Good evening and welcome to the June 24th, 2025 meeting of the East Law Meadow Town Council. I'll call the meeting to order and ask that we stand for the pledge of 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. Take a brief moment of silence to reflect on all of the events going on both here and abroad. Thank you. In accordance with Mass General Law, this meeting is being recorded by LCAT. And if there's anyone
else in the audience recording, if you could identify yourself. Seeing not public comments. Is there anyone in the public that wishes to make a comment this evening? See no one online or in person. Council comments there. Any
counselors with a comment this evening? Okay, seeing none, town manager report. Good evening, Tom. Good evening. How we doing? Um, so uh as usual, attached are the uh project reports for weeks of June
2nd and June 9th for the construction of the high school and auditorium. Uh just uh wanted to give special thanks to Skanska uh specifically our program manager Rich Laru who uh spends a lot of time putting these reports together and they're they are quite thoughtful and
insightful and are providing a a nice historical documentation of this whole process for us. So uh thank you to them. Uh there was a public service announcement that went out last week about uh construction at the high school. Um, as of last week, that that
student parking lot, turf field, and tennis courts are closed, uh, and inaccessible to the public. Uh, construction will begin in those areas. Uh, both site work and underground utilities. Um, I guess they'll be reopened again in early August, but
until then, uh, those areas are fenced off. Um, and we ask that the public refrain from trying to access those areas, uh, until we communicate that it's safe to do so. Um, so I'm pleased to announce the uh Westcom
team was recognized and award awarded the telecommunications team of the year for 2024. Uh, ceremony was held on June 18th hosted by the Massachusetts Communications Supervisors Association uh, and the state 911 Department. Uh
this rec this recognition is a testament to the hard work, dedication and professionalism of every member of the Westcon team. So thank you and congrats to the whole team. Uh their new trophy case at the new building will have something that they can put it in right
away which is kind of nice. Um and and sort of lastly, I guess I want to wish everybody a happy and healthy Fourth of July. Uh uh certainly a special holiday for the entire country, but uh nobody does it better than the town of Is Meadow. So I hope everybody has a safe
and happy and healthy one and uh enjoy. Uh upcoming events July 2nd, coffee with the town manager. Uh contrary to rumor, I'm not taking the summer off. Uh we'll be there uh in July and August. Uh that's at 10:30 at the COA on July 2nd.
Uh and then uh all of our festivities, but I don't want to steal any thunder. Uh but the Fourth of July parade obviously is the fourth uh starting at 10 at the high school. So uh high school slash uh St. Mike's in that second there. Uh and that's all I have for
tonight. Great. Thank you, Tom. Anyone have any questions for Tom? I do. Sure. Um, I was approached by a resident on Summers Road, um, asking if we received any time frame that Summers Road was going to be repaved. Her concern was she
has her driveway being done and she doesn't want both to coincide at the same time. Right. And last time I had talked about a a scope of work meeting uh, with DOT uh, which I think was supposed to be last week that got rescheduled. So, I don't have an update
on that because I don't think I've gotten an update from DPW whether that meeting happened andor what details came out of it. So, um it will be this paving season as I understand it no matter what. Uh they have to spend because they've been doing work on summer's road
like crazy. Yeah. So, our our crews have been out in front of them uh hopeful hopefully uh as as the contracts are written saving money that we can spend elsewhere. But we're not talking within the next three weeks. So, nobody's talking about getting ours done. And I'm
like, I don't think so, but I said, I will ask and I will report back to you. No. Yeah, we'll we'll have all those notifications uh for bidding and all that stuff that that we'll have to be aware of and all that. So, yeah, no, nothing no details to share yet for
contract for scope andor schedule. And then I think it was on our last meeting, Westcom grand opening July July 14th. Yep. That'll be awesome. Yep. Thank you. Great. Any other questions?
Thanks, Tom. Yeah, thank you. Then under communications, correspondence and announcements, uh there's three things that I have this evening. The first uh we received a letter from I believe Joe Sullivan um in regards to a tenure remembrance being held for
Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Sullivan and that'll be held on Wednesday, July 16th, 2025 at 10:30 a.m. at the Thomas J. Sullivan Memorial Park at South Branch Parkway in Springfield. That was the first one. The second is the Fourth of July parade as Tom
mentioned. So, the council as part of unit one will meet at the St. Michael's parking lot since the student parking lot won't be accessible and there's no on-site parking. So, we'll have to either get dropped off or walk or Uber
Uber or something. Um, and then if we could meet around like 9:15 because the road closes at 9:30 in that area. That'll be fun. That was the second topic. And then the third was uh the town's also holding a
hazardous waste collection day on Saturday, July 19th at the fire station from 9 to 12. And it's for residents only. And if you wish to participate, you can register on the town's website. What is it again? The town at the fire
station. Fire. The date July. Uh July 19th. Okay, that was it for communications. It is too early for our public hearings. So, I would entertain a motion to move
new orders of the day until it's time to go to public hearings. Second. Motion's been made and seconded to go out of order. Any other discussion? It is a roll call since we're on Zoom. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm a yes. Marilyn, yes.
Ralph, yes. And John, I'm a yes. Great. We are out of order. We have no licensing matters. Uh financial matters we have, which ironically coincides with our public hearing at 6:15 uh for the chapter 500 fee, fine, and
penalty schedule. We can do it now. But essentially the overview of this one is as the bylaw committee was going through the fee fine and penalty schedule reviewing the updates that came out of the budget
process, we noticed a few other discrepancies with the storm water fee schedule that we appropriated in the budget last month. And nothing's like majorly wrong. It was just more when you
looked at the description column, it had the old amounts from when we first adopted the bylaw, even though there were new amounts in the right-hand fee column. So, we needed to remove the incorrect amounts from the middle column. So, there wasn't any discrepancy as to what we should be charging
someone. And then the right hand column didn't have per acre listed next to the amounts. It only said per acre in the middle. So, it was a little confusing there. There was also one category, I forget the name of it, that said,
it had a question mark next to it. Agricultural vacant land. Yes, agricultural vacant land. And it was really supposed to be part of the one that was directly above it. And then I think there was one other that it wasn't it was just a bold
formatting thing. It wasn't bolded, so it made it look like it was a line that didn't have a fee, but really it was the header for the fees beneath it. I believe those were the three things that we s
agricultural vacant land. It now has listed zero for fees. And I don't think that's accurate because as Diane Bishop was saying, um, under farms, when there's a V next to the code, like 714V, the V stands for
vacant. And I think the agricultural vacant land should be up above. So it should say farms vacant land because those are all the codes for it. And that way there the rate would be 57
and $59. Let me just find that page again here sec. Oh, right, right, right. Yes, it was supposed to be combined 59, but those zeros are actually not supposed to be there. Yeah, because originally the version
from last year had 57 next to farms and it was crossed out for the new one in FY25. Well, actually for the next year to be 59. Good catch. Funny when you go through it three times and you still
Okay, I think those are the only things that we noticed changes to it. So, if it was the council's pleasure, we could vote on it now or we could save the vote until we do the public hearing. Sure.
Okay, I'll make a motion to rescend the motion made on May 27th, 2025 to approve the proposed FY2026 storm water fee schedule. A copy which which is attached to the motion and is made it part of a part here by reference
entitled FI26 storm water enterprise ratesmended by 26 storm water fee. Another motion or Yeah, we'll do this one first. Okay, motion was made and seconded. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes.
I'm a yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. And Jim, I mean John, yes. Thank you. Okay. And then we'll have the second motion to reapprove, but at the end we'll probably just want to add um with the correction. Yeah. For $15 next to
farms agricultural vacant land. I see. Okay. Um, I make a motion to approve the revised proposed FY2026 storm water fee schedule, a copy of which is attached to the motion and is made a part here of by
reference entitled FY26 storm water enterprise rates in column recommended FY26 storm water fee. The correction of $59 for farming agricultural vacant land.
Great. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, Jim? Yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm Yes. Ton, yes. Ralph, yes. And yes. And just in case that wasn't clear to anyone as well, none of the fees were
actually changing from what we just did in the budget a month ago. It was more just some formatting issues that we noticed that needed some correction. Okay. Financial matters. Done. We'll move to minutes. Motion to approve the 10th open session.
I make a motion to approve the June 1025 open session minutes. Second. Motion's been made and second and to approve. Any further discussion? Seeing none, Jim? Yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. And John, I'm
a yes. Okay. Motion passes. And then the executive session minutes. Make a motion to approve the June 10th, 2025 executive session. Second. Motion was made and seconded. Any further discussion? Um, yes.
After I had sent the correction, Genie, I noticed on page one under in the matter of number one that it says Connie. Same with number two. It was the same correction as before basically. It's just on page one
and I didn't even touch it before. Oh, I catch. Oh, do you want a motion to approve the minutes as amended? Sure. Or do you want a motion to amend those? Let's just make a motion to amend.
We'll vote on that and then we'll vote on the amended motion. I will make a motion to amend the approval with the change on page one under number one and number two from Connie Browers to Constance Browers.
Second. Motion was made and seconded to amend the motion. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. And John, I'm yes. The motion is amended. So now we will vote on the
motion. Oh, Dem. Yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm a yes. Marilyn, yes. Uh, Rob, yes. And John, I'm Yes. Thank you all. Mike Lux is 6:15.
Unless you want to do executive session. Just did. So, perfect. So, we're now back to public hearings at 6:15. This is a reading. So this is
a public hearing at 15th review the proposed amendment chapter 500 fee fine and penalty schedule. And the council members this evening are Jim Leiden, Katy Hill, Paul Jones, myself,
Connor O'Shea, Marilyn Richards, Ralph Page, and John Torsche. And I would ask the clerk to read the legal notice into the record. The East Long Meadow Town Council will hold a public hearing on June 24, 2025 at 6:15 p.m. in the media room of the Council on Aging located at
328 North Main Street. A required second reading of a proposed bylaw amendment chapter 500, fine, and penalty schedule for the purpose of an annual update of of all the fees, fines, and penalties for the town of East Long Meadow. The public hearing may also be attended via
Zoom webinar. Information relating to this bylaw is available for public inspection at the town clerk's office. To view an electronic version of the proposed amendment, please visit town's website for the council. Gina, town clerk, clerk of the council. Thank you, Genie.
