself doesn't mean that the site's overburdened. But if you look at the
massing of the buildings, the styles of the buildings, that's more a concern than the actual number of units, especially when we're trying to do some smaller units in addition to the traditional size units. So, the number of bedrooms will will completely change the size of each unit. Um, but I just I
think 20 would be I mean, we have to go back. We have no matter what we decide, you folks decide and what we get an RFP, who answers an RFP, we have to go to town meeting to get them to give us the money. So, it has to be something palatable for the entirety of the town.
So, let's, you know, keeping that in mind, we need to be realistic as to what um what it can look like and and make sure we deliver the best aesthetically pleasing property without overburding the site. That's a very if I could interrupt that's a very uh interesting point because if we would put out this
RFP and and a developer is selected with a particular proposal by the time we go to town meeting will we have at that point already signed a land disposition agreement or will town meeting be able to say we think this is too many units we're not going to pay for all of those
and we want this reduced >> that's what I was trying to get >> that's an excellent question and I'm not sure >> I I think We would have to go to town meeting. >> I would hope it would go first to town meeting. >> We would. And so the LDA would be contingent just like we've done with other purchase and sale agreements. That is contingent on a town meeting vote.
Eldidge garage, the same type of thing. >> So we wouldn't be obligated to the developer's original plan if town meeting decides it's too much for them to accept. >> Yeah. One of the things about a project like this is that there is a lot more
flexibility to potentially decrease the number. So, we're not in that position for Main Street and Meeting House Road when their funding is so tied up with low-income housing tax credits. So, there's going to be nothing like that with this. So, if you guys remember the hack proposal,
it was 36 units and they had offered to phase it so that we could get money at different, you know, at different times. And the other thing that they offered to do was reduce the number so that the total input from the town was less. They
didn't propose fewer than 36 units because that was the minimum, but it was a possibility that they would be open to reducing the number because that would obviously reduce the amount of money that the town would have to put in because there would be some sort of, you know, average cost that we would be
buying down for each of those attainable units, which would be more for 10 units than it would be for six, for instance. So I think that if you do want to entertain something like that where you potentially reduce the number like this is the project where it could actually happen
>> is there when we talked about the previous projects you mentioned some limited funding available from the state I've forgotten what the program is called commonwealth works or something like that >> there yeah there's uh that common yeah there's actually commonwealth works that is funded um but there's ARPA fun not
ARPA funds anymore but home funds And um what's the workforce housing funds? >> So also whether it's >> there might be some potential funding even for the attainable. >> Yeah. >> I heard on for what it's worth, I heard today in the news that the president is
going to declare a housing crisis >> and presumably come up with a program for increased housing opportunities around the country. Maybe there'll be some federal money. Who knows? >> Well, hopefully it's better than opportunity zones. >> Caroline, go ahead. Yeah, just one more point I'd like to make. Um,
>> sorry for interrupting. >> No, no worries. Um, just to be cognizant of the AMI distribution that you're going to have. We didn't get any 80% AMI on any of the projects we've done. So, I'm really hoping that we do that on this. So, we got the four houses. I'd
love for them to be at that 80%. And also be aware that if you do the hund if you do a number at a 100% which I sincerely hope you also do um that that can be funded through the housing trust money because the housing trust can go up to 100%. It won't be part of our shi
but it would be the 100%. So just be aware of that. That's an opportunity to use. We generally have more um trust funds than we have the other funds. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you Caroline. >> Thank you. >> Um if there are any comments Jeff. Yeah, I just want to get back to the notion of
for the for the attainable units are are uh earmarking them for police, fire, teachers, etc. Now, talk to us about that, Gloria, please. >> So, that was part of the benefit of the town adopting the seasonal communities designation at town meeting. It gives us
the ability to um for yearround and attainable housing to actually target towards certain groups. So, uh, municipal employees and it specifically talks about like DPW, teachers, EMTs. Um, it talks about artists, writers, um, and other
creatives that are important for the economy. And if you remember, we did a home rule petition for, um, commercial fishermen, too. >> That I mean, that's that's extremely exciting to me >> to be able to turn around and offer that to to municipal employees and and our it would just be really would be great.
That's really, you know, it's what we want big time. excited about the ownership model. We we you know, as we discuss the rental units at both Meeting House and and uh Main Street. You know, we always said I always said we always said that there'll be opportunities for ownership going forward and hopefully we
can get a flag in the ground for ownership here with with a piece for affordable as well. Um my earlier question about um about town meeting was just concern about you know the ask and and getting it getting it to a a mature
offering that we can put our we can put a price tag to and go to town meeting in a cogent way and get it approved and get it and get it going. Comment comment on the on the neighborhood. It is a neighborhood of small lots. It is all all up and across the street in the north and north east and west. And of
course, there's a cemetery across the street and a school, you know, to the north or to the northwest. Um, so I think it's a it's a great spot. I I I think it's a good idea to go for a minimum. Um, I would do 12 as a minimum. I I only I throw it out there. Just 12 is a minimum.
>> That's what it says, isn't it? It says 12. >> Yeah. And then and then see what what creative, as you noted, Gloria, what creative developers might come up with for um for increased numbers. When we talk about increased density or increased numbers and they're going to
go to municipal employees, I get more excited about the number of folks the increase in the number of folks we can actually house there. So, it's kind of where I land. That that's pretty exciting. >> Are you opposed to the 20 cap? >> You know, I think I I you know,
I'm not a developer, but but you know, you know, you did. But but but that's okay. I mean, we've heard we heard that 20 is pretty high, including Shireen. So, I mean, if someone can do 20 there and do it tastefully and we can, you know, and house municipal employees there, I'm I'm psyched. >> I think it'd be great. >> I think it gives a level of creativity
and options for people to come up with much better design choices. >> You were on the you're on the trust, so I assume you you're okay with the 12 to 20. >> 12 to 20. >> Yeah, I'm okay with the 12 to 20. I'm okay with it. You know, like a recommendation of a minimum is >> Okay, Steuart.
Well, you you mentioned Dean, I wasn't here, but uh the number eight as >> Yeah, we had we had a couple of presentations by the the consultant that came in first. We had some revisions. Some of it had to do with the the roadway and the driveways and and then I
think Gloria came back. I don't think they were there the second time. Maybe they were. And we talked about it again and then the trust came and asked us to refer this to them. And that was the last time this board heard of it.
>> And um what what size are the lots in that area? Are they uh >> well >> I think they're quarter acre inherited. I mean >> we said they're comparable but I I I I don't know that because I don't know what size lots they are. They are relatively small but they could be some a third
>> 20,000 square feet. >> So 20 >> 20,000 is going to be closer to half >> Yeah. Half acre. >> Yeah. Half acre. So it's it's more like >> 10 12 15 would be it there. So >> the non-conforming >> Yeah.
>> not pre-existing. >> So um I'm I'm just concerned about overwhelming this property. Although I'm I'm certainly uh you know want to have my cake and eat it too where we want to
uh I want to I want to be able to accommodate the local folks first and um what's the best way to go about that? >> Oh, you're asking me. I mean, the best way is to put out an RFP like this and
to actually, you know, put a minimum, maybe put a maximum two and just um, you know, during the vetting process like look for maybe maybe we can do more of like a workshop where we talk about all of these highlighted things and we talk
about, you know, the massing of the buildings like Caroline was talking about and talk about specifically like keeping the scale of the building small but but increasing ing the density in a sensitive way, something like that. I mean, honestly, not that I want to like
hark back to something that's already been done, but like we could we could have used those design guidelines from 127 Old Harbor Road for this, too. Like, if we had gotten that, because the whole point of those guidelines was to like establish like how big can a building be
before you have to start breaking it down so that it looks like small buildings. Like those are the kinds of things that you want to bake into an RFP so that a developer knows what we're looking for. We're not looking for a big apartment block. We're looking for, you know, buildings that look little and
look cute and, you know, are small and and fit in with the neighborhood because the neighborhood's not big. Even though even though those lots are bigger than what you're going to get here, it still has a scale that needs to be respected.
So, I think that maybe um maybe if you guys want, we can either run through it today or maybe have another meeting where it's more of a of a workshop where we go over all of the highlighted areas and we start thinking about what we want this to look like and what you put in the RFP.
