3, two, one. Welcome to the May 5th, 2025 meeting of the Long Meadow Select Board. This is select board chair Veneathy. I will be confirming that all members and persons anticipated on the agenda are present and can hear me. Members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Dan Zoro here. Andrew Lamb
here. Mark Gold here. Staff, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Lynn Simmons here. Mike Barbieri here. This open meeting of the Long Meadow Select Board is convened in person and via Zoom webinar as posted on the agenda and town's website identifying how the public may join.
There's no chat or Q&A function. All the materials for this meeting are available on the agenda posted on long meadowmma.gov. The public is encouraged to follow along using the posted agenda unless I note otherwise. This meeting will feature resident comment. For residents attending the meeting in person, please please raise your hand
when we get to the comment section of the meeting and I will call on you to approach the microphone. For residents participating in the meeting via Zoom webinar format, please use the raise hand icon at the bottom of the screen. The meeting moderator will promote you to panelist, unmute you, and give you permission to speak. If you join the
webinar by phone, dial star9 to raise your hand and star six to mute unmute. Residents who wish to speak will identify their names and addresses only. Each individual is afforded three minutes for comments. Please note that this meeting is being recorded and that some attendees are participating by
video conference. Please remember to mute your phone or computer when you are not speaking. If anyone in attendance is recording this meeting, please announce yourself now. Uh we will now begin with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right, and we will move into select board uh announcements. The annual town
meeting is set for May 13th, 2025 in the Long Meadow High School gym. For additional information and resources and to view the annual town meeting warrant, please visit long memma.gov/town. The preliminary election is set for tomorrow, Tuesday, May 6th. to narrow down the list of select board
candidates from 5 to 4 to be featured on the June 3rd annual town election ballot. For a list of candidates and additional information and resources, please visit long meadowmma.gov/elections. A full listing of candidates for other elected positions on the June annual election
will uh can also be viewed on this page. Mass DOT is holding a 25% design public hearing for Long Meadow Street Route 5 phase 1 work on Thursday, May 8th at 6:30 at the Greenwood Center at uh 231 Maple Road. The project area is from
Converse Street to Crescent Road, including modification of signalized section intersections and improvements at Edgewood Avenue, Bliss Road, and Bernie Road. The roadway improvements include pavement mill and overlay with minor full depth widening, curbing, pavement markings, signage, roadside
restoration, and vegetation pairing. More info can be find at mass can be found at mass.gov/org/highway division/events or to view a recording of the presentation if you are unable to attend the meeting. Long's annual shredding event will be
held on Saturday, June 7th from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at the Long High School student parking lot. For additional information, please visit longmeta.gov/civic alerts. And with the conclusion of announcements, we will now move into resident comments. Is anyone
here to make a resident comment? Is there anyone online? [Applause] one second. Oh, no. Would be help if we muted. Uh, sorry about being muted it for anyone on the Zoom. We are good to go with audio now. Sorry about that, man. All that for
nothing. Yeah, start over. Good. Yep. No one on the zoom for um okay for resident comment. Great. Thank you. Yeah, go ahead Tom. Tom Shay, 81 Green Meadow Drive. Gateway Fiber Correspondence is in the agenda for this evening. It is a significant private fiber company with
equity from a major infrastructure fund and has existing operations in Massachusetts. The letter is dated March 27th, was likely sent by regular mail and missed the April 7th select board meeting, but the attachments to that
letter need to be posted. Gateway signed poll agreements with Eversource and Verizon in June of 2023 and is likely over a year ahead of Long Meadow Fiber. What did people in this room know and when did they know it?
What correspondence was there? And were there any meetings or calls with Gateway? Why has there been no discussion of Gateway for possibly the year and nothing in published select board or town management comments? If anyone in this room knew of Gateway and
its early lead in financial investment, they likely had a fiduciary responsibility to the select board and citizens to disclose it, especially before voting for and funding the $500,000 for the fiber spring contract.
Select board should discuss this issue tonight and the select board and citizens need a full timeline and summary of discussions and status with Gateway. Three major DPW issues. Did you know on March 28th there was a major water
pressure drop in town and level of water in the storage tank dropped substantially? I've confirmed this with the DPW director. The issue was like there was no fires or broken water pipes. The issue was likely an issue
with the telemetry equipment which was as you know was a major issue last year. What happened? Is this an issue to be addressed? Greenwood Pool in February. There were two significant incidents of major broken PVC piping in the filter
area and large losses of water. I witnessed one of those arment trucking and the DPW responded to the one I saw. Was the pool properly winterized? Springfield Water and Sewer has alerted
its wholesale customers there is a risk of water curtailment this summer due to construction of the new water treatment plant. Long Meadow DPW is aware of this. Springfield Ledllo and one other municipality have held planning meetings with their emergency management groups.
Has Long Meadow done this? should have had a previously suggested water bill insert this month regarding proper irrigation practices. Did you know of these three major issues? They are not in the DPW monthly activity reports. Ask about them
tonight. I look forward to the water and sewer rate discussion. It probably won't get decided tonight. So, uh, look forward to the next meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? I kept it within one second. That was good.
Hello, my name is Jim Moran and I live at 48 Aenddale Road. In the pack package tonight for tonight's meeting, I found a letter from Gateway Fiber addressed to the law select board that was a response to an email of February 7th from our town manager. This letter is pretty interesting given the fact that it shed
light on Gateway F Gateway Fers's active interest in building a fiber network in Long Meadow. Gateway Fiber is a national company with numerous completed projects and a solid track record. In this response letter, they were asking for a public hearing about their proposed
project. From the content of the letter and its attachments, which I've seen, uh, it seems that Gateway Fiber has already spent considerable energy and money toward the goal of building a fiber network in Long Meadow. Interestingly enough, I checked
the fiber task force final report issued in June of 20 2024, and I could not find any mention of Gateway Fiber and their capabilities, even though I've been told that there was at least one meeting between the two groups. Gateway Fiber is currently building a fiber network in the city of Northampton
and has already spent $3 million on the project as of November 2024. Their internet pricing structure for Northampton residents is pretty similar to what Longmet Fiber is proposing. They're proposing one gig or they they've announced one gig up and down
symmetrical speeds for $90 a month with up to two gig symmetric speeds. This fiber network will be owned by Gateway Fiber and not by the city of Northampton. Bottom line, Northampton residents will not be risking any taxpayer dollars in its venture, but
will be receiving highspeed internet at competitive pricing. Got a couple questions for the select board. It seems to me that having two capable private sector companies, Comcast and Gateway Fiber, competing for Long Meadow customers and investing their capital and not Long Meadow's
taxpayer money would be the ideal approach. So the question be why was this approach not taken? Why haven't some members of the SLE not heard of Gateway Fibers local interest in Long Meadow? We we we have a town meeting next next Tuesday. We're looking to
change our charter, our town charter to enable the select board to act as a municipal light board and be able to approve expenditures for the creation of our own fiber network. I think the town me town meeting members should say no next week to article 28 which would pause the law metal fiber project in
order for us to rethink our strategy. Thank you very much for your time. Anyone else? No. Okay, great. Uh, we'll move into select board comments. Anyone have a select board comment they can make? Andrew? Uh, Lynn is going to touch on this in her comments, but I just wanted
to uh recognize and say that I'm very glad that we finally have a contract for the consultative evaluation of our empty town buildings, including the town hall, the community house, and the old town hall, which is this tiny building on Long Meadow Street across from the CVS.
These buildings have been empty and I've honestly been chomping at the bit to try to help start a communitywide conversation about what we should do about about them. At this point, I think it's not too early for people to start thinking about what they'd like to see here. We're lucky we have a surfit of buildings in town. You know, we have
plenty of meeting spaces. We have plenty of office space. We don't need another auditorium, especially with the middle school coming and having a large one. And my priorities, and I think we probably all share this, is that these buildings are preserved and utilized. Right now they are empty. They cost a
lot to maintain. They entail liabilities and in an ideal world they would be vibrant community spaces that are avidly uh used town buildings or uh serve other functions that generate income for our town like property taxes or rent. It's helpful. It's helpful especially for
historically minded people like me that to know that they are the community house and in the in the town hall are in the historic district so they are protected like the exterior of them can't change essentially. And the next question of course would be what is the cost of modernizing them which I'm
confident will be a lot. You know I based on my experience uh renovating the Brewer Young mansion. I'm pretty sure the consultant's going to say we're going to recommend completely redoing the HVAC the electricity the plumbing in these buildings. Make them ADA
compliant. Install elevators. And like all projects, the cost of this will be much higher if the town undertakes it in comparison to, for example, a private developer um due to of course prevailing wages and other municipal requirements. I think it'd be wonderful if we could have determined a good use for these
buildings that justifies the town's cost of rehabilitation. But if a good town use is not apparent, I think we could also consider private development, which would turn these buildings from a liability into an asset because then the town would benefit from the sale of the property, substantial annual property
taxes, and we would forgo the town uh onus on the town to modernize and maintain them. If we felt it was really important that the town control them, the town could modernize it, but then rent it out essentially and get income that way. And I think there is a great demand for professional offices in town
or co-working spaces. These I think are the sort of zoning changes that I think would be the most stable over decades. And it's also possible that each building could have a different outcome. I personally would love to see the community house remain owned if we could just find a good use for it. U but perhaps the town hall could become
professional offices and generate property taxes. This town conversation should be wide ranging and consider all ideas. I've even considered like the possibility of the community house becoming a a recreation center with an indoor basketball court for example. Like we should consider everything. I also want to ask the historical
commission to like consider this from historical implications although again and see if they have other other ideas but again I think we don't need to worry about the historical properties exteriorly being changed because those are protected. So anyway, I expect this report will hopefully be available in a
month or two and I wanted to highlight this important issue for people and get people thinking about it. Thanks. Great. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. All right. Uh then we can move on to the town manager report. Thank you. Uh regarding the long range plan, uh we
announced earlier this year that the long range plan earned a statewide award for its climate resilient long range plan. Adding to that, I'm pleased to report that the Long Meadow Plan was honored with the 2025 Vernon Deans Honor Award for outstanding small town or rural plan, small jurisdiction from the
small town and rural planning division of the American Planning Association, further cementing the plan's reputation as a model for small town planning. This was a national award. Um the award was presented at the National Planning Conference on March 31st at the Colorado
Convention Center in Denver. And while we were unable to have Long Meadow officials attend the award ceremony, Judy Barrett from the planning group who had assisted us in preparing and updating Long Meadow's plan was present and accepted the award on our behalf. Uh, as was mentioned in select board
comment, a contract was signed with Fuss and O'Neal for $95,800 to assess the general building improvement needs of Town Hall, Community House, and Old Town Hall to quantify capital improvement needs, code upgrades, and ADA access
improvements. A line painting contract was signed with was signed with pro finish lines for $40,687 for a line painting work to be completed by June 1st. There's a map linked in my report that shows the um sections of town that will be painted.
It is most of town. Uh and Long Meadow Street L project waterline replacement night work is about to start next Monday night, the May 12th. This is at the intersection of Converse and Laurel as part of the waterline replacement project. Overnight work by the town's contractor, Lello Construction, will
take place between the hours of 700 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. and it's expected to last for one week, weather permitting. Converse street detour through traffic will be maintained in the westbound direction on Converse Street. Eastbound will be deter detourred uh to Bliss Road. The typical work zone on Converse
Street will utilize a one lane road alternating traffic detail. Night work at the intersection of Long Meadow Street and Forest Glenn is tenatively scheduled for June 2nd. Detour information will be available as we get closer to that date. We'll again use um electronic sign boards to notify the
public uh and social media and the town website. In my report is a memo from Fussen O'Neal uh reporting on the nightwork operations. Ever source is beginning work on Maple Road with their contractor NPL construction. This is to improve the
natural gra natural gas distribution system um for Maple Road and several surrounding streets. Work started April 21st and is going to continue through June. It's going to take place on Maple Road, Hazardville, uh, Leetwood, Fair, and Fair View Road. Construction
generally takes place Monday through Friday, uh, sometimes on Saturdays from 7 to 4:30. It's all weather dependent, and a map of the project area is available on the town website. an update uh about Long Meadow Police Department as an alert resident and diligent police
work by LPD officers Rowley and Martin thwarted a home break-in that resulted in an arrest of an individual who had two outstanding warrants. Uh Chief Stock stated in his Facebook p Facebook post commenting commending their work um that the incident highlighted the importance of both excellent police work and
community v vigilance. And an update on Long Meadow Fire. Uh kudos to the fire department for their work rescuing two baby bald eagles who fell out of their nest when high winds blew the nest down at the Fanny Stubbins Wildlife Refuge. With the assistance of Tom Ricard Ricardi of the Mass Birds of Prey Rehab
Center in Conway, the birds are going to be cared for until they can be released back into the wild. An update on a DCR, Department of Conservation Recreation grant. The tree warden submitted a grant application to DCR for a project entitled establishing tree fellow in Long Meadow and training
procurement. This grant was approved. The application was submitted through DCR's urban and forestry urban and community forestry challenge grant and was awarded in the amount of $5,6914. Two more updates. Um parks and recck department. I want to just draw your attention to three recent
announcements by the park and recck department. Parks and Recre has upgraded their registration system. They're now using my wreck. It's requiring families to reregister. Um, but it is a much more robust platform that's easier to use both for town staff and for residents.
You can uh find more information on lrpd.net. Uh, summer program registration's now open. That includes traditional day camps and specialty camps. Pool passes for Reynolds and Greenwood Pool are available and both pools plan to open for the season on
June 14th and will be open seven days a week until the end of August. And the Veteran Services Department has launched a newsletter. This is going to be released quarterly. It features um general announcements, resources, commendations, and upgrade upcoming program events for veterans. There's
also a section for subscribers to give feedback or suggestions for upcoming newsletters. And you can view the previous editions of the quarterly newsletter uh on the veteran services page on long meadow mma.gov. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much, Len. Uh any questions, comments for Len? Josh? I just want I don't know who did
it, but I want to thank uh the town for changing the single the dash line on Long Street to double yellow. Uh the first time I pulled out of my street and somebody drove around me, it scared the hell out of me. and I see weird things happen occasionally. So, I'm glad that
seems like a good safety thing to do. Um, and then just an overarching question on this. Are is our p our pothole crews getting ahead of the line painting crews? I don't want us painting over somewhere we're going to have to patch.