All right. And then this evening we had met as the bylaw review committee, the council's subcommittee uh last week to review the changes that were proposed and overall recommended
mostly the same as what was submitted. There was some language that you'll notice in the document that's green that came out of the uh committee's recommendation that was different from the blue and red text that was in the original document. Essentially what was
different, we added the language to the part that was questioned about the waving of fees under the DPW that it would be that with the knowledge of the town manager that only the DPW superintendent could wave the fee rather than just anyone in the department
waving it. Uh we changed the word dump to transfer station under the transfer stations section. Um also [Laughter] changed the
uh transfer station fee from $50 to $60. There was the second uh duplicate mattress line that was just moved up into the first category that already had mattress there. So, that essentially changed the fee from $15 to $30. Fixing the same storm water rates that
we just voted on under the financial matters. Um and it removed the 0007 ALS1 ambulance table row to just be 0. Removed the plus $2 per butter notice
for all of the planning and zoning uh notice records. It fixed some of the headings for the dog and kennel licenses as well since that was kind of unclear in the table. There was an ad of the $3 street maps
for the clerks. And then we did get some clarifications to some of the questions that the council had as well as the subcommittee had. So it was clarified that the storm roer rates are per or not per category.
It was a little confusing as to which the table was trying to refer to before. So as an example, if you fell into the 10acre category and it was $588, that's really $588 per acre. So really at 10 air gears your total was $5,880.
And then there was a question about with the waving of fees if the town had any sort of like financial policy um about waving of fees. And we don't have anything specifically except that the collector does follow the Mass General Law Chapter 60 section 15 that
allows them to wave fees that are less than or equal to $15 in value. And then there was a question at our last meeting as well about the Little Red Schoolhouse where it had a percent per student charge student charge and
Donna had clarified that that it was a charge that participants would pay. So, if they were to pay the vendor like $40 for whatever class or activity was happening, then there may be like a $4 or 10% charge
of that class that should be remitt to the town. And some classes have different overheads um and therefore different ranges. So, they don't treat like a dance class the same as they would a painting class based off of the number of participants and what kinds of
activity may be happening in the space. Um, and she said there was generally a range of like 4 to 40%. That the amount would be. And then what was the last one?
Oh, that was it. I think I think those are the answers to all the questions that we had. So, I think I covered the overview from where we were last time from the first update. If someone wants to start the pleasure
of reading it again for our second time since it is a second reading. Sure. Thank you, Ralph. Well, I'd rather do the front eight or 10 pages than the last. So, um, chapter
500, fee, fine, and penalty schedule. Um we are looking to add in subsection 500-4 which is collector treasurer department fees fines and penalties. Um subsection
500 uh-4 will now be 500-5. We're also changing subsection 500-5 to 500-12. um adding subsection 500-13
which is the recreation department fees fines and penalties and changing 500-12 to 500-14 that is on page one can just keep rolling. Okay, on page six, uh, we have subsection 500-4.
It used to read Council of Aging. Uh, it will now be 500-4 will be the collector, treasurer, department fees, fines, and penalties. Again, directly under that, uh, the subsection 500 uh-4 will now be 500-5, which is, uh,
Council on Aging, Fes, Fines, and Penalties. Um and then on page seven, subsection 500-5 will now become uh subsection 500-12,
which is the public works uh department uh fees, fines, and penalties. And then under under that uh general fees, fines and penalties for the public works department uh engineering inspection rate to our
minimum uh will be increased from $50 to the new fee of $75 per hour plus IRS standard rate mileage. And then under subsection 500, think that should be 12, isn't it? The life cycle.
So on page eight at the top, it should read 500-12. Anyways, um uh under the five-year roadway moratorum, um next right before that, under current
unit costs, um the $4 is now going to be $16 per square foot. Five-year roadway moratorum fee, it's going to go from $2,500 to $3,000, and that's for less than one
year old. Um then $2,000 to $2,500 uh between one and two years old. Uh fee is from $1,500 to $2,000 and that's between 2 and 3 years old. Uh there will
be an increase from $1,000 to $1,500 for pavement that is between three and four years old. And then an increase from $500 to $1,000 for pavement between four and five years old. Um on the next line
um we're suggesting that um the new line read the DPW superintendent with the knowledge of the town manager reserves the right to wave the LCMC or moratorum excavation fees if it is determined to
be in the best interest of the town. Um the difference is we're adding superintendent with the knowledge of the town manager as previously stated. Um then under 500
believe it's -12 uh E which is transfer station uh fees. Um, under item, it'll say residence only, transfer station, sticker are allowable items. And we're going to remove the
dump, um, the word dump. And then under fee, we're going to uh increase it from $50 fee on a yearly basis to $60. Under bulk item, uh, couch, rug, table,
etc., It's $10 per item and we're going to increase from $15 to $30 per item for a mattress or a box spring. And you must also have a yearly sticker. Um, at the very bottom, we are going to remove uh
the mattress, the $30 as it's now listed up above. And then under 500-12 uh F water service fees under illegal hookup to water uh that will be
increased from $500 to $1,000. And then under 500-12 uh G uh which is water, sewer, and storm water rates uh the water standard rate will increase from $4.40 40 cents per
100 cubic feet to $4.60 per 100 cubic feet. The water agricultural rate uh rate will increase from $3.30 per 100t to $345
per 100 cubic feet. Uh the sewer rate uh will increase from $4.74 per 100 cubic feet to $4.84 per 100 cubic feet. Um we are recommending under the next category the
FY25 uh be removed from the storm water enterprise rates heading and then under storm water enterprise rates as we said before they're all changing
and then do we want to read all of these okay um less than one acre Well, you're going to take over as soon as I finish this column. One acre surface.
We're going to remove the equal uh $200 from the description column. And under storm water fee, it'll be $224 per acre. Um greater than or equal to one acre and less than two acres impervious surface.
Uh under the description column, we are removing equal 250 per acre. Under storm water fee, it's going to be increasing from $265 to $276. And the words per acre are being added.
Uh greater than or equal to 2 acres and less than five acres impous surface. We are removing the wording equal to $350 per acre under the description. And under the storm water fee, we are increasing from $365
to $380 per acre. Uh greater than or equal to 5 acres and less than 10 acres impervious surface. Under description, we are removing equal 450 per acre. And under storm water fee, it will um we're
going to remove $465 and it will be increased to $484 per acre. Greater than or equal to 10 acres of imperous surface. Under description, we are removing equal 550 per acre. And under storm water fee, we
are removing $565. It is increasing to $588 per acre. All yours, Jim. Under commercial condos, less than an acre, less than one acre, impervious
surface, striking $200. Under storm water fee, striking $215, adding $224 per acre. Greater than one acre, less than two acres, striker, striking $250 per acre. Under storm water fee, striking, excuse me, striking $250 per
acre. Storm water fe striking $265 per acre adding $276 per acre. Greater than two acres less than five acres impervious surface striking $350 per acre. Storm water fee striking 365 adding $380 per acre. greater than five
acres to less than 10 acres. Impervious surface striking $450 per acre under storm water fee striking $465 adding $484 per acre. Greater than 10 acres improve surface striking $550 per acre. Under stormwater fee striking $565
per acre adding $588 per acre. farm/aggricultural vacant land striking $57 adding $59. Uh next column down striking the question mark and striking agricultural vacant land.
Mixed use parcels striking $75 adding $78. Less than one acre impervious surface striking $200. Next column striking $215 adding $224 per acre. Greater than one acre, less than two acres, impervious
surface, striking $250 per acre. Following column, striking $265, adding 2 $276 per acre. Greater than two acres less than 5 acres, impervious surface, striking $350 per acre. Next column, striking $365,
adding $380 per acre. Greater than five acres, less than 10 acres, impervious surface, striking $450 per acre. Next column, striking $465 per acre, adding $484 per acre. Greater than 10 acres, impervious surface, striking
$550 per acre. Next column, striking 556 $565, adding $588 per acre. Exempt parcels, residential, striking $57, adding 59. Exempt par residential vacant, striking
47, adding 49. Less than one acre, impervious surface, striking $200. Next column, striking $215, adding $224 per acre. Greater than one acre, less than greater than or equal to one acre, less than two acres, impervious surface,
striking $250 per acre. Next column, striking $265, adding $276 per acre. Greater than or equal to two acres, less than five acres, impervious surface, striking $350 per acre. Next column, striking $365, adding $380 per acre.
Greater than equal to 5 acres to less than 10 acres. Impervious surface, striking $450 per acre, adding, excuse me, striking $465. In the next column, adding $484 per acre greater than or equal to 10 acres impervious surface, striking $550 per acre. Next column,
striking $565, adding $588 per acre. under golf courses striking $565 adding 588 page 13 subsection 500-5
striking FY25 in the storm uh water enterprise fund raise heading under the storm water fee striking $75 adding 78 under towers striking 125 adding 130 under vacant industrial striking $47
adding 49 9 subsection 500-6 fire department fees, fines, and penalties. Under ambulance service, BLS emergency and non-emergency transport striking $1,3494
adding $1,43. BLS emergency transport Medicare striking $456.19 adding $416.14. BLS non-emergency Medicare striking $28511 adding $291.96.