>> I I think that that would be helpful. I I know it would be to me. Um, and I think it would be helpful to the community and to the neighborhood if we had a better understanding of I mean, I like when I hear we're trying to accommodate our local fishermen and our
cra our arts people and the uh people who work here in the in the government. Um so I think we from my perspective I think it would be helpful to flush that out a little bit further and um better
understand sorry the density and um this uh you know when I when I initially see being a layman you know 12 to 20 on 2 acres of property that says it's going to be overwhelmed to me and I um so if
we're going to be at eight that makes me more comfortable and then we maybe don't have a limit or have a lower limit, but it would help, I think, universally, if we had a workshop like you're suggesting and we can flush these details out so we don't get so far down the road that
we're going to lose control of this, >> Corey. >> Well, no, just to just to kind of move the conversation along um because we do have this the element of town meeting. I think we've kind of discussed that 20 is a little bit high. Um I'm definitely on the lower end of things. you know, if if
if you know, we're allowed in theory allowed to build four without zoning now twice the density would be eight. If I threw a range of 8 to 16, that gives us a very broad, in my opinion, window. I I'm not really warm and fuzzy
about the 16. Um 8 to 12 is probably more my where I'm landing. But for just just moving this forward, would 8 to 16 be a number that the board would be considered to throw out there or are we >> I mean I mean 16 is four times the potential
density which I think is far too much. But just for the conversation, >> you know, I don't know. I'm trying to play a middleman right now. >> Yeah. I mean I I would advocate for a a a lower number. I think 16 is is still too high, but to move the conversation
forward, I I could live with that. >> Share, >> I just want you to go back to some of the conversations that were here earlier about the density issue. It's really not about the number. It will end up being about the design and the opportunity for how many bedrooms will be into the units. So, I don't want to see this
group get bogged down on density. Um, it's a it's a bad word, obviously. It's a it's a it's a hot button word. Um, but I think that the if we are if we're considering a a different number, uh,
and I'm open to that if that's the way it goes, I thought the minimum might work best. Um, and then I think that we can see some really good things coming our way. The more restrictive you put on an
RFP, the harder it is for the creativity and the opportunity to come through. doesn't have to accept it if it's too dense, but you know, we could definitely would be able to see models that are
creative and, you know, will provide the opportunity we want or the success we want out of this project. >> Corey, >> no, I I agree and that's that's kind of where I throw the 16 number out because it's kind of higher than, you know, if we just look at a strictly density for units, it gives me some room for the the
architect to, you know, draft something that might be more palatable. would be a number slightly higher than what I'm really thinking right now, but giving them a little bit of extra room to to grow and present us something because right now a hard 16 I'd say no to, but I'm giving them some, you know, growing
growing space to to see what they could do creatively. So, um >> I have a Did you have something? >> Yeah, I understand what we're trying to get to get to here, but I do appreciate Shireen's comments and Gloria's as well. And I I would go I would go 12 to 16,
but I don't think we want to hamstring um a potential developer. I I get the 20 seems tight and again, I'm not a developer, but I also don't want to lose sight of the potential opportunity here. And I also don't want to um hamstring or
or put uh constraints around um the creativity of of potential developers. I just I think we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot. We we want to create housing here now. could be done really tastefully and still get 12 units or maybe even 16 units, but you could house
a whole bunch of people. So, I mean, I I I think we want a decent balance and I think 12 to 16 probably gets it done with for this group. >> Um, so that's my suggestion. >> Well, I wanted to ask you about a workshop. So, if we did a work workshop, how does that affect the timeline here? That would be done before the RFP is
issued. Is that what you're talking? Uh that would that would be you guys sitting down and going over this line by line with me and and making sure that >> I wouldn't favor that kind of >> so all of those high all of the highlighted things that I put in there. That's that was basically me saying give
me your guidance for that. Do you want to change that? These are these were the the sections that the affordable housing trust discussed. Those were the things that were kind of up for debate. So um have the debate. I mean, if you're not if you're not fully prepared to have the
debate tonight, we can do it, you know, next week or something. Or or maybe you're okay. >> I honestly don't want to delay. >> Please let me >> I don't want to delay. >> I'm not up for a workshop that's going to go through this line by line. I mean, I think it's incumbent upon us. It's our responsibility to go through this document. I did I can point out a place
where a period is missing. That's the level of detail I I undertook on this. But you know I I thought we were perhaps talking about a workshop where where we would talk about potential design but how can we do that without a consultant present we have the old
um designs right that were done by Utah. >> I mean at that kind I thought that's the kind of workshop that Steuart was talking about. I mean maybe I'm wrong maybe I misunderstood. I mean, >> so I would say if you go to page six, for instance, in the center of that page
is a highlighted section and it says the town of Chadam encourages the following. >> Oh, good. >> Multiple buildings which could be of similar or various sizes, native landscaping, outdoor private space for each dwelling unit and ample interior. Like those are the kinds of things that
you can ask for. And then the other place where you can see a lot of those kinds of details if you go to attachment A which is the evaluation criteria there are sections that talk about building design
you know site design look at site design thoughtful and efficient site design of course curb cuts are minimized new landscaping designated area for snow. If you look at um building design um buildings can be all one type or a
range of single families, duplexes, town houses and stacked flats. Is that what you guys want or do you want all single f like like this is why I highlighted this. These were the things for you to consider and these are the sections of this RFP that are going to shape the responses that you get. Well, I
personally have no issues with what's in here. I mean, I could even live with the 12 to 20 as something that is put out. Uh, that doesn't necessarily mean that's what we're going to recommend at town
meeting. Um, but I'm not seeing the benefit of a workshop that's just going to go over the document. Um, we could either take a vote on the document tonight or and I'll say for I will say I think we're giving this document more vetting than I felt we had on the
previous documents at this select board. But anyway, that's just a cheap political comment on my com my part. I'll one last comment from the board and then I'm going to go to public comment. >> Jeff, that's I do have a question. Number one, the yellow highlighted areas
that you highlighted on page seven. It's about sewer. >> So, so the western part of this property is could already be um could already use gravity um is what the way I read this >> perhaps. >> Okay. Perhap. Okay. So, if I'm a I'm a
respondent to this RFP, what do I assume about sewering this area? Am I um responsible for the cost of sewer tie-in or is that the town's uh responsibility or is that subject to negotiation going forward?
So the site as it as it is has a high point and a low point. The high point is by an existing sewer. Um the sewer invert is fairly deep. So it would allow a certain portion of that site to potentially
gravity feed into it. That would be the develop on the developer to pay for that. That sewer manhole can absolutely not service the entire site. So there's a couple different ways you can handle it. you can um pump the lower portion of
the site up to the sewer manhole or you can wait till the sewer comes around in like four or five years and you can do a phase development. Um but any pump that would have that would happen would be the responsibility of the developer. I don't know whether it makes more sense
to have individual E1s in the basement of every unit, or if it makes sense to build a small pump station on site, which is something that the Affordable Housing Trust um you know, pondered as a solution to this. Um, so yeah, that's why I highlighted it just because that's
a that's a >> a very different situation than our other two properties which have sewer right there >> and it's a it's a development constraint right now. >> Just one one other comment >> say those pump stations can run a million bucks a piece.
>> Yeah. >> Well, I mean this would be a pump station for maybe six houses or something. It wouldn't be like a >> an o overarching comment here. I'm very comfortable with this RFP. It's it's wellcraftrafted. the criteria is well done. Um, and I think we ought to move forward as quickly as we possible. >> I just had one question before I go to
the public. On on page four up at the top, it says, "All costs and expenses of developing the property, including without limitation the cost of permitting and improvements and leasing to tenants shall be the sole responsibility of the successful proposer. Is that consistent with the
town going to town meeting and requesting some subsidy money? Um, what what paragraph is that? >> It's way up at the top. It's the first full sentence. All >> Yeah, I think the leasing to the tenants. It might be just a a carryover
from the other. >> Yeah, we can I can add something in here about the town understanding. Um, well, also there should be a section in here about >> there are sections dealing there is language dealing with the town subsidizing. I just wondered if there
was some internal inconsistency. >> Yeah, it there might be. Actually, I appreciate you pointing that out. >> Otherwise, I I I I do agree with Jeff. I think you've done a good job putting this together. Um >> that's a good catch. >> Yes. When you're ready. I'm done. Yeah.
>> Okay. Um, so we talked about I I think you mentioned Gloria that um the the buildings would uh you know fit the character of the community.
