7:01. Is he ready? Take your time. Good evening everyone and welcome to the 701 uh finance committee meeting. Paul, glad you could be here. Thank you. Lot of traffic out there.
Rodney, whenever you're ready. Absolutely. Uh, so tonight and Wednesday night will be our warrant review. Tonight we'll be doing citizen citizens petitions and anything non- capital. Um, here's just where we are in the process. I realize this is probably just a
selfish slide for me to see the progress I'm making as I get through these two months, but we're very proud of Thank you. But we're almost there. We're almost at the finish line. Um, would you like to do it again for us next year? Well, hopefully not, but no. Um, we'll start off with the three
citizens petitions 36 37 38 uh related to zoning. Uh, I'll defer to you, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Uh, I believe we're going to take article 38. Uh, first, Mr. Morose. Uh, howdy. Jim Rose, town meeting member precinct 3 and citizens position uh to
see if the town will vote to rescend the uh 3A MBTA zoning changes made by prior approved warrant articles or articles 89 of the 224 special town meeting. Warren articles 6 7 8 9 10 11 and 12 of the
11521 special town meeting and warrant articles 5 of the uh 210 special town meeting. or take any action thereof. And uh now that I've read that all when I submitted this, I I had no idea and and the planning board reminded me that in
order to make these changes, you have to have public notice of meetings and and everything else. So So it was pretty much impossible to to to meet those deadlines. So we just respectfully request that this uh just be uh passed no action.
Thank you. Uh given that you're now requesting that this be a motion of no action, is there any question from the committee? Any question from the audience specifically on article 38? Is there a motion? So moved. Motion of no action. Yes. Is there a second? Second.
All in favor? I I opposed. Thank you. Uh the Do you want to do 37 or 36 next? Jim, we'll do 36. All right. 36. Uh the petitioner is Mark Zubric. Uh he had somewhere to be tonight and so Jim is asked to present. So Jim, go ahead.
Okay. Article 36 here is a petition to uh repeal of zoning to see if the uh town meeting will vote to direct the town to prepare the necessary articles and meet all other requirements to repeal zoning change adopted to comply
with the MBTA mandate or take any action thereon. Okay. So this petition seeks to return our community to the traditional zoning and character of our town. So, so, so, so the intent of this is to is to back up the
um the the MBTA zoning articles that we that Dan has passed uh so we can get back to a level set and then uh hopefully uh you know it you know uh you know implement
zoning that more reflects damage. this oneizefits-all is u a little uh overbearing and and and it's a one-sizefits-all that just doesn't quite fit the character of Damas. I mean the the uh again and the
whole theme through this is increased density with decreased parking is just a recipe for disaster. And uh that's all I have to say about it. Anybody has any questions? Questions for Mr. Moros
Wally. So, do I have this correct? Right. This is already a state law. That's right. And we've already voted it in. So, to change this or to accept this, we're going to just make sure you're using the microphone. We're going to ask town meeting
to break the law. That's right. Okay. I'm can't see any sense in that. So, I'm done. Okay. Ted, what what exact articles are you
referring to when you talk about the MBTA mandate? As far as I recollect, the only time that and I could be wrong, the only time that zoning was done in con adjusted to fit the MBTA
requirements was last year. And there was other reasonzoning of the downtown that I think you refer to in article 38 in prior years. But again, to the best of my
recollection, none of that resoning was in light of the MBTA zoning laws. And through you, Mr. chair, if I might ask. Yeah, maybe Aaron to if the planning director, land use and community services
director, excuse me, uh could just address that. Uh could you just give us a a brief timeline of um the uh specific MBTA mandate zoning that the town addressed? I agree. My recollection is
we did it once. Um yeah, I strictly speaking, Mr. Blake's assertion is correct. Um, as we were developing the mixeduse zoning for downtown, we were aware that the legislature was working on what
became the MBTA communities act. But that process and the calibration of exactly what we wanted to do in that district was really kind of done as an aside through the planning board and the outreach work that the board and the staff were doing. Once the law was adopted, we felt
our the zoning as it existed at that time was compliant. Uh DHCD, now the executive office of housing and livable communities, then promulgated regulations which the SJC decision subsequently ruled out of procedure with
that had a procedural flaw in the adoption of those rags which were then corrected procedurally. But when those regs came out initially, it was determined that we failed to comply with two criteria of the regulations and
therefore we had to return to town meeting last spring to make those uh minor adjustments, a minimum density and a minimum parking requirement. Thank you, Eric. have. So I I guess I I get that we might some people might not like
the law the the state law. I'm not sure that I love it either. How how much effort have you done lobbying our state legislature and state senator on that issue? like the best remedy I can see is having that law getting that law amended
because I I'm aware it's not terrifically popular in in many parts of Massachusetts perhaps including Danverse. Yeah. I mean, I I personally have sent several letters to Senator Lovely and and Representative Currents
about this and several other laws of one sizefits-all, but yeah. And so, uh, I've done that, but to no avail. And and again, the only reason that that we're doing this is because other towns have
started to push back. So, I mean, you know, Mr. type as devel you're asking us to break the law. I'm just asking to push back. We we we need to start pushing back when the state keeps pushing all these laws. One science fits
itself. Today it's MBTA zoning and and now backing up on this is uh ADUs and the intent of this is is is very clear. They want to get rid of single family homes. I mean, this used to be a rural town and so people move from the city to
the rural areas and now all of a sudden, and that's some of the feedback we're getting from the residents is that I moved here to get away from this and now it's just coming here. So, so when do we start pushing back? That's the question. That's what these petitions are all
about. Okay. Um, I think that's all the questions for me. Okay. No questions, Mike. So, so on a on a couple of things with Jim. I mean, first of all, this concept that people have that
what we're dealing with now is somehow somehow a substantial and remarkable change to the nature of this community is just simply not true. And it's not true because it fails to recognize the fact
that those changes occurred in some cases 150 years ago. Danvers in 1950 was not a rural community. There was a very substantial portion of Danvers that was rural. It was really rural. There was like 500 people who lived in most of
Danvers. But if you lived in the area of Danvers where most people lived, basically the port, the Plains, Tapleyville, and the and the square. That was a much more urban environment
than what any of us think Danvers is right now. That was an environment in which you had substantial amounts of really serious industries, leather industries, coal depots, fluorescent light
manufacturers, all in that part of the community where those 12,000 people lived. There was 200 people who lived at the at the the um state hospital and there was literally like 500 people that lived in the rest of the town and that
was really rural. I agree with that. My old man told me stories about it. What I can remember from 1973 that had already changed had doubled its population had 26,000 people in it. We still had a
fluorescent light manufacturer on Silven Street. I don't know if anybody in this room remembers what it was like to drive on either Silvin Street or Pine Street when they were letting out one of their three shifts, but you weren't getting from point A to point B during that
period of time. There was 400 kids that were downtown. We had double sessions in our high school. That change that occurred from 1955 to 1975 absolutely dramatically changed the way the town has is. But what's happened
since then quite frankly is really inc in incremental in regards to small amounts. I don't disagree that things have changed. I don't ag I don't disagree that when somebody has the opportunity to find a two family and turn it into a three family or a three
family and turn it into a four family or take their six acres and put four houses on it. They do it and they've been doing that for the last 70 years and no more now or over the last 15 years than they were doing it in the 70s quite frankly
at that at this point. So, so this idea that Danvers has is is in the midst of some type of dramatic change just flies in the face of facts. Sometimes I like facts. I've sort of lived with them. The other problem with this article, which
is, as we've talked about, adnauseium, I don't know what he plans to do with it. And I and I'm glad he's not here because I won't yell at him, but I it's it's just it's confusing. It's I I you tell me what his intent is.
Laws have to have language that is understandable and definitive. This is not who is going to do this. Who does who does he think town meeting has the authority to tell to do anything quite honestly when it comes to this stuff. So
when we're dealing with these things, even if I agreed, and I don't necessarily disagree with you, we've said this about about the the fact that the state pushes pushes communities quite a bit when it comes to these things. Again, not a new thing. Uh
remember, the reason we have swingway golf is because of 40B, right? The reason uh the two biggest changes that we've had within this community over the last 20 years, the state hospital is because we were we would we were frankly
stupid, pardon my language and didn't zone that to be another Cummings Park and we thought it would be really great to put 500 residential units up there. Right? You want to know who that was? The guy who did this article was behind
that. Wasn't me. Right? So I I always get a kick of the change that people have they when they look back at the prism of history with it. But but in terms of these these types of things again we are a municipal corporation
created by the state. I'm going to say this to everybody because they've probably heard it from me before. If you want to know how little authority we as a municipality, a municipal corporation have over our big
brother that is the state. Take a ride down Route Two. Take a left turn. You'll see the Quabin Reservoir and you'll see the four communities in Massachusetts that no longer exist because the state ended them so Boston could have water.
So this idea that the state can't force upon its it's it's I I don't like it. The option for you guys if you really don't want this is is do it not a referendum in damvers get out in front of market
basket get the signatures and do a referendum against this on the state level. It works. Seen it happen before. But but this is again it's just it's just craziness in terms of thinking that we're going to bang our head in locally and it's not going to make it bleed if
we do this. So is there a question in there? No, that was all statements. Thank you. Just wanted to make sure I didn't miss it. No, I did. No. Can I just Yeah, go ahead. I mean, there was a lot of information to pack on. The only thing I want to address is yeah, you are correct
when it comes to people taking the single family houses turning them into double two families, three families, what whatever is known for and that's fine. But what we're talking here is density of, you know, 24 per acre, 60 uh 36 per
acre. So it's it's a little bit different than a three family, four family house. That's all I'm saying. And and again, other other towns and cities are pushing back and that's again why we we started this and there are a lot of
citizens that are highly concerned and and you're right, we need to get on some bandwagon. So eventually we will and and it's just not again it's just not this is the ADUs are even going to you know add insult to this injury. But that's
all I Yeah. I mean I if I could Mr. here. I I I mean I I don't again Jim I think you I understand exactly what you're saying with it and you know there are there is a case that case still exists as I had said to you I
don't think anybody in their right mind should believe that the the case that involves it is an unfunded mandate is a back door to order to be able to undermine the legitimacy of this action. The the SJC made it perfectly clear that you must you must adhere to this and
that if you don't adhere to this, the attorney general has an absolute right to be able to make you adhere to it. And this attorney general is clear that she is going to make people adhere to it. That being said, my guess is, if you wanted to bet
me that they probably will come back with a determination that there is some unfunded mandate component of this. And what'll end up happening with it is is that we will be refunded some amount on our Cherry sheet like we are in other another state implied 40 40 whatever 40
B 40C 40D 40 E 40F all those different things we'll get we'll get a refund back on that with it but again the idea that that mechanism the mechanism that's being proposed here which is in essence to either sue the state or to take an action that is highly unlikely that the
attorney general who has to approve all these is going to approve in in the first place is just isn't just it just isn't going to happen in regards to it. And I and and that's where I say is I think the effort needs to be at the state level if you want to be able to sort of pull this back. It's very much a
regional thing. I mean again development development is it zoning is really dangerous first of all. Okay. If you do it wrong, you really screw things up badly. And and we have a David McKenna will remind everybody about the the
David McKenna Tower on Route 114, 13 stories, which was really well-intentioned what we wanted to do at that time. But but you got to, you know, they have lawyers, too, and and sometimes they're better than ours, and they do a really good job with that. So, I think that's the other part of this is
is that if we want to really look at zoning and change zoning, let's do it in a professional sort of metered fashion. Let's let's if if you're going to do something with this, let's get together.
