Everybody, welcome to the November 4th, 2025 select board And uh thank you all for coming. We've got a nice full room. D, would you start us off with the pledge of allegiance? >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. Yep. If we could please silence phones and put them away. I understand that you need to take calls. If you
don't mind stepping out to take the call so it's not disrupting the meeting, that would be great. Thank you very much. Um, do I have approve of the minutes of October 21st, 2025? >> Move. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I oppose. None. At this time, we're
going to have um new public business. Um, please come up, introduce yourself, and uh, the clerk will be putting the timer on. Please try to limit it to three minutes or less. Okay. Um, Bill, thank you. Bill Bates, town meeting
member, precinct 4. Um, I was I stood up here two weeks ago at your meeting on October 21st and I complained about the traffic and the detour on Maple Street. And I just thought it was fair to come back and thank the town manager who
responded with an email uh including a little joke that if she was deciding where the detours were, nobody get home or be a bigger mess. But more importantly, Steve King uh reminded me that in November of last year, he had
provided a complete road closure notification procedure to me as a town meeting member. And I reread that and it is uh you know traffic congestion on this particular area. They said can you know can it go two-way traffic and be
managed safely? um that the officer on scene is the per is the person that decides whether the traffic pattern is working and that uh if he feels the road should be closed, he can contact his supervisor. Um and they inform me that
they don't have a detailed uh I'm sorry, a civilian traffic control program in Danvas. But he also mentioned that on that particular route, Maple Street, uh that he had a pre-construction meeting um on October 1st and that they walked
the corridor. The group determined that allowing one lane traffic would be a safety concern and that they felt that they did a a nice um road clo prof the closure of the roadway would only be from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. And the
group did not feel that it was safe to split the traffic onto neighboring streets that were not meant to handle the big tracker tractor trailers. So that's why Summer Street, Locust Street, North Street was chosen. So, I just wanted to come back and say thank you.
I'm glad that there is a lot of thought that's put into it before you close the road. Thank you. >> Thank you, Bill. >> Um, Bill, the other bill. >> He is the bill. >> The bill.
>> Bill Bradley. Tommy, remember me precinct one? If I may, some point in the past I asked if when the town was paving if they would want to put a proper pad underneath the dumpster, what have you with where the
food pantry is. I've seen what the property looks like when they plow in the winter. And I I think it would serve well to have it done. I was over there to make a drop off today with my wife and noticed it hadn't been addressed. Is
it still on the to-do list or is on or is it on the won't do list? >> We'll have the town manager look into it. Thank you for bringing that up. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Bill. Lauren, >> good evening. Lauren Steves, town meeting member, precinct 3. Um, I'd like
to offer some clarification on comments that were made at the last meeting about my research and the electronic voting survey I distributed to town meeting members. Participation in the survey was voluntary and intended to encourage open, candid feedback. I presented the aggregate results consistent with the level of detail typically shared in town
surveys to capture the overall sentiment rather than the individual responses. A concern was raised about the survey's reliability based on a handful of informal conversations with town members. >> Is this not an agenda item? >> Um, it is let her just speak. Let her finish it. Go ahead.
>> Thank you. That line of reasoning undermines the value of verified data. casual feedback from a few people isn't representative of the body as a whole. With 56% of town meeting members responding, this survey offers a far stronger and more reliable measure of sentiment than anecdotal conversations
do. Questions were also raised about the way the survey was phrased. To be clear, the question was written in neutral, straightforward language. It simply asked, "Would you be in favor of implementing clickers for town meeting members to vote electronically at meetings?" There was no persuasive framing, just a clear question. The
range of responses, yes, no, and undecided, show members felt entirely free to answer as they saw fit. Ironically, the idea that phrasing could influence responses actually highlights one of the major issues electronic voting seeks to fix. Our current voice vote system relies on perception, who sounds louder, or how the tone is
interpreted in the room. Electronic voting completely eliminates the subjectivity. Some have also suggested that people may not want others to know how they vote, but that sentiment runs counter to the foundation of representative government. Town meeting members are elected to vote on behalf of residents. Our residents deserve to know
how we represent them. That role comes with the expectation of openness. And if someone is uncomfortable with that level of transparency, they are misunderstanding what it means to serve in a representative capacity. Since the last meeting, an employee from the town of Hamilton reached out to me to share their experience. Hamilton has used
electronic voting for over six years with great success. Each clicker has a unique ID. The moderator knows exactly how many were issued, ensuring every vote is properly accounted for. During each vote, a large screen shows when all clickers have registered and each device lights up when your vote is received. If
a device fails, it can be instantly swapped out. They describe system as transparent, efficient, and well tested. Lastly, I'd like to reaffirm the integrity of the research and the survey data I presented. The goal was to provide useful data to help inform this discussion. It is of the utmost importance to ensure we are making
decisions for our town from an informed standpoint that gives equal weight to each voice and that those decisions can stand up to scrutiny even after the vote has been called. For transparency and for the record, I'll restate the survey results. 81 members responded, 52 in favor, 21 undecided, and eight no.
>> Thank you. >> Next, Mike. >> Thank you. >> Hi, Mike Trainer. uh town meeting member precinct 5 and I just uh wanted to speak a little bit about the town manager um town meeting act committee uh that we
some of the discussion that's going on I attended some of the meetings I know that group put a lot of work into some of the recommendations there was a lot of debate going with it um I think at the last meeting we uh you had discussed
um the recommendation was to reduce the number of town meet members to and it kind of came up. It's based might be based off population. So that's why we went to 18. There are other sit there are other towns that have greater
population with far less town meeting members. >> So >> this is this this is that was a board meeting for which we explained that there would be public input at the further public input. Yeah. >> I think this is an out of order. >> He can just just finish. Can we just ask
the the qu the is it based off popular? I can't ask the town council, but it's just if you're making a decision or acting on a recommendation, I think we should ask all the questions regarding this. >> Yeah. So, what's going to happen is we're gathering tonight. We're going to be doing deliberations for the town manager act. Right. >> What we're doing is we're getting all
that together and then we're going to you it's going to the public is going to be able to speak. So, that's when you'll be able to speak. >> No, I I get that. I'm just I'm just asking if the board could ask >> a lot of the questions. just is this based up rather than make assumptions. >> We will and we will as we gather.
Remember how last meeting you were here that we were gathering everything. But thank you. Thank you for coming up. >> Next. >> Hi, please go up and introduce yourself. >> Hi, my name is Eddie Shreggy and I'm a town meeting member for precinct 1. This
is not a title I take lightly. I have been elected to represent the people. It's not about Eddie Shreggy. I have attended and voted at one town meeting so far. I was very surprised how much one person has so much power at the meeting. Votes are decided by her
interpretation of the loudest group. I don't blame her at all for this is the way it's always been done. We have an opportunity to bring Danis out of the dark ages with these handheld voting counters. I am also hoping that when you hit that button to vote, it will
register what each specific person votes. The voters have the right to know how you vote. Otherwise, how does an educated voter know who to vote for when they fill out their election ballot? There have been two separate polls taken on these handheld devices, and the
response was overwhelmingly in favor of the devices. In my humble opinion, if you vote against those, you do not want the people who vote for you to know what your votes are. I thank Lori Steves for all the work she has done for this.
Let's all bring Danvers into the air 2026 doing what the people deserve. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else? Mark [Music] Good evening. Mark Zubreck, resident of
Danverse. I would like to bring up a couple of items and one of them you've already answered because I was very concerned about the public input into this town manager town
uh meeting act review. It's town charter basically. That's what we're running in. And what you're telling me right now that the public will have an opportunity to participate and comment on your decisions. Is that true?
>> Yes. >> Fine. Then the other item that I'm very interested in is I go through meetings uh that are scheduled on a regular basis and I go through the internet site and I
noticed that there's a finance committee meeting scheduled for November 13th already. I thought the finance committee is an appointed uh committee, not an elected committee that makes no policy
decisions except for what funding is going to be allocated to each and every one of the items. I understand that tradition has been that finance committee gets involved, but this is way
premature. We don't have a warrant article. We don't know what we're going to ask town meeting to vote on. Why are we scheduling a finance committee meeting already? Now my question is why
are we rushing through this process? We have been waiting for this process for 30 years now. It's finally been accomplished. However, I would like to make my comments when I get a chance later on
about how this process went by because as you know, I have been a proponent of a town charter review for the last 10 years. So, that's my comments and I'd like to, you know, finance committee
doesn't belong here yet, >> right? Right. And we're going to go over the the time frames that Tommy manager will go over at the end of the meeting once we get through um why the dates of what the next steps will be with with the review the del after the deliberations you know when you get to
um come before us with the public hearing in December. I think it's December 16th right Joe. >> Madam chair. >> Yes. >> If I might to add clarity to what Mr. Zupri is asking the presentation to this to the fine come is not the warrant article. It is the presentation by the
committee that presented and offered changes. September 23rd present presentation to to the board. October, November, the select board looks at it. November, it's a presentation of the report to fin.
>> Thank you. >> On December 16th, we'll have a public hearing for a select board will have a public hearing on the warrant that is finally crafted. And in January, Fincom will review that warrant. They're not reviewing a warrant that is not prepared yet. They're they're getting a report
just like we did last previously. >> There is no warrant. The finance committee is not an elected >> elected committee. It's an appointed committee to look at issues as the warrants are presented to the town
meeting. We have not presented anything to the town meeting. We have a report on the table and we are discussing it. However, what I noticed in November 13th, there's a finance committee meeting to review
the report. >> The report, not the warrant, right? >> It doesn't belong there. That's my observation. That's all I wanted to bring up. >> Thank you for your comments, Mark. And thank you, Gardner, for jumping in. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? Okay.
Thank you. Um, so at this time a public hearing will be held in accordance with section two of the rules and orders governing private livery service within the town of Danvas on the application of otr limo inc. DBA otr limo
otter mccuri owner 500 Maple Street to increase current livery license from 10 to 15 passenger buses to travel on all streets in the town of Damas and to provide transportation on a reservation basis only. Who's here to speak? >> Hi. Hello. Hello everybody. My name is
Arthur. Welcome. >> Bless you. >> Bless you. >> Sorry. >> Me and my wife here, we own otr limo here in Danvers and also we own the property. So, as of right now, we have 10 licenses 10 licenses. Uh now we we try to increase to u 15 so we can park
15 uh vehicles in there. >> Excellent. Um board members, do you have any questions? Gardner? >> No. I see the PL plan uh of his property. I also see the pictures clearly showing he has room for the increase. Um knowing where the property
is, who the neighbors are, and that it's commercial, I I see no reason that this uh shouldn't be approved. >> Thank you, Mike. Questions? >> Uh yes, please. Um are these vehicles you currently own? Are you going to be purchasing? >> I do own as of right now 10. We will be
purchasing more. Now is the time for me to buy because it's on the winter they go down on the price a little bit and that's when I try to get uh some more. >> So business is good I'm taken >> is excellent. >> Yeah. All right. >> Thank you God in the United States. >> Oh I really mean it. I really mean it. I
really mean it. >> Is there any uh with the more vehicles is there any chance of having any kind of spill, oil spill, fuel spill, anything like that with the increase of vehicles? >> No. No. Most of the vehicles that I buy, if not brand new, fairly new, >> okay?
>> Late models, low miles on them, cuz they get used once a week really. The limo business is literally once a week and they will be, you know, sitting all week. So, I don't see having any problem. I've we've never had any problem. >> And no neighbor complaints? >> No, sir. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Excellent. Thank you, Mike D. >> Yeah, I I'm actually a neighbor and I haven't complained yet. Uh well no I I I don't have any problem with this. Um I would actually say I remember when uh the gentleman came here
with one boss and I think that was like an old uh MBT bus few years ago and now you're 10 and you're going to 15. Kudos to you and your wife. >> Thank you. >> Great job. That's that's
>> that's awesome. Congratulations. >> Thank you Dan. Yeah, these um in compliance with all the rules and regulations, zoning and everything that from the last time you had to make some changes and we appreciate you doing that and I have no problem with you going from 10 to 15.
>> Thank you. >> That's wonderful. Um um clerk, is the paperwork in order? >> The paperwork is in order. >> Wonderful. I think it's wonderful. I'm glad to see that you're going from 10 to 15. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. Thank you very much. >> I move that we approve the application as presented public hearing. >> Oh yeah. Close the public hearing. Do I
move? Move we Well, you have to >> close the public hearing. No, >> no, no, no. You have to ask for public comment. >> I'm sorry. Any public comment? Anybody want to get up and say anything? >> I move we close public hearing. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. >> Okay. Do I have a motion? >> I move that we approve the application
as presented. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Excellent. So, thank you. Good luck. >> Thank you very much. >> Yeah. Thank you so much for coming. >> Good luck. say that about you before, but welcome back.
>> Oh, thank you. Thank you. >> All right. A public hearing will be held on the application of DGN Auto Select LLC DBA G DGN Auto Select 72 Holton Street. Nick Dorville, owner of a class 2 dealer's license at that location.
This location previously held a class 2 dealer's license issued to ENS Auto Emporium, who was here to speak. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Welcome. >> Yes, my my name is Nick Doville and uh I
currently taking over previous uh class 2 license from ENS autoum at address 72 Holton Street, Danver, Massachusetts. >> Excellent. Um board members, do we have any questions?
>> Just uh one question. How many vehicles can you keep in that area? >> Uh total of three. >> Three. Okay. All right. Thank you. >> K. Do you have any questions? >> No. And I uh is this only for sales or will you be doing repairs on site? >> No repairs will be doing on site.
>> Great. Thank you. That's my questions. >> Yes. >> D. >> Uh no question. Looks like it's change of ownership for me. No questions. >> Excellent. Dan, >> is this a transfer of the license from the previous owner or a new license? >> It's a transfer. >> It's a transfer. Okay. Thank you. No
other questions. >> Okay. Uh, this is a public hearing. Anybody in the audience have anything they'd like to say? Okay. Cler, >> move we close the public hearing. >> Okay. So, I have a second. >> All in favor? I >> opposed. Clerk, is the paperwork in order? >> The paperwork is in order.
>> Thank you. Um, well, thank you very much. >> Close public hearing. I move we accept the application as presented. >> I'm tired. That baby duty. >> Governor Indeed. >> Governor indeed. And do we have a second? And all all in favor? >> I >> opposed. Terrific. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you very much. >> Okay. All right. The board will hear an update from the manager of the Beverly Regional Airport. Who's here to speak? Please introduce yourselves. And we're going to keep this in order, everybody.
[Music] [Applause] [Music] Good evening. Uh, my name is Gabriel Hannneathan. I'm the airport manager at Beverly Regional Airport. >> I'm Kyle Retalik, chair of the Beverly Airport Commission.
>> Um, thank you for having us today. So, I want to start out um, kind of an overview of the airport operations. So those that don't know, an operation is a takeoff or a landing of an aircraft. That's kind of how we
measure the busyiness of the airport. In 2024, we had over 91,000 operations um for the entire year 2024. That was the busiest year that the airport had seen uh since 2002.
