Good evening. Welcome to the Milton, Massachusetts War Committee meeting. It is March 9th, 2026. Uh Karen, can you call us to order by call? Uh yes, we have Jay Fundling, Elaine
Craighead, Lorine D, Grace Story, Larry Johnson, Julia Maxwell is on Zoom, Brian Maguire on Zoom. We have Lee Michael Mlan, Ron Seal, and you have Nicholas Tagnney and Cecil Yang. You have a quorum
>> and James, they just showed up. >> Oh, and James Leassy. So, tonight we have multiple guests in the house. We have Meredith Hall, chair of the planning board, and our planning director, who will remind me of her name,
>> Manning. >> Manning. And then we also have Fire Chief Madden here to answer any questions we have about the fire stations. So, we're going to start with the first thing on our agenda, which is the signed bylaw and planning people. And after that, we'll go to the fire
stations out of respect for our guest time and then hit the other items on the agenda. >> Yeah, if our two guests could come. Sure. >> And uh Larry Johnson has been doing
quite a bit of work on this sign bylaw also. So, >> I'll leave it up to you. Um, who wants to who wants to get us started? Assume we don't know anything since the last six months.
>> Either way, maybe I'll just just do a quick introduction and then I'll let Larry take over. Um, he's um wonderfully provided a presentation. Um, so the last time we came before you, um, we had a very lengthy, um, signed bylaw, which
some of you were here for, some of you are are new to, but basically, and my apologies, you would you would received a redline version. So, it was really marked up, probably very confusing. Um, and what we have done is we realized there were a lot of questions um, on
that particular um, article. There was a lot of um there were a lot of definitions. There were a lot of um more technical to um the sign review which would be appropriate for the sign review committee but not necessarily to be in
the bylaw. So the the good thing is we now have a we have KP law which is our new town council because at the time we were in transition between our town councils. So we had two different people reviewing it which added to some of the red lines. our Carolyn Murray who we've
been working with is has been excellent and so she was able to take the document clean it up say you know get rid of language which was unnecessary definitions which were just common sense which just made it overall burdensome for for an applicant to read this way um
it's about half the length of the previous um the previous article it is um it's the language is much clearer um it it sort of it brings brings together sort of the goals which were to take um
our bylaw as it currently exists. But then we had regulations which were outside of the bylaw to bring those all within our bylaw because everything our our bylaw our guidelines and then we also have a handbook which we give to
applicants were all conflicting information for an applicant to come before. So we have we are fortunate enough to have a wonderful sign review committee which Larry sits on. Um it was really important for us to make sure
what was going into the bylaw is what the current practice is right now as far as the sign review bylaw really um codifying the process as it currently exists which was not the way the bylaw read. So now this bylaw makes it much
more clear when an applicant comes comes in what are the materials that the sign review committee will need. So they come in prepared so they don't waste their own time. They don't waste the sign review committee's time and the building commissioner's time and the um director
of planning. So this way there's a streamlined process for for an applicant when they come in and how they would what the various steps are. and Larry will sort of outline that and go through that process which is now embedded in the bylaw. Some of the things that we
also added were the the bylaw as we currently have it is is just really silent on some things which left a lot of gray area and it left it up to the interpretation of whoever's on the signed bylaw or signed review committee
which really isn't fair to an applicant because just like the site review process we want it to be consistent with all applicants. We don't want if the sign review committee changes for one applicant to have gotten okay we're going to allow this but then another
applicant doesn't get that same benefit. So we wanted consistency and this will make it clear what is what what is allowed what is not allowed. It cleans up some of the um issues that we've seen in the past. Um many of you probably remember recently there was a billboard
that was pro uh proposed at two granite place which was on the Neponet River which caused a petition because people were very upset because it was on the you know a billboard on off the highway. Both the Dorchester side and the Milton side were very upset that um a a lit
billboard would be put um and it would be you know um hazardous. the Neponet Neproa got involved and we just want to avoid that those type of situations where we don't have to have residents having to create petitions to go to the select board to say you know what we really don't want billboards we can just
we can have it in our our in our language and our bylaw so we have tried to clean up um as many of you remember Tim Zwinsky um when the previous town planner has been saying this has been a mess for years so we feel like we're
really addressing a need which will improve improve the process again for an applicant, for our town staff, our building department, town planner, and the sign review committee who does a a really wonderful job. So hopefully this will be um this has been something that
we've had John Ziggowitz, the chair at all of our meetings. We've had um Larry to be involved and um so hopefully if um there's any questions, we we will be able to answer them this evening. So with that, I will >> Yeah, sure. I mean I can
>> Larry jump into it. >> Yeah. >> Presentation >> some point. I don't know if we have a template for presentations for the town like a town template. >> I hear a volunteer. >> Oh, I'm terrible. I'm terrible. I mean it
would look like that. So wants that. >> That's a great idea. >> Just in case nobody remembers who I am. >> As always, >> just >> making sure >> you haven't missed that many meetings.
You're being too hard on yourself. >> Um yeah, so the way I saw it, you know, it's it's just what Meredith said. you know, it's it tries to clarify it, tries to make it easier for the applicants and um tries to sort of divide up what's you know, what's required by law, the signs
that are, you know, the exceptions, the signs that are restricted and things like that. And uh but tries to divide that from the, you know, things that are more aesthetic and style. I mean that go all of that goes into the style guide that the sign review committee and the applicants can use to
design their signs in a way that's you know that's appealing but maybe doesn't have necessarily have the force of law you know so that's basically what it does is it tries to to clarify it Meredith just covered all that so you can just the next slide J I'll just talk through the um proposed process and how
it's different from the um current process Um, so the proposed process is the applicant submits the materials to the building commissioner. Building commissioner uh goes through make sure that they're all right, that everything's included, that they've checked all the boxes and then forwards
it on to the sign review committee. Sign review committee schedules a hearing. I think it's within 60 days, right? That's required in the law now. That was a sort of a new uh that was a new addition to the law is the requirement that the hearings within 60 days. Um, the sign review committee re reviews the submission based on the bylaw. also the
design guideline guidelines and general aesthetics. And then they'll make a recommendation to either approve it or for the applicant to make changes to the sign if it's if um if it doesn't if it doesn't abide by the
bylaw or if there's something even if there's something that maybe necessarily isn't necessarily illegal but it's just a recommendation based on the aesthetic value of the sign. The sign review committee may make a recommendation based on that. If the applicant uh accepts the recommendations, then
they'll resubmit based they'll resubmit their application. They'll make the changes to their design, resubmit the application based on those recommendations, and then come before the sign review committee again. If they're small enough, we can handle it by email. We don't necessarily need to have another meeting. Uh if the
applicant disagrees, which does happen, um then this is a a pretty big change to the current process. Then the current process is they would have to go to the select board to appeal these agreements that they have with the sign review committee and then the select board would have to re review the materials
and do it. This the new bylaw changes that so that the appeal goes to the zoning board of appeals which is a lot more much more appropriate for this kind of thing than having to take up time on the select board for this for this sort of thing for for a sign appeal.
If the um zoning board of appeals um determines whether to override the SRC recommendation, then it's approved and they're able to put their sign as designed. That happens. I'm sure that will happen on occasion. Uh if they uphold the sign review committee's recommendation, then they'll have to go
back and resubmit their application with the changes. And that's basically how it works. Um so it's the only real major change is you know the timing is codified and the um zoning board of appeals is new that's instead of the select board. So I tried
to divide up the u changes to the bylaw into um you know basic you know high sort of high level skill changes and then some detailed changes on the next slide. Um the um
I used a I may have used a slightly older version of this. I use a copy from the 22nd and I saw that there was a a more updated copy that came out today of the bylaw. So there may be some things that have changed since then. I don't know if there's been a lot of changes since the 22nd.
>> Some some some minor tweaks after our last meeting. >> Oh, okay. >> All right. I also uh I used AI but I reviewed it to do the bylaw. So just in case there's anything that jumps out of you as being inaccurate, you can blame AI and not blame me.
Um so the scope of the current bylaw only applied to business districts. Uh whereas the new bylaw applies to any districts, residential and business districts. Um the definitions, uh I didn't actually compare the definitions. Uh but in general, the definitions are much clearer. Um there are a lot more.
There's um this not quite as many of them as there were in the old bylaw, but they're a little bit clearer and a little bit stricter. U for example, billboards, the internally lit signs and reverse lit signs um have always been a um a point of contention with the
signing committee. Um we don't generally approve any internally lit signs. So think like LED or neon. Um I don't think anyone uses neon anymore. It's usually LED now, but we don't generally approve those. We wanted to make sure that it it seemed like you guys wanted to make sure that that was clearly defined in there,
which is great. That should help the applicants quite a bit. So, we spent a lot of time having that discussion on the sign committee, but internally um the design elements, as as me pointed out, um you know, they're off they were included in the bylaw in some cases,
which doesn't really make any sense. I mean, you want a bylaw that's going to last forever. You know, you want to buy a law that doesn't have to change every 20 years as LEDs are replaced with some other technology. 20 years down the road as neon was replaced with with LEG at some point in the past 20 years. So you want to make sure that that sort of
thing is the design features or design guidelines or technology isn't referenced in the bylaw and you move those to the design guidelines which are also part of the material that goes to the applicants. Uh the permit process I just went over
that goes to the building board of appeals now rather select board if they have an issue with um the S review committee's recommendation. Um this they added special provisions for uh restaurants, fuel stations, B&Bs, directional signs within a um
directional signs like within a parking lot. They like pointed to the exit, things like that. You know, it's that wasn't really clear in the old bylaw either. Uh fuel stations in particular, um I don't know if you guys have noticed, gas stations tend to have a lot of signs.
So, they wanted to specifically u spell those out. Um non-conforming signs, uh that's a big change. The um non-conforming signs that predate um the existence of any sign bylaw, the sign, the original sign bylaw, I don't think
it's that old. I think it's maybe from the 90s. Um so, there are plenty of non-conforming signs, you know, that go back before the 90s. Um changes only be allowed with good cause. Um if under the new bylaw if a
non-conforming sign um comes before must to make a change then it has to go through the process to make a change. Um and then there's a wa waiver to the size of the signs. uh it was sort of general
in the old bylaw and the new bylaw specifically specifically spelled out to 25% of the dimension 25% of the area or 50% set back. So you want to go to the next slide J uh the total sign area was a pretty
major change uh two square feet per linear foot of the facade. So, uh, it's kind of a strange calculation. Um, took me I had to sort of map this out when I was reading this. That's been reduced to one square foot per linear foot. So, if you have, say, 20 ft. Um, if the front
of your building is 20 feet, 20 feet from left to right, then your sign can be 20 square feet in size. Um, awnings were sort of vague in the old bylaw. Uh, we spelled out in the new
bylaw that awnings may contain signage. um window signs. Um you may cover in the old one you may cover you were able to cover 20% of the window. Um now we're limited to 10% and may not block the middle third. So window signs are still
allowed which is will help all the coffee shops >> and on commercial only commercial. It doesn't affect residential. >> Oh okay. Yeah. Actually, if if at the end of this, if you wouldn't mind clarifying the residential versus business
district, you know, I'm not sure I can quite explain that. I might need your guys' help. That's all right. >> Um, sidewalk A-frame signs are allowed in the rightway with select board approval,
48 inches in height. the elimination rules which I talked about the LED neon exposed bulbs. Uh we generally we generally approve only reverse lit or internal elimination um internal elimination like LED or neon
signs are generally prohibited and would require a special permit. They'd have to go to the zoning group of appeals. >> What does reverse lit mean? >> Reverse lit is it's it's also called halo lit. So, here's the sign and then behind the lettering it's lit. So, that the edges of the letters are are lit.
>> Okay. Like you might see in front of a church. >> Uh >> lady, have you ever have you ever I don't think anybody's ever looked at the catchy's law sign at the top of the Catchy's Law building or Well, next time. That's one of them. That's a good example. I'm trying to think if there's
another example. Um we also allow signs to be lit by like scoop neck lighting, things like that. externally lit signs. Um, you know, you just have a sign, you have some light shining on it. I mean, that's generally that's a little bit more common than the reverse lit,
>> but gas stations are excluded from the internal lighting. >> Um, well, often those are, you know, grandfathered in, but no, we don't generally approve those either. If you look the new Milton gas station, the Milton uh the new one on Canton a new gas
station. Well, it's not new, but their signs are externally lit. >> Yeah. But you're right. The ones over by East Moonland Square, a lot of those are internally lit. >> Yeah, there's a couple there's there are quite a few non-conforming signs. You know, this but we I call it the sleepy sign. It's Rebuild Fitness Now. I don't
know what it is now, but that's the big one. That's the one that always comes up. every time there's a new tenant in that building comes before the sign review committee and we reject your application and then it gets over it usually gets overruled by the select board because generally the argument that the applicant makes is well I bought this building because it has a
particular sign on the top of it right next to the highway. Um, and then, you know, you have to kind of we don't approve it because we're not allowed to approve signs like that. You know, it's just it's it's always been pretty pretty clearly by law. You know,
signs like that aren't approved, but uh generally we get overruled, which is fine. Um, freestanding signs, that's some of the gas stations have those. So there's no there wasn't any explicit limits on those in the current bylaw, but now
they're capped at 8 ft in business districts. We do have some gas stations that don't conform with that as well. Um right now directory signs, we specify those 9 ft plus one square foot per tenant. I think the old uh seems six feet height
is a little restrictive per directory. think out of the fruit center or any of the medical buildings, you know, they'll have a directory out front which shows all the tenants inside. And then temporary signs, uh, temporary signs are now allowed for 45 days.
Um, must be registered and do not count towards total sign area. Now, I said earlier that this applies to all, which I guess it does for commercial, but not for residents, right? That's what I wanted to clarify. This doesn't apply to residents.
We no it would um temporary signs. It it primarily is this was intended for commercial uses um because excluded out of this um is uh for sale signs are would be included in a residential area. So say a house sells, we don't want that
for sale sign to stay up more than 45 days after the house after the property closes. So that would be one of the times um if they had had maybe a construction, you know, sometimes an architect sign or construction sign. We don't want that just being left out
indefinitely. So, this gives some input to that >> and it covers political signs as well, right? >> And that would be the only Yeah. We don't want political signs saying after the election's over, you know, everyone should clean up their signs. So, um yeah. So, so I know one of the things
that um the town council had advised was to include a definition for sign non-commercial, which is a sign used as an expression of free speech. So, you're going to find that on page one, >> right? Um and that is also um listed
underact. >> So and then and then that points to this section this new section 10 which kind of like gives sort of like the the um regulatory things that you can apply under that free speech like whether it's like maintenance or it's you know safety
or what have you. So it has to be set back a certain amount and has to have that corner clearance issue which can be an issue. Um so we so our town council worked really carefully on that one to make sure that that topic was was covered you know as well as as well as
we could anticipate um without restricting folks um you know first amendment rights essentially. Um there's also a section um 11 for residential um districts um and that basically spells out the
types of um signs that you might anticipate seeing. you know, we talked a lot about some of like the new developments like like the memory care facility on Highland AB and some of the 40B projects and etc. Um, so we really wanted to make sure that we captured, you know, some of those different types
of uses that are that could be new that aren't necessarily pre-existing non-conforming. There are a lot of pre-existing non-conforming signs already in the residential districts. Um, so there's language there about that. Um, and then it talks about how um, anything pre-existing non-conforming
in a residence district would get would get handled as if it was in a business district. So, I think I think the residential stuff is pretty is we contemplated a lot of the different types of signs that you might see um, in a residential district. >> Yeah, because we do see business a lot
of businesses that are existing in residential districts. So we wanted to make sure that they were treated fairly as a business just the way a commercial district would be. So that language had never been in the bylaw before. So this um allows for clarity on that.