Would that not go on page six uh in the middle where you have highlighted? Um we can add that over there. It's in the evaluation criteria, but we could definitely add something about that that it's really important that the you know Chattam character be maintained.
>> She's saying she she could add that. >> Yeah, sure. And um as far as I I just want to harp back to because I'm not sure I'm clear on it on the um use uh being able to uh I'll use the
word favor, but we're trying to help the local community here uh that works here. And um where is that in here that uh we'll be we'll be you know uh there
again that bad word favoring. Uh >> how do we get to how do we get to accomplish that? >> So that would be something that um I wouldn't necessarily feel comfortable putting it until we get actual guidance. >> When do you think >> about seasonal communities? Yeah. >> The draft guidance is supposed to come
out sometime in September. I literally check every day so far. It's not out even though it's only September 2nd. Um, so it might make sense and I know you guys are on like a time frame for >> I'm not on a time frame. >> So, so I'm not either actually because there's there's sewer issues and you
know other things and you can always you can always have a special town meeting, right? Fall town meeting. But um yeah, it would be it would be good to put something about that desire in here. I'm not sure how it might influence the
design of the buildings, but it might knowing that it's going to be going for, you know, town employees or something. Um maybe they'll have other considerations. Um and maybe we can do kind of a very general blanket statement, something um something just like, you know, per seasonal
communities, we're going to be pursuing this um without fully understanding >> subject to guidance. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Something like that. >> It see Yeah. It seems to me that the seasonal communities uh explanation is going is is coming quickly in that we're in September and we expect it to arrive
in September. And I think that that's a big component to this project and others. And I'd like to be able to understand what we're able to do using that seasonal communities designation here. And I think we'd get um we, you know, we
just get a whole lot more uh support if we were to do that. I think which um I would suggest you could put some language in that says it is the intention or however you want to phrase it of the town to provide um preference
to these various categories um under the seasonal communities act subject to guidance from the state department of >> I would feel comfortable something like that that's great >> that way we wouldn't have to delay anything but we
>> the the the um proposes would be on notice that that's what we want to do >> it. Yeah, it if if you think that that's going to satisfy that I if I were a proposer, I that's kind of a >> I hear you, >> you know. >> Yeah. I just wondered since since you
were not part of the original >> reviews that we all participated in on the other properties, the way these these evaluation criteria work, the committee will be appointed by the town manager and then Gloria gave us these charts and matrices matrices and we each
independently of one another went through these criteria and and rated them and then um they were that's what this is all about. Okay, >> it's a scoring system. >> And then that went to the town manager who makes made the decision as the chief procurement officer of the town on a
recommendation from both boards at that time. That's how that process worked for the young. >> Yeah, I don't know whether I'm I'm I may be uncomfortable with that. I don't know who what's the criteria by which this committee is
appointed. who I I think if I remember right and Jill you can I think town council advised us that that that the town manager made the decision. >> It's yeah it's under it's under chapter 30B procurement that the chief procurement officer which is the town manager will designate a committee for
evaluation >> but he recommended at the time I think it was Mr. Costello that maybe it was Talon Mr. Talman that both boards should endure should make a
recommendation to the town manager and that's what happened last time on meeting house and main street right >> so >> after the review after the scoring matrix had done that >> you took two two separate votes >> yeah because there wasn't a
>> committee that was making a recommendation >> yes you officially designated that as the review committee at the time >> yeah for timing and we had to yeah >> okay all All right. How >> uh I don't I don't >> Go ahead. >> Let me let me just
So town council has said that under the procurement act that the committee committees are appointed by this board. That committee is going to Yes, they are. Committees are appointed by the town manager. >> Yeah. There's certain working groups like the parking solutions working
group. Um >> we didn't say working. We talked about a committee. That's that's where I go. >> That's the term that's used in the law. It's a committee. However, the board wants to decide. So, that would help you be comfortable with the decision and then we can move forward. I I don't I
don't really >> do it without a committee. >> I could do it without a committee. I I have normally done like with the COA projects, the Wells 10 and 11 used an internal staff review and then we made our recommendations to the select board. >> Oh yeah. and that you know those
technical types I I can understand but this is beyond technical it's uh it's a very sensitive community issue and um I want the process to be uh you know something that the community is involved
with and since we represent the community I thought that the board would be more involved in this. Um that being said um you know I guess Yeah. >> Are you done, Steuart? >> Yeah, for now. I'm sorry. Shireen.
>> Yeah. I I I mean, I'm sure that town manager, you know, has heard our feelings. I She's heard my feelings about who I'd like to see on the review committee. And, you know, that we can have representation from the community.
um you know I I don't and and from the select board if that's something that that she decides but I I think that this is this committee should be people you know should be a a a representation of the community but also a representation
of expertise uh when it comes to um housing projects as well maybe it's somebody from the planning board you know >> okay all right public comment Mr. Phillips. >> All right. Ryan Phillips, 374 Orleans
Road. Um I was really hoping you guys could explore uh the opportunity of tiny houses. Um >> what >> tiny houses? >> Okay. >> Um for one, um they're all going to be inherently affordable, whereas the kind
of project for RFP you're talking about right now where it sounds like it's going to be 25% affordable and you know 80% whatever market value. So, these are going to be in No, >> no, that they're not going to be market value. Would they be? >> No. We're going to do a project that's
uh 25% affordable and 75% attainable. >> Okay. Attainable. Um so, but if you crunch the numbers, I believe these units are going to be um much much more cost effective. I think a lot of them they're prefabs. They just come and drop them off. Um, I think it'd be easier to
create, you know, higher density with these units and allow for more, you know, green space and trees and that type of stuff. And then, um, is there anything else? I was standing there for a long time. Oh, yeah. I read something that Mora Healey is going to be doing or giving
away $60 billion. I think it's 60. It was either 30 or 60 million or billion, but I'm pretty sure it was 60 billion dollars. Um, so I think for projects like that for the seasonal uh communities. So if you know if she's going to be promoting it with all that
type of money, I think we should seriously consider it, you know, and it's I think they have, you know, lower impact environment. I think there's a lot of good things to look into about these tiny houses. >> Right. Thank you. Um, I'm going to go online next. Uh, Lane Gibbs, you have your hand up. Is that Do you want to speak to this or was that from before?
>> Yeah. No, this is now. Thank you. Um, I'm pretty familiar with that piece of land because if you recall about five years ago, we had a citizen's petition to consider it for the Council on Aging. >> It's a very oddshaped lane
is very uneven and the bike path is, you know, defines the boundary in the back. Um, in in if I recall correctly, the footprint on the Council on Aging was about 7,000 square feet total. and then with 40 parking spaces and it it was
going to be potentially tight. Uh I can't imagine 20 units on this uh particularly since this is going to be for home ownership. It's one thing if you're renting and you say, "Well, we've outgrown it. We're going to leave or we have no private space." You know, more
temporary housing. Um the uh there has to be outdoor space for people. If you had 20 units, you have to have at least 40 cars. You cannot restrict it like they did at 1533 where
they said you can only have 1.51 because this is not near anything. Everybody who lives there is going to need two cars per unit so that they can get around and it has to be, you know, there with potentially guest parking
because this is home ownership. Uh so people are going to be looking for different amenities. Um, and if I if you keep using the term maximize this lot and you overbuild it, uh, and you try to go to town meeting and we're going to
have to put up money, it's going to get rejected. People did not have a say, much of a say on 1533. It is overdeveloped, not enough green space, a lot of issues that people are facing
now, and they will remember that. And this is in a much more residential area and I think people don't want the same mistakes it's made. So I would hope you don't bank on trying to maximize this. I think it should be more conducive. They
should look like homes and that's what I think the people in Chadam particularly if taxpayers are paying for it and the people who are going to buy them live in town. I think they have a right to expect that. Uh I don't want to get to the point where we were before that we
got three RFPs and we had to choose one and it came down to well which is the lesser of the three evils. Uh because nobody was happy with any of them. So I would hope that we don't make the same mistakes we made before. This is home ownership and it should be done really
well and look like it blend into the neighborhood, not stick out because that's what the people who are buying them are going to want. And it would be a shame if we found out that nobody in Chattam wanted to live there and pay money to buy a house and then we end up getting people who are
not living and working here, people we're trying to attract. Thank you. >> Thank you, Elaine. Uh John Hogan. >> John Hog. So Chad, I'm really I'll be a quickie on this one. when I heard the uh circular drive and so on possible the circular road in brought up the idea
that in trying to maintain houses that look similar and so on some of the older homes in around here obviously when from the street you see the gable end the narrow end so the house goes back so that way you could potentially have I hate to say it more like mobile home
thing you know where you have more homes this way and so on and still it doesn't look as dense from the street so that's just something that could be considered as far as the design, you know, how you >> Yeah. >> configure the the properties and so on.
