All right. Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Community Preservation Committee regular meeting. It is Thursday, January 15th, 2026. We are in the lower level of town hall and available via Zoom. This meeting is being recorded and
can be viewed at a later date on the Town of Dayton YouTube channel. We can all please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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 all. >> So, we'll just start off with uh committee member introductions. I am Kevin Smith, chair and parks and recreation representative. >> Dave Eckerson, atlarge member and
financial representative. Dan Higgins, planning board representative. >> Dale's Historical Commission. >> Brian Sedron, uh, member at Lodge. >> Kathy Perry, housing. >> Thank you all. I think, let me just double check, make sure we don't have
anybody that's trying to get on Zoom. Yep. Uh, first thing we have is review, discuss, and act. Um, approve prior meeting minutes. Now, Elizabeth, you didn't get a chance to send those out, right? Okay. So, we can just >> send them out the next month. >> Okay. We'll make sure we get those
approved for next get them in and approved for next month. Um, so next we have financial reports. Dave, do you want to take the lead on that? If you have anything, >> we don't have any new report there. So we can go with the previous ones. >> Yeah, it looks like I don't think
anything has changed. >> Nothing changes at the Femier except the gradual incoming tax receipts. >> Correct. >> Which have already been >> there was a notice sent out and I didn't get a chance to read it prior to the meeting. I don't know if any of you all did get the correspondence from the
coalition about there was some additional funding um coming in with like matching funds from the state level, but I didn't get to really read in depth. So um sure we can kind of do a little research on that and see exactly what we can expect if it's going to be
more or less than what we usually see um historically over the past few years, what the trends are. So we'll look into that and kind of have that ready for the next meeting. All right. So, old business, uh, just review and discuss the C, uh, CPC project updates.
Um, I think we kind of briefly touched on this last time we met from a from for parks and wreck. Anyway, the Timothy Ryan's playground equipment was installed, the engineered wood fiber was delivered and and spread out. Um,
I think the only other expense that we have there is the creation of like the sign for the playground, which I'm going to work with Bristol Plymouth on producing that so we can kind of get it as inexpensive as possible. Um, and that will be the final piece. And then we
have a surplus of rubber mats that we're going to install, but we'll wait until the spring because that wood fiber kind of needs to settle. One thing I learned with North Titan is if you put it down right away and the wood fiber then settles and they become all chilapy. So I learned my lesson with
that that it's best to let it settle first then kind of grade it a little bit and put the the rubber mats. But we have a surplus of rubber mats. So I don't expect having to purchase any additional mats to cover that area or what we need to cover the areas down there. Um, I
know we had I think the engineered wood fiber I actually just that invoice needs to be paid, but the the original um approved amount for that project was 67,000. Um, the playground equipment install
equipment and installation was 59,576 and I want to say off the top of my head that the engineered wood fiber was like around 1,800 or 2,000. So, we should have like around and then I don't expect the materials for the sign to be more
than a few hundred. So, um we should have like a you know somewhere between a four and a $5,000 surplus on that that we can return back to the committee. Um boat ramp is still in limbo. One thing that popped up in my head and I wish I
would have reached out sooner, but I want to f I'm going to follow up on and I'll report back at the next meeting is um the Broad Nature Trail. I'm not sure where the trails committee is at with that or if any because I think after um
Jeff Cavalo stepped away, it kind of they lost a little bit of direction on what they were going to do with that. So, I think and especially in like accordance with what our guidelines say, just need to follow up and see if that's something that they're going to like actively pursue.