>> Great. Great. >> Question. Um it's like an apartment building but standalone. Is that considered this like residential or business? >> It residential, right? Well, it's considered residential, but it could be in a residential location or a
commercial um a commercial location. So, like I'm thinking of like Unqu House or you know certain um Quissit Brook, you know, those may be um those would be residential zones. A lot of you know what we've seen lately are in commercial
districts. Um, and interestingly, a lot of the multifamily housing does not have freestanding signs and they don't, like if you look at the Henry's building, they just or 440 Granite, they just have the address, the number, they don't have an additional sign. But there were times
where like for Winter Valley for example would be multif family housing and a lot of the dimensions that you see we actually took off of literally we people went out and measured the signs like how tall is the winter valley sign and it's bigger than you might think it is
because it's on sort of a concrete you know or granite um pilot um sort of and set up on stansions. Um, so we actually looked at what the actual and Liz put together a whole list of what our actual signs are. Um, and that's where the the
reduction from the two linear feet to the one linear feet. Um, because we realized it was much larger than actual signs that are on our buildings. And what it would allow for which we just wanted to um be careful of there may be
a building that's really large like down in the lower mills one of those like 60 Adam Street or where the muscle and flow building huge buildings which would allow for a massive sign if they were able to take advantage of that. So we thought based on the reality of what our
what applicants come forward it was very realistic to to keep with what is desirable for for a a business. um based on uh current um standard size size requirements. >> And how does that work for a building
that doesn't really have a facade like Winter Valley? You know, it's uh there's no front. There's no front of Winter Valley. It's out on the road. >> It's on the road. Yeah. >> This is So this is So the way this this the way this works is they're allowed 20 square feet
>> and it can't be higher than eight feet. >> Okay. So, so there were some there were some parameters put around that as well that was kind of again that was you know based on like measuring like Leer Valley and and um multif family housing in a residential neighborhood.
>> Yeah. >> And I think um Fuller Village too village. Yep. That was another example. >> So my question I guess this is for Miss Manning. Right. Um, I guess was Larry's summary of here's the difference between
the old and the new because that that's what I want to know to make this decision. What's the difference between the old and the new? Was Larry's summary accurate? Is there more to add? >> I think it was I I thought it was excellent actually. I I I looked at it today and I was like, "Oh, thank you very much."
Um, and I've been using AI a little bit myself, I have to I have to admit. Um, >> you gotta check. >> Yeah. Well, it it it's a it's a good it's a good companion. It's a good companion. I'm I'm learning. Um but um so
yeah, I I think that um I think this was really comprehensive. I think between what the the what Meredith set the table in terms of why and sort of how this is really kind of, you know, even though it's what 17 pages long or something like that, which >> it's a lot shorter than it was last
>> a lot shorter. A lot okay. 16 because I think page 17 are things that are going to get moved into the design guidelines. Um 16 pages. It's um it's this is what I'm hoping we're working towards actually with with with KP Law like in terms of when we're we're doing zoning
bylaw amendments because this is very um this is very sort of um uh I'm struggling for the word I want but but clear and you know concise and you know kind of like a really really thoughtful about sort of like what's
already in the bylaw and how this can work well with with what's already in the bylaw and tying things together nicely. I mean, we we we talked about like enforcement where some of the fines are different throughout the bylaw and you know, just just just different things like that where we're really kind
of working to tighten things up and I feel like this is a great first example of that. Um, and um, yeah, I mean there's there's a lot in here, but I'm I'm confident I've done a couple of these already since I've been here. I've done a done a couple of sign reviews with the sign review committee, so I've
already sort of seen things firsthand. that I think this I think this approach can work really well. >> Can I ask the sidewalk A-frame signs? >> They no longer in the new bylaw will not require insurance coverage.
>> So that is actually on page 17. So that is going to go in the um the guidelines. >> It is it will still require insurance or >> the guidelines are are sort of in companion to the bylaw. So, if there's
if there's um language in the guidelines that dictates something about the the sidewalk signs, then that will also apply. >> Sorry, I >> I guess I'm not I'm wasn't looking at the >> I think that might have been AI thing.
The insurance for the A-frame signs now that you mentioned it. >> Yeah. Is that required in the new >> Is that required in the new bylaw or the >> It's posted. Yes, it will it will be it will be in the um it's recommended to be moved into
the design guidelines. So there's so there were a number of items that were were were previously in the bylaw >> and the attorney was okay with that not being in because that seems like it might be a a bylaw thing. >> So it is required. >> Pardon me.
>> It is required in the new bylaw. That's that's what I'm asking. it is being it's being moved to the to the to to the design guidelines. And the way this is structured, the design guidelines are sort of like a companion to to the bylaw. So So my understanding
is that when somebody comes in wanting a sandwich board sign, they would have to comply with both the bylaw and the guidelines. That that's my understanding, but but certainly not. >> No, I just want to be clear on that. And so when the Cub Scouts or the Milton players put up a sign, they need to
carry liability insurance for their A-frame sign versus reads under the current and new guidelines. >> Wow, that's a good question. >> Well, first of all, I think the uh >> that falls under temporary signs. Those
would fall under so those would not. But if you had say um Astero Madre who puts a sandwich board out, you know, or or Abby Park, >> that would and and that will distinguish between what is, you know, what is temporary and what is what is um some a
business ongoing puts out their signs. I think part of the it was a recommendation by town council that that we did it this way. Um, one of the other one of the things that we're looking at also as a town is being consistent with what our f what our our our fees are.
And so that's something that I the new building inspector at Michael White is I think looking at are we are we fairly treating different you know are we charging one person one thing and charging someone else another. So, I think all of the fees will be looked at at some point and maybe that was part of
the reason why she um didn't have it within the bylaw so we wouldn't have to go back to town meeting to change >> necessarily, but >> like temporary A-frame sign >> just take let's just take a step back then because I think that might have been I think the thing about the A-frame
signs requiring liability insurance now that I'm looking at the the bylaw that I used for my comparison it's included with something about A-frame signs and I think it's not really related But I guess the qu but the question is really when is liability insurance required? Is it required for any signs? So if
somebody if Andrew were to put a political sign in his yard, would he would he require liability insurance for that? I wouldn't think so. Right. >> Because that's residential. >> Right. >> Right. >> A-frame signs are the same thing. When you put an A-frame sign in the middle of an intersection for the Boy Scouts, does
that require liability? >> That's a question. Yeah. And I I it wasn't clear on whether that fell any gap or whether they are technically required to carry it. And >> I mean the current the current bylaw requires it.
>> Okay. I mean >> you know it's >> town sports. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know whether or not >> and I would argue that it's insane to ask them to carry a million dollar cover. >> You have to go through the select board on those signs. So, um, an application
is made, you know, if it's a garden club event, you know, a perennial sale or green sale or, you know, whatever, boy scouts, um, that you go through a permit and it's it's given, but it's never been, um, there's never been an insurance policy that's been required.
>> Is that different from this process? >> Maybe that's maybe that's >> I don't know that the scouts ever go for a permit. Do they just throw it up in front of the stand? You know, I I don't know. >> Somebody says, "Hey, can you put the signs up?" And then I go and put the
signs up. >> You're supposed to go before the select board and you and the town administrator and the select board's office and you there's a form that you fill out. So, if you're going to put something around, you're allowed um only a limited amount of signs. And there has been an issue with enforcement, I could tell you,
because it gets, you know, the high school if they music program might sell mattresses or, you know, whatever. It's, you know, all of a sudden there's signs everywhere and there is supposed to be just a limit of how many signs in certain locations that are supposed to be approved by the select board
>> and also yeah can impede traffic. I know for the porch for portfest we do we did get approval from the select board for portfol disappeared when I put it on the parkway last year >> um which is DCR >> a hurricane coming and
>> so the DPW have been pulling up some of those because >> I I just want to make sure some practical pragmatic >> absolutely and that will all be in the guideline that >> I said that might be something worth
look at them making sure the liability is clear. >> Yeah, we'll check that with >> then the temporary signs >> just I want to make sure I heard that correctly. So you're saying that they're removed in a within a reasonable amount of time. But how long are they allowed
to be put up? >> 45 days. >> 45 days. >> Okay. So, and how long do they have to take it down after like the real estate example that you close? After a sale closes,
how long do they have to take it down? >> Starts 45. >> Yeah, 45 days. >> And so, if I'm selling my home, I only have I'm allowed to keep the sign up for 45 days. >> Till the sale. Didn't you say till the sale?
until the close of the sale and then you want it removed. >> I if it was honestly I would think you'd probably have to renew for for the second like temporary sign permit. >> So in the maximum I could have to sell
my home sign for example would be 135 days. >> You're saying to renew? >> Yeah. Three times at 45 days. tell you that doesn't sound reasonable for half a year. >> I just want to double check that's something we should double check um for
months because it was in >> that that is not underexempt >> do not require sign >> even for >> double check that. Yeah. Signs indicating a property is for sale or lease or advertising. Yeah. Signs indicating a property is for sale or
lease. Those are those are exempt >> are exempt. >> It's exact >> like political signs in a storefront window would be maximum you're allowed to have it be 135 days. >> Political signs in a storefront window.
That's a good question. >> Campaign sign. >> Oh campaign sign. So sign non-commercial. I don't know. That's a tough one. I mean is it I guess I guess it is a non-commercial sign. It just happens to be in a commercial storefront. >> Um It seems like >> I think there is language that if it's
not if it's not related to the business um so it would the sign in a in a storefront would would have to be related to that business as far as
>> political science in businesses. It happens all the time in these >> 135 days seems like a really short period of time. >> Four months. Well, we do have a problem down in election season. You'll see it, >> you know, with political signs. I mean,
there's so many of them, >> right? But are you putting those out more than >> like in a storefront window? I don't know. I've seen them on property. I have seen them on >> you in a storefront window. I >> I feel like I haven't
>> existing by law is 45 days for temporary signs. The existing bylaw is 45 days for temporary signs. It's >> I thought I read 60 and was 45. >> Well, I'm I'm I'm curious and I I see
your hand is up, Michael. I'll get to you in a second. I'm curious. The new bylaw has a definition of temporary sign, >> but that doesn't seem to be used anywhere in the bylaw. So, >> what are we saying about temporary signs?
>> It is in It is Oh, it Yeah, I believe it's I believe it's in section um >> 2 2753.2C signs of billboards. >> There's there's language in there about temporary signs. >> I'm I'm I'm sorry. Say again.
>> So, it's it's 275 section 3.2 C2 is language on temporary signs. That's in the existing bylaw. >> Oh, I'm talking about the new bylaw. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. So, the new bylaw does have it in the in the definitions. Yes.
>> And >> Yeah. And and my understanding is that it tracks it tracks pretty closely. >> I'm sorry, but I don't see anything about temporary signs in the bylaw after the definitions. >> I don't even know. I don't even know what the attention is.
>> Temporary sale signs under on page 14. >> Saw temporary sale signs. >> Maybe I dismissed that. >> Yeah. Just do a quick search on temporary. I think there is. >> Yeah, it's it's mentioned >> a couple of times.
>> So, so the language So, the l So, what you So, the language that you're seeing on page two of the of the the new bylaw, the proposed bylaw. >> Yes. >> That language that's that's underlined temporary science advertising any service commodities including but not
limited to goods, foods, and services. >> Okay. till the end. You're going to find that in the um in the existing bylaw in section 2753.2C2 where it talks about temporary signs are permitted provided that temporary sign
advertising any commodities including that unlimited goods, food and services shall be displayed only on premises where commodities are sold. So the the this was part of sort of the reorging where there was this one section this one small section that talks about signs
of billboards um in the existing bylaw. So that language was carried into this definitions section. I don't I mean >> there are some references, Jay. There's a reference on page 14. Temporary sale signs. >> I temporary sale signs. That's the only
reference I see. We were talking about like if Milton Players wants to put up a sign saying we're having a play uh 44 days from now. >> I don't see anything. >> The temporary sale signs is the only place in the bylaw that I see reference
to temporary signs. Maybe that's intentional. because in number three has had a new section as follows and then most of the document looks like the new section. So is there like old stuff that maybe refers to your temporary that isn't in this
>> the latest >> the old stuff is is what is repeal because if you look above that it says it says repeal section 3.2 C and 3.3D those. So that's the old bylaws referred
designs. Now it's adding this fundamentally. Here's a problem that I have. As you said, I understand the spirit of this. We don't want signage that is either offensive or really disgusting.
Some somehow detracts from we don't flashing LED signs that are at all night. But um the ones that I have real problems with are the
temporary or the window signs and the prescriptive percentage area that you're allowed to post. Like if I'm a store store owner and I want to put up a Black Lives Matter or political campaign signed,
uh I don't want the My first gut reaction is that the 45 days is a really short amount of time. square footage feels like a really small percentage amount of time and fringes
on sort of my right to support a support something um and 20% is really small and so I don't know what the right
duration or the right size is but This was a recommendation by the chair of the sign review committee. Um he said you would be surprised because you have a regular sign on your building and then
if you cover 20% it was not only for um he mentioned not only for aesthetics but for safety. When you start blocking your store windows and covering them up it becomes a safety issue. um whether it's on the door, the windows, um it's
something that it was a recommendation by um John Zigglitz said 20% would um be really would >> I I disagree with it like a real estate office that has uh postings in the window that approach is 50% of the
window >> like in lower mills area. >> Yeah, >> it's a lot. Um, >> and so yeah, you wouldn't have to take it. Again, if it's there, if it exists, this does not require anyone to take down anything that is currently >> Well, the real estate office he's talking about, I'm sure they flip them
out every every time they sell a new house. I'm sure they >> Yeah, if but if the existing sign we're not, you know, that's not required. So, a new real estate office would be could have less square footage to like I don't
think that's fair either. And I don't want to beat up. >> No, it's No, I think um I think I I see where you're coming from. >> It may be this may be the kind of thing where we might just have to look at. >> So, Lee Michael's had his hand up for a while. >> Yeah. Lee Michael, uh
you're recognized. Thank you for your patience. >> Yeah, sure. No problem. Um, I agree that we probably need to address the uh real estate um issue because a realtor's office uh does have that kind of sign.
So, we it probably can just be addressed by noting in here that that that's allowed or something. Um the thing that I wanted to point out was in the design guidelines area at the end the items that are moving into the design guidelines
next to or underneath the A-frame sandwich signs uh paragraph there is item number one Roman numeral one. It says the sign shall only be displayed in front of the place of visit adjacent to the buildings only and not along the
curb. I can't figure out what that means. And I'm wondering uh what I am able to figure out what it means. I think uh imagine how it applies to Abby Park which is on a corner and this curbs that run along every inch of outside
wall space that they have. So uh what does that number one mean? So I I think that what what we were I think the goal and this came from previous language that I think existed um is that
that you would yeah you would have the sign would be to the front of the building. So it would be most visible um and not along the curb, you know, for safety reasons. Um but so you would it would identify the the business and you
know we did talk about this um a little bit like Auststerio Madre they put it up at the top of Adam Street because you can't see not everybody knows there's a restaurant down there and that would we we would consider that to be in front of of the building. So it would be so that
the so that it would be safety, not along the curb necessarily, but so it would it would be identifying whatever that place of business is, not you know, not confusing to anybody who would drive by to say where exactly is is um
>> is that 88 Warf? Is that >> at 88 Warf? They have one. Abby Park has one. Um I mean I don't think there's ever been a problem with the not putting it in front of a building. Um, I think Liz, do you want to
>> It sounded like the way you described Madre Austeras that that that sign isn't really in front of their building. >> We considered it to be because of that driveway access that that that we would consider that to be in front. Um,
>> so what does what does and not along the curb mean in this instance? I mean, honestly, my re reading it, my my sense is that you don't want to impede pedestrian access. >> Okay, here's my sense. Have language in
the bylaw that we can't defend or or explain like that. That number one I think needs to be relooked at. I do not understand. >> So, this actually won't be in this this will this is something that will be in the design guidelines. So we'll have some more opportunity when we revise those design guidelines to address these
questions. So that's so that's really helpful. And the way this >> who's responsible who's responsible for ratifying the sign guidelines? >> It is a combination between the sign review committee I believe and the planning board. I think the planning board is listed in there as well. Yeah. >> So
>> they don't have the force of law guidelines. >> Right. >> Correct. Correct. Y >> that's you can see Lee Michael that it's not for inclusion in the zoning amendment. So that's being removed. >> Yep. Okay. >> Well, before it gets into the design
guidelines, I hope it can be clarified because I don't know what it means. >> Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. >> How many signs get reviewed in a year? >> Somewhere around there. Dozen. Maybe. Yeah, about a dozen. I'd say thanks. A little bit more.