Let's have people who who understand it from the planning board, from the board of appeals, let them be able to come in with a with with recommendations in regards to these types of things and and and move forward with it and do it on the local level that way. Referendum I
have don't have a problem with referendum in general. Referendums and zoning are really really dangerous. Thank you for the feedback. I I will one thing that I thought was kind of funny was the last planning board I think
someone who owns Glitterati they they did an ANR so that they would freeze the zoning as it is today which yeah exact that's exactly what hey yeah not for like two three years and and and as you as you know you can you can take
advantage usually pick and choose so you get you get the best of either one which is why we have the tower there was no height requirements for for for residential whereas there is for business again and and I understand I'm wasting people's time to some extent but
the one of the things that that people really need to respect is is that the first the first committee I ever served on and I think Dave might have been with it was the 114 um corridor zone and at one of the meetings Tom Flattley who Tom Flattley
was probably the biggest developer in Massachusetts at one point Tom Flattley happened to come to our meeting and I was maybe 20 years old. I was a moronic kid and I'm sure I said something moronic to Tom Flattley. And Flatly sort of looked out at me and he said, "You know, the problem is
this. When you become too limited in what you're going to be able to what someone can do with their property and of course he was one of those people said, by the way, it's my property. I own the property. You are restricting my right to use my property." Right? It's always interesting to me that the the
most Republican people in Danvers who generally I would say are the people who really really fancy property rights don't really go that way when it comes to the people who live next door to him. But uh but it was his property. And the other thing that he made the point to me was if you limit what I can do with that
property too much, I'm going to find an alternative to screw you over. And that's swing away golf. And that is other places in Danvers where that's the it's the it's the it's it's the the
tower on Route 114. You got to give them some opportunity to be able to use their property in a good way. You just can't stop everything that you think is bad. I won't say anything else the rest of the night. Doubt it. I doubt
that broken promise. Make want to make a bet on that. I move. Uh, Eric, well, I would say that uh, Mike, I appreciate the history lesson because it is I think it's it's helpful to get context when I'm when I read the
petitions. I haven't been in Danvers for 20, 30, 40, 50 years. So, it's unclear to me what character of our town means. It's it's very vague and it's subjective to what everybody thinks themselves. I think the character should be X, Y, or
Z. So then we have laws that define it and then there's a very ambiguous push back since I work in multiple towns on the Northshore and so I do hear some of this chatter. Uh Glosser just passed a yes on three, you know, this week. And
so I think it's important that we hear from residents because there's a lot of vexation around 3A but I'm not completely clear on what
folks want. Like it's not clear to me. So when I look down uh 5 10 15 20 years in the future and I say well what is it that folks want in the future? And if the answer is we want in the future what we had in the past, it it doesn't make sense to me because the price of a
single family home today will kill your town. It will absolutely and we talk about that, right? So you can't buy a single family home anywhere for less than what 7 what's 750 $800,000 or some
wild number like that. If our community or any community that has home ownership prices at that level, seniors can't age in place because they can't afford to maintain those big four bedroomedroom, five bedroomedroom
ranches with property and and uh a family who's got, you know, one child doesn't need a four bedroomedroom, five bedroomedroom, or two working parents still can't afford $800,000 for a home to do anything. It doesn't really
add up to me how our community thrives. If we say we want to plant a stake in the ground, freeze, keep keep the community as it is today. I think, okay, that's fine. No one's going to move here unless we want folks who only have
millions of dollars and no children and we die out because we then no one has no one with children's is going to come and buy into our town. So I think it's very there is an there is an answer to what folks are feeling and these are not
the answers. These are emotional responses to we want to preserve something but what we're preserving does not um create a future for us. I mean it's very concerning. You can't buy a condo for less than $600,000. So I do think
that I hear the concern. I don't believe that this going backward and pushing against this keeps provides any future for our for our town. Like none. When I see this, I see the death of communities because no one can move there. No one
can move there. Population decline. Oh, now your now your tax revenues are down because no one's moving there. Why? Cuz they can't afford it. Why? because folks push back on 3A back in, you know, 2025 because they didn't like the the the changing demographic of the town. Okay, keep the demographic you have. We have
an aging population. We need new families to come and they can't afford to come unless there's something for them to afford. So, I I just I think there's some healthy conversations to be had around that from passionate people who want our community to exist. We can
agree there. How we go about it has to be I think more nuanced than to have or not to have this particular zoning law. It is law. Working within that I think we can do better. But at this level
we're not controlling the things that we control well enough. You know and this is just emotional responses to things and say well I don't really like it. Wouldn't do it. I don't think this is the answer. But I appreciate and respect members of our community are trying to say that something is not
sitting well. Let's do something about it. I hear that and I think this doesn't do it, but we should figure that out because it doesn't it's not going away. Folks are just upset. But I appreciate the um uh the
communication. Thank all set, Jim. Paul, uh, I'd be disingenuous if I told you I had anything to answer, uh, add to what's been said. I came into this town in, uh, in I was
going to say 1841, but no one would have corrected him, just as the railroads were really getting in. Yeah. A lot of coal around at that point. But no, I came here in uh, what was it, 1981? So, I've had 40 plus years
and you're not going to go back. I mean, basically, we're not going back. Not going to happen. Never will. And, you know, we're not going to be like we were in the 50s or the 60s. Thank goodness. And all that. So, everybody said what I think I could say. I think we're we're here. We're going to move on. And, uh,
I'm finished. Thank you. I don't want to spend too much time on it because I think it's relatively obvious of what's going to happen with this particular um article, but just out of my I'm looking at this and um and
again I I understand Jim where you're coming from on this and and where where some people are coming from on this, but um I start with a question. And I don't know if we've asked as asked our town council this or not, but can you just can town meeting repeal? I think the answer to
that question is we can certainly pass the article, but then when it appears on the desk of the attorney general, um she'll laugh at it and send it back and say this is not acceptable. But then if we repeal, do we just automatically go back to the zoning that was in place in before? Uh well, the the quick answer to
that is no. We just eliminate zoning. We have no zoning basically. I think and Aaron, if you want to address that more more articulately than I can as as I'm not a uh any kind of attorney or uh but just if you could touch on in
theory if this article or any similar article for the sake of conversation so you might not have to get up again in five minutes um were to pass. Can you talk about the what I'll describe as unintended consequences of repealing zoning?
Well, again, you run the risk of potentially having no zoning in place if you resend. And I know that's very unusual and kind of seems counterintuitive. That said, in a prior community that I had worked in, we had a
judge invalidate the the zoning in question on a specific parcel and our response was, "Well, what what is it now?" And the answer was, "It is unzoned." Now, fortunately, the land in question was abudding a reservoir and
had some enough protection because of the res it abudding the reservoir that the community was able to pivot and deal with that before the land owner and the land owner had no intentions of doing something. But it can happen that you can have unzoneed property. Not a good situation. Anything goes. There is no
book. There are no rules. You may do whatever you wish. Um, he hike limits, all that. So, I did want to address Let me know if that happens because Yeah. Yeah. Um, but I wanted to address the question about have we talked to town council. I think the short answer of that is we
have inquired to town council about how to what would happen if this were to occur. A couple weeks ago, our town clerk, Kathy Ellsworth, held in this room a regional training where the uh attorney general's office came here to
talk to town clerks about um bylaw changes, zoning changes, and how to file the paperwork that goes along with those. Just kind of a refresher, it was actually quite nice to see this room full of other town clerks. Um but we did have a chance to pigeon hole uh the AG
staff that was here. Um, and we put that question to them. Um, they followed up with us in writing, but we have not received a response. Basically, the question was, if the town properly adopted this zoning change that rescended this zoning, what would the
attorney general's response be? We do not have an answer to that question yet, and I'm not sure that they will take a position, but they have the right to deny that zoning change even if it were properly adopted. Right. Um Aaron, while you're up there, um I if
if if I don't know that that we could resend it. So basic based on what you're saying, um but if we didn't have the zoning, are we losing are we losing funds? Are we losing money from the state?
Um I I would say in the last couple of years, we have not tried to tap into any of the programs that the state has put under this umbrella. you know, compliant communities may only apply for these programs. But the most obvious and recent project that would have not
occurred is the rail trail extension. That was a mass works project in the mass works program is I think they call it one stop. Um I'm forgetting the overarching umbrella that they've put the community onetop. Um there are a
number of grants under that umbrella that again I wouldn't say we use them annually but we are regularly following them and we have projects in our mind that are like okay when we're ready that would be one open space acquisition land and park program. Um there are programs
out there that we intend to and we have in the past. Um but at the moment I don't think there's anything like in the next you know six weeks that we're trying to do but we certainly have tapped into those in the past. Thanks thanks Erin. Um, so you know, Jim, one of the things you said earlier was was
essentially get get rid of it and then come back with some other kind of zoning. But I think that's the reverse of how it has to happen. If if there's going to be replacement zoning, the replacement zoning has to be has to be what repels the prior zoning. We can't just have a nozzoning uh uh outlaw city
uh situation. So, um I don't think it works. I also agree with um Ted and Mike, I think, which when they said it's kind of a state issue. It's a referendum issue. It's a it's a you know, you got you got to work on this from from from their end of it, not from
our end of it. And I don't think anything comes of it from our end of it other than we're spinning our wheels for nothing. So, that's all I I don't want to again, it's been talked about pretty lengthy at this point, so I'll leave it at that. And um but but yeah, I I appreciate your your comments
and your feedback and and again, it's just to make a statement and and and and I mean I've been in in litigation when there's five lawyers, you know, for and everyone's got an opinion, right? No, no one agrees. I mean, to me, you
know, the, you know, the smell test, if you're going to back out zoning, then whatever zoning existed before you back out that zoning that it still exists. So, I don't think it does, though. It's gone. It's gone. Yeah. Yeah. There, remember that litigation you had had
five lawyers that you're talking about? It had one lawyer who did matter. That was the judge. And the judges have spoken on this. And that's part of the problem with this is, and so, you know, as I've said to people all along, I agree with you. You know what? I happen
to think my lawyerly opinion might be worth more than other people's, but that's cuz I'm selfish and and conceited. But the the reality the reality of it is is that this is on tape for Ann's sake. But the reality is is that, you know, there are there are
decisions, there are judicial decisions on both specifically on this, but unquestionably as it relates to zoning. It is a, trust me, there's a really big book of zoning law that wasn't dis it's not disagreement. They don't do the laws
with disagreements and opinions. They tell you how to do it. And and this stuff is pretty well established. I don't think there's any question, frankly, that no, you our zoning bylaw is what our zoning bylaw is. It's it's there. If you take a piece out of that zoning bylaw, there's nothing else that
just automatically replaces it unless there is a state statute, an underlying state statute that provides some protection to people. But again, these are people's property and you're taking away their rights to use their property. So they have a lot of opportunities to
be able to take care of that because if not it's a it's eminent domain. It's an unfair taking, right? There's that constitution thing that talks about what they have rights about. So okay, any questions from the audience?