This year, year to date, uh we have only had 58,900 uh operations. That's compared to this time last year, about a 26% decrease in operations. This represents and going at the rate
we're going, I would estimate we'll see in this year with around 70,000 operations. That's similar to where we were in 2020. Um, this rep would represent the first decrease in year-over-year operations since 2014
and the largest year-over-year decrease since 1977. So, I want to put some visual kind of where we were up to 2024. This the black line are yearly operations going back to 1962. That's as
far back I could find reliable operations data for Beverly airport. You'll also see various red lines uh throughout the history of the airport at various times. There have been forecasts given of the airport and where it was
projected to be in 5 10 20 years. Um I know at one point they were projecting in 1992 we'd be doing 450,000 operations. Um, of course that hasn't come to fruition. Um, and the airport has consistently underperformed on the
operations. The last um, good forecast analysis and study that was done for the airport was done uh, right here in 2019. That was as part of our uh, last master plan effort. Um,
and since that's happened, we've been well outperforming the operations. Now, if I throw in 70, assuming we'll in this year around 70,000 operations, that's where it would put us. Um, so it
almost seems like a correction of sort back to our forecasted numbers. 70,000 is right where we have been forecasted to be. um in 2019 said around this time
we'd be at um 70,000 operations um and we've just outperformed that for whatever reason as the industry really has seen increase nationwide since co um so
that's operations now a little bit uh more interesting behind the curtain on the operations is that decrease is exclus exclusively in small single engine aircraft. Um we're actually
seeing a slight increase in jet traffic at the airport. Um two reasons behind that. One again is just the overall since 2020 nationwide there's just been an increase in use of that type of
travel. the ondemand jet service specific to this region and specific to this year is that uh Boston Logan is actually undergoing a lot of major improvements. One of them being a total reconstruction of one of their main
general aviation jet ramps. So there's very little to no parking at Boston for these private corporate jets. Um, so there's this year been several folks that would otherwise be
flying to Boston. They don't have room for them, so they come and fly into Beverly. That's the National Airspace System at work. Uh, we are designated as a reliever of Boston for that exact reason. Um, but that gives a little bit
behind the scenes on that slight increase in jet traffic. So now I uh spend some time on noise. Um so year to date I have received 176 total noise complaints. Um I've
broken that up into the communities. So each complaint I receive gets one uh tally here and then unique addresses. So, um, those 176 complaints have come from 35 individual addresses spanning
the listed communities. Um, so you can see I've here I've heard so far this year from 16 Danvers residents um, totaling 48 total complaints. Um, in 2024 we received 98
total complaints. Um, so we're at almost double the number of complaints this year um that we've received in all of 2024. However, in 2024, we also heard from 35 individuals. So, we're hearing from the same amount of people. They're
just sending in more complaints. Um, and a little bit deeper dive on that. year to date um three individuals account for about 60% of our total noise complaints. So um there's our three top complainers
have sent in 106 total complaints year to date. Um look at the aircraft type. um threearters of all the noise complaints come from our single engine piston driven aircraft. Um and I would say that
of those 132 complaints, 125 plus are about flight school aircraft. Um one we've got two flight schools based at the airport. Um so we uh they make up most of that that number
of complaints about those single piston engine aircraft. Um the remaining 25% is divide between the 20% of jet traffic um about and then the remaining 5% kind of scattered through other types of
aircraft. Um looking back again to 2024 uh again the overwhelming number of complaints were about the single engine piston aircraft at 82% and only 10 and a half from jet. So even though this year we're still seeing a majority a vast
majority of the complaints about those single engine aircraft um that gap between them and the jets is closing. um whether that's um driven a lot I think by those operational decreases
that uh I opened with um and the majority of noise complaints about jets are about medium-siz jets and I've thrown in what that means the um dimensions of a medium-sized jet as defined by the FAA
and then uh look at kind of when I'm getting these noise complaints. Um I as far as time goes, in 2024 I received 15 reports of curfew
violations. Our noise abatement program says any flights between 1000 p.m. and 6 a.m. um should be avoided. Um that's our curfew. Again, we
the airport is open 24/7. Um, the FAA solely holds the the authority to mandate and control air traffic and flight routes. However, in the voluntary noise abatement policy, we ask everyone
to try to refrain from flying between 10 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. In 2024, I received 14 or excuse me, 15 reports of uh people breaking that curfew. That's down significantly uh year to date. I've only
received five reports of that. Um kind of one of the more surprising things I've found in this year's tracking is that uh we get significantly less complaints on weekends. Um I always kind went into this assuming weekends would
be our highly complained about days when folks are home and they're outside and doing family activities. But as you can see um Sunday is our least complained about day follow closely behind Saturday. Um, Fridays are the most complained about
day. Um, and then here's the months that we uh we only received two complaints in October. Our most complaint about month was in March. So, this map shows the location of every
address that we've heard from since 2020. So 2020 21 23 4 and year to date 25. So if you've sent in a noise complaint to Beverly airport, your address is plotted up here. Something we
found is that only about 15% of our noise complaints are about aircraft that are on approach and landing, which makes sense. even though they're low to the ground, they're usually little to no power and so they're not producing a lot
of noise. The remaining um complaints, the vast majority of complaints are about aircraft that are taking off or in some phase of flight uh shortly after takeoff where there's power in, they're
relatively slow um and they're low to the ground. that creates a really disturbing, loud, uncomfortable noise for those on the ground. So, going with those numbers that we've received. Um,
you see, we'll start off with runway what we call 27 right here. So, if you take off of 27, that's the runway that takes off directly into the Danver's neighborhood. And you see all of these correlating
addresses that have uh complained about that traffic 34. If you take off of 34 and go this way, you have all of these. This is uh all Winnham addresses up here. Um have
these pockets of individuals that are disturbed by that traffic taking off of 34. If you go to 16 and you take off of one6, you have this pocket of folks in Beverly
that are uh affected by that noise. There's one gap in this map and it's all right here. We have a few addresses kind of scattered through here, but for the most
part, an aircraft taking off of this runway, runway 9, takes off and is over farmland, dense forest, and Winnham Lake at that loudest, most disturbing part of the flight when the aircraft's full power taking off. um doing what we call
a crosswind turn when they're still climbing out of takeoff but they make that first turn away from the airport. That tends to garner a lot of complaints. Um because you can that dip in the wing of the aircraft turning causes the effect of kind of sounding
more droning and loud on the ground. So looking at this, we came to a conclusion. Up to this point, our publications stated that when wind is calm, aircraft
should use runway 16. So the runway that aircraft use is largely determined by the direction of the wind. You want to take off into the wind. On times that the wind is calm, then you
airports will publish their default runway. The preferred runway that's using calm wind. Beverly's publication said that 16, this runway was our calm wind runway.
Well, we looked back at all this data, looked at data we've been collecting of noise complaints and found that six might not be the most neighbor friendly runway. Um, as you can see year to date, it's
gotten we've gotten the most complaints about traffic off of 16 followed by traffic off 27. Our data collected over those last five years suggested that runway 9,
this runway here taking off in this direction is a much friendlier option for those on >> Excuse me. Can you show me where? >> Yep. So runway nine Yep. So runway 9 is here. So if someone is using runway 9,
they will take off in this direction. Now if they're landing runway 9, they're coming in like right here and landing. >> Still runway 27. They take off 27.
>> They'll take off 27. That's >> Madam Chair. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Can we let let them finish the presentation and then I'll allow questions afterwards? >> Um so um you see base and final these are your approach phases of uh these are
your landing phases of a flight. So um just under 15% are about um that phase of flight. Um, so of the 26 complaints we've received about runway 9 in 2025, nine of them were submitted by Danver's
residents. So that's the these eight um homes which are right on that final approach into nine and then one of these downwinds. So um six of those nine complaints came from one individual.
So, when using runway 9, we've only heard from four individuals. Um, and so, uh, this is by no means set in stone. Um, this kind of shift to using runway 9
more often. The data that we've seen beforehand and since doing it does suggest that it has alleviated some of the complaints we have uh been receiving in the past. >> Madam Chair, while he's on the slide, could I ask a question?
>> Um yeah, what we can do is um we can have board members ask questions if they'd like. If you would like to make a comment. Sure. >> Sure. on this one. >> Yeah. >> You and I have spoken before and you have an abnormally large number of complaints from two or three people in
Winnham >> Mhm. >> off of 16. So have you normalized this analysis to one person calling a 100 times skews and that's you laugh the audience members but that is happening. One
person is making an abnormally large number of complaints on 16. >> Yeah. >> So, have you normalized the data to say that if you take that them out of that equation, is 16 still not preferred?
>> Yes. Okay. Because Yeah. And you brought up our our friends in Winnham who have been extremely vocal. um even taking them out of the picture. Yep. >> We're still contending and have this whole chunk of folks in Beverly. >> Okay. So, you normalize the data for
that anomaly. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> That was a big discussion with us. We're like, do we just keep the 300 complaints that we got from that one Wenom resident and we we decided we were going to we'd have two charts that showed normalized like this
is one person and then the the chart with the 300. So, >> thank you. Yep. Um, so that's that on noise. Of course, I'm happy to answer any questions at the end. Um, I want to move on to some airport projects. Um, the projects that
we're doing at the airport are all revolving around the eventual reconstruction of our main runway, runway 1634, um, our largest runway. Um, so we just finished up an aeronautical study.
That's where we look at any obstructions that are piercing our airspace. We found a lot. Um, so that final report was submitted in August 2025. There are several obstructions, trees, buildings,
utility poles. Um, that will require mitigation. Almost all of these lay in Winnham uh, and Beverly. Um what this has triggered is our minimums have increased. So in really
poor weather when pilot in the cockpit can't see outside they can still land an aircraft just with using instruments um they can guide the aircraft right down pretty much to the ground um without being able to have visual reference of
the ground. Um they can take it as low as what we call minimums. So the minimum height that clouds can be and if you hit that minimum and you still don't see the airport, you have to abort the landing and figure something else out. So our
minimums have sat around 200 feet. So clouds could be as low as 200 feet and you could take that glide down um break out of clouds to 200 feet, see the airport and still land. because of these obstructions, those minimums have now
been raised. Not only that, but um these approaches into our runways uh you are not available at night. So going back again to what we started with and that drop of operations,
some sliver of that is due to these increased minimums and those um approaches being unavailable at night. Um just people are getting aren't able to fly when they
used or when they maybe have been able to in the past. Um, also uh in preparation for the runway project uh just completed a draft report uh for the environmental assessment environmental notification
form and environmental impact report. That draft report was just submitted um for comments from FAA and Mass in September. Um and we're awaiting the final report. This year is going to be all about permitting and data
collection. So all the necessary permitting that comes along with reconstructing uh a runway. So what does the runway reconstruction look like? We'll be going into design and construction in 2027 and 2028. We're
reconstructing the entirety of the 5,01 ft by 100 ft runway 1634 and then adding 300 ft of paved safety area on either end of the runway. Um when that's done,
we'll have to address um uh and do additional work uh in the unpaved safety areas of runway 34 um to kind of close that up. So um 1634 is this runway here. So this entire
thing is getting reconstructed. We'll be adding 300 ft of safety area pavement here and here. Um you might recall that safety area. It can be used for takeoff. It cannot be used for direct landing. So um we already have a
small safety area right here on the 16 end. So aircraft can start their takeoff roll here, but they cannot land directly on that. Um so that's what we're adding. We'll be extending that 300 ft and that
300 ft. And then we have to address some grading and vegetation issues down here. That'll probably come 2029, 2030. Um, just to close out that project. Um, I'll touch briefly on some projects
that some of our tenants are doing on the airfield. Um, first one I'm sure you all are very well aware of is the flight level aviation. They're the fixedbased operator at the airport. Um they're building a new hanger. Construction
started on that in September or August. >> I think early September. >> Early September. Construction started on that. Air Bear Aviation. Um they provide maintenance on the field. They're uh completely renovating hangar 4, the
adjoining office space and surrounding ramp. That is, sorry, keep going back and forth. Um, just for visual, hanger four is this one right here. Um, and then the new hanger, you can kind of see some of the ground work
happening right up there. Um, um, multi-wing aviation, uh, they are remodeling, uh, building 56. This is the old air traffic control tower. It was built in 1942,
I believe, and uh didn't um and it served as the airport's traffic control tower till 1975 when it was uh replaced by the current one. Multi-wing aviation, they um have several hangers on the
field. They've taken over building 56 or totally gutted it, totally remodeling it. So if anyone wants to have some office space with a great view of the airport, um, reach out to them. And then Aviier Flight School, one of the two
flight schools on the field, um, they have, uh, taken over a portion of what we call building 45. It's an old army barrack on the east side of the airport. Um, and they've installed three uh,
aircraft simulators that take up entire rooms. really cool. Um it's a new division of their business, but it's going to provide a way for pilots to get training to do recurrent training um without actually getting in an aircraft
and flying. It's can all be done in that simulator. And then finally, I want to end on community outreach and involvement in the last year. So we in July 2025, um we hosted Dream Flights. They're a a
nonprofit organization that provides uh veterans with uh flights and antique aircraft. Um uh really really cool neat event. Last uh let's see, two Sundays ago, we held
the first annual flyby 5K and fun run. Uh we shut down the airport for about 2 hours and had a 5K on the runways. Um there were about 250 participants. Um just recently the airport commission approved a lease with the Massachusetts
Air and Space Museum. Um they'll be moving into a a portion of that building 45. Um they have been running their museum out of Hyannis. Um but they've decided to move that up to Beverly
airport. So hopefully within the next year or so um we'll have a full uh air and space museum at at the airport. And then just continued partnership with area schools to promote careers in aviation. Um this is head uh really
spearheaded by one of our commissioners, Jesse Zubric. Um and she does a great job uh getting in touch with area schools. Um, so we go there, we have representatives there at career days,
um, give presentations um, just to promote careers and aviation. And with that, that's my uh, planned remark. So any questions I would be happy to take. >> Excellent. So at this time, board
members, what I'm going to do is I'm going to allow comments from the board public. This is not a public hearing, but in the past we've allowed, you know, you to go up and maybe ask a question, but then we'll limit it to three minutes. But going forward after that, um, if you had any other questions because we're going to probably narrow
it down to about 20 minutes, 15 20 minutes with questions. Um, and then if you want, you email the, uh, your board members with questions and then we'll discuss it. Um, Gardner, do you have any questions or comments at this time? >> Couple of questions. Um
so um you talked about the drop and and first of all I happen to know the answer to this but touch and goes represent two operations. >> Correct. >> So as a pilot is training an important part of that pilot training is touch and goes. >> Yes.
>> So all your numbers >> uh a touchandgo represents two. >> Correct. If you were to extrapolate actually how many without that what what is the profile of of of the uh of the planes that I don't want to say
come in or leave because but a distinct one operation >> event do do you do do you have a profile and then the next question is why is the drop >> what what is I mean we knew there was a drop at >> co
>> we knew there's certain times when the economics are really bad and aviation fuel is high, it causes a drop. But is there a cause to the effect of of the drop? >> So your first question without touchand
goes, I mean touchand goes represent a huge part of our operations. the folks coming in um and not doing touchand goes. Those are either um folks here flying here for pleasure um
just >> tourism vacation. Uh we tend to see a spike in October being the closest airport to Salem. Um, so we see a a great portion of of non-touchand go
traffic center around tourism and then the other is business. Um, a lot of those um jets coming in, they're there folks with business in their region um
that they're flying to, going to meetings um and then flying back home. um the drop. It's really hard to, you know, pinpoint exactly what's causing the drop. I I
think a lot of that can go back to one some of the weather and those increased minimums. I think uh account for a portion of that and then I think there most of that is in touchand go traffic
that's dropped. Um, I know one of our flight schools has had a a rough year with maintenance on on the fleet. So, their fleet has been down um longer than it has in past years just for
maintenance uh reasons. So, I think that is also kind of shown in that drop. I'm I'm glad you were able to extrapolate out the um complaints, especially and it's especially telling
that three people represent a large percentage of the complaints. I'm not suggesting that complaints aren't sound, but when one person is literally doing 300 complaints, >> that may that skews things dramatically. >> Yeah. >> Um you had five curfew um and curfews
being a recommendation, >> correct? Um, you had five curfew of I don't even want to call them violations, but they were people who flew within the curfew window. Of those, did you discount any that were military or public safety flights? >> So, none of them were military. We in
general get very few military flights out of Beverly. Um, I'd have to go back and look exactly. I know one or two of those flights were what are called angel flights. So, this
is a nonprofit organization that connects private aircraft owners with um patients in need of uh advanced medical care medical care. Um, and so no cost to the patient. They can meet up with this
pilot and fly to a hospital that has the care that they're looking for. I know two of um their curfew violations listed um were for those angel flights. Um folks that were had to go pick up a
patient. They took off at like midnight or they had just dropped a patient off and were arriving back at Beverly um after that curfew. Um the other ones uh the other three were just
>> airport users. But to know that 40% of the five >> Mhm. >> were for reasons no one in this room would deny you know or if it you know often we hear about why is a helicopter hovering over a certain part of town >> and it's often because it's a public
safety helicopter searching for a person a missing person those kind of things. So, >> I don't know that you could actually qualify those, but to say this number of complaints related to this safety operation,
>> this power operation, you know, because we know that the helicopters fly the, you know, technically fly the the power lines, things of that nature. But I heard the Coast Guard flight come in. Um, I've I've heard a couple of military planes come in and uh and and it would be helpful to know if
those complaints, some of these are certainly understandable reasoning, >> right, >> for that, not just a pilot who may or may not know the curfew, flew during the curfew, >> right? >> Um, okay. Um
uh and I and I think we've talked about sometimes you get nonBVY complaints. Do you dismiss those? Do you take them out of your numbers? Flights about Logan. >> Correct. Yeah, those are not represented in here. I I do get a handful about
Logan. I um will get some about Lawrence as well. >> Um >> but you take them out of your >> I take them out. Yeah. I only count ones that have touched down in one way or another at Beverly airport.