I'd like to ask something following up on one of the last things Andrew said, which is I understand why we're grandfathering in old signs, but if I want to build a gas station right next to a pre-existing gas station, they've got a big sign showing their prices, I
want a big sign showing my prices. Theirs is legacy grandfathered in >> and mine is not. What What are you know? >> That's a zoning. That's the >> That's too bad. That's >> Well, it's the zone. It's the zoning
act. It's the state zoning act that allows those pre-existing non-conforming uses to continue. >> So, the answer is too bad. >> Not necessarily too bad. I mean, >> again, >> it's appealable, Jay. So they could go
and ask for an exception to match their next door neighbor. >> And we also we also carved out we actually are giving and and carved out and making it less restrictive for a new gas station to come in because we felt
you know in the commercial areas the signs that have gotten permission to have the LED lights and I don't know if anybody remembers in East Milton Square where there's there's three gas stations currently. One has the red LED lights on the corner of um wood, not wood. Um
>> the one by the nursing I mean by the funeral home there. >> Yes. Which was hugely controversial. I don't know if you guys lived here, but it was a big East Milton was up in arms about it because it was so close to a residential area that they they they were saying this these lights are going
to be shining in my bedroom. And there was a big back and forth and there was you know some they lowered the height of it. Um, but it was still very controversial. We recognize that in a commercial area now because one has
these LED price signs, it would be unfair to probably say, "Okay, this other gas station and already the same owner has applied on on um on Bryant for him for for his new sign to have these
LED lights and he's gotten approval on those." So, if the third says, "Well, these two have it. why can't I have it? So, we carved out permission for those gas stations to have LED um price signs because we realized the reality is it's
been granted by, you know, for two it would be unfair for the for the third. So, we've actually made it more permissible for the um for the gas stations and we've also allowed a higher height for the gas stations um than a freestanding sign would be allowed by
other businesses. So, we've actually given them more lenient if because for that reason if if they weren't grandfathered in and they're new that it would be more permissible. They would have they have I mean gas stations have a number of services you know they they're required
by law if they're an inspection station have the inspection sign up there they just have the requirements for what >> this one area I'm least concerned about the whole window sign thing I think about a liquor store that has lotto signs in it that's going to take
up a huge percentage of winter window space and that's standardized size. And >> that's what we're trying to avoid because we that was one of the things that we can't tell them to take it down. But does it really look good for our
business districts to have posters of beer beer cans and you know it's a really unattractive look and but no one's going to ask him to take it down. But when we have a new, you know, crafting crew come in, not everybody has
to have that. You can have a different look. you can sell the same products, but you can have a more aesthetically pleasing to and enhance our business district rather than looking at, you know, a bunch of cardboard poster covering the whole window. So, that's
hopefully where we'll be end up eventually, but over time, >> weird. You could fill your window with bottles of liquor and have one sign that it's less than 20%. Right.
>> Sure. I mean, because it's not a sign. >> You can have it, right? You can have displays. So, we wanted to allow for people to have displays of their of their whatever products that they're selling. Um, but you can see through, you know, you want to be able to see into the store,
see into the um into the building. Again, aesthetics, but also for safety reasons. >> Yeah. Sorry, J. >> I'm sorry. I think I don't mean to derail this conversation, but I'd really like to focus on what's changed from the old rules to the new rules and
specifically what's more restrictive from the old rules to the new rules. Now, you already addressed that two square feet per linear foot, one square feet per linear foot. I think you addressed that. What I mean, I can put Larry's slide back up here if you want. You know, that's really what I want to
hear. What's more restrictive and why are we making this more restrictive? I think would would go a long way. Let me let me share this again. >> So the so the sign area the sign area would be would be one that's more
restrictive as you mentioned the um >> duration >> the window >> the duration goes from 60 to 45. >> So it is I believe it's 45 days in the in the existing bylaw >> is it? >> Yep. Yep. Temporary advertising signs shall be displayed for no more than 45
days. So that is in the existing bylaw. >> Okay. >> Um so that's not that's not more restrictive. Um let's see >> the size of the window signs. I mean >> yeah it's less it's less restrictive. It's less restrictive for freestanding
signs because originally it was it was the sign signage area calculated both faces of the signs and that was clarified with the sign review committee that it was just a single face of the freestanding sign. So it's less restrictive there. Um the sign review
committee is able to wave dimensional requirements um in for for size and for >> setback size setback and I think a third a third area where they were able to wave it. Um so that that's
on the face is more permissive because before it was sort of like you know sort of with good cause. um the uh pre-existing non-conforming now does require a special permit from the zoning board of appeals. So that is
that is sort of an added piece. Um but in my opinion it makes the process more clear and there's a very clear set of um criteria that need to be followed to to issue that special permit. >> That's correct. If it's changed, they
need a special permit. It's unchanged. They just keep on keeping on. >> Yeah. But it's pretty narrow. >> Okay. >> It's pretty narrow, right? In terms of like what's allowed to just keep on keep it on. If somebody wants to, you know, kind of, you know, refresh their signage or change their signage, which, you
know, longtime sort of, you know, pre-existing non-conforming businesses are probably going to want to do that periodically. Um, that's not a that's not a that's a special permit. Um, what else? Um, so I mean honestly I
think it's mostly the the the places where things were silent, you know, like that height where we talked about the height in the residential district, right? Um, but I would say on balance it's it's
it's more clear and it's more straightforward and um hopefully the outcome is that is that um it's a benefit to the to the folks that are going to be trying to pull permits. So part of what we do here is try to anticipate how the conversation is going
to go at town meeting. So I think uh maybe we want to have this really tightened up is what is going to be more restrictive. I think town meeting will care about that. What's going to be more restrictive? Have a very short list. Here's what's going to be more restrictive and here's why. and
pictures. Pictures are flip side all these signs >> or could be more permissive as well. >> Yeah, true. True. The other direction too. What's what's going to now be allowed? Halo lighting versus back lit versus internally lit versus >> reverse lit.
>> Yeah. Examples examples of those types of lighting. Yep. And I would say overall >> the things that are in here now that didn't exist. It's not that it's more restrictive. It's just making it's clarifying. So it's a lot of clarifying
language that's in it. And because it didn't exist in the previous bylaw, it just was a gray area. So this is the this is taking what the practice is of the sign review committee and giving clarity for an applicant. So it's not
it's not being more necessarily more restrictive. Um it's it's more of making our bylaw align with what is consistent with what are the practices now and codifying what our current practices are.
>> Also again thinking ahead meeting discussion can imagine a 45minute discussion very much on like the the cub scouts signs. >> Yeah. I still don't know the answer to that question. >> Can they have them know the answer? >> Yeah, we we'll get clarity. I just want
>> Absolutely. >> Maybe an exception, you know. >> Yes, absolutely. They can have them or yes, absolutely. You're going to get the answer. >> No, no. I I don't know what you're saying yes to. >> We'll clarify language. I'm writing and thinking and >> I'm multi for sale signs. I think we
want to have that. >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead. I just was going to say like the for sale signs we want to give, you know, language and um because >> if it takes me a year to sell my house and >> Yeah. And that Yeah. And no and no one goes for currently for a permit for a
real estate sign. >> I think I think we we settled that though. >> That's that's an exception. So that one that we want to make sure that that is clear. Okay. So, so the process on the A-frame signs is is clearly like that's that's something people want to want to
be sure we're super comfortable with >> if there's been any changes >> um to that. And uh I honestly wasn't super focused on it because it wasn't coming in front of the design review committee, >> which is what I have to staff. Um but but yeah, so so I'll um and I knew a lot
of it was moving into the guidelines. So because right through the building department. Yeah. So we'll So we'll um >> the liability insurance too. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> Is liability insurance required and the 20% thing. I mean that's going to be a huge debate to tell me. I'm not sure what to do about that. It's >> 20% of the
>> 20% of the window. >> I mean it's pretty I don't currently I wasn't even aware of it. I I still don't like it. But >> yeah, some people don't like the neon lights either. Some people think we should allow young lights, but we don't.
I I can't predict what town meeting will debate. I wouldn't have expected the window 10% 20% to be a topic, but >> just say that and then I'll regret it. >> I know. I know. And then three nights later. >> And it doesn't include holiday
obviously. You know, a lot of a lot of storefronts do some holiday which looked really great. Abby Park did it um the gift store um on Central Avenue. you know, has some different do different sort of creative things with the with
the holiday windows which would take up more, but that those are exempt. >> So, >> has that been abused? Because that could be a loophole if someone, you know, now it's St. Patrick's Day and after that it's Easter and after that it's Labor Day and after that it's Arbor Day. If
someone wanted to >> That's why we actually changed the language to be seasonal rather than holiday. So seasonal, it's all exempt. I'm gonna celebrate fall. >> Yeah, >> I summer. >> Yeah, it's not been abused and um >> seems like someone could use that
>> winter sale. >> We could figure we could clarify it, but it would be like a 35 page. You know, we'd have to list all the holidays that are allowed >> right now. It hasn't been a problem up until now. >> Excellent.
>> So, I'm not I'm not I don't mean to end discussion. I don't want to end the discussion, but where do we stand as far as open questions? Miss Manning, were you writing down questions we had for you? Where does this committee stand for questions that we need answered
>> before we make a recommendation? >> Should we So, we want to get the answers to these questions before we make a recommendation. Right. So, on the agenda that we could vote on this tonight, >> yeah, I I said on the agenda we could vote on this tonight. I don't I mean, one thing I'm thinking is we didn't get the final language till like 5:00 PM.
I'm I'm not going to tell people they can't make a motion and second it and vote on it. >> I >> I think we can wait until we get answers to these questions. >> But do we know what questions we have? I don't know. >> Oh, well I mean what I have written down here is liability insurance. Um the for
sale signs or temporary signs. >> Um >> some of the A-frames. >> Yeah, the A-frames. Any questions about the A-frames and >> political signs and businesses? >> Local signs and businesses. Yeah. >> Is it also it's not just the A-frames,
right? Is it just any of the promotional signs you see stuck around for different things. It could be for sports league sign up or um they're not necessary A-frames though there are temporary signs. >> Those are required to be permitted or um
>> those go through the select board. Do they though? >> They do. They should. >> Why would they go through this? >> Yeah, >> they're supposed to go through. >> Why wouldn't they go through this? Why would this not apply? >> That's just >> for the temporary signs. >> For the temporary sign. >> Are we Are we still talking about Are we
talking about temporary signs? >> Yeah, we are. >> Yeah. No, I think temporary signs. >> Yep. >> So then why wouldn't again temporary sign doesn't I don't really see how this bylaw applies to temporary signs or doesn't. So there's so that the the the section on page two which which defines
temporary sign I think kind of provides most of the language around authorized by the select board an activity involving public health safety welfare election referendum um they so is is the question that it's
not defined what the process is to go to the select board because I believe that that is contained in the in the design guidelines Yeah, I would. >> So, right. So, I mean, is is that sort of the question? Because because the that it's anticipated that these signs
go to the go to the select board, but >> I don't see where that is in here. >> So, it talks about um it talks about signs, special event. This is on page two under >> You know what? I think I I I totally I hear you loud and clear on the temporary signs. It needs to be tightened up.
>> Yeah. needs to be tightened up and and so and it's not that we chatted a little bit about this >> with the strikeout and the underline you know the way the article is written it talks about that you know certain languages to be deleted certain
languages to be is to be inserted and then anything that doesn't fall into those two categories is already in the bylaw in in the definition section of the bylaw right so that's confusing so we could probably talk to Caroline a little said about that. >> I think that's fine.
>> In my opinion, I think the first >> Oh, that part's fine. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, so I but I feel like this I feel like the existing language on temporary signs in the existing bylaw and this language in this new proposed bylaw, I feel like there's some confusion about sort of how those two
things tie together. And I think we can do a better job of defining that and talking about the process for obtaining a temporary sign permit. Yeah, >> there >> I I Yes, I think so. >> Okay, good. >> The other one was real estate.
>> Yeah, >> I was going to ask that. Did we ever get an answer to Andrew's question about real estate agencies being able to cover most of their windows with those signs? Are they considered displays? Are they considered signs? And why would real
estate agencies be exempt if you know an ice cream store wants to just show all its different kinds of ice cream in a window? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And that goes goes back to the whole thing why I'm not comfortable with the 20%
there. Some cases that are real estate offices tasteful can't see through them. I don't think it's a safety issue. um liquor store with
all kinds of advertisement. It's aesthetically non nonpleasing, but >> it's a completely different >> thing and something else. And so then the question becomes like how do
you balance all of that? >> That's a hard one because I don't think any amount of clarifying will >> No, exactly. We can do an exception for real estate offices, but beside beyond that, you know, it's just what, you know, kind kind of comes down to what do you want to sign by whether you want to
sign bylaw to make your town look a little bit better or not, >> whether you consider that a violation of free speech. >> And and for me, that issue is the current law says you can only have up to 20%. Now, it doesn't sound like your objection is going from 20 to 10. It
sounds like your objection is sort of having anything there. the current >> that maybe your objection is going from 20 to 10 but >> no it's it's that 20 to begin with seems very restricted just at its gut and I don't know how to
how to create a bylaw that fairly makes creation other than having a style police look at every proposal and say this is okay or it's not >> and maybe you don't like this >> maybe you don't like this response my response would be we currently have
bylaw that lends it to 20%. >> So, we're not radically changing that. Now, if we wanted to say we should get rid of that 20% rule, that would sort of be going a different direction than >> That's right. >> I I Why why we allow real estate
officers under the current framework? >> We haven't. There's been a there's actually there's a lot of signs that were things that people have put up without any permission because they didn't know that there was a process in town. So, they just >> put them up and when and the problem is
once one does it then another one wants to do it and then it's and then it um but it's you know it's been an enforcement issue. We've had some change of um it used to be more enforced I will say in the past it's um we've just had some turnover in our in our building
department. So that that leads to something that we haven't talked about which is fines. Um $50, $100 and then $300 a day. How does that compare to the current bylaw? How does that compare to I guess it's sort of apples and oranges
to other zoning problems? Because if my garage is too close to the my neighbor, I can't with snap my fingers and fix it. But if my sign is too big, tell me to take it down, I can take it down. Um I just know in this committee, not only
this year, but in previous years, we've raised the pitchforks and torches when the fines seem too high. So, >> so there was input put into this also from the building department. So, I don't know if that um and that's also why it's not going to be part of it's
not in the bylaw. It's going to be >> the fines is part of the bylaw. >> So, this is >> the fine but it's um but I think there's also going to be guidelines because we wanted to make sure that it's consistent and that the we um we do get input from
our building commissioner. So, I believe that's what we currently had. Um, >> I'll double check, but we can double check. >> Yeah, I'll I'll double check that with with um >> I'll double check myself. >> Yeah, if we can talk. >> It was it was definitely part of the
conversation was was making it making it, you know, consistent. >> Looking for looking for places to be consistent within within the zoning bylaw itself. $50 for a first violation. I got to be honest with you. Seems pretty low.
>> Oh, it's the per day. >> So, fine fine shall be cumulative and each day on which a violation occurs shall constitute a separate offense. So, I guess you'd have to send somebody out to enforce it. >> You know what I mean?
>> Special services. >> Yeah. So, that that that that's a that's we'll we'll we'll figure that one out, too. Yeah, if you can point to something in our current bylaws that we can compare it to. >> I don't think um I'm not sure what's in the current bylaw, but I do know that it doesn't seem it's ever been enforced.
>> Made recommendations for signs or ask people to take down signs and it's just never happened. And I can think of like, >> you know, signs just they said okay and they just went on their merry way in the sign stage. >> Yeah.
So we can get clarity for that. >> If I if I put up a poster of beer in my liquor store and you tell me to take it down, I can take it down or I'm fine $300 a day. But if I build a 13 foot sign and you say it shouldn't be higher than 12 feet, it might take me more than a few days to fix that.