ALS1 emergency non-emergency transport striking $255.77 adding $242 even striking uh 7. Jim, I think that was wrong. $2,155
$2,155 77 struck seven cents adding $242 $224 $2242 they're all blending together. Yes. ALS1 emergency transport Medicare striking $541.72
adding $554.73. ALS1 non-emergency transport Medicare adding excuse me striking $342.15 adding $350.35 ALS2 emergency transport striking $3,24463
adding $3,3742 ALS2 emergency transport Medicare striking $7848 adding $8289 mileage per mile striking 300 excuse me $3640
adding $37.86 mileage per mile Medicare striking $8.80 adding $9 intercept fee 300 adding $312. Then under 500-8 library fees, fines and penalties for striking replacement
library cards $2. Then under 500-9, local licensing authority fees, fines, and penalties, we have restaurant all alcoholic beverage on premise. Uh striking $2,200
and adding $2,420. Restaurant beer and wine on premise 1,000. We're striking and adding $1,100. Package store all alcoholic beverage offremise $2,200 is stricken and adding $2,420.
Uh, package store beer and wine off- premise, we're striking 1,000 and adding 1,100. Farmer series pouring permit, we're changing from 500 to 550. Club license is changing from 650 to 715. Veterans Club license is changing from 650 to
715. Then a new application fees, new retail liquor license, new $100. Transfer retail liquor license, new $100. Then under
500-10 B, planning department and C, zoning board of appeals, we're removing plus $2 per notice from each category. 500-12
is reumbered to 500-14 town clerk fees, fines, and penalties with the addition of street maps $3. the header of dog license fees, dog licenses beneath, and then kennel license fees for the dog
ranges that were already previously beneath. [Music] And we have new 500-4 collector treasurer department fees, fines, and penalties. Advertisement fee cost thereof with a reference of MGL chapter
60 section 15. Betterment release $4. MGL chapter 80 section 12. Certificate of redemption recording fee $15 as per Hampton County Registry of Deeds. Demand fee $20. MGL chapter 60 section 15.
Instrument of taking recording fee $105 as per Hampton County Registry of Deeds. Municipal lean certificates $50 MGL chapter 60 section 23 post public notice $5 MGL chapter 60 section 15 prepare
advertisement $10 MGL chapter 60 section 15 prepare instrument of taking $10 MGL chapter 60 section 15 returned payment fee $25 MGL chapter 60 section 57A warrant fee $10 MGL chapter 60 section
15 online telephone payment fees fees unipay check050 Visa debit card $3.95 credit cards online phone fee assessed on a per transaction basis and then we have section 500-13
recreation fees fines and penalties little red schoolhouse birthday $50 per four hours little red schoolhouse classroom rental $50 per four hours plus percent per student charge community gardens full plot dollar community gardens half plot $20 Pineol Birch Hall
$55 an hour resident $70 per hour non-resident Pineol Pine Lodge $55 an hour resident $70 per hour non-resident Pineel Grass Picnic area $45 an hour resident $60 an hour non-resident
thing that it looks like from our last meeting that we forgot to update was spelling out the word resident and non-resident instead of it just saying res- Love you guys. So, it has now been read. It is an opportunity since it's a public hearing if there's anyone in the audience that
wishes to speak at this time on this matter. Okay, seeing none, I'll close the public hearing, public input portion, public hearing. Does the council have any comments or questions or concerns that
help? So, um, on the last page under the little red schoolhouse classroom rental under reference comments, should we put um range like student charge ranges between four and 40%.
Under the comments? Yeah, it's not a bad idea if everyone's in agreement of that. That was the information. And then doesn't have to be done this time, but I'm thinking going forwards. Um, I have a storm water enterprise
rates. I notice that there's many categories with the same impervious surface with the same exact rates. Can we look in the future to do basically like one column that covers
all of those categories and only put those rates in once? Yeah. Just list all the categories that it covers and these this is the rates. I think it'll be a lot easier to read going forwards. Um Jim will appreciate it.
Oh, you got volunteer next year and all. Um I think everything's changed for this year. Maybe that's something just to look at going into next year as as an alternative. That's a good idea. No, that's a good point. I didn't even real I noticed the
same thing as we were reading it and I'm like, "Oh, we just said the same number four times, but I didn't realize it when you're reading the numbers on the page." Yeah. All right. Hey, any other comments? There's none. Then I'll entertain a
motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Motion's been second. Made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Hannah, yes. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, yes. Uh Ralph, yes. And John, I'm yes.
Hearing is now closed and then I will entertain a motion to approve. I make a motion to approve the bylaw amendments to 500 fee fine and penalty schedule as presented. Remove section 10-9 fee and
renumber sections 10 to 310-9 within chapter 310 alcoholic beverages article 2 liquor license rules regulations and fees. Remove section 379-5
license B chapter 379 public entertainment update. Any other reference to said fees in the bylaws necessary? Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? So
as presented um schedule 500 as presented and amended. I'm assuming that's what we're going for, such as the Little Red Schoolhouse, adding those in. Yeah, if we want to be specific, we could amend the motion to add those couple things that we just commented on. And then the only thing
I'm curious about is the sections 310-10, 310-9, um the alcoholic beverages and all as we didn't those at all um tonight. All we've been discussing is chapter 500. So, I understand what these
are. I just don't think the public would understand. Um, these are other areas within our bylaws where these fees are included within the bylaw that we're looking to remove and just put everything into the fee schedule. Um,
should that be done as a separate motion? Um, I'm just not sure. I mean, like I said, it's not something we've even really discussed. Uh the agenda was to discuss chapter 500 fine schedule and not the
other chapters. Do we adopt it here and through the charter review process take it out of the bylaw? We can do it either way. I mean to me they're both related since we're talking about all the same fees, fines, and
penalties. It's the same number. We're just updating the references or striking the references in other related areas, but it's the council's pleasure if we want to do that at a different time. I guess my question is, is the council
aware of all these locations and what the fees are and the portions that we're removing? No, I'm good with that. I'm not. Well, I think if under the s same topic, which is really
what it says, right? If if those revisions were read in the first and the second reading, I think you're okay. Even if you're calling it chapter 500, because if you're changing something in 500, that changes something somewhere else in the same topic. You have to read
them twice, but we're only changing the amount. And in this case, we're asking for all of that language to be removed from those other chapters. Oh, you mean delete the chapter entirely. Not well, not delete the chapter, but delete the
Yeah. Yeah. the letter underneath the chapter. My thought would be again if we were changing the amounts from, let's say, $1,000 to,200, that would be appropriate. But when you're looking to remove the fees from that, I think it should be a
separate public hearing on it. Um, and I think we're already doing this exact process under the bylaw reviewed. Um, I would I would suggest to um make a motion that we amend chapter 500 fee
fine schedule, any related areas for those num for the pricing within the bylaws, but not to literally remove sections out of the other portions, the other chapters.
someone like to resend the motion that they made and make the new one or or again I I'm just asking for discussion. What's I I think your suggestion and how you just worded it would work.
Yeah, that's fine. So, do you want me to resend? I can resend my motion. Sure. I resend my motion. Resend my second Okay. And then is there a new one? It'll essentially be the first part but without the two remove sections and then
and update any other reference etc. You want me to try? Go for it. So I make a motion to approve the proposed bylaw amendments to chapter 500 fee fine and penalty schedule as amended tonight. um
with the two additions that we had that we discussed. Um and change any other related sections within the bylaws pertaining to um
the fees fees fines. Is there a second? I just asked him if he was I think I think I covered everything. Was there a second? Second. Okay. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, Jim?
Yes. Kathy, yes. Hannah, yes. I'm a yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. And John, I'm a yes. Okay, that motion passes. Can I ask something sort of for for operations? Um, sure. The bylaw is now
amended. He fines penalty, correct? Is this effective immediately or July one? And I only ask because I need to buy a dump sticker tomorrow. I wish I was lying. Transfer station. I
mean transfer jeeps. Thank you guys for taking notes. No, I'm just saying if they make it July one. I agree. I guess that was my thought processes for the next fiscal year. These fees, fines, and penalties. I think that was
the intent, but I suppose it's technically effective now unless we Sorry. No, that's a good point. I didn't even think about that. You went quick on the discussion on me on that one. After you guys rescend it and I I Yeah. So, I
just want to make sure operationally that everybody knows what the score is tomorrow morning. I thought our thought process was always it's for the next fiscal year, which I would agree because the water rate really can't change tomorrow. Exactly.
Yeah, I think that's the intent, but we probably should be clear about it in the way we vote on it. And I didn't think about that until and I didn't think about it till have to change that or put effective July 1, 2025. I think we could make a new motion that just says that the y previous adoption of chapter 500
is effective July 1st. I move that the previous adoption of chapter 500 fees, fines, and penalties shall become effective on July 1st. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? None. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, yes.
Ralph, yes. And John, I'm yes. Almost asked me. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Save $10. Okay. I'm gonna wait till July 2nd. Now I feel bad going to chip in for the difference.
Okay, so we now have our second public hearing. So this is a public hearing to approve five $54,200. No, I'm I'm looking at the wrong one. This is a public hearing to approve $28,369
from the Community Preservation Act historic preservation fund account for the planning department digitization project. The council members are Jim Leiden, Kathy Hill, Anna Jones, myself, Connor O'Shea, Marilyn Richards, Ralph Page, and John Torsche. And I would ask the
clerk to read the legal notice into the record. The East Long Leto Town Council will hold a public hearing on June 24, 2025, 6:30 p.m. in the media room of the Council on Aging located at 328 North Main Street to address a community preservation act application for the
Planning Department digitization project. Information relating to this application is available for review by the public in the town clerk's office and on the town's website on the community preservation committee's page. Public hearing may also be attended via Zumo Zoom webinar for the council. Gina Arwetti, town clerk, clerk of the
council. Thank you, Genie. And then we do have the uh chair of our community preservation committee. Evening everybody. Good evening. Okay. So, the committee met on May 28th and we had actually four projects in
front of us. Two of which are in front of you tonight for approval. Um the first one you just mentioned was uh Jeanie's project. She reached out to all the department heads as as is in the application. Planning and DPW have gotten back to her if I'm understanding the process correctly. Planning will be
done first. DPPW will then be identified after planning is done. If this is approved this evening, it was approved by the community preservation committee unanimously because we understand the urgency and the necessity to start digitizing all these records before something happens and they get
destroyed. Quite honestly, makes sense. Thank you for the overview. Then at this time it is a public hearing. So this is an opportunity for anyone in the public that wishes to make a comment or ask questions. Seeing no one in the audience, I'll
close the public input portion of the hearing. Ralph done. Um, no. My question and again I I already I personally have the answer but um are these records deemed to be historical records or are these
just um they're historic like five years old or something? It's it's historical. So when we when we started this project organizing and categorizing and putting the records in you know um better protected boxes we got the um or I guess
I got the historical commission involved and they deemed all the records in there of historical significance which is one of the criteria you need for a CPA application for that. So, so this is like the next step and I did reach out to all the department heads and only planning and DPW responded. Um,
Rob, planning director wants a number of box boxed files done and a number of rolled plans and maps and then Bruce wanted all of his done. So, because of the the enormity of both projects, we're going to start with planning and then we
then go on to DPW. And if I'm correct, after they're digitized, we still have to keep the paper copies. Yeah. According to the state's records retention schedule, this is basically uh easier access to get to them. Um
and then if something were to happen to where they're stored, we have a Well, that's records, right? If happens down there, I was going to make that point that Yeah, we deemed it necessary in case something happens down there and we lose everything before this process is completed.