David, you all be up there, please. Yeah. Just so those little old ladies on 114 who are watching can uh still hear you. We miss love and love you like they were your We do miss getting phone calls from her. They need to speak more into the
microphone. David McKenna premium member precinct date. Uh yes, Danvers is changing. We all know that. I know it probably more than any of you. I grew up in West Danvers off Buckton Road. Our nearest
neighbor was a quarter mile away. You couldn't see any other houses. It's changed a lot in the last 30 years. uh from those days has changed everywhere and unfortunately it's going to keep changing because there are more
people coming along that want housing. Um your children are going to want housing, your grandchildren, people from out of town want to move in because it's a great community. I I don't think it makes a lot of sense to try to change this. As as as said, we have no zoning
in place. We have a hole there that would probably cause more problems for us to start and get into a legal battle when there's so many others already doing it. Let them spend the money. Why should we waste ours? If they prevail, that law will go away and then we'll
figure something else out. And one last comment, that tower should never have been there because while the ANR zoning did provide that it pro protected the land owners interest and their rights, it was never supposed to give them more
rights than they would have had under the old zoning. They still should have had a three-story height limit even though there was no residential height limit imposed. We didn't know that in time to stop it, but it should have been stopped. I don't think this should go through. I
think we got to play this out and let the chips fall where they may with the other communities fighting it and maybe it'll prevail. There were a lot of lot of hearings went into what was verbose downtown. Probably 30 or more hearings over a 5year period. I remember being
downtown putting little stickers on a map. I don't remember exactly what the purpose was, but the citizens had plenty of input into that. We tried to make the downtown more vibrant by giving it mixed use um with neighborhood input. It
wasn't something Town Hall jammed down everybody's throat. It was something that the neighborhoods and all the citizens had a chance to and did speak on for had to be at least 5 years. So, I think we need to give it a chance. I agree that building is big. We'll have
some more big ones, but it's going to have to work one way or the other. This is not the way, I don't think. Thank you. Thank you, David. David, you dropped something uh just behind you. Go ahead. Got a free piece of gum.
Nova Sam meeting member precinct one. I just wanted to stand up in support of the MBTA zoning. Um I think it's a great zoning. Um I would love to see more uh residential availability in town, especially downtown. I am not afraid of
the empty Jimmy's Roast beef that's been empty for years at this point being replaced with something four stories and has like maybe 10 units of residential. This is not anything to be afraid of. It's exciting. Um yes, it is changing. I
did not live here in the 50s um or the 70s. Uh and I don't want it to stay the same. And this is not a small town. I grew up in a small town. There was less than a thousand of us. That is a small town. 27,000 is not a small town. And I
I think if we embrace this as a positive thing, it could be good for us. It's it's nothing to be afraid of. Anyway, that's all. Thank you, Nova. Anyone else? Yes. Thank you. Uh Joan Baguchi, town meeting
member, precinct 3. um changed my remarks a little bit after listening to the board and got some nice history. I'm a 20 uh 25 year resident of Danvers um and grew up in Beverly right next door.
So I was in Danvers a lot and do remember a lot of the industry in Danvers, the Sylvania plants. My dad was a Sylvania worker as were many of our dads and moms. Um but to the one of the reasons why I
ran for town meeting uh a couple of years ago was yeah there is some changes in town that you know maybe I didn't particularly like and as I was talking to residents in my precinct one of the things that
constantly rose to the top was overdevelopment development and I think what resident mean is the walls closing in on them, the town becoming more dense. a lot of residents and new
families that have moved to Danvers in maybe the past 20 25 years um moved out of the urban settings of maybe closer to Boston Reier Sus something like that and they came here
and one resident in my precinct in particular I was having a conversation with and he said you know I came here from another community was more urban And we came here to Danvers. We liked it. It was more suburban for our
family and we really thought that the town was looking out for our best interests. And he says, "20 years later, I see all this development happening." And I know it's pushed a lot by the state, and I understand both sides of
it, but he said, he goes, "I don't think that anymore." He says, 'I wish I was more awake 20 years ago. And that kind of has stayed with me the last couple of years that I've been uh on town meeting is that I think a lot
of residents feel that way. And you know, we all have resident input, but there's a majority of the residents that don't have time to come to meetings. They have families. They have other obligations. they have jobs
just to survive, you know, and I think, you know, I'm not going to preach to anybody, but I think one of the reasons I take what I do kind of seriously, even though it is volunteering, is that we need to really listen to the residents and even as town
members and as volunteers in the town, is sometimes not vote for what we think is best, but really get the input of our constituents in each one of our precincts or in the town and what they want and a lot of them are very afraid
of the overdevelopment. They don't want, you know, their walls closed in. They moved out of an urban setting. They want this to remain suburban. So, I think that's the crossroads that Danvers is at. whether you know Jim and a lot of the
group they've worked really hard on these articles and to try and I understand the legalities of it but I hope that this really starts a conversation in town a huge conversation in town and to let the residents know
that we see it we hear you and we're going to work on this and we're going to make it better because people are afraid this is going to happen to to the town. they don't like it. They don't like what they're seeing. Um, so I hope we all can work together and I hope I hope it
started a big conversation through this whole process. Um, I don't want to see it go away. There was one other remark that I know they asked Jim about have we, you know, at the state level tried to lobby our representative and our state senator. I've mentioned it in
conversation when I have been able to speak to them and you know we really don't get a stance. It's well we need more housing and that's really it and it's sort of everyone's kind of in lock step with what the state wants to
do. So I do agree that it is a trickle down effect. It is from the state. Some of this is from the federal level. You know uh people aren't selling their homes. Interest rates are high. they're going to add on to the home there, you know. So, there's a lot of things, but I
just hope that we can continue to have a really positive conversation. And I see Dan Bennett's here tonight. Ronnie's here tonight. I know acting town manager, but when the town manager comes in, Danvers really needs to sit down and say,
"Okay, we got to be very careful here where we go because it can be it could become Ran Tool Street in Beverly." And everyone laughs at that. Don't bring up Beverly. Beverly now is on a water restriction. And they say, "Oh, it's because of the drought." I grew up in
Beverly. We never had a water restriction. Beverly's overbuilt. And we just went through the town just went through Tras Lane Covenant that the town let expire. And now they're going to build another 400
apartments on Folly Hill and more. So that's going to impact our town. That's going to impact our residents. That's going to impact the investment that people put into their homes to live there and the town really needs to think
about this and everybody does, you know. Thank you. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Nice job. Anyone else? Yes, Noah. Hi, my name is Noah Leven. I'm a town meeting member from Precinct 7. Um, so I just wanted to share a few
thoughts. Um, like Nova, I'm in favor of the MBTA zoning. Um, we have a housing crisis in the state, in this town. Is it a perfect solution? No. But I think it's a step in the right direction to build the high density housing that we need. Um, I also just want to speak as someone
who's a new resident to town. I moved here in 2020. Um, I want a town that is moving forward, that there is progress. Um, density is not bad. Density is good. One of the reasons we moved here was
because we can walk a half mile downtown and have coffee shops, restaurants, businesses. We see our neighbors. I feel like there's a fabric in this town. You know, people talk about character and losing the character and I always wonder what that means
because to me the character is seeing my neighbors going downtown, knowing the prince at the coffee shop. I don't know. That feels pretty great to me. I like how that feels. Um, I'm concerned that there's a sentiment that I hear from folks that the town is closed and we
only want a certain type of resident here. When people talk about character and demographics in article 37, um, we should want a town that welcomes everyone. We should want a town that, as other members have said,
um, that is moving forward, that is open to new families. Not everyone can afford a single family home. Um, so I I just think it's, you know, it's important that when we hear folks saying everyone's opposed to this or everyone's opposed to that, that there really aren't. I moved here because I like the
direction this town's going in. I ran for town meeting. I'm running for library trustee because I want this town to move in a positive direction. So, I just, you know, I think that if folks are really opposed to this, sure, fight it on the state level. Um, but I think those are
different conversations, too. I think that folks are pining for a damn that maybe existed in the early 1900s. I don't think it's existed recently. Um, and I think it's disingenuous to say everyone's opposed to this because there are many of us who moved here because we like the direction this town is going
in. Since Maple Square started, look at what's happened downtown. We have a new coffee shop. You have the modern butcher. There's lines down the street every Saturday morning. Like, I don't know. That's a positive development to me. So, I just wanted to not just speak in favor of the zoning
um the NBA zoning, but just speak in favor of the direction of this town. Like, it's a place that I'm proud to live in and I want other people to be able to live here as well. Um and that to me makes Damas feel like home. So, thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Is there a
motion? Move no action. Second. Motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? Thank you, Jim. Uh once again, the uh submitting petitioner is not here and uh you're up.
Article 37, citizens petition MBTA zoning and uh basically this is a well to see if the town will vote to have the planning department discuss and incorporate zoning bylaw updates to dismiss specifically address the overdevelopment created by the MBTA
zoning requirements of increased unit density and decreased parking requirements. during the 2025 2026 normal zoning review and update public meetings or take any other action thereof. So, so basically this is just a kind of a
gentler version of addressing MBTA zoning. I think that uh you know the MBTA zoning updates allow from 14 to 16 24 units per acre with with less parking requirements. I mean that's and that's the the key. So I mean this zoning it exemplify the story complex at the
corner of Hobart and Maple Street and that's going and and so they also allow up to 36 units all the way down High Street. So and again parking and the increased density and uh and basically all these initiatives are coming you know from you know the
state down. So the every year the planning department goes through their zoning bylaw revisions and updates just to see what they can do. I'm just asking that we just look at the zoning bylaws
uh in in light of increased density and the decreased parking requirements and what can be done to alleviate that pressure. That's all I'd have to say on that. Thank you, Arthur. Oh, wait. There was a group thing. Can Joanne speak to this? Joanne will be
able to speak during the citizens comments. Okay. Um, so I don't think that I have I think my opinion is similar to what it was on 36. Um, I'm not sure
what this is what the what this is really providing for. So, is it is it intended just to have the planning department think about making changes or is it telling the planning department you need
to address overdevelopment created by MBTA zoning? Are we are we are we asking them to to just think about it or are we telling them to do something? Well, the article says uh vote to have
the planning department discuss and incorporate zoning bylaw updates to So, I don't know what that means. Do you know what it means? What does it mean? Does it mean that that we're telling them that they need to make changes or is it tell is it I'm not and I'm not trying to be a pain in the neck. I just don't understand. Is it I don't
understand what this article is is trying to do. I don't I mean I maybe I don't see it, but it says discuss and incorporate zoning bylaw updates. So, it seems to me that it's saying planning department, you need to you need to
incorporate new bylaw updates that will address density and increase density and decrease parking. But, however you do it, you can do it however you want, but you need to address it. And uh and if I
could have a correlary question that you can think about where in our uh governing documents does the authority of town meeting to direct the planning department to do anything actually exist. That was going to be my next point. Okay. So but but that that so I was going to come to that next but but
my my biggest question is my biggest concern and again I understand where you you guys are coming from. I also understand where you you guys are coming from. All right. Um you you know people want things not to change
too much. Other people don't care how much change comes in and and I shouldn't say that but they're fine with a lot of changes and and of course my answer is it's always something in the middle. Um because my dad told me uh moderation is everything.