>> Okay. And I guess I I I I would want to pressure test a little bit more about the 16 not being the preferred runway, maybe changing it to 927. And I have a personal reason. I live at the end of 927. I live on Lindle Hill higher than the airport. Mhm. >> So the planes are actually powering up
over my house and they power down right after it because that's the point of demarcation where they could actually glide path back in. So I probably am at the highest sound profile of the flights taking off 927. >> Yep. So
I would like you to to to to you know look at the the omission of the >> statistical complaints for 16 and consider that is it it is the longer of the two runways. Mhm.
>> It is preferred because of its length, if it's calm winds, I think it should be equally split, if not, you know, at least 50/50. >> Um, but actually still maintain its preference. >> Um, because it goes over Cherry Hill in Industrial Park.
>> It goes over Wenham, which is less densely populated than Woodvale. >> Um, Woodvil is of the profile, Woodville is the most densely populated, followed by the Winnam. >> Yep. followed by Cherry Hill, followed by the going over Wenham Lake going >> that direction. So, I' I'd actually ask
you to to to reconsider changing the designation of the preferred runway >> unless there's a real statistical reason to do so. Um, so, >> no, I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Yeah. Um, those are my questions. My my
I I do to the to the chair. This wasn't You're right. This was not listed as a public hearing and I'm only concerned that opening comment exposes us to the people who might have been here had they known there was going to be opportunity for public hearing. So, uh, your discretion, but I'm concerned about that.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Thank you, D. >> Yeah. Thank you very much, Madame Chair. Uh, just a quick thing, Jesse Zubig in relationship to Mark Zubick. >> Yes. Um, that is his daughter. >> Okay.
She's a a Danver's native but lives in Beverly now. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I have a few questions. So, um the curfew rate, do you base those
numbers on complaints? >> Yes. Okay. Yeah. >> So, yes. So, those numbers are based on the complaints I received. I I'm aware that there's probably not probably there are people flying within that time frame
that aren't garnering complaints. Um but the ones tracked up there are just ones that have been reported to me. >> Okay. Because I think I mean airport is open 24/7. >> Mhm. >> I don't think you should be relying on
the complaints to to get any curfew. That's those are data that you have, right? And they probably going to be more than the five. >> Yeah, there would be more than five in the year to date that have flown at, you know, past that or within that time
frame. >> Okay. Okay. And I also, and I should have prefaced this by thanking you for being here again today. Uh I said it last meeting and I mean it. I think um and this is just my personal opinion. I
feel that you've you've had um you've been a little more forthcoming than previous managers uh and and kind of show some appreciation to the complaints of the residents and that's that's appreciated.
Um did you say in your remark that there was a draft environmental study that was done? >> Yes. Uh related to the runway 1634 uh reconstruction.
So in preparation for that they um did a study on the affected areas. >> And what does that entail? just what obstruction they have or is it just like air pollution like what what what does that study entails?
>> Yeah. So the environmental uh study looks at wetland impacts rare species impacts um uh any sort of um change to topography. It
looks at um um socially disadvantaged areas that might be affected. Okay. >> Um it it's a whole slate of anything related to the environment that it it it considers.
>> Okay. Um do you have any specific action that the airport have taken as a result of complaints from the residents? I mean, I I think that the shift to you
trying to use runway 9 more that was a direct result of action that is within our purview um to do but my authority is very very limited. Um the noise
abatement program is voluntary. um the moment the aircraft's wheels leave the ground, I lose all authority over it. Um that is preempted wholly by the FAA. So the the
real true actions that we can take are in scope pretty small. It's a game of inches for us. Um and so but within that small purview um you know sitting down with our air traffic control manager and
saying hey here's the numbers I've seen. Um let's try to use runway 9 a little bit more often and see how that works out. See if that helps. Um that's kind of what action looks like. >> Okay. And then the complaints when you
get them do you just use them as a data point and statistical analysis or do is there any action that follows? >> Yeah. So I I like to try to reach out to the complainant. Um and then
I will have um I'll reach out to flight schools, air traffic controllers, um folks on the ground. Uh, you know, if if there's a particular complaint I've gotten and it's a flight school aircraft
and they did 15 laps in the traffic pattern, well, I'll forward that on to the flight school and, you know, remind them that, hey, if you need to do more than like five, try going to Lauren, do five here, go to Lawrence and do five
and then go to Hanskum and do some um, and so there's that followup as well as necessary. Okay. Now, um one of the I've received I received so many emails about um the
airport uh constantly. Um and and I'm glad that you've doing a lot of due diligence in the way you're constructing everything, but there seem to be a lot of push. People are asking about an environmental
impact study. You've probably heard that. Mhm. >> Um I understand there was one conducted at Hanscom uh base. Is that Are you aware of that? >> Uh the handsome one. Yes, I did hear
about that. >> Okay. Is that something we can I know I don't know what pays for it or if that's within your preview. Uh it may or may not be. Is that something the airport can consider? Um yeah, the main question
would be a budgetary question on that. Um you know, Hanskim has the backing of Massport and um they have a much more robust budget than we do at Beverly. So
that'd be something to um see if the FAA or state would fund. Um, I don't know that that'd be something that they they'd go for um at Beverly, but it's certainly something
that we've discussed >> and we've reached out. We've talked to the the departments that do the studies at Hansum and at Logan. Logan, I think, does every single year they do an environmental impact study like that, but it cost them $500,000 every single year. So when I talked to the gentleman,
he said we could do a lesser version and more catered to your airport, but it would be around $250,000. >> And for to contextualize that, my budget is about 600,000 in my operating budget. So
>> So how do we how could we get massport of the state or whoever? because um and I don't think this is something that should be done every year because we don't have expansions every year. We don't have constructions every year. Uh
I don't know if that has ever been done, but if we getting even though we're getting less traffic, if we getting bigger airplanes, it might warrant something like that. Uh because just so you know, I I look at that study. I I
read it. Obviously there are some limitations but speaking as the representative of the resident just so you see and this may not this may be out of your your hands but so you understand where
the residents are coming from. Uh when I read some of the findings in the studying handsc uh it was troubling and actually scary and I don't know how I can turn around
and tell a resident that sees this and says there's a lot of pollution in the community and this is beyond noise, right? This is this has to do with Leedfield and the kids at the school and
>> just looking the other way. >> I mean, I don't know how we do that. Like, help me help my constituent. >> What do I say when I read a report like this and then it talks about
all these air pollution factors? Um, and this study didn't even look at it inside the homes. This was like outside. And it appears to me that if they conducted a study inside the home, it might even be worse.
>> Yeah. What do we do? What do we see? >> So, a couple things I you touched on the unleted or the leaded aviation fuel. um that yes, the fuel that's being used by
your propeller aircraft um is 100 lowled octane uh fuel. There's it's still leaded gasoline. The the FAA's plan is to have that phased out by 2030. Um currently there's
just no viable option that can fuel the entire general aviation fleet at this time. Um, so I want to at least touch on that. Um, as it relates to Hanscam, I,
as Kyle mentioned, we would be open to a a study of of that sort. Um, it just comes down to a budgetary question. I would also caution against
drawing a oneto-one comparison between Beverly and Hansum. the the amount of traffic Hanskim is doing on a good year for Beverly. Um Hanskim is doing just about double that. Um and then the
traffic mix of Hanscom, they're taking much larger aircraft. Um their runway is another 2,000 ft longer than ours. So they their operations are very different than Beverly operations. So, um, I
certainly understand the concern on many aspects. It's a a concern I share and would love to dive deeper into, but I do want to caution against folks making that onetoone comparison between Beverly and Hansum because we're two very
different airports. No point well taken. And that's the problem when we have a void. People fill it up with whatever we have as information. Um again and and you may in that process of getting this study
done what I'm hearing is it's a budgetary issue but Hanscom was able to get some help from the state. Beverly may not be able to get that. How do we do we go to your to our legislature? Do
you champion that and we come with you? How do we get that going? >> Request from us to the state. Again, >> Hanskim and Beverly are not one and the
same. And so they I mean they're backed by Massport, which is a a tremendous economic machine. Um, so there's that funding that just generated by Mass
Porch Properties and Logan, Hansum, and Worcester. Um, that we just don't have that economic um, revenue stream that Massport is able to provide for those airports. >> So, have you asked or do you intend to
ask if we can get help? Yeah, as Kyle mentioned there, we've it's been a conversation. We've we've been talking with the folks that have done it for Massport, the company that they've contracted out. We've brought it up in
meetings with state. I mean, it's it's certainly talked about. Thank you. I mean, talk about is really not satisfactory for me. I think I think we have to do a little more than just talk about I I think and again I I
do believe that you're more responsive uh than previous managers. Uh but I think on this specific issues for the resident of Danvers we have to find a way to do a little more than just have it as an idea
cuz looking at this even though we we can't have those correlation one to one we know even if it's just half of this uh it's already a lot. So thank you. >> And just to clarate, we're not like just
coming up with an idea like we talk about these things and request and we have a list of requests of improvements and projects that we things that we want to accomplish. And then Massport, the avionic, the aviation department, the
FAA, they all sit in on these meetings and they say, "Okay, this looks good. Nope, you can't do that. That's ridiculous." and they just and they'll just swipe it away and say, "No, you can't do this. You can't do this. You can't do this. This is okay." So, we bring these things to them, but if you
guys have a different way to come about it um and raising that kind of capital to to pay for this, we're we're very open to to anything. Um it's just really difficult to come up or like have Mass
Mas dot or massport or anybody come up with an extra quarter million dollars to to fund a study. They it's just not unfortunately on the top of their list. But we we do ask every time. So >> yeah, maybe the jet owners, I don't
know, the people who own the jet, they probably have a lot of money. Anyway, I think I'm not getting anywhere. I just hope that you have this as a high priority. We we just can't talk about it. At least not anymore uh from the
diverse uh perspective. We we have if you need us to come to those meetings, we more than welcome to come and elevate those voices. Uh but reading this was pretty scary. Thank you. >> Thank you. Dan,
>> thank you. Um, correct me if I'm wrong, Gabe. Did not a legislative body request the Secretary of Transportation to do an environmental study and was turned down? >> I believe so. >> Correct. So, we did ask through our representatives, uh, Secretary of
Transportation is no longer with us. >> Correct. >> Uh, Mr. A is now in charge. I don't know if he'd be more receptive to looking at that. So, maybe that's a route we can go. Um, $250,000 in the scheme of things is not
a lot of money, but we don't have it. You don't have it. >> We need the state to pay for it. >> Well, that's where we need to follow up in my opinion. Um, Gabe, in the beginning you said jet traffic was a
slight increase. >> Describe slight and what do you think the next three years looks like on jet traffic? Um, so I'll tackle that second question first. I do think we'll probably continue to see a general
upward trend of chat traffic. Um, I looking at back 2024 to now, I think we're up um, I want to say about a hundred
operations, jet operations. Um so it's that you know it's increasing year over year about 100 to 200 operations per year in jets. I
>> is that jet traffic similar to the small planes where it comes in at certain times of the year. >> Um >> was it spread out throughout? >> It's pretty spread out throughout the year. Yeah. Um, and like I said in the
beginning, this year in particular, um, a lot that can be kind of pointed out, the overflow that we're getting from Boston. When that project is over, um, we might retain some of those, uh, those
jets, but I I venture to guess a lot of them will return to going to to Boston. Can you limit the number of jets in the airport during a year? >> No. >> No. >> No. Um I'm the per federal regulation, I
cannot limit um the number of aircraft of any type using the airport. >> But increasing the length of the runway, will that increase the size of the jets and the number of flights? >> Uh no. Uh and you know the
um at the end of the day 600 ft of extra pavement is very small in the aviation jet world. Um that increase that those
dimensions of the runway are a response to what's currently happening at the airport. So um the FAA has looked back at our operations for
the past years. Um their threshold is 500 yearly operations of jets above a certain uh certain size. In 2024, uh, we did 766,
um, operations of jets in that size. Here to date, I think we're sitting around 650. Um, so we'll probably meet, if not exceed the the um last year's 766.
All that's to say is that um those dimensions on the runway, that added pavement is the FAA saying you already have this traffic here. We need to build infrastructure to make that give them a
bigger safety net when they're operating in and out the airport. They're not doing that and funding that to say, "Oh, if we do this, maybe we'll get some more traffic." um that's not how the FAA operates and funds projects. Um so the
the demand precedes the the project. >> All right. Thank you, Gabe and Kyle for coming at least making the presentation with some specifics. Um hopefully we can continue these conversations. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
>> You're welcome. Mike. >> Hi. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um hi, Gabe. Hi. >> Is it uh possible to get a copy of everything that you showed us on screen? >> Yeah. >> Would you mind emailing that? >> Okay. >> I'd be happy to. >> Thank you.
>> I believe I have all your emails, but do you want me to send it? >> Send it to the town manager. >> Okay. And then she can distribute it. >> Yeah. All right. >> Are you having any problem with air traffic controllers? >> We are not. >> Okay. Good. Um so our air traffic
control is provided the building and all of the equipment in it is owned by the federal government. The people inside the building are employees of a private corporation. So the ongoing air traffic control issues um uh throughout the
shutdown we are unaffected by thank goodness. >> That's good to hear. Um on the Danver side um we have some fuel tanks right? Yes, there are two fuel tanks. >> Are they getting replaced or are they getting bigger ones? >> No, they were moved. Um, they were
moved. Yep. So, those are owned by Flight Level Aviation, uh, who are building the new hanger. >> They moved those fuel tanks. So, the hangers going in, um, and part of it is kind of where those fuel tanks were. So,
they've just moved the existing fuel tanks to a new location. >> Okay. Um, >> okay. What you need up there is a restaurant is what you need. >> I You're preaching to the choir. >> Yeah. >> A lot of people like to sit up there and
watch the planes. >> Yes, I would love I'd love that. >> Um, and when as far as the complaints, I think you you answered this, but you are getting back to people when they do call. Okay. All right. Thank you. Uh, I appreciate all your info. >> Yeah. Thank you.
>> I want to say thank you. I think the presentation was good. Um, I do like everybody's comments here about the environmental to get the state to help out, but um, and I like how you mentioned about trying to change the destination of the um, the flights taken
from the different runways. That would be good. The touch and goes are a big, >> you know, thing with us, the size of the jets. >> Yep. >> Um, but thank you and we'd like you to come back, >> of course, >> you know, again, and keep us updated. Please send the presentation to the town
manager, which possibly if if residents want to get a copy, she could um put that out to send it to them, too. >> Yeah. >> And um I did say that we're going to allow about 15 minutes. It's not a public hearing. If anybody wants to come up, not controversial at all. Just,
>> you know, stand aside and um Tony, you got three minutes. >> I just want to say one more thing, too. uh uh Sally Karns, Senator Lovely, and also new Representative Hannah Bowen have put together a bill that's kind of been in the works for years that have
kind of requested us to publicly post our touchand goes. There's a whole bill written. It kind of gets stalled every time in the state house. And Gabe and I had a discussion. and Hannah had reached out personally to me and we
talked and Gabe and I talked and we're had a meeting with Hannah and also we tried to get Sally she didn't come but we are publicly posting on our website the numbers that are requested in the bill that has not been voted in. So we just want to let you know that we are
trying to be as transparent as possible and even if something's not getting passed at the state level we're trying to put our best foot forward and just put it out there redacted. We don't put anybody's addresses or phone numbers or anything on it. So, but we just want to at least let you guys know that we are
putting that out there. >> Thank you. That's good. That's good to know. Thank you. >> Can you make Can you put the the map up there for the runways, please? >> Tony, you get three minutes. Remember, >> I need more three minutes, man. Believe me, >> this is this normally isn't allowed because it's not a public hearing.