>> Then you then you then you >> Okay. I don't know if the $300 could add up, but >> I'll throw that out to the committee. Is that is that a concern we have or >> Yeah, I'm very interested in looking at the fines.
>> Absolutely. >> My comment would be that I don't want to send this back for you. I'd like to ideally get this done, this town meeting, but then I really hate taking up this much time of everybody's
time here, but to me it doesn't feel 100% or 90% hate. You talking about the window sign specifically or you talking about sort of big picture? >> Big picture. Like I think there's a lot of things that may not have been
a lot of exception cases that haven't been sort of figured out yet. Um these are just a handful we're throwing up and I'm sure there's others and I just want to make sure that people are aren't inadvertently out of violation of them. Um or we have
to make all the all these holes and making exception cases for everything. I don't know. >> Well, you heard Larry's list of issues that he's taking back. >> Do you think that was a complete list or do you think >> I hope so, but >> you saying we may not be thinking of everything?
>> Yeah, I mean like those are ones that I just came up in the last we came up with in the last 45 minutes. Are there others that >> Yeah, 300 Tommy Tommy numbers quite a few more. >> And we also will have public hearings on this. So, we wanted to get it to you
first, but we'll there'll be public hearings on this and, you know, we'll be listening to anything that that we feel like we want to be prepared for telling me to >> devil's advocate like I would I have never
>> That's what I was about to say. You know, I've seen your public hearings. Three or four or five people might show up and have 250 people in the room at town meeting. And oh, what about if my Girl Scout wants to sell cookies? >> Yeah. What I what I don't want, and I
don't know how we avoid this, is 250 town meeting members thinking, oh, what about this case? What about this case? >> Yeah, it's hard to avoid because I mean, the bottom line is that some towns don't have a sign review bylaw and they just allow any signs. I mean, many times, you
know, I don't if you guys have ever driven through Canton. I don't think they have a sign by law. Sometimes >> that's some shade there. >> Canon has good things, but their signs are not one of them.
>> Um, but uh yeah, it's uh you know, so I mean some people some towns just don't believe in a sign. Some towns probably never did it because it would always seem like a violation of free speech or too restrictive, you know. So at some point we just have to take a step back and decide if we want to be a town like that or if we want to have a tone have
some control over it signage. You know that's kind of up to people to decide. >> I mean what do I care about? I don't want things that are offensive people put up. >> Yeah. >> Like sign that says I hate Korean people.
Like I don't I don't think that that is appropriate. But you know what? I bet it's You could do it. >> First amendment. >> I know. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> But but um >> my point is like that's what I hear
about in in a town. Do I want it to be like Christmas town aesthetic >> and that's why we're here because and and we have a bylaw right now which has been problematic and we're trying to fix the problems. I think these things your
list are are very good questions and I think things that our town council can put language to and that's where we we have a fabulous town council and I can trust to put some to tighten some of that language so there's clarity on
those. Um but this this is a problematic our current bylaw is problematic and this is it's come a long way. It used to be, you know, years ago, Milton did not allow any political signs at all. Some of people who lived here didn't allow
any um, you know, it was it was just very restrictive. Real estate signs, political signs, nothing was allowed. And so, this is we're allowing these things, but trying to keep, you know, an aesthetic look to protect the historic
character of the town. Um, there's a, you know, >> I do want to respect your time. you've been here for an hour. I appreciate that. >> So, yeah. So, we can answer some of these questions. I think um >> Liz can check with town council, get,
you know, some answers uh to Larry and then hopefully you can take it up at your next meeting and resolve somebody's questions. write down lemonade stands too someone meeting the last >> yeah we're trying to fly but
>> do we have to call that out and does that mean like >> but I might say I might say it here and I also might say it I probably will say it in front of town meeting we're not building a signed bylaw from nothing we're taking a current sign bylaw and changing it is the change better or is
the change worse or is the change so ambiguous that we need to wait for six months and hopefully the answer is the first one but the assumption is that the first one was >> well the first one is the current law >> yeah
the question we're ask okay with the changes not necessarily right right to have do we agree with these >> right what you're saying >> yeah two very different questions okay have we gotten all of our questions
questions out >> skyriting. No, I'm just kidding. >> Okay. >> Right. I want to thank both of you for your time. >> Yes, you know how to contact. You know how to contact We have our list. >> We should our town council is very
responsive and can um hopefully get this. >> So, we've got a meeting two days from now. Obviously, that's too soon. We've got a meeting next Tuesday. Be focused on the schools. Then, we've got a meeting the following Monday. So, that'll be two weeks from today. to have something not only updated but
go back and forth with me and Mary or >> two weeks from today. >> Yeah, for sure. >> Okay, great. >> Okay, >> thank you so much. Yeah, >> so Chief Madden wandered off. >> Next door I think. >> He might be next door. He might be just outside.
>> Okay, >> we do have we have a lot of other stuff in the >> You have other things we can talk about. I wanted to respect his time and go next. Um Okay. Someone want to >> Yeah. Sorry. >> That's all right. I mean, that's the
debate we're going to have. Unfortunately, the whole 20% thing for an appropriate amount of time. That was very good talk. This is definitely going to come on. >> Wish I could have been there by this first.
Our next guest is Chief Madden. Our agenda included all other topics and Chief Madden heard we had questions about the the Atheertton Street Fire Station. So, uh, Chief Madden, do you have things you'd like to say starting off?
>> Uh, no, I'd just like to thank you for having me. Um, I know there were a lot of questions and it was a lot to take, you know, try and answer every one of them. Um, so I did send out a I don't know if everyone got it. Just a kind of schematic of where all the apparatus will be. Um, I don't know if everyone
got it. I sent it out today, this morning maybe. >> I will forward it to everyone right now. >> I can send it around. >> Just a kind of a rough schematic of
where everything would be. Do you have all this equipment now? >> So the only So actually we have two engines and a ladder coming in due by the end of the year. Uh we have an engine that will be picking up uh at the end of probably April. Uh the new tower truck will be here sometime around
September, October and the new engine, another engine will be here uh before the end of the year. >> Okay. >> Everything else we have. So, um, >> yeah, I'd love to, you know, um, right
now some great conversations with Mr. Johnson. Um, you know, right now the the fire station building committee has done an amazing job for 10 years to try and get where we are. And, um, they've asked every question imaginable with the fire
service. And I know not everybody knows much about the fire service. were kind of uh an anomaly like you know everyone you know has questions so I'm here to answer any question that you would have uh and I hope I can do it with clarity
>> just have a quick question you guys use that chemical building the chemical number one building >> uh the chemical building next door is actually used by the um the auxiliary fire department >> oh >> volunteers that kind of help out with like road races uh they have lighting plant they have generators uh you know during the blizzard they They have an
F-150 with four-wheel drive. They would give nurses ride to Milton Hospital, their homes or the MBTA. Uh, you know, so that's they kind of help out u some fire scenes, some police scenes. >> They they they give, you know, uh, hydration
kind of support us in that way. So, >> okay. >> It's just a bunch of volunteers that that do that. >> All right. Maybe I'll I'll try to think I'm thinking about there was a series of questions that last week, right? I'll try to like triangulate it because I
think it like evolved, but one of the thoughts was like a lot of um calls you go on are nonfire, but they're like emergency medical. >> And is there a way that And I know you always send an engine.
>> Yep. But is there a way that if you go and just like a non not a car because you need the equipment for a car but if it's just a house and it's emergency which is primarily what the things are can you send an ambulance and instead a smaller vehicle and I think Jay mentioned an SUV or something.
>> Yep. >> Or either it have space in there and it would save on the engine wear and tear and probably be more efficient. >> Yeah. So you you look at you look at that. So the fire department has changed
in the years, right? So it used to be the fire department used to fire only fires and that's what we do. We've evolved to an allhazard response. So everything under the sun and the way I look at it is that if someone calls 911 because they're having their absolute worst day, no matter what the situation is. Uh the the call takers of PD answer
the phone and say, "Is this a police emergency? What's your emergency?" And if it's a police emergency, then they do they they dispatch their units. if it's anything else under their sun. Um, then we usually get caught. So, obviously fires, uh, hazardous materials. Um, we
do water ice rescue, we do technical rescue, which would be, you know, if something's crushed or we need to lift something heavy, we have all that equipment. Um, we do, oh, we do animal rescues, we do, um, you name it. Like, if someone has a funny smell in their
house, we get dispatched. Uh, we do carbon monoxide, we do gas leaks, gasoline, natural gas, propane, we do oil, we do I mean everything that you can imagine from the medicals from from heart attacks to I'm not feeling well to
falling down the stairs to car accidents to um actually we do house lockouts if if people lock their house themselves out of the house, we do the uh we can actually get into somebody's house. Um car lockouts. If somebody locks their keys in their car, we do that as a service. So, we do so much uh that a lot
of people don't realize what we do. And when you look at like the fire trucks, the fire trucks have so much equipment on it and that if we took something smaller that didn't have all of our equipment and then we get called out to
something that we don't have, that only delays time. So, we look at the national standards. The national standards tell us what how long we should get there, right? So, we should be everywhere under four minutes, right? That's that's the standard that we're looking for. Uh the national standards. So the NFPA which is
based out of Quinsey which has all the standards for everything all everything under the sun that's fire related. Uh from dispatch times to the equipment that we carry. The equipment that we carry they they term you know so we have class one engines here. So the fire engines that we have is class ones. It
it carries more than 500 gallons. Our our engines carry 750 gallons. Uh we have about 2,000 feet of hose which is 1,000 feet of feed of hose from the hydrant to the pump and then from we have attack lines 1,000 feet of attack lines. You know you look at some of these uh you know we may not be within
50 feet or 100 feet of somebody's home and we still have to get through the house and then we have to get upstairs or downstairs, second floor, third floor. We have to have that hose to be able to do that. We have to have the the the uh so we call IDLH immediately dangerous to life hazard, right? So we have our SCBAs. Our SCBAs are basically
what allows us to go into a fire or hazardous area so we can actually breathe safely. We have all of our turnout gear, all of our equipment, helmets, everything we have is kept on those trucks. We have, you know, the water rescue suits, the ice rescue suits, you know, and we get those calls, we get the ice rescue, we get the the
drownings, we get all of that. And so if we decide not to take the big truck and take a smaller truck and then all of a sudden that call comes in for something now, it delays. it just you know we'll never get where we need to go in four minutes or five minutes or eight minutes or 10 minutes you know because we have
to go back the four or five minutes get back to the firehouse to take the appropriate piece then to uh respond to the place. So that's why we we everywhere we go, we take the engine because it has everything that we need to to do to to do what our job and that's probably the most important thing
is that you know I'm a Coast Guard guy proud was our was our motto and always ready right so you always have to be ready the the firefighters that are in the firehouses are always ready if they go out in a call they have to be ready to answer that next call. There's a lot of times that we go out and we don't
come back for two three hours just because it's incident to incident to incident to incident. So we always have to have that equipment with us. So you know you you look at that and and it's not the first time that people have come up with that and said can we do this can we do that but it's it's basically what
we do. It's nothing that I do personally. It's the equipment that we carry and the training that we have that allows us to do our job. So that's the important part is the equipment. make sure we have everything uh there and ready to go. So, I hope that answered your question. >> Yeah, it's amazing the number of calls
you guys said. I'm always blown away by it. >> We did over 4,000 incidents last year, >> right? >> Um but what am I know? So, but I understand. So, it's a man it's really a manpower thing because you can't have
you got to have the people on an engine. You have to have people ready for an engine and you probably don't have extra people at night. We don't. >> Right. >> Um, one of my other thought questions was I remember this from last year, but you weren't last year. I know you had some open spaces. Do you still have open
spaces or >> So, we try and fill it. It's about a uh it's about a six month. So, I actually just put in three applications. We're hiring three more. Yeah. Um, I just put them in today academy and uh they are eligible for they got the first available class which is August 3rd. So there's a substantial weight uh for
that. >> If you had those extra people, would you be able to >> No. No. I I I don't think that we would be able to, you know, you look at you look at staffing and staffing the NFPA creates, you know, has all these standards for staffing as well. And you look at, you know, the fall rubifier,
right? And what was the biggest cry there was the staffing. They only have three firefighters per piece and they have three per ladder. We have three firefighters per engine. we have one person on the ladder. So, we're substantially understaffed. So, you know, you look at the city of Boston, even the city of Boston has four
firefighters per engine and and four firefighters per ladder and then they have four firefighters per heavy rescue which has all that super technical rescue stuff equipment. So, even that those team those cities and towns like Quinsey, Boston, New York City, New York City, you would think that they would
have all that people and they don't. they still drive around the engines because it's all their equipment that they need to have with them at all times. >> I I I realize I started with a point I raised. I do want to try to focus as much as possible on questions about the Atherton Street station >> which and maybe you were and I wasn't
following but >> well related because we started to ask well whatever that's fine. Yeah, >> I got my questions. Okay, >> I hope I answered them. >> Yeah, appreciate it. I think that's the just >> that was a really tight answer. That was great for that question. My question is
the Atheran station seems to be as big as the central station and um and and why is that? It just seems u I'm just curious about why seems, you know, especially relative to the East Milton station. It's twice as big as East Milton Station and that surprises
me. >> Yes. So when when you look at the the Atheran Street firehouse right now, right, it's it's a building that was built in 1901, right? It's 125 years old. uh the the apparatus bays that are there uh 10 feet by 10 feet and the the
fire engines uh you know if with a the rollup door that comes up if it loads >> I'm sorry it's not the size it's not the that the Aton station doesn't need to be renovated. I totally get that but why have five bays instead of two like I think the East Milton station's the new one's going to have two. >> Yeah.
>> Why have it be twice as big, two and a half times bigger? >> Right. So, so the two bays that are there, actually what I was looking for was two to three bays. Three bays is is optimal that I think for the future, three modern bays that can actually fit and hold modern fire trucks or fire
apparatus. The bays that are there, like I was, you know, the the height is 9'8 in the n the height of our engines is 9 ft 5 in. The width of the door is 10 feet. The width of our engine is 9' 6 in. So we have three inches on each side
and we only have three inches on top. When Stoton Stoen Fire came to cover during the uh the funeral for firefighter Thomas, they had to take equipment off the top of their truck to fit in. We struggled, you know, if you get especially during these snowstorms, if you get a little bit of a snow up there, you have to make sure that that's
shoveled out because two, three inches of snow that's compacted kind of does that for us, right? And then you know so those two existing bays when when we rehab the the existing building there's not a lot of structural work is going to be done to that building. It's going to
be almost like cosmetic the interior and the exterior and make sure everything is upgraded and everything else but but that building will stay this we can't touch the structural of it because then that sends the cost through the roof. Um so it's going to be more cosmetic to upgrade that building. The real cost is
the addition around the outside uh around the back and then to the to as you're looking at it to the right side the one modern apparatus bay that will be added to it and then the other parts of the firehouse that are actually important which is the decontamination the the wellness center those those
spaces will be added on. Um, so when you look at it, if it's just the building, you know, option one, it would only be one apparatus bay for the future. >> Even if they just substantially renovated it to make it two bays. So
>> I would I know you guys have looked at it extensively, so I apologize for driving, but it feels like that if you renovated substantially renovated the existing building to get the two bays that you need in the right size that
that would cost more than the plan for the five bays, you know, the two that you have plus the three more. And so I just that's what I'm trying to understand. I guess I I think it is I think option four might might be and I I off the top of my head I'm not sure but substantial rehabilitation of that
building to make it structurally sound and and and deal with it and to raise those bays to you know or lower the floor uh is going to be a lot of money a lot more money than it would be would just than adding something the way that we're looking at it now.