Um but in this particular case before I get to that question about about can can town meaning tell planning anything um is if this is saying that we want the planning department to make
changes then I kind of have the same problem I have in the other one that that that you're you're you're you're demanding that that changes be made. Um, but what changes? Because it's just the vague increase unit density and
decreased parking requirements. So, um, so that's and I don't really think you can answer the question, Jim. I'm just No, no, no. I I I think I said, it's more of a hypothetical than anything. No, because clearly, you know, the planning department every year has their yearly
review of the zoning bylaws, right? And so all I'm asking all of this is asking is to incorporate discussions in the zoning. But I don't think I don't think that's the way it's written. So that's my problem. It says it says discuss and
incorporate zoning bylaw updates. It doesn't say discuss the possibility of incorporating zoning by bylaw updates. If it said that, then what you just said would be true. But since it says discuss and incorporate it's kind of making a demand on the planning department and
based upon some general concepts which the general concepts may have validity but but again it's not enough. So I don't think and then that goes to my second point with CRAS which is I don't think you can you can order planning to do anything town meeting can order
planning to do anything. So again I just don't think this is it's going to work. Um, I don't think it's specific enough and I don't think he could do it even if it was specific enough because I don't think the town meeting can can require planning to do anything.
Aaron, maybe can we ask Aaron about that? Well, I'm sure I'm sure Aaron is going to is going to agree with that assessment. Yeah. I mean, is that is that that's correct? Right. I apologize. I was staring at some numbers. Well, I didn't hear the question. Does town
meeting have any authority to order? I I don't think I'm the person that should answer that one. Okay. I think that charter and is that is that town council? That would be a question for town council. Yeah.
Deflect order. Mr. Chairman, I will allow your point of order. Although you're not a member of the committee. Go ahead. You can go to the microphone, please, so that people can hear you. Bill Bates, town meeting member, precinct 4. Bill, thank you for being
here tonight. It means a lot. Pleasure. Thank you. Always. Phil, welcome. Um, we must be doing it wrong. The person who submitted this is a William D. McKenzie. Yes. How can you be discussing a citizen's petition when the
citizen is not here? Uh, an objection I have raised with Mr. McKenzie uh on a personal level or private level. Uh I will leave it at uh it was actually Mr. Morose who wrote the article and given the extenduating circumstances of Mr. McKenzie's inability to be here this
particular evening uh I am allowing Mr. Marose to stand in as it were. Thank you so much. And if you would educate me please if I can't do a point of order because I'm not a member of the finance committee. Is it a point of information I should No, it's just sitting there
silently. Just sitting You can start practicing now. You'll always have time to talk, Bill. Just when you get to talk. Um, all right. I mean, I think I've made my points on on partly on the last one and partly on this one. I just don't think
it it works and I don't think um it's it's legal. Basically, I don't think it it can it can do anything. So, I'm going to leave it at that. Okay. Uh Paul, yes, you're up. I really don't have much to say because
I think I've heard a lot and I don't it seems some of it seems repetitious to me. It really does and and you know the lawyers can tear it apart and and not put in every comma and we're still going to be at the same spot. All right. Uh I
don't see the change coming. Personally, I I was a little surprised at the design of the project that I know is is uh the one we're probably referring to. I did have questions about parking, but I hear
a lot of things about, well, we got to re we have to revitalize the town. We have to bring more people into the town. How are we going to revitalize? How are we going to get restaurants if no one's going to come? Well, we're going to get restaurants because we're going to bring people in, but we don't want to bring people in.
It's like not in my backyard. Uh so you know I I'm done. Thank you. That's it. Eric, tonight is probably not the the the time to have I think the more robust
conversation that was alluded to um earlier. Clearly we do need one. I similar to you know what I said earlier and similar to what Paul said. I think that one I hear the frustration and I
hear the concern and I think there are folks are asking for things that are not in the town's best interest you know when it is understood. And I would love to have the conversation what is it we're trying to get to not what is it we're trying to get rid of. Right? So
when we have that conversation, I think that would be a healthy good conversation to have with all of the moving pieces because you can't hold everything freeze it here decrease. We don't want more parking. We do want more parking without having what are the
consequences of that? As as Paul said, businesses thrive with people. Businesses thrive with people. So if you don't have the people, you don't want the people to come, your businesses aren't going to thrive. You're not going to have a thriving downtown. This conversation is going on all across the Commonwealth. It's going on all across the region. Some there are
some things in community development that are very clearly understood by the professionals in community development. You need foot traffic if you want your businesses to thrive. They have to be able to afford to live there if you're going to get foot traffic. So, if you want foot traffic, that means they have
to live close enough to walk there. So, you got to build it for them. But you don't want to build it. You want them to live further away and nowhere to park. We keep talking in circles and I think it it would be helpful to have people see that these conversations are not
uh they're not yes or no conversations. Every piece that we move left has consequences on the right, the up and the down. And we need to then find that sweet spot. There's a sweet spot out there, I believe. And some people miss the opportunity to uh arrive at that
sweet spot when you have five years of development and folks, you know, look at it the finished product and then throw rocks at it. And that's unfortunate. But there is u there is an opportunity for more discussion now that folks are paying attention. I'll leave it at that. Yeah.
I think if I may chat for a minute. Yeah, because you won't have any time after. Yeah, that's my plan. Um, you know, I I I agree with your sentiment, Eric, and uh, you know, one of the frustrations of being on the finance committee is that with citizens
petitions, we are limited on either a recommendation to go forward with exactly what you're presenting or a recommendation of no action. Our hands are tied. uh unlike with a uh traditional warrant article uh for example the gen general stabilization
fund where we can make changes to that a citizens petition we cannot edit uh additionally I think you know and the opportunity to to make changes to that on the town meeting floor are also incredibly limited and most of them would be called out of order right so I
think uh you know procedurally I think you can you can probably you know read the writing on the wall and see where we are but I think there's a general sentiment certainly from this group of individuals that uh some kind of um you know the um I always forget the uh what
we had back in the 80s balance the balance the balanced growth steering committ the balanced growth a balanced growth steering committee which I believe uh the uh select board chairman at one point referred to something similar in discussions with uh with um the with regards to these three citizens
petitions was brought up uh might be the right way for the town to move forward as a larger group um with everyone who wants to participate participating um and listening and uh and making a decision uh tied to our uh rather
constricting warrant um is probably not the smartest move. Um so it's certainly something you know and you know again we're tied to an up and down up or down vote on this in a very limited way. Um, but I think what you're hearing from us tonight, and I hope you are hearing it,
is we certainly understand. We hear you. Um, and um, and people are listening. So, uh, Mike, yeah, I mean, if I if I had the opportunity, honestly, especially with this particular warrant article, to to
offer an amendment, I probably would have offered an amendment to the to the extent of to have the town manager appoint a um, call it whatever you want. And I mean the balance growth steering committee is the name that we use but you can call it whatever you want with some specific group of people member
from the planning board a man member from the board of appeals a member from the conservation commission. Um I really like the idea of it coming from our new town manager because I think it's an opportunity for her to be able to really grasp a hold of what is clearly an issue
that that have affected people. Uh again, I am under no circumstance am I going to even accept begin to accept the idea that as a community we have paid no attention to zoning and development. David uh Griffin got elected select
board member in 1968 because he had it took his cow from his farm on Wenham Street and put a sign on it that said save our town farms. So since 1968, there has been a movement within this town to impact and to and to
address zoning. Again, both David McKenna and myself started our quote unquote political careers as arguably anti-development individuals. My case, it was on the the east side of Route 114. In his case, it was on the west side of Route 114. Um, all of these
things have been consistent within this town and trying to address it. Our zoning bylaw is entirely different and so much more improved than it was in 1975 and what it was in 1984
when I started in this business. And I think that's all good things. But I but again I think that in this particular situation the chair is absolutely right. We are limited to what what has been provided to us and unfortunately what
has been provided to us is either unclear, questionable from a legality standpoint or likely to result in very negative unintended consequences. On this one here, I will go much farther
than my my my legal brother does. The planning board is appointed under article 15 section 15 of our town manager act. They operate under section
81 chapter 81 and chapter 81A and chapter 41 of Massachusetts general law. Town Mining has no more authority to limit or dictate to that independently created entity within our town
government than they would to tell some resident when they got to brush their teeth. That's just the reality of it. And you know, I understand people will give me the old, well, lawyers have their own opinion. Yeah, but sometimes our opinions are right. And I'm telling
you on this one, I'll bet you my opinion is right. So again, think about other options. Think a little bit outside the box. Think about being part of the solution. Not
that this is you, but but don't just be throwing rocks at the windows from outside. Things work better when we work together on these things and we try to find a solution that doesn't get imposed by one side or the other on something. We'll leave it at that. Thanks, Mike.
Erin, I appreciate all my peers um questions. I think they've answered everything that I would have uh asked, everything I would have asked. And um no more questions. Mr. Blake, um just as a point of information, I believe that the um the building on
Hobart and Maple was done by variance. Is that correct? Yeah, it wasn't that wasn't that ZBA, but but it wasn't actually from the MBTA zone. Nothing to do with it. Okay, I'm
just going to just Yeah, the the project defined as Maple Square begrudgingly. Um I just had to get that little dig in. It's the only thing I don't like about it really. Uh is uh is irrelevant to the MBTA zoning.