So, and I've got my property in South Chadam. I've got it's summer cottages, but there's six cottages on one and 3/4 acre and so on. And we could easily have put if we moved them around, we could have easily put at least another four or five on there. So,
>> that's any more public comment? Um I take it back. We did get um an email in support of of this project. >> Maybe I did. >> Don't recall it. >> Yeah, >> Kathy. It was civic. I think it was like
>> Yes. Now I think there was one >> there was a a res >> kind of a generic >> Yeah, it was a resident of um Knob Hill Road which is across from the project and he was very excited to see that we >> support general support. Yes. >> All right. I'll bring it back to the board. What does what does the board
want to do? So, we have this draft RFP before us for consideration. We could vote, take a vote tonight, whatever. >> Stuart, you would you were >> So, help me with the process. We
I'm not ready to vote on this RFP. uh one and two I think it's it's a good start but I think that there's still outlining questions at least that I have and goals that I'd like to get to that I'm unsure of one of which is the seasonal communities um issue. So um the
other issue is after this RFP is let uh what is the process for approval here? the town manager approves the uh the respondents, right? You you pick a respondent. No, I'll designate a review
committee and then they'll go through and rate the respondents all of them and it will be as what we did before where Gloria provided basically a worksheet and then that committee will make a recommendation to me and then I make a
recommendation to the select board presuming it would go just to the select board um at a public meeting where we would present the the findings of the review committee that's been designated. Okay. So the >> your decision after the >> that that's that's where I'm headed.
>> Yeah. And you might also go to the trust. It might go to the trust. >> You want trust money. >> Um Yes. Yes. So, but it's it it was a little unique with the the main street and meeting house roads, but it would be my decision,
but I have asked the board to endorse my decision so that there's a public vetting because as you may recall 1533 meeting house wrote, a lot of it took place in executive session by the review committee and that was comprised of primarily the the affordable housing trust and then I think we had two
members Um but ultimately it was presented to the full select board and the trust at a joint meeting. So Gloria and I haven't discussed that in in great detail, but certainly we could um put the outline together of what the process is in in >> presenting. I I think that that would be
helpful, Jill, because I don't want to get so far down the road that we we end up with something we don't want. Um and I I fear that this could be headed that way if we act tonight. So, um I I would ask that we, you know, not
too much of a delay, but I think we'll have much better information when we um can solidify this seasonal communities. You can give us a written process because under the procurement act, I don't know why you're coming back to the board since I I don't know where that requirement is
unless you're self-imposing that on your >> self-imposed because it's it wouldn't be a public process otherwise. And so, that's the opportunity. So yeah, if we were if we were able to if you were able to do that, that would I think that that would be at least be helpful to me and I don't think we're undoing, you know,
undo delaying uh a project that we absolutely have to get right if we're going to get support in the future. Thank you. >> Cory, you were first and then Shireen. >> I'll let these guys go first. >> My comments really simple. I mean, for one, um I think we should set a minimum,
not maximum. I think we should all have some flexibility. I'm open to that. you know, eight maximum. >> No maximum because I anyone's paying attention to this knows that if they come up with >> 25 or 30 units. >> Well, if they're gonna pay if they pay attention to it and it's poorly designed, then they're going to know
they're beating down the you know that they're going down the wrong road. I mean, so but I mean, so I could go with that. Um, but also too from a timing perspective and and Gloria maybe can comment more on this is the sewer thing
is is a little bit of a kicker in this whole project because you know it's going to impact the finances the design it is not a small little element that's that so I don't know how that's going to play even if we were to say yes we're going to go with this tonight move it forward how that plays out because that
is a significant element to this project >> is in my opinion So, I don't I don't really know how that's going to play out. So, I think that's a really significant element of this project, too. I think that um the fact that probably half the site can be
sewarded right away is a good thing, but I think that depending on how quickly the sewer gets there, and the trust had met with Rob, I can't remember what he said. Was it like four years? But I mean, >> it wasn't four years, Gloria. It was I
didn't I didn't think so. I thought it was a two to three year process which what might have aligned right up with the process. >> So two to three years would be fabulous and I think that a developer would probably want to wait for that if it's reasonable because
because already they're going to be selling these units at below market and they're going to be asking the town to contribute you know I I don't know how much $300,000 per unit let's say. Um, but then if you have to add the cost of a pump station onto that, that's
something that also would be, you know, end up coming back on the town. Like the town would end up subsidizing that a little bit too. Like there's a lot of um questions about um how expensive that would be. And you know, if you can't get market rate for the units, how do you
how do you cover a pump station? >> Okay, Jeff. >> I'd like to move it this evening. and and I I appreciate Corey's uh suggestion and Shireen's suggestion about naming a minimum and and keeping it open-ended. I I think that's the right approach. I I do. And I also think that when we if we
were to approve this, we need to include that language that you jotted down, Dean, on the seasonal communities. And I don't have the exact language that you articulated, but it was very good. And I think and I think that ought to be included in the RFP in the appropriate the appropriate uh at the appropriate section. There's been a lot of thought
on this, and I I really don't want to hold it up. So, I'd like to move approval with the caveat that the seasonal communities language is is included and a minimum uh of uh >> 12 units. >> And there were two other things that we talked about. It was adding something
about the town's contribution for attainable units going to town meeting >> um for those funds. >> What about the number of units? Are you going to >> I said minimum 12. >> Minimum of 12 with no cap. >> I mean, as long as these >> That's your motion. >> Yes. Is there a second to that?
>> I'll second it. >> Can I just have discussion because >> I personally would be okay with that, but I I know Steuart is would like to see document. >> Yeah, I'd like to support it without rushing it. I don't think there's any I don't think waiting a few weeks is going
in this process is going to hold us up. Um, but there's still there's things that we've spoken about here that haven't been solidified in this document or in the process document that we're going to get that I'd like to be able to see. And I don't think that that's unreasonable to to wait. We you know,
we've rushed other projects and you know, uh, and I think we can do better this time and um, it's >> we're currently scheduled to meet again in two weeks. is let me just throw I'm just trying to be accommodating to everybody on this board and I I've
articulated where I'm headed but um is there any a receptivity to deferring a vote on this for two weeks and get the kind of discuss a document from the town um
staff on the process >> and this RFP revised with Oh yeah, some of the things that we chatted about >> really easy to do. I think that >> Yeah, I think it can be I think we can do this within two weeks. And now maybe the maybe the one thing we haven't
decided on if we could decide on waiting a few weeks is uh the you know the 8 to 12 or 8 to 16 or >> well I think what the motion is you said eight >> I said 12 >> 12 you started with 12 12 and up. That's
up for debate obviously. I what are the what are the negatives about a minimum if I mean if if um Jeff is with uh 12 and I'm at eight I don't understand the negatives about going to eight
>> um >> if there's no negatives about going to 20 >> it's just the the offering of the supply of housing >> and it was the recommendation of affordable housing trust after doing a lot of vetting on this project and the 12 was the number um And you know, I
would look at it from that perspective that there were people in the room that were developers, architects, and had land ba land use uh experience that made that recommendation. The 20 was offered instead as a cap instead of an
open-ended. Um, and I think it was simply to be as flexible as possible. Well, like I said to begin with, I you know, the the the uh the 12 to 20 seems the 20 is too much. And I think I don't see
the harm in going to 8 to 10, understanding where the affordable housing trust landed. I get that. But I I I don't see the negative in that. We can always say no. We can say no to the high end. We can say no to the low end. And again, I'm gonna say let's not get bogged down on on the density issue here
when and keeping it flexible. >> Well, >> you know, because I think the will come out in the design, Steuart, how how how that looks and I think we will be pleasingly surprised by >> without without becoming argumentative. Look what we came up with in West Chadam
to to a lot of people's uh a lot of people's thinking is it's too much. And that's what that's what I'm trying to avoid. So >> I I'm not going to argue with with you on this, but I just I do disagree absolutely with what you're saying.