>> Thank you. >> Completely raising the building an option starting from scratch. It was it was um you know there's a lot of people that you know um love the the exterior and love how it looks and and you know
love the the the history of it the the 1901 you know what I mean it's been around for a long time the stone foundation and you know uh a lot of people love the the charm and want to keep that um you know and the fire station building committee did a lot of that conversation back and forth what
should we do and you know should we take the whole building down should we leave it should we do this should we add on. So, and and that's where, you know, it's been a long time. It's been several years. And actually, when you look at it, the very first the fire uh station space needs committee, which I think it
was like 2014, 2015, they actually came up with this plan and said, "Rehab this building and put an out building out back, you know, so it still keeps its charm. You finished rehab this building and and it looks great, but then you still have those that space for any kind of uh, you know, changes in the way that
the fire service does, you know. I mean, I would say that in the 20 years, 25 years that I've been on the fire department, our mission has changed tremendously. You know, back when I came on, we were doing 2,000 3,000 runs a year. Now we're over 4,000. So, the mission changed really, really changed
for us. So, you never know where we're going. and you know and and that's I know you know just I think one of the things that we look at and I look at you know someone challenged me and said when you become fire chief what is your what is your
first thing you want to do and I said I want to re-evaluate everything that we do here in the fire service in the town of Milton and I believe we've done that you know so when you look at those smaller bays they had the the brush truck and the boat and everything else that was kept up at engine 4 because there was no space here in this
building. They couldn't use the fire. There was no space for it. We were hampered by our space that we had. We could not operate the way that the fire department should be operating because of the space that we had. And now we do have some
space. And that's why the the the the brush truck that, you know, that we go out, you know, the brush truck, we can be down in the Ponet River. We can be uh down off of uh you know, Andrews Park. We've had some brush fires back there. Uh we can be up off of Chikatabitet road off of 28. We're always up there. Uh you
know, everyone always assumed that the brush fires would be up off the Blue Hill Aside, but it's not. It's actually it's all over town. And the same with the boat. The boat, you know, everyone said, "Oh, it should always be up by H Hotton's Pond because that's where the drownings are." And that's just not
true. We've had plenty of other people or accidents along the Neponeta River where we need the boat. So that that equipment should be centrally located here. So it it best serves the town. When it's stuck up there just because that's all the the space that we had, it really doesn't do anybody justice. Yeah,
we have that, but it doesn't mean that it's really doing any good because it's just a giant delay of getting there, getting to where it needs to go. So when we we we looked at that, that's where all that, you know, back then. But since we've had this and we've opened
this this this the space next door, I I think we're operating way more efficiently and and you know, in line with with today's fire service, you know, the the training that we do and the equipment that we're keeping and the and the the the the um just the
day-to-day operations of the fire department operating way better because of that. And you know, so I hope I answered your question. I I don't know if I did or not, but you know, looking at that, I don't know where the fire service is going. And I think if if we
don't have space for modern fire trucks, one of the things that I struggle with is is, you know, um we don't have and I've talked about a brush a brush tender or tender or a tanker which carries a thousand gallons or 2,000 gallons, whatever we can get. That has been a
challenge for us, you know, for years is trying to get fast water on the fire. you know, the the big fire that we had up off of uh Big Blue by the by the state police barracks. Um when our engine showed up there, our brush truck showed up there or the engine showed up there first because that's close to the
engine floors territory, engine four, Atherton Street. They got around the backside and they they had to walk in because you can't take that fire truck off road. So, they called for the and the brush truck started from here. They got there and it was about about a half a quarter acre to a half an acre and they ran out of water trying to put that
fire out. So they had to go back out and get more water and come back in and within probably two hours it would it exploded up to 30 acres and just you know if we had that thousandgalon tanker to get off road and actually get into the fire and try and put that down it would have been a totally different fire
and and you know we have to rely on our mutual aid partners like we were calling tankers from you know Canton has one, Foxboro has one, uh Norfor has one, Dover has one, Brainham has one. So we were really stretched in. We had people from all over, you know, talking half
hour, 45 minutes, hours to to get up here, you know, to that fight those fires. And we have, it's the Blue Hill, 7,000 acres. There's a lot of homes that are up against those. And we were fortunate that that we were able to the the firefighters did a great job. All the work that they just did at that that
horse barny road. We were fortunate. The firefighters did an amazing job standing there and and taking that wind blind blown fire towards them and they held that line and so it didn't get at that horsepower or the state police barrack. So it's just a challenge and that's
something that for me when I look at the needs you know something like that significant off off-road capabilities is something that we need as a department. It just this isn't going away, right? Climate change is not going away and it's still it's a very very challenging thing to do. Hot windy days. It's just
got to be a challenge for us. >> Previously, but I found it now and I just emailed to the whole committee, which is the options that our station building committee were looking at. >> So, I emailed this to everyone. >> Yep. >> That um Is that the current?
>> So this is headquarters's current engine two will be open uh by the end of the year. And then this is that five bay or actually it's a three bay with two. Yes, the ancillary uh space.
>> Yeah, I think we want to work on that. Maybe you work with Larry, work with me. Something to show like maybe before and after. Here's where everything would be. >> Yes. >> Right now. Oh, here's where everything will be once we have Atheertton built out. I think that's a step in the right direction. >> Yeah, I wasn't sure. Again, I I looked
at it. I I watched a little bit of your video and uh you know, tried to start, you know, and also I had a graduation on Friday and the recruits, we had four graduates, so that took up my day on Friday and then Okay. >> trying to get uh some stuff together for you, you know. >> So, this is the options. I realize it's small. Um but I think option
>> three might be option three in the green column is what is being recommended now which is the uh >> current design as drawn which I'm imagine that means >> the the plans >> station plus one additional onto it >> uh plus two additional apparatus space.
So maybe like column blue on the left would be the bare minimum. I'm just adding on one and column three green is what's being recommended which is doing that plus adding two on the back. Uh I'll scroll down to the price. That's an
important thing. Estimated price. We don't have a final price at this point. >> Now the bare minimum or not even bare, you know, you could argue if it's bare minimum, but the smallest one be 14.3 million. the one we're looking at would be about 16.1 million. So, Mr. Walsh
said they're all about the same price. I mean, that's a matter of opinion of 14 million and 16 million are about the same price, but there's certainly more expensive options here and less expensive options here. Um, so to me, what that says is if just
doing the building with the additional bay is 14.3 million and then adding the two things on the back is 16.1 million, the building on the back, which I'm thinking of as four walls and a roof, that's almost $2 million. So that that that's that's good to know.
And I guess you know you and I were talking before the meeting. The whole point of the next six months or next year is that we'll really hammer down if we think we're looking at a five bay design. What will that thing in back be? Will it be corrugated metal, four walls
and a roof? Will it be a little bit nicer? Will it be that'll answer does it cost $2 million? Does it cost more? Does it cost less? >> And then so there's there's two there's five days total. And then there's also room to add more if you need to. The
temporary base. >> Yeah, I think if we if we do the plan that we came up with and and that last fire station building committee meeting, we kind of nailed down this one. We had a lot of um people from the town. We had the planning board members. We had the historic commission members. We had a
couple of select board members that took part in that meeting. Uh and and all gave their two cents and and the idea was to come up with this. And you know, I think for me operationally speaking, what makes most sense operationally for the fire
department? That's the way I'm going. What will enhance the fire department operations? If you know, I I think that, you know, option one from for my own personal opinion, it doesn't really I think that sets us backwards as a department. Uh yes, it'll it'll give us
the new existing bay uh uh the the new bay with the two existing bays, but there's not much we can do with it with those bays, you know, with modern fire apparatus. And that's the challenge because if this building is going to stand for the next 75 to 100 years, then we've kind of done that. I think and I
said this at the uh capital meeting uh capital planning meeting is you know I think we're learning from the schools where the schools kind of built what they needed at that moment and not and now we're going through a huge you know Ky Cunningham they're doing extensive renovations there uh and then you know
you're looking at a whole new school uh because we never built out for the future and that's what I'm looking for is for me to do my job I have to sit there and say okay this is this is where we are now this is how we should be operating And where do we see ourselves? Where do where do we see the fire
service in 5, 10, 15, 50 years? You know, that's what I'm looking for. And that's why I I think we have this one shot because we waited 125 years to build this firehouse. We waited 146 for this firehouse and, you know, 75 for the East
Milton firehouse. So, it's not something that's going to go away. and and you know, like I said, you know, before we moved into the firehouse next year, the fire department operations were really hampered by the space that we have. So, that's just I think it's I I owe it to the town. I owe it to the fire service
and I owe it to the residents that, you know, I don't know where the fire service is going. Nobody can say that. But I think if we if we just did the bare bones, then I don't think we're doing that entire side of the town any kind of service forward. you know, and you know, you
look at the history, right? That that that building was opened in 1901 for a need. I know Mr. Walsh talked about that and then, you know, in the 80s we closed it down and we saw that need again, right? The 80s and 90s that they had to open it. Now it's I know Mr. Johnson has
looked at the numbers, but it's significantly busy. There's a large uh life safety problem up there, right? with Bula Village, 1200 Brush Hill Road and Curry College and all along Blue Lab and Brushill Road. There's substantial life safety up there that I I really do think that we need to make sure we take
care of that side of town. >> Chief, could you help me wrap my head around something? I was Everybody loves firefighters. Nobody can say anything bad about them. >> Well, highly trained resource, right?
And in grand scheme of things, an expensive resource. So, if I were looking at the fire department as like a business, for example, I would think it'd be crazy to send a highly trained firefighter to open someone's door,
right? And so, we would look at things. How do you cost optimize it? Do you have lower trained resources that you could apply to certain events and reserve the firefighters for like >> I would like to mostly focus on the >> No, no. And this go this goes to a same
same about equipment, right? So space is valuable. And so the question is what really needs to be there versus somewhere else like brush truck. Can it sit in an auxiliary garage in the Blue Hills or whatever? Is that even
possible? So, uh, what I'm trying to figure out is why can't are there why can't the problem why does a fire why do you need a brain surgeon to des to send to like everything and same for equipment? Why
does it all need to be in a tightly confined expensive hotel? I mean, I I'll say to you, you know, if you call 911 and you want us to say that we're gonna send less people because we don't think it's that much of an emergency. And you know, most people when they call 911
don't actually give all the information that they're there. And I and I, you know, one of my favorite stories is we had a reporter from the Milton Times come sat with us for a couple days back when I was a brand new lieutenant and we did so much training with her and showed her everything we did and we got zero
runs. So, so it was just one of those days, right? So, but so then she said she needed to leave for an hour or so, right? And during that hour, we had a medical and then we went to a house lockout. And so when she came back and she's like, "Oh, I didn't miss anything." And I said, "Well, actually,
I'll challenge that." I said that house lockout was someone that actually just got home uh from shopping and they brought their six-w week old baby, put them up, put the baby on the floor in the kitchen and the door locked behind her while she was trying to get her groceries in.
>> Oh my goodness. >> So that house lockout was the worst moment of her life. >> Y >> right. So then when we show up when you have professionals that can get up, it took us less than a minute to get inside that house. We didn't break any We didn't break the front door. I'm not going to tell you how we get in. We have
our secrets. We have our secrets that that we do. And we were able to get into that house in less than two minutes to it was the greatest day of her life, the greatest moment. It went from absolutely terrifying. So when I sit there and say, you know, one of the things, you know,
car lockouts, I I see it as practice. Even if there's not an emergency, we don't go there lights and sirens, but it's practice. Our members get to practice their trade. when it does come to a child or a car or or an animal locked in a car door in a car on a hot summer day and they're
they're struggling medically, then we're very good at getting getting that into that that thing where we practice what we preach and we're always training. >> I I sort of wanted to stay focused on the topic. I think >> no. So the the acen and um what do we
need there and how do we optimize the use of space and like I I might phrase your question a different way, but I think I think we're getting the same idea, which is >> there be five bays at AOD if you count the two small ones as bays. One of them
will have a truck that goes to emergencies. >> Yes. >> And the rest will be and there's a spare and the rest will be like storage. Could that storage be somewhere else? Could it be in the DPW yard? Could it be >> anywhere else? So, one of the things
that that and I would say, you know, like it it doesn't really do well, right? So, when the firefighters get on duty in the in the morning, they check out all their equipment to make sure that it's ready to go. Even though the guys the day before checked it out, the guys you check it out because one, it's your life and you need to make sure
everything works. So, everything so everything under our power, we like to keep it, you know, inhouse. So, we're always maintaining. We're always making sure that everything is an operational readiness. We have to make sure that because if there's any if we don't have an equipment or if there's something missing or something like that when we
go out that door if that first engine doesn't work uh then we go out we go out the door and we're missing anything then that doesn't work and then so you know if we had to ride to the DPWR that would would just slow us down you know what I
mean it still doesn't keep us within that 4m minute response time four to six minute response time so you know maybe for the second spare or something like that. But even still, you know, even if it's the brush truck or or whatever it is, and we need it in a moment's notice,
we can't have to travel someplace to go get it and then come back. You know, it just slows us down and you know, you see the the the bumper stickers when seconds count. You know, >> that case I understand, but like let's say I'm having a heart attack and I know we're going to move away from that and
I'm this just medical event. I don't care that an engine is here. I want an EMT and a Ferrari to like get there as fast as possible. Right. So, so yeah, if you're having a heart attack and you want we send the closest the
closest apparatus that we can and and you know, I know that there was questions about EMS, the last one, uh why do we send a fire truck to an EMS call? Uh you look at it a heart attack, you look at anything. Again, we are the first responders and it's true here in
town. We arrive on scene first. Yep. >> So even if it's again that that I'm not feeling well >> might and we just send an ambulance and then they get there and turns out to be a heart attack and CPR in progress. Well, now they're calling. Now we're behind the eightball on that. So So we
send highly trained people to every call because we don't know what is on the end other end of that line. >> I'm sorry I didn't follow. >> Yeah. No, no. I'm like I'm just thinking about um I still have a hard time getting over it
that we're sending such well-trained PE people to everything. Uh >> I Yeah, I think that's a little off top, >> but I thought you were also saying, >> but why do we have five bays and four of them are storage? >> And same same with that. >> Not really storage. The spare isn't
storage. >> It's really not storage, right? It has to be to be able to go in service. >> Is it standard for every fire department to have an engine and a spare at every location >> pretty much? I I talked to the Hangingham Fire Chief who happens to live in town and we were discussing this
and I asked what they did. Uh so I said they run two engines, a ladder and two ambulances. They're front line. And I said, "What do you have?" He said, "We have four engines, one ladder, and five ambulances." Okay. >> Randolph is Randolph is the same. Randolph has four engines. They run two
engines, a ladder, and an ambulance. They they have four engines, a ladder, and four ambulances. >> I sort of understand having a spare for like spare parts, but Mr. Walsh implied it's not only spare parts. It's you get in there, you turn the key, it doesn't start, you hop on the other one. Absolutely.
>> How often does my my car always starts when I turn the key? >> So, they are big pieces of equipment and we we buy them. And you know, Milton is behind the eight-ball. I actually had a chief's meeting this morning and I this afternoon and I met with uh some chiefs from all over and I asked that question. I said, "How often do you replace your
engines?" They said, "Every 10 years >> and Builtton does it every 15." >> The front line. So So we are five years extra. You know that you look at the age of some of these, you know, that our spare engine right now is a 1999. It's 26 years old. >> Okay.
>> Uh our our second our next newest one is 2005. It's 21 years old. And that's Front Line. It's the piece that's right there. That's the piece that's getting replaced at the end of the month. But we so you need to have that. So, uh, does do they break? Absolutely. You know, when you you look at the roads, you look
at, you know, they're big trucks. Trucks do break down and they're meant to run. You know, that's one of the things you look at diesels and, you know, diesel engines, they're meant to run long time. You know, they're not supposed to go with that quick start start and fast and stop and fast and stop. You know, that's
not what a diesel engine does. But you need the diesel engines for the power to carry all the equipment and the weight of the water. The weight of the water is the biggest thing. 750 gallons is heavy. >> I I think what would help me and then in turn you maybe the rest of the committee and in turn help town meeting is again
getting back to the the diagram and saying sort of exactly you know once it's built here's what's going to fill up these five bays at Central. Here's what's you know two bays at East Milton. That's easy. Here's what's going to fill up these five bays at Athetherton. Here's, you know, we've got a boat.