Yeah. So, I do believe in the past the seller had flooded years ago and many records were destroyed. Um, hence the reason for the necessity of this and I think it's a great project and
I'm all for it. Yeah. But I had to ask. No, I agree. It's definitely important not only for making it easier for folks to find stuff instead of way easier looking around in boxes but also just for being able to have them in case a natural disaster or something else
happens. Okay, there's no other comments or questions. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Motion's been made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any other discussion? Seeing none, Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm yes. Marilyn,
yes. Ralph, yes. and John. I'm yes. Okay. And then I'll entertain a motion to approve. I motion to approve the Community Preservation Act application for the planningization project in the amount of $28,369
from the historic preservation account. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any other discussion? Seeing none, Jim? Yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, yes. And John, yes.
First one is approved. Okay. And it is now 654. So we are plenty of time. This is a public hearing to approve 54,211 from the community preservation act public recreation fund account for the
east baseball field fencing refurbish and replacement project. The council members are Jim Leiden, Kathy Hell, Anna Jones, South Rochet, Marilyn Richards, Ralph Page, and John Torsche. And I would ask the clerk to read the legal notice into the record. East Long Meadow
Town Council will hold a public hearing on June 24, 2025 at 6:45 p.m. in the media room of the Council on Aging located at 328 North Main Street to address a community preservation act application for the East Long Meadow Baseball Field Fencing Refurbish and
Replacement Project. Information relating to this application is available for review by the public in the town clerk's office and on the town's website on the community preservation committee's page. Public hearing may also be attended via Zoom webinar for the council Jr. Quagleti town clerk clerk with the council. Thank
you Jeannie. And we also have and again um the same evening this project came before us. We had extensive discussion on this. Uh the committee, we understand where this what it looks like, but some of these fences are in
pretty sad shape. Um we've got to be it's time I think we invest the money needed now because our field our playing fields are starting to dwindle with the new high school project. We lost two baseball fields. Right now we only have two 90 foot
diamonds in town. One at Lehey and one at um Heritage. These are the fence. These fences are in pretty sad shape. I did look at them. Also, part of the project at at Heritage is to put up protective netting from the dugouts to the to the stands to prevent
fall balls from going into the street and kids chasing them, getting hit by cars, as well as protection for the fans. So, it's just more than a fence replacement. It's putting up that protective netting, which we deem as something that's very important these days.
Great. Thank you for the overview. Then it is a public hearing. So if there's anyone on the audience that wishes to make a comment at this time. Sure. So I'd like to some pictures that were taken. Um the other thing I'd like to add to
that is that um there's no denying about the passion for you sports in Yale. I can assure you that baseball leads the pack when it comes to that. Um we currently have around 300 kids and with the numbers that we're seeing in
T-ball and Pinto, uh it supports the fact that baseball's going to be strong for a long time in East Long Meadow. One of the reasons why we um pres are presenting this as a CIP, I mean as a um BC project is because the CIP is so
extensive and there's so many needs. um that go that that would go before this in the in in uh when you look at the CIP list. Um I mean when I first arrived here, it's going on in my eighth year,
fields were on the CIP 5-year list for East Long Meadow and every year it's been down down. So the last eight years the same the same projects that need to be done on fields just keeps getting moved down the line. So that's we
thought we'd go a different route and present this to the CPC. Great. Yeah. Uh just go with Donna what she said. Uh Joe Williams metal baseball uh president. Um, you know, we've been trying to work on on, you know, getting
better fields for for some time now. And, you know, to Donna's point, we are we're trying to grow this program and we do have, you know, 26 teams in total. Uh, 27 if you include the Legion team right now that I'm also coaching. Um, so the program's growing. We have a lot of
kids. We have a lot of enthusiasm. Um, and it would be nice, you know, I think this is a good step in the right direction to give us, you know, nice fencing, give us some some possibly some, you know, our we had bullpens at Heritage Park. Uh, we would like to put those back. Um, you know, to Bill's
point, also the netting would be good to protect balls from going in uh in Dearborn Street as well as basically going into the woods uh on the back heritage field because we probably there's been times where, you know, we've lost eight baseballs a game and, you know, eight eight baseballs is basically $60. So over the course of
just the season alone, that's $500, $600 plus. So, you know, starting with with repairing the fencing uh and going from there, you know, it's just a step in the right direction to to make our fields better. Um and you know, for that, we we would like you guys to consider um you
know, allowing this project to go through. Great. Thank you for your comments there. Anyone else? See anyone else? So, we'll close the public input portion of the public hearing and if the council has any comments or questions,
so CPC is uh extremely tricky um especially under recreation. So, I took the time to go to the Community Preservation Coalition website. Um, page six to seven. Um, the top line says CPA
funds may not be spent on ordinary maintenance or annual operating expenses. Only capital improvements are allowed. With that being said, I think the repairing of the existing fences and all fall under maintenance. um this is a
normal maintenance cost that should be addressed, should be taken care of. Um whether it's through our DPW, um I I don't think the fund should be used for that. Now, with that being said, the addition of netting, I think
that's a capital project. That's not something that existed. That's something that could be added. Um I think that becomes a capital project, something new. And I would have no issue myself with adding netting and all, but
I do think I mean everything that I've read even from um the baseball association uh second paragraph in addition to the normal repair and replacement work. I mean that just goes to show that these are things I mean and
even in the pictures I mean adding pole to the bottom and stuff that that should be under normal repair. We should be handling this. we should be fixing this as we go along when there's problems. Um, but I don't think I don't think that
use of money is allowed under CPA. Um, I mean, maintenance is completely separate and they're very straightforwards when they say that it's not allowed. Um, again, if they were to amend, and this
is only myself speaking, if they were to amend and come back and say, "Hey, we'd like CPA to or CPC to spend the money on the netting and all," I have no issues with that. That's my thought process on it. Um,
I don't know if anyone else is or if anyone else would like the coalition. Again, I printed this directly off of our So, we pay for the community appropriation coalition. We pay to be a part of it so that they can
give us uh information, updated stuff. And um I mean, maintenance has always been one of those. It's just not allowed. Um again, capital projects and all I have no no issue with. It's 50.
Um, I did read that same sort of thing, but I guess maybe I interpreted it different when I saw the mockup plans and it was talking about changing out and replacing bottom rails. That to me that sounds less of a maintenance
activity and more of a split the capital project in nature. But I don't know. I guess it's a gray area of interpretation. Unfortunately, the maintenance part of this is open to interpretation and I understand what you're all saying, but
we look at it as a safety hazard, too. Kids sticking their hands under those fences and getting cut. I agree with you. Absolutely. It's it's a it's just a it's a gray area. So, the committee approved it and put it in your hands to get your get your No, it's just the way the process works. We had extensive
discussion on this and we're really the committee was really genuinely concerned when Joe brought up the point that there's sharp edges underneath that fence that kids it's just a natural instinct. Ball rolls under a fence. Kids are going to go under go under and get it, you know. But we understand what
you're saying as far as the maintenance because it is tricky and this runs right up against it. I'm not going to deny it. But you know what? Let's give it a shot. I mean, I would say it would fall under a capital project if you were saying,
"Hey, all the fences have to be removed. Four feet's too short. We've got to go six feet everywhere." Um, to me, that's a capital expense. Yeah. Something like that is different. Adding a pole or a bent pole or fixing, you know, a bent fence, that's maintenance. Um
so in in my opinion um assuming it's a maintenance issue then we would um have to assume or presume that that maintenance would have to come out of the DPW budget. Is that what we'd be
looking at? Yeah. Or wreck or uh do you have it on your capital plan? Right. the defense stuff or if it's there's a lot of things under the the overhaul of all of Yeah. So,
yeah, but it is a conundrum because it if Donna puts that on the capital improvement plan, it doesn't rise to the same level of uh priority as many of the other projects that do find their way to
the top. So, if there's never going to be the chance to um fund a project through capital improvement because of the town's capacity just to fund one to
$1.5 million a year, then it seems as though we're penalized by not trying to um attach it to, you know, CPC funds. It's a catch 22 then. But if it's a
safety issue, what what compels us to not take the chance? Ralph is right, but so are you. That's where we and we wrestle with the same thing. The you know, this is our money.