>> They met Monday night. I don't know what they came up with, but >> Yeah. And I don't think they they record their meetings. >> They don't. >> Yeah. So, I don't think Yeah. It's not like we can just snoop and and go back and watch the the YouTube. So, I'll I'll
check in with them. I believe that Rachel Ki is is acting as the chair. So, I'll um I'll reach out to her and see if they have an update. That's good that they met recently, so she probably may have a update um on that. That's all I have as far as from like a park and rec
perspective of what's going on. Uh you have stuff >> the historical commission on our Mount Hope application for the National Register. Um we should have a draft of that by the end of this month from the
consultant. just kind of going through the um the project list to see if there's anything else that pops up that we might have questions on. >> The um any word on grants for the library? >> Oh, so actually I'm glad I'm glad you
brought up the library. Um there we're the original Massachusetts Cultural Council grant was approved. I haven't heard from Serena yet if we physically have received that money. One thing I will say about that project in general
um is that they seem to have squeezed every ounce of juice out of that stone that is our additional funding. um to the point that I think I got a an invoice and I'll print out a report of all of that for our next meeting so we
can all go back and look at at it. Um I I even Mark had emailed me on my way I was on my way down here. Oh, we have one more CPC invoice and it's getting to the point where it's it's like $54 from Home Depot. So like really kind I think they were
really getting excessive with how the funding was. I mean, it's there and we did approve it. However, I don't think there was a lot of diligence done in like making sure that like we really there's not a lot that I would say
there's not a lot of oversight as to whether or not it was truly >> which category >> which category it was intended for. If if that makes sense. Um, >> right. I I mean, at the end of the day, we're still going to we know we're getting 200,000 back, but I think they're leaning towards like almost
tapping into like that side of things. Um, and it was I think if you all remember, it was originally proposed to us that we would like to use some of that funding that we're going to get back, but we're not going to use all of it. And it's been very much every ounce
of it. Um, so I think moving forward, we need to, especially on projects like that where one of us isn't like really directly involved, we need to go back to we're going to approve invoices like and not just blindly sign off on them cuz I
think we could have been a little bit more um diligent about watching how that that funding was spent. I think it's just just that's just my opinion and I just want it to be like kind of said that I think we could have done a little bit better cuz actually we're looking at
that. Yeah. Out of the total there there's like a remaining up until those like one of those last little invoices. The last thing I got from Serena was in December so it's relatively current. There's like 204,12426.
So they had, you know, spent um all of the overage the additional whatund for some reason the original amount is not on here. >> What were we 303 330,000? >> Yeah, something like that. >> So you know they've spent all of that
and it was like dangerously close to like going into the 200,000 as well. So, I just felt like it wasn't presented to us in that way. >> Going forward too, if there's a more definitive way that the money is going to be spent, can we do that? You
know, like this is what defines it, you know? Well, I felt like we were clear in our intentions of how we wanted it to be spent, and there just seems to be like
every little piece that could even possibly fit into the category was >> was squeezed >> was squeezed into it, you know, like and one thing I think there's if I had to be super critical about one aspect of it is
because the way that the lighting needed to be purchased because we wouldn't obviously we're not going to disperse funds until we receive the product cuz that's the way that the town does it. They had the electrician doing the work, order the fixtures, and then once they
arrived, we in like so he put them like on his account and then he invoiced us once they were received. That way he could like put the money up. We never received an itemized list on his invoice of which fixtures, which in
my is a very important part of it because if it wasn't periodspecific, which if I want to be super critical, there were no light fixtures or next to no light fixtures in that period, but
like say the children's room, >> the cloud fixtured, nowhere air period specific. So, you know, say if that was if that was >> like, you know, whatever $20,000, it's just like a probably an absurd number, but say if it was $20,000 on light fixtures that weren't period specific,
that technically would be misuse of CPC funds. >> So, I think Makes >> sense. It does. And I we I think we want to be very very careful of that because >> that's not >> I was on the the building committee and
um when the bills were presented they were already determined which categories they were coming from. So I never thought to really say are you sure >> right >> you know because I figured everyone knew what they were doing. >> Mhm.
>> Never really thought about it actually. >> Right. Yeah. I just I think I feel like and I'm not saying that and that this that necessarily happened where like this was used for that and it shouldn't have been. However, it just feels like there
wasn't enough oversight of the invoicing to like say that we did our due diligence to like really make sure. >> So perhaps on our end it would be that we have to at least see the invoices. Even if you don't have to approve them, have them submitted to you, >> right? Yeah. Because like I was pretty
much what was submitted to me was like the bill schedule and the um like a like kind of a blank like that a blanket invoice that's just showing all right it was $33,000 by the
electrical contractor by the carpenter like so I think detailed descriptions of the work would be more appropriate. Um, >> I mean, in reality, I never thought about it, but >> we should have looked at them and
>> they could call them period specific. And what if they're not and they're already purchased and up? Then what do you do? Tell them to send them back? >> No, no. I mean, no, it just it needs to go from a Yeah, you need they would need to pull from another >> another source
>> source, which they I mean, and there were there were multiple sources there. Um I and I just felt like it was a little advantageous of the use of the funds that were available. >> Yeah. From a sheep point of
>> from a C point of view, you know, >> and I would also look at it that >> it may look like it that way, but also we weren't on top of it either and asking we should have asked for those detailed invoices. Correct. Sure. So >> 100%. Yeah.