Um, to the extent possible. Yes. All right. There's a Yeah. different question. Put it within there. Maybe uh anyone else? Okay, great. Thank you so much, Len. Um, and so, uh, I know we have the, uh, the water study next, but,
I thought that we have a pretty long meeting ahead of us and, uh, we've got our folks from the recycling commission here. Um, so, if it was okay, I I thought that it might be appropriate for us to move that item up, uh, the agenda so we can take care of that first um,
before, you know, we kind of get into the rest of our meeting. Um I will uh move to uh to place the recycling to size discussion and vote um to to be the next item on our agenda. Second. Okay. Uh any further
discussion? All right. All those in favor? Okay. Thank you. Um so we'll go ahead and get into that. So folks uh that are here to present on that if you can come up and sit in front of a microphone. Um, and I and I think that so we've got
a and I'll kind of just start talking here while you guys are getting settled in. Um, but we have a couple of memos attached to the agenda. One is from DPW, one is from the recycling commission. And I think that we kind of have come to
some meeting of the minds here where we are going to try to roll out a system here where beginning possibly tomorrow um we will give folks the option of indicating to the town what size uh
cart that they would like. Uh but I think for the discussion we're having tonight, the biggest question is what is going to be the default size for these carts? Um in case that folks, you know, don't go in and select what cart size they want. Um so just kind of wanted
there's a lot going on here with this. So I just kind of wanted to like put that up front as that as you know what the focus of our discussion is going to be. But um I'll turn over to you Lisa if you want to um kind of talk first. All right. So I'll start with just a little bit of a background. The town signed a
five-year contract with waste management to do curbside trash and recycling as fully automated. Um at fall meeting, we voted voters approved funding to purchase new recycling carts um to facilit facilitate this process. Uh the
town has also been awarded a grant with the recycling partnership which will be $15 per household for carts and a dollar for educational material which will total around $88,000. Um at this time we're trying to decide what size carts so that we can do
an order and distribute to the households. Uh so we've um automated recycling is saving the town money in the hauling contract. The contract will be safer and more efficient for the process of the haulers. Um research shows that currently there are only two
other towns in the state of Massachusetts who run fully automated recycling and dual stream um programs. So by staying dual stream, the town will continue to reap the benefits of the favorable recycling markets compared to those towns that have gone single
stream. Uh so to discuss the cart sizing, you've probably read the memos and you'll see that the recycle commission and the DPW have put a great deal of time looking for the best option to serve the residents. And ultimately, it's been very difficult to come up with a conclusion that is agreed upon by all.
In the last quarter water bill, the town put a s a link to a survey which received 1,377 responses. Uh this residents were asked what size they felt best fit their needs for cardboard containers and if
they would prefer one or two carts. Uh 68% wanted 95 gallons for cardboard. Uh 47% wanted 96 gallons or larger for containers and 32% wanted the 64 gallon and overwhelmingly 91% decided that
they'd prefer to have the two carts versus use one and swap between the two alternating. Uh the recycle commission and DPW have been meeting with our hauler waste management to get their feedback. Uh the root drivers came in for a lunch one day and they expressed
that cardboard is a problem in town. roots often take an extra four hours comparative to the containers weeks due to the volume of how much cardboard is in town. They suggested that cardboard carts should be the 96gallon to offer the most space available. Any smaller,
they had concerns that when it tipped, the cardboard would be too crammed in and would not fall out because it has to fall via gravity. Uh with this said, we also talked to our recycle partnership who's giving us the grant. They said to, you know, listen to your hauler because they
see you re year round to how much cardboard and containers are out there and they said they sort of air on the side of larger than smaller. Uh so we've had the sample carts at the DBW for residents. A lot of them come in for the recycle sticker pass and they look at
them. Some give feedback that they can't wait for a bigger one. Some give feedback they don't know where they're going to put it. Um certainly size of families changes how much recycling each household has. Um at this time the DPW is recommending the 96 gallon for
cardboard and the 64 for containers. Uh we recommend that residents use the two carts and not offer the option to switch between you know using just one so that the two carts can have lid colors and you know one color be cardboard, one color be containers. you look out at the
street, you know, everyone has the right cart out with the right stuff inside. Um, after the carts are delivered, the town we think should then survey, see how people like the sizes, and then determine if we should offer, you know, um, switches or things like that. Um, we
have a July 1st start date with this new contract. Cards do take six to eight weeks to manufacture and then it will take two weeks to distribute. Um, so this town, if we wanted to be on time, really should be placing the order like now.
Great. Thank you. Um, and I'll turn over to the recycling commission if you all want to talk about your memo or Sure. Yeah. Um much of what uh Lisa offered is we agree with in terms of uh in terms of
the budgeting and um the design of the program where we have a difference of opinion is the size of the carts. Um the survey that went out initially, we're concerned that uh most of the people that responded the cons to this
survey, yes, they want a bigger one and but they probably didn't know how large that 95 g gallon uh bin was. Many of the people that took a look at it said far too big. I don't know where I'll put it.
Um, we had some meetings with people at the adult center and to a person, uh, pretty much they said they they have no room for it. They're having trouble, many of them handling the trash carts that we have now, which is about a third
of the size of the of the 97 uh bar uh gallon barrel. Um, so we felt that's just too big. Our recommendation is um 48 gallons for the bottle of cans, 67 gallons for the
uh paper and cardboard. Um we also did a survey for quite a few weeks driving around town in each pickup zone to see what people were throwing out, what were their requirements.
The great majority of households we saw uh the 48 gallon would more than fit their needs for bottles and cans. The 67 gallons would more than fit their needs for paper and cardboard. Uh not everybody. There was a good 10 20% that
certainly needed larger. What our proposal says is let's do a let's give default. Let's give the default the 48 and 67 gallons as a default to everybody. If you want
something different, if a household wants something different, trade up or trade down or on either or both, um we have a period. It's it's a brief period. It'll it'll be a week um to respond and uh give their choice. Okay.
Uh which they want, bigger or smaller, and uh and we'll meet those needs. We'll we'll meet those requests. This way. Any changes uh any changes that need to be made are done before the order, which will save us money. Uh we'll
order what we should be doing is order more precisely to uh what each resident wants. Is that fair? Yeah. Anything to add? The only thing I would suggest is that or clar I think I think capture it is is that we
feel that that the opt out which is what we're going to call it is a fair and reasonable way to get a get a vision of what people really want what they need and doing that upfront I think will save the town from ordering a lot of extra containers that they might not need to
try to accommodate people's requests at the back end instead of the front end. And we spoke to the the vendor and the vendor was uh agreeable to put letting us put that give give him that information in advance programming that and when he's
when he's doing the roll out he can he can give those distinct barrels to the right right home. So we feel it's a reasonable thing it can be done. It's going to be a great program. We want everybody to use the carts and enjoy the carts and uh not have to fight over them
or be unhappy with the size uh that they have. I've I've been doing workshops. I've been doing driving around and maybe it's just the people I run into, but overwhelmingly the 95gallon is overwhelming to certain certain group of
residents in the town. So questions, comments? So yeah, I mean I I agree that I think that if giving people the option at the outset to select what type of or what size cart they would um want is would be preferable. Um but I don't think that's what I heard from your
guys' report. So is there a a issue with that? Like DPW have an issue with that or a concern with that? So if we ordered this week and picked like the default size for everyone, we'll make it on time for July 1st. If we don't order this week, we run into we're probably not
making it for July 1, so Waste Management could renegotiate. We have to pay more for the hauling while we don't have the carts out. Um, we don't know that. They could though. Um, as for ordering now, I do see there could be issues of I didn't get my order in. I
got my order. Now that I see it, it's not what I want. So it would create that there's still going to be a lot of want us to switch versus everyone try out this size and then we get the feedback. I think we also had different information than you guys have depending on the demographic that's been disc. So
I think that's that's the other kind of we had the public survey which said they wanted the larger sizes. So um yeah not to take away from the work they've done just that's just the information we've gotten. Okay. And then so um in this in the kind of the system that you all are proposing so people get the cards and
then they can swap them out after receiving them. And so how would that how how would that work? So we could either decide to order in front when we get the delivery and x amount of swappable containers or we could wait and then once we get the feedback from
the survey then get a feel for how many people wanted a different size and see if it was worth doing a purchase. Um, a lot of what the carts are pretty much all around the same price, you know, $5 difference depending on the size. It's more the freight of if you fill a truck, it's $2,000. If you don't a fill a
truck, it's still 2,000. So, if you're ordering around 600, it's most beneficial. If you're ordering a h 100red, you're paying way more per cart. Okay. And then, so, and just to clarify, you're concerned with doing on the front end, that's obviously people when they actually get it, not not being happy
with uh with their decision maybe or what they were given. and also maybe just not have enough time right here to give people Okay. All right. Thank you. Um Josh, what was the timing on the survey? When did when was that? Uh it went out at the last water bill, which
would have been um three months ago and they had about a month of responses came through. I I could probably speak for the decent amount of people in town. I did the survey. I said, "Yeah, I want the biggest one." Then I went and looked at it and said, "Oh my god, that is
massive." Yeah. Um, overall both both containers and paper, everyone said the largest and so we don't actually suggest it for the containers. I I know I think we talked about it before meeting once that we those of us who went in were just shocked by how big it is. I It's
like half of a car going to the garage. It's really big. Um, so I I certainly understand why we want the biggest for paper. It makes sense logistics wise. I'm worried that people will start getting those dropped off and just lose
their minds. And I what I really don't want us to do is have to go back and order a lot more. Uh it's going to cost money and I don't I don't think the town should pay for that. I I would think if people aren't happy with it, they we
should charge them for it. But it's also really wasteful. And where do we where do we put all these carts? What do we do with them? Are they recyclable themselves? Um, so we're really this timing stinks. I mean, it's there's no
way no way to sugarcoat it. Um, but I I I do I really think and for those of us who have gone to seen them, if you see the biggest one, I think it is just too big for paper. I I would like the biggest that would fit through in I put it in my shed. Um, I should measure. Uh,
but I know 96 won't fit. It's this wide. Um, so I I think it would be a mistake to default to the biggest. Thank you. Uh, Andrew, you want to go? No, go ahead. First of all, thank you so much to all of you for doing this and I
know specifically the recycling committee has put a great deal of effort into this. I I clearly see I think we all do both sides in the sense that we have a metric, a survey that has a number, but I definitely think there's adequate like concern that really people didn't know exactly what they were getting into. I think my feeling is that
your plan would be great and could be great except this timing issue is being a bit of an issue. So I guess we need to know more about how let's say we gave it a week. How are you planning to get people's input? Like let's say we did
the default is the 48 and the 67 67 for cardboard and we're hoping maybe that's great for 85% of the people but n it's wonderful to give people choice. I think that's great. um how are you going to get the word out and could you do it by Friday basically and so that this week
we can make an order and then maybe have a chance because two months from now already puts us past as as she as Lisa noted July 1st. Yeah. I think before we panic about the deadline which we agree July 1st is our commitment is we should check with waste management to see if we
could have a a week or two beyond you mean it's possible they could give it to us faster. They're not going to have the new trucks. They're not even going to they're not going to have the new trucks that they promised us. I see. So there is a chance that we could mutually agree to postpone. I think it's I think it's worth a question. That's all I'm suggesting. Sure. Because we we didn't
think Totar, the company we're buying them from, would would do what they were going to do. When we called them, they said, "Sure, I could program them in. You don't have to. It's not going to be a big deal. We can deliver them." So, can you talk about how you would get feedback for the people who don't want the deformed? No. Yes. So I think she's
Liz has created a created a Google form. Okay. And uh basically we would ask for the town's help to distribute it. So we would like it to go through like a rooc call um on all the social media. Um we'll put it on our social media and
spread the word that way. I think we would be able to capture a lot of especially through a robocall and the Google form is anybody can take it. You don't need a Google account to do it. Um and uh I mean tell them how it populates and it so all the information
populates into an Excel spreadsheet so then we can um decipher how many carts and I'm asking in the Google form for addresses so we know if people do you know a like two people from the household take the um take the test
we'll know how to eliminate that um and we'll know who's been asking and the thing about the Google form is that this is an opt out option. If you're okay with the default, um you'll say yes, I'm okay with it. And
then uh that is counted and you don't need to go through the questions. So basically, we'll know how many wants the default and how many wants different options. And we don't need to we don't need to input the addresses right away. What we need is the numbers for the order. So we can we can figure out that
later on. So the key things I I think she's got we've got it ready to go. It can go out. Okay. In two days. It's not like we have to one day. Today, tomorrow. And if you're fine with the default, no need to uh respond to the survey, right? And and and um if we do
extend this window past this week, I think Arlene, you had mentioned maybe even next week at annual town meeting on Tuesday. Well, that was that was something we talked about, but if if it if it's too tight to do that, I mean, I think we're saying we could do it without that, but I think it would be love great. and and advantageous to use
that opportunity to have the carts there and have a that conversation. And this this isn't going to it's going to be we'll have to word it. And so this is a one-time shot. This is your chance. The opportunity she's not going to order as many extra ones if we do this because we have the data the better data. So we
we'll have to have some extras, but if we can get the majority ordered correctly, I think it'll be done. This brings us back to the default question though because if I think the people that we would miss with this survey who are unable to do it, they're going to be the ones who are we have to
be the most worried about them getting the the big cards. They probably have less use for it and would not be able to handle it as as you heard. And that's where I was kind of going with this was just giving options where folks can do this in person perhaps like if we had you know senior center things like that. Yeah. Like that
would be great. Get out get out in the street talk to people. Yeah, smart. Yeah, I I unfortunately the carts aren't here. I think I have the same reaction as Josh and I think maybe even Andrew. Holy smokes, how big is that 95? And I think if it was here, people would see
that it it's it's pretty pretty large. And we couldn't fit it in here. It wouldn't get When you're done, I'm going to say something in favor of those who favor the United States. Just so people do actually some people do want it, but that's fine. I I think the key points for me are are I think if we default too
big, there's going to be a lot of people saying I can't handle it. I can't locate it. I can't store it. And the town's going to end up spending extra money. And I I'm concerned about that. Uh I'm not at all concerned about the timing only because we know that, you know,
Waste Management isn't able to supply us to new trucks. So, we've got a bargaining chip with what we're trying to do is saying, look, if it takes an extra week or 10 days, you know, the world doesn't end. And and and that's a big a big deal. We're in this for the long. Can you can you say a little bit
more about the trucks? Sure. Part of our contract is Waste Management agreed to purchase all new trucks. They're high-tech trucks. They've got all kinds of cameras. They have detectors on them. They grab the the carts automatically and you know with with arms and stuff
like that. But the trucks are a long delivery item and and you know even when we were going through the contract they said you know we got we may not have them for July 1st. We may not have them for 6 months nine months a year later and we said well you know it's it's a
requirement of the contract but we're going to be reasonable and we hope they're going to be reasonable. So, you know, it to me it's it's not a a showstopper. More importantly for me is as we've se seen with our 35gallon
whatever it is trash bins, barrels, carts, whatever we call them. You know, we're in this for the long haul. We're in this for the long haul. And so I would hate to see us buy some and have to end up with, you know, a thousand extras of the wrong size or sizes people
swap at the DPW. We don't have room for them and and they're they're expensive. They're what, 50 bucks a piece or something like that, Lisa and and Vine. So, you know, to take our time and do it right makes a whole lot more sense than rushing and rushing because we feel this