>> We're just talking scheduling. I'm sorry. >> Well, we have a motion on the table to approve this with the suggested revisions tonight. That's been seconded. I just threw out in an effort to try to take
into account everybody's differing concerns whether there is any might be any interest in deferring that vote for two weeks until we till our next meeting until we um get the revision revised version which
isn't going to have much revision in it. um and um a document that lays out the process that would have to be put together by the acting town manager and director of housing within that
period if that could be done. Um >> I'm sure it can be done, >> but I'd throw that out for the board's consideration. I mean, as far as the minimum, you know, I guess I'm okay with the 12 because I want ownership housing in this town, and I was very disappointed we didn't get it on the
other property. Um, and you know, um, I suspect, I'm not a developer, but I suspect that any party that's going to come in here and look at that property is going to want to put more than eight houses there, eight units there. That's
just where I'm coming from. So any can can I have some feedback from the board and what what you'd like to do? Corey, you haven't been participated in the motion or the second. So maybe you can. >> No, I mean I mean yes. I mean a minimum for my in my in a perfect world would be eight. I understand the process. I'm
giving 12 because 12 is probably more like closer to my maximum versus my minimum. So I'm willing to work with it to to see what the we're going to have a good proposal. So they come out there. We also have a town meeting elements that is giving me some some relief that you know we have a sign of a safeguard if something goes really
>> off track. Town meeting is a chance to weigh in on this. So I I have some comfort in that. So I'm giving it a little more room than I would normally do and trying to be because because this is home ownership. I'm I'm I'm not going to go into the other projects, but home ownership is
desperately needed. So I'm looking to see what we can do with that. So a minimum of 12 and let's see where we can go with it. I'm I'm open to that right now. >> Town meeting has absolute control over a number of units because they can reject a proposal that we don't like that they don't like. So,
>> and you guys can reject proposals. There's a >> Yes, I understand that before it even goes to town meeting them all if you feel >> but the ultimate control is if we want money from town meeting is they're going to handle it. And I understand you know what Miss Gibbs said earlier. You want to present something that you hope can be passed at town meeting. You got it.
Um, well, I guess I'm I'm gonna unless there's any more comment, I'm there's a motion. I'm going to call call a vote on it. So, the motion was by M Mr. uh Dykans to approve this RFP,
which would mean you would make the revisions, Gloria, and you would put it, you would post it on the the the state um >> register, >> central reg, >> sorry. Um I'll send you guys a draft after I make the um changes and I'll
track them so that you can see what I've done because it goes on the central register. >> Yeah. Is it sent out individually to >> No. So people have to request it specifically and then Shauna keeps a log of everyone who requests it. >> Okay. And then there are revisions that
you're making that we have already articulated. So that's that's the motion on the table. I will call the vote. Mr. Miss Davis >> I. >> Mr. Dyen. >> I. >> Mr. Matters. >> I. >> Mr. Smith. >> No. >> And the chair votes I. >> So that's four to one. Thank you
everyone. >> Thank you. Next is an item requested by um Mr. Smith, review of expired town council contract. Stuart, I'm going to turn it over to you. >> Sure. Thank you, Dean. Um so, as the
memo explains, uh now I forget how I came across this, but I think I was reading the town council's contract and it had expired in May. Um suggesting that, um the board, uh vote to um >> Thank you, Gloria, by the go to solicitation for interested parties that
may want to uh become town council, interested firms or parties. >> So, are you looking for I'm sorry, I >> missed the last point you made. Uh I was just I just suggesting that the well
town council's contract has expired uh and the board is the um appointing board for that >> position and I'm suggesting that we go out for solicitation advertisement to
interview and um uh decide who um may be our next town council. And you'd like to do that at the present time or did you were you possibly interested in extending this contract or renewing the contract for a period of time? >> I don't I don't I'm not interested in
renewing the contract uh as written or currently because there's a provision in there that >> uh you know we we can continue with town council without renewing it. So um my my motion is to
put out solicitation. so we can get input from various uh firms and interested parties that maybe want to be Cadamstown Council. >> So that you're offering a motion to that effect. Yep. >> Is there a second to that motion? >> Okay. There's no second. Does anyone
have any further comment on this or >> um I I did want to say something about the the paragraph that's in the contract. The parties acknowledge and agree that contracts for legal services may not be for a term of years. The party parties acknowledge and
agree that town council services are subject to an annual appointment or reappoint. It was the first sentence that I questioned Mr. Talman about wanting to know where that came from. Under the rules of court that apply to lawyers, lawyers can be discharged at
any time. So effectively um there's no term recited in this contract. It was signed at the beginning of this um fiscal year I guess or the last fiscal year after we interviewed
firms and selected this firm um and because it's subject to an annual appointment or reappoint. That's what you're talking about. It's expired because a year has gone by. Um someone had their was Corey. Yes. >> No, no. I was just going to say um I I
would not be in favor of doing an extension um with like a multi-year contract. I think the language that's in place now makes a whole lot of sense. Um I think we've had some bumps here and there. Um with some of, you know, legal opinions
or maybe interpretations. Um I don't know if I'm out of line making the statement. If I am, you can shut me down. I think um the current town council has has been represented by multiple faces in the firm and the multiple faces um
you know I've interacted with different department heads and on various um cases and topics that we've had and um in a broader scheme we're getting I guess general good positive feedback from staff and and about the representation
we're getting collectively you know we we may have some issues with certain things but if I'm misin interpreting my interpretation of of of the response from staff, you know, please correct me, but I'm I'm I'm getting the impression collectively we're getting a a better or
a more positive um response from the team. So, that's just my interpretation at the moment. >> Are there any other comments? >> I mean, we don't we don't have a seconded motion, but I'm allowing discussion here. >> No, I think it's I mean, I think what
Corey just said is absolutely spot on. That's the feedback I get as well that uh um the team um Taliban's team if you will um I won't mention names but the we there are others that that that service the town of Chadam that done a
really nice job and and so is Jay um as Corey also noted at times um you know with really good lawyer speak one wonders where he really stands on issues however he frames them really well both positively and negatively frames issues
is very well. I I I think it's a very coste effective relationship. I I I like the fee schedule. Um and I would like to see numbers at some point for for what we've been charged thus far this year versus other years. Um and knowing that
um he can be kind of termed at any time we want. I'm I'm I'm I'm okay with that. I'm I'm I'm okay with that relationship and and I'm I'm okay with continuing service here in town. That being said, um I've been frank with him at times and
there's always opportunities to have clear communication and a certain degree of frankness with him and he does listen. >> Thanks, Shireen. >> Uh yeah, uh the experience the affordable housing trust has had with um the representative attorney from that team has been really exceptional and uh
we've been very satisfied with that. Um again I agree I agree with what's the general consensus of the board is that we've been very satisfied um understanding um uh that we um can terminate at any time.
>> Um I'm probably a harsher judge on this because I've done this job. Um and um I I very much appreciated um Mr. Costello and that was he was a oneperson
operation for most of the time and I think I think u my only interaction with the current firm has been through Mr. Talaman. I think Lisa me has been on a couple of times um and she seems very knowledgeable and Mr. Costello I'm sorry
Mr. Mr. Talment is a a very knowledgeable and capable attorney. Um and um um I personally, especially since I'm in the chair, wouldn't relish a major disruption at
the present time. Um and um I'm still getting used to working with with our new town council. Um and he is responsive. He's very prompt, very prompt. in his responses which I very much appreciate and when I have pressed
him on a legal point he has responded um to clarify where he's coming from and that's not just in the form of email communication but I've had conversations with town council president on things and um he was very helpful um most
recently the last time we met when we were discussing the main street and and middle road properties. Um what we have in effect is a um contract at will as it were employment at will because of the nature of the
rules that apply to legal services and we can discharge council anytime we want. Um so I'm inclined to kind of let it go as is. I don't know that we have necessarily have to if we wanted to go in that
direction and not adopt Stuart's motion. Um I don't know that we have to take a vote to extend the contract a year or do we just let it let it go as is? What would you >> It's um so with Pacello we and I I
didn't um bring his contract. We didn't do an annual review an appointment but this is a a contract that um me Taleran and um see I'm sorry the person um this is their typical contract. So I if if it
makes something clear to the public that the board has endorsed it. I was just looking for the exact term section that it had. >> Well, I guess we could take a vote that we we could either do nothing. We could do what Stuart's proposing. Uh we could
probably take a vote endorsing the continuation of the services with this firm as per the contract that was signed on June 28th, 2024. Those would be the options I'd throw out. >> Was the expiration date there?