>> It's kind of like both sides. So, we take it now and as a lesson learned, >> correct? >> And any project that's done, you ask to see those invoices, >> right? I feel like a lot of what we do is very like cut and dry, black and white. Like, you know, it's like, yep,
that's eligible and that's what you're doing and that's it >> either or is or it isn't. But like something like that where it was such an involved, detailed project with a lot of moving parts and >> new and old aspects that was unique in
the fact that like like you said, lesson learned that we need to at least >> do our due diligence to ask for specific documentation just to cover ourselves, >> right? >> You know, >> because if someone comes back to review that, you know, then the onus is on us.
>> Correct. Yeah. I think really like the two big critical ones are really historical and housing are like the two pieces of what we do that can be like really really um >> specific >> specific in h in the use of funds you
know so just like I said lesson learned and we'll just know that we need to adjust and kind of act accordingly moving forward >> yeah park's an open space it either is or it is >> yeah it's like kind of like yeah you're building a playground all right it's a playground Yeah. You know, or you're
buying a piece of land. It's Yeah. A lot of it is just Yeah. >> Well, even historic like if you were trying to we want if you're buying a property that was clearly a right. It's pretty cut and dry. >> All right. So, next thing I have um on
the old business was review, discuss, and act historical documentation present preservation, which I kind of kept on there. So, that was >> Shah just I just wanted us to have a conversation about it. I believe Dave, you didn't you send over? >> Yeah, >> that documentation. I mean, I haven't
heard anything further. >> I dropped I ended up uh not being able to scan it, so I just dropped it in an envelope. Back up back. She should have gotten it. >> So, Pat, have you had any correspondence with her like on that? >> Not on that. I talked to her like right after our last meeting said to asked her
to look out for it, but I haven't. Um I can make a point to talk with her though on Monday. >> Okay. Yeah. just to follow up cuz I want to make sure I it I know originally she kind of >> needed some assistance and like some direction on how >> to navigate that application.
>> I know she's been out straight to >> Yeah, she's going to get busier. So, >> it's approaching that time of year for the clerk's office that things are going to get busier. Uh, next thing I have was review, discuss, and act the CPC annual public meeting.
I believe, didn't we originally say we were going to do it after this meeting? >> Um, after this meeting >> like it would like I think our original intention was to be like have a regular meeting and then morph into >> when was it last time it was a May meeting, right? Did it?
>> So I think I got to go back. I again I didn't do my due diligence to like look at >> that was a springtime meeting >> and I think I just recall us >> been spring >> I recall us having the conversation though to try to have it far enough
ahead of annual town meeting warrants >> really fired they could >> yeah to kind of get the word out I mean we know what the turnout was previously so sometimes it's becomes more of a technicality than it does like you know this a inspiring opportunity for people
the show. It's pretty much what we have here. We're going to bring our projects and and move on, but it's just something that we have to do. So, >> February would be best. >> Okay. So, if I'll look Leanne did send me all the cuz it's like one of those things that you
do once a year, so I always forget the whole protocol. Um, if the timeline allows for me to properly get it posted in the gazette, do we want to just keep that like post? We'll just do it immediately
following our reg February regular meeting. >> Same night too. >> Same night. Yeah. So like Yeah. We just kind of will, you know, >> in one meeting and begin. >> Yes. Spend a half hour talking about regular business. We'll go into our annual >> Did you do that last time? >> We did it. >> I think the last two two years we did
that and it seemed to work perfectly fine. >> Um yeah, we can kind of just have a session where we >> chitchat if nobody from the public shows up. I think we do need to um set an amount of time that we want to say that
we're holding it. I don't think there's a time requirement, but I I think the first like the that one time that we did it and we we brought some like snacks and things like that. I think we set like a pretty substantial amount of time. It was like an hour and a half and we ended up we
were like so I think that's one thing. So because during that time someone from the public could just pop in >> pop in right. So it's like yeah we couldn't leave early because that just like a public hearing it's like it's from this time to this time. So
>> I would say if we can like >> 45 that's what I'm thinking. 45 minutes. >> Yeah. So if we have our regular meeting from 5 to 5:30 and then we hold the annual public meeting from 5:30
to 5 to 6:15. Somebody wanted oh the other thing I wanted to that way we can kind of just not make life difficult on Elizabeth cuz I do have it as review discuss and act. Do we also want to if the timing doesn't allow for us to hold it in February with
posting requirements with the gazette we'll go to March. So if we can kind of make that kind of motion for time and dates. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> All right.