artificial deadline of July 1st when, you know, apparently we're the only ones who feel that deadline because waste management doesn't feel the same same about the trucks. And so from my perspective, I think when people see the carts, they'll opt for the, you know,
and and again, I thought Irwin's note was great because what we're providing is I think the number was 115 gallons of the tube recycling where most towns provide a single 95 gallon for dual
stream recycling and so for single stream recycling, I'm sorry. So we're actually providing our our residents more more volume than you see if you go into Awam where they have a single 95 gallon or you go into West Springfield or some of the other towns. They have
the bigger cart but remember they're collecting everything every other week. And so from my perspective taking the time and doing it right is better than rushing it and ending up with hundreds if not more extras. I'm not worried about the timing and I'm really really
concerned about the size because Josh point out it's big and for people say well I know how f you don't know how big 95 is. It's big. Andrew Dan go ahead. Go ahead. Thanks. Um so I I was just wondering in terms of
the excess uh cardboard for example, have we had that conversation in terms of um where like do we have a place in town to to put that? Can the DPW handle that? Have we thought about that as well as part of the conversation? A lot. We thought about it a lot. So, I I know you haven't. I just for Yeah, thank you very
much. Currently, what we we've done is we've changed the uh rules at the recycling center and we've allowed people now to bring excess cardboard down there. We need to make that dumpster larger. We're kind of working on that. And we have we don't have a second location, but what we could do is
um you know just tell people get get a sticker and come down to the recycling center and they can bring their their paper. I have got some ideas for different locations but that has to pass the Paris to be before we talk about that. And then the other the other p uh point I wanted to make. So, have we have
we talked about like a a swap internally within the town if you know if Mark has a large bin rather than return it or pay more money? Can can I swap with Mark and can we track that? Well, we have to keep a record of everything. So, we there's the serial number go through the
DPW within our town. Well, the bins have to go through be recorded on a list. So, everybody's number goes with their house. So, you can't swap it. maybe DP. So I couldn't swap with Mark cuz he has a bigger one and I and I have a smaller one. But you
can turn yours into the DPW and I can turn mine in and they will reassign them to and there might be some of that. We're expecting when houses sell that people are going to change. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They'll be changing. I I do want to mention I agree with you completely Andrew that from driving around that some people really need the 95 and want
it for for for paper and cardboard. But I I I don't think it's 50%. I think I agree. I mean I I I think your solution is excellent. I think it gives the best thing we can do for our town residents is to give them flexibility. I agree that the 48 67 are fine for default but personally as a family of six people you
know a lot of packages and this idea you released brought a great point like I didn't think that when it dumps out if it's too tight it doesn't fall out and then that's kind of annoying. So, I do think for the to speak up for those families that actually need or want the nice, this gives them the option. And I do think there will be some people who
want that. But I think that if we Oh, absolutely. Yeah. And I think I think we're all kind of agreeing we definitely do not want to buy any as many as minimize the extra purchases as much as possible. So, I think the question is we're not we're not saying that the default has to be 48.67. That's sort of
what we we've agreed as a recycling commission. But if the default were 40 48.96, it still would work the same way with the op opt out if you wanted to do that. I personally think it would be the the numbers if I was betting I didn't
win Saturday, but if I was betting on um something like this, I think the 67 is going to be more common than the 95. But we disagree. I think that's fair to say. Josh, uh, this just popped in my head or at least on Sean. Would, uh, we have
ADUs. I have ADUs on the mind that's coming up pretty soon. Is that two trash cans or is that just one? If you have an ADU, do you get another trash can? We haven't gotten there. House. No, it's one. Well, it's one. If
you're a two family house, you can have two, but if you're a single family house tax, you get one. Good point. They better have some big your question. We need to work with people to work live better within that composting
more more room for recycling. There were people at the workshop I did Saturday that said that's is great. I'm going to have more room to recycle because I never have enough room to recycle. So convenient, easy, clean for the town. It's cheaper for the town. Yes. Um Mark brought up a point about the the new
trucks, right? So, do these trucks are they do they have the capability to to make sure that that folks aren't dumping trash in into No, nothing. The same process has a camera that sees it dump and it will know what house it was in and so after the fact
it'll give us an AI report to tell us who it was. Yeah. And we we have to do followup. I don't want to hear that. But I I I agree with the other side about giving them so much extra room is there's a lot of extra room for trash on the bottom, but we don't want we don't want people to do that. We want the
right amount of room to accommodate the recycling and not too too much room. Um just a few things for our grant. Um it's $15 per household. They say if we have weekly recycling, it must be a 64 gallon to be reimburseable. So it says the grantee at its discretion may distribute
carts that are smaller to fit the needs but such carts are not eligible for the grant reimbursement. However, if every if every house gets either a 67 or a 95 that's but if we have people opt out both for 48 they're not going to be reimburseable and that would not be a
lot of people. Yeah. Okay. Um go ahead Liz. Can I just say something also about the trucks? I I I don't want the um people to think that the old trucks are um not going to pick up trash because they they will have that arm on it to
grab the arm of an a cart that is going to come in July and still dump it automatically. It's just not going to have the grabbing yet. So, right, it's still going to be auto like semi-automated. It's not some person lifting it over their head and throwing
it into the bin. So, work I love that. I was just going to make a motion just to move this along. I don't know what people Well, yeah. I mean, I I I think um right right now from what I'm hearing, you know, I'm in favor of doing it at the outset and giving people the
the opt out option, but I would I I I am concerned though about having it limited to just this week. Um, you know, if we do think that there's enough leeway for us to go into next week and to give people an option, too, I would like to do that. But again, I think it's great,
but like they've said, I think there needs to be an an agreement with with the hauler that that we're going to be not have all these in place on July 1st, it sounds like, but from my my personal perspective, as I said, I'd rather do it
right than do it quickly. and and you know if that means we need to have a discussion with the hauler then we we ought to do that but but do that tomorrow I propose that we basically aim to try to do it the day after town meeting gives us a week to get Google
forms online and blast it to the town at town meeting more people will be captured and then we go on like that Wednesday we can we can contact waste management tomorrow exactly have to wait for that should be a very quick question. So if if they're if they say
no, July 1st or we're going to charge you x amount of dollars, we could have an emergency meeting and change this. Yeah. But it sounds like it's more likely. It sounds more likely from what Mark says. So well, they they they did promise to help us with the implementation. There's
nothing better they could do than accommodate us. Okay. Yeah. So I mean I agree. I mean I would like it to go into next week just to give people time um to and get find different ways to get to folks to make sure that people get a chance to actually look at this developed and we
have developed more. Yep. So you know if we can go until next next Wednesday I think after town meeting I mean that so would you propose to bring the cards to town meeting and then have a slip of paper maybe or like have they last town meeting if you recall? We can do that. We can definitely whatever you think is best. definitely do that. And we said
you could hand out something at the gate maybe for them to look at and they come into town meeting and then well we want I think it would be ideal if they could those who could if those who haven't already done the Google form maybe some people who are don't use a lot of computer stuff they can have fill out a slip basically and then maybe you guys
could enter it. Thank you for all the work you're doing for this. Obviously it's it's a lot but it's a huge responsibility right now. The question still comes down for the high percentage of people in town who don't fill out a a respond. What should the default be? And I, you know, I I
tend to agree with Josh that that the default ought to be, you know, 48 gallons for plastic and glass and 67 gallons for paper and cardboard. And and for families like yours and others, you know, we we target those, but there are
we know that they're a lower percentage of the people in town and say, you probably want to go in and ask for the 95. I totally agree with that. I agree with the size the sizes that we're doing, you know, and we'll do that and and it's a lot easier to target the the larger Well, they're alert. They're
alert. I mean, having done several workshops, people been talking about this, people kind of know something's coming and that's that they have to respond to and uh I think they they'll want to respond real quick. So, we I don't know. Sure. I'll make a
motion that we approve the the proposed system for uh identifying and purchasing recycling carts and that the default be 48 gallons for glass and plastic and 67 gallons for paper and cardboard and give
residents through Wednesday the 14th 14th of May to select an alternative opt out size opt out. Well, they don't opt out. They just get to select an alternative size, Arlene, for for their recycling bins.
Second. Um, any further discussion? I just ask in any communications you send out that you just you put the dimensions of them. Uh, I know that we have pictures, but if you could actually put square inches. We can do that. They've
got to they really need to see it. And we've tried to make No, I agree, but I think it would be helpful for that to One comment is if days if days really matter. Mark said through the 14th. Did if we wanted to we could say through the 13th which is the end of Tuesday and
then they could deliver it on Wednesday. I don't know if days matter but I'm I'm fine. I'm willing to change it till the 13th at all. 13th is the is the town meeting through the end of the town meeting for people to make their decision. Oh well that's fine. We're not I think it's a little rougher. She's got
to input that. We'll do it right at the time. Keep it the 14th. Okay. Fine. I also don't honestly feel you guys have done so much work and it's a lot to drive these things around. I honestly think it's enough to tell people it's at the DPW as it's always been if you you should look at it there. Like I don't
want you to feel like you have to I can't drive it display it'll be at a town meeting basically. It'll be at town meeting but I think tell people to go to DPW. Okay. And that's been very helpful because people a lot of people are buying their not that far. Anything
else? Okay. All right. Um, all those in favor? Okay. Great. All right. Thank you all so much for joining us. Thank you. Uh, good luck outside. All right. Um, and I want to uh we'll move on to our water and sewer rate
presentation. Thank you all for being patient. my phone. Yeah, thank you so much for joining us tonight. Um, and we've got a PowerPoint and um, so this tonight is a presentation. We're not going to be taking a vote tonight. Uh, but um, we're
going to kind of just digest this presentation, ask questions, and then uh, we'll revisit this at our next meeting. Um, but I'll hand hand it over to you. Great. Thanks so much for having us here tonight. My name is Jennifer Gilbert. I'm the project manager at Tyen Bond and I'm joined with Josh Bousard who was the main contributor to doing
the rate analysis. And we'll answer, excuse me, answer any questions at the end if you have it. Um, so um, tonight we'll be presenting rate options to the board which will enable the town to continue to provide reliable sewer and water uh, service to their customers and fund capital improvements plans that are
essential um, for the continued operation. So, if you go to the next slide, just as a reminder before I jump in into the rates um about the previous water study um that we did, um that was part of an ongoing um uh u diving into
historically comprehensive approach that the town has been taking in the past. They've looked at storm water. They've looked at sewer, roadways, and street trees. So, this was like a natural next step to look at the water infrastructure. Um and the study um provided a plan that proactively replaces water manes. And if you go to
the next slide, this is just what was presented at that last meeting briefly showing the GIS map that showed the prioritization of the water main replacements and quite a large um uh budget that you would need in place to start start this herculean effort of
replacing your water manes. So if you recall um about 80% of your water manes are AC, 30% are undersized and over 50% are 60 years or older. um in particular that combination of age and material um creates a more likelihood of that you're
going to have emergency repairs. I know this has come up before the board and DPW and you all are aware of the the both costly impacts to emergency repairs but also unfortunately disruption to your customers. So being able to proactively replace um as you go through the city um and prioritize those
locations that are more likely to um fail is um would be an advantage to the community. Um so the next question is well how that's a big nut to crack like that's a lot of uh um capital improvements that you would need to do. So the next question is how do you fund that um to b fund the backlog of
critical water infrastructure means um so uh one way to do it and how we proceeded was do an initial study of a rate evaluation look at possible structure options that are differ from your current structure um evaluate customer impacts and community
comparison. So, how would these um rate increases compare to similar size communities as yourselves? Um and also um just start looking at the anticipated Springfield water sewer expense increases. As you're aware, there's a very large capital improvement project they're doing. Um and I'm sure you're
starting to get correspondents from them. So, we want to make sure that that's part of the decision-m and information going forward um with f further evaluation of the rates. Um another thing is that the the intention of this again this is initial study is it to be a living model that can be
adjusted as your needs change capital improvements change or you know as um your main source of of your water and getting rid of your sewers from Springfield water and sewer. It's not always in your control um to be able to um set it yourself. So uh one um goal of
this uh rate evaluation was to maintain a healthy retain earnings. It's crucial for rate setting, um, ensures financial stability, supports future capital projects, and provides a buffer against unforeseen um, circumstances. My understanding is that um, currently it
sits in around the 270,000 um, range um, which isn't necessarily the best. You know, the minimum 500,000. We like to see four months of operation maintenance costs, which be for you guys would be about a million dollars. So, um it just puts you in a tight spot um to be
reactive and to um you we want to have a balance of not debt funding all of your projects like being able to do those smaller projects. And that's part of our evaluation was to um include in that retaining earnings being able to pay for projects just out of the capital you have. So, um and then finally, just
wanted to um uh talk talk upon just the idea of looking at more of long-term look at this. you can stagger rate increases sort of an idea of where you're heading um versus to avoid hopefully that big spike that is a jolt to to your customers. Okay, next one. Um one item
that is of particular note is um Long Meadow's customers um I think it goes without saying that you know your your your constituents most of it's residential. You have very little um industrial and um uh cons uh excuse me
industrial commercial use. Um, so 99% of the town's customers are of less than 2 inches in size. Um, that was from fiscal year uh 23 and there's not large parcels where you're looking to be doing large development and that's not the characterization of the community either. So some communities would get a significant part of the revenue from
those those users and in the case with Long Meadow, it's really solely on the residents um with single family maybe some double um um multiple family homes. So, um, another thing before I move on and get into the heart of the rate study, just want to mention that the town has significantly higher than
average reg residential water usage largely due to the above um average irrigation sprinkler system use. So, that was another thing as part of the um rate study we wanted to be mindful of and and um try to address based on EPW's
input and from we're hearing from Lynn and the town manager. So the next um slide here is just a brief I um look at what is a rate um evaluation proc uh process. You know I think you've seen rate studies in the past and several of
you are very familiar with the process. Um but in in the end you want to have a net um look at your expenses versus revenue. And um what we did is we looked at your expense data um depth service capital expenditures and we also included um some inflation for those
capital pro uh projects so that you are keeping pace with as we all know prices will be going up. Um for revenues we utilize existing statements um that we received from Lisa and from Ian. Um we use the meter inventory three years of usage data to build out the model. Um
and then we did a calibration as well. Also Josh calibrated it to make sure that it was within the accuracy um range that we're expecting um for projecting in the future. Um so based on the projected expenses and revenue we can identify proposed rates. Um and then
next is evaluate customer affordability and rate recommendations. So that just gives you a brief overview of it. Um so we were um asked to look both at water and sewer rates. Um so first I'll look at the preliminary rate evaluation for water. Um this graph is showing you the
operation operation and maintenance is shown in blue um which is fairly steady. It is showing some increases over the years. Um the major expense there would be buying water from Springfield Water and Sewer. Um in orange is the town's capital improvement plans. Um and you
can see that that's driving the increase in um expenses for the next five years totaling about $53 million um over the next five uh years is um the current uh capital improvements plan. Okay, the next slide. Um, so we looked at two
alternatives um for the rate structures. Um, the first option is alt A. We looked at your existing rates and then just proposed rate increases. Um, so that was applied both to the meter charges as well as your unit charge. Meter charges of the flat fee that you would think of.