Understand? But >> in the past, I've you know, it's happened. I want to allow >> We got to clear things up here. They're not telling you the truth. That's the problem. Okay, let's >> that's the problem. Okay, now runway 9, they changed the runway 9. Not good for us. All the fumes are coming back into DAS. When they power up like crazy, we
hear it. Okay, number one. Okay, Ghana's right what he was saying. First, I have to agree with Ghana. Okay, number runway 16. That's the one they should be using. The reason why they're not using it, they've been getting complaints for Beverly. That's why they only used it for a month. As soon as they started getting complaints from Beverly, they changed to nine. Another problem they have with 16. Okay, 16. The problem they
have with 16 is when they do 16, they've been telling us for years, we got to take lefthand turns. Well, you know what they're doing on 16 now? They're taking rights. They're coming back into Davis, man. They don't want to go into belly at all. That's the problem. They don't tell you that. How I know this stuff? I have a radio at home, okay? And I monitor
everything. I have to cuz otherwise you're not going to get the truth. Just like uh Sunday, okay, watch the Patriots. Okay. 4:00. Okay. Winds were calm. Okay. Where are they? Runway 27. They stayed there from 4:00 to 8:00. They've never moved. Okay, they should not have been on that runway. We shouldn't been hearing that noise. But
that's what happens with these people. Oh, they can't control it. They can control it. We have a big problem here. Okay, we got to get squared away. I've asked once before for a selectman workshop. Okay, I asked Mr. Bennett. He said he was going to give it to me. We never got it. I want a selectman's workshop to work on these problems that
we have with this airport. This airport is killing us. Okay. And I'm going to give you one other one. Okay. I walked around to about 75 houses. I talked to people. They tell me no one complains. Well, believe me, no one is happy with this airport and no one complains because they don't bother. Like someone told me for 20 years we've been
complaining. We got nowhere. Okay, I felt bad for this poor old lady on Bradford A. Okay, I went to her door. When she first saw me, she was trying to shoot me away. I told her here, I'm talking about the airport. Soon as I said that to her, she was fine. She remembered me from coming there before. Okay, the poor old lady walked over with
the walker. She told me it's getting terrible over there. The fumes are coming into her house. Okay, the poor old lady. Okay, this is I'm not lying. Let them tell you the truth. Okay. They tell you no one complains. So that's a bunch of Okay. I'll let go that way. >> Yeah. Thank you very much. All right.
Anybody else? Mike, go ahead. >> Hi, Mike Trainer. Uh Tom meet member precinct 5. I actually just uh have a question on the reconstruction of the 1634 runway just because that 27 runway really that impacts Danvers. It's a very
dense neighborhood. Um I live two blocks in the direct flight path of that runway and I can tell you when planes are taken off from there, you can be in your house on a call and you can't it it it's a lot of impact. So I'm just wondering with that runway being reconstructed, are we
going to be taking off on 27 more often and are we going to be dealing with that for a number of years? >> Good. Yeah, Gabe, just quickly. >> Yeah, of course. >> Yeah, thanks for the question. Yeah, during that reconstruction 1634 will be
shut down and so um 279 will be the only runway um in use at the airport. >> Thank you. Okay, next. Yep. >> Just a quick question. Um when you do
1634 over, are you changing? >> Yeah, please mention your name. >> I'm sorry, Mike Barker. >> Okay, thank you Mike. Um, are you changing the instrument approaches at all? And if if so, is it going to change the minimums to make uh it more
approachable in bad weather? >> Um, the instrument approaches themselves are not going to change. We're still trying to figure out what mitigation of those obstructions look like. Um but however we mitigate it um
we'll regain we'll get back to those like 200 300 foot minimums. >> I'm sorry I think you missed the answering of one of the questions which is how long is the construction? >> Oh yes so sorry that construction we should just be one construction season.
So say May to September October. That's the plan. >> Thank you Ed. Go ahead. >> Hi, Ed Pino. Um, on the reconstruction of 1634, question for you. You've mentioned about 600 ft added to the
runway, the length. >> Will it be widened as well? >> The the runway width is remaining the same. So, it's 100 foot now. It will remain 100 ft. >> Okay. and the thickness of the concrete
will that increase? >> You're testing my It's not going to increase. It'll be the same >> because the only reason is because if you start doing that, you can get you can introduce bigger uh bigger jets. Um years ago, I don't know 15 20 years ago, we were told that they were going to put
on 150 ft for safety and it ended up bringing in larger jets than what used to be there. So adding this 600 ft or whatever, of course, now the safety area is going to be used for runup, it's more um runway length for even though it's
class C jets, correct? >> Um yeah. >> Okay. Class C jets. When you have a certain runway length, but then you add another 600 ft, there's a a list, we'll say, of 20 jets for class C. Right now, Beverly might only, and I'm not 100%
take on 10 of those, but once you put the 600 feet, you can go another class, larger class C jet in that airport. So, noise, pollution, the whole thing. Um, lastly, the big thing is we're missing all the time, and I've said it before,
is the safety issue for our town with introducing more jets that if they're running down the runway at ballpark, 150, 140 m an hour for takeoff or landing, if they don't make it, there's
going to be densely, as we know, um, neighborhoods, high schools, businesses, a lot of casualties. So, >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Todd. >> Todd Dinto from Woodville who talked to you as a resident and uh corporate
pilot. Uh I want to put that in perspective because that's a good question, but this let's get to the to the issues. Uh Rathon would never use Beverly airport because it doesn't it defaults in our in our software. The the runway for landing is 4,700 ft. Okay.
Now, the only time that in my 34 years we ever used it is when we did a risk assessment. So, the improvements to the runway, they're they're called displaced thresholds, and they're putting the displaced threshold on each side of that runway. That improves the safety margins
for takeoff. It doesn't change the landing uh available for that runway. Okay? So, Rathon as a corporation would still do a risk assessment. uh the software in the in the in the airplane's computer would not default to Beverly
airport as an alternate. Okay. So, we keep saying that it's going to bring larger airplanes. Larger airplanes are not coming into Beverly because the it's just it's a it's a mediumsiz uh jet type of airplane. I mean airport. um the with
the higher minimums and with the runway under construction, we're going to see less jet traffic in the near couple years. Okay. Now, uh obviously at some point there's, you know, it's going to increase, but for the near the short term, we're going to see less jet
traffic. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Maybe a couple more questions. That's it. Again, Mark, >> it's me. I'm sorry. It's the time. [Laughter] >> She makes sure you want to hear it. >> You ready? >> The noise.
>> Ready? Go. >> Thank you, madam uh chairwoman. Uh I have sat there and just listened to what was being said. And as you know, we Tony
has been working on this issue for 25 years. I've been on it since uh basically when they cut down all the trees in 1997 and then it all evolved. However, one of
the things that I have found is the comment about the noise complaints and and it seems like Beverly airport commissioners have and the manager have latched on to noise. That's not the only
thing that happens out there. It's all the environmental impacts. It is the the trees. It is the uh wetlands. It is the noise as well. The
let it fuel emissions and all of the other emissions that are happening at the airport and they're all flowing towards Danvers. The reason we don't have more noise complaints because even I have decided
why am I calling this number because yes there is an you know admittance that there is a problem because when I reported it is a problem. It is a jet going over your house and my house
because that's the way they operate from that location because you're on top of the hill and I'm down on the bottom in 95. So the the issues that are being reported are selective. They're not constant. And
what we have to do is normalize that reporting because I have been working with Gabe uh very uh you know very nicely. I we get along just fine and we're getting a report that Gabe
provides for me and the last five years uh in regard to the number of jets that are having operations at the airport. My problem is the jets are causing more of a problem than the little puddle jumpers
that I call the little prop planes. So, right now, uh, we're looking at four months worth of data for the last five years. And the thing is that we're sort of
um succumb to the fact that yes there are jets but it is increasing. There's a a number of operations by jets on every year and every month that we have been tracking.
>> Sorry time is still >> can wrap it up. I can't turn back time. >> Wish we could. Huh? >> The thing is that the number of operations per day is gone from in 2020
was five operation uh five jets per day that were operating at that time. Now in 2025 it's nine to almost 10 jets. So there is an increase in the number of flights that are happening. And the
flights are not sporadic. They're not recreational. They're scheduled flights. And one of the reports that we've been hearing is that Reich is a flight that comes out of Beverly to Iceland. So I'm
I'm not going to take any more of your time because uh there's a whole bunch of things. I'll send it to you. >> Send it. Yeah, please email your select board members. Thank you, Gabe. >> I just want to uh make a point that there are no commercial scheduled
operations out of Beverly airport. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> So, I'm sure there would be a lot. >> All right. Well, >> thank you. Thank you for um Go ahead, Bill. Last one. >> Last one. >> Thank you.
>> Quick question. I I watched the last airport commissioner report. I was very uh meeting very concerned and would the board please look into it and have our fire department respond. There were two different opinions of whether Danvers had foam say
>> and and and I am being told that we do and I'm being told that we don't. So could we get our fire department to tell us if they feel they have the necessary tools if god forbid they have to deal with something? >> Yes, we'll have the town manager look into that with the fire chief. Thank you. All right, everybody. Thank you
very much. Um, thank you. Um, we'll put you back on for more updates, >> of course. >> Please continue logging everything and and get that report to the town manager. >> Yep. I'll follow up with town. >> Thank you everybody in the public for um your for your concerns. >> Thanks.
>> Thank you. Does anybody want to take a two-minute break? I think Mr. B take a two-minut break. Three minute break. back. Hello. Hello. Hello. All right. Welcome. Thank you again. Um that was very good. Um at this time the
board will discuss handheld electronic vote tabulation for town meeting. Um, first of all, I want to thank Lauren Steves for doing all that terrific work and research. Um, really excellent job. And I'm going to tell you the truth. I haven't gone through all of it myself
too because of all of this. So, what I wanted to do is I wanted it to open up to the board members um and uh ask them how they would like would they want to entertain any discussions on this tonight and then I'm going to give you my suggestion what I think. So, um let's
start with Dan. uh with regards to >> I'd like to hear your suggestions. >> Oh, you want to hear my suggest? All right. So, what I'm going to what I would like to do is I don't know about with all the other board members, you know, um have you had a chance to really dig in? I want to spend a lot of time on
this. I don't want to, excuse my lack of a better word, blow it off, okay? Because I think it's really good. Um what I would like to do is I would like to um if any discussions tonight about what we think but I would like to create
a committee of about three to five people have a have board members maybe submit names to me and then what I'd like to do is have this committee and then have this be put back on the agenda the first week in December
>> because I feel that >> why Why do you know? >> Because excuse me, out of order. Um I I feel that myself personally, I haven't had the time to really dig in and I I know there's a lot more research that has to be done. And then I think what we would do is then with that committee, we
could instruct the town manager to look into more research for us, too. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I don't want to cut it off for her. I think with all this research, um I'd want to hear how other board members feel on do you like that suggestion? Would you do you want a table? Do you want to talk about it
tonight? I think that we put it off until December if anybody has any questions. >> Well, I I I I like I support the idea of a commission because I've looked at the details. I've looked at what has been presented to us >> and there's still a lot of open questions. >> Mhm. >> A lot.
>> And I don't I don't think you should put a December time frame on it. I think you should get citizens and select board members and town employees who can do the right amount of research and and and discussion to come to this >> and I'll offer my thoughts on what my
what questions I would want answered but I would support a committee. I would not support a decision tonight. Absolutely not. I would not and I don't think you'll get those answers by December. >> So we might Yeah. Right. So I'm thinking December meeting sometime. I think of the first second maybe the second. >> I'm saying I think that's too
compressed. that gives you less than a month >> to get all the answers. >> She's given us a lot of it though. >> She's provided us one aspect of a larger picture, >> but we're going to have that committee and that that's what I'm saying. Well, >> but the but in order to get the answers
that need to be answered, um it will take more than four weeks. >> Well, I don't think really think so. Um Mike, what do you want to say about that? >> I don't want to red tape this thing up. I think we can I think we should discuss it today. I think it's pretty common
sense issue. I don't see any problem with having a discussion and then move forward with uh trying to implement the plan. Get find out get the three bids, get the program going. What why why go any further? This isn't this is just
a clicker. It's not we're not doing a heart surgery here, you know? I I just don't want to see it all dragged around. I don't see the point. T >> well uh I have more of a mixed feeling. I'm in general support of the idea of
having a clicker. Uh I was a hard no. Um but after I review um all the material that was submitted, I I actually review all of it. Um I feel like I mean why not? I I think I think
it will be good. Uh however just like you madam chair I do have some outstanding questions uh to make sure that we do it right. Um my first thing will be I I feel that this I don't know how we go about it if
it was something that the select board needed to have as a policy or if it's something that town meeting needs to approve. I will I will prefer the latter that we actually have a warrant article that goes to town meeting for approval
that that gives it more more teeth. Uh but you call it a committee or town staff. But there were outstanding questions that I had to make sure that if we had a warrant article that goes to
town meeting a solid and can pass all legal masters because um uh we had like the type of technology and I know other cities are using it but the type of technology does everything
that we vote at town meeting goes to the clicker. If we have 33 articles at a town meeting and we say time to vote one minute, okay, then we're going to wait the whole minute and then tally the result. Are we going to be able to have
our town meeting in one night? So maybe this will make us start to either have less article at town meeting or maybe have town meeting in multiple nights because it's not just all in favor. Yeah. all in. No.
>> So that is a question that we need to to answer. Um another thing will be um the initial cost seems like it's fairly manageable but what the subsequent cost look like
uh year after year. Uh but the key the and then once we get that approved it will have to go back into the way we vote in general. Do we just use this for certain voting items or do we use it for the
entire town meeting? Because if we're going to use it for the entire town meeting, if because I was trying to picture what does it look like, we will have town meeting over three or four nights depending on how many warrants we have, what article we have.
>> Madam Chair, it's hard to hear the member and his comments with the audience. Uh >> oh, sorry. No, I want to hear what you have to say to >> Okay. Yeah. No, I was just saying that though I'm I'm in generous support of the concept, but I just think that we
should find a way to you call it a committee or or volunteers or people to really put together a plan of what does it look like in practice. Uh that that that would be my two cents. Excellent.
Good. Dan, >> um I hate to come up here with a predetermined thought on how I'm going to vote until we've had discussion amongst oursel and heard from the public. Um
and I that takes time and I think the main event here is the town manager review that we should be concentrating on tonight. It's already 8:20. I think we need to take care of that business first. So, I would make a motion that we
post table this agenda item to the earliest the first meeting in December. And that gives um members a chance to put their questions to you and the town manager to do some research, further
research to get try to get the questions answered so that when we do reconvene on this, we know what we're talking about. Mhm. Well, I think um I'm in support of this too. You know, I don't want to say what my vote is too, but I do think we
need more time and I I want to do that committee and I think we should table it till December 1st. >> You're tableabling the discussion to move forward, not a decision >> because I have a host of questions that I want. >> I would make a motion. Yeah. To uh table
this for conversation to the first meeting in December. >> I'll second the motion. All in favor? >> I'm concerned about unintended consequences. If we race this through, and I understand it's an important issue, and I understand that people have feelings about it, and I'm not
suggesting I'm against it. I want to make sure there's no unintended consequences and we consider fully the questions I have because we have a process in place right now. And I don't want to go into the details. I'll go into the details in December. And I'll offer them to the to the town
manager ahead of time. So, if there's any legal questions, she can look into it. Ro is right. We want to have legal counsel. We want the town manager to look into it >> because the first the very first question I'm going to ask is is it the authority of the town meeting to force to do this? Is it the authority even of the select board or is it the authority
of the town moderator to manage how the meeting is run? That's that's actually a legal question. >> Well, I think >> All right. So, you have a motion and a second. >> Anybody want to make another motion or do >> I made it? No, he made a motion and I
seconded it to table it to table this discussion >> till December to the first meeting in December. >> All in favor want to table it and with my suggestion I think too that well >> no his motion is to table this >> going to table it till December 1st >> first meeting December
>> first meeting in December and then I want Mike um any any more comments on you? Um, no. If we can get this going, if December 1st we can, you know, get together, have our information ready and
get this process moving, um, you know, I don't see any problem. I think we have to find out who if there is a legal, if we have the legal authority to say it, I would think we would. Um,
I don't see how and I I'm not trying to dispute you, D. I don't see how it would do anything but streamline the meeting. It seems in my mind the way I picture it would be a lot quicker. I don't know how it could be quicker than it is. It's already pretty quick now, but it seems like it would be quicker.
>> I I actually again the comments from the from the audience at this point are irrelevant. I actually agree with D. It will elongate thing elongate and I can discuss how it will. >> So there's a motion that we table till December 1st. >> There is. >> Okay, we have a second. All in favor?
>> Second. I >> I >> oppose. Okay. So, we're going to table this to December 1st. It's not to go. >> Any questions >> from the board? >> Questions from the board. >> To the town manager. >> To the town manager. Yeah, we're going to get our questions to the town
manager. Okay. Gardner, Mike, D, Mo, and Dian. All right. Madam Chair, if I may, um I will send a follow-up email to the board um so we can figure out like a deadline of when to get questions so that we would have time to prepare and and all that kind of information
>> because we do have the town manager act to review tonight. Dan's right. We do have tax classification. >> We have discontinued the next two weeks >> next actually through December. Um and >> um November is a strangely short month. >> Yeah, it is. You have
>> the holiday in the 16 business days. Yeah, you have a holiday next week. You have a holiday the Thanksgiving week and it's a 30-day month. So, it is >> and that way board members can put a lot of thought into it. All right. Terrific. Thank you. Um,
let's see. Okay. Number seven. The board will continue discussion on recommendations by the town meeting manager act review committee. All right. Hold on one second here. Hold on.