>> So the motion will be to hold hold the annual public meeting uh after our February regular meeting from 5:30 to 6:15.
if posting requirements allow. If not, we will hold it after our March meeting with the same times 5:30 to 6:15. >> Motion made and seconded. Any discussion?
Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I. All >> right. Thank you. All right. So then next under new business um application of eligibility eligibility Dyon Lions Club um Spratfield seating. Do you guys all everyone got that in their email to
look at? Got it here somewhere. Okay. So Dan actually had sent this in on behalf of the Dyon Lions Club. Uh the project is the Spratfield bleacher replacement. And the project summary, um Spratfield is one of Dyon's most active and visible community recreation assets,
serving residents of all ages for youth sports, walking tracks, as well as events and community gatherings. The existing spectator bleaches constructed in the 1970s of concrete have reached the end of their usable life. The structures now show signs of significant deterioration, including crumbling
concrete, cracking, and outdated safety features that no longer meet modern st safety standards for accessibility or public safety and pose liability concerns for the town. The project proposal is to replace the deteriorating bleaches with a modern, durable, and code compliant system designed to be
determined through engineering review and stakeholder input. Improve accessibility by incorporating ADA compliance, access routes, seating areas, and safety features. Enhance spectator comfort and appearance of Spratfield as central as a central
community asset. Leverage available funding from the Dyton Lions Club available grants and the Dyon Community Preservation Committee. Go down. Just want to look quickly at recreation. So if we if we go down and we look on
the on the um chart for recreational land which is active or passive recreation use including but not limited community gardens, trails, non-commercial youth and adult sports use as a park, playground or athletic fields. Um and
then we go down to rehabilitate or restore which is remodel, reconstruct or make extraordinary repairs, not maintenance to make property function for its intended use including in including improvements to comply with federal, state or local building or
access codes. So and it does explicitly say yes um if acquired or created with CPC funds. Um, so >> it does. >> So the thought process was the Lions
would and I've actually already begun the process of uh talking to vendors for design. >> Mhm. >> Um, conceptual design initially to bring in stakeholders to get ideas because there's many varieties of how you could reconstruct it. You could replicate it
or you could do any number of other things. um including the questions like does it need to be the size that it is for the given use >> right >> I don't know I mean it's something to look at talk to the stakeholders you know how what is how does it actually
get used how big does it really need to be >> um various other questions with the as I said the lions working on the design piece and with the consent of the town and um the town administrator is one of the particip pens in that
obviously. Um, so it's more the construction piece that would most likely fall to the CPC as a request for funding in which case it would be CPC funds that build it. Perhaps not CPC
funds that fund the design, but CPC funds that fund the construction. >> Mhm. >> Or purchase if it's more, you know, out of the box kind of thing. So I think if you couch this under
rehabilitate/restore because it's not wasn't done most likely wasn't done with well no there was no there wasn't >> there was no CBC back then however you essentially creating a new
opportunity for use because that doesn't really you're you're not you're not rehabilitating or restoring what's there. You're creating new access and seating. So it's not like I would say if we if the intent was to
like say resurface it to just make it so it doesn't have cracks and stuff like that, but you're you're really in I would I would couch it as you're creating a new opportunity there that
isn't really currently present. >> Yeah. I think the determination has been made that it's not repairable, right? >> So it does have to be torn down. Mhm. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Um and the um the board has um select men rather have already
said they're surprised it hasn't been condemned already, you know, just roped off, >> right? That is the next step, you know. So, um hopefully we can h that off and have something new before that occurs, >> right? because it's like and it's
essentially unusable as like you said as is um and it has been for quite some time. It's >> splitting hairs on this one. >> Yeah. Well, Dennis, just question. Where where did that come from? That if only
if the land was acquired originally by the CPC. >> It's I mean it's right in the chart from the coalition. >> So you copied that chart right from the coalition. Correct. >> That's for the rehabilitation. This is not really >> Yeah. So it's like >> how about the CPC aspect? I mean the ADA
aspect of it. >> Yeah. Like it explicitly says for rehabilitate or restore. Yes. If acquired or created with CP funds. >> But there was other choices there too, right?