So this and and and that project was before the zoning board of appeals many times. Correct. Because there were variances granted. There were no variances. None. But there were some applied for, weren't there? Wasn't there a drive-thru? There was a height varian drive through
the microphone. Yeah. Yeah. CVS in there. Sorry. I apologize. Um so for the audience uh were there variances necessary for the development that is Maple Square? No, there were some design waivers. I think they got three or four
feet of height variant. Not variance, I shouldn't call it that. I'm just saying it's not a variance. Um it was a design waiver for rooftop mechanicals. Okay. Um but there was a few design exceptions um that were granted in that process. Okay. So my like I think um somebody mentioned
before that they want to have a conversation about development in Denver. The issue I have with that is it's not a single conversation. It's a constant conversation. And you don't get to say I don't have time. I have two jobs. Yeah. I have five kids. I have a
job. Like, and speaking of time, we've been here for an hour talking about three citizens petitions that are at best ambiguous, at worst unlawful, um, filled with information that's
simply not accurate. The building that people complain about all day long on Facebook has nothing to do with the MBTA zoning. This article implies that it does. There's a lot of flailing going on. And I think, you know, it's not just my time,
it's professionals time. I've I've been here long enough that I've seen several of these zoning changes go through the process, come before us, and go before town meeting to very little opposition. And I know that Mark Zubric was sitting
here paying attention in 2020 and 2018 when these things went through. I was at the town meeting. I didn't hear any if maybe there were a few but I didn't hear very very much opposition. You don't get to say I don't have the time and then
when everything gets put through and we've invested a lot of staff time a lot of volunteer time in putting forth what we think is the best plan for the town to just throw your toy and say no we don't want that go do it over. That's
effectively what people are asking for. And I think what the gentleman who said, "I wish I'd been paying attention 20 years ago," really meant is that he should have been involved on a more constant basis. There's zoning board of appeals meetings all the time that people can go to. I've heard people,
every single candidate that's not on the select board say that that oh the the overdevelopment and you know what not a single one of them not one has mentioned that the select board are the people that appoint the zoning board of
appeals. That's probably the most direct thing you can do to to slow down growth in this town. And not a single one of them, not one has mentioned that as a power. Not one. like it needs to be more thoughtful. I don't disagree with some of the
complaints that people are making. I get that when people and I don't want to put people words in people's mouths. If somebody says the character of their town is changing, I don't think it means what type of people are coming in. I think it means they don't want to sit in traffic. They don't want their utilities, schools, and other
infrastructure overstressed. And they don't want the view from their front from from their front porch to be taken over by some something dramatically different than what they're looking at right now. And I understand that. I feel the same way about my house. But there
has to be logic and thought put forth at the times when it's ripe for deciding, not after the fact. If you guys had come come through tonight and maybe suggested, hey, maybe maybe we have a citizens position to encourage Danvers
to join the lawsuit that other towns are have have filed against the state. Okay, we could have a conversation about that. But like literally just saying we three different articles that are saying we just want to do this to the to like 5 years of work. It doesn't make sense. It
just doesn't. And it it like needs to be more thoughtful and coherent and it can't be a single conversation. People have to participate in the very transparent processes that have been laid out for this and many other issues in this town and every other town in the state. And they can't cry when decisions
get made without them. Those are the facts of life. That's it. Okay. Well, I I would like to make a comment on a couple of things you said. Number one is, you know, we're not standing here throwing rocks and we're not, you know, we're not coming out of the blue and and
you said in 2020 when this all started. But this article was last year, Jim. Jim, the last article was last year, 12 months ago. We were all here for crying out loud and nobody said a word. So one year ago Joanne just we're not
ready for citizen comment. You can be seated please. So in 2020 Mark Zubri and I had a meeting to go over the zoning that was prepared and implemented in 2020 and there were over 45 50 people
there and I posted that out on the the morass of Facebook. So it's it's not like this is just out of the clear blue. People have been concerned about this and yeah there's always you know there used to be a 35 65 uh percentage of town
meeting members going no the 35 no we don't want this but 65 yeah we want it now it's just a mere whimper. Okay. So so it's not like uh people aren't paying attention and understanding what's going on and and and you are correct you know
yeah we we kind of use wrong words. was just really concerned about No, I get I get it. Like I get it. I understand. Okay. I get it. I'm done. I'm good. Wally, you're all set. Thank you. Did you have something else there? Questions from the audience.
Your blood pressure. Joanne, go ahead. Um I just I wanted to um Joanne Muchi, town meeting member, precinct 2. I just wanted to address this gentleman on the board's comments that we just want to rip up what everything's been done over the past 5 years and so forth. This is
citizen participation whether it's now whether it was 5 years ago was whether it was 5 minutes ago. This is us trying to participate in our town and to listen to the residents that we volunteer and serve
for and this is our our effort. Jim went through a lot to get these three petitions put together in this town. A lot of frustration, a lot of meetings, a lot of, you know, circle and
jerking around. He did the best he could with this because he couldn't get straight answers from the town and so forth. This is our way. We're trying to participate and sir, whether if you like it or not, we are. And if it's not,
excuse me, I'll speak to you. I know it's Joanne, if you could speak to the article, please. Article 36. Are we on 37? 37. If this isn't a great effort, we're
sorry, but it's an effort. Okay. So, I'm getting a little frustrated sitting here and kind of being dressed down by the finance committee. Whether you know more history about the town, whether you know this or
that, we're trying to do our best, too. So, I'm going to go home now cuz I've been here for an hour and a half. I have a husband with cancer. I have a mother who needs me who's an invalid. I'm gonna go home now to them because I feel this
committee has wasted my time tonight and you've wasted the town of Danvers' time. I'm disgusted. I'm leaving. I'm so mad. Any other questions from the audience? Noah, go ahead, please. Um, so I just I I know the petitioners
are here, but I know Jim brought it. I was just wondering if you could expand on this language um in the warrant that says demographics. I'm wondering if you could just explain or define what you meant by demographics in terms of future zoning. Yeah, I really didn't give it much
thought. Let me let me just contrary to the presentation. No, seriously. And Jim, if you haven't given it much thought, if you could keep your answer to under a minute, I would appreciate it. You know, article 38 was the one that we wrote. Okay.
And that was the only one we put all our wood behind and got all these articles going. The the Thursday before the deadline, I got a letter from the uh planning board saying that you you can't do this because you have to have public
meetings. And it just wouldn't fly. It's just totally illegal. So in the Hey Mary even here, you know, we put these two other one, you know, Mark Zubric put one together and I just wrote one trying to just, you know, put
some sense into it. And demographics, what are demographics? what people you know it's it it's their jobs their you know there's a whole list of you know when you get the demographics of the town there's 25 categories so I'm just saying Danvas is
Danvas it's we got a demographic I you know you can well I could go to the thing and look at it and see what it is but uh it's it's it's you know it's it's just you know I don't know I I don't Is it even in Is it even
in petitions. Pardon me. Is the word even in the petitions? It is 38. It's in 37. It's in the uh It's in the explanation. Oh, okay. Okay. In the Yeah. In the expos Beacon Hill legislative city, the mandate blah blah blah. I know. I was just I was just
reading what was on the screen. Person and I and damage personality. I mean, you want to talk I lived and grew up in this town down town and we used to walk to sandy beach by the the lack of company. Maybe that's my problem. Walk
by, you are high as a kite. But you're making my You're making my point, Jim. Anyone else? Yes. Annette Collins, um, precinct one town meeting member for many, many, many
years. also resident in town for 59 years and hoping to be here for another 50 if I can, God willing. What I want to do is thank the board, the finance committee. I know you don't sit around waiting for people to thank you from all the history and all the many of you who
grew up here and had family here who still came later and joined and want to help the town. I also support what Nova has said. Um, I love this town. I was transferred here as a young person u
from a very small little city called North Adams out in western Mass and I thought I had arrived in some amazing place. I still think of it as amazing and it was not the same. We have a five we had a five and dime down in the square plus things that mighty Mike
remembers that I don't because I too was raising five children. So for me to I thank you. I thank you for all you do. these warrant articles, I do sometimes feel there's a frivolity with them. Um because I know there's a law, there's a
legal way of doing things. And uh first of all, when Wall-E said it, I totally feel the same way. It's the law. We voted it in. And now we have to try to work it out. And I think you are all helping us do that. And all the people who are here contributing also do that.
And by the way, there are a lot of people who feel like, as I do, that we are not heading in the wrong direction. That in fact, much like you have pointed out, there are people who want to go forward and are not pulling at the
fabric of what happens and what happens in Maple Square. Every time I walk by there now, I'm kind of amazed. It's coming together. And yes, it takes time, but the rest of the town will follow suit, I'm sure. And thank you. Anyway,
thanks internet. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. David McKenna, precinct day, town meeting member. Um, couple of questions. U I I agree the language in this is flawed. Unfortunately, great job. great job
trying, but um unfortunately town meet uh the planning department does not incorporate bylaw changes. They can only suggest them. That's town meeting shot. But I think I disagree with a couple of members who said that town meeting does
not have the authority to direct town hall. If not, why the hell am I a town meeting member? I think that's a part of my job is to decide the direction the town should be going and make suggestions how to get there. Um I think there was a good suggestion about having
a study committee. I' I've been on two or three of them myself over the years and we've made some progress because of them. Um and I guess I have a question. Would it be appropriate I know you can't amend this because this is citizen petition. Can there be a member from the
floor that would suggest a um committee be formed? Uh because of uh interest among members of this committee, the conversation on the select board, I did reach out to the moderator. I won't hold her to this, but she indicated that no,
that would be ruled out of order. Now, maybe there's something that discussions during town meeting will encourage the new town manager and the board of selectman. Yep. Whoever they may be, hope we have a good board when this election's over. Uh we got some
good people running. I hope the best two win, but best hopefully will and we can move forward. Thank you. Thank you, David. Anything else? Is there a motion from the board? Move uh no action. Second. We have a motion and a second of
no action. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you, Jim. Uh just a word of thanks from this committee. We appreciate all the work that you did and uh the abuse you took from us. Uh lovingly I hope you understand that uh we do appreciate the
time that you put in and uh and the work that you and others have made uh without a doubt and uh we hope that you're continue you continue to participate in conversations around this. Thank you. If if I could just very quickly I want to thank Jim as well. I
had the opportunity throughout this process to have some some uh communication with Jim. I know last year I had said to Mark, you know, instead of coming here with one of your ridiculous ambiguous articles, why don't you talk to somebody who might be able to help
you work it? Jim did that um at the end. I you know, I I know what he was trying to do with article 30. I don't agree with it. I know what he was trying to do. I you know I I think he they he should have recognized from my discussions what that what happened was
going to happen. But I appreciate what he does and I do think that everybody who's here should should you know again I don't normally talk nicely about town meeting members. But um but Jim is really one of the most earnest and one of the most honest people that we have
in town. And even though and that's coming to the fact that Jim and I have probably never agreed on anything. But I do appreciate both of those things from you. So, thank you. Thank you, Jim. Okay. And now that the platitudes are over, we'll move quickly on to the
special town meeting. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Special town meeting. We have three warned articles to discuss. Um, first is unpaid bills. Uh, this article will be on the warn if we had an unpaid bill. At this time, we do not. So again, the procedure
I surprising this is the first time I think I've had no unpaid bills. So I guess the question would be is it no action and then we would if one pops up between now and May 19th. Yes, we we we'll be looking for a vote of no action now and then if on uh the night of town
meeting the 19th the 19th uh we will have a fincom meeting scheduled for 7 p.m. in the event we need to u change that recommendation. Yep. No action. Just no questions from the audience. Great. We have a motion and a second.
All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Article two, budget transfers. Uh we have a couple of budget transfers. We talked a little about this during the budget process uh two weeks ago. We're recommending free cash of 200,000 and
150,000 from DPW personnel, both to go into DPW operating uh to resolve the snow and ice deficit. Then we have uh 30,000 from IT personnel to IT operating. We had a vacancy to begin the year and we had to contract out some services. So this just taking the surplus from the salaries and
putting it into the operating to cover those expenses. And then department heads personnel a transfer into HR personnel. We had again two vacancies in that office as well. Um and we brought on some temp staffing and in order to pay for that temp staffing we're requesting a transfer.