Get my papers here. Hold on. [Applause] All right. Bear with me for one second. I lost my paper that I prepared. Here it is. All right.
So, tonight we're going to begin the deliberations on the changes to the town manager. We'll consider the recommendations of the re review committee. We also want to consider any items select board members would like to introduce. Thank you for submitting them in advance. Please be sure to bring them up when we get to the
appropriate section. We will start with housekeeping items and then move through the document section by section like we did with the previous act. Um we provided a chart to help you. Okay. Um summarizes the review committee's recommendations to help you guide this
section the the discussion. The goal tonight is to determine the consensus of the board on the items we discuss. Staff will then work with the town council Kate's here also to update the redline version of the document to reflect our deliberations. We will then review the
and discuss the updated versions at an upcoming meeting and entertain motions to create to create the warrant articles. At that time, the re review committee recommend a new section to the town manager act related to recall elections. We have been advised by town
council that this should be considered as a separate item not to be included in the town manager act. Therefore, we will discuss the other recommendations to the town manager act tonight. We will then discuss the recommendations related to recall elections as a potential warrant article. Depending upon time, this may
happen at our next meeting. >> I'm sorry. You're saying we'll discuss that at our next meeting? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Just that one part. >> Just that one part. Great. Yeah. Please note that the recall is contemplated throughout the document as its reason for a vacancy in various offices and will be addressed after the board has
discuss and decided on a potential recall provision. Okay. Um so we will start with section one of housekeeping. There are several grammatical changes,
capitalizations, etc. included in the recommendations. They are summarized on pages 1 and 8 of the flowchart and are found throughout the red line document. We refer we will excuse me we will refer to these all called housekeeping changes.
So board members take a look at that. Um >> section one. Yep. >> Section one. >> Yep. Uh yeah, it's all it's all grammatical or all all housekeeping. I move we accept the those changes >> throughout the document. >> Yeah.
>> Pages one through eight. >> Yeah, we're not voting on it. We're just This is the clerk's taking notes. Thank you. >> No through eight is housekeeping, I believe. one through >> Oh, do you have >> uh one through >> Well, >> it is
>> one through five because >> the recall starts on page the bottom of page five. >> One's talking Sorry, Madam Chair. I think Gardenner's talking about the document and he's looking at the flowchart. So, the housekeeping items are on the flowchart pages 1 through eight, >> right?
>> Oh, yes. >> Sorry. Thank you. >> The revised flowchart. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Should be the same page number. Okay. >> So, it's one through eight. is how I have it. >> Yeah. >> And it's all capitalization. >> It's add Yeah. capitalize the letters of the town election. Capitalize the first
letters of the town. >> Add the word finance. Capitalize a C >> school committee, >> right? They want that capitalized. And members of the housing authority, >> so I don't see a need to go individually. It's all pretty much
straightforwards. I don't think there's anything there that we would object to. >> Comments. Anybody? Mike? >> No. >> Got >> no I agree with all of that. >> I agree. >> Dan D. Okay. >> All right. So, that's going to take care of that.
Section six. >> No, I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Back to section one. >> I'm sorry. >> Section one, you're on page nine of the flowchart. Section one of the document. Page one of the document. >> I have a different flowchart
one. >> Yeah. Um, >> when did you print that out? >> I got it in my envelope. >> Okay. This number one was >> this came in late.
>> That's not chang. >> He's got it. >> Too much too much paper. >> There's too much paperwork. That's why we wanted a table in the front. last one and then in the middle >> this is this is the old
>> okay now we >> it's pretty it's the it's it's very close >> so on the revised >> or the flowchart on page nine >> yes >> yes >> okay >> oh okay >> you madam chair you'll be you'll you'll be good just keep an eye there's only
one place that got on >> section 11 I think >> that was the only change so you should be good >> all right so So we are going to >> just section one. >> Section one. >> Okay. >> Okay. So everybody look at that.
>> Yeah. In section one, I had a question regarding um No, never mind. Uh I'm I'm good with all of the changes in section one, >> Mike. >> As offered by the committee. >> Yeah.
>> Uh no no questions. >> You're good with that? Okay. D >> no questions. >> Yeah. All set. >> Okay. All right. Then section two section establishes the process for the election of the select board members and the process of filling a vacancy. There are
no substant changes recommended. These changes are summarized on page nine of the chart in page three of the red line >> document. >> I'm comfortable with all of section all the proposed changes to section two.
>> Same. >> Mike. No problem, >> Dan. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, section three. The section defines the powers of the select board. The substitive recommendation change in the section removes the town
accountant as a select board appointment. The changes are summarized on page nine through 10 of the chart and pages three and four of the red line version. Uh, section three. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm doing
the wrong thing. >> Page four. >> So, I I will again voice my concern about changing the town account from the current chart. I think there's a level of responsibility to or
at least a a um I'm trying to think of the right wording appearance of uh that uh there should be the appearance that a town accountant
should be able to respond to the select board with concerns outside the chain of command of going through the town manager. It's not about this person. This would be about no matter who was the town manager. It is
a fiduciary responsibility to the town. Um, which I agree the town manager shares, but it is a separate and distinct fiduciary responsibility. And my preference is to have if it's not in a hierarchy that that person responds to
us from an HR perspective as a responsible fiduciary agent of the town. I would want them to have to report to us without us having to go through the town manager in either direction. we ask that the
town accountant whoever that might be or they can say I'm concerned the town manager has given me a direction to buy all crypto whatever it might be and I think that there's a I think there's a uh uh an opportunity to dispel any
concern about about who they report to my thought I'm not going to fight it hard but I offer that in case other select board members feel the same way >> Dan what about you >> no I don't feel that way. I'm in favor of the change. Um,
in the course of a year, I see the town accountant twice. We see the town accountant twice. Once when the auditor is here and maybe during Bencom, um, Mass General Law requires the accountant to bring any irregularities
to our attention. Is that correct, >> Kate? Kate, can you mind going up? Yes. For any legal questions we can >> please let's uh ask Kate >> through madam through you madam chair to
the previous speaker Kate Connelly town council the town accountant under the statute that governs town accountant is chapter 41 section 55 which says any town may authorize the selectman to appoint a town accountant. In practice, however, most town managers have been
the delegated appointment authority by the or have been delegated by the select board to appoint the accountant. If the board wishes to maintain stronger checks and balances, you may want to retain appointment authority yourselves rather than delegate it to the town manager.
That's really about the extent of statutory governance of of the town accountant position. >> Great, D. Yeah, I I I think when it came out last time, that was my understanding that this change
will be um aligning our town charter with current practice. That's what's happening now. uh because uh when I use uh Dan as a reference I
think he told me that >> historically historically the select board have not been the one appointing the town accountant here in Davis it's been the town manager so the this change is just to reflect what is actually
happening so I I I'll support it >> but I'll tell you that the change happened >> what now that it reports to the town >> that I'll support the change the recommendation from the committee. >> Okay. >> But I also will tell you that that has not been you are correct that you're changing it
but this was a change made under Wayne and at the time he made the change there was oppos there was some select board member opposition to that change knowing we would throw it outside the charter. Um, but I think town council has offered
the fact that we can delegate the appointment, the hiring and the all that other work to the town manager. You're right, that person should come along, but we should be the ultimate appointment. And if she if the town manager, I'll refer to her as she now
because she is, um, but if the town manager says, I'm hiring the, you know, this is the town accountant I want. These are the credentials. I still think it's to this board's protection to say
have a hand in that and and and again maintain that we are the ultimate reporting authority for that person. >> I can count to three as a as a friend of mine used to talk say often. And so I I
I just I am not going to let this go with I'm not going to pass this without offering my off my my my thoughts. That's all. >> So to you, Madam Chair, will would you be possible then to revise the language and have the select board as the
appointing authority but then add that language of delegation? Uh do you think that will like we keep the appointing authority but then we add the fact that we can delegate the town
manager to do it because that's what actually happens in >> I think that's what but I think that's already enshrined in state law. >> Yeah. >> I I'll be open to that. Well, if I may, the some boards the town manager has the
appointing authority but brings them to this board not to vote on but um to be aware of the appointments and we have the ability to object. We just um
zone yeah not zoning board but planning board and other boards uh managers appointments but we're aware of the appointments and if we had an obje objection I'm sure Gardner would speak up
>> or I would too. >> No you would too if you had an objection and we all would. But you've just made kind of two conflicting statements in saying we don't have the authority, but we have the authority. >> And so I'm saying retain the ultimate
authority, but as we have delegate to the town manager role to come to us with a candidate that you know that that they feel is the appropriate candidate in person, but that the ultimate authority and reporting authority comes to us. The
ultimate reporting authority of the town manager is to the select board. I think the ultimate reporting should of the town accountant should be to the select board in the same manner. That's all I'm suggesting. That's all.
>> And that's what the correct the conversation has been for a number of years is to remove that appointment from this board. >> Right. take away that our authority >> to appoint the >> to appoint and be the reporting
point of that role. I want I want I just >> So you don't want to make the change to >> I don't want to make the change. I'm saying strike that from to remove the to not accept the recommendation of striking the accountant from
>> Madam Chair. Can we ask the chair of the review committee for their their thoughts? Sally, >> reasoning for the change. >> Sally, could you please get up, introduce yourself, and please tell us the reasons. >> Good evening. >> That you felt that way? >> Uh, my name is Sally Calhoun, town
meeting member from precinct 3 and the appointed chair of the review committee. Um our recommendation to remove town accountant from um the uh from being appointed by the select board to being
appointed by the town manager was uh as has just been mentioned. We understood it was it was incorporating the current practice and the many years long practice of the of the town manager being the person who actually selects
the town accountant. Um, also our goal was to uh grant to the town manager the authority um to set up the whole finance team. the town manager felt was needed
in order to um operate to to to serve as the chief fiscal officer of the town and to have a team that the town manager creates at all levels of that process including town accountant. uh so that that team can act as as one as a unitary
team under the town manager to protect and um and forward further the financial goals of the town. I also feel that by ver by statute by Massachusetts statute the town accountant no matter who is the
appointing authority has an obligation to come forward if they felt there was something a miss that needed to be reported directly to the select board. So I feel the board is already already has statutory protection in that regard. So those were the the the gist of our
recommendation in this regard. Thank you. So and that confirms my thought that the manager should have the control of appointing that department including >> and she and the town manager does in a
later section which I fully support. It says the town manager has the rights and responsibilities to structure departments as they see fit. If that includes someone, we our appointment of the town accountant doesn't change where the town manager may put that in the in
the in the in the structure of the financial uh you know uh aspects of the town. I support the fact that the town manager later one of these later one of the sections speaks specifically to the town manager's right to create whatever department they want in whatever
structure they want and move people between them as needed. I support that. Appointing that person, the the onus of appointing that person doesn't change that further section of the of the of
the town manager act. >> Seems to me they're in conflict then. >> No, we appoint a person. The town manager then decides where in the hierarchy that person is. >> Well, we're calling the town accountant. >> Where the in the departmental structure that person is. Yes, you would think
that person will be the the top of the financial department structure. >> Not necessarily. >> And that's still at the town manager's discretion. >> The appointment of the person is the the key part here. But >> I I've I've dragged this on to
>> you, Madam Chair. Just uh just so I understand too, this act doesn't say anything about reporting authority. It only talks about appointment. So my understanding was that the current practice is the town
manager does the appointment and the the town accountant reports to the town manager and if there's a problem they can come to the select board. By changing this language we adapting it to current practice. But if we keep it the
way it is, we still don't have reporting authority as a as it the the the town accountant. So it it will be like we appoint a town accountant that's reporting to the town manager
because there's no reporting authority of the town accountant in this on this act to the select board >> except in case they want to bring forward something >> under our current structure today before we offer any changes
>> the select board is responsible for the appointment of two people that's it in the entire town. >> That's correct. the town manager and the accountant. >> Yes. >> The fact that it we currently don't do that is because a former town manager changed that on their own of at their
discretion. They discussed it with the board, but it falls outside the charter. So either we're right sizing the charter to the practice that was recent within the past eight or nine years was changed and then take away the fact that that
person is ultimately our responsibility or we maintain it. So, do you think that the town So, the question is, do you think the town accountant should always report to the town manager or should that role because of its very unique
situation report to the select board? >> If we're talking about reporting to the select board, that's something new. >> No, no, no, no. It's not. When I say reporting, I mean assignment. We're the ones who ultimately hire that person. >> We do hire them, but they report to the town manager. That's that's the conflict.
>> They also report to us. The town manager reports to us. >> That's correct. We hired >> because we hired the town manager. She reports to us. >> Yes. >> The town accountant, if we're the hiring authority, if we're the appointing/hiring authority, that person reports to us.
>> However, the town manager manages them. >> Does that have to be specified or that's automatic that if we hire someone, they report to us? Is that to to you madam chair to >> to late Kate >> legal if we are the appointing authority
does that automatically means that they report to us or we we could be the appointing authority but then the reporting to the town manager because I don't see anything here about reporting to the board. Um yes madam chair through you to the
previous speaker um selectman Jooko um typically yeah the appointing authority would also be the the boss if you will they the person would report >> okay >> to the appointing authority um you might want to be specific about it though in the town manager act which essentially
is your charter also I find no statute part of what you're talking about is reporting and fiduciary obligation to let the it it seems to make common sense that there would be a fiduciary obligation of the town accountant to report any mismanagement of funds, that
sort of thing, whether it's to the town manager or the select board. Um, but I found no statute that actually governs that. It's a little bit separate from who they report to. But yeah, typically the appointing authority is the is also who you report to.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> I think the goal is to bring this document into the current practice where we're at back to the document. >> Right.
>> No, I'm in favor of the change. >> I think the ultimate reporting should go town should be be to the select board too. Gardner with you. So taking those notes. >> Sorry. Well, but but I think what's the consensus? It counts to three. I'm happy
that >> we're at two to one >> right now. You and I >> you and I >> and Dan has expressed his >> Yeah, we're just So, >> what are you thinking, Mike? D >> I guess it's another level of security even though >> checks and balances, she said. >> Yeah, checks and balances. You know,
it's another level if we're the appointing >> authority as well. >> I'm sorry. So, what are you saying? So I'm saying yes, we would be the we would be the appointing authority. >> So we will So what I'm hearing is it
seems like we will prefer to be the appointed authority, but that means we will actually have to change current practices. >> Yes. Change back from a change of practice. Yes. But yes, either way you want to say it. >> Could we modify the language and be the
appointing authority with the option to delegate it to the town manager? I don't think we have to codify that here. We always have the option as a board to say please go and find the right candidate. >> Uh to you madam chair is that correct uh to legal?
>> You could certainly put into the town manager act that the board of selectman is the appointing authority and that the town accountant would report to the town manager. You we'd have to specify that but you could certainly do that. No, it will be that the town the select
board is the appointing authority but can delegate that appointment to the town manager. >> Yes, that's what I'm saying. >> You got to say it. You got to spell it out in the in the chart. >> You spell it out in the in the charter, if you will, the town manager act. But yeah, and that makes sense, too, because you all work elsewhere and do other
things during the day, and the town manager is here managing all the employees, mo many of which she appoints. But if the select board decides that you want to appoint the town accountant, you could still delegate the uh supervisory authority to the town manager.
>> So that would be I think a middle ground. >> I'm fine with that where we retain the authority. >> But put the language in there. Don't just make it part of a vote. Put it. Yeah. >> Exactly. >> I'm fully supportive of that. >> Okay. >> Me too. >> Me too.
>> And I'll work on something and you'll have language to look at. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. You good, Mike, with that? >> Yes, we do. >> All right, good. Not that we're voting on it, but >> All right. So, that was section three. >> Let's go on to section four. >> Well, and obviously you'll strike recall
if that no longer occurs in section two. Okay. >> Section four. The section establishes the process for the election of school committee members and the process of filling a vacancy. There are no substantive changes recommended. These changes are summarized on page 10 of the
chart and page four of the red line document. >> I'm fine. No, no objection. Any of four or five? >> All right. Any any >> uh I I just have a quick question. uh
given the fact that the if we had um recall as a separate thing and that got ratified, will we come back and add it here as a
reason of disqualification? >> We're going to do them separately. >> I understand. But um >> yeah, tell me. Um, so what I think the intention is and I'll work with council is if when if you guys discuss recall, you get a a sense of which direction you
want to go, then we'll work with town council on whether where that should be included and how to vote on it in in the warrant article and then yes, it would be reflected properly within the document. >> Okay. Thank you. So that'll as you guys once we get a sense of what your thoughts are on recall um we'll take it
legal legal is going to take a look at the whole document so you know what's in front of you um to vote and to review so you know which way the article goes but it'll make sure they go together. >> Exactly. >> Does that make sense? >> Yes, >> it does. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. So we go on section four.