Um, and then the unit charge u would be per usage per um uh cubic feet. Um, okay. And then we'll go to the next slide. Um this graph is just showing you graphically what it where your relative increases in um cost would be. So if
you're looking at this, blue is your operation to maintenance cost. So again, relatively steady. I mean, there's obviously going to be expenses that'll um um increase over time. Gray is your existing debt, so things that you're already paying um for previous projects.
Black is the new depth debt for the capital projects. Um and then the red is the capital outlay for smaller projects. Um um and then to help spread the cost of the work, retain earnings really needs to build initially. So part of the um rate increases is to start building
that retain earnings to get to a more healthy level for long-term sustainability of your your enterprise fund. Um and like I mentioned previously, we're really looking for that million dollars if we can four months of operation and maintenance costs. Um at that five you get time, you get to the end of fiscal year
29. Okay. Um and then just to literally put it on on the paper, what is your existing versus your um the proposed tiered um rate? So alt B, we're looking at an alternative to your existing structure. In this case, right now you have an annual annual base charge and
then you do have a flat usage charge um which is shown in the middle, the non-or highlighted section. And then what we're proposing for the future would be at the top taking those annual base charges and actually having them paid quarterly with the quarterly bills. And then the second
thing that would be added is doing a tiered usage per um cubic feet. So the more you use the the higher the rate would be is what we um are proposing um as an option for you guys to consider. Um, and the the reason why uh you would
want to look at this type of um restructuring um is especially during wet summers um I know this is a concern for the community is that when it rains a lot, people aren't necessarily watering, which means revenue is going down. Um, and so what we've done is that
not only are we taking the annual charge and making it quarterly, but we're also increasing the percentage of the revenue that's coming from that flat fee so that you'll have a more steady revenue stream that's coming in. And then as usage, you know, we do want to make sure that you're getting the usage um charges
based on amount you're getting. So um generally increasing um revenue generated for higher users. So the more water they use, the more cost per cubic foot. um and yeah reduces the unpredictability due to weather conditions is typically why a community
would choose to go this route. Okay, do the next slide. Um so altB again we're talking about that modified similar colors similar um type of um graphic here um and we're staggering the rate increases um same goals as the existing
rate structure the um percentages are about the same as well um for the percent increases where you'll see if you go to the next slide where where is the difference between the alt A and alt B maintaining your existing or doing a modified structure um so you would want to look at the customer impact so what
we have shown in this graph and I'll walk you through it because I know you're initially like what does this mean? Um annual bill for average residential customers and what we're showing is in blue is the average customer and in orange is the largest customer. Um which um let's see it's uh
3,400 cubic feet for average users and um just about 550 umund00 uh cubic feet for the largest user um in the community. Um so for the average community which is in blue so look at the bottom half of this graph the existing rate structure is solid and we
have about $185 per year increase or 50 cents a day. However in a modified rate structure which was alt two uh B they'll be playing slightly less at $129 a year or 35 cents a day. And that's all in comparison for fiscal year uh 26 I
believe it was. Yes. Um now if you want to jump up to the top half of the graph the for the largest water user the modified structure is the dotted line and the existing structure is in the solid line. So by sh switching to the modified line as you can see the dotted
line is above for the higher user and lower for the um existing average customer. So, um it's just shifting some of that um revenue to your larger users and overall a reduction for an average user which makes up most of your your your community. Um and one other last
thing before we go to the next slide is just checking for afford availability. Um so we like to aim for utility bills to stay below 3.5 of the customers um annual income and we evaluate both median um income as low as the lowest
per capita. Um and in both scenarios you're far below um the thresholds. And in my conclusion um slide it'll show those percentages for you. Okay. And then my final graph about water rates is showing a weight water weight um comparison. Um again this is
Long Meadows average annual households if you in implemented um alternative B the modified structure. Um so for uh fiscal year 26 compared to other um water um companies or uh public water supplies in the area um we are in the
lowest uh cortile. It should be noted just because I know the question comes up is how many people are doing tiered systems? Um is this common? Would we be an outlier? It's very common especially for utilities of your size. Um those shown with the asterisk are the ones that actually do have tiered structures.
Um so you would be one one among many but totally every community needs to make the decision if it's the right fit for you guys. Okay. Um so in conclusion about the water capital projects are driving these rate increases. As you can see it was $53 million is um the reason
why we'd be increasing the rates. Um both structures either all A or B will build your retain earnings to a healthy level. And as I mentioned previously, the financial burden for both of those is well below the um threshold uh for for household burdens. Um alt A, as a
reminder, the existing rates will be increased to fund the CIP projects and without modifying the um structure that you currently have. Um and then alt B, it will reduce the variability in revenue, creating more stable, predictable revenue stream. Adding the
tiered juices is very common um and will increase revenue collected from higher users and it's a relatively cost sav cost savings for an average customer over the keeping your existing um structure.
Okay, next we'll uh a lot of these slides will look very familiar because we're just going through it again but this time for sewer. So in this graph it's showing the operation maintenance. Similarly with Springfield Water and Sewer, that's your by far your largest uh ON&M cost. Um 2%
escalation was uh assumed as part of our analysis. Um and you know, differing from the water enterprise fund, it's only about $10 million in um CIP projects in the next five years. So um as you'll see in the next few slides, it's a significant le significantly
lower rate increase is being proposed. Um so uh for alt a the existing rate in proposed rate structure again a little bit of repetitive but we're going to be increasing both the meter and usage charges um um for both uh in both scenario um since the total cost of the
sear projects are smaller thus uh rate increases are lower. Okay, next slide. Um very similar slide as you can see instead of in the range of 20% um rate increases over the next four years that's uh more like from um 6 to 2% um
and we'll have the same goal of wanting to get retain earnings um increased. Um the onm cost for sewer is less um so actually if you hit a million it would be about seven months of an O andM expenses. We have that assumed right now for this analysis, but if you chose um
to um set it at 500,000, you know, have it more in the four four months range, absolutely could be possible. But just for consistency between the two models so that you're doing apples to apples, we did keep it as $1 million retain earnings. Uh then the second option for your consideration is alt B. That's the
proposed uh modified base rate. Um, similar to the water rates, we um recommend splitting your annual base charge into a quarterly base charge. Um, and there is not a tiered structure um for sewer. So, this would just be
maintaining your um flat um usage by um um residential, commercial, and um sewer for your sewer uh commercial for the usage, pardon me. Um it should be noted um I guess you can skip that. It's fine. Um yeah, we're good. All right. Next uh
slide uh alt B enterprise performance proposed rates um 2% um to zero just maintaining um so there's less of an increase um required if you do alt B um but this achieves the exact same goals as alt
A. Okay. And then similarly customer impact. Um in this scenario we looked at the average residential annual bill. um it's less than 10 cents a day we're talking about to to be able to um pay for the $10 million in capital improvement plans in in fiscal year 26.
So um relatively low income. I mean I spend more of that on coffee. So um we also check for affordability well below the 3.5 threshold and we find that it's reasonable um for these this increase. Uh similar to water reach in
conclusion capital projects are driving rate increases return earnings um will be grown to about a million dollars. You're well below the threshold for affordability. Um all a will maintain your existing structure um but increase to accommodate and pay for the planned
CIP projects and the modified rates will um reduce variability because you'll be shifting to about 30% of your your revenues coming from um unit charge and 70% would be usage charge. Um so relatively saving cost savings for an average customer also um under under
this um with how we modified it. So um the final slide for your consideration would be just talking about you know like what was the impetus for us? Why are we doing this? I know that's always the question is why my bill? Why do I have to increase my I don't want to pay more. Well to be able to continue to get
reliable service um not have disruptions to your service. You don't want boil orders. This is, you know, may you may still have those things happen, but the idea here is that you want to reduce the frequency and hopefully by making a proactive replacement of your water manes um and to make the upgrade needed
update upgrades to your sewer system um that we um will have less impact overall. Um and um I appreciate the the uh thought and effort and time that goes into making this really important decision about um putting more money in, you know, out of people's pockets. So, I
just wanted to recognize that. Um and then the other goal here is just making sure that we can retain those earnings um and to a healthy level. So next steps um I would we recommend and after talking with Sean and and um Lisa and the rest of the uh DPW is you know if
you really are looking at the modified tiered structure I'd recommend doing a little bit more analysis to refine those tiers. We made a baseline assumption. Um, but based on doing a deeper dive into your data, figuring out where you want to hit those levels, um, and balance affordability for different
usage sizes, um, would be recommended. Um, and really want to also focus on consistency and quality of consumption data. I know there was um, some um, issues Jos was having with LA few years of data. No fault to Lisa, there was a change in in how um the information was
being recorded and but just having a consistent next three years would be would be helpful or you know going forward as you build and make this more of a living model and reliability. Um and then evaluate customer impacts for mean-based or senior citizen discount. I
know that was another thing that the community has been talking about for some time and and is of concern to um lower income um people in the community as to whether they could get some type of discount while also providing the needed revenue that the that the DPW
needs to provide service. Um and then f uh the other thing is further evaluate possible increases with Springfield Water and Sewer. Um, I know that you guys probably are having intense conversations with in the coming days or years of what is coming next and and making sure that you're keeping up up to
pace with that and and making sure it's hopefully not uh unpredictable. Um and then just reiterating living model same with the water study just we want to recommend to keep continually to improve it and refine um because then once you start something it's good to keep it up
to date and that way it's more useful to the community and to your to your customers. So um with that we can go to the water looking question mark um that we came across which I thought you'd appreciate um and either Josh or I or um the town can help answer. Great. Thanks
so much. Go ahead Josh. Um, I this is great. Thank you very much. Uh, I I've been banging the drum for a while about increasing our uh meter rates, which I and I think that that is a a great start no matter what we do. Um, I just a question generally from other times
you've looked at for with tiered pricing, do you find that having the tiered pricing uh affects behavior so people are cognizant of not hitting the top tier? Can that then lead to revenue shortfalls because people are maybe in
the short term that happens but uh is that something you see or is people are gonna have a green lawn no matter what? You want to answer that one? Yeah, I was I have an answer but please Josh. So according to studies uh there's a lot of price inelasticity with water usage.
It's similar to fuel usage for a car. People that are going to use high amounts of water, they're going to use high amounts of water regardless of what you're charging them. And uh vice versa, those who are using little bits of water are going to use little bits of water regardless of what the price is. Just
those people are typically more price cognizant versus the higherend users that don't care and they just want their green lawns. So typically when we've introduced these tiered structures, there's not a dip in revenue. It's pretty consistent, but it can happen.
