[Music] Hello and welcome to the warrant committee. Uh, today is August 25th, 2025. Karen, can you call roll?
I can. Uh, we have today Macy. Mason, I do believe there. Yeah, I'm here. Thank you. Uh, here.
Uh, Lorraine. Yes. Grace. Larry Andrew. Yes. Julia here. Brian here. Is Lee Michael there?
No. Ron Nicholas. Yep. Yes. Cecil. Okay. You have a quorum. And I don't know if you've got Larry, who not a lot of people may have been able to meet in person.
I did not, but I've got them now. Thank you. Okay, great. Okay, I want to share my screen briefly with uh a semblance of the agenda for tonight.
Okay, there it is. It's not pretty, but uh it'll do. uh what I was so we had people assigned to their various uh fall town meeting articles and we've
scheduled for four or five depending how you count them to report back tonight. Uh some have been able to bring speakers in, some speakers have not been able to come in. So what I'm putting up here is a timeline which is
aspirational. We might hit it, we might not. but sort of a goal of, you know, maybe 20 to 30 minutes for each article. See how far we can get and see what we can get to get get done. Uh I'm grouping the I've got fines and light trespasses, two different items, but they're I think
going to be very intertwined. So, I've got those grouped on the on the screen. And sort of what I'm imagining, and if people want to take this a different direction, they can, but I'm thinking for each one, the warrant committee experts and maybe an outside expert who's in if if they're here, can give an
overview of the article. And then I'd ask the warrant committee experts, what questions did you have? Because you've all done some background information, background information gathering. What questions did you have looking into this? What answers did you find? And then I do want to open it up a bit to
what other warrant committee members have relevant questions. Now, if we're spending 30 minutes on each of these, that's not enough time for all of us to, you know, raise every question we have and get every answer. So, if we have one or two questions that are quick, we might get through them. Otherwise, maybe
the goal is to raise questions tonight, take those away, and the experts can come back with answers at a later date if needed. And then, and I don't know if this will happen tonight for any of the articles we're talking about, but the ultimate question is, do we have a full enough understanding of the issue to as
a warrant committee to present it to town meeting with our recommendation? And if so, are you ready to vote on it? I don't know if we'll get there tonight, but that's the the ultimate goal. Elaine, were you raising your hand or No. Oh, okay.
So, that's how I'm seeing this. Again, 30 minutes per issue. that I don't know if we'll hit that, but uh that that's my goal. So, let's start right out. So, the first one on the agenda is the climate action plan. And
I'll stop sharing my screen. We do not have the guest who's sponsoring the climate action plan here, Alexander Hasha. Uh he has confirmed he can be here on the 15th, which is three weeks from now. So, I think we'll get a
more thorough presentation from him, but I still think it would be a good use of our time to, you know, Andrew, you looked into this. I did. Can you Yeah. Take it away. Uh, James Lee and I were supposed to have uh scheduled a call together with
uh Al Alex Hasha. Um, wasn't able to get in touch with James Lee, but I did uh keep the call scheduled last Friday. the uh 22nd and um Alex and I had a nice
conversation. Um there are two questions that Jay, I know you were hoping to have answered. One, what would the town be committing to and uh what would the town be entitled to? I was able to ask those
questions and the u genesis of the this particular proposal or warrant uh article was that in and I'm hope I get this correctly. my notes are
accurate enough, but uh the CAPC, which I believe is a climate action preparedness committee, was charged in 2023 um to uh align the town's uh climate related
goals with that of Massachusetts. Uh Massachusetts uh roughly the net standard that they're targeting is to be net zero by 2050. And for those of you not uh um verbose and climate action
plans, net zero is essentially uh being carbon neutral or u producing uh using u no net energy relative to sort of the impact or uh u energy the town may be u
producing. Um the current Massachusetts standard has legally binding goals in 20 2030 and 2040 in addition to that 2050 target. Uh the reason I I bring that up um is that by aligning and adopting this
plan we would and just to be clear not legally binding but I want to get clarification on it but um be committing to best efforts in hitting similar targets. Uh by doing so it would entitle
us to funds two different pockets of pools of funds. Um, one, if I understood correctly, was uh um $150,000 per grant cycle, which is typically every 30 years uh for
technical assistance or uh uh consulting um sort of fees. Um and up to a million dollars in project funding. Um the
uh the best description that Alex was able to give me is that this is uh the green communities 2.0 uh type proposal.
uh essentially uh in addition to the residential uh targets um that were established uh several years ago uh in terms of energy efficiency standards, this is sort of expanding it throughout um for the town
and I would get further clarification and I'd rather defer to Alec Alexander to to get more details on that. Um the CAPC reports to the select board two times a year year currently.