>> Yep. >> Okay. Section five. There are no recommended changes. Section five. Beyond housekeeping. >> Uh no everything's good on five. Good. D on five. Dan, >> that's okay. >> Okay. Section six. SE. >> Yeah. Is is it redundant to in section
six? It seems redundant to uh the language about the mass general laws. We're bound by mass general laws independent of actually citing them in this document. Is it redundant to have it in there? If I could ask.
>> Let me let me read it. The section addresses the holding of multiple offices. The change references the MGLO and is summarized on page 10 of the chat and page five of the red line document. >> Madam chair, if I may. Yes. This is one of the comments that I made earlier. It's you can put it in, but it's
superfluous because it's in the state statute, chapter 268A. It's the state ethics commission statute. You have to comply with it anyway. So, you don't need to add this in because it's you're already required under state law. >> Yeah. My my concern is the state law could change. You know, the numbering or
or a could be superseded by another state law. I I would just strike I would say under Massachusetts state laws and stop there and not have the section chapter verse. >> Oh, I see. >> Um, what do you say, Kate, to that?
>> I can't imagine that the state ethics commission is ever going to get rid of the statute, although it certainly could amend it. Um, but you can you can add it. It it's harmless. You just don't need it. That was my comment. It's not wrong. It's just unnecessary. But if you have that concern that the statute's
going to go away or, you know, be superseded by something that you're going to disagree with, then sure, put it in. >> Sorry. Okay. Just if I may, Madam Chair, >> so your earlier recommendation was don't include it because we don't need it.
And I think that's what Gardner was suggesting also. But then I'm just confused because then you said >> I understood select as saying that he's concerned that the statute could be over overturned. >> You're citing a specific statute that
may have may change in the next 20 years in some manner that we don't comport to that we wouldn't agree with. I'm just saying just say Mass General's law because that that for whatever laws they might be He's I believe he's suggesting being
less specific. >> Yeah, that that's fine. That's fine as well. You just don't want to site chapter 268A. But that is >> exactly right. I don't want to site 268A, >> right? That's the ethics statutes with all the subsections. There is no other statute governing ethics. But I understand what you're saying, but yeah,
it's it's super to put this in right now. If you're going to cite the statute, if you want to just put it in and say general laws, that's fine. >> Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But you guys just >> I'm okay. >> I'm okay. Me too, Mike. >> That's fine. >> Okay. All right. And as stated earlier,
we'll be discussing the recommended new section seven recall elections separately. We will continue with the document based on the original numbers. Section seven. All right. Section seven. This section allows the select board to employ
experts. The recommended change is to delete the cap of 10,000 and replace it with a sum equal to 0.02% 02% of that year's annual budget. The changes are summarized on page 11 of the chart in
page 9 and 10 of the red line document. >> I am fully supportive of making this a percentage of the annual town budget as opposed to a hard number >> because of inflationary >> uh reasons up or down
>> and I have no other offers on that section. Yeah, I'm fine. That's I'm fine. Me, too. I agree. Y >> All right. Section eight. Section 8. This section authorizes Select to appoint a town manager. The recommended changes in this remove the residency
requirement for the town manager. They are summarized on page 11 of the chart and page 10 of the red line document. I'll start out with my my my change would be to make it a remove residency in Danver but make it a contigu or a
contiguous town Davis or a contiguous town. I think that if we remove it entirely, you know what? If we get someone from Welssley, great candidate, wonderful candidate, meets all the criteria we'd want, but
they live in Welssley. I think residency should be established within six months in Danveris or a contiguous town. >> And I disagree. When we hire the next town manager,
we'll have a list of criteria that will look at their qualifications, uh, series of questions, and one will be, will you live in Davis? depending on how they answer that will be part of the
conversation in making the decision >> for that person. But I wouldn't make it a requirement. >> It just it's something that a future board will or will not consider based upon all the other mitigating factors
that they would want to use to hire a town manager. It may be important, it may not, but I think we want to get the best qualified person for the job. where they live may have a bearing, but it's not the
ultimate decision making. That would be disservice to the town. >> So, I have a legal question based on that. If we went with that path and I I'll state it and then ask the the the uh town council, can we disqualify someone if they say
no? Do we open ourselves up to litigation if it's not >> Kate >> here that they have to live in a specific local but we make it a a condition that but we
make it part of the job requirements or disqualify them because >> it's part it's part of the interview process and the interview process is private in the beginning >> yes that's true >> right >> it's private but however However, if the candidate says, "I am
the most qualified candidates and you disqualified me because I said no, I wouldn't live in Danvers or nearby town." >> Do we open ourselves up to potential litigation because of that? If we don't say this is part of our charter, >> we say they don't have to live here.
>> We're or we're removing we're removing the residency requirement. It stays mute where they live. But when we interview candidates, it could be a factor. >> That's the question. >> That's the question. >> The question is if we remain moot here,
>> uh mute here, but you make a qualification in our >> interview process. >> In our interview process, are we opening ourselves to potential problems? >> I I don't think >> can can we legal opinion, Kate? You can
have multiple requirements such as being in the office certain hours 5 days a week and it's up to the candidate to get him or himself or herself here and if they want to rent an apartment whatever they want to do. I it's not a direct discrimination to say that you have to
be a resident but there is no statutory requirement for it. Um chapter 41 of general laws does have statutory um residency requirements for certain positions and town manager is not one of them. So, I would not recommend making it a requirement, but as I said, you can
have other things such as hours that they've got to be in the office if you're not going to allow remote working and that sort of thing. >> Okay. >> What are you thinking, D? >> Oh, I I I I do agree with Dan. I I think
that um yeah, we want to get the best candidates and it's upon us during the interview or the the board at the time during the interview process to determine
if they want to hire someone who lives in Wesley or not. I mean, if I don't think that where they live should explicitly dictate them getting high or not. And then the idea of having
close by towns is so subjective. I mean, you could live in Danvers and someone lives in Peody and get to town hall before you do. So, I don't know how we define
those towns around. Um, so yeah, I'm I'm in favor of >> It just makes it difficult. You start putting a radius contiguous. It just either they live here or they don't. And if we require that requirement, it'll
enable us to reach a bigger pool of candidates. I also had a thought where we could think of keeping it with the option of waving by the board. Um that's that's also
>> kicking the can down the road. >> Exactly. We're here. Let's make a decision, >> too. Yeah. But you're right. But no, I'm I'm in favor of removing it, >> Mike. >> Yeah, it was a hard uh no before, but I think um I'm okay with removing it. Uh I
think Sally said it best. I mean, there's communications today. Um there's so many ways to communicate. Public safety people are here are here, so there's no real emergency for a town manager to have to come out at 2:00 in
the morning. They can get here at 3:00 and be all right. So, >> but the first responders are here. >> Yeah. >> And I know that's a lot and I know a lot of people still feel that way from some emails they uh but I think it's just different world. So, I think
it's okay. >> Okay. Me too. I was uh at first thinking about required Olivia, but as we know with the candidate, you know, we don't we want to have open up that pool. So, I would uh I would wait that they don't
they don't have to live here, too. All right. Any more discussion on that? All right. Let's go to sections nine and 10. The only recommended recommended changes are grammatical
um section 9 and 10. Are we okay with that? >> Yes. >> Okay. Section 11. Let's look at that. This section outlines the select board's authority to remove the town manager. The recommended changes include the payment of unpaid
salary at the time of the removal. These changes are summarized on page 12 of the flowchart and pages 12 and 13 of the red line document. So the only thing that there's a section here that talks about
the modification of payment. I'm concerned about putting in hard numbers uh or or this is a contract. the what we pay the town manager in the event of uh
dismissal or or of a of a u a suspension is a contractual obl is a contractual >> uh issue. That's, you know, the town manager may say, "Hey, I really want this job, but if you suspend me, I want payment at X." And I think you're
removing a contractual negotiation point by specifying uh three months or whatever the number uh up to next three calendar months. I'd prefer not to have that there, but
again, I'm offering my preferences and want to hear what the other board members feel. I think it's an important negotiation opportunity. >> I think the current language already had three months in there. >> No, the according this is redlined and
it says everything red line everything in red is added. Yes, but before before the red one on the little chart, the flow chart, they say deleted language that said >> uh
3 months. So the current language >> I realize that what I'm saying is we have an opportunity here to change even language as it is not just this isn't just a correction activity. It is also
not a not a let's get better wording or more specific wording or the recommendations of the committee. We also have opportunities to modify this in a way that's more reflective of the way we want this charter to work. And
I'm saying in either case, I think we should remove the three months and should say um I would change to in compliance with contract contract language agreed upon or something to that effect. I I think that adding three
months is is is I think specifying a number is takes away that opportunity to negotiate with the town manager. um when I when I follow the the committee discussion because here we're talking about
suspension. >> So I don't know how we discuss in a contract, okay, when you're going to do something really bad and we're going to want to fire you, we're going to pay you or not pay you. I I think >> at its discretion
>> having that as a contact discussion is very difficult because we hiring you for all good things. uh the their discussion seems to and maybe Sally can speak better of this than what I saw on DAT. It was that the
way the current language is written, you could dismiss a town manager for any reason, but you have to pay them 3 months, no matter how outrageous the the reason is. And their concern was that the board
needs to have a little bit of discretion into determining, do we really want to pay this person an additional 3 months after they've stolen $5 million? So >> that's cause. >> So >> that's cause. >> That's cause.
This one here says in any cause, >> right? So the $5 million theft happens. And as a select board, I would feel really uncomfortable giving that person another three months of salary. And this takes away that discretion. And it's
also a contractual obligation. They may say, "I like everything you're offering, but if I'm going to leave, it takes the average of six months for a town manager to find a new role in this industry, and I want six months, and we're happy with everything they offer, including
salary." And that's a negotiation point. For cause should be for cause. I I just don't like the three months in there. >> I'm confused. So are you saying that the current text was already a problem?
>> Yes, I am. That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying the changes that the the the that are recommended carry with it something I felt was already an issue. So it's not I'm not saying I don't like the changes. I don't like the fact that it says three months in there
for cause is for cause. >> Mhm. >> And it's also a negotiation point for on both sides. >> We need Kate up there at all. >> Probably um question. What's the specific question?
>> Well, I mean, I'm I'm confused because the current language specify that automatically we will pay 3 months if we dismiss the town manager. The proposed language says
that it is at the discretion of the board. So I'm not sure what the for cause means like or those legalistic words. My understanding of this change is that
if the board deems the suspension or the reason of the suspension outrageous, they could decide to only do one month instead of the whole three months. >> Instead of having it automatically give them three months
right away. or it could be automatic if someone if if you want to fire the person for doing something illegal. Um yeah, you you do want to consider whether you want to put this three months or six month period or whatever it is in there because then you're stuck
with that and you can't you you've got to abide by it. >> Not if we do it at the discretion of the board, >> right? If so, if you take out the m the months the specific amount and put it at the discretion of the board, then that gives you the discretion. Yeah. >> And and and my only difference is to
that point is based on contract similar to what Dan just convinced us about residency. I would think a future board would say would negotiate and say you're gonna if we suspend you three months unless it's for cause
and I would rely on the negotiation in the contract that we set with the town manager to guide that as opposed to putting automatic 3 months no matter what. >> No, it says up to three months. >> That's legal and that addresses both. If it's for cause, then it's at your
discretion. Otherwise, you can certainly put a time limit in there. If you decide to terminate, give the person three months or whatever, except if you terminate for cause. >> But he says, >> that would be fine, too. Either way, I don't think either we add
except, you know, language that says except for cause or we take out the three months as an automatic. And it says up to three months. You're correct. >> Yeah. So, it's not automatically 3 months. >> It could be one month. up to >> it could be nothing.
It could be two months. So that >> I'm comfortable either way. Either remove three months as a number or add cause to this content. And I and I'd like I'd rather add cause to this content. >> I agree with God. Add cause is zero.
>> The door is there. >> Yeah. You've embezzled. >> Mhm. So I just so I understand when we say with cause for what other reason >> could we do a suspension without cause? I'm confused.
>> We can we can meet and decide that time for the town manager to leave without cause. They have there's no reason we've decided as we hire we fire and we would give them up to three months
>> pay. Okay. >> Not cause means just underperforming. Cause means they did something really bad, >> right? >> So, can you do a suspension to you, Madam Chair? Can you do a suspension for underperforming? >> Not a suspension.
>> I don't want to specify it. I don't think you would you want to >> I'm not a labor attorney, so I don't I don't know the specifics of I'm talking about termination. Suspension. Typically, >> we're not suspending. That's different. We're terminating. suspension would be because they did something wrong. Maybe
not something egregious, but >> if it's under suspension, don't come to work for 3 weeks. >> Yeah. If it if it's underperforming, you wouldn't suspend them. You'd maybe put >> Yeah. They've done something that needs to be investigated and innocent proven guilty. But while the the investigation is going on with suspending your duties,
>> we're going to pay you. >> I'll be okay with adding cause as well. >> Okay. So, >> add cause >> add cause to the language here somewhere. >> You good with that, too? I think so, too. Good. Good point. And I just just for clarification, I think Kate and I have it. Um, but it leave out leave in a
time frame or no time frame at all. >> I don't mind leaving the three months as long as we say that we for cause we have the opportunity to just basically cut you off. >> Okay. >> Don't embezzle five. >> Would you like to get up there? >> Sure. um as I recall and I don't have all my
notes with me but we went around and around with this a lot at the committee meetings as well and felt similarly that there should be a different provision if it's for cause or not. Um but I think you know we added that at the discretion of the board language
but what we were trying to do is follow what we understood is in the contract currently. We were basing this language. I I think what we were trying to do is reflect the language in the advertisement for the position >> and in the language in the contract or
the or the draft contract or the then current contract at the time. >> So I just want to add that as a caveat. You may just want to check to see if that's so. >> Yeah. I'm not in favor of tailoring this to a contract. >> But however, cause could be they didn't
follow the contract. They broke the contract. >> But the question is, would you be breaking the contract if you contract? >> If um >> we need the we need the right to break the contract with cause. >> Yes.
>> Yep. I'm glad to hear it's not just a point of deliberation here that you guys also had this conversation. >> Any questions for Sally? Any more? >> Put in cause. >> Okay.
>> We'll see how that looks next go around. >> Go around. Yeah. >> All right. Let's move on to section 13, please. This section, this section outlines additional duties of the town manager. The recommendations in this section requires the town manager to
inform the select board of organizational changes, all personnel changes in litigation. They are summarized on pages 13, 14 of the chart, and 13 through 18 of the red line document. >> Did do we I'm sorry. Did we miss the
section previous to that about receiving such compensation which I'm all in favor of. It's just minor changes. >> 12 is not substantive. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Yes. >> I just want to make sure we're being thorough. That's all. >> Okay. So, back to 13, which is special powers. >> Yep.
>> Superhero powers. >> I'm I'm very comfortable with what's here. Um I think on this section 13A uh we're going to revert back to uh the the co we they cost out
accountant. So we're going to put it back cuz we said we we retaining that authority >> with the possibility of having the town manager do it. So that language should go back.
>> I'm sorry. Which section A? 13A page 13. >> It says delete town accountant. >> Yes. So we we we're going to unddelete it. >> I and I think this is where we differ. I still think she has the ability to I
keep saying she the town manager has the ability to structure >> department >> departments, commissions, boards. >> I want to keep the town >> in a manner that is >> best for for the town manager structure. >> Okay. It's just a appointing and
directing are two different things. And I support I I I I would I would in I would I would say she has the ability to appoint the town accountant structure and the financial structure however she she wants.
>> Okay. I may madam chair for clarity further along D it there's a section you'll come up to it later um where it would have added the accountant as an appointee of the town manager so what you what I think what you thought you read there so you'll see that later okay
>> so we would correct that to be consistent with your recommendation previous okay thank you >> Dan >> okay >> you okay Mike >> it's okay yeah >> I'm sorry on section
The last sentence says the town manager will notify select board of such change. Is that nec is the language in the charter necessary? We expect the town management role to always notify us of changes and so on and so forth,
>> right? But I think it should still stay stay there because I think we had some examples last time where people weren't notified about some things. So I think we should leave it.