There's there could be a potential variability in it. So, I don't want to say 100%. That was my impression. So, I I've never read a study on that though. So, great. Thank you, Andrew. Actually, that was kind of my exact same question because just for your for your feedback when I
read uh slide 15 and this claim alternate B alter alternative B the modified rates will reduce variability in revenue creating a more stable and predictable revenue stream. When I first read this without hearing your explanation, I didn't understand that. That seemed counterintuitive because it
seemed to me well if you're going to charge people a tiered rate, the people at the highest might start using less water because they don't. And then that seemed less reliable to me. But I'm now understanding I believe that that's more this is a more reliable mainly because your meter rates are increasing. Yes. So
in this scenario this we're going up to 38% of the revenue would be right through. So a third alternative would be to make it to raise the meter rate which I think this board is pretty sympathetic to doing that to be honest and not
having a tier system which would be the most uh reliable as far as income goes because therefore you're getting the definite meter rate and then nobody is deterred from using more water because it's too expensive at the top of the tier. So that I think would be worth
having numbers uh at at a follow-up meeting to maybe suggest, you know, alternative a but with a higher meter rate. And then I mean that's we really want kind of as much predictability as we can. We know that when it rains it kind of messes things up a little bit.
we want to minimize at the end of the year when we're off. But to me, if I'm thinking about how to make this the most reliable as far as the money we're going to get for the town, the highest reasonable meter rate and then a flat rate for everybody so that nobody's deterred from using water. That seems to
be the best compromise in my opinion. I think that starts to butt up against um then we're people on fixed incomes, then you know the most reliable would be charge everyone three grand and that's it. You mean without regard regardless of water? Use as much water you want and
then we'll just charge you three grand for your meter. That's very predictable. That would be totally unfair. No, but but that's what we're getting towards a bit. If if we get the meter rate too high. Oh, I agree. Not too high, just reasonable. I mean, well, we have to balance uh predictability and uh being
steady with um also being fair. And I think which is why we have Well, it's not that the people who are using more water aren't paying more. They are paying more. It's just we're talking about should they pay an even higher percentage. Correct. And I do think it's valid that if you get a bill that's like
$5,000 when it used to be $2,000 or $3,000 used to be $1,000 that might deter people from using so much water on their lawn. I mean I think it's possible. And I think it's also possible that people some people just water loan no matter how much it costs. But if we're just thinking about how to be the
most reliable as far as the town's income, I I feel like that's the compromise. There's probably no right or wrong answer. It's fine. that we need to get the money from these rates somehow. And yeah, just just a for so for affordability that can get tricky um if
you're just wholeheartedly only doing a fixed rate um because it does bring into you know equity and like well why are they pay why is that is our current situation that is what we do now though right yes right so okay yeah Dan thanks yeah so I totally agree
with Andrew's points in terms of the having a you know raising that rate we want predictable uh revenue um something we this board has talked about for I don't know months maybe years. But um in regards to um like discounts for seniors or or
other folks in town, could you just talk about how we could how this board could go about potentially doing that because that's something that um I'm certainly interested on that one, too. Okay. So, I I've just actually recently looked at a senior discount for a um another utility. And what's difficult about
implementing something like that is you need to know all of the all of the residents that would fall within that senior discount range so that you can figure out what the accuracy in your revenue drop off would be because for closed systems like this you need to
take in a certain amount of revenue regardless of where that's coming from. So if people are getting charged less money everyone else needs to make up the difference for that. So that that can be very complicated. Um, what we did in this other analysis is we looked at a
15% across the board rate decrease for senior citizens or citizens that fell within a certain income bracket. Um, and that resulted in a need to raise the rates for everyone else by about 2%. So, it it can have a pretty large
impact on everyone else depending on what the uh what the criteria is. of a particular committee like what percentage of them would qualify for it. So great. Thank you Mark. Thanks Benise. I have I have a bunch of questions. I've
gone through this very very thoroughly and I thanks for your done a lot of done a lot of work on on water systems and on this and so first just a couple of comments. The meter size of half inch and 3/4 in people need to know it's not a choice. It was there was a zoning
change. residences move from half inch to three quarter inch I think in the late 60s early 70s those are all residential homes so to differentiate them is no purpose at all it's really when your house was built and what you ended up getting and so for most
purposes and as you did they're considered the same above 3/4 in it may be the house that went to extra you know couple of dishwashers or whatever the heck it is but but I think you need to people need to understand that that's
really the basis behind that that kind of thing. The other thing that I'm concerned about is you talked about the what you called the water stabilization fund I think or or actually you called it the capital fund. I I grew up here
believing it was the rate stabilization fund because and I said this at the last meeting when we set water rates we do it the inverse of the way we set town budgets. What we do is we know our expenses and we guess on our revenue
because we're setting the expenses the revenue for the coming year. And so we guess on what the what the usage is going to be. And the one thing I can guarantee you, we never guess right. We either guess low or we guess high. We never guess right. And and so I think
when Springfield Water and Sewer were here, they talked about this concept of true up. At the end of the year, they said, "You use more water than you so quote unquote contracted for. You owe us an extra x dollars, you use less. We deduct it from the so it's it's kind of
the trueup, but that fund has always been required and necessary and utilized for that what I'll call endofear true up with with Springfield Water and Sewer. It had never been the capital fund. Now over the years it had gotten large and
occasionally we used it in fact for the small projects. I remember using it for the small projects but we mostly bonded larger projects. And so just so people understand that you know we need to maintain that fund. You say for capital
for capital emergencies and expenses that's fine but we really need it for that endofear true up in adjustment of the rates because we can never know what what what people are going to be using. The other request I would have is the
the slides you had and I think slide 13 14 or 18 the ones that you had the bar charts with the different colors. Yeah. It would be extreme I don't know Mike if you can put that one up but it would be extremely helpful because you have at the bottom of that that chart a a major
blue bar that you call operating expenses. But I think that it would help us and help the town to separate out what we pay Springfield, make that as green for what our operating expenses are because
some of those operating expenses are literally town of or the city of Springfield or spring Springfield water and sewer passroughs. And so I think it would be useful because much of that increase is literally coming out of the city Springfield and not related to the
the town of Long Meadow. And that would help us look at that a lot better. Uh the other thing I I was concerned about is is tiers. And and the reason I'm concerned about tiers is that the way we
run our town is we'd have to have a different tier every quarter because we do quarterly billing. And I looked at I that's what I did over the weekend. I looked at all 5490. That's how many there are water
meters. And I looked at every usage by quarter because I have that data. And you can't set a tier level without adjusting it every quarter because especially in the you know the the uh irrigation quarters our rates go way up
and so tiers would be very very difficult in my opinion to administer and and and monitor and to control. And frankly I I guess my comment to the select board is we have a system and the system consists of three primary sources
of revenue right you us the well we charge by usage but we look at meeting three primary sources of of expenses and that is capital needs our cost of our operations and then the
whether or not we want to modify this what I call water stabilization fund. Okay. And so, you know, we use a meter rate and a variable rate to to do that. And as Andrew indicated, we can
adjust the meter rate. And for years and years, we were low. For the people at home, and I know I'm going on for a long time, the the meter rate was illegal in Long Meadow for years. Wow. We implemented it and it got brought up at a town meeting that it's illegal. Our
charter said you shall charge for water by volume. We needed a charter change. So we had to withdraw the meter rate and so the meter rate came back in very low. We we increased it once two years ago. We increased it this past meeting. You
know from my perspective and it's my perspective only. You know, getting to this whole idea of how much do you charge the little users, the big users, we can take the capital needs and say if you're connected to the water system, you have to pay your share of
the capital needs. That's the fixed rate. And you know, Josh was shaking his head. That makes a lot of sense. It'd be very, very high if we did 100% of that. And we knew that. So, we were working our way up to. But I I have a real tough time to say the city of Springfield is
charging us a flat rate per cubic yard or 100 cubic feet or whatever they charge the but we're going to charge a variable rate because we can do that. The the towns you indicated that charge variable rates aren't on the Springfield city water and sewer system
because they charge a fix a a fixed rate. I feel very unc un uncomfortable charging a variable rate when we're paying a fixed rate, you know, personally. So I I think what we need to do is say the current system we
have works. Let's look at what our capital costs are. Put in a plan as we did folks in the select board. We knew that we needed a storm water utility, but we couldn't get there in one year. And we set a an eight or 10
year horizon to slowly move to where the town was fully funding the storm water system. We ought to do the same thing with water capital through fixed rates. We adjust it percentage based on the percent you use. And the system we use
is the bigger the meter, you know, the more you you have the capability of using, the more you're paying for it. And after that, we pay for pay for the operations based on on volume. And again, we guess on it. The last thing I'll tell you is you're saying we need to build that reserve fund up to a
million dollars. We can do that tomorrow. How do we do it tomorrow? We have a very, very dry year, right? And we're going to because we make an assumption we use the past what five years running average of water
usage. If we if we guess high and water rates are water uses are lower you know we we're screwed up. But if we guess low and water usage is higher that fund goes up. And I've been on the
select board now 15 years and that fund's been over a million bucks and we've used it up. So it, you know, we can charge people for it, but we may be better off, you know, using adjustment based on the volume we use as an assumption on the on our rate system.
All in all, you know, I think the system we have can work. I think you said that the system we have can work. You know, we we look at fixed and variable rates and we we move forward with that. I the last thing I'll talk about is the sewer
system. We use a quarterly sewer system with a cap and I didn't see that cap anywhere in your discussion because we've gone through a lot of it iterations on this and people get very
upset when they're paying sewer fees on irrigation water and so with the help of the DPW a couple of years ago we set a 55 unit quarterly cap on sewer rates that needs to be taken into account when we sewer fees and that I didn't see that in
your Did you know about that? I I was aware of it. I I I know it was a while ago. Do you recall putting it in? Okay. Yeah. Okay. That's not We need to probably see that. That that tweaks that a lot and and and it it makes a big big difference in well I'll call April
through se through August September kind of kind of usages numbers and and it's not going to it's not going to make that big a difference but it's not the two or three cents. I think the number we're going to find is going to be probably twice that because of the the cap system. There's a lot of people who hit
that quarterly cap. So I I have a lot more comments, but I I just like to start with there and and like I said, when you get to tier systems, I've looked at the tiers. It's a mess on a quarterly basis. We'd be in in the system constantly. Thanks. Um I just
wanted to add some some more to what Mark was saying about the cap. Um, and this may make more sense to you, but in some of the research we've done on other communities and how they've structured their rates, I've noticed other communities instead of doing a cap on a
sewer, they do um like a 80% sewer charge as opposed to 100%. So, it makes it a little bit easier for the calculation. Um, but I I guess I'm just putting that on your plate to look at when you go back and look at that because I I don't want to speak for the board and I actually have no role in
this at all, but um I think they maybe would consider seeing how other communities have done that because I know it's pretty common to not bill 100% for sewer with the recognition that not all of that is um making it to our sanitary sewer system. Yeah. Lyn Lynn,
just as a response, we looked at irrigation and we looked at that 80%, we looked at a bunch of things and that 80, you know, we have people in town who water their lawn twice a day, whether it needs it or not, you know, and I don't I
don't condone that. I don't think it's right. Clearly, it doesn't need to be done. But in truth, they shouldn't be paying sewer fees for what's going into the into irrigation. And so this 55 cap probably isn't the perfect solution,
but it's the one that you know Lisa came up with. It was the it was a it's workable and since we implemented all those complaints and discussions pretty much calmed down. I mean I think alternative would be doing meters you
know for all the irrigation. Yeah. And an alternative was a second meter. But that the cost of that is is not only for the installation in the meters, but then administering it. Oh, yeah. Yeah. But and and believe me, there have been plenty of residents who said, "Can I put
in a second meter just for irrigation?" And the answer is no, you can't because we didn't want to do the meter reading and all that kind of stuff. Anyone else? Any other questions? One quick question because Mark alluded to uh the fact that
maybe the town doesn't have the capability for a tiered system. I'm not suggesting that that I support a tiered system. I just want to hear from the the town. Is that something that if it were to be implemented, do we have the ability to do that? Well, I didn't mean the town can't do it. I mean, Munis can do all it. You'd be shocked at what
Munis can do for water systems. It's actually sort of how the cap is working right now because it's tiering at 55. It goes to $0 per unit. So it's easy to add the tiers. What I indicated was the quarterly changing tiers every quarter would be something we'd have to go into
the system and change the tier every time because we're we're making it sound like that's something that's really difficult. I'd like to it's not it's not difficult. No. And you typically you wouldn't be changing it per quarter. you would set the rates for the tiered structure for
that year and it it would it would be set in a way to account for all that variability seasonally. So you'd have a huge dip in your winter months where no one's using water and then your usage would ramp back up and you'd make a lot more of your revenue within the summer months assuming that it wasn't a super
wet summer. to your point by increasing the percentage that you'd be getting from the fixed fee or your char your unit charge that that that would less. So the way the way it would look just so it's clear the year starts everyone's kind of like ramping up to 0 to 2,000 and everyone's paying their rate and
then it's not till the very end that some people are going to go over the benchmarks to get and then you get it. Okay. Correct. Okay. Yeah. So I actually see how it would work. I don't think that's correct because Munis looks at every quarterly usage. It doesn't look
at your total. Yeah, it's not cumulative through the year. It's not cumulative to your point. So each quarter will have a threshold. So Mark's point is actually right. You'd have to be resetting the threshold every quarter because winter and summer are different. The usage is the usage. So once the usage goes over
so I look at it cumulative then well it's not cumulative quarter to quarter. What it is is each each quarter is going to have a different amount of usage. So you'll have different sized buckets. Once a bucket gets filled it'll spill into the next bucket. Once you hit the next quarter, the buckets reset and you
start filling the buckets again. But like in the winter quarter, nobody's ever going to get to the threshold is what you're saying. You only see people hitting the tiers in the summer typically. Now I understand. That's fine. But it would be it would be the same rate structure every single
quarter. You just make up most of your revenue in the summer. It's the way it is now. Yes. Correct. Yeah. You just have buckets now with a tiered structure rather than just one large big pool. Okay. Right. One more. I hate to keep it going because it's a really long
meeting tonight. I know. Could you go to slide nine? I just was wondering you know when you for these um meter chargers I just wondered why you know it's a 22% increase 24% increase 20% and then only a 4% increase. is just to is more conservative to basically get in a
better financial situation sooner or one could like make it a little more even and make that rate increase a little more of a gradual slope. Yeah. One of the biggest thing is by the time you get to fiscal year 29 we as long as you don't have a very wet summer we'd be
ramping up to get to a healthy level for the retain earnings. Um so that pot of money that um Okay. So it's just a more conservative approach to kind of do it all together kind of the big driver for those large increases to begin with is due to your current capital schedule. So
I have the model up in front of me so I can look at these numbers in real time. Uh you're going from uh $921,000 worth of capital projects in fiscal year 25 to about $5 million in capital projects in fiscal year 29.
After fiscal year 29, the capital projects kind of stable out and you're looking at about $5 million in capital expenditures yeartoear. That 22, 24, and 22% rate increase is to get you up to that capability of being able to pay those projects off. Once once you get to
that capability, your rate increases don't need to be as large because you're already there. It'll be flattened out a lot. So, this is this is this because of our backlog or correct? So if you were to push capital projects out, which I don't advise doing, you could spread out those rate increases even further. We've been doing that for decades. Correct.
Great. This is the result of dealing. Can you imagine if had had we had the foresight to think about this, you know, 20 years ago, you know, we've been we've been since I've been on the board in three years, we're talking about this every couple months, the and the projects that we have to do. We've
neglected um the rate structure for years. And now look at what we we're talking about the what we're gonna have to pay. Correct. It's crazy. So I mean everyone listening at home like this is why we're having these conversations and we're actually finally going to put something in place because years of
inaction and that's the fact. All right. Anything else on this one? Where do we go from here? Well, we'll we'll talk about next meeting. This was just a presentation today. We had a chance to ask questions and we're going to talk about at our next meeting there. And there's a memo from Lisa on here as
well, right? Y Oh, you want to talk that as well? It it's just to explain to you that um you need to plan to prepare to make votes on the 19th and the second, right, for the new rates for next year
for FY26 rates, but also the last billing quarter of 25, right? Okay, great. All right. Well, thank you all so much for being here. Really appreciate it. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we will now move into old
business. Uh the first item under old business is approval of draft meeting minutes. We have three drafts of meeting minutes um to approve. Um any comments, questions about any of these?