Here's why we have a boat. Here's why we want the boat to be at Athetherton or wherever we want it to be. We have a hazmat thing. Here's why we want it to be there instead of somewhere else instead of in the basement of town hall or something. I think that would help me a lot. I don't know about the rest of people. I think it would help town
meeting and maybe the rest of people in this room. >> I also think having Chief do the presentation, I think he's very compelling, is good. >> Oh, thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah. I've been doing this for Mr. Mr. Mr. Bal has his strengths, but I think I think both of you
>> it's a passion of mine. I mean, obviously I I love what I do and when everyone says, "Hey, come talk. Can you come talk about your job?" I say, "Jared, you know, my wife, you know, I was in the Coast Guard. I flew in helicopters for four years for five years before I became a firefighter." >> We can ask you questions about that for the next hour.
>> And my wife, you know, I talk about work and she's like, you know, not everybody loves their jobs. You know, for the last 30 years, I've absolutely loved my jobs. and she's like, >> but to answer your question, I'm looking at space and firefighters as finite resources. The question is like, are
they are we optimizing? I I think we are. I I think we have some highly trained people that do everything. You know, we do a lot and and to send them out and again, like I
said, you could you could leave at at at 8:00 in the morning and your shift starts at 8 o'clock in the morning. You can go from a one instance to the next instance, the next instance to the next instant, not get back till 2:30, 4:00 in the afternoon. I've done it where you go out at, you know, 8:00 at night and, you know, you you're getting relieved on
scene from a fire or something like that or, you know, a horrific car accident or something. You know, you're there for two, three hours and you just go to the you you just, you know, and it happened today, you know, unfortunately they went to do a fire drill at Tucker School and next thing you know, we got a call for a
building fire. So everyone has to leave whatever they're doing. And sorry kids, we got to, you know, we got to go do this, you know. So it just happens. You go from run to run to run. You need to have all that equipment and you need to have, you know, you want to have highly trained people to do to show up at your house and that's what we do.
>> So the I'm sorry, just but it's a manpower machine >> is really what it is. >> Okay. I want to sort of circle back to the question in front of us which I don't think we're voting tonight. I can't, you know, can't prevent you from it. Question in front of us is, do we
approve a million dollars to design and study a fire station? And not only that, but these things have a life of their own. I mean, if they design and study option three, which is, you know, the three bays and the two more bays, if they come back with a million-dollar design for it, town meetings are going
to say, "Ah, kick it out. Make it four bays." So, it's sort of we want to start as we want to continue. So we're being asked we want to approve that money and sort of we're being implicitly asked we want to approve that money to study option number three. Given that people
on this committee I think we still have the open question of let's get a really good diagram. But aside from that >> we can get that we can get that ready for town meeting. >> I'd think better if I saw that. >> Oh would you? Okay. You'd rather have that be >> putting that aside. Do we have other
questions that are open that we haven't had answered? think we need >> available. >> I emailed that to you just 15 minutes ago. I'm asking like oh town meeting >> this answers a lot of questions I think and this is super helpful for like
>> the fire station building did they have done their homework and it's all they're all residents now it's on it's available on >> yeah all the designs are available on the fire station building committee website >> that's really helpful that would be >> yeah that's what I was thinking >> because we are going to get that
question >> what about building instead of building a totally new like those are the questions will certainly come Mhm. >> And we could, you know, most of the people in this room heard me say when I was recruiting them to be on the war committee, I was like, >> we could talk to the fire chief for two
hours. I'm going to try not to. I'm going to try to respect your time. I know everyone's time. >> I don't mind. >> No, everyone's questions I please. >> Everyone's time. And Mr. Johnson's been great. If you want to come visit me at the firehouse and you want to have more questions and absolutely, you know, I'm always open to that. If it's not me, I
can have a deputy chief or somebody. Um, >> only if you get a donation. >> Oh. want me to go off with. >> We have a couple more items I want to get through tonight. So, um, >> if that's fine, we'll release our guest.
>> You guys can store the 1848 steamer in my >> Yes. No, thank you. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Awesome. >> So, I I mean, I can send this out to you again. >> And I'll work on my autistic, you know, I'm a firefighter, so
Thank you. >> So cool. So I I tore the >> attur because I can't do much with the basement. So they >> Okay. So the other three things I want I know it's nine o'clock. I'd rather put in a little bit more time tonight. Uh three other things I want to talk about
tonight or the next three things on the agenda. The I'm calling it tax title fund. I don't know if that's the right way to call it. the tax credits and a school budget discussion, partly a discussion and partly an airing of all of our questions. So, the school committee will be ready to answer our
questions a week from now. Uh, yes, Elaine. >> In order to save time for that third thing, because we have no new information to offer, although Julia can contradict that if she wants to, could you all just send me your questions by end of business tomorrow because um,
school committee would need it that far in advance in order to be able to answer those questions by the time they come visit us next week. >> Yeah, we Nick already sent his questions, so I already have those. Um Jason has questions. So I have those. Um
>> I had a question uh that hasn't yet been answered and so did Julia who that hasn't yet been answered. So um we've got some but if any of the rest of you have questions please just send them along to me. >> And ideally we'll never achieve this but ideally we'll get all our questions them
ahead of time. When they come they present them to us and we have no questions. It's all settled. Now, maybe that's maybe that's unrealistic, but that's that's the goal. So, I know people in this room have questions for the school budget. That's good. And the school budget
subcommittee is meeting Wednesday morning. So, when we say get them to a lane, end of business day tomorrow, that really means end of business day tomorrow because they have an 8 a.m. meeting. >> Then at night, I have to like write it all up and send it along. >> Yeah. Because they have an 8 a.m. meeting the next day and they're going
to want to talk about our questions. Do you go to that meeting? >> Yes, I do. And when I can. >> I mean, it's >> it starts during my workday, so sometimes I have to take an hour of personal time or I have to work late. >> But yes, Brian, I try to make it. >> So, um, >> God bless you.
>> You can base those questions on what what material like I mean, aside from the discussions that we've had here and the meetings with the school committee and whatnot, we have some materials, I think, right? >> Uh, >> yes. >> I feel so much materials I can't even strike my head. >> Yeah. So, what did we share?
>> Right. Mark Loring shared a the budget book um with all of us, I think. Did he? >> Um and that's the most detailed that we have. >> All right. I'll take that. >> So, yeah, that's that's Yeah, I don't mean to beat a dead horse,
but let's get our questions to them. Does it do any good for us to surprise them with questions when they're in front of us? Let's have an efficient meeting next a week from Tuesday, which yes, I apologize is St. Patrick's Day. >> I'm not going to be there
>> because it's St. Patrick's Day. >> No comment. >> Okay. So, is that issue settled? >> So, now I'll turn to Well, what's first on the agenda? Eeny meenie miny mo. tax title fund was that was James.
>> So, uh have you guys at least looked at the uh the warrant itself? It's a one warrant. Um it's pretty straightforward as terms of what it is. is to establish a fund to collect um to basically take
the the the fees and any kind of um charges that they put towards the collection of any foreclosed properties due to failed taxes. Um and so the idea is rather than creating rather than
having to um for it there was a uh trying to remember what the phrases for it whatever. So basically they establish a fund and then that fund is going to be used to pay for all the bills um as it relates to um the collecting of funds
right so um Everybody's looking for time. Yeah. Recording fees, title searches, mailing, purchasing legal notices, filing petitions with the land court, process servers, attorney fees, all those things we currently um have to uh
appropriate with the fund. We don't have to do that any longer. the fees that are collected can carry forward um year over year depending on what whatever the town sets for. And so all we're doing is we're voting to say yes, we we want this to
actually happen and then um the select board will implement this before the new budget start cycle starts and we have this fund in place so they don't have to come back to us and say this this is the budget as it relates to the treasurer collecting. >> And where's the initial funding coming
from just from comes from our county budget. >> No. Oh, so we would start it with that budget and then it would roll. >> Yeah. So it's basically saying the fund will start and so the fund will start to collect >> after this >> after this. Correct. >> So once it collects the fees, now we have a fund that can actually be used to
pay for all of those things. >> So it doesn't require us to add more money or to raise more money. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> What happens to the money now? It just goes to the general fund. >> Correct. Okay, cool.
>> So, do we have to vote currently to use that? >> Yeah, it goes part of the general budget that says that this money will be used by the treasury in order to pay for the fees. >> So, what's the pluses or minuses? I mean, right now the money goes into the general fund and the money comes out of
the general fund in the treasur's department. >> Why is this better? supposed to be more efficient um because it doesn't have to we don't have to annually say this is how much money we're going to be allocating towards this particular um service that's um that's being provided by the town on the I kind of look at it
on the contrarian side which is the um well right now we have eyes on it if there's a fund we now lose that that visibility I mean it's still public fund so we can still ask for it but it's not doing this and this can happen with any fund that we establish Right. Once
you've taken it out of the general budget and say, "Okay, there's a fund associated with fees, we now no longer see it anyway." But >> yeah, I might say it the opposite way though. I might say it's a little more transparent of >> Yeah, this is >> this is about the money from it has fees
that come in. >> Correct. Provided you ask for it, right? Because now it's no longer being discussed. >> There would still be reporting on an annual report on the town. That's correct. So there's still transparency around it. Just >> shorten the town meeting discussion every year. That's correct. >> Yeah. So, for all intents and purposes,
this is one of those that we more likely do than not do because it'll only benefit us. >> Yeah. >> But doesn't it >> maybe I'm seeing this wrong, but doesn't it um reduce flexibility in being able to spend those funds because now they're allocated to a particular revolving fund
rather than going into the general, >> right? But it's specifically related to the the business that's being done. The I mean on the flip side is that you could start to becoming more aggressive about collecting right which could increase that fund but again or that the
fund could be used for something else like it could become a slush fund but those are things that we can trust that our select not >> that's the transparency that's what >> if it gets too large you can make it free cash >> yeah I'm sure if it gets too large they'll figure out some figure out
something to do >> I mean occasionally I'm sure that will happen you're expecting to pay some fees Then you don't actually have to pay it for some reason. Got this extra money in the account or in the fund, right? That never happens. >> We can probably vote on this one. >> Yeah. Do we have more questions about
this? >> I will entertain a motion. >> Second. >> I will I have not heard a motion >> to entertaining it. >> I've not heard a motion to vote on this tonight. So that we recommend >> make a motion to recommend the town to
accept the provisions of Massachusetts Journal Law Chapter 60 section 15. Second. >> Okay, got that Karen? >> Article 35. >> And now uh Karen, can you do a roll call vote? >> Um Elaine,
>> abstain. >> James, >> did Lorine leave? Yes, you do. >> Okay, so we'll go to Grace. >> Yes, >> Larry. >> Yes. >> Andrew, >> yes. >> Julia,
>> yes. >> Brian, >> yes. >> Michael, >> yes. >> I believe Ron has left Ron. Okay. Uh, Nick, >> yes. >> Cecile,
>> yes. >> And Jay, abstain. >> The motion carries. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Cecile, I have your
sharing presentation. >> The presentation. Yes. Yes. Yes. Did I forward that? I can't remember what I for >> Yes. That that I'll take credit for Karen's work. Um
sent this to me. Why am I not seeing it? Oh, because >> I think it's from the work. >> What would it have been titled? >> Article 36 presentation >> Sunday. Oh, Sunday. Thank you very much. I was
looking at Saturday or I was looking today. Okay. Just a second. You have it, Jay? >> I do. >> Okay. I was gonna say I could share it.
>> Having a hard time slideshow. Come on. Okay. You asked about a template for our presentations, Larry. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, I'll try to make this quick. Um, basically there's two where
article 36 has two main clauses that we kind of uh bundle together to vote on. Um, but the gist of it is uh additional tax exemptions for certain communities. So um the first one is targeted around veterans. Um, and then the second one is
a more general. Um, so like I think it's like veterans, seniors, surviving spouses, and children. Um, and so I'll go a little more in detail. The article itself is really short. Um, but unfortunately, as I found, it was
linking to like a bunch of other clauses in MGL. So it was kind of a wild goose chase. So I attempt to summarize it in this presentation. Next slide, please. I think we can this one. So the first one is uh I don't remember the exact
string but it's 22I of the the law that was pointing to and this is uh a pretty recent clause added to MGL. It's also called the Hero Act and it's basically a cost uh consumer price index increase.
So cost of living adjustment for the exemption um on certain qualifying veteran exemptions every year. So there's a list of them and I may create a table in the next slide um but since you guys all have the presentation we don't have to go into the the table but
basically every year um consumer price index has been going up and so uh veterans will be uh potentially we'll be able to get higher exemptions every year based on that increase. Next, please.
>> So, this is a really long table. Um, you guys have it. So, if you're curious, I kind of tried to summarize the million different clauses that it was pointing to. Um, the town, in short, the town is responsible for paying the full
exemption upfront and the Commonwealth will reimburse the town for a certain amount for every level. And so these clauses are basically different levels of disability connected with um a veteran's time and service. And so
Milton in particular has a history of paying out two of these and they're in full. So it's clause 22 and clause 22B. Um for both of these, Milton's responsibility is $175 of the total credit, which um is either
400 or 1,000 depending on the clause. Does that make sense? $175 per year per >> Yes. >> And I have a little more detail on that promoter. >> All right. So, >> just so I'm clear, I'm a little
confused. So, like 22E 6,000 of the property's taxable value. So, if their taxes at 10,000, they get 6,000. >> So, it's whichever is greater. And I think that's the same language for all of these. is basically you get a 6,000 deduction like your property value minus
6,000 um and that's what they determine the tax on or they get a $1,000 credit so whichever ends up saving them more. >> Oh, so it's just 6,000 off the value of the house. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So I think it usually ends up being
>> So I had a bunch of questions. I ended up meeting with Nick Milano um and he helped answer a bunch of them. So um the first question was if uh if the exception goes up uh is the town responsible for paying the difference um with the consumer price index increase
and the answer is yes. The town will absorb the cost of that. So that that's the I think one of the big call outs for the article. Um the town is going to be responsible spoiler alert for paying for both of the the clauses in here. Um, and then if co consumer price and disc goes
down, which is like a super hypothetical scenario, um, do the tax credits also get adjusted? Nick said probably not. It would stay flat. Um, and then how soon would the town be notified of the increase? It will be in March every year for the following fiscal year. So, we'll
have a few months to adjust um, and make sure we have enough money. So the second clause is um I think it'll be a bigger financial burden on the town. So this is voting basically you can vote to add additional tax
exemptions on a number of uh qualified uh populations. Um so you can set it for up to 1,00%. In the article currently it is up to it is at 100%. So, if you got like a $100 exemption, if we passed this
and adopt it, they would end up getting a $200 exemption. And so, again, there's like a billion different clauses that it links to that would apply here. Um, and I made a summary in the next table. Um, and then there was some language
here basically to avoid uh doing like tax fraud, property fraud um with people that qualify. I think basically doubling the exemption for a bunch of folks in
Yeah. So another summary of the clauses that it pointed to um 22 is included. So, the the veteran credits that we talked about for the last clause and the other notable ones that are bolded that Milton currently has um people applying
for are the seniors, the legally blind and there's like a different senior clause for 41. Um so, these are the ones that Milton is currently paying for and they the town responsibility is slightly different for some of these. Um so, it's
not just always $175. What does full amount mean? >> So, some of these and these I asked Nick about it. He said that Milton doesn't currently have anyone in those categories, but it would be like they would be completely tax exempt.
>> They would want to help Milton to pay no property taxes. >> I think it's up to a a certain like value. The house can can be a certain value and to be fully >> but um yeah, I think these are not You can't double that. >> You don't. That was another one of my
questions. >> Yeah. You can't double something that is just um >> like a full amount. >> Okay. >> So, so can I just So, if you're a veteran, if you're serving in the war and where you don't have to pay any taxes also, that's another one. 56
>> active >> active duty in foreign countries. >> Yeah. Up to 100%. Um, I don't know exactly what that means in practice and I I don't think it like anyone in Milton currently when I ask Nick like falls
under that category, but I can I can ask him for clarification. >> Did you ask him before last week? >> Yeah. 20-year-old boy. >> Yeah, I talked to him. >> Yeah. Yeah, I know. Both of these clauses means tested.