I know I know what CPC says, but but this is this is town town funds and if we feel that these um improvements, if you will um address a public safety issue,
to me that that weighs more than just the fact that it's being interpreted as repair. Yeah. And again, like I said, it's open to individual interpretation. What's maintenance versus a safety issue? Okay, because it it's it's if it's
maintenance, it's going to prevent it's going to make the place safer. It's going to prevent this an accident from happening. So, to Cathy's point, it's a catch 22. We're in we're in a real tough spot here because it's if it's maintenance, then how do we address it? Because it it it will fall it will fall
way down in a pecking order if you throw it in a capital plan. That's just the way that's just the way life is. But I think we have the opportunity here to do something to prevent something serious from happening. And I don't want to say we're taking a
chance because we're not under any kind of a microscope here. But I think if if we were questioned on this and we bring up the safety issue of it, I don't think they would say no. I really don't because there's I've talked to Stuart Signor who is the the chief executive
officer a number of times and he said safety is a concern but safety and maintenance often go hand in hand but he said it's open to interpretation so even he doesn't have an answer he leaves it up to the individual m municipalities to decide how to move
forward question first and then Kathy thanks um I don't know anything about chain link fences is so when I read this it says change the chain link. So to me that's like replacing it not fixing it. So
replace so replacing it is not maintenance. Replacing it is replacing it. So is that different than like maintenance to me would be like to repair it to fix it. Replacing it. It was replace or refurbish. And the way
it was presented to the committee was where it can't be refurbished, we will replace. So there's two things going on here at the same time. And that would be at the judgment of the fence contractor. Contractor. Okay. But
I think they would have to also come up with a solid proposal of what has to be done. The number here is the maximum amount that it would cost just on an initial without digging into going down that rabbit hole. I just have one more question. Um, so to
me, this is like replacement, so I'm looking at it as not maintenance, so I feel like I'd be okay with pushing it through. But my only concern is the fact that I believe something came before us. I can't remember what it was, and it had to do with leaking field, but we denied it because we're not sure what's happening, right? That was the drainage
issue. Oh, okay. Okay. And you know, Ralph was study, right? Well, it was a study, but to Ralph's point, he made it very obvious. It's PVC piping that's underneath the ground along the third baseline that was crushed by some of the heavy equipment that comes in for the
carnival. Carnival. Okay. And it's all clay and it doesn't drain. And then the other thing is I know that we've been you know thinking about heritage and you know revamping it and stuff like that. I mean I don't think it's a waste because I think you know safety issues here. So,
but I just wanted to mention that like it wouldn't be anything that would certainly not a problem in a timeline scenario and I'm not so sure much of the baseball complex is in the heritage design. Okay. I just wanted to check that. My understanding was that's correct and it was the other side of the
park that's going to be taken care of. We're just I mean I think the the direct rec department as well as community preservation wants to invest in what we have and and and you know keep it going as opposed to you know a million-dollar project comes before us to acquire a piece of property because we didn't do
what we had an opportunity to do 5 years ago. Yeah. My question would be, as you said, a child sees the ball rolling and it goes under the fence and child puts his hand or her hand under to grab the ball and
Yeah. gets a, you know, 6 in cut on the hand in some way. It's a tetanis shot. I know that part. But if it's if the if it required stitching, can the parent come out come back
against the town? Anything's possible. I think anything's possible. And in the this society we live in today. Yeah, I think anything's possible. So, first thing I would ask for then is an update on
what sections of the fence are being replaced. um because obviously not all of it is. And if you look at all the fencing around the fields, you'll realize that for this cost, they're not going to replace all the fencing. Um so,
and as far as the maintenance issue, um I don't think maintenance rises to capital projects. Um I think if you take a field the maintenance on a fence is probably 810 122,000 which doesn't reach
capital expense and and a lot of this stuff should be being done in house as as the problem exists. I mean, I remember um a situation with the playset and it's
yeah, it was broken for a year or more until it got brought in front of us and all of a sudden it's like, well, wait a minute, why is this still broken? Um I remember uh Mountain View, the basketball courts, all the backboards are broken and all and until someone stood up and said, when are these
getting fixed? Nothing got done. soon as it got brought to our attention, all of a sudden, hey, let's get this repaired. I think this is the same type of situation. Um, I think we can take a field at a time, we can go in, do the repairs that we have to. As far as the
fencing, um, what I'm looking at is they're going to be adding bottom poles to it. So, the bottom poles literally stiffens the whole bottom of the fence. Um, but I'm not going to tell you because I I know fencing enough. The bottom pole goes on, the fencing still
sticks down below it and a kid can still stick his hand in and get cut if that's what we're worried about. Um, I just think I personally think the netting rises to CPA use. I think any maintenance like
this, we should be doing this. I mean, um, and this is one of my issues. We have to we have to find a way to get funding into a certain area that it can be used for stuff like this when it comes up. And I think that's why it was brought to
the C community preservation committee to your point, Ralph, because it, hey, the budgets are tight. I I guess the biggest problem comes in is all the little repairs when you put them all together, they probably become as much as our entire budget if we do it. Yeah.
But just trying to which do you go and which ones don't you? And I'm sure that's the the problem that the DPW has all the time. Where do we go? Where don't we go? Um what can be done? What can't be done? Again, I think it was just they that the rec
commission and and Joe in particular looked at this as a as a way to get something done. You know, I realized that, you know, when you're dealing with a new high school and you're dealing with road conditions and everything else that recreation isn't at the top of the
chopping block. I get that. I get that it's not a priority, but I think we can't lose sight of how often these fields are used. You can get 15 guys that go together and say, "Let's go play baseball." And they're out there playing baseball and everybody's going to drive by. Look at our fields are being used,
but let's make sure they're safe for everybody to use them. You know, that's the way when this frag when I first read this, I'm thinking safety. I didn't I I understand maintenance, but it's a safety hazard, too. Especially the netting. And the netting is like a no-brainer. Even the
look at what's going on in the major leagues, all right? They have netting all the way down both both sides now. Yeah. Like I said, to me, the netting is a capital. Um not been there. It isn't there. It it should be there for protection. Um I think that fits
perfectly under community preservation. And I'm just I'm not convinced that the other stuff does. And I mean, I would rather see us if we felt the need to say, "Hey, let's take a chunk of money and put it in here and get that done." Um, yeah, but is there that chunk of
money to do? That's the And I mean, I understand. I get it. But is that chunk of money because if we don't do this and it gets kicked down the road, we're looking another year and then it comes back again. And is the budget going to be tighter? Is that chunk is is that chunk of money?
First of all, this would cost more. And is that chunk of money is going to be smaller? I'm sorry. You say that one again. This would cost more. What do you if the if the pro the way inflation is this project would cost more in a year in this issue. So where's that chunk where
do you envision that chunk of money coming from what's in your reserve fund. Guess a question would in when you install the bottom rails does that cure some of the problems with the fencing below? Yes. Well, that'd be a new Well,
to me, that's makes it makes it stop. That's a new addition. That being said, I just questioned the town manager about the reserve uh fund and there's still funding in there for the next week or whatever until it gets turned back, which it does every year. Do you have a
general idea of How much are you picking up on CPA? Well, that's 20,000. of the F. So, do I have 34? I mean, sure. Can I just Sure. Go ahead. Um, can I
just Sorry. Say a few things. Um, I I I walked with um Mike from Jamie on this project directly. Um, this these quotes uh are very specific to the type to the exact things that we were trying to do.
Um, and in the spirit of what we were trying to do this for, we were trying to keep it costefficient, right? So, I only wanted to replace the fences that truly needed replacing and we wanted to re, you know, realistically refurbish the fences that were already there. A lot of these fences do have the rails, but
they're buried 6 in under the ground. So, they need to be unburied and then retied up. But if you go to, you know, for instance, this front field at Heritage, uh, the back stop, it's only a matter of time because there's literally prongs of fence that stick out. And I'm
actually shocked because the DPW probably, um, we wax it every time they're there. And I'm shocked, honestly, that a kid has not been stabbed in the hand relatively because any there's a million pass balls and I'm surprised someone hasn't tried to reach in and they would get stabbed because they're literally sticking out like
that. So to me, you know, and trying to be costefficient about this whole thing is I wanted to only replace the items that needed replacing, which are actually a lot of the fences that are listed on this project. And then if something can just truly be where the
bottom rail is dug out and the fence is retied down, then that would be, you know, fine as well. But that was kind of the spirit of what I was trying to accomplish and in, you know, combination with with Donna here when we when we decided to to submit this project. But
this these diagrams um I know they're kind of I guess you know baseball guy. You're not an artist. But um I tried to do it like overhead. This is me. I try to do the overhead pictures of what exactly we were looking
to try and accomplish and and replace andor repair um with these overhead Google images. Um so and you know that's really the the idea behind it is that trying to be I was trying to solve a problem which it's safety for sure.
That's number one. And number two they're just these fences are just so tired. I mean, the bullpen area on both Heritage Fields is basically non-existent, and it hasn't even been operable in forever. So, anytime anyone's trying to throw bullpen, there
the balls either end up in um on where are we, North Main Street, or they end up, you know, in the woods or they hit some car that's parked in the back corner of Heritage Park. So, that's kind of what the idea was behind, you know, doing those types of things. Um, and I just didn't want to break the bank, so
to speak. I mean, realistically, we could have GH go back and give us a quote for brand new fencing for all of these, and I'm sure it would be three times as much, but you know, No, thank you. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. So, I was just trying to be conscious about, you
know, trying to what we were trying to do here and not tie up too much CPC money, but get done what we needed to get done. Um, and then, you know, move on to the next project ideally. So, I just wanted to say that, guys. Thank you.
just comment. Sure. And I I'm trying to be delicate with this or careful, but if as um Mr. Williams has stated the the description of the back stop at lady,
um what is the standard of care when a DPW worker is we whacking and knows prongs are sticking up? Does does that not go to the foreman of the crew? You would think that that would be reported. Yes. Okay.
That's how how quickly it gets another right. But yeah, it strikes me as something that I mean unfortunately the projects these problems haven't cropped up overnight. It's been going on for quite a while
and this is a conversation we have every time and the next time we have it, we'll have a different view of what maintenance is and what's a capital project and what counts and what doesn't. And this is why CPC has such a hard time picking projects and what makes sense and what doesn't, right? I
would call replacing a roof maintenance, but it's a capital project, too. Yeah. So it depends on your argument and what the asset is and how much you're replacing. Uh to me this is beyond maintenance.