Yeah. Go ahead, Mark. Yeah, I I had sent Mike some corrections to I think at least the first two. The last one was a like a sentence and a half, but I'll I'll I'll move that we approve the January 21st select board minutes as
corrected and they were typos and and thank you. Whatever. I mean, there's nothing grammar, nothing specific. Second. Okay. Uh any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor? Great. I'll make a motion we
approve the February 24th minutes with the corrections again. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor? And I'll move we approve the April 18th minutes. Second. Any further
discussion? All those in favor? Oh, all those abstained. Thanks. All right. Um, and now, uh, next up we have the bottle shop annual liquor license update. Um, and Mike, can I can I turn
this one over to you to provide some Jim that just walked in? Oh, great timing. Yeah, something came up. I apologize. No, no problem. You made it here. Uh, yeah. So, uh, at the last select board meeting on April, well, to backtrack to the annual liquor license renewal
season, the select board had requested, uh, had approved the bottle shop liquor license for a 90-day, um, period of time with the, um, request to provide a purchase sale agreement or a, um, uh, lease agreement. um that time came up and then as the April 7th meeting
approached, slight board then extended that to May 5th tonight to either hear from Jim Thomas or for him to provide an update um on a purchase and sale or a lease agreement. So turn Yeah, thank you Mike and Mr. Thomas, thank you for joining us and uh we are ready to hear
your update. So I've had a purchase and sale in place for quite some time. I just I'm not crazy about putting it into public record. full purchase and sale. Just the nature of a business deal. I think you all can understand that. And we've been waiting for the
ponds to finish the the negotiations with the ponds on a lease agreement. Uh they've been sitting on a lease agreement that we've drawn up about three weeks now and have never heard nothing back from
them. But that's where we stand. Uh the license the sale is ready to go through. uh just need to get u a u notice of good standing from the state
and I've just with the all the nature of the fire I haven't been filing the the business taxes because I've been waiting for the u insurance uh claim to come through and that has just come through this year
too. Okay. So, you have a purchase. You said you've had a purchase sale in place, but it's really about the the folks that are buying this from you and getting them uh their lease all set with
the ponds. Okay. Y okay. Um Josh. Uh so one I I don't know if you've watched our meetings. We really been patient on this and really want to not take not take this from you your license because this
none of this was your fault, right? Um I really wish you had told us about this much earlier. Uh the the purchase and sale agreement. I understand you don't want it to be everyone's business, but I we had asked you for it. wish we had
known. My problem is uh this sale agreement as of it it cannot go through. Uh you can only own one liquor store in town uh in a town. That's state law and the the timing is
an impossibility right now um with with what you have as a as a closing date because you're there's no way you'll get an application through by then. Um so I the we've always wanted more information. I think we have it now and
I I appreciate you doing that. Now I think we need to have dates certain, not we're working on it. Not um we're waiting on the other party. We got to put we got to have some teeth on this and because we've really
been patient and I I want this to to work out for you and I I I really mean that. Um, but it's been a long time and I I I I would like to have some some faith that it won't be much longer time.
No, I am going as as as now that now that the space has become available and as you know there's not an abundance of spaces in town to put to put this license. Um, and so I was waiting for waiting on that. I was waiting on the insurance settlement, both of which take
taken extraordinary amount of time. Um, and the landlords are amazingly uncooperative. Um, that said, I am, you know, pedaling as fast
as I can. Um, so beyond that, I there is an issue of the ownership they need to address. It's going to be set up as a corporation. He was going Yes, he is whole set of management in there. Well, it's the
ownership is the issue, but it it'll be set up as a corporation. The owner, it goes a step beyond that. The owner, you can't be the owner of two corporations. ABC keeps track of this. Okay. So I if it gets reject if you'd submit it as is
even with a corporate assigne it would get rejected or they would it would get rejected actually I know it would so um I'm telling this informationally as well so you can take care of this now. Yeah. Okay.
So he would need to find a new buyer. No uh it could be assigned to a corporation that is owned by someone else. Okay. Um, any other questions, comments? I I just think we need
to I don't know. I I don't know how to I don't I do this for a living. I know how it is dealing with landlords. Yeah, it can be very difficult. Um, but I at the very least we need progress reports, I think. Um,
I I'm hesitant to put a a drop dead date on anything because I don't want to put you in a bad position, but we need we need to at least have a date where we have a update. I I know there's not a lot of other places, but there there are
um I I I don't mean to call you out, Joshua, but You give me a list. I'd be more than happy to talk to somebody else. The old town hall maybe. Old Town Hall.
No, that's a basketball gym. Um I thought it was a dance studio. Um but yeah, we at least need to have Yeah. No, I I'll be more than happy to. Okay. And do you want it through town meeting? Can I have a conversation with Mike?
Um well no I I mean town meeting is uh we don't even not town meeting but it's like swing part. Yeah I I would say it does it doesn't make that much difference to me. It's just easier for me to get to Mike. Oh no you can absolutely talk to Mike. Yeah. Um in my opinion I don't know if anybody else
feels differently but uh yeah I think by the next meeting I'd like to know what's going on with the lease. Maybe you could keep us updated every meeting. Okay. Yeah. and in the form in written form email or letter so that Mike can share with us would be best. I mean um and and
like Josh said Mr. Thomas, you know, we we know this happened to you under no, you know, not your own doing. And so, uh, you know, we do want to make this work for you, but I think the lack of communication, the lack of updates that we've received, we've kind of just felt left in the dark a little bit about what's been going on. And I understand
that you've been trying to make it move on your this ball really started moving middle of December of the landlords even reaching out to us. That has been a closed door. They have rejected me at at every step
of the way. Even though I've expressed interest in going back in, I've written them letters. I've been in contact with them. My lawyers have been in contact with them. They had us draw up the new lease, which is more than to say a little
odd, but they wanted me to pay for the lease, not them. Uh, and then I've heard had no updates from them, as I said, for three weeks. and we put two phone calls into them. Okay. Yeah. I mean, but even getting that update from you, like that would have been helpful, you know, just
I appreciate your situation and I apologize. Yeah. Yeah. No, just Yeah. Just let us know what's going on and Yeah. And I think that's a great idea with the with the reports and if they're written so that we can take a look at them. That'd be that'd be best. Okay. I can do that. All right. Great. Um Yeah. So, I I think with that I don't Well, we
we did we did have a vote today. Yeah. So, we'll have to take a vote to extend the contingency date. Yeah. If you're looking for progress reports at at at each meeting, I mean, I don't know if that's tenuous to approve by the meetings, but if that's something
you want to do. Yeah. I don't I think you have most experience with this. Well, I've never been in this situation. It's a it's a it's a unique one. Um I mean I Well, you're the chair. Do you want us Do you want this on the agenda every every two
weeks? I don't think so. No. No, but can can we I don't know if it's delegate or or you know designate our our liquor license, you know, coordinator here to to to let us know if there's any, you
know, any any changes. But I think like Josh had said, we can't let this continue. And so I don't I don't want it to be a standing item on on a select board agenda, but if you know a month from now, 6 weeks from now, and 8 weeks
from now, nothing's been done, you know, we're you're we're going to run out of ability. Yeah. No, I I I recognize that. So, you know, and I think the issue is we meet every other week, you know, twice a month, first and
third Mondays a month. let Mike know that, you know, we don't need to take any action, but if we don't hear from you, we likely will. I think that's the best. We do have to the license expires today, so we have we got to do something. So, I I'm just looking at the
calendar. We could I mean, I would say June 16th. Do you want me to pay for the license and issue it without a location? No, we can't. That's a pocket license. We can't do that. Yeah. No, I it's not it's not that money. It's the there's four of these
licenses and they should be used in town. Yes. And that's that's the issue. That's always been the issue. And um so and that's why, you know, it's only personal. It's just these are they're good for the town. They bring in revenue. We have to do it. Um, so I I
would say even if it takes you two more weeks to get the the lease done, three more weeks, then you got a couple weeks to get the application in. I think the application for transfer should be in by June
16th. And that would be uh that would be the contingency date that I would put on it. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Oh, that's our meeting. Do we want it by the that Friday's the 13th? And so we've got Well, but the license expires on the
16th, I'd say. We Yeah. All right. So, uh, I would move that we extend the bottle shop license, uh, through June 16, 2025, uh, to expire if a ABCC license is not put in place by
uh, June 13, 2025. Can Sorry, can I I don't mean to tell you your business, but I'm not the license won't be able to be in place. Sorry, Lyn corrected me. the application. Okay. Yeah. All right. The license won't be I mean that's just not
even No, no. I Yeah. Okay. I just Yeah. The application submitted by June 13th. I'll second that. But I have a question, Josh. Having because you have experienced this. Is is this motion
give advantage to either the landlord or the tenant in this negotiation? because that's not our intent and we don't want to do that but we do want to get in other words is the landlord now say well gee now I can ask for a bazillion dollars because I know you won't agree
to it and now you're risking losing your liquor you know that that's my concern tell you who's putting the pressure on the town of Longman our buildout there's if yeah the this gives the landlord leverage and I I that's what I was trying to hint at before I I don't want
to do that but we don't have a choice if there was a million places to put this license. No problem. There's not many. Um, but this is also this would be a good tenant. I I know that. I know it's a the
liquor license the liquor business is lucrative. Um, it would be good to have in that spot. Um, so does it give leverage? Yes. But I don't think we have much of a choice and that's why I'm trying to be more generous on timing.
Okay. Um, any further discussion? All those in favor? All right. Great. Thank you. Sure. Appreciate it. All right. Uh, next up is our road paving bond uh discussion. Um, Lynn or Ian, did you
want to speak to this? Sure. It just really quick, you know, granted that this is a long meeting. This is more just anformational piece to let the select board know where we stand currently with the bond sale. I wanted to mention that after our meeting on
April 7th, uh DBW director and myself spoke at detail as to what the original borrowing or the original sale contained. So when we went out to bid and we were awarded the $4.7 million project, that did not count for
contingency in police detail. So, uh, the town Lynn, myself, we are working with our financial advisor and Troutman Pepper Lock in order to provide the information needed for the requirement letter for us to continue with the bond process, but we will be going forward
with the full $5.1 million bond. Um, this is on the topic that we have the 350,000 allocated towards the debt service for this project. We will be lumping the HVAC chiller of 900,000 into
this bond sale in the in the future. So this will make it more advantageous for us to go out for a sale. We are going to do this at the lowest cost for town. So I'm currently exploring options to do this over um a short term given the the
current interest rate market as the rates are very volatile. So this is something that is currently in process. Um, in terms of where we are today, uh, this is again currently in process and I have no action for you guys right now.
Okay. Andrew, so Oh, yeah. Um, in the within that um second paragraph, I'm sorry. Thank you, Lynn. Uh, I would just need the select board to resend their original request to direct the finance director to take
the $4.7 million bond. That is the only directive I would need today. The only action I would need today. Okay. And you don't need us to go up to 5.1 tonight? No, because when the town voted for the $5.1 million borrowing at special town
meeting, that was really all we needed to pursue this. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Question. Yeah, Andrew. Uh, so I read this and I was a little confused and I spoke with Ian just just to be clear I and I had a long conversation today about this um because I felt that it was kind of rehashing a lot of what we had
discussed last time and my understanding where Ian maybe wasn't given the clear directive that I thought we had discussed but after a long discussion I don't think anybody here was saying uh the bid is 4.7 so you can only have 4.7
and that's it. Everybody kind of agreed, you know, we need to make sure there's money for contingencies. We need to get 5.1. But wouldn't it be better to borrow less if we could and perhaps we can redirect the interest on the operational stabilization fund since the police
department project wasn't going to happen towards this project and that could be literally set aside for this project and we can borrow less and obviously that'd be advantageous because we have less interest and it would cost the town less money. Correct. And in our conversation, it seemed that maybe that
directive wasn't clear enough. Maybe if you heard from us that we this year, maybe for the, you know, when the police department building is ready, next year the interest can go to that this year the money can be used for this. Would that not be better and has cost the town
less money to take a lower a lower to borrow less money? Basically, if that was the direction that the select board wanted to take, yes, it would allow us to go out for a lesser borrowing. I believe that's what you tell you guys tell me if I'm wrong, but I thought thought that's what we had basically
decided last time. So, there's m there's some assumptions you're making in there though, that 400,000 in interest, the article is to move it to capital stabilization. So, then you need another vote at the fall town meeting. So, we're making some assumptions. the town meeting would pass that article. Ian and
I talked about that too. Ian, you had an answer for that though. Yes. And when I explained it to you originally, Andrew, I wasn't 100% sure and I did check with Jason as well as reach back out to our auditors. And although we can do a transfer from capital stabilization fund
for debt service, we cannot do it for a project itself. It has to be allocated for it. So we would have to do a vote in order to take the funds out. So, the only obstacle that we're seeing to what we agreed to last time is that it would require another warrant to basically a two-thirds vote to move it for potential
contingencies. Well, it's not potential contingencies for the contingencies. Yes. And we know that there's police detail costs that were not factored in to the the bid that was submitted by the construction company. So, so we know we need more
than 4.7. Understood. And and really in all in all reality, we don't need the board to authorize the borrowing amount. Tom, we brought it back to you because there was such a difference between what was authorized and what um the bid came
in at. It's a good thing. Um I mean I I guess I feel like I we all have the same goal, right? What's in the best interest of the town. And we understand that the town warrant at the Alaska town meeting gave you gave us gave you the right to borrow 5.1. In your judgment, do you not
feel that it is worth the trouble of having a town meeting vote in the future to borrow $400,000 less in the interest that that would acrue or do you think that you really think that we should just borrow 5.1 million and you know? Well, I don't know. I'm just saying trouble. Well, the trouble is that that
the next the uncertainty that the next town meeting might reject a twothirds vote to put this money into the right place. So, regardless, we would do the borrowing at we could we're a little bit premature. The payment for the debt service is not due until I think what
what'll be April 1st or June 1st of next year. Um, so we will have some time to figure out is it going to be the 400? Are we going to use the 400,000 to help pay that debt service or or I think you're saying don't borrow that full amount. Use the 400. Why? Yeah. Why
borrow an extra $400,000 and pay the interest on that when you could keep the you know you could we can wait this money can be earmarked for that. It can only be for that. I mean obviously the the vote notwithstanding but it can actually be acrewing interest itself while we're waiting to spend it
essentially. So anyway, I I felt that that's what we had all kind of decided last time. And I don't see anything here that's necessarily saying we can't do it still. So if we have an invoice coming in fall and it's going to be over the amount and we don't have it borrowed, we can't pay
the vendor. But you're not spending 4.7 I mean I know and this doubles out here. You're not going to spend 4. You're going to $4.7 million loan. You're not going to spend all of it at once anyway. It's going to be all spent by September October and then 200,000 beyond that already. So, we have a change order. Okay,
there's the money. Where's the roads? Those roads done ASAP. So, so in in between this bid coming out and the contract being executed, we already have a failed covert alongside the project, which I'm going to need the money for to fix right now along Long Meadow. The invoices for the police officers are
probably going to be $60 to $100,000. And we also have no coverage for the irrigation damage that's going to likely to occur. So that contingency is necessary to keep those change orders and contracts signed to move the project forward. I do think that if there was money left over, you could always vote at another time to pivot it to something
else. But understood. Thank you. That that was helpful. Um okay, so tonight we just resend the vote, right? Last last meetings vote and and then we should be set to go. Okay. Go ahead, Mark. Yeah, Ian,
I thought the vote we had for $4.7 million was based on bids that we got from B on bonds. Correct. No, it wasn't. So, are you going to get bids then for? Yes. Well, I based it on samples provided by Uni Bank. So, okay. Those
were samples. Those were samples. Those were not actual hard bids. Okay. So, so the borrowing at $5.1 million is going to be based on actual bids going to and Brienne is Brienne is aware
that the town has a $350,000 cap and that will be built into the borrowing. So, our first year's debt service payment will reflect that 350,000 that was allocated originally. I'm not necessarily opposed to this because I I trust you guys are
doing what you think is right. obviously, but I just want to make sure we remember last time the what's going to happen here is that yes, we're saying, okay, we're only going to pay 350 for the debt service this time, but it's going to go up in future years, and
that's going to hurt our capital budget. And I just want everyone to be clear that that's the consequence of what's going to happen. Josh made a great point, which basically was the same as what Mark's point was. Josh said, "Let's take a big hit, a swing at this. let's put the $400,000 in the first year so we
can like not have to pay so much more in the future years. Then Mark said, "Why don't we just borrow less?" And we all kind of agreed. But I just feel like we're having the same discussion again now. But I understand that you can, you know, I think
that I per I'm not weded the idea, but I just personally think that if it's not that difficult to do, we can still get the 5.1 million by allocating the 400,000 towards this project, even though it
might require a fall town meeting vote. But certainly like, you know, it's not something I'm there's not a hill I'm gonna die on or anything. I'm not gonna be offended if we don't do that. But when we were had the 4.7 discussion, we didn't know about these overages,
right? We are we were we were at 4.7. Now we know that there's money. No, we knew remember I um we knew there was Dan made a great point said we want Dan made a point and he said we want to make sure we get this done. And I think there was acknowledgement that like there's no way there's there's no way we're there's
going to be contingencies that we're not going to pay for. The money is going to come from somewhere. And it was reassuring to you guys to say, "Hey, that $400,000 is going to make sure we get there." And isn't it better to have money in the in your pocket now for this project rather than borrow $400,000 more?