Does anybody who falls under a category regardless of their net worth qualify or >> so the what's written in MGL I think is based on the value of the property >> irrespective of whether or not somebody has
>> anything about interesting >> that's really interesting >> that mean everybody above 70 years old >> I would have to go back and um >> is um so I mean Jesus I don't really pay attention to my taxes you know I mean I
just can't make my mortgage payment taxes out of it >> how would this be how would you did fall into one of these categories I guess you'd have to >> you okay >> I I definitely I had a conversation with
Nick and he said the veterans agent's job is to find people who are qualified for We've got a new veterans agent who told Nick I do my job well paying more of this and you know the currently existing programs. >> Just throwing that out there.
>> Do we know the process of this? >> Yeah, I have a slide. >> Okay. What do we have? Oh >> yeah. What it means for me? >> Um yeah, so I did a little like just basic scenario for a single person. Um
so scenario 22 is the $400 credit. The town responsibility is 175. This is the current um town payment. So if we choose to adopt both of these clauses with article 36, that means that for 22nd I
will the town will end up paying be responsible for 18060 60 cents because we're also paying the difference based on the cost of living increase. Oh sorry this is a hypothetical of 1.4% increase
in consumer price index which was based on last year's data. Um, so there's a slight increase of town responsibility per applicant here. The second one I think will be the bigger town responsibility because we're basically
doubling the exemption and we're doubling it after the cost of living increase if we accept the first one. So the last line is basically what the town would be responsible for this one scenario if we double it. Um, and the money is coming from the overlay fund,
which I I have some data on that as well later on. Um, but Nick thought that the current amount that is going in and coming out, like we should be able to accommodate for adopting both of these as well. >> So without this we
pay 586. >> Yeah. >> So it's tripleish give or take. >> Yeah. Somewhere on the order of triple a little higher. That's per applicant. 586 per applicant. So that's
>> how many people down with this. Do we have >> Yeah, I have a Okay, >> can I Yeah. Can I peek? What do we have? >> Yeah. Oh, okay. >> Yeah. So, Nick was kind enough to share the data from the last five fiscal years on exemptions. So, the raw table that he
shared is on the bottom. um there's not a lot of exemptions and so the bar chart is kind of a lot of data but I thought it was easier for me to visualize at least than the the raw table. The bars is the total amount that
the town um has paid in exemptions. Um and then the lines are the the counts. So the number of applications for exemptions. So it's 83,000 paid last year.
2025 >> reduction town revenue basically >> of $3,000. >> So this money is coming from the overlay fund. I'm not super familiar with that, but from what I understand it's
allocated from the tax taxes that we get every year. The board of assessors allocates money to the overlay fund. Um, so I think it it's nodding >> still collect the taxes but then take it from this fund to pay these people back or repaying them the taxes they is that
what you're saying. >> So I think I would need to look up I can get the answer there. >> That's what Nick's getting at. It's like is it decreasing in the revenue or is it just coming from another fund after we get the money? >> Yeah. Okay. So, does the overlay fund
count towards town revenue today? That's where >> I hadn't thought about those terms. Yeah. So, it's either reduction in town revenue or it's redistributing taxes. >> Exactly. Yeah. >> Either way, it's $100,000. I >> see what you're saying.
>> It's $100,000 for a good cause. Feels like it's something to support. Yeah, >> you're saying it might be we collect the same amount of taxes as a town, but everybody else's tax goes up by a little bit because theirs goes down. >> Yeah, that that is good to know if it
which which way it works. >> Do you understand the question? >> But you're saying you're saying that I don't I don't think she's saying the taxes are going up necessarily. >> Well, it could be for the people that don't qualify for the No, if I don't know the answer, right? So either either the town just collects less in taxes by
that amount or the town collects the same amount of taxes, people just get pay less. That means everybody else pays more. >> Collects less. >> Yeah, it's probably. >> And so these numbers are actual numbers.
So these before the increase. >> Yeah, this is historical. Yeah. >> Yeah. So no cost of living adjustment doubling. Well, but also not reflecting this proposed law. >> Correct. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Sorry, you said what? >> Yes. Yes.
>> What is that estimate? It's $82,000. Is that correct? >> That's exactual. >> No, that was the actual >> X actual from last year. >> 25. >> Okay. So, the >> what would the projection on 25B if these new
um >> if these new proposals were in place? >> I thought about doing that calculation and I was like, it's a Saturday. Yeah, I didn't do Yeah, I can I can check with Nick if he's already done that. >> I certainly think before town meeting we should do that now. Whether we should do
that before we vote maybe different question. >> James that you were raising your hand. >> Can we go back two slides? >> It means for >> that one this. So this is all the things
that it covers. So, I'm not sure like plus 17 is for seniors 70 plus. Everybody that's a senior that's 70 plus gets $2,000 off on their taxes. Is that what that means? >> There's a there's a property value >> the property value goes down $2,000.
>> Yeah. Doesn't it? Those numbers don't it's got to be more than whatever. >> No, there's a So, if your property is above a certain value, this doesn't qualify. >> Oh, I see. And so I guess so if the house is worth say it's
$70,000 which probably doesn't exist but it would be $68,000. Is that what you're saying? Is that what that means? >> So if you tax it you would calculate it as 68,000. >> Um and they have to be 70. Um,
so they get up to 175 offer if we should get the values of what the houses would be because I'd be curious on. >> Yeah. Like what's the threshold because the values are 20,000 >> I would prefer to see means testing. >> Yeah. >> Well, I don't think we get a choice.
>> This is MGL. >> So we have we do what they propose or we don't do what they >> and these are the ones bolded like we have been like doing those extensions. >> So, and we're not voting on whether
we're doing those exemptions. >> So, increase the >> voting the doubling of it >> doubling and the cost of living increase >> in theory reject it and come up with their own set of guidelines or
>> probably not. If if we don't adopt MGO, we can create our own like half 70% or like >> I don't know when I doubt the town of Milton. I mean we we charge residential properties at X amount per thousand.
>> I don't know if we could just come up with our own unless you're over 85. I'm not I'm not making a joke. >> I'm trying to understand. >> Yeah, I'm not making a joke. I I I I doubt we could come up with our own thing like that. I think it's there's a mass general law that I think you want
to adopt or not. I think because I think I think some sort of credit is the humane and right thing to do, right? Um a little scared at the uncapp
variable for a second. >> Well, I think when we talked about unknown, I mean this example costs approximately triple. Correct. >> So if last year it cost 80, call it 80,000, triple that.
>> 200. Yeah. 20 40. So a difference of 160,000 ballpark. And I think we should refine that before town meeting. >> So are we going to be presenting this before town meeting or is the proposing
like so I guess the present? >> Good question. I think I you know I like to hear myself talk. I think it I think it's prudent for the warrant committee certainly for something like this for us to get up we say Tom meeting we know so much about your finances let's explain
this and kill them with information not only this but then you know also the how much it will cost. >> Sure. Yeah. If we're presenting I can definitely see if we can get a projection. From what I say, it seems kind of
palatable in the scheme of the overall town budget. It was $300,000 that would be closing school. >> And that's context like the two schools.
>> Well, that also goes back to the are we reducing the town revenue or we reallocating, right? >> That's a good question. We do need that. >> And if this is this gets back to I think something Andrew was getting at and if this is for anybody regardless of
income, I know you said that their house can't be worth only their house can only be worth so much. But if it's for everybody regardless of income, then that also shapes what I would say.
>> I Yeah, I'm with you. I I would want to see what that is, those values, >> somebody that owns five houses and has eight million. >> Oh, yeah. You just wonder. Thank you. Um, it has to be your primary residence. >> It doesn't matter. But if you have like
seven vacation homes elsewhere, like to me, why do they deserve a tax credit? I'd rather do you think people like >> is it a realistic scenario where someone's property is like it the cap is pretty low >> so their primary residence is this house
that's worth not that much money and then they're like having >> 20 million that's really possible to save 20 million what are you talking about like they have the cap how much they can get possible
but they're only 175 if their house is worth up to a certain amount. >> I'm trying to pull it up, but yeah. No, no, but what Andrew is saying, I think it's it's it's relevant because the net worth of somebody, >> I think, should dictate whether they get this or not to a certain extent, not
just their service. >> Andrew and Brian were here last year. We had a similar but different issue last year and we sort of spent a lot of time talking about it. But what it ends up with is the mass general law says what it says and we can adopt it or we can't.
But the people on Beacon Hill and their wisdom have written the rule this way. >> I I >> Right. But aren't we talking about doubling what the match? So that's what I'm concerned is doubling that. you know what's in place is what's >> that was important though knowing what
that was last year because it was really low and you realize very few people would could get it and the people that could get it should get it so we knew what that was so that's how there was speculation about people owning cape houses and gold bars and we went >> yeah but that was relevant though we
talked about that proposing to double it >> right yeah >> so Nick said it was just an opportunity to give more tax breaks to like frankly like people who might need them. >> Yeah. But I would rather say let's
allocate 250 grand and create a pool that people could apply to rather than >> I blanket it. >> And I'm not saying that's the right answer. It's just that um >> No, it's fair. >> Unknown numbers scare me. I agree with
you. >> Yeah, I agree. It's a permanent >> risk that we're taking. >> No, sorry. At the bottom of this page, you'll see those numbers are going to be very limited and for narrow periods of time, at least for
the one at the top that is the most open-ended surviving 70, you know, seniors are 70 plus, which is, you know, part of the demographic in this town that's growing, right? Um, and then their surviving spouses are minor children of a deceased parent,
minor children, minor children of any parents. So, like if if you're three years old and your parents are 35 and uh the minor child stays in the house or I don't know how that works. Um
>> Oh, it's minor children and one of the parents did. >> Okay. >> And their property value is of a certain amount. >> Yeah. But that's their surviving spouse. It's like you're double counting. >> Double counting what? >> The surviving spouse on the first row, right?
surviving spouses or minor children of deceased parent. So when the minor children with deceased parent has one parent that would be I see what you're saying. >> Well the minor children whoever whoever >> survivor Yeah. >> but you could also have situations where there is a spouse surviving spouse with
no no minor children. >> Yeah. Okay. Sure. >> Yeah. And then the minor children aren't generally going to be the property owners. They happen to be. I don't know how that's even possible. >> Senior seven is openended. Yeah, that's true. >> Yeah, I want to say the values.
>> This is clear. >> So, we have the total notice. >> I guess we just need >> Yeah. And when I when I look at the second section of what's proposed to us, >> it's all lumped together. >> So, it's not like we're asking Tom
meeting to say adopt this and this and this and this and this. You're asking Tommy to adopt one thing that covers all of these. >> And we can't cherry pick off this list. Is that correct? >> That's correct. I'd ask to see the expert. But >> yeah. >> And then um what about um I mean
property values keep going up and up and up in this town? I mean eventually is there just not going to be anybody that's >> can afford to live >> or that's going to be >> too. That too. >> I mean it seems like the numbers are going to drop. >> Yeah. I mean, if you look at the this
graph, like the number of exe exemptions have not been going up over years. >> Probably. >> No, I know. But to Nick's point, when we have excess money, like we've got school budget issues, like not that this isn't important, but shouldn't we be thinking about how do we close the gap in the budget and trying to add more?
>> I think question I want to get answered is can we allocate money from the overlay budget to schools? Because if we cannot then that's not really >> I think here's one thing I'm seeing the one we're concerned about is number 17.
>> Yes. >> Go down here. How many people take number 17? Two. Three. Four. >> 10. >> It's going back. >> It's going. >> No. It goes from 10. No. No. Two. Most recent. That's
>> Oh, no. It's going Oh, yeah. Okay. >> I don't know how many 70 year olds we have in town, but I think it's more than two. >> Yeah. >> So, >> this isn't all the 70 year olds. If that makes people feel better >> and it was only for a total
>> people become aware of it and every 70 year old now applies for it >> if there so but only if you're I mean we >> all the 70 year olds who can apply to your team. >> So, sorry. What are the other criteria?
If you're over 70 to make eligible >> to go back, you have to be a service. >> No, that's only 22. >> Only 22. 22. That one doesn't hold. >> Yeah, your property value can't be too high. But I don't know what the limit is. I'd be curious. >> There is a limit >> because that would def because because
that would that would do this open-ended thing and make it closed end. And it's a lot easier to support it there. Even though I think we still have to wrestle with if you tripled it to 300, you know, that's still meaningful in the school budget even though maybe it's less meaningful overall to the overall
town budget. At least then have an open. >> Yeah, if anyone has internet access. Um I don't >> I'm trying to pull Yeah, I've been trying to pull section 22i, which should just answer questions, but it's not loading.
It's >> Yeah. say 20. What did you say? 22. >> So, it's like MGL 59 is really long, but it's like if you look for 22I, I think you should be able to
>> I mean, I'm trying to get on picture. Anyone at home have better internet than we do? >> It's just Karen. >> Oh, Mr. Milano. Oh, Mr. Milano is here. >> Oh, >> please speak. >> Share your wisdom. Did you
>> haven't quite followed what the specific question is. >> How much have you heard? Um, I guess part of the question, do you see my screen right now? >> Part of the question is, we're wondering about clause 17, which seems to say seniors over the age of 70 get an
exemption of $175 a year. We don't we don't know if that's fully accurate for it's a value limit of there's a um asset limit of 40,000 or $20,000 um that's applicable. So, not everybody
would be eligible. I'm sorry. Say that again, please. >> There's an asset limit um that applies to clause 17 of $20,000. >> What does an asset limit mean? >> Oh, that's what qualifies for. >> No, I'm asking Nick. What What does an
asset limit mean? >> Oh, it's it's just any kind of assets that you might have on the books. So, um >> So, you're you're bankrupt pretty much, >> correct? >> That could be it. >> But people are getting that changes. It's for property taxes. So, you'd have
to own property, >> right, >> in excess of >> $20,000. >> Yeah, >> Mr. Milano, this implies someone's owning a house. So, they've got some sort of assets. >> No, isn't it? If they're if they have
assets more than $20,000, >> how could you own a house and not have assets more than $20,000? >> In this town, >> you could be a renter. >> Then you don't pay property tax property taxes. Yeah. You have a very small house. >> It doesn't
piece of land on the corner. That's what you want. >> You live under >> Are we stumping you, Mr. Romano, or thinking? >> No, sorry. I was just trying to pull up a more specific um answer on it because I have a sheet and I am just pulling it
up now. All right. Sorry about that. Clause 17, senior surviving spouses and minors. It's a small exemption in terms of dollar value. Senior must be age 70. Um minor child is somebody with a deceased
parent. Total net worth may not exceed um a do value of $77,000. That excludes the assessed value of the doicile. >> Okay. >> So it's a it's a net worth valuation of $77,000. That's the cap that it does not
include um the house that is um that you live in. >> Oh, it's assets outside of the home. >> That's But it doesn't give any specifics. I feel like I'm talking to the or something. Um it doesn't give any
specifics about the the value of the house. What can the house be worth? >> It's excluded. >> Excluded. >> It is excluded. That's correct. >> Completely excluded. So I could own a house worth a million dollars and have very little else in terms of
assets >> because you gifted it away to your children. >> Pension actuary the house itself is such an asset to everybody. >> Give it away to everybody. The exemption
>> cash flow. >> The exemption is $175. So, I just want to I I know there's 2,000 or 175. It's 175 >> um in terms of the exemption amount. >> Well, it says 2,000 or 175.
>> Well, 2,000 of property value, 175 of dollar value. >> The 17. >> So, Mr. Milano, we're also noticing that this clause 17, we've had two people, three people, four people in recent years claiming it. Some people in the room thought, well, if every 70-year-old
can get it, there's going to be a rush for the g be a rush for the um I don't know, a run on the bank, but do you think there How much is this publicized, Mr. Milano? Are there a lot of people who are eligible for this that just don't know
about it? Do you know? you say >> I don't have a good handle in terms of knowledge of it. Um they've been in place for forever. They're statewide. So every city and town has this specific exemption. Milton's not alone in that. Um we do some, you know, public
notification stuff through the Council on Aging, but beyond that, I would say we're um on in all over the place about them. So I don't know that the public awareness is um superb. Um but again there are asset limitations both to this
to clause 41. And the other thing to remember on all of these is you can you can get one of these um not multiples. So >> um >> does that answer We had a lot of questions about call 17 especially. Does that answer the questions
>> the top line? Yeah. >> I I have another question. >> Okay. Most people have savings for retirement which would be considered an asset. However, if I have a pension coming to me that's not that and that goes over my lifetime. It's not my
money. It's not my asset. I just get paid every month. Does that count toward assets? >> That's a a better question for the assessor's office. I can check in with that. I don't see you could >> yeah I don't see you could either because
social security >> social security >> I agree with that group >> I know you had more more slides >> yeah but I think while while Nick is here >> can you go back >> Nick had a question about >> three more >> I'm sorry go ahead
>> um So, M you had a question about the overlay money. Um, is it coming out of the general? >> Yeah, my question is, is it a reduction of revenue or an increase in uh cost to the town? >> I would phrase it a little differently.