>> So there's >> preserve, but we're not >> No, >> we're not preserving anything cuz it essentially create says to bring into being or cause to exist. acquire does that's like for
land purchase. >> Well, you can't really use the field in the track without the seating. So, you are preserving the use of the land, right? >> No. So, that's preserve would be protect
personal or real property from injury, harm or destruction but not maintenance. >> Right. >> So, like say that the house on water street. >> Yeah. Like we could have had the option like if it was in a state that it could have been rehabilit like we could have
purchased that to protect it from demolition >> to you know protect the historic resource. This one is a little bit >> I guess when you did the playgrounds >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean >> you basically
>> same playground >> took it down to zero and built it back up. It was an existing playground before. for an existing playground afterwards, but everything got removed and everything new got put in and >> it was a maintenance. >> It How would you have described that? That's different. Not that we're talking
about the entire field, but >> I think I couch it always as create because you're adding additional and we did get that clarification at one point. So like North was funny because at North it was essentially became a
blank slate. So, we were clearly creating because the playground equipment had long been removed. And then you're so like I would I would tend to lean towards like this is that same nuance that you're creating a new
opportunity. >> Well, I I'm just wondering if that chart is even really accurate because I'm I'm looking at 44B52 here. >> Yeah. I'm sure they know what they're doing at the coalition, but it seems like to me, like he says, both are
allowed. Both the acquisition and rehabilitation and re um you know, all those good things y of land you acquire and doing the same things for land that you did acquire with CPC funds. It seems like both are
>> Oh, it's like and or Yeah. Here. Okay. this for acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration. Whoops. Okay. Acquisition, creation, and
preservation of open space. Acquisition, creation, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration of land for recreational use. Dot dot dot dot. and for the rehabilitation or restoration of open space in community housing that is
acquired or created as provided in this section. >> Uhhuh. >> And then it says provided blah blah no not used for maintenance and uh further on down again it's prohibits artificial turf and uh the
definition of recreational use doesn't include stadiums. That's what I was worried about making a snow. I think the implication was it was a commercial stadium that they had. >> Right. Yeah. >> Can I ask question why are the Lions Club doing this? Like do they do they
>> um occur? What happened is there was a discussion at the selectman about no longer permit fees for nonprofits in town looking to use town facilities or places for events. Um it got raised at
that point. the Lions presented something about all the things they've done for the town. Um, and Mark Pico made a comment about liability of the bleachers. So, at that meeting, the alliance said,
"Have a problem with the bleachers? We can help. Period. Just let us know what you need." Um, so this is a followup to all of that. And this has been presented to the selectman subsequently to say we specifically want to launch a project and you appoint a town representative to
work with us um to jointly replace the damage bleacher. So that's kind of the history. Um the Lions are also interested because they use that space quite a bit you know for events. So um you know they want to make sure
that it continue to be available for that purpose as do other groups >> right? >> It's clearly not maintenance. >> No >> it's going to be torn down and >> right
>> something in its place. >> Yeah. It's making it usable because >> making compliant and it's not safe in general then the code needs to be
made usable. >> It also opens it up if you're doing for um ADA kinds of considerations. It opens up to another whole group of residents that can't access. >> Correct. Right. >> Yeah. And that's why like to my point, you're you in my opinion, you're
creating something that is non-existent like where like again if you're resurfacing it, you didn't increase access to anybody. It's just it is what it is. It just looks nicer. Then we could probably essentially say, well then we're teetering on
that rehabilitate restore. But you're, in my opinion, you're creating. So, I'm okay with that. >> I mean, I think it's eligible. We'll have to see what the proposal is. If they come back with a proposal to, you know, patch cracks, >> then >> correct.
>> Then we have to look at it differently. >> Right. >> Right. >> Expect something really good. >> Well, and there is like explicitly additional language. I don't have it in front of me but about like ju kind of similar to what we're doing with the
trails committee and broad cove is we do have that ability like so depending on what avenue you end up taking with um like feasibility engineering whatever we can clearly support that as well like you know
depending on costs and other factors so I'm good with it somebody wants to make a motion to approve eligibility >> I'll make a motion to approve the elig eligibility determination form of the Don Alliance Club for Spratfield seating.
>> A second motion made and seconded. Any other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I oppose. Nobody. Anybody else have any other new business stuff they want to bring up talk about?
Any public input? We don't have anybody on Zoom. So that's it. So entertain a motion to adjourn. >> Make that motion. >> Let's leave. So much fun. >> Is there a second?
Second. Motion. Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? >> I oppose. No. We are journ. Thank you guys. >> All right.