>> Then the question about notify is prior to or after and I don't want to get into that whole >> swamp. >> So we're looking at B. Do you see that? >> D. I'm okay with living.
>> Dan doesn't have to notify us before the the change. It just once there's a change we should be notified. I guess that's >> fine. I just think it's redundant, that's all. >> All right. So, let's go to C. Did you
see C? Let's look at C. >> And on D, the last sentence and power measure will notify the select board of by composition of all town employees. That happens as a natural
um town. We get that report automatically. We are asked, we are given the management compensation plan and every employees salary is a matter of public record.
I'm I again I'm I there there's a opportunity to streamline the language so there's no potential ambiguity and taking that out. Leaving this here is yes, it's absolutely okay, but it's also a
it's a provision of the job. The job is you've got to tell us what you're going to be paying people and actually you have to tell the public what you're going to be paying people. So is it redundant? >> No, I think keep that again too because I think
we have some examples at the end of the last term where some people got raises and we didn't find out about it. So >> if I don't know when that occurred unless it was the year I wasn't here because if you if people got raises >> if people got raises that you didn't
know about >> that would be an issue. Yeah. >> But I would >> find it hard to believe that the management compensation plan that's presented. >> I wouldn't have enumerated that but okay. It's a matter of public record. Mhm.
>> And you went to D, but I wasn't quite sure what C the letter at the end of C there. >> C. >> I'm not sure what it really means. >> Collective bargaining. >> Yes. So, what what >> Sally,
>> what are we adding there at the >> I'm sorry. >> 13C page um >> 14. >> Sally, please. >> Well, she has a different page number. What what was your the question particular >> 13 C >> page 14
>> uh what was the rationale of adding that language at the end >> that the town manager shall notify the select board of every such appointment and removal that language >> yes and even before that unless otherwise provided in any applicable
collective bargaining agreement I'm not so what are we trying to achieve >> well the the language of this section says that The town manager can appoint based only on merit and fitness. >> Yes. >> And can remove
>> um officers and employees um except as provided in chapter 31, which is the um civil service statute. and um and but the town manager, if you're not civil service, the town
manager could remove could could fire an employee um on 5 days notice. And then we added unless otherwise provided in a collective bargaining agreement. If if the employee who was being fired was uh part of a collective
bargaining agreement, the collective bargaining agreement would dictate the terms and uh conditions of any discharge of employment. >> The current practice like I'm sure we have employees that are part of the collecting bargaining.
Now, what happens if they have to be dismissed? >> Well, I would I would assume that if an employee was being dismissed, uh the union representing that employee would challenge the dismissal. Um, so this is really just trying to recognize within
the within the town manager act that the collective bargaining agreement would supersede the town manager's ability to remove somebody with 5 days written notice. >> Okay. >> All right. Because there might be a civil service hearing. civil service. Civil service would be one set of rules that would apply
>> and then there's collective bargaining agreements and then there's some employees that don't fall within either of those categories. So, it was really just a way to try to fold in recognition of collective bargaining agreements um setting forth what the obligations are to terminate an employee
>> because I think it sound it seems to me that adding that language we we taking some of the town manager authority away. uh because now they have to like >> some of it is already taken away by the state. >> Well, not so much by the state but by
the collective bargaining agreement. So, let's say um let's say a collective bargaining agreement said that um required that uh before an employee could be discharged, they had to be given a um an a potential
uh what are they called? PIPS, an improvement plan. they had to be given three months to to um meet expectations that have been set by the department manager or something. Well, the town manager would have to abide by that. What's in the collective bargaining
agreement? The town manager wouldn't be able to just discharge that person with 5 days written notice >> and it wouldn't be and it's true that I suppose one could look at that as taking away the authority of town manager, but that provision in the collective bargaining agreement was bargained in
exchange for other things. So it's it's it's too easy to say, "Oh, we gave up some authority." It was usually a a concession that was made to to gain something else in the course of bargaining. >> So if that was already taken away in the course of bargaining, is it redundant to
have it here? >> Well, I I suppose you could you could you could argue that it is. But what we were trying to do is since there was already an exception in the old language, the current language for civil service, we thought the recognition of collective bargaining agreements that
should be here too. >> That's important. >> Okay. >> I think that's important to recognize that. >> Yeah, I support that. I support the line the change offered. >> If we're on section F,
I have a concern. It's the top mind top of page 16. Uh may be required by the select board uh at least monthly. Um a okay a report of operations. You struck full and you struck all
operations I think is good. Why are we setting a time frame of at least monthly? We get a we get a town manager update at every select board meeting. It is the salient operation changes. We It doesn't speak to every operation
change. We didn't we don't hear at these meetings what's the next road paved, what's the next telephone pole replaced? It's the salient thing. So, I'm glad they removed full report and all operations. But is there a reason to put in the
words at least monthly? >> I would would another town manager change it the way it's operating now. Is that why it has to be >> the town manager works at our discretion and if our discretion is that we ask that town manager to report monthly or every meeting or whatever it is that's still us managing the town manager
>> but does this also force that behavior by the town manager as as well as us does this just back us up by saying at least monthly >> I'm just wondering if it's necessary and again I'm trying to get rid of
unnecessary words just I don't want to call them fillers. >> I think I I I understand governor cons select board member gardener consent here. We we don't meet in July for example. So if we have a report in June
and another one in August, are we then violating this act? So yeah. So maybe because here's why we have the >> we're all doing it together. >> Exactly. Right. So we all we have the
discussion of getting a port daily if we choose to. >> So maybe the monthly is not necessary. >> And right above it it says shall render as often as may be required by the select board. >> Yeah. >> So is the words at least monthly necessary?
>> It's not. >> Yeah. I >> it's not necessary. >> I agree. We probably don't have to set that. So the consensus is I'm hearing the consensus is we can remove the at least
monthly language. >> Correct. >> I'm I'm helping Kathy. >> I'm sorry. I I had to step out. >> It's all right. And >> I got this was an easy one. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> I'll try. >> And I hate to be nitpicking like I said
it last time, but I got a rare compliment from Mark to say, "Yes, this is a longlasting document. We should make sure we make it as accurate as possible >> at least. Yes. 20 years. >> Mhm. >> He said 10, but that's okay. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Are we all good with that? >> Yep. >> So, let's go to section 14. >> Section 14, 15, 16, and 17. The only recommended changes are grammatical. >> Oh, you see that? >> Wait a second.
>> 14, 15, 16, and 17. >> You're right. You're right. All grammatical. >> Okay. Everybody good with that? >> Nope. >> Dean. >> Okay. Page 17. >> Page 17.
>> He's back on section 13. >> 13. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. Okay. I get confused with this blue section 17. >> There you go. I had it I had it right
the first time. So um town man have the authority to prosecute, defend, compromise all litigation blah blah blah and the judgment said town manage may be necessary the town man shall keep the select board informed regarding any such
legislation and I'd like to add in there in a timely manner. Now I realize we took month out >> above but here litigation we should be notified in a timely manner and that would be at the discretion of the board
if that information was given to us in a timely manner or do we feel that it went too far before we were informed without getting into specifics. >> I like the concept of timely manner. I would actually like to say when filed
with updates. I'd like to know as soon as the town manager feels that they have to litigate something. I'd like to know. I'm not asking for approval authority. I'm just saying >> well litigate. There's also the um the
need to investigate. Do we find out about the investigation after everything's done? Should we be told that earlier? Granted, nobody's guilty till the pro nobody's guilty until proven otherwise. But I just think we need to be informed
of any litigation in a timely manner and the board will determine when it's given to them if that was timely or not depending on the situation which I can't anticipate. And >> but I guess I'm worried about the subjectivity of in a timely manner.
Yeah, >> that's all. I'm just worried about the the legal ambiguity. >> No, I understand. And the presentation from the manager would say because of a need to keep it confidential. Um, but now we're going to tell you and here's
what's going on. At that point in time, we can decide if that was if we were informed in a timely manner. Because you're right because right now the active practice is on a regular basis at least annually if not more we get an update on what litigation
>> those litigation I'm talking something more egregious not the normal yeah >> run-of-the-mill lawsuit >> I think by adding the time we're adding a level of subjectivity that could cause problems cuz timely
manner for you might be too late for me. >> It's up to the board, five of us. >> That's correct. So, uh, that will it it adds because I might think one month is timely. You might think >> we're not talking about normal run-of-the-mill updates.
>> You're talking about >> would would our attorney have an opinion on >> litigation? And this was for the town council to you, Madam Chair. Another thing is depending on the sensitivity of the subject matter we may not have to be informed.
>> We should be informed on a yearly basis on most of the litigation any litigation but there are certain personnel issues that's a different story and that's what I'm referring to. >> Yeah. Right. But as because we are the manager
of the town manager, we should know of the town manager's actions. I I agree. I I agree with you, Dan. I think there are there are specific ones that we should know about early on at the time we file this. >> Let's get legal opinion. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Unfortunately, this is really more of a policy thing. There's no legal requirement by which the town manager would need to inform you. A timely manner is is typically the language used. I can see where that's vague because you're you're right. Timely for one person might not be timely for someone else.
>> Timely for the board. >> There's so many different >> right timely for the board. But again, how do you quantify that? But um as somebody's already suggested, there are there's litigation and then there's, you know, investigations of very sensitive nature that maybe uh the board can't
know about right away or maybe the board should know about right away. You you can't generalize. So that's why a timely manner is what people typically fall back on. I know I'm not directly answering the question, but it's not a legal thing so much. Um, again, based on what I'm saying that there's litigation
where the town manager might decide that to to sue or defend or may have to defend against a lawsuit regarding money, but then you might have some kind of a claim against a town official that's of a very sensitive nature. And that might have to be um done a little
bit more discreetly for some time. And maybe maybe depending on who's the investigator, maybe it's not something that the town manager would be authorized to share with people right away. So that's why >> we're not saying right away though. I'm not saying right away. It's in a timely manner,
>> right? That's why you sort of fall back on in a timely manner >> and it's a policy >> because it's such a broad. >> I'm okay with that. Thank you, Kate. >> So we're adding we'll add that. Okay. So, we are on to >> um and I'm sorry and I did not send this
but section 17 um I just had a quick question on page 19 if for any reason a vacancy occurs blah blah blah. Uh the members of the board of health appointed
uh shall organize for the proper conduct of their duties and should possess all the power and right and should be subject to all the duties and liability confer or imposed by um by the
law upon board of health of towns. But in the performance of their duties, they shall be subject to the general supervision and direction of the town manager. I don't know if the word gen
and this may not be for now but the use of general supervision there was is so vague and I don't know if that was purposefully left that way because I know local board of health are also subject to mass
general law of some of the things that they have to do. Can can we be a little more specific as to what the role of the town manager is as far
as the board of health is concerned and if the board of health wants to do something and the town manager oppose it and is contrary to mass general >> I think that's why it says general supervision. >> What does that mean? It's wide open.
>> Above it, it says you have to comport to the law first and foremost. So, you have to comport to the law. Right above it, it says exactly that. You're you're you're a board of health member is compelled to follow the law. So, if the law happens and and and you want to
enact something that is within the law, the town manager could not say stop. However, your general management things outside that legal definition or I don't want to say restriction or or you know
condition is they may say I want to have a board of health meeting every two weeks. I want this is a this is an issue where we're having a rise in whatever. I want more. I want your board to do X.
It isn't in the face of the law. And I think you're covered by what you're saying. Law comes first, but the town manager has general management. That doesn't supersede law. >> Okay. >> That's how I read it. But if you feel differently,
>> do we want legal opinion, Kate? Please. >> I would concur with that description. Chapter 111 is the the main statute that governs boards of health, as you alluded to. Um, chapter 30, chapter 111, section 31, for example, allows them to adopt
reasonable rules and regulations, and they wouldn't do that under the supervision of anyone but themselves. Exactly. >> But they could have they could be supervised for procedural things by the town manager. So that's why it says general supervision because she's not going to monitor everything they do.
They can unlike other boards that have to have public meetings on their boards, boards of health are allowed under that statute to adopt rules and regulations with because typically they're dealing with things of um a pretty important nature of public health and safety. Yes. >> Um but general supervision means, you
know, she wants them to have regular meetings or she wants them to do, you know, to to come in more often when there's a certain issue happening in town, that sort of thing. >> Okay. Thank you. Good. Ghana Dan. >> Yep. Fine.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um, did we say section 14, 15, 16, 17? We said was for grammical. >> Okay. >> Right. We're good with that. Let's go to section 18.
This section is about the board of assessors and the recommended changes are essentially grammatical. Look at section 18. Good with that. >> Good with 19. >> We're good with 18. >> Yep. >> Okay.
>> Section 19, 20, and 21. The only recommended change is a grammatical two. >> Yep. >> Okay. Mike. >> Yes. >> Okay. Dan. >> Yes. >> Okay. New section. Um, this new section is recommended by
the review committee and establishes the town manager as the appointing authority for the town accountant. The summary can be found on pages 1516 of the chart in page 23 of the red line document. >> I think this is the one I was referring to earlier.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Based on strike that whole thing. >> Yes. Strike. Yep. section 22 and through 32 >> discussion. >> I'm sorry. Before we move on striking
the whole thing, >> I think an important section here to speak to the concerns people had is the second half of that said town accountant shall be subject to the general supervision and direction of said town manager. That's what we were trying to
say. We appoint town manager supervises. So, but if you're striking the whole thing, you're striking the whole thing. and Garner or sorry me madam chair. >> Yes. >> Um I think that's goes back to that paragraph in 13A. Yeah. So they all
coordinate. >> I just happen to like that language about you having the authority to supervise. >> Yeah. >> While we maintain this authority to appoint or delegate. >> Yep.
>> Section 22 through 32 for me at um changes. 31. >> Oh, I'm sorry. 22 to 32. >> Well, there was uh in section 28, which actually is now back to 27.
You just have to modify the the discussion about is the there's a uh the town accountant as CFO, does they still maintain that in the is that still appropriate or accurate? Is that legal? Right.
>> CFO date on >> uh section 20. I guess it was the old 26 page 27. >> 27. >> Um Oh, it's just grammatical. I apologize. It's grammatical. I apologize. >> Pages of that.
>> I apologize. >> All right. And then did you review the other sections, Gardner? Uh section 35 >> 33. >> Um >> let's go to >> Okay, fine. You said the Okay. >> Section 33. The section is related to
the finance committee. The recommended changes are mostly grammatical and are related to the terms of the first finance committee appointees. The changes are summarized on pages 18 through 19 of the chart and 30 through 32 of the red line document. Um, I think
you've uh there there was one ahead of that. Um, >> I don't think so. >> Oh, no, no, no. I had a comment on a section ahead of that. You We kind of 30 page 29 because I'm losing track of what
the original sections were. Page 29. um to the uh the town manager shall also submit to the select board a statement showing revenues received by the town and the town manager shall report to the select board the probable amount
required to be levied and raised. Um, I'm trying to figure out why I why I noted that, why I circled those >> on section 33. >> It is the original 31. >> Okay. 31. Okay.
>> Yep. Uh, I I guess I'm all right with that. Never mind. I'm I'm okay with that. It's these numberings are screwing me up. The Yeah. >> Um, >> okay. Madam Chair, thank you for being patient as this was a difficult thing to work through with all the changes, right? So, >> so I apologize
>> for getting there. >> Okay. So, >> which page do you want to be on now? >> We're going to go to the new section recommended by the review committee requires this act to be reviewed every 20 years. >> So,
what page is that on? uh page of the the document you're looking at >> 33 >> 33. >> Okay. Um >> did you >> um so actually before we get there back on page 30 the original 33
it appears that this is redundant to section nine of the town meeting act and do we need to enshrine it here? It is almost word for word the town management the town meeting act section nine and it's not actually a town manager duty.
It's it's a definition of the finance committee which is in that other document. >> Mhm. >> Is it redundant to have this here? Is it actually appropriate to have it here? It's not a town manager. It's not
a town manager function. It's >> Can you just repeat this section in town meeting? >> Sure. >> Page 30, the original section 33. >> Y >> is redundant to section nine of the town meeting act. >> So if we were to look at section 9 of town meeting act, you can go back in
this document. Um you would find that it's almost uh which starts on page 11 of the first part of this book. >> Are we really gonna get that? >> It is exactly and it is the same language. Well, it it is the there shall
be a finance committee consisting of here. There shall be a finance committee consisting of I'm saying in the it belongs in the town meeting act. It doesn't belong in the town manager act.