>> But it doesn't it doesn't really say Stuart, you have to put your Go ahead. the the expiration date on the contract if >> does but it doesn't say anywhere that it's a year one-year contract. It just says >> it says it expires on May of 2000. >> Where does it say that? It says the
agreement is effective July 1, 2024. And then you go to paragraph 14, unless I'm missing something. The parties acknowledge and agree that contracts for legal services may not be for a term of years. That's their language. The parties acknowledge and agree that town council services are subject to an
annual appointment or reappoint. So you can interpret that to mean or infer from that that it that on June 20 on July on June 30th 2025 the contract expired. I think that's where you're coming from. >> Yeah, it did. >> It just doesn't recite it that way. But
that I think is your implication. But >> well the the there's very few things that the that the board is mandated to do in the chart. One of them is appointed town council and the other is to appoint a town manager and that's what I'm suggesting that
>> it it at the very minimum it needs a reappointment. So my third option was >> so why why don't we simply the board review town council's contract and at this time recommend no no no no changes to the current contract or something as simple as that you know
so we acknowledge we have an annual review we're not making any changes >> upon annual review the select board >> recommends no amendments to the current contract to make no changes to the
contract or to continue the contract as is. >> That's fine. >> Pending an annual It's pending the next annual review. >> Yes, you could have subject to the next annual review. >> But that that's fine. That language is fine here. >> Is that your motion?
>> Yes. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Do we have that? >> I'm sorry. So Kathy is trying to get my attention. So um do you want to >> Yeah. I just wanted to there was the question about whether or not you had voted for terms. Apparently, um,
Attorney Costello had a three-year term that you was voted that you voted on May 4th of 2021 for a three-year extension, which would have brought you to the 2024 RFP. >> Was there a new contract signed in 2021? I didn't I didn't >> I don't believe it was a contract. I
think it Let me just get back. >> I was first hired in 2015 before I got on the board. I think Jeff was on the board. Um, and then there was a renewal in 2018. We we we were asked to vote on that, >> right? That was the term of his contract. >> We voted another three years,
>> and that's what it was. I don't think it was >> nothing since. So, we had two three-year contracts and then it was just sort of at will, I guess. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. Well, can we summarize Corey's motion? Do you have that, Kathy?
>> That was seconded by Shireen. something like maintain the current contract in force contract for >> it's important because it's got all these other terms in it that we want to carry forward so we have to reference it >> sorry the transcript is get going a
little faster than my typing here >> but we could have a simple vote saying we a motion to we we vote to re we've reviewed the contract and um we vote to reappoint this firm as town council
according to the terms of the contract signed on June 28, 2024. >> Yeah. >> You want to >> I'll draw my I'll draw my initial motion >> and I'll second Deans. >> Okay. So, we have that. So, you don't have to look anymore, Captain.
>> All right. Do we have that motion that's on the table right now? It's been seconded. >> Yep. >> All right. I'll call the role. Miss M Miss Davis. >> Hi. >> Mr. Dikkins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> No. >> And the chair votes I. Okay.
Order one. Uh, next item. G. Discussion on returning to a weekly meeting schedule starting September 9th, 2025. This agenda item was also requested by Mr. Smith. Stewart, it's yours.
Thank you. Um, so I when I was new to the board, I think you folks I think we we voted for uh a summer schedule. You know, I think in the real world, summer schedules that end around now, Labor Day, and not into o the middle of
October, end of October. Um, we have a lot of issues in front of us. Um, I think we'd have more time for discussions like the affordable housing discussion we just had, uh, that I think was rushed. Uh, I think we'd have more
time for discussion, uh, when it comes to, uh, town council services. Um, we, uh, the evaluation process was mentioned here, but, I must have missed it because I didn't see the evaluation process. Um so and we we
for good or bad we uh deep six some uh a lot of agenda items that were old uh and people were offered to come forward if they uh if they wanted to um you know bring them back to the board but it seems to me and we have budget season coming up um and I think it's important
that we go back to a weekly schedule and um that's my motion. >> That's a motion. >> Yeah. Um, and is there a second to that? All right. Does anyone have want to have any discussion on the topic, Mr. Matters?
>> No. Um, a couple things. I know when we set the summer schedule, uh, I think we've always been very clear that if things come up that we will absolutely have extra meetings that's never I don't think any we've ever boed at that. So, if there's something that needs to be done, um, you know, going back earlier
than than what we have doesn't bother me. I'm happy to, you know, go back earlier. Um, you know, part of me also was happy to have a couple extra breaks because, you know, to speak from a personal perspective, I know one, if we start next the 9th, um, I'm out of town. I've already booked a flight and I'm
moving one of my kids down to Florida for, you know, the the fall. So, I physically won't be here. So, if that's decision, you know, I won't miss that one. Um, you know, I I, you know, I'm a small business owner. I still got
another sixes six weeks at least. Um I go so whatever whatever you know if we do weekly if we go back to weekly meetings whatever I'm indifferent about it. Um I do want to take an opportunity that if we with the board would
entertain making the meetings at 5:30 until after we get through Columbus Day weekend. Uh that would be greatly appreciated. But um I will work with I've I've worked with whatever parameters we've had in the past. I will continue to do that. But um if I if I'm
looking for some relief myself, so I'll just throw that out for for conversation. >> Shireen, >> I'm I'm in Cory's camp. You know, we're the two working stiffs on the board and you know, it's uh you know, we should um we've made a lot of accommodations and
adjustments to to make the meetings and and and and what I'm fine with the five or 5:30. I can be more flexible, I think, than than Corey can. he's, you know, he's got hourly st hourly hours for for a store. Um,
I think and and I agree that it's based on the idea that if there's a hefty schedule or some things are coming up, we're always moving in and filling in the gaps of those those weeks that we have as optional. Um, and I think we can run I think Dean's run a fairly
efficient pretty efficient uh meetings and um you know I don't feel rushed. >> Okay. >> Okay. That's that's all. >> Any other comments? >> Um I just want to offer a couple. I the the when we referred to the term summer schedule, June was not part of the
summer schedule. We had meetings every week in June. And you know, I just think it's important to point out to the to the public what select board members do. It isn't we don't just show up here once a week.
um having picked up the packet and I know that's true of everybody on this board and everybody I've served with on this board and especially if you're in the chair it's there are daily responsibilities whether it's special meetings and we had
I think an interview session a long interview session for two hours and one week that was so-called off week um I have a weekly meeting with the town manager to plan the agenda and I know other members of this board
regularly meet with the town manager. Um there are numerous communications that come in, emails, phone calls. Um and you know those don't respect the
weekend either. Um, so you know, I think board members put in a full commitment to this to this responsibility once we're elected. And I I I I guess I'm I'm very comfortable
with the current schedule. I understand what Stuart is saying. We have had occasions in the past where we had a summer schedule and we had to call an emergency meeting um for some reason or another. doesn't happen very often, but we can always do
that. And um you know, I guess I'm of the view that almost nothing is so urgent that it can't wait. Um maybe others will disagree with that, but that's the way government works.
Um and always will work, I think, at any level. So that's kind of my my feeling about it. Uh, I appreciate Stuart bringing it forward um for for discussion uh and um you know we can always think about it again next year
when when um the board decides what it wants to do um for next summer. Um so I guess we had a motion but there was no second. So we'll go on to the next item. Thank you Stuart. The next is to consider amending the
select board meeting public participation policy. This is was requested by board member Meadows who has been on this issue for some time and we will accept public comment after the board. Corey, I'll turn it over to you. I know there's a document in the file that you worked on with Kathy.