Happy to answer any questions on those. questions from anyone on the board? Questions from the audience? I I you know I do I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um ju just to just to make sure they're clarify with this. So So the $350,000 that's going to the DPW DPW
operating is entirely for over expenditures in regards to the um snow and ice. Snow and ice. Correct. Okay. Okay. Okay. Is there a motion? Move the
article as written. Second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. And then lastly for special town meeting article 3, the state public works grant. Um this year we're expecting pending approval by the legislature to receive one point a little over $1.2 million in
chapter 90 funding. Great. Questions from the board? Questions from the audience? Just sorry. Go ahead. Um Ronnie, how how you know with the situation that we have, we're in the process of these grants in regards to their approval at the state level, is
there any possibility that these are going to be pulled back or are we right basically secure in the fact that this is going to be here with us? And if for some reason our portion does get pulled back, I'm assuming that we simply just won't do the projects in an order. Yes.
So again, yeah. Again, I knock on wood a lot tonight. I expect it to be approved, but for some reason if that amount was lowered or whatever reason not approved, this would not authorize DPW to still go out and spend $1.2 million. We'd have to revise our paving schedule. Yeah. Questions from the audience. Is there a
motion? Move the autolo written. Second. Motion in a second. All in favor? I oppose. Thank you. Moving on to the annual town meeting. Annual town meeting. So, it's my understanding that we don't vote on article one. Correct. And then article two we took care of two
weeks ago. Correct. That leaves us with article three which also we discussed a couple weeks ago and that's just the vote of the town meeting required to authorize the electric division to operate on a self-supporting basis. Any follow-up questions from the discussion two weeks ago? Anything from the audience on article 3? Is there a
motion? Uh can I I I abstain from this one abstension the article and I second motion and a second and all in favor? I opposed and one abstension. Thank you. And just publicly so people know, the reason I
abstain from that is because I'm on the municipal light board. So I don't think it's necessarily an issue, but we don't want any impropriy. Article five, uh, annual article authorizing the colle collector of taxes to use any, uh, of the tools at their
disposal to collect taxes. Any questions from the committee? questions from the audience about the collection of your taxes. Great. Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. Motion in a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you.
Article six, committee reports. Again, an annual article. This one, uh, the fiscal year 2024 annual town report was distributed to all town meeting members. Thank you. Questions from the committee? Questions from the audience? Is there a motion? The article second. Motion and a
second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Article seven. Article seven. And I hope he's just waiting out in the hallway, but Kobe. Look at that. Magic. Say his name three times and he appears just like that. Unfortunately,
[Laughter] I know whose email isn't going to work tomorrow. Why do you think I said it tonight? Um, Kobe's here to talk about three articles. One's our annual uh technology warrant and then we have a couple standalone articles related to some infrastructure. So with that I will turn
it over to Kobe. Sure. Thank you. Colobby Cousins uh IT department. Um the technology plan this year consists of a general government request of uh 197,000 pool request of 185,000
uh library 15 and then our reallocation of regional revenues at 147 for a total of 544. There's a further breakout and we're happy to answer any questions. I would
point out the regional IT benefits us not only in some revenue that we collect in but it allows us to bulk purchase and get a much better rate on particularly our cyber security than we would if we had to go into the market on our own. Okay. I was going to ask what are the seven partner communities now?
Oh boy. Uh we have uh Middleton Topppsfield Hamilton Essex Manchester and Marblehead. Great. Excellent. got anything? I'm good. Paul, all set.
Eric, I do. Oh, yeah. Oh, go ahead. Just in general, um, if you could just say a word about u trends in it. So, you know, we see the numbers now, where the trends are going and certainly uh concerns about what those trends might be, you know, including the the rise of AI and
and you know, yeah, so those are some concerns for sure. Um and we've been over the last few years digging very deeply into cyber security and um when AI was kind of released into the
mainstream um we wanted to take that very seriously as well for two reasons. The security risk it presents and also the opportunity for efficiency in our organization. Right. So, um, we just this year received a
$150,000 grant to study AI readiness and okay, that's essentially the cyber security prerequisites, data security, protection of your sensitive data, all of that type of stuff um that you really ought to have in place before you just
unleash AI into your environment. Perfect. Mike, no. Erin, Eric, asked mine. All good. All right, Ted. All set. Thank you. Good. Thank you. Questions from the audience? Is there a motion on article 7? Move the article. Second.
Motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Next up, we have article 8, disaster recovery. Yeah, thank you. So, this is our disaster recovery. We are transitioning
from uh an on-remise disaster recovery site which is a capital investment of about 500,000 every 5 years. Uh we're moving to a subscription model in the cloud for disaster recovery and it looks like we'll realize a cost avoidance of
about a 100,000 every five years in that cycle. Um so we have some actuals in now that's proving to be true. So, in the future, you'll probably see an adjustment to the number um of this
article or we may try and operationalize it in the operating budget at some point uh as well. But, uh it is a cost reduction over our current approach to uh disaster recovery.
Thank you, Wally. I'm good, Ted. So this would be 100,000 ongoing every year roughly. Yeah. So initially we matched the budget 100,000. Uh we're finding our actuals are coming in around 80. So that'll give us the
option of um you know we probably have enough money to make the fifth year that we would normally have to fund or we could reduce it to about 80,000 and realize the 20,000 annually. We have some flexibility there to discuss with the
budget team of how we want to approach it as um is the pricing on the annual expenditure um fairly locked in? But but my my my my motivation for asking is I know the
price of computing and storage at least I'm under the impression that it's being driven up by because of the demand for um AI you know data center demand for AI and andor mostly AI but also bitco you
know bitcoin like processing power and you could you can laugh at me and tell me that has nothing to do with what with this and I'd be totally okay with that. But you could also say good question either. It's a good question. Either one.
Um, so I'm sorry. What what So no, I didn't understand the question. It's not an option. Sorry. So we're switching from spending 500 grand every 5 years to to basically to to turning it into a software as a service, right? Correct. To to spend I think you said 80 grand a
year roughly right now. Yeah. And it is a variable cost model. to get some actuals in to verify that, but it's um it's about 80 grand a year. And the reason for that is because we're only paying for the storage in the cloud. Yep. Um we only
need to pay for the compute resources if we have a disaster. And um in that scenario, we'd be covered by insurance. So, um, by kind of leveraging those, uh, opportunities, we're going we're
going to avoid, um, $100,000 that we used to pay through. You, Mr. Chairman, just asked the question. We're not concerned that that 80 is going to be 80 this year. Next year, it'll be 90, there'll be 120 the year after that and it explodes the pipes versus if we just kept it in house at the 500 every 5 years. No. Um, one of the things we're
going to be doing too is these are legacy deployments that we're working with here. Uh, so we want to get the legacy deployments into a place where we have the freedom to turn down resources over time as we retire them. Um, with a capital investment,
we're stuck with it for the entire life. Right. Okay. I'm good. Thank you. Okay. No questions, Mike. No, thank you. I had questions, but I think I'm I was excited for your question. Yeah. All right, Paul. No questions. I'm good.
Questions from the audience? Is there a motion on article 8? Move the article. Second. Motion in a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Article 9, which I believe if you're looking at your screen, it should re read phone service consolidation. That is correct. That's
mislabeled there. Article 9 is phone service consolidation, which is another project that will allow us to consolidate and generate some long-term savings. Colobe. Yep. So, we have we currently have um seven different phone systems in town. They're integrated together, so
they speak to each other, but um that is a lot of backend maintenance, and some of these products are um one of the companies just filed for bankruptcy. Um, so we want to get out of this
distributed model um, and move to an enterprise phone system in the cloud where we can just lift all of our onremise stuff up there. Um, consolidate all the phone service and bulk purchase
it and um, the savings we'll realize from bulk purchasing the phone service will will cover the ongoing operational cost of the phone system itself in the cloud. So, um, and we're expecting an overall
operational savings of around 50,000 in our phone bill, um, just by changing the approach. I'm good, Ted. I'm good. Aaron, no questions. So, in I'm just trying to think back now
in the past, right? So when we talk about these seven independent phone systems, are these are these hardwired? Because I know for example in the in the schools, we spent a substantial amount of money a few years ago over the course of a few years because those phones had
to be hardwired for security reasons. Is that one of the seven independent phone systems that we're talking about? It is. And the way we're going to approach this is is keying off that phone system. Okay. because it's the um most robust
phone system we have. Um so we're we're going to use the upgraded version of that. Um our licensing allows us to be either on premise or in the cloud so we can migrate without having to double
spend. Um, and then it is also compatible with the rest of our town environment so that we can have one unified phone system for town and schools and really consolidate all of that spend. Okay. Thank you.
So is it uh I think was it NEC that went out of business or Mel my filed for bankruptcy here and the contract term was my question and then with the the system that we're getting into there is some hardware
replacements that will go along with that I imagine. Correct. So, a number of our phones uh in the schools, they're all Cisco phones. Um a number of them are compatible with the new system, but um a a large portion of them need to
upgrade with new uh device, handset devices. Then my next question is, are you rolling this out with training? You know how folks are. Yes. What are you saying? S having done this of right the minute you roll out a new phone system
folks can no longer answer the phone they can't answer the phone they you know hit the wrong buttons especially when we introduce newer technology and it's what it's voiceover IP or some right so they'll have soft phones they can work with too so it it's easier if
you understand the technology but if you're used to what you're used to it it it creates uh pain points for management so I I just wanted to flag that like if the training isn't attached to it, we do a great thing, we spend good money and then people go home saying I I just I'm
fed up with the new whatever. So I appreciate that. Thanks Eric. I'm sorry, just sort of to go go to that because I to go back to the situation with the ones in the school because I think the ones in the schools are the ones that I always would be the most concerned with because again
that is not just a communication mechanism in terms of being able to call up and find out what's for lunch down in the lunchroom, but obviously it's a intricral part of our security system within all of those schools. um in your opinion that this system is
going to be a better system for that regard. Absolutely. Yeah. And and in regards to the training, which I think Eric is absolutely right on, you have no problems being able to make sure that those teachers and those staff, school staff are capable to be able to use
those phones for exactly what we want them to be able to use them for. I would say we we can minimize those problems. Yeah. Well, I I'm going to tell you, I don't want you to just minimize them. This is one area where you got to perform it and there's no there's no
half truths on this one. Yeah. Yeah, part of it is we'll be doing the project over the summer, so we'll get a little bit of flexibility in testing and stuff like that, but uh we are preparing um kind of one or two page guidance sheets on using the phone and we also as part
of the project uh or included training, some regular training for our users, pre-recorded YouTube videos pushed out to people so they can watch it. Um yeah, there is some video based training from a company called Fible. Um particularly
on the you can have your phone on your computer now and that's exactly my point because I know that's where it's going, right? So I just two more. Okay, two more. Well, the first one is is since Bill Brad isn't here, you can
have those where is Bill? It's the it's the computer access uh you know phone on the computer like that's the kind of intricacy that I think should be very clear right that becomes a new that's part of the new modern telephone integrated into it uh that training has
to be attached to and my other question is it come with um are we doing fourdigit dialing now across the entire town is that correct because I think to Mike's point now it's easy it should be easier to get to whatever department from within the system. Correct. And
then the contract term, how long are we in with the new um once we once we consolidate? Are we in for like three years and and then and go and Okay. Yep. Paul,
um you said you save savings about 50,000. Yeah. Over what period of time? Um that's out of the um phone line item in the school's operating budget. We should see that savings and so that's in the
operating budget. Um so annual existence. Would you be saving 50,000 a year or 50,000 over the life of the contract? 50,000 a year. Yeah. Um, and Mike touched upon a little bit.