Is it a reduction in the total revenue that the town collects or is it a redistribution? These people's taxes go down, everybody else's goes up a little bit. >> That's what I thought. the latter. Um, >> okay. >> The overlay is is not technically
appropriated by the town meeting. We account for it when we're building the budget in terms of a contribution into the overlay as a non-appropriated item in the budget. Um, you know, it is set by the board of assessors. The
contribution into the overlay is set by the board of assessors when we set the tax rate, which happens annually in like middle to late November. Um, so it's it's kind of one of the last elements of the budget, but it is an expenditure out
of um the tax levy essentially um directly into the overlay and then tax abatements, tax exemptions are paid out of the overlay. Um overlay is occasionally also released back to the general fund. if it is at a a value that
um we don't need or it gets to like a reserve level that we the assessors don't need, they they can vote to release it back to the general fund and that happens on a on a fairly regular basis where money will go in and then the needs go down, money will be released, money will go in and then on
go. I >> I'm sorry to interrupt you. I got confused several minutes ago. I don't know about the other people in this room. Sorry, I shouldn't have interrupted you. Maybe everybody else is following you perfectly. >> But I again I wonder if we're talking a
few hundred thousand as we all know a few hundred thousand could make the difference between you know the FY27 budget being happy or not happy. Is it less money in the budget that we have to spend or is it just that everybody else in town pays a little bit more and the
budget is still the same size? B operating budget. No. If the need for money to go into the overlay increases significantly, then yes, it would reduce available revenue to be spent on other items.
>> Thank you. >> Does that Yeah, I think sorry that uh I think is what you're getting after. Sorry about that. >> I think it's not the answer we wanted, but that's the answer that it is then. Thank you.
>> It's a tough one. So, it's $82,000 >> for triple. >> Should we go through the rest of >> Cecil's? >> Yeah. So, this was just a screenshot of the current overlay worksheet that sent over. >> Thank you.
Um, so on the right, the like little table on the right is the abatesments and exemption. So it's a little bit higher than the graph you saw because it's also counting a payments. Okay. So yeah, you can see the the total
budget on the >> Okay. I'll admit I don't fully understand. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. So what is it? So we're collecting 2.4 4 million is only paying out. It's like about 100 or $200,000.
>> Am I reading that right or am I reading that totally wrong? >> I don't know what I'm looking at. >> Yeah, that's maint. So 172. >> Yeah. So 172 on average each year
>> over five a fivey year period. That number isn't over five years. >> Average. Yeah. >> So what's the >> So what's the 2.4 billion 2.4 million overlay available?
>> Is the overlay used for something else besides this? >> We used to have 2.4 million sitting there. Mr. Mono, >> that's we don't know what this is. >> Yes. So as you um so you got to take the
top and the bottom. Um so the the top is telling you what's available today. Um the 172 is the 5-year average that they say you're app you're likely to need based on what you've actually contributed out. Um so in excess of that
is the $2.3 million. So it's the 2.476 minus the 172 gets you to 2.3. Um and then if you look at potential future liabilities, um this is the amount that the department of revenue suggests that the overlay be at least in excess of
this total. So tax receivables at the end of fiscal 25 or 1.3 million, personal property tax receivables are the 148 and then the pending ATB um cases is a liability that sits out
there. Um, we have a appeal from Winter Valley and Equity House about their nonprofit status that is working its way through the ATB process. It's valued at $292,000. So, we're required to keep that. So, the $1.78 million is potentially the maximum exposure the
overlay has. So, the Department of Revenue um strongly recommends the overlay balance be in excess of that. Um, >> and the number that kind of bounces around the most that throws this off on a year-to-year basis is that
receivables figure. Um, as you can see this year or at June 3025 it was 1.3 million. At June 30 of um the prior year it was 1.6 million. So there's that flux that bounces around.
So sometimes we're a little bit in excess of the minimum and sometimes we're right on it. Um for example, last year the Department of Revenue had a warning on us that we were our overlay balance did not cover our potential liabilities. So um it's a number that we're kind of we try to target um and it
fluctuates depending on where things land on fiscal year end. >> So I have a question. So out of the 2.3 million 1.7 has to be fully allocated to cover these potential liabilities. still leaves a little bit more than 500,000 to do with. Is that what you're saying in
this overlay? >> Correct. And as I indicated before, the uh board of assessments and cons, this is what I mean by release. So if by the time we approach the end of this fiscal year, the board feels that the overlay balance is is sufficient, they could
choose to release money out of it >> or alternatively not put as much into it when we set the tax rate. So, those are ways to manage the the balance in the fund. Right now, it's a little bit high. Um, I shouldn't say it's high. It's in excess of what we need >> at June 30 of the prior year. We're
below what we needed. >> Do we have to hold for receivables because we might not collect those? >> Yes, that's the uh concept. >> Okay. >> But, okay. So, it's already >> it's all good, but if I understand this, the average over the last five years
that would show up in a warrant as an item, budget item is $172,000. >> And that that's under this proposal going to double >> which would take up more of that excess, >> right? >> Yep. >> Like 250 >> 500. So, we're still good.
>> No, but not even counting the excess, right? Because that 172 is >> no but every year >> if you double that it'll take out of the 2.3 >> and then there'll be less excess >> unless you increase the amount that's
allocated in the warrant to double that 350 >> if you increase it. Yeah. >> But I think it's going to more than double >> triple. >> The proposal was double was a triple. >> No. throat pounds responsible for all of
the increase. >> Okay. >> And I just would like to just point out the the what you're seeing here the 5-year average is abatements plus exemptions. So as you can see fiscal 21 and 22 it probably more abatements than typical in the wake of the co effect on
real estate tax property values and commercial values in that time. But as you can see that kind of has dissipated a bit. So, um, Cecile showed the exemption amount, which is the amount that would be >> potentially doubled or increased, not necessarily the the numbers you're
seeing here in the summary level because again, that that rolls on those abatements. >> So, that's the $82,000 that you had before. >> So, it's 82 could triple >> to 240, right? >> As a line item in the budget, a charge that we have to make in the warrant every year.
Is that right? Is that right here? >> Yes. >> Yes. Should I go to the next slides? >> Sure. Yeah. >> Other towns. >> Yeah, just other towns in Massachusetts that have adopted these. Um there's a
number that adopted in the last year uh 22i, which is the cost of living increase. Uh and then if you go to the next slide, there are also a number of towns that have adopted 5C and a half, which is the 100% increase. Um the ones
in both, so Lexington, Belmont, and NEM have adopted both of the ones that we just talked about. And um I think Belmont was pretty recent. >> Are these examples or are these the only ones? >> These were the ones I found. I don't I can't say they're the exhaustive list,
but that's fine. And that's just appendex cost of living. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Hand raised. >> Uh Mr. Milano, is your hand still up? >> You can just speak. >> Thanks. I I just wanted to add one um
piece here is that the the warrant in terms of 55 It's the second one and I always forget the numbering and I'm sorry still you probably have it but 5C and a half is that it
>> um >> so that one I I just wanted to make sure the war committee understood that the it doesn't have to be 100% in terms it doesn't have to be doubled. Um that is where towns have some decision to choose what the
additional exemption will be. um as proposed it's proposed to be at 100% but it could be 50% where it should takes you know it increases your exemption by 50% rather than doubling it. So I did just want to um make sure uh you understood that that was um an element
of the article that is uh the town's election and the town's choice. >> Thank you for telling us that. >> Right. Uh, Elaine. >> Um, I have to go. Um, but before I do, I just want to thank Cecilele for dealing
with that particular article because it gave me a popsicle headache just like trying to read. So, you did a good job. Really good job. >> Fantastic. >> Are we voting or >> do we have other questions? committee. >> I hate to ask a question because I don't explain I don't I want I want to leave
too but um >> but like this is this is a lot. Can you go back three slides to that list? >> Um yeah. So I just want to be clear. First one is we got that
22 is hero act. The next one's leaving your mind 70 years old plus I think the the one that's like 41 41B 41 C 41. >> Okay. >> What is the value on that? There's got
to be a means test on that one. I guess that's the question on the other ones like what are the mean tests, you know? Mr. Milano, do you have that? Yes. Uh, hang on one second. Um, it's got an income and an asset
limitation. So, income is less than 35,000 a year. Assets are less than 57 for a single person. And then for a married, it's $52,000 on income and $61,000 on assets. >> Okay. So, >> or clause 41. All right, committee. Do we have other
questions? Do we feel prepared to have a motion tonight? >> One answer might be it's 10 o'clock. We don't want to vote right now. And >> yeah, >> let's vote it. >> You have a quorum anymore to >> Oh, yeah. Well, we don't need eight for quorum, and I'm counting eight in this
room. So, >> okay. >> Um, would someone like to either make a motion or informally propose that we just think about this other night? >> I make a motion we think about this overnight. >> Yeah. >> I don't know. That's going to change my mind, but
>> that's not going to change my mind either. So, I know our >> probably >> someone would like to make a motion. >> Go for it. Motion >> do it. Andrew, do it >> with the motion to vote on this. Is that the motion? >> Why don't we mo motion?
>> Well, I mean, it seems weird to not do it with >> Yeah, I'm a motion to I don't want to adopt it, but I make a motion to vote on um >> Well, you'd be moving to adopt. You can move and then vote no.
>> Yeah. So I move to adopt >> the word articles as present recommendations as as written on screen. >> Okay. >> Um All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> A second. >> Okay. I will open up to discussion. Um
I'm a little surprised to hear informally that someone's not supporting it. Would someone like to say why they don't why they do or don't support it? >> I'm going to vote in favor of it. Um, I think that the people that are going to benefit from this, um,
have earned it and are the, you know, I think typically long-standing residents of the town under the different categories that are listed there and it seems like a small gesture on the ha behalf of the town uh, to support those people that seem like they would need
the extra support. And I think the trade-off against say the benefit of that extra revenue for the schools, it's a it's a trade-off that seems uh worthwhile to me. So I'm going to vote in favor of that. >> Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> So I I will say that um I think it's a
good um idea. I think the doubling of it is a problem for me because I do think we should look at putting money towards schools and areas of the budget that are in deficit to try and make it more equitable. I for me um it's not our only option. We
can draft an amen draft a warrant article that achieves the same purpose without the same type of impact or sort of >> unknown cap.
Why can't we uh create a fund to um fund u tax tax agreements for people that qualify under similar >> Yeah. Mr. Mullen, are you still with us?
>> I am here. >> Yeah. The question did come up earlier. Rather than adopting the mass general law that says do these things, can we come up with our own way to reduce taxes of certain people that we find is more
>> fixed pool and follow these guidelines? >> Mr. Milano, >> yes. Um, but it wouldn't be a local action, I don't believe. I think it would have to be um a home rule petition
that is approved by the town meeting and then submitted to the legislature for adoption. So I don't know that we can locally affect. My recollection is you can't locally change or institute exemptions at the local level only. You need the legislaturator's approval and
permission to do so. >> Really? We could create a relief fund, right? You got to figure out >> I mean it's still money that would wouldn't be going into taxes. I don't really understand how that would help.
>> So I guess I'll chime in one you know to address both comments. One to address Andrew's comment. I mean, I don't know if within this town we have the expertise and the inclination to draft our own bylaw rather than rely on the wisdom of the people of Beacon Hill
who've come up with these rules. That's my thought. And to address what Nick said, I agree that, you know, these people deserve, I think is the word you said, deserve these credits. I look at, you know, we're we're it's unclear if we're
a high tax town or a medium tax town, but we do keep having to have overrides to go back to the residents to fund the town benefits. And maybe the people on this list, you know, maybe the 70-year-olds who have don't have any assets, maybe they're not enjoying the
library like we do. They're certainly not probably not enjoying the public schools. They're still paying taxes. and anything we can do to offset the overrides, which have come in the past and will certainly come in the future, offset the impact for the overrides, even though I'm sure this will all be
forgotten when the override comes back up. I think it's morally the correct thing to do. Even if we won't get the political credit for it, I think it's the correct thing. So, we have a motion. We have a second.
We're having discussion. Is there more discussion before we vote? I'm >> sorry, I just have one more question. Um, so I mean, we're really voting on doubling it, right? The exception is still going to exist, >> right, >> for these people, but now we're talking about doubling it. Are we also voting on pegging it to CPI?
>> We're voting on the whole package. >> Okay. And it's not currently pegged to CPI, right? Okay. All right. Well, that's important. grind together. >> I think it's a um yeah, low means and I think it's hard to say no to this
because I think those people it's tough. Um that being said, I do think there are issues with the town's budget. I don't know if they go to how we budget and managing funds and everything else. That's a whole separate matter. But I think that's an issue too, but that's a
separate issue. But it's these are people in this town. This aren't a lot of them, but I think probably was there >> um >> we can do a short version or long version.
What I hate is that >> we have to make this choice and that it's so many more people are going to be affected by cutting school budget as opposed to benefiting this and that that's what
what I don't that's what I don't like about this this situation. I guess that >> one one thing my brain is going back to several months ago when I think we had a presentation on the council on aging and I said I wanted to rain money down on the council of aging because the people like myself who have kids in the public
schools get a lot of benefit from the taxes and the seniors are paying as much or more taxes than I am and they're not getting as much benefit from the town. So I would love it if we had a goldplated council on aging so we would all share from what we pay in and this is not exactly the same thing. This
isn't giving money to Council on Aging, but it's effectively giving money to seniors and disabled people and veterans, >> right? But we did just set up a fund for tax relief for seniors at the last war. >> We did and that's an optional fund. I
don't know how that's gone. >> Yeah. To help. >> That's why I struggled with it. But the flip side of that is like that's a choice you make when in a good school district, right? you know that
you're paying high taxes. >> Well, I mean, we're focusing on the 70 plus senior citizens. There's a lot of other people that are eligible under these provisions. You know, if you're family member of a firefighter or policeman that died in service, you know, I think there's a lot of broad-based support that goes with this
be and we're focused on one of it. >> I understand. >> Okay. Okay. We've had a motion, we've had a second, we've had discussion. So, if there's not more discussion, Karen, can you do a roll call vote?
>> Can I just confirm that um was the motion to recommend that the town vote to approve? >> Yes. >> As presented? >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. The wording got away from me there. Sorry. Okay. Um I believe Elaine has left. So,
James Lee, >> yes. Uh, Grace, >> no. >> Larry. >> Um, >> yes.
>> Andrew, >> I don't want to do this, but I don't want to abstain either. I'm just gonna say no. >> I believe Julia has left. Julia. Okay. Brian. >> Yes.
Uh Lee Michael I believe has left. >> Uh Nick, >> yes. >> Cecil Cecil, >> Cecil abstained. >> Oh, okay. I couldn't hear her. Sorry. And Jay,
>> I will abstain. >> Okay. The MOT you have four yes, two no, two abstensions. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank all of you. This was a tough discussion and I appreciate all the thought that went into it. >> Jesus. >> That was a hard decision.
>> No, I'm glad it passed. >> It was a very thoughtful discussion and I appreciate it. >> That's what did it for me. like, "Okay, well, it's good to see you back." >> Again, please send your your um questions for the school committee to
Elaine and all by tomorrow, end of day. And we will have a Zoom only meeting on Wednesday. >> Wednesday, >> two days from today. Wednesday. >> Why is that? >> I do like it better actually. I just I'll just
>> you. Did you move to? >> Do we have a motion to adjourn? >> I think everyone's standing up and that indicates they want to >> journ. Thank you.