To me, that's literally the conversation that we had. Well, I I know we talked about the known unknowns. Now we now they're known knowns. We know what the contingency is. We know how much it is. I I just think the timing is not going to work out. I I totally I see what
you're saying. It always makes sense to borrow less if we can and if we have the money, but I'm worried that the timing won't work out because this money is going to be spent before fall meeting and we don't want to be in a position where we can't. Well, let me argue against myself because I I I understand. I think that if the $400,000 is not used
for this, it can go into the capital planning and then it can be used for the debt service in the future. I mean, that's kind of like the counter to what I'm trying to say. How can it if it's if the $400,000 is borrowed and not used, it's very specific. Got a very specific
use. You can't just put it. I'm talking about the interest. Oh, the interest from our capital station fund. Okay. I mean, it can be used for debt service, which is I mean, it could be acrewing interest in the meantime, which can counterbalance the interest the debt
service that you're losing. Okay. Okay. All right. Anything else on this one? Um Okay. So, you know, I think a lot of this is we have to kind of wait and see on some of this stuff. So, but but for right now for tonight's action, um I will uh I move that the that we
resend the select board's vote from our April 7th meeting to direct the finance director to pursue uh the $4.7 million bond over a 15-year term. [Music]
Isn't the five million? No, we're okay. Yeah. Second. Okay. Uh, any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor? Okay. Great. Thank you.
All right. Um, okay. So, now moving into new business. Um, we have the quarterly investment report. Is Erica with us? She is on the move right now. Awesome. Hi Erica, thank you for joining us.
Can you guys hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Thank you for joining us. Um, and I will turn it over to you. Thank you. I'm here tonight to submit my quarterly report on the status of the town's cash and investment for the period ending March 31st, 2025. As per the investment policy, the
town held no long-term investments that exceeded the 5-year limit. The bank's individual balances were under the $20 million provision. All banks received the highest safety rating of green from bear bank and all accounts are fully insured or secured. The third
quarter of fiscal year 2025 has been consistent with interest rates and there have been no significant fluctuations. Um the treasur and assistant treasurer are closely monitoring interest rates and moving funds to the appropriate accounts that will optimize investments with the best return. Newberry Bank and
Eastern Bank both experienced a change in berry bank ratings, returning from the yellow status back to green this quarter. Um, as you know, they were yellow last quarter, but they're back to green. The OPED pension Reserve Investment Fund experienced a gain in quarterly interest. The quarter ended
with a net increase of approximately $10,000, and the March 31st balance is approximately $8.6 million. Also noteworthy, during the third quarter, the town earned a total of $485,6991 in interest. The treasur's office continues to seek the best
possible interest rates and diversify funds appropriately to maximize investment potential while being in compliance with Massachusetts state laws and regulations. We will also continue to monitor all accounts to ensure that they are safe and secure. Great. Thank you so much, Erica. Um, any
questions for Erica? No. All right. Well, this one was easy. I like this one. Yeah. Well, we made you wait long enough, though. That's all right. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. No problem.
Have a great night. Great. Thank you. All right. Uh, next up on our agenda, we have a request from Fletchers to uh extend their opening hours on Mother's Day. um in in terms of their liquor license. Um and they what they're
requesting is you know within the the um the limits that you know they can be in. Um so any comments, questions about this one? Move we extend the Fletcher's liquor
license hours to 10:00 a.m. on Sunday, May 11th. Second. Okay. Uh any further discussion mark something on this one? I guess my my question was are there what are the prospects of there being others that'll come now and ask although
Mother's Day is Sunday next week but yeah the requests are obviously at the liberty of the board's meeting schedule. So if people were to come between now and then we wouldn't be able to grant them you know they got the press before the meeting. So the alternative is is
this something we should offer to as a competitive position to some of the other restaurants in town or does it Josh you're the expert or does it have to be in in in response to a request if it's oh can we offer it
I don'tform informationally we could uh I don't see any reason maybe the my word should be can we authorize it for other comm other other restaurants in town. So, you actually can. So, liquor licenses cannot be barred between selling alcohol between certain periods
of time, but you could authorize early extending and late extending hours as you as you see fit. I believe that's well within your realm, but I can look into that further to individual licenses or across the board. I think as the licensing authority, I think across the board really, but let me because the
license itself has ours. It does. Correct. But the ABCC guidelines constitutes the early ex early extension hours and uh late extension hours. But I'm not confident enough to like say that with full fact, whereas it may come off based on a temporary extension
request like we have seen in the past. I'm just uh Mark, I was surprised to hear you answer because I know I just remember last time this came up, we had a back and forth. I think it was uh the board was a different makeup, but uh and there was a lot of uh question over whether we want to do this at all. It
was either beating house or um but I thought it was a much broader than just a one day Mother's Day, wasn't it? Was it was a much broader This is a one day Mother's Day. People going out to breakfast, brunch, whatever. That's that's my only thought is that you know somebody hears about this tomorrow said,
"Hey, how about us?" And and you know, extra credit for watching meetings. I don't know if I don't know if we can. I I'd be surprised if we can do it across the board. Um, but uh I I think Mike, if you could look into that for us. Yeah, I don't feel the
need to do it for Sunday, especially if businesses now they I this seems like there's been a lot of planning going into it. I don't know if everyone else says, "Oh, I can open an hour early on Sunday if it'll matter." Uh but if you want to move, I mean, I would support it if you want make a motion. Look, the you
know, and I'm not going to name names, but there there current clearly places who sell light liquor that aren't opening at 10:00 on Mother's Day, but there may be some others that might. And and I just gee, I never thought of it, you know, from a competitive position,
why can't we do that as well? That's that's my only point. I mean, I I'd like to extend this to other organiz other, you know, facil, you know, establishments that would like to do that as well. I'm not I'm not against it. I just think it's two hours, right?
Well, yeah. Uh probably one. What is it like on Sunday? Um theirs is actually noon. Oh, it is? I think it's two hours. So, um I'm not I don't feel strongly either way. I I just think maybe a better way to do it would be to every year when we
have we could say just so you know, you can do this if you want. I think there's a MGL you can adopt. I'm pretty sure. Okay. for across the board. But until I find that if you want to table it till the end of the meeting, we could come back to it. But if not, just I mean, I'm
not w to this. I just I mean I think it's interesting something we could look into and I think maybe for right now we vote on Fletchers's Hey, they were the ones who asked the something that we could look into further and maybe implement in the future. All right. Uh there's a motion
on paper second. Yep. And uh any So anything else? Any further discussion? No. All right. Um, all those in favor? Great. All right. 200 pages left. All right. Uh, we've got the utility bill insert request. Uh, two of them. I
don't know if anyone's here to speak to them or we can just kind of vote on them. No one's got Okay. Thank you, Lisa. Uh, so it's two inserts. One is a third of a sheet to just notify residents that the annual water quality report is available online. Um, it's just some mass D requirement to either
send it out or tell them where to see it. And then the second one is a third of a sheet two-sided for the recycle carts. The recycling partnership just wants you to keep um making sure residents know that they're coming so that when they land on their lawn, they don't say, "What is this?" So, great.
Thank you so much. Okay, I'll make a motion we approve both these instruments. Wait, can I would you have that up? Second. I had I made a note that I I wanted to say one thing about this, but I'm trying to I'm sorry. There was something about um Do you have that up? I got him. I'm so sorry. I got him
here. Oh, it's this it's this thing, right? Yeah. Okay. The one thing that I would suggest before you send it out is this thing where you say to sign up because the default is that they're going to get it, right? Even if they do nothing. So, I was worried that people
would get this and say, "Oh, well, I've got to go do this." And so, maybe just eliminate to sign up and keep it to learn more. Y Thanks. Great. Okay. Um, Mark, were we able to make the motion or were we in the middle of it? I I made the motion.
Okay. Second. Okay. Uh, any further discussion? All right. All those in favor. Great. Oh, that website actually does have all the dimensions of the cards. I was saying the same thing like backing up, you know, into your
Well, yours is in your shed, right? All right. Uh we'll move into the uh street closure application uh for the Long Meadow Street East of the Green. I'll move we approve the street closure for uh east east of the green
for June 1st from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All right. All those in favor? Okay. Great. Um, next up we have the construction manager at risk vote uh for the middle school building project.
Um, Lynn, did you want to explain that one? Sure, happy to. Um, so this is just a standard uh form that has to be completed uh by our town council and in reviewing the uh town meeting vote, the uh language in the vote did not go so
far as to be as explicit as CM at risk. It needs to be authorized by the governing body of which the select board is the governing body according to MGL. So, this is just a um really an administrative vote so that town council can sign this form to send it into the
inspector general. Great. Thank you, Josh. Yeah. And I don't know if everyone got the chance to talk to Lynn about this, everyone on board, I mean, um but the middle school building committee has uh chosen a construction manager at risk, which is a basically a form of contracting with it's somebody who acts
as would you say a general contractor? Yeah, it's a it's a a super general contractor for the middle school building project. It uh is a choice that is uh there's a a slightly higher fee,
but the idea is that we can especially with talk of tariffs, they we they move much faster and they become part of the design team much earlier. And so the idea is that they can start ordering things that they know are going to go up in price that can save us in the long
run. And also I think from the middle school building committee, the biggest uh at least driver for me and that we talked about a lot, they because they get in earlier, it moves up our timetable and allows us uh if everything goes well to hit that 2028 opening,
which uh is really the the goal here and so we can and make a much smoother transition. So just in case anyone watching or you folks are wondering why we're doing the CM at risk, that that's why. Great. Yeah. Thank you for that explanation, Mark. Yeah, Josh, has the has this middle school building
committee considered the the clerk of the works and when we did certainly the the uh DPW project, we had a construction manager at risk, but we found that clerk of the
works who had a whole different set of and I'm not putting this in part of the motion, but who had a whole different set of obligations and and job require was very much uh beneficial to the town to have.
And just I just want to throw that out because this kind of reminded me of that when you guys next talk. I it I know we spent that money out of our money, but but it was well worth the cost. Lyn, were you here at the time when we Yeah, we didn't do a CM at risk for the DPW,
but we did have a clerk of the works that was part um part-time there and part-time at the adult center. Right. Definitely well worth the money. Um I I know we've talked about it. I don't remember. Uh we're just not there yet. Yeah. Okay. You might not be there,
but talk about it again, I guess. No, we definitely It's come up just preliminarily. Yeah. And I uh it from projects I've worked on in legal capacity. Yeah, it does really especially for something where we need to have we have a pretty tight deadline
that we want to hit. It's a good idea. Great. Um, so there's no like specific language, right, to lead or apologies. Um, there's specific language authorization. Um, in the memo, I believe at the the last paragraph it
it's in the memo. Yeah, I think there's specific language for vote, but I the other attachment I believe is a town council certification. I don't know. That's the one we have to recite if I'm misspeaking, Lynn, correctly. So I I guess I move that we authorize the town
to proceed with a contract with an atrisisk construction firm with no second. Okay. Uh any further discussion? All right. All those in favor? Great. Okay. Um and then also um Lynn, if you
want to explain this next one too. Um the um intergovernmental agreement for the Thank you. Uh so this is also just a standard agreement. Um but uh recently with the intergovernmental agreements that we've had come up um they actually need select board
approval, the intergovernmental ones. And so this is uh for the lease of the tritown trolley van uh through East Long Meadow and Hampton. Um in order for u me to sign it, I need your authorization. Great. We we just went
through this with Fiber Spring. Yes. Yes. Okay. Um, so I will move that we uh direct the town manager to sign the intergovernmental agreement uh for a
vehicle lease between the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority and the towns of Hamen, East Long Meadow, and Long Meadow. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All right. All those in favor. Okay. Great. And uh next up, uh we have a proclamation for ALS awareness
month. This has come before the board a couple of times. um or come to select board members a couple of times in the past couple of years, but I think just because of the timing of when it was sent, it was never um I think brought up at or one of our meetings to be voted on. Uh but this is something that is I
think you know Dan received an email about it. I received an email about it as well and and Dan was the one that kind of uh really queued it up and brought it to my attention. Um and you know we were able to connect with some of the the residents that made this request and you know the importance of us recognizing this um in Long Meadow.