>> Was my thought process. >> Sally, do you want to comment on that please? >> Yes. Thank you. uh that language appeared in both acts as we reviewed them. Uh we the committee members question too why it's in both
places and though I don't know the answer it is in both places. The finance committee is unique to the town in that it and it works very interactively with this board and the town manager. Um, I
suppose for that reason to me it seemed appropriate that it be mentioned in both acts. Whether or not it has to be, I don't have the an answer to that. But in the two acts that were that we were uh given to review, there's language that
very they were very similar. Uh there was a sections of the town meeting act and sections of the town manager act which both dealt with a nine member finance committee to be appointed by the moderator. So uh I couldn't tell you
historically why it appears in both acts but it does but because of the unique role it plays. I could see that it that it could be one could argue that it should be in both places. >> But and I understand exactly your reasoning. We don't know why originally it was there. Mhm.
>> But if it is going to remain, it should be an exact mirror in both documents. >> Yes. I I I one one thing I would say, and I don't I'd have to I don't remember now if they're exactly the same or what what ways they're different, but one thing that the town manager act does, of
course, it deals not just with the town manager, but with all of the different appointments that the town manager has to make, all the different department heads, etc., etc. And all of those departments have to work. One of the biggest jobs they all have is working with the town
manager to create every year's budget and the budget requirements are really stringent. He has to give not only what what's happening in the current year but is it two years prior or is it five years prior? Anyway, very specific stuff about what has to be in that budget and
it affects every person that's appointed by the town manager and that alone could be reason why the finance committee should >> there lies the difference. The finance committee is appointed by the town moderator, >> not the town manager, >> reports to the town moderator and does
not is not a participant in the creation of the budget, >> right? >> But a reviewer of what is being asked in the warrant, >> right? But it's being asked through the hard work of the team that includes all those department heads. So, it's up to you. I mean, it's it's not
it's not something that's up to me. It's true. It's redundancy and it's in both places. And you got to think, why did those people way back in the 40s and the 20s put it in both acts? I couldn't tell you. But >> I'm not going to question those people. >> I am. >> I'm going to question them only because
there is nothing in this section that the town manager affects. The finance committee is outside the purview of that town. >> The town manager, the the finance committee can request any and all records in their deliberation and they would need to go through the town
manager to get those records. as part of the town the town meeting act. >> I think I'm okay with leaving it in this section because the paragraph after describes some of the functions of the
finance committee. So it will make sense that prior to saying this is what the finance committee is going to do. We can in this act so someone doesn't have to go to the town manager act to the town meeting act to find out what the finance
committee is and then come here to see what they actually going to do. So having that definition here and I wasn't there in the 40s but if I was there it would make sense that we define it in this document since we're describing
some of their functions in subsequent chapters >> then I would suggest that either you if we agree that it should be in both then I would think we would agree that it should be the same language in both. So we'd have to review
the two side by side, >> right? >> Or or take the first part of the language from the town manager act and town meeting act >> and you can say something to the effect of section 33 as described in the town meeting act.
The finance committee has certain powers and then extend it. If you put the narrative all questions pertaining >> I wouldn't reference the town meeting act. I'd keep it in the town the manager act. So I guess >> it should be the same, but I have to review it to make sure it is. But >> so hearing the hearing the thought
process, I'm wondering if legal counsel has a a thought on >> I'm up here already because I had a comment I wanted to make if I may. Madam Chair, uh and I'll defer to Chair Calhoun as to why it's in both. Um we don't really know why, but given it a
quick look, it's much longer in the town manager act than it is in the town meeting act. It starts out exactly the same in the first paragraph. So, you just want to make sure if you vote that you want to keep it in both. I I agree with um Select Mr. They've got to mirror each other or at least one should refer
to the other and they're not exactly the same. They start out exactly the same, but the town manager act it goes on much longer than than the provision that's in the town meeting act. >> Okay. >> So, I think >> we'll compare the on the intent. The
>> Yes. Okay. We get it. Thank you. >> Okay. All right, let's see. So, with that being said, >> all right. Um, >> um, do we want to discuss the recall or
table it? >> Section 36. >> Section 36, the new one. >> Oh, okay. the the the time we need to use to do we do it every 20 years. Oh yeah, the time. What are we going to what what uh
>> Oh, I think we decided to keep 20 years on the other. >> Did we say May >> or did we leave shall? >> I think what we discussed in the town meeting act similar language but my concern was
determined by a vote of the town meeting members. And I think if I recall correctly, I made the argument it should be determined by the select board. And I think that was a I think that's something we agreed should be changed. >> Well, >> yeah. Could you could you remind us what
we said in this in the town meeting? >> I've been spending a lot of time in these documents. >> Um, so my notes and uh Kathy and and um and Kate both have their notes as well. My notes suggest that you requested
language that may be within 20 years. Town meeting can slash should initiate a review but select board should determine the process. So so they it can be asked by town meeting basically what we said but at the end of the day you got the select board someone who says yes and
we're going to appoint a committee and this is the time frame and >> yeah so basically the last three words of what's being added here we suggested was a select board authority y >> not a town meeting authority that's the only change I would make. I'm fine with the 20 years and shall may doesn't matter to me.
>> Yep, that's fine. >> Yes, I'm okay. >> Mike. >> Yep. >> Um Cal Sally, yes. You have something to say. Thank you. >> Just just one excuse me, just one quick comment to that. Um
I don't think this came to mind at our last meeting talking about the um town meeting act but the last sentence in both provisions about review of each act says the review will be conducted in a manner as determined by vote of town meeting members and I know last time and
tonight you're talking about changing that to being that it should be as determined by vote of the select board but as I recall one concern during our meetings that was disced discussed and it's up to you whether or not you agree
is that town meeting is the legislative body of the town. The town meeting members could say, "Hey, we want to change these acts. Let's get a review going right now and not need to come to the select board to have you
agree with them that it should be town meeting the voters of the town, the elected representatives of the town to decide it's time to make a change. And you I'm not saying this could happen with today's select board, but can you imagine a time when town meeting members
are hot to change something in the uh town meeting uh act and the select board doesn't agree with them and says no, we're not going to we're not going to review it. You guys go home. So that is kind of it's like the people the representatives of the people saying
it's time to review and change and and this is how we want to do it. and they felt the the committee felt that that should be within the authority and power of the representative voters of the town um the representatives elected by town
as opposed to the select board making that decision. I just wanted to add that little excitement into this question. >> Sure. >> I think I think that uh you're right. I think that the only thing select board member Gardner was suggesting was that
the manner of the review is the authority of the select board. >> Right. >> But the the request or the the review itself is still dictated by town meeting. Am I correct? >> I I agree with you. The town meeting has say initiate this. We want you to do
this. The methodology and we we wouldn't ignore a town meeting request to initiate a process. The methodology of conducting that process is ours. The mechanics of it is ours.
And I would actually suggest that, and maybe I'm wrong, we're the legislative b we ask town meeting to approve those legislative changes we put forward. Town meeting doesn't create warrant articles. >> No, they don't create warrant articles.
They se warrant articles are created either through citizens petition or through the process of town manager presents selectment approve or selectment ad goes to fincom goes onward or the ZBA or whatever it is that has
done that work they are the approving authority of the of the legislative changes we ask >> I I I don't know it's so late if I can make this argument very effectively Yeah.
>> But if you look for instance at um at the Mass Municipal Association website, form of government language. >> Mhm. >> Uh talk about a town meeting, representative town meeting or an open town meeting is in fact the legislative
branch of the government of a local government. The select board or the city council, the mayor's office in other forms of government, they're the executive branch. Okay. >> Now, I don't I just don't have it in me with all the nuances of the differences
to to get very specific about that argument. >> I can understand that. I can I'm not going to I can You're right. >> When we have Kate Town meeting is the legislative body period with the executive >> and it's true the select board uh drafts the warrants with exceptions for uh
citizens petitions and it's true the finance committee reviews all of them and makes the opening motion on each warrant article etc etc. But it's town meeting that has this really significant important function. >> But similarly the what I'm saying is the last part is who defines the process.
Not who defines what's going to be talked about but who defines the process. And I think that's on us. >> That's Kate. We got to believe >> that's correct. She's correct. City form of government, city council. Uh and that can include a town that has a city form of government like the town of
Barnstable for example has a city form of government. Anyway, many statutes require a legislative body to take certain actions. So, I've looked at this multiple times and and she's correct that um it's it's either the town meeting or the city council or the town
council if it's a town with the city form of government. You guys are the executive branch, so you're correct that you would define the process, but you're not the legislative body. >> Yep. Okay. And and it's late, too. And I miss So, it's late to and I was speaking to process >> when we bring it back. >> Yeah. and you'll have more time to look
at it, review the language when we bring it back. >> All right. Um, board members, do we want to discuss the recall or table it for future meeting? We could have >> We should table.
>> I mean, the question is, are do we have a sense of a consensus? Are people, maybe the process could change, but are people generally in favor of having it as a warrant article? So if I might
just offer this I'll try to be brief. >> I agree with taking it out of the town me out of this act completely 100%. It requires a whole new petition. I am supportive of going back to a warrant article and I am supportive because I am the original author of this. I did the
research. I worked with town council. I got the language approved. I presented it as a selectman's warrant and at the time the board makeup at that point did not want to pursue it as a selectman's warrant. So a citizen took that language, carried it forward and it
didn't pass initially >> and then a second citizen, Mr. Trainer, took up the language. I want this to pass. It was my baby. And so I because it is a home rule petition, I think it should be presented as a new
warrant separate and distinct from the town manager act and that would be the way I would want to vote and pursue this. I want to pursue this but not it can't be part of the town manager act. >> Okay. Separate. Let's get Kate's legal
opinion on that please. >> That's absolutely correct. I think that's right. >> It's it's got to be special legislation. So it's got to be a home he selectman trust just basically described it's got to be a home rule petition you've got to go to the legislature for special legislation. So it shouldn't be part of the town manager act. So if you want to
do it you don't have to do it but if you want to do it that's the correct route. So, do we want to separate and I I I would I will again ask that the language be adopted as a select board warrant >> and if that's not the consensus
>> then I think it will be followed up by a citizens petition again whether it's Mr. Trainer or someone else >> Mike >> who might feel strongly about it. >> I think so too. >> Yeah. No, I agree with that. I agree with that.
>> Yeah. I'll be okay to look at drafting a select board one and five. >> Yep. >> Uh Dan, >> I'm not making any more decisions. >> Okay. >> Oh, Kathy's got notes for us, right? No more decisions ever.
>> Ever. >> I can count to three. >> Was sure. >> I said yes. I'm going to go with it. Well, >> I mean, we'll bring it we'll bring it back. We'll bring it back. It's going to take it out of here. >> Yes. Okay. Select board. Wonderful.
All right. Um, thank you board members. Let's um the town >> I want to thank legal counsel for all of her >> I knowsight. I know all and Sally and >> Sally and the board and everybody was on that committee. >> Yep. They're all here. Thank you
everybody here staying so late. Great job. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Good evening. >> Thank you. the town. Where are we now? Okay, here we are. The town manager will report to the board on various items of interest.
Okay, >> sorry about that. >> Here tomorrow's okay. You want to just email us? >> I can email you. Um, I will say the one important thing I want to bring to people's attention is um there's a this mass DOT was working on a long-term safety study for Route 114 improvements
and that is open for public comment now. So, I will send it out to the board and we'll post a link on the website. So, um my understanding is people have been following this. So, I want to make sure that um the residents know that that is
open for comment. Um, other than that, um, drop your pumpkins off here to recycle them. It's and please join us for Veterans Day and honoring the veterans on November 11th at 11:00 a.m. at Danver High School Auditorium.
>> And I did send you guys an update on all street closures >> that I received today, so I won't go through them here. >> Thank you. >> Motion to approve the consent calendar. >> Okay. Do I second? >> Second. All in favor? >> I opposed. Terrific. Correspondence,
select board, new business, previous new business updates, and select board closing comments. Gar, you want to start? >> Uh, the only I I've received similar emails to you in uh in support of the uh electronic voting. Uh I don't want to be remiss and not say I haven't I have
received some. Um and then uh all my other emails are internal administrative stuff. Um I do want to wish George Sulto success tonight. He is presenting to the Winnham Select Board his plans for revitalizing the swamp >> already presented already.
>> Well, you're right. By this time he's presented. >> I did I I want the board to know I sent a personal letter of support to the Swanum select board, not as a selectman. Um because I had been there when he did the initial initial and I would have stood beside him tonight except I'm
here. So um but that was a personal note. So that's all I have. Thank you, >> Mike. I'll talk as fast as I can. Um, at the traffic board meetings, a lot of people come in and uh there's a lot of uh talk
about the speeding and uh poor driving in the area. So, um I looked it up and some place on the interweb it said that uh in 1990 there was 133 million cars on the road. Now there's 298 million in the country. So, at least two and a half
times the vehicles. I think that's obvious when you try to drive through town. Um, so the push is that we had back then we had 31 patrol officers. We have 33 now. Um, somehow we need to get a traffic division. If we had solely
traffic people, uh, uh, dealing with it, um, the revenue is insane. and you could bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars with full-time traffic people as well as uh fighting the obvious uh traffic dilemmas that we
have. They could also handle uh accidents and whatnot which would uh allow regular patrol to do the other things that regular patrol has to do. So yes, the push back is that the money is the big problem. So we have to see if we can figure that out. Uh, and maybe the
uh maybe the uh offset would be what they can return to us um if they're, you know, two people on every shift just um doing traffic, not answering regular calls. That's all I wanted to talk about. Thank you. >> Is that a recommendation that should go
to the chief for his discussion? I I don't know that we as a board should be setting a >> there's already a you my understanding is you initiated a um staffing study for the police department already that's that's underway or well the scope is launched and I think the um we've we've
found a >> um a firm to do it. There's essentially only two that do it. So that is underway and I will let you know my update from the police chief today. We will be um we have some conditional offer letters out and we'll be fully staffed for the first
time and I think he said something like 13 years. 13 to 15 years. >> Wonderful. >> Um with these two hires >> and please join us for the swearing in ceremony. >> Yes. >> I think it's on your packets. >> D. >> Uh yeah, thank you. I received the same
email. I said we want um a lot of email in support of the clickers. Uh there was I think two people that town meeting. One said they did not get the survey and another one said they had concerns because they want to keep the tradition
and they don't want to go away from that. So they they were opposed. Um I attended the Harbor Light Homes Housing Institute um at the senior center on October 22nd.
Very very informative. They talked a lot about affordable housing policies in Massachusetts, what's happening, what's in the pipeline. Uh kudos to Alicia, Eron, Henry, and town staff uh for putting that presentation together. If
if you missed it, you may want to have them send you a copy. It was really informative. Thank you. >> Excellent, Dian. >> Thank you. I attended that as well. Um, I'll be brief because but I have a couple of things are timesensitive.
November 7th, the revenue committee will be holding hearings on local tax options that the state will be looking to pass on down. Meals tax, hotel tax,
increasing the state number, and also the ability of towns to add to the meals tax and the hotel tax, a separate item to raise funds. That's on November 7th.
Today I headed east on Maple Street. There was no detour sign. So I continued on to find at Summer Street. Westbound traffic was going through. Bill didn't mention that today at 10:00, but there
was no sign at Vineyard telling me there was a detour ahead. So I had to swing around on Summer Street along with everybody else. There should be a detour sign on Vineyard Street for the uh detour um on Maple Street. And if you see a
vet, please say thank you for their service. >> Yep. That's good. Thank you. And then for myself, I um do want to, like the town manager said, remind people about the Veterans Day ceremony. Thank the uh review committee, Sally and her group again, and Kate. Um the town manager,
the clerk, um everyone. Um, also I saw something uh that our clerk recently was awarded the International uh Institute of Municipal Clerks designation. Congratulations, Kathy Ellsworth. Yeah, >> I guess what it is.
>> Yeah, I kind of Googled it to see what it was all about and uh it grants the CMC designation only to those municipal clerks who complete demanding education requirements. who have a record of significant contributions to their local government
in their community. Um, you know, Kathy adds a lot of value. She keeps us in line. Thank you very much and congratulations, clerk. >> And, um, I just want to thank the board members. This has been a lot of work. It's now 10:06 p.m. Thank you for everybody in the
audience. And, uh, I did receive a lot of emails about the clickers, too, and I'm looking forward to discussing that some more. I think it's going to I think it's good. Thank you very much and good night. Thank you.