Um, we think we're going to be more secure, correct? With with these phones? Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Has there been a lot of cyber attack on phones nationally like it for for towns or is it through
computer into the computers and that type of thing or we Yeah, it's interesting. We get them in the phones every once in a while. people people get into the phones and make calls out. Uh we've had it happen uh two or three times probably uh over the years and
nothing seemed really malicious, just they were able to get in and do something and then we had to run around and figure out what they did and and block the block the leak. Um but I think we'll be better off then.
I mean, but this this phone um isn't so reliant on local personnel um to manage that type of stuff. It's in the cloud and there's a team of experts working on it. So way more specialized. We're we're generalists, right? We do
our best with many systems around here. Um but when we can take advantage of that specialized expertise, it makes things a lot more efficient for us. Okay, that's it. Thank you. I don't think there's anything else to ask about phones. No. Does anyone in the audience
have anything they'd like to ask about phones? Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Let's take a quick five minutes uh and return at 8:50.
Thank you. Thank Welcome back. Article 25. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chairman. Article 25, transportation services. This is requesting funding for year two of a two-year pilot program. As you may know, we're part of the Salem Skipper on
demand ride share service. Um, we're under no obligation beyond the second year, but the request, we found their first year funding with an existing resources. This is an appropriation to fund year two. Um, Aaron Henry's here to answer any questions we may have. We'll open it up. Um, Aaron, if you want to
just give us before we ask any questions, just an update how the program's going. That would I'd be very curious to hear that. Thank you for that question. Um, yeah. Um, I apologize. I went into the um, what is it? uh the operations center what gives
gives us all the latest greatest today. It was not working. So the numbers I'm giving you are about three weeks old. I apologize for that. Uh I'm not sure why the system went down today. Basically we do about uh a little over uh 270 rides a
week are either originating or ending in Danvers. Um the service has about a 30 minute wait time. If you're in Danvers and call for a ride, it's going to take about 30 minutes. Um the hot spot is the Liberty Tree Mall. Uh that's we have limited geoence.
We couldn't afford to join the program and put the entire town in. So we had to select smaller subset uh where it could go. Um the Liberty Tree Mall in the Andock corridor is the hot spot here in Denver. So again, people say, "I don't see it around." And I say, "Yep, that's
probably true because unless you're sitting downtown, you'll probably miss it." Um if you sat at the mall, you would definitely see it. Um, for a point of reference, um, when the MBTA cut the 465, the 465 was averaging 16 riders a
day. Um, and so we're seeing more robust, we're seeing, I won't say robust, we're seeing far more ridership than what we were getting with the MBTA 465 and we're still climbing. Um, as Rodney said, unfortunately, this is largely funded by a federal earmark. um
and that is expiring and so the cities of Salem, Beverly, and the town of Danvers are all trying to figure out what's going to come next uh a year from now when that funding all dries up. I think in our case, we've been working with the MBTA um to try to restore some
sort of service to Danvers. Um not sure that that's going to pan out, but the uh conversations have been productive. So for us, it's probably moving on and hoping that we receive we see restoration of service from the MBTA proper. We've given them access to the
to this data set to prove to them that we have demand and we have a need for uh public service that uh reaches beyond just the mall. Right now there are two existing bus lines that terminate at the uh Liberty Tree Mall. Um but we need to get into the community. Um, and so this
project has been successful in demonstrating to the MBTA that we do have ridership downtown. Um, so thank you for the question and I will sit by in case there's others. Stay right there. That's I already have a question. Outside of the mall, where else can you
get the skipper? Um, uh, Cherry Hill, uh, Northshore Community College, which has actually been a fairly popular hit, and that's a lot of commuting, uh, from, uh, you'll see the folks come up, uh, using public
transportation and then get off of a commuter rail station in Salem and then pop over to here. Um, the other one would be down downtown is the third. There's also the Lehey Clinic, which is kind of out that way, um, on Kirkbride Drive. So, we tried to pick a couple of
the medical spots. So, again, I say the Liberty Tree Mall. It does extend up to Mass General um and to it doesn't go into Endicott Plaza where um Market Basket is, but it gets you right there. And again, I have seen people waiting there with groceries for uh the Salem
Skipper to return. So, those are basically the hot. I'm trying to remember if I'm missing one. Have you used it? I have not. Okay. And how much does it cost? $2. $2. Okay. $1 if you're a senior. And what how what's
the age of a senior today? I apologize. I don't know off the top of my head. I'm going to go with 55. Okay. You're almost there. I think we did the AARP. I think we did the AARP. We're in We're in Mike. Exactly. What you're saying is that that Wall-E
and Arthur are seniors. Yeah. Sadly, I'm starting to get those Arthur, got anything? Um, not. Well, let me ask you. So, this has nothing to do with anything, but how far does it go up? Does it go up? Does it stop at an
undercut street? Does it stop at Mass General? Yeah, it it basically because we it can use that property to turn around or go straight. I mean, if it needs to Salem, it might go out to the right, but turn into Endicott Plaza. So, I won't have a problem with this. But so
do the people from Market Basket walk across Endicott Street with all their groceries to get That sounds awfully dangerous to me. Signalized there is a protected crosswalk there. Again, you don't do it unless you have to do it, but it is there and we do make sure that we have there's a signal down at the
exit ramp as well. So there's two pedestrian crossings there that have uh protected. Do they get to take their carriages too across the street? Not get to take their car. Sounds very difficult. Yes. All right. That's all. So, um, is is the goal to bring this
that type of service, the skipper down into Danver Square eventually or not? Well, that just be bus service. No, that the goal currently is restore MBTA service. We're paying a lot for nothing. Um, and the goal was always to try to
use the Salem Skipper as a pilot project to demonstrate to the MBTA. The real vision for the skipper was to have the MBTA look at that as a service model that might make more financial sense for them to adopt in some of the outskirts
of the of the core region that they serve. I don't think that's where they're going with it, but um if they restore service to us and we and we get that back um that's still a huge step forward for us. two separate in they're
two separate businesses. Thank you. So, Eric, a comment and a question. The comment is and I have heard really good things about the uh Salem Skipper and uh the expansion from folks that I talked to in Salem and in Beverly like it really does
meet a need in the community. Like folks are very um appreciative of the service. And my question is, you know, $2 is affordable. What does that actually generate in terms of revenue? Is it anything noticeable? Is it not? I mean,
$2 a ride and they're doing 3,000 or 4,000 rides in systemwide. They're getting some some money, but um transportation doesn't make a ton of money, whether it's private or public. Got it. Are they working off a grant?
Yeah. vast majority of this is is funded by a federal grant that we've received. Okay. Thank you, Mike. Well, the um so so basically it's it's it's Uber, right? In a way, and it's is it through Uber?
Are these actual Uber drivers or these um it's a similar model, but this is by the the contractor is a company called VIA. VIA. Um, if you go to VIA, I think it's ridewithvia.com. You can see they operate all over the world. But they
basically are taking an Uber model, but saying you might we might stop and pick somebody up along the way. Yeah. I mean, I've I've done my total stories tonight. I'm not allowed to have any more, but sometime I'll tell the story about my one time I used Lyft, but other than
that, do you um do you I won't make any comments. Can you just tell that to Aaron privately? Yeah. Um, do do you think though that in this particular situation the people prefer this type of because it seems like we
get a we're getting a lot more activity with this than we had out of the bus. Granted, there's a a more robust service area and locations, but is it is it plausible that maybe we don't want the bus service, we want something of this
type to stay on on plane because we're actually going to get a better a better result out of it. If I had a magic wand as I you don't that earlier I know if I did I would I would again suggest to the MBTA that in I won't say the hinterlands
but in the outer reaches of their service areas I don't understand why running fixed route with large vehicles I don't I I'm not surprised that there's financial problems in that organization. I think this model
distributed where there's no fixed routes. Now, we are using the data not so much in Danvers, but Beverly and Salem, the data is starting to reveal where fixed routes might be viable because you're seeing regular patterns between this point and that point. So, again, we were kind of hoping that TE
would come in and do a deep dive on that and maybe adjust their service model. Um, that doesn't appear to be the case. Okay, thank you, Erin. No questions. Um, all my questions have been covered. Thanks, Molly. I'm pretty good. This is the last year of this, though, correct?
This is year two. This is it. I mean, someone's We're not Well, if your numbers are right, you know, we're paying eight bucks a ride. They're paying two bucks a ride. So, it doesn't really make sense, right? Yep. Questions from the audience.
Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. Motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? Thank you. Pew 29 29 and 30 two warrant articles related to the Hero Act which granted additional exemptions
to veterans. Um it' be administrated by the assessing department as our other exemptions are. Our chief assessor John Leel has been waiting anxiously to discuss these articles. John, thank you for staying. We appreciate it and we're happy to answer any questions. I think it's they're both good good articles.
One would adjust the exemption we give by CPI and the other one would allow us to grant an additional exemption amount up to 100%. We can do that during under existing Mass General law. Unfortunately, it's capped that your bill in the current year can't be less
than the year before. Did I ever say that right? Thank you. So, this would allow us to give them the full exemption even if that means that their overall tax bill is slightly less than what it would have been the year before. and we'll do questions um together on both articles and then vote on them separately. Wally, I'm good on this one.
Ted, so can you explain what's the Hero Act? The Hero Act was signed by the governor. Okay. Hero Act was signed by the governor uh I think last July or August, something like that. uh which expanded a bunch of
um veteran benefits uh and these are just two of them. Okay. So 29 years you're basically just saying whatever the exemption is that applies. Yeah. now can be adjusted by CP adjustment 2% 5% whatever it may be
we'll add that to the existing amount statutory amount and then what article 30 you're it's saying all right so currently under the current clause that we use um for instance one of the exemptions is
$400 the town years ago adopted to grant up to an additional $400 so they could get up to $800 but that clause the way that clause is written is they can't pay less than they did the year before. So basically their net tax bill after the exemption
would stay the same until they reach that 800. This allows us to bypass that and just give them the 800 right away. Okay. So it's essentially like a town match correct of the of what the state the state only reimbures us for the Okay. the original 400. The rest comes
out of the overlay. Okay. That's it for me. Thanks, Eric. Um answered my questions. Thank you, Mike. So, so this that this adjustment just it ends up on the cherry sheet in terms of what we get from this or do we for the I think the section 20 article 29 does article 30 would just come out of the overlay.
Correct. The additional exemption. Okay, great. Thank you, Eric. Nothing, Paul. All set. I'm good. Thanks. Questions from the audience? Yeah. Amy, thank you for everything you guys do. A lot of work. It's been a long
night. Um, just one question. Amy Butler, town meeting member, precinct one. Um, I know that the National Hero Act, um, only applies to certain veterans. Does this apply to anyone who is a veteran no matter when they served?