This is a capital replacement of language in here of a portion of a fence. And I'm not saying that because I don't have $34,211 in the reserve fund that I'd be willing to put up if you put 20 up for the
fence. But I think the whole project as described can be used CPC. That that's my opinion. My interpretation. I wouldn't have necessarily let the application when it came in. It would always go to CPC, but
I don't know that I would have sort of leed on the way by. Does that make sense? I when I looked at this, this rose to a enough of a replacement to be a capital project, not maintenance. That's the opposite opinion of what
you're having. And I totally understand yours. And again, this is why we have this argument virtually every time we look at a CPC project because in and to your point, Tom, Stuart said the exact same thing. It's a it's very confusing because you run up against is it
maintenance or is it a capital project and it's open for interpretation. What's maintenance to me isn't going to be maintenance to all of you people and what's maintenance to you is may not it's just it's how we interpret this. But I think at this point we've brought in the safety issue which takes the
maintenance and pushes it off to the side because if we let it hap if we don't do something now or we try and use reserve fund or whatever if the if the fences continue the way they are it's only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt. And I don't
want that on my watch. I really don't because I think we have an opportunity here with an interpretation to fix the problem. I think it does rise higher than maintenance. I mean, maybe just the
concept of chain link fence is a little more difficult than if it was just a wooden fence and you're applying paint. Like, okay, paint is something that you could say is maintenance. But I think the intent, my interpretation of it anyway, of the whole maintenance thing with CPA funding
is not to have operational costs like trying to have people that are coming by and picking up the trash at the park every day. That should just be part of your budget, you know, being treated as maintenance here. But this doesn't seem like it's just something that you could
do every week and improve it anyway. It's like some of these things just are natural occurrences after decades of sitting there. Like you're not fix the rusted out sharp points of a chain length fence just by doing regular
maintenance to it every week. And that and that's that's the point, right? Because the fence itself is a capital asset. It rises to that level. You I mean we were just saying if we had to replace the whole thing, it would be God knows how much. So we're at 20.
we're at a 5, 10, 20 year lifespan. If you're replacing that part or all of that fence, that's a capital upgrade to a capital asset, right? And that that again, that's my interpretation of this
application as it came in. But that's not what we're doing. It wasn't replacing all the fencing. We're not digging up a field and rehabbing it, right? We're taking certain sections of the fence that are beyond repair and
maintaining them, fixing them, which means you undo the twine, you take a section six feet long that's bent and you twine in a new section. So if I only replace a quarter of a roof, is it maintenance or is it a capital project?
I mean, you did a whole wing. That's what I mean. Like it's such a like you can come up with a conversation for every angle of this conversation. this particular project. Yes. There's so many different angles to how you can look at it. So just so that we can move
forwards, it would be my preference that we suggest to the town manager that because with end of the year because funds will be turned over has funds in it serve that we look to use that to do the the repair work immediately.
um under the guidance of the DPW um we've issued um CPC monies before um that the whole project hasn't been finished but then allocate the $20,000
for the netting as a capital project that so so we're getting at it just depends on where the the money's coming out of I guess was quick question. Sure. Uh, Mr. Town Manager, were you planning on using
that those reserves for anything else? Anything else in the next seven days? Not unlikely. Okay. And it would I'm always happy to turn back as much as possible. Okay. Ralph's suggestion is to basically
divide the proposal half CPC and half your reserves or whatever halfish. Yeah. under the jurisdiction of the DPW. That's where I'm drawing. We have a a bid here from a fence company who's
willing, you know, who's stated how much it's going to cost to fix. Are we going to um turn the project that part of the project over to the town? Well, what I'm saying is under the guidance of the D so
they can hire GH or whatever. How they fix it is up if they But the money but now do you have to go out for a bid process because of the money or the amount. So the project gets stalled. You do anyways. Yeah. But you're going to have to go out to bid no
matter. Yeah. So whe CPC or whether it's under the town, it still has to go out to bid. Correct. Yeah. I'm supportive as is. It's Oh, sorry. An entire project. The scope of the project I think is a capital expense as listed in our motion
here is to refurbish that if you go around to any singular community and look at their ball fields and that what these what these look like we are nowhere near it. I think we should keep it as is keep the project and get it as nicel lookinging as we possibly can. Oh,
I agree. It's just I think just too many wheels in motion trying to fix a problem that we could just solve fairly easily and not to go rebid and take money from reserves and the money's there. You know, especially from an aesthetic the public safety I think is priority. Absolutely. From an aesthetic
standpoint, I think it fits right into the intent of like this type of project with CPA money. So, I'm I'm fine the way it's written. Can you add something? Yeah. Um just a couple things. I know we've been talking about capital projects. The um threshold
on the capital projects is actually 25,000 now. So, it would have to be 25,000 or more to kind of fit under the um capital program, but there is an amendment in the um website that you
talked about, Ralph's um about um sorry, recreational facilities where it allows rehabilitation to include replacement of playground equipment and other capital improvements to the land or the facilities there on
to make it more functional. So, I think that that amendment and there are other areas in here where it talks about keeping things up to code and safety as well. So, I think all of those things would kind of cover the
amount of work that's being done on the fence. It seems like the only thing that they're really keeping is the poles and they're putting um you know up new chain link and it looks like they're also putting the bar at the bottom as well. So, it seems like quite a bit of rehab based on what I just saw.
Okay, great. Thank you, Ben. That I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Second. Motion's been made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph,
yes. And John. Oh, okay. John, dinner reservations. And then I will entertain a motion on the project. I make a motion to approve the Community Preservation Act application for the East Long Meadow
Baseball Field Fencing Refurbish and Replacement Project in the amount of $54,211 from the public recreation account. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Hannah, yes. Emmy,
yes. Marilyn, yes. Ralph, no. And absent is not motion passes. Thank you all. Thank you. Thanks, Bill. Thank you, folks. Donna, thank you. Okay, we already did a couple of minutes. We are to business
back the discussion about the proposal for leasing space at 382 North Pain Street. This is something that we started talking about at our last meeting and we had some questions and followup that we come to look into and he provided an updated sheet. So Tom,
the floor is yours. Thank you and I appreciate you putting it back on the agenda. Um, I realize uh there wasn't a whole lot of information last time other than my request for your permission. Uh, so so
uh we've had this conversation a bit and I think when this whole 382 process started, I think uh most of us were excited of the prospect of building becoming the new town hall and getting people in there sort of as soon as possible.
when we took the when we ended up taking it by imminent domain, we took it with all the existing leases, uh which means we essentially sort of became a landlord uh while these leases that were in existence um sort of came to pass. Uh
all part of our uh friendly eminent domain taking that we tried to pull off. So um we started having this discussion uh when the building sort of came online in July of is it last year when we yeah
when we when we became owners of the building um and we started looking at and projecting building costs and the revenue um from the leases and uh the payment on the principal and interest of
um the borrowing to purchase the building. Um, and you know, when when the budget process happened and we noticed that we started to get a little bit tight, um, we had this idea that, uh, perhaps
it was in our best interest to keep the tenants in there to pay for the building for a little bit longer than we wanted. Um, and so that is really this sheet that I that I have you here I have for
you here with um extending uh the RFP would be for the space that the Westfield Bank is in extending them out for for four years to when the other two large tenants are coming off um so that we can continue to collect
that revenue and pay for the building. Um, a lot of this, uh, building maintenance number we're still obviously working on. We've only sort of had the building for a certain amount of time and these numbers are sort of our best guess on an estimate of what it would cost. So, it could be a little less,
could be a little more. Um, but you can see how quickly the payment for the building comes on the general fund, uh, compared to if we have this extension. Um, and again with with the way things uh are so tight right now and again sort
of factoring in uh the goal about the space study and the move to the new town hall, um it seemed to me that the most prudent fiscally responsible plan would be to get all
get Westfield extended to when the other two large um tenants were coming off so that we could continue to pay for this building out of that fund separate from the general fund uh for for much longer
obviously into into 2031 um and beyond. Uh the other reason for that is uh from an operational standpoint, yes, we want to make that our new town hall. uh if we are to move into that space currently occupied by by
Westfield about 5,000 square ft of the 12,000 we occupy at town hall right now are coming the rest have to stay. So we're still going to be instead of 1585 we're going to be 50/50. So, um,
not to mention we're going to piece out whatever re rehabilitation andor capital improvements we want to make so that we can live in that building uh, forever. Uh, or at least until somebody else takes another building in town for a new town hall 60 years from now, hopefully.