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll make this extremely um brief because um this is not a new topic for discussion. I very much appreciate you putting this on the agenda. Um, safe to say that philosophically I kind of have a slightly different opinion on kind of how we deal with um public part public
participation. Um, you know there's you know to date four of us have served as chairman. We've had the privilege of running these meetings the you know the the the elements of having to organize and you know on this on a regular basis. We've gone through regular meetings. We've
gone through COVID. I mean M. Davis guided us through COVID through all kinds of turmoil. that was a task in itself. I mean, so we've we've we've gone through a lot of elements over the years and I just think that um having public participation with a back and
forth dialogue um has some benefits. Um you know, sometimes on these longer agenda meetings, you know, we go to public comment and then we'll have four, five, six items come forward. You know, we may take notes. You know, we may not get a full kind of sense of
where the conversation was going to. um someone's comments may you know half hour later I could have another question that really procedurally can't go back and hey you know Mr. Smith, you know, can you give me more response to that? And so I just think from my own personal
opinion after serving on this board since 2015 that um when we were when I was first on this board, there was a more more back and forth dialogue and I found that to be uh beneficial to both myself uh and to the and to the public's um perception of what to expect when
coming to these meetings. So I throw it out there. Um you know, I'm obviously passionate about this. I brought it up a couple one, two, seven times. So, um I swear this is the the last time I'll ever mention it. Um but I just want to, you know, put it up for consideration.
Um but I do think it's important um for the public to to have this type of engagement from the board. So, >> any other comments from the board? Shireen? >> Yeah, I just wanted to clear that Corey, the the changes that I'm seeing in this participation policy are your
recommendations, >> correct? And most of them are based on um the option for the to be the discretion of the chair. >> I I solely feel the chair should have discretion on Yes. >> And I agree and we have uh the opportunity for consent calendar if if
we find that to be optional. Um I I you know I'm I'm fine with the changes um going forward. I was fine the way the process was this way too because you simply were at this discretion of the
chair um putting together opportunities for people to weigh in on some of the matters that we needed a lot of feedback on. And um I also remind people that we receive emails, we do have conversations on the phone, we do see people in
public. This is not the only venue um that we hear about an issue or an agenda item. Um, so I just want to remind people that this isn't, you know, this isn't the only place that we receive feedback from it. Um, this is a more
public place for people. Um, so I think that oftenimes we hear a lot of um, from a lot of the same people >> a lot. Um, and uh, you know, I just want to make note that we do hear from others as well in other ways.
>> Okay. Any other comment, Jeff? Yeah, I I you know, I I'm the opinion if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But, uh, you know, we've we've heard repeatedly from our voting public that, you know, they want to weigh in on issues, uh, you know, aren't allowed, if you will. Although, I
do believe that Mike Shell and Dean Castro and have done a wonderful job of allowing public comment on those issues and items that are deserving and have galvanized or that the public is really interested in. But I'm okay with this
and and uh it's a little bit of a turn for me. Um what gets me going a bit is the the repetition of some um of the folks that come to the mic. Um I would just ask the chair be circumspect with
respect to his or her um time limits on folks that that are repeating what has already been said by another by another by another speaker. Um I don't think this is going to be that that big a change to be honest with you. I went through our our agenda here this evening. I I I don't know who would
oppose or be a weigh in on su I mean anyway I won't go through the list but I think for example tonight we picked Dean array the exact correct items that we're going to have public comment and we had public hearings as well. I do have a I do have an issue on the consent agenda
that if I might Mr. Chairman bring up although it's not >> well it's in the document. It's in the document so you can talk on it. I would like to save some time by proposing thus if a petitioner um citizens request petitioner comes forward and uh is
requesting to use town facilities and or an entertainment license or whatever the law allows us to do. If they've been before us before and we have approved that item before, I would like the chair
working with Kathy and Sean and the town manager to be able to at least place those on a consent agenda that we review and then we can pluck the those items from the consent consent agenda off if we want to. But if we've approved it before and there no changes, we're wasting their time and ours kind
of. I say that respectfully. Now, that being said, if the petitioner or the citizen's request wants to have a public wants to present the public, then we allow to do so. But I think I think it would save us a little bit of time once in a while to rearrange our consent agenda, be more thoughtful about what is
placed in front of us that we sit here and listen and go, we know we're going to vote yes. I mean, you know, we know we're going to vote yes. Anyway, I'd like to put that forward. So if if there's sentiment from the board when we take a vote on this, we could have Kathy draft that insert that type of thing. But
>> I think that I I I feel pretty strongly about I'm okay with that myself. >> I'm okay with that. Um I do find um sometimes it's really, you know, I I I think that a lot of people would be very relieved that they wouldn't have to present multiple times. I also look at
it from another end that this is a time when people can you know bring their community ideas forward and let people hear them. So I would leave that option up to be a collaborative. >> Um >> all right any other comment from the board? Stuart, did you have anything on?
>> My only my comment is I'm fine with this. I voted for the change some years ago. I indicated more recently that I would be amendable to making the adjustment that Corey has proposed. I think the language is fine. I think there is inherent in the uh and I base
this on a communication I had with town council that Jill was partyed to that the chair can inherently um limit or restrict repetitive comment. So
I I don't think we need to insert anything in here on that. Um the only substantive change I I think this reflects what we've been doing largely anyway. Um it's been in the discretion of the chair no matter who's
been in the chair. Um we are um uh reducing the time per speaker to five to three. And I'm very supportive of that because there are times when we've had people speak and they repeat. >> You know, they're saying the same thing
two or three times. And I've I think we've all let folks go on, but you know, I don't know that that's particularly helpful if you're just saying the same thing two or three times. So, I'm okay with that. Um, and with that, I'm going to turn to public
comment, Mr. Hologrin. And then there were a couple on the screen. John Hogan again. Um, yeah. And obviously as somebody who tries to make these things extremely brief because, you know, I I follow try to follow Norma Avalar where basically she said something in 30 seconds and outdid
somebody that spent five minutes. So the thing that I like being able to public comment is sometimes when you guys come up with a proposed motion sort of like the well what about you know sort of from my career as a computer programmer debugging you know finding the finding
maybe a glitch or something like that and you know bringing that to your attention. I think sometimes I've been able to do that and I think that was something I really missed the opportunity to do for a few years there. The other thing as far as the three minutes, could we maybe get like a digital countdown clock and put it over
there? >> We can have one on the screen. >> No, but I'm saying there would be maybe on the screen, but basically for people here so we could see it there. >> Well, you know, we can get into that. I I'm inclined. There it is. >> Right. But but you know, I'm saying is
I'm I'm tending to look at you. So if there a way to have that something >> suppose we could look into that. Um my inclination would be to put that clock on on at a public hearing rather than general. >> I don't I don't want us people feel overly restricted.