Uh and he said Milton is a little unusual as towns typically have an AR article with specific climate goals uh uh targeted in
there unlike the current verbiage of the the Warren article. Um the select board suggested that the CAPC bring to them bring forth an article um
that um reflects the language that is presented in today's version or the latest version of the article. He said the framework is voluntary. It's not compulsory. Um
and uh he is looking for engagement and attention from the town staff. Uh and wants an article that has a little bit more teeth because the town um tends to be very reactive and unless there are
specific targets and uh specific language, it's sort of a squeaky wheel gets uh degrees type situation. Um he has from a due diligence standpoint
uh court went to schools facilities meeting spoken to uh several towns including Amherst Lexington uh and that there are 20 towns currently
that are signed up with the DOE er program the climate leaners committ community program, which is essentially what this article would have us be signing um uh getting on board with.
Um, one of the things that uh I had suggested was to get real great clarity and a little bit more clarity and language in terms of what we are committing to and what we are putting
best efforts forward in. I don't have the article in front of me. Um, but the only article that had a specific target or goal in mind uh was, if my
recollection was the last one, which would have the town commit to looking at alternative fuel vehicles. Um, and uh where replacements are possible.
uh and there are some qual slight qualifying language that I would like to make sure that uh ensures that we're able to uh if we were to adopt this which at face value seems to make sense
that we have uh flexibility in terms of the timing uh of when those vehicles are replaced uh as part of a regular u capital uh project recycling u uh maintenance
schedule and two uh that economics uh gives us a reasonable out meaning that if there is a some unreasonable premium on alternative fuel vehicles or an electric vehicle that uh
we not be bound to having to replace it uh for financial reasons and so I think The questions that I would suggest that we focus on are really the cost uh impacts uh including the having an
understanding of what the u adjacent costs are such as is uh facilities management not facilities management but the uh vehicle maintenance crew are they capable? Do we have the infrastructure
of maintaining um electric vehicles or is that going to require a series of training and all kinds of capital equipment etc. Uh and that uh we uh that the framework truly is voluntary
and not compulsory uh given the uh current financial state of the the town itself and likely um aversion to u anything that results in any material increases in cost expenditures.
So uh he would like to propose something that measures progress on a fiveyear basis rather than 10-year targets. uh
and measure progress. Uh I guess guess uh five five years is something that he came up with not something that is in an existing standard in either the climate leader communities program or or any
other program. He thought it was uh some reasonable number. uh I suggested that there would be very very very very clear language in the article itself in terms of again outlining the costs and costs and
obligations. I think again face value it seems to make sense that we want to be conscious of how the t town uses energy and its uh impact on climate
uh and that we make smart financial decisions that make sense in the timing that we're comfortable not necessarily ones that that u fits a a rigid timetable. So, uh, to the extent that,
uh, we can tease that out and get him to commit to putting language that gives us that level of comfort, I think the article makes sense, at least based on the conversation that I had with him. Does anyone have responses, questions,
comments? Can I just clarify? So really the only change that the town is making is to a commitment to buying to purchasing electric vehicles. Well, that is one of and uh let me find the article itself.
Uh there are a number of components to it. I've got it in front of me if it's helpful. Um it says that um we would uh direct the select board to adopt communitywide greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals in alignment with the
limits set by Massachusetts law. So a 50% reduction from 1990 levels by 2030, 75% reduction by 2040 and net zerocarbon emissions by 2050. And then um and then again this all
feels very non-binding. It says Milton's climate action plan recommends many such policies in particular that the town work to achieve climate leader communicate community certification by the department of energy resources. Um the remaining requirements for climate leader community certification are and
one of them is adopt a zero emission vehicle first policy for new town vehicles when commercially available and pract practicable. Yeah. and and that that that language that word practicable from my standpoint gave us an out in not committing to have
to purchase an electric vehicle but make best efforts to um and well yeah in some cases and and so uh I agree that language that is fluffy and doesn't have us committing
to anything um may likely will keep may encourage us to keep kicking the can down the road. But I also uh think there is some middle ground that
one measures our progress. Um whether or not we're successful or not. It's important to measure to understand uh and be clear about what we're successful at and what we're failing at. Um, Andrew. Yeah.