Um, Utah. Um, so all those things sort of made this make the most sense to to extend uh the the leasing of that space out uh so that when we do move over, we have the
the four or five years now to make a full plan to build out that space for the town of East Meadow. Uh probably a town council meeting area that's all hooked up say of the you know what I mean? like so that we figure out with an
architect through our capital planning what we need, what we might need and build it out when the building's empty and and which sounds like a long time away in 2031. Um, and I know that that was not the intent of most of your vote
when we took the building by eminent domain. I think we all wanted to move in there immediately and get out of town hall. Um, like many decisions we make, uh, we have to be aware that they're going to change and probably will always
change tomorrow. Um, and for me, looking at the numbers, looking at the space, looking at the, uh, logistics, um, this RFP is the best move. pushing this off with some sort of extension, taking the revenue, not putting the
building on the general fund, and waiting to plan the move when we can all move and move right and move once. Um, so this is the this is the picture of what it looks like if if we don't put an
RFP out uh again in 27, we're we're that balance is already in the red. Uh whereas we're not in the red till 2031. And at that point, um, you know, we'll have we'll have architectural plans slash, uh, contractor, bidder, uh, sub
biders ready to go. When that building is vacated, we do our construction and then we all move in. Um, that that to me is position A. I I'm willing to have more conversations, but that would be
the cleanest um most fiscally responsible, easiest logistically, operationally move that we can make into that new town hall. Um so I'm willing to have obviously, you know, all the conversations. Again, I know um this
wasn't the intent the intent at the beginning to wait this long to move into the town hall, but uh we can't we're all not going to be able to do it until 12 or 2030 anyway. So, I think we should extend that that leasing of that space
out to that point. Um and and we might as well take the money while we're waiting to all move in there anyway. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. I I would say I disagree not from the fiscally responsible perspective. I do
appreciate that aspect of wanting to line things up in an efficient and economical way for the town, but to me it just seems like that would lead us backwards. I mean, that's at least seven years away
before we'd actually be able to even think about moving anyone else into the new space. And it also makes a couple big assumptions that I don't know if they'll be true. One of which is
if you wait to redesign and make the space our own for us to all fit in at the same time and make the whole building perfect, probably going to be a big capital expense. What are the odds that the town is actually at that time, six or seven years from now, going to approve? Hopefully, it's not this much,
but I'm just making up a number. A million dollars to to redo that. Maybe not high. And then like what are the odds that all of us on the council and potentially even
yourself or the town manager are still in the same position seven years from now? We may think we can wait that long and and things will work out. But what if things end up being different seven years from now with the people making
decisions and they have a different take? But that was totally different than the intent of acquiring that building in the first place. I don't want to keep prolonging that for the residents because that's just seven more years of people having to go
to the collector's office at Old Town Hall, but then go over to the assessor's office at noon town. If nothing else, we need to seriously come up with a different plan for people to not have to bounce between them as residents. Even if that means employees
or someone needs to be crossrained to do activities in both buildings, but residents shouldn't have to play ping pong to get their services. The problem I I don't dis disagree. In fact, I would like to see everyone there as soon as possible, but I'm looking at
the numbers and um in two years and we're already in the red and um how do we fix that, you know? Well, again, and this is the the crux of
the whole thing is, yeah, we could move, I don't know, collector and clerk and treasurer over there and fill up that space, but we we still have everybody else here. Um, so if you want to go pay for
your transfer station sticker with cash, you have to drive across town and pay the collector and then go back and get your dump pass. So, it's not great operationally, but I don't think from a long-term spending money standpoint.
Keep slowly moving people in there and slowly spending money to refurbish spaces and then it just it's not going to work out right. It it's always we're always going to be chasing a move. Um, and that and again just my opinion and I
I respect what you're saying because it I know that does suck and that's probably the only complaint we have about assessing being in the new building. Nobody nobody goes to see Kim. Um, no, but I mean that's that is the
complaint that the assessing department is now separate from that. And so maybe that's something we can fix operationally. Uh, I'd be willing to look into that rather than sort of slobinly slowly move over in a way that maybe isn't perfect operationally in the
long run when we have this building that we're calling the new town hall for 10, 20, 50 years. I guess I would say to maybe we're not here. It doesn't matter. It's not about us. It's about Islam
Meadows Town Hall till 2070. A quick question just regarding the um table without Westfield lease extension that number is that number cumulative at the bottom or is that every year we're
running that deficit? So like I'm not seeing a cumulative number there. It is cumulative. Yeah. So So we're not we're not you know what I'm saying? So the the payment Okay. Okay. The payment is what it is, right? You're not I'm not adding each one of those numbers together. Correct. That's the ending balance at
the end of Gotcha. Okay. Well, I just have I guess maybe like one or two comments is, you know, I think when I wasn't here when the vote took place to take the building, um, but it's a unique situation
given the tenants that are in there. And I don't want to call it a this is a self fulfilling conundrum in terms of how to manage this. This is not a easily managed situation. Um I
would want to see it done with I guess the most respect to the residents and the taxpayer from the bottom line perspective. Um quite honestly looking at just off-handedly I'd be in favor of um authorizing the town manager to enter
into an RFP. I think it's the most respectful thing to do to the taxpayer. I I can certainly see why I see your argument, Connor, where it's not the most advantageous um plan. And and no matter what pe if it's I don't know, three years from now or five years from now or 10 years from
now, people are going to be inconvenience no matter what. Um as a taxpayer, I'd rather be inconvenience less by my tax bill than having to go how many times a year am I going to go to the assessor's office over a 10-year period? Probably not once. I'd rather save
a million bucks or so than worry about Ralph. I know you're in a different to us normal people. [Laughter] Haven't even started my new term. No, I mean I get that argument in terms of
the convenience factor, but I think the the right thing to do by the residents is um doing the most prudently financial thing possible. I think one thing we'll have to consider though if we do go forward with an RF is that we are we have to acknowledge that
we're delaying goals that we've set for the town manager previously because some potentials of existing town hall are going to have to be delayed if we're not moving that space out. So things like the police station probably nothing we
can do until 2033 rolls around. So, so I guess I would say that this is going to take a while. Like, so this was and I I I'll I'll say that I did not accomplish that goal. I think we're all It's pretty obvious at this point. And I
think it's because that sort of the focus changed. And this is not a one-year goal. That was it was never going to be a one-year goal. Um, and I guess I probably should have said more about that when we set it together, but this goal is going to take a very long
time to even get to a point where we can design that space, right? Like we we need to you you've seen how long this process takes from feasibility to, you know, getting an architect to what can we do for this? So, I think to your point, the plan just changes. This is
what I mean. It's I I it's like we wanted to move into this space at this date. Well, if things change and we change the plan, it doesn't mean the plan stops. It's just a different plan. And so, we'll still be working on that because that's the goal. If the main
goal is to do it prudently and do it once and get in there at 2030, we have four years to make sure we hit that mark. And it will take all of that to to plan that all out. So, I don't know that it necessarily stops the goal. It just
can't be accomplished right away. You know what I'm saying? Yes. And no, I think if we take a step back to when we had this discussion originally, the original goal was not to stop things or extend leases. The original goal was folks told us we
needed more space for town hall. So, if that's no longer true, that we don't need that space sooner rather than later, then I would have changed my position that we don't need that building. So, fair point. And and that was the
reason we did the original RFP. Sure was. And we got space and we wound up luckily getting a whole new building for a a very very reasonable price for the market.
I know there was some conversation about that, but we see what it costs to build a building. We're building one right now. This is still a great investment for the town of Isa. Still, still still. And the tenants are paying for it. And I
know maybe it wasn't the intent of why everybody wanted to buy the building, but by the when we move into it, it will have been half paid for now that with money that didn't hit the general fund with tenants. And again, I know it's not
necessarily normal, did I use your word normal? To to be for for for for to be a tenant for that long, and that wasn't the intent, but the way that the financial picture has sort of shaken out has sort of forced a a change in plan and a change in
outlook. Um, and if that if if the RFP goes out and the space is filled, now we have this other plan that we can attack. Right now, I can't attack anything. I there's nothing to I like I have to
figure out if this RFP doesn't happen, how who I'm putting in that 5,000 square feet because I can't let it sit there. I just can't. That that that is improved. So, I Yeah.
Sure. Yes. Um I have a newer question than the one I was waiting. I just want to make sure I'm understanding this. 5,000 square feet is where Westville Bank is right now approximately. Same thing. Yeah.
The RFP would allow them to remain for four years. The RFP would uh allow a completely confidential public process to rent that space to someone that um meets all the criteria meets all the
criteria in the RFP for that length of four years I think is what so what is we we can pick what use we want that's our right and so the RFP would say we
want this use because we don't want to disrupt our other tenants, right? So, we can craft the RFP to say this is the kind of tenant that we want at for this length and we think you should pay us this much. This is what we've identified. And then they submit the
their their submission. So, right now, when does the lease for Westfield Bank end? March 2027. So four gets then the March 2031. Uh that's when everybody else's lease runs
out. Well, right. There's a November 2030 and a November 2031. So everybody would be out then everybody would be out of the way. My second question is um right now do you have a vision of
what that building would look like and which department would be where? Uh or do you have to rely on uh a different RFP to get an architectural opinion? Yeah, we would we
would certainly want that. Um, and this was where me and Bruce's conversation went the last time we talked was who's occupying what space, who needs more, this kind of thing. Um, and where we want people to sit. So, that would just be the full buildout of the space.