So um hopefully folks had a chance to take a look at it and I don't know if anyone has any comments or questions before we take a vote on it. Josh, I just thank Mona Swanson for bringing to our attention. I know she uh thought this was a good thing for the town to do. It's in honor of her father who
passed away from ALS. Um, so it's a very nice uh thing that we can do, I think. Great. Thank you. Second or was that we have no motion. Um, so I uh move that
the um town of Long Meadow um I guess approve this uh proclamation of uh May 2025 to be ALS awareness month. Second. Okay. Uh any further discussion?
All right. All those in favor? Great. All right. Uh so, uh next up we have on our agenda setting our special town meeting and election day for the debt exclusion vote for our middle school building project. Um, and what
the proposed dates are are September 9th for a special town meeting for the debt exclusion vote and then a actual ballot vote uh to take place on September 30th. And um and and I don't know if you all want to speak to the timing of this and
why this needs to be then. There's a meeting for the the town meeting for bonding. I'm sorry. The the September 9th one is yes. the bond authorization. Oh, it it was must have just been a typo when I typed it over. Okay. Yeah, the um debt
exclusion vote should be for the Oh, it just says declusion. Yeah. Uh yes. So, we looked at many options. Um I brought a couple scenarios to the middle school building committee. Uh we discussed them and this was the recommended schedule. Um we have worked
around holidays, school vacations, um professional development days, other potential elections, uh and fall town meeting later on or traditional fall town meeting later on, which uh we could have done except we
gained considerable amount of um uh design time, which seems crazy, but actually allows us to meet that fall 2028 deadline. um if we schedule the vote in September.
Thank you. Um anything else on this one? No, they they both have to happen. It didn't really matter the order, but uh we thought that this one makes a lot of sense because town meeting is a bit cheaper to hold, right? Mhm. So, if this
failed the town meeting, uh then we could cancel the election. Yeah. Right. And this is the same process that was uh in place for the middle school or I'm sorry, the high school town meeting and then the election. Okay. Can you just remind me, Josh, what is it the middle
school building committee needs to do in advance of this September 9th town meeting vote? I think uh what what do you mean? I mean, does anything need I mean, we could have the vote, you know, anytime the we've got a
an amount of bond to to approve, right? No. Oh, well, they're working on getting the right number, right? My followup question is, you know, with this deadline, is this going to be something that we're comfortable with setting this as the deadline and not
say, gee, we're going to be a week later. We're not going to No, I think as of a couple months or weeks ago, yeah, the schematic design was submitted to MSBA May 1st. That was the deadline, the last deliverable. uh the MSBA board meets on June 15th, I believe it is, uh where they'll actually vote on our
schematic design submission and then once we get to that point, we just wait until the funding authorization by the community. Uh and so one of the other reasons why it's important to set this date tonight is that our architect um has um a pamphlet for those of you that
attended the Williams Middle School walkthrough uh with the different tables showing the different phases of the project. Uh they the pamphlet gave a vague a vague, you know, fall vote date. Um they're going to finalize that if you vote on this tonight and they will have
that pamphlet available next week's at next week's annual town meeting to get people prepared that in September. There's going to be two big votes on this. Mark, I don't have it in front of me, but we the number is was submitted. We the middle school building committee voted on it voted on the submission at
our last meeting. I just wanted to make sure that we're not going to say September 8th, gee, we need another three days. No, no, no. Right. Yeah. This this was always uh the timeline was always shooting for this. Okay. Okay. Um so I move uh to set the special town
meeting um for Tuesday, September 9th, 2025. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor? And then I move to set the special town
election for the uh debt exclusion vote for the middle school building project funding for Tuesday, September 30th, 2025. Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Okay, great. I'll I'll edit the agenda retro
to change that typo so that it's clear if you look back that it's a bar. Okay. Thank you. Um Okay. And then we also need to set our uh fall special town meeting date. And uh the the date that's being proposed is Tuesday, November 4th.
This is the date that is going to be election day in most municipalities in our town. We don't have any elections that day. And so this is the same thing that I think we did maybe two years ago. Um and it kind of worked out well. It felt like an election day. People were kind of primed to vote and participate
civically. Um and so um because that kind of worked well, we thought it would be good to do this as do this on November 4th as well. And also it kind of gives us some space from the other um you know special town meeting on September 9th. Um rather than doing this fall special town meeting sometime in
October. It just gives us more more time in between meetings. Um okay. So I will uh move that we set the fall special town meeting for Tuesday, November 4th, 2025. Second. Okay. Any further discussion?
Okay. All those in favor? All right. Great. Uh correspondence. Any comments or anything on correspondence? I just Yeah, I was just going to comment also on the Gateway Fiber letter only in the timing. I think it's unfortunate
that it's a, you know, it's a letter that was apparently sent on a certain date in in March, but we got it here in in in May. And I think that if it's addressed the little select board,
rehab mails, we ought to be able to get these things out more quickly. Yeah. So, I I I'll talk about the gateway fiber letter, especially since we had two resident comments on it. So, you know, I think seeing this letter without context, I can totally understand how, you know, folks can get confused by what
this letter is saying and, you know, what this process is, especially since, you know, most folks aren't familiar with the process for, um, you know, fiber internet to a fiber internet company to go into a town. So, uh, in the state of Massachusetts, a private company cannot attach to poles or run
wires underground in a municipality without first getting a public hearing and an approval from the select board or that municipality's equivalent. So, here at Gateway Fiber, um, they were not even
aware actually of this um, law. Um and uh the town manager with you know the help of town council we provided them with information on how to initiate this public hearing. Um they have all the information to initiate the public hearing public hearing and they have not
done that yet. So um you know when we're talking about investments being made here or anything being done here they have not even gotten to the first step. Um and so it is the ball's complete on their court. they can initiate a public hearing. Once they once they do so, we
will have a public hearing. Um, you know, I think some comments were also made about the task force and the task force's thoughts about Gateway Fiber. Um, you know, I think that those comments are probably better um, you know, reserved for when there is a
public hearing and I can speak more into what, uh, the task force assessment was of them. Um, but, you know, so so I'll kind of set that to the side. Um, and then a couple of other things in the letter that I think were kind of confusing maybe to folks because some of the attachments they talk about sound
similar to what we funded um at our fall special town meeting, but in fact are not what we funded in our fall special town meeting. Um, so for example, the first item is a poll license agreement. So that is much different than what we funded which were poll applications. Uh the pole license agreement is just a
blanket general agreement that they signed with um pole owners that covers the entire state of Massachusetts. That just gives them the ability to submit a pole application. So that is very different than what we funded which is
actually submitting a poll application for every single poll in the town which costs money, right? This doesn't cost anything. This is just an agreement that they signed. Um and then also you know something like their highle design and I think that we are providing the attachments. Uh this was kind of
confusing because this was letter that was um addressed to the entire select board was sent by mail without the attachments and so that was uploaded um onto the agenda but the attachments were then emailed to I think just myself and
Lynn. Uh but of course we'll I think I think Lynn has probably already provided those attachments to folks that have asked for them. um and we can publish them in our next agenda or or however we want. Uh but even something like the high level design is very different than
the design and engineering that we funded. So the high level design that they provided was a map um of our town and the the map is just it's incorrect. Uh there are areas of town that show polls, but those areas actually have
underground lines and it really looks like something else kind of just slapped together uh to just submit. So that is very different than what we do and what the normal process is um when you know like for example this winter fiberpring walked a 100 miles went to every single
poll you know measured it assessed it documented it and you know that is what we paid them to do. um this was this was not anything close to that. Um so uh you know we are not aware of any investments that they have made um in this process
and they have not even like initiated uh the process to even begin the conversation to come into uh into town. And you know, this is something that we have seen in municipalities all over Western Mass, uh, that have been moving towards municipal fiber are some of
these private companies that kind of come in and try to tap into that enthusiasm for fiber just to see if they can kind of get people to, you know, change their mind or, you know, maybe if some folks get cold feet. Um, so this kind of like
aggressive talk, um, is not something that's, you know, uncommon. We've seen this all throughout uh Western Mass. So, um yeah. So, you know, this is just it's on Gateway Fiber to initiate the public hearing. Uh I think if they ask for it, I think we're mandated by law to have a
public hearing. So, you know, we're we're just waiting waiting for them to do that. Thank you for that. That's I think very helpful. just and it sounds like these people may not may or may not be actually serious about actually following through with this but am I just for my education do we get to choose whether
they're allowed to do this so therefore if it's in the town interest could you see a situation let's say they beget serious and they get look like they're reputable in doing it two questions would it be in our interest to deny that to prevent um competition for the one we
really want to succeed which will benefit our Or is it even possible that somehow they've just turned it all around and they're great that we somehow benefit from them doing it instead of us? Yeah, I mean that's that's you know a
conversation um you know that we can have especially I think if they initiate a public hearing. I will say that in all the research that we did, there w no other private company actually went through the step of having a public
hearing. um once they saw that the town was supportive of municipal fiber because you know there is something that is very kind of odd about this approach that most of the folks um you know in the space in the area are very kind of scratching their heads about is that to
kind of come in in this adversarial way that where you're trying to kind of thwart the will of the people of the town is just doesn't seem like good business uh sense or a good way to build a business reputation. Um so this is kind of unchartered territory for us. Um
most other talents have just kind of said you know go away and these other companies have just gone away. Um and so the fact that um you know that they they are hinting that they want to do this or something you know I'm not exactly sure. Um and then yeah I mean I think you know
if when we get to the public hearing I can kind of talk more about the seriousness of maybe their proposal. Um, you know, one thing they had communicated to us was that they were build interested in building out in section in sections in the northern part of town and would maybe consider the
rest of the town would not were not really interested in doing any of the underground areas. Um, and so, you know, I there are reasons why I think they would be interested in doing that, and it's not necessarily to provide fiber to Long Meadow, but maybe to just connect
um fiber loops from Springfield to other communities. Um, but you know, that that's what a public hearing is for if they want to come. But that's those are some of the, you know, I just I guess a sample of the major red flags that we uh we saw from, you know, having any kind
of communication with them. Yeah. Thanks. Uh the only thing I would add to um their request for a public hearing, uh it needs to be accompanied by the correct poll petition paperwork and a butter's notices. So that has been what's missing. Um I followed back up
with them uh from that April 11th letter letting them know that I don't actually have enough information to bring it forward to you for a public hearing. there are required abutters notifications if it's a new poll and it's impossible for me to tell with from that plan what is new what is existing
um and and what exactly it is that they're laying out. So they can request a public hearing but the documentation needs to be submitted in order for you to actually have um a valuable public hearing process. Thanks. So, just so
we're clear, the the town did nothing nothing wrong in this situation that was brought up. Guess it depends on who you ask. There could have been more refreshments here. So, that's kind that's kind of my point. I just wanted to bring that up
because like this this was supported by so many people in town, went through all the process. Beneath has done an excellent job doing this and it's it really comes down to the same few people that are just want to attack Beneath
want to attack progress in town and unfortunately it's that's kind of the role we're in. We take all these shots all the time but it's the same people talking to themselves talking to each other. you're making positive change in
our community and people want to create misinformation, create some conspiracy theory. We see this at the national level and it has no place in our town. We've done everything the right way. Vene you've done everything the right way and you know it's the same few
people that just want to cause uh issues, question things. Conspiracy theory has no place in the town of Long. So, thank you. That's Yeah, I gotta respond to that only because the letter came out this way and
it appears to me and I think appears to some of the people who commented tonight that somebody somewhere somehow knew about this, but this is the first not public notification. Like I said, my concern is this letter is dated March
and here it is May that we got it. And I'm not saying anything was done wrong and beneath your explanation was perfect and ideal. It makes a lot of sense. I've had emails back and forth with Lynn about it. It all makes a lot of sense.
But I think when a email's addressed to the select board, it needs to go to the select board and not just the chair. And I recognize only you got the attachments. That's fine. But and and frankly, this isn't the first time this has happened on letters that have come.
They just sit and sit and sit and they wait for our our next our next meeting and then people call me did you get the letter I sent? Did you get you know where'd you send it? I sent it to the select board. So I think my my only point is you know the more transparent we are the more things we get out to
everybody the less people believe they're caught off guard. I don't know that they were but I think they believe they were. Yeah. And I think the March 27th letter was dated that but we didn't receive it. We didn't get until mid April. Yeah. Until mid April. So, this was the first meeting since we've gotten the letter that we could attach it to
the agenda. So, um and again, I mean, I think the the letter itself, it it the dates on it throughout the letter are incorrect about even when Lynn's emails are and and and all of that. So, um yeah, I'm not sure why they dated it March 27th. We just got it, I think, two
weeks ago. Josh, uh, for anyone who's gutted out this long to the meeting, I just wanted to point out that I, uh, stole a article from the Globe behind the payw wall about Milton that just the override was almost $10 million, I think. And Milton's a very wealthy town
and uh, but school the school budget that the inexurable rise of costs has caught up to them like it's caught up to a lot of towns. And I if you read it, I think it's a great uh lesson on what
what can happen and how this town really works hard to keep even services, which is a struggle. And you know, it may not always be that way. We may have to do an override at some point, but the fact that we haven't to date, it really shows
how hard our our schools and Lynn and Ian and the whole team work on keeping us uh within our bounds without um having to ask people to pay an extra $10 million. So, I I would encourage people to read that article. It's uh very
enlightening. Great. Thank you. Anything else? All right. All right. I uh move that we adjourn. Second. Okay. Uh any further discussion? All right. All those in favor. All right. Great. Thank you everyone. Thank you.