Good question. No, this applies to the existing statutory exemptions which are all based on disabled veterans. Thank you. Anything else from the audience? Is there a uh motion on
article Oh, go ahead. Um, obviously the FIN is free to do whatever they like with these. For article 30 though, our recommendation would be to go to the full 100% because we are asking you to pick the percentage. Okay. And the assessor and I are comfortable with 100%. Okay. Is there a motion on article
29 to approve article 29 as written in the warrant article? A motion. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Opposed? Thank you. Article 30 to accept article 30 as written with the exemption amount of 100% of the amount of tax exemption
granted to veterans. Is there a second? Second. Motion and a second. All in favor? I. Thank you. Next we have our annual revolving fund account article. Again, this all this does is set the maximum amount that can be expended from these various revolving
funds. Um the only one that has a slight uptick in the amount we're looking for authorization on is the childare program. I believe the rest are all level recommendations from the prior year. Arthur, and what's what's why is the child care program up a little bit?
Um we get additional staffing. Okay. And cost of living increases. Thanks, Paul. All set, Eric. Good, Mike. Good. What is the child care program? Is that the that Oh, fun stuff. Okay.
Okay, Jed, you okay with fun club? I recuse myself. Actually, I don't need to anymore. Not anymore. You're good. Uh, Wally, I'd like fun club as well. Thank you. Any questions from the
audience? Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. 32. Thank you. Um last four this evening all res revolve around stabilization funds. Um first is the
special education stabilization fund. We're recommending this year that 500,000 be appropriated from free cash that would bring the existent existing balance up to $1.25 million. This allows uh school committee with authorization of the select board to spend without
further appropriation should we uh see an influx of special education tuition and cost. Again, it's basically like our own version of a circuit breaker essentially. Okay, Wally? No, I'm good with this. Okay, Erin, no questions. Oh, I'm sorry, Ted. Okay with it. Okay,
Mike. I mean, other than the fact that in some of the cases, I wish we could put more into these stabilization funds, but I'm fine with what we have. Eric? Yeah, and that was related to my question. Uh 500,000 gets us to the 1.2 and that's budgeted somewhere. Did we
Did we already budget that? Nope. So that that just becomes our rainy day. So we do use the circuit breaker as part of our budgeting operating year-over-year, but this would be a standalone fund that we have not yet to tap. The good example is a couple years ago, actually two out of the last three years, we had to do free cash transfers into the school
department budget to keep it solvent due to special education costs higher than anticipated. This allows us in the future if we do not have a strong free cashier and we do have that need to tap into this fund. So why 500 and not seven or three? Statutoily, there is a cap on
how much you can have in the special education stabilization fund. This would bring us pretty close to that max amount. There we go. Paul, all set. I'm good. Questions from the audience. Is there a motion? Move article 32. Motion. Is there a second? Second.
Motion in a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. 33. Article 33 is our general stabilization fund and this is our the town's rainy day fund. We're recommending $1 million be transferred into the general stabilization from free cash. That would
be bring the projected balance at the end of FY26 to 6.15. As we've talked about in prior years, the goal is to incrementally increase this to a point where this becomes our 8% target for unassigned fund balance. Anything good? What's the max that
you're looking to to to hit on the uh on that fund? 1.6 6.15 or more. 6.1's the target. Eventually, we'd like to increase it, you know, based on available resources. Beyond 6 point. Yeah. Okay. I think we'd like to get it to roughly 8% of unassigned fund
balance. Arthur, I'm sorry. Arthur's also. Eric, I'm good. Thank you. Good. Thank you. No questions. No question. Wally, I should ask you. I'm good for now. Thank you. Okay. questions from the audience?
No. I was going to ask one for Keith. I won't waste your time. Thank you. Anything else from the audience? No. Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. Motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you.
Article 34 is the debt stabilization fund. Uh again, this is our working stabilization fund. As you remember the last two weeks ago when we approved the operating budget included some debt stabilization fund to offset debt uh mostly on school projects. Um our
replenishing target is 1.2 million but in addition to that 3.8 million was excess revenue from the landfill project. When we started the project we recommended putting any additional revenue after expense into debt stabilization for future capital or debt needs. So that's why the recommendation
is $5 million this year. Wally. Okay. So, the 3.8 million from the from the uh landfill um just going to sit here for a while.
The reason I ask is is and we asked uh with the school committee about what we thought we might come short in federal monies. And uh I think rather than uh spend this now, I'd like to see it sit till we know where the education funding
ends up. And it seems that nobody could tell us at the last meeting where that was going to be. I mean, I guess the short answer is if we were in a situation where we needed to back stop the school budget, we would we could appropriate from any sort of general stabilization as well or from
available free cash. We still all the recommendations tonight still leave more than 1%. 1%'s our policy to leave behind in free cash, which would be around 1.3 million. We're recommending 2.6 million. So to your point, should that situation arise, we would still have existing free cash to I believe the superintendent
said it was like a $1.6 million potential hole should all of our federal aid be wiped out. I'm good. Good. Ted, are you able to use the debt stabilization to retire debt?
I know that sounds like a really obvious question. Can can you buy for I I think I asked you before. Yeah. And I owe you a response. I don't know if we can just if if some of our debt is trading at levels greater than we earn with cash
sitting down the street at the bank and we wanted to repurchase it at a discount, would we be able to do that? And would we be penalized by the rating agencies if we did it? I I would assume no. I just want to ask I don't believe we'd be punished by the ratings agencies, but I'm not positive we can do that. But that's a question I owe you an
answer to. Yeah. Isn't sorry some when we refinance we can refinance debt. Yeah. Like in the So I'm I do corporate bonds by day and corporates if a bond is trading at a discount to par. They're
well within their right to just go buy it in the open market. It's not like a mortgage where you can't you can't be like, "Ah, my mortgage is at 3% and now it's interest rates are seven, so I can buy my mortgage back at 70." In the in the corporate bond world, you can do that. And in the municipal bond world,
they absolutely trade there. I I can I I'm well aware of municipal bonds issued by creditw worthy issuers in Massachusetts that trade in the 60s, 60 cents on the dollar because the interest rates they were issued at. I but I I which I think is obviously it is true but I thought we did have some
limitations placed upon us when we refinanced in regards to our yeah so know our call period I believe is 10 years on municipal bonds on when we could refinance but right but call refinancing and forced call force calling bonds at par and buying them from a willing counterparty
at 80 cents are are two different things but we okay that's fine I'll let me look into it Ted's question was good okay thanks Mike anything No. Thank you, Eric. Not on this one. Paul, I'm all set. Arthur, all set.
Questions from the audience. Take a motion on 34. I think Ted should be allowed to second. Oh, I'm sorry. Did I? I said Ted should be allowed to make the motion. Oh, sure. That's a great question. You want to make the motion, Ted? Sure. Motion to move the article.
Article three. Does anyone want to second Ted's motion? We have a motion and a second. Lots of motions. I didn't know that. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. And then we have the OPED trust fund. So, a couple years ago, we transitioned
to funding this partially out of the operating budget and partially out of free cash. We talked about the operating budget a couple weeks ago, and this is the free cash portion portion, which would be $300,000. Um, the projected balance in this trust would be approximately 18.5 million, and that's assuming the
discount rate of a little over 5%. So, we closed FY24 with 14 14.3 million. We're projected for FY25 to close at 16.3 million. Great, Arthur. Nope. All set. Paul,
probably should could have asked this for any of them, but when you have the 18 or somewhere in neighborhood of 18.54 million, where is it sitting? It's in invested in a trust fund. Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Eric. That makes sense. And
how is a trust fund um impacted by market fluctuations? It is. And so the projection that you have there is based on what uh return? Rosecolored glasses at this point. That's that's what I wanted to get at. Okay. It's based on the the discount rate we have based on
evaluation which is roughly over 5% return on investment. We cross our fingers. Okay. Has that been stable over the LA? Well, stable isn't the word I want to use, but just like anything else in the market, we've had a couple strong years. Three years ago, we had a really tough year. So,
okay. Thank you, Mike. I think I think we answered this back when we discussed this in the sort of the overview, but if if we did sort of have the break glass and and pit here, we could we could rob this amount and to be I mean, we we'd
face consequences, but yeah, I mean, accounting wise, I wouldn't know. It would probably require some type of appropriation, but yeah, theoretically this funding is for retirey health insurance and it's not locked in for a certain period of time. So, yep. Erin, no questions. Ted,
what's it invested in? I knew you were going to ask that and I didn't bring it with me, but I'm just wondering, I mean, it's a mix of securities investment. you look for a specific breakout in terms of like if it's a fund that's explicitly to cover health care health
care I wonder if we're supposed to like be long the companies that provide health care and profit when expenses go up. That's a good point. Yeah. Like buy insurance companies, buy the companies that make OMIC by you know what I mean?
like maybe not 100% of it, but like that money goes somewhere when you know our if our health insurance goes up cuz everybody's on GLPs, the providers of those GLPs are making a lot of money. Yeah, that's on fire tonight. Same thing
with insurance, health insurance, all that stuff. Um, I mean the only the only I guess the question that makes sense, but can we can we even be that aggressive in the marketplace or do we have controls
in regards to our investments that would that would limit our ability to be able to Yeah. So we have an investment policy. I'm sure it wouldn't be in policy on day one for sure. That'd be like a a revi exploit. But the state there's no state the state state limitations in regards regards to our ability to be
able to invest that aggressively in that situation if we wanted to. Yes, we would be able to. Yeah. Okay. Well, so how much of of both the investment into the OPED and retirement would have contributed to our loss of
credit rating? We would have to would it matter? I mean, I know you're talking about putting a new town garage back on on the wish list. Yeah. Um, and obviously that's going to be a major expense to want our credit rating back. Um, yeah, I mentioned earning that back. Is
it the investment we'd have to make for them to view it as a significant investment would be reducing our pension fully funded date by several years and in investing millions upon millions of dollars into our oped, which would be a dramatic impact on services. So, I think
unfortunately the short-term answer is we're probably going to be dork on wood. We'll be double A+ for the next few years until we get closer to retiring our pension liability and have a stronger foothold on our OPE liability unfortunately. Or retiring some other debt.
Yeah, thank you. Questions from the audience? Is there a motion? Move the article. Second. Motion in a second. All in favor? I opposed. Thank you. And that concludes, you're going to need to patent that answer because that
question is going to keep coming back up. What do we have to do to get our rating back? Just just before um we we we close up, just so everybody does know, tomorrow night, the plan is for us to do Wednesday night is the plan for us to do um as one of those articles the
the um uh Essex VTEC. There will be nobody here from Essex VTEC. I'll be here to be able to answer anybody's questions that they have in regards to that. I know everybody got the that very lengthy document with it. Um, in regards to the budget, I I do hope that
everybody also got that that letter that I signed from Desi and and again to the extent that Desi has authority over us is another question. But but basically what DESIE is telling us is is that we as a community both the select board and
the finance committee have no authority to be able to amend or change that number that is provided to us by the regional school board and that that number as provided by the regional school board is required to be forward to town meeting and then town meeting in
turn obviously has the authority to be able to vote up or down with that. So I would probably advise everyone as we move forward if you are interested in following that that desi direction which again is your own business but um we
would simply on Wednesday night be expected to forward that number even if we did have I don't believe we do but if we did have serious reservations with that number we would be required to forward it to town meeting anyways. So thank you Mike. Yeah. Okay. Meeting adjourned. We'll see you all on
Wednesday. There we go. Thank you. Now, now this