>> Oh true we can watch the time. >> It was something that that you know because if I'm speaking they may not know what the what the time is. So >> no I hear you in response to your earlier earlier point. I think that was the concern that people were voicing that until they heard from select board
members how we felt about a particular issue. They wanted an opportunity to comment on that after that fact and that's they felt that the current policy didn't allow for that >> right or proposed motion and you go well wait a second you did you think about second so thank you
>> Nicole Stern I think you were next >> good evening Nicole Stern here I want to once again express my support for cont Oops public comment on agenda items I strongly believe that citizens should
have genuine access to the process of town government. While we select select board members to represent us, we still expect to have the right and responsibility to participate in meetings in a meaningful way so that we
listen to the presentation of an issue, hear your comments, and then ask relative questions or provide our own comments in context, all followed by your vote. I hope you'll consider voting for these changes. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Nicole. Helen Gibbs. >> Uh, yes. Now, I'm I'm a little unclear on what Corey's motion was. Are you saying that all agenda items we will be able to comment on? >> Yes. Yes. I mean, the the operative
language, it was in the packet. I don't know if you've seen it. It says, this is the um opening sentence under the public comments section of the current policy with the revisions. Contemporaneous public comments will be allowed on agenda items at the discretion of the chair with the exception of committee
appointments, personnel issues, or items the chair deems exempt. >> Okay. So I assume that at the discretion of the chair that we can assume that we're going to be able to speak because the problem is we don't know until the agenda packet comes out when we're going
to be allowed to speak and it's very difficult preparing for the meetings uh when there's you know 300 pages in in um >> well I think the assign >> I'm sorry go ahead I didn't mention interrupt you >> Elaine please continue Elaine I'm sorry
I was going to say something >> okay I just want you to understand that this isn't just the public, you know, telling the board uh how they feel. A lot of people watch and they want to hear other people speaking. There are a
lot of people that are intimidated. They don't want to come. They don't want to be embarrassed. They don't want to be cut off. They don't want to wait. They've got to feed their kids, whatever. Yeah. >> So, not just talking to you and you meeting people in the grocery store. It's a method of getting the information
out to people from uh uh the members of the public. And again, it's our money that's being spent. Uh and I think we have a right to to weigh in on that. Um these packets are really huge. Uh they
are overwhelming and you know there's a lot of preparation going into it. So, um, I would have recommended I like the idea that you will listen to the public before you actually take a vote or or a motion or deliberate uh like the zoning board of appeals does. I think it works
very well. Uh, so thank you very much. >> Thank you. I I think there's a presumption here that the chair is going to allow public comment, but you know. Um, okay. I didn't see any more public comment. Yeah, we do need to take a motion and I
I I assume the motion would be to approve Mr. Meet's recommendation with the addition of uh the consent agenda uh revisions that Mr. Dykens proposed. And if there is a motion to that effect,
I can entertain it. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. And Kathy, you have that in. So, the intention would be um do we vote this tonight or do we want to see the draft of that additional language? I don't think the need there's a need. I
think it was pretty clear what you're comfortable with it. >> All right. Motion's made and seconded. >> I'll call the role. Ms. Davis. >> I. >> Mr. Dyken. >> Hi. >> Mr. Meadows. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. Thank you. >> Thank you, board.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Now we have committee appointments. Let me just get my paperwork here. There are several. The first is to um appoint uh the historical commission representative to
the community preservation committee. For a long time it was Stephanie Hamilton. Uh they are now recommending Nancy Bar who's a full member of the um historical commission to the community preservation committee. Um,
is there um a motion? >> Mr. Chair, I move to appoint Nancy Bar as a historical commission representative to the Community Preservation Commission until June 30th, 2028, unless sooner revoked or successor is appointed. >> Second. >> Okay. Moved and seconded. I'll call the
role on that. Ms. Davis. >> I. >> Mr. Dykins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes. The next is the taxation aid committee. So, we have interviewed as recently as tonight, six candidates
in total. This is the brand new committee that we approved recently. Um the the candidates were Seth Taylor, Steven Daniel, Richard Mack, Mary Hillyard, Anmarie Lichfield, Thomas
Campbell. Um I would say with respect to Mr. Daniel and the material was in the packet for the interviewing session because he's a member of the finance committee, um there was a legal question that I put to town council as to whether he would be eligible. Um, under the
still existing bylaw, he's technically not eligible until probably tomorrow. The attorney general um has approved the amendment um to the bylaw that town meeting adopted which um still bars a um
member of the finance committee from serving on a standing committee but opens it up to other types of committees. Town council advised that um Mr. Daniel would be eligible under this particular bylaw. So if there were
sentiment to appoint him, uh I would suggest that the vote of appointment be conditioned on um the final posting by the town con constable of the bylaw approval by the attorney general. The
other point I want to make is that um the statute just says three three atlarge seats. Two members are dictated by statute. One is um the chair of the board of assessors and the other is the town treasurer and there are three at
large members and Kathy has suggested since we typically do stagger appointments that uh there be one appointment for one year, one appointment for two years, one appointment for three years, but these would all be three-year terms
eventually. So with that, um I'm I'm going I will say I was impressed with all the candidates. So I would ask um she's proposing an initial appointment to June 30th, 2026. We can do whatever
we want. We can appoint them all for three years right now, but what's the sentiment of the board, Corey? >> I'd be open to three years, be honest with you. >> For everybody? >> Yeah, I would. So they would all expire in three years >> and then we start staggering, you know, but
>> Okay. Any other comments on that? >> I agree. Okay. >> That makes it easy. It >> does. >> All right. There's any unless there's objection, we'll go for a three-year term till June 30th, 2028.
Some of us might not be on the board back then then. But go ahead, M. Mr. >> I don't know who was first, Steuart. I think you were first. >> Go ahead. Um, sure. I'll I move to nominate Seth Taylor as a member at large of the taxation aid committee
until June 30, 20126. Unless >> you're going to make 28. >> 28. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yep, you're right. 28. Unless sooner revoked or a successor is appointed. >> Second. Yeah, >> that's seconded. Okay, we'll call the role. Any other nominations? Well, we're going to have three positions, so
they're all the same. Um, Ms. Davis, >> abstain. >> Mr. Mr. Dyken. >> Hi, >> Mr. Meadows. >> Hi, >> and Mr. Smith. >> I, >> and the chair votes I. So, it's U 4 01. >> Mr. Chairman, >> yes.
>> I move uh Stephen Daniel uh I move to nominate Steven Daniel as a member at large on the taxation a committee until June 30th, 2028, unless sooner revoked or successor is appointed with the caveat that uh we get approval by of his legally being able to be appointed by
the attorney general. I'll second that. >> Okay. So, all right. Uh, we'll call a call a roll. Did you have a question, Mr. Meadows? >> Um, we got more bodies than >> Yes, we do. >> Yeah. >> So, >> we can take other nominations if you
want. We didn't on the first one, but we could. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm going to nominate Thomas Campbell as a member at large till 2028. >> Is uh is there a second? >> I'll second it for the sake of >> It's been seconded. Any other
nominations? So, we have Mr. Daniel and subject two >> and M and Mr. Campbell. >> And I'll call the role. Just indicate whom you vote for. Miss Davis, >> uh, Mr. Daniel, >> um, Mr. Dykins, >> Mr. Daniel,
>> Mr. Matters, >> Thomas Campbell, >> Mr. Smith, >> Steven Daniel, >> and the chair vote Stephen Daniel. So, he's appointed for three-year term. We have one position left and these are all to 2028. Right. >> Um and is there a nomination? Uh
>> Mr. Chair, I move to appoint Amarie Lichfield uh move to nominate a Marie Lichfield as a member at large on the taxation aid committee until June 30th, 2028 unless sooner revoked or successor is appointed. >> Second. >> All right. Any other nominations for this position?
>> I will say the the language in the motions was to nominate, but we're actually appointing them. >> Appointing I move to appoint Amarie Lichfield. >> All of them. So no other nominations. So nominees. So Amry Lichfield has been u moved. I'll call the role. Miss Davis.
>> Uh I >> Mr. Dikkins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. >> Hi. >> Miss Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. So the nomine So the appointees are Seth Taylor, Steven Daniel, and Marie Litchfield. all until
June 30th, 2028, unless a successor unless soon revoked or a successor is appointed. Next, we'll move on to the cultural council and we have um two nominees that we've interviewed, right? Um Alice Brett Bartum, whom we
interviewed today, and Jennifer Jones. Um not the actress, but Jennifer Jones. Um and um these terms, two terms run until June 30th, 2027. One runs through June 30th, 2028. So uh don't know what
you'd like to do. We can nominate one to 2028 and one to 2027. So I'll ask for um nominees for one of the two positions. So however you want to do it. >> Uh Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah. I'd like to uh move to appoint
Alice Bartram for the term that runs through June 30th, 2028. >> Second. >> All right. Any other? Is there another nominee for that particular position? >> Okay. We'll call the role on that. >> Miss Davis. >> Hi. >> Mr. Dyken. >> Hi. >> Mr. Matters. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. Okay. We have the next position goes to June 30th, 2027. >> Nominate Jennifer Jones. >> Second. And that's been named and nominated and second, moved and seconded. I'll call the role. Miss Davis >> I. >> Mr. Dykins. Hi.
>> Mr. Meadows. Hi. >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes. Sai. And the last is the airport commission. And we had an interviewee. Uh, Peter Farber was interviewed on August 19th. There is one vacant seat currently with a an
unexpired term running through June 30th, 2026. Is there a motion? >> Mr. Chairman, I move to appoint Peter Farber as a member of the airport commission until June 30, 2026 unless sooner revoked or successor is >> a successor is appointed. >> Is there a second?
>> Second. >> It's moved and seconded. >> All right, I'll call the role. Ms. Davis. >> I >> Mr. Dykins. >> I >> Mr. Matters. >> I >> Mr. Smith. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. So we now have full compliment on the Airborne Commission.
>> Is there move to adjourn? >> Second. >> Okay. I was going to ask that. All right, Miss Davis. >> I, >> Mr. Dykens. Hi, >> Mr. Meadows. >> Hi, >> Mr. Smith. >> I, >> and the chair votes I. We are returned at 8:52
p.m. 7:52 p.m. at [Music]