Right. Right. So, how many people we got, right? Who what kind of space they need, who do we want together? So, we didn't want to send Diane. Truth be told, when when we talked about it, that was not our first choice. Unfortunately,
Dian's threeperson department was taking up the biggest office space in this town hall, and we could get her in up there. It's not comfortable for her up there. They they didn't get enough space. We're starting to spread out a little, but building is now in that space, which is
a much better fit with with two more people in it. Right. Right. So the design will be perfect for our needs. And again, we may have this conversation where one of those, say,
column 6,000 square foot quadrants. One of them can be some sort of community space or something because we have we're at 12,000 here. We got to get Donna um involved in in our because she's stuck
in COA and they are they could use more space as well. So in the full plan of things we we'll fill out that building nice with a conference room or community room or something like that. That's how I view that's how I envision it. We have enough space for that. So,
is there does it make any sense to do a second RFP and get some fraction on what an architectural study would look like? Why would you wait four years? So, I won't I'm sorry. Hold on a second. No,
good question. I don't need your permission for that, but thank you very much. Very welcome. This is specifically because you took this building by Main. Yes. So, that I need your permission to lease portion of it. And that was a gray
era from the attorney and she thought it was in everyone's best interest if we were all in agreement and that I should have your blessing when I go do it. Gotcha. So that RFP for architectural will be forthcoming in the probably next capital
plan. Um that that's my look and again that all has to change if I have to fill up that space sooner than I want and you want to wait the four years or
five years to do that. I think it it's most this is that's position A to me. I I'm we have uh 12 other iterations of this plan and I guess we can hit go on any one of them, but Oh, okay. In order to do position A, we really need this
lease extension. And if we don't have it, then we'll find another plan and we'll find another way and we'll build out that space in a quadrant like hopefully as close to how it will stay when we all move in the first time so we don't have to go back into that space
again. It just may not make sense operationally and we certainly won't all be together. Thank you. Um so a couple different things. First, at our last meeting, I had asked if you could send me copies of the existing
leases that we have. U and I'm going to reiterate that if you could send me copies of the existing leases. Yep. So that way there we can see just when each one ends. Um and again that generalization's great. I just like to
see the leases. Um because I believe one of them Maxio Facial will be going into their um extended so they have an option and that brings them through that. Yep. Um my thought process is we approved the
RFP um but we put a two-year um cap on it and say that we'll allow them to do an RFP for a two-year period. And the reason for that is we say hey within that two years um we want to see
architectural renderings of where we want the building to be what we want it to look like how we want it to be built out what the needs are for each department. The reason I'm saying that is we may find that once those are done that,
you know, hey, this section with the bank because it's got a separate entrance and all, we can go in and we can start all that work and we can get the clerk or whatever area all built out. Um, my thought process is building a vault
room and all in there is probably going to take quite a bit of time if we wait the four years and then we start that. Um because currently from what I understand from the manager of the bank, there's not an actual vault room. The vault is more like a safe which can be
wheeled out. Um and I know from talking with Jeie, she needs quite a bit of space because of all the ballots and stuff like that. So if we do an RFP for two years, we may, as we're coming up to that, say, "Okay, after looking at the
architectural plans, let's let them go two more and get it all done at once. But this way here, we take it in bites. Um, if we can get in earlier, then we'll be able to we'll already have the architectural plans. We'll already know the build out and what we're going to be
doing. Um, if we just put it off for four years, let let's be truthful. What usually ends up happening is three months before is when all of a sudden every all the rush, oh, everything's closing in three months. We always put off to the last
minute. um whatever we're doing and it's not it's not on you. I'm just saying. I mean it's same with us, you know, we're going to do a town manager review and um quarterly. Well, eight months goes by and it's like we missed those. Um and
again, it's just we get busy. But that would be my suggestion. look at a two-year RFP and that way there he can put it out if it's Westfield that wins or whatever, they know, hey, at least we're in here for this length of time.
Um, it helps them, it helps us, helps a little bit with this, but it also guarantees that we're going to actually get the plans and all that we're going to need. That's my thought. Nice. Something quick. Sure. One quick question. Do you think the
two-year will um deter Westfield? Are they looking? Okay. You don't know that. Um I guess all I wanted to say was you had me at the chart. I mean I think getting Kim had me at the
chart. Um I think getting in there quicker yada yada yada all great points, but at the end of the day I'm sticking with the numbers. I want their lease to help us pay for it. I think you could probably get an architect and some architectural whatever you just said in
there and get it done planned out for you know when they leave. That's all I have to say. That great. Is there a motion then? I'll make a motion allow the town manager Tom Christensen to solicit
request for proposals to lease space at 382 North Main Street. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? I would like to end the motion, cap it at a 2-year RFP. I will second that. Any further discussion on amending the
motion? I think if we limit it, we can always extend it. I think if Westfield Banks in there and they want to stay, they're going to grab the two years because you know what? Not having to move for at least two more years helps them. All right. I have a question. Sure. Oh,
what if I don't agree with your two-year Senate vote now? Then you vote no on the amendment because we're going to vote twice. We're going to vote on the amendment. Okay. I think procedure of my motion as written and being seconded not voting being
voted on first. Is that problematic or No, that's why there's vote on the amendment before the first motion. I was thinking you have the motion on the floor and you vote on it as is. No, you vote on an amendment to the motion.
Okay. So, can I make one more total because the amendment may not pass. Sure, Tom. there. There um I had forwarded you the motion language
approved by our attorney uh from before the first meeting. And I feel like there was more to it than that. Uh and and and I only say that because um was specific about the commercial use
restriction. And maybe you haven't seen it. I forwarded it to you. Jeez, Monday the 9th. So that was I didn't resend it. I because I assumed that it was in the
your report and stuff. What? Sent us the report. Your town manager's report. No, I just forwarded this thread from our attorney to Connor. Oh, I apologize. Attachment.
Can I have the legal like template, but I don't see the Oh, here we go. That's why that didn't make it. Sorry. I'm sorry. I I I I just assume this motion made it
into the motions. I guess my other question is is this something that has to be voted on at this meeting? I don't believe so. Of it sort of like to know if the attorney has specific
language that we have to vote on. Well, why don't we just vote on it? not not your not your length of there are there is specific things that need to be said in the in the original right if we're amending the original Yeah and the
original is wrong then that doesn't help us good point there you just sent it to us well I I should have copied it Yeah. And I just sent you one too cuz it I think the motion can be
straightforward. Now I've now I've copied and pasted it from the thread so you don't search the thread. Sorry. Wait a minute. You just sent it again. Well, this one I took it out of the body so you didn't have to search for it, which I which is what I meant to do.
Better send it to me on the 9th. So it could have been Yeah. been on the original What meeting was that? Oh, you we had it for the last meeting. Yeah, for June 10th, I think. Yeah, the original original. Now you're
reading my banter out loud with our attorney. You're not supposed to do that. You forwarded it to me. I did. I didn't know you were going to read it out loud. Is it right there? Yes. And right there it says language approved. Yeah.
Yeah, that's it. Okay, there it is. Yeah, they'll have that. Want me to forward it to I just forward it. I assume you copied it from my email. Yeah. So I just want to read,
right? Okay, here it is. You just from DHY. You just resent it. You just resent it. Okay. just read through if you could. Can I just read aloud? Well, hold on. We have up to I've hijacked the meeting. Sorry. I recommend that I will resend my
second to Ralph's amendment. So, we don't have an amendment on the floor. And then if the seconder and maker of the original motion would res resend my amended motion then. So, the second mine's gone. Did I make the original? I
believe so. Did I think Jim did? Yes, Jim did. Second. So Ralph second. So everyone's rescended. Are you rescending your I have not rescended. Let me send my uh original
um motion and I'll make a new motion to lease suite 100 located at 382 North Main Street which was taken by eminent domain for a period of four years to commercial tenant and or until such a time as the town requires use of the premises. Additionally, the town council
authorizes the town manager to declare the property available for lease and the commercial use restriction be imposed. Thank you. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. I would make a motion that we adjust uh four years uh period to two years. I
will second the amendment. Any further discussion on the amendment? This feels like voting on amending the motion but not the motion overall. Jim, no. Kathy, no. Anna, no. Emmy, yes. Marilyn, no. And
yes. Okay, the amendment fails, so it stands at four years as originally spoken. Any further discussion on the original motion? Seeing none, Jim, yes. Uh Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. I'm a no.
Marilyn, yes. And Ralph, yes. The motion passes. Yeah. Okay. Okay. You're done with all this? Oh, sure. Just as further comment, um the council
willing to suggest that we start looking at or we direct the town manager to look at the space that's um in the new building to start um getting an RFP for architectural layout and stuff as soon
as practical as soon as possible. I would say I think we just have the ball moving. Yes, I would expect that to be in next year's budget if if not sooner. I would make a motion actually that way. There it's in uh a motion form that we
direct the town manager to um look at issuing an RFP for architectural layout of 382 North Main to accommodate the town going in to our new town hall when
practical. I will second that. I have a quick question, Tom. Given the length of time involved, if we were to do that quickly, is there a possibility of us throwing money away if needs change within the
next six to seven to eight years? If needs change, space, personnel change, department change. So as you know uh we've pretty much been running at bare bones uh and functioning
quite well. So I don't see a whole lot of expansion in our number of employees that we need to uh sort of take on in this space. Uh but I think naturally there will be some buildout area uh which will probably be
suggested by the architect. Yeah. Um as we as we build out the space. That's it. Great. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Chim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Yes. Marilyn, yes. And yes.
Pass. Thank you. Okay. New business. Uh we in our first meeting in July have our annual acknowledgement and affirmation of the council rules. But this was just a reminder to review the council rules
that we have set. and there's anything that we wish to add or remove or modify for the next meeting. And then I also sent out the go through the packet that Jie sent us all
next fiscal year town council calendar. Um, similar to previous years, we'll only meet once in July and August, unless there's some pressing matter that demands a special meeting, but otherwise we'll just follow the normal summer schedule. And the calendar is the same
as mostly last year, the first year that I put together this one. Um, I fixed the thing from last year where we had the tenative meeting, the second one in December. I removed that since it's
always so close to I added the budget public hearings that we have laid out in May now. And then there were a couple other milestones that we've caught over the last year that I've added in there like the new transparency bylaw salaries having to be
posted by March 1st. There were a couple other little things like that, but otherwise it was mostly the same. a few of the things dropped off since it's not the year ending in a zero or a five. But and if I could um on November 11th, which would be the second Tuesday, it's
Veterans Day, right? So that means we have to meet on the closest Thursday, right? Okay. Yes. Thank you for the call out. I forgot about to mention that. Oh, wow. So those are the only things that I have on the calendar and that also sets the summer
meeting schedule for us going forward. So if there's no comments on that in terms of great awesome job great job big undertaking I appreciate having all this in definitely helpful to remind me otherwise I would forget all these
things we do without calendars. So then looking forward action items for our next meeting. Our one and only meeting on Tuesday, July 8th will be our reorganization meeting. We will affirm the council rules. Hopefully we will
have the year-end financial report and any necessary transfers that we need to close out the fiscal year. And it's all I have planned thus far. There's a public hearing for the private car sales. Oh, second reading. Thank you.
And if you're all willing, can I still reach out individually to have our sort of uh debrief from Sure. 25? Well, absolutely. Uh so I if if you don't mind, I'll I'll sort of I know it's hard in July and
August, but if I would I would appreciate it um if we could spend some time together individually. Well, QT Yeah. Great. There's no other action items. I'll present a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Second to adjurnn. Any
other discussion? Seeing none. Jim, yes. Kathy, yes. Anna, yes. Anna, yes. Marilyn, yes. And Ralph, yes. Okay, we are adjourned at 811. Thank you. gave us heaven.