Do we know what the 1990 levels are? No idea. Not I didn't ask. Okay. I wonder if that's even possible. Like the first one is get to 50% reduction by 2030. That's like two years from now. I don't like how can you
actually, you know, unless we're close. I would think that's not something you just turn on and be like, let's reduce a ton of emissions tomorrow. But I I would wonder someone should be able to say we've calculated what the emissions were in 1990 and what are we today and there should be some glide path to say are we
even close or is this a joke? I mean the thing is is too is it's not actually it's it's describing what the law is or what the goals are but it's not really saying we'll actually do it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I mean it's kind of like I hate to say it but I
wonder why it's there at all. But looking at the three bullets down the bottom though, it's developing a plan, developing a road map. I mean, those are actual real concrete things and adopting the zero emission vehicle. What's nice about them too is they don't seem to really um I don't think they none of them really
cost cost anything. So, yeah, it's a plan. Well, I think well, you know, they're but they're and that's the other question I asked him. What is it going to what sort of lift or cost is there? I specifically had asked him are we looking at if we're looking at huge
consulting fees in order to achieve the goals outlined in one two and three then we may not have the appetite for it. Um or we may if it's some modest number but uh we need to be clear about that in
order for us to be able to make a recommendation. So he he knows in advance of his appearance next week or he should know because I've asked a question already to be prepared to to answer that. Um but there is real
vagory. I mean develop a road map could mean put together an outline not ne necessarily a detailed plan and we're still in compliance with that. And so uh I think to the extent that he can create
or the authors can have more clarity in the language in the article Yeah. the better their chance of of success. I mean so some of your comments I was a bit confused. So were you saying that Alex
wishes there that this article itself was more concrete or he's saying this is more concrete than what we have currently which is No. Uh I think what he is hoping for are milestones and a framework that that has more teeth to it uh
within the body of this article within the the the article and the sort of actual plan and I don't know if he meant the article itself or nec or the framework or the road map. Okay. So, we don't like cuz I'm
wondering if we should expect to see significant revisions to this. I think there has to be. Okay. I I don't think the article as written is is sufficient. I let them know that and I told them I'm going to defer to the rest of the committee and that I'm going to let them ask questions. But
personally, what I would prefer to see is a lot more clarity around what the costs are and what are we actually firmly committing to. I think Ron's question is um spot on for me just to start with like do we even know what our 1990 levels were? I'm looking at the
climate action planning um page on the Milton's website because I was wondering what this greenhouse gas inventory is and it sounds like the town worked with consultants to prepare a comprehensive greenhouse gas inventory for the town of Milton um for 2017 and 2022 and they did
it in 22 retrospectively it sounds like for 2017 and then did it for 2022 and there was an increase of 3.6% over those 5 years. So that to me is not a great sign to begin with, but um yeah, what was it in 1990? How much did we pay for that? How much would we have to pay for
if we're going to do this every five years? And then on the flip side, does this unlock funding for us that we could use for that sort of thing that we wouldn't currently have? So see Lee Michael. Yeah, thanks so much. I was wondering if you could see the hands or not. Um
yes, but feel free to speak up if I don't see you or acknowledge you. It sounds like we need a lot more information on this. So, I would encourage us not to spend too much more time on this discussion. Um, but one of the pieces that I think we need to collect before the next discussion is feedback from our various town leaders.
How feasible do they think this is? Have they already adopted similar um initiatives within DPW and or other parts of of the town? Um, so that we know just how you know what kind of work we're saddling people with.
Yeah, I I've I I've got some thoughts sort of related to somewhat related to what people have been talking about. Um I guess if if we're saying this needs revision, who's revising it? I think I mean I I I know Alex Hasha I think this
he's taken this as far as well I shouldn't speak for him shouldn't say he's taken this as far as he can but this is his best presentation to us. So, somebody's going to change it. Is it going to be uh the town administrator? Is it going to be the select board? Is it going to be us? I think it should be the author of the
article. Okay. Um and I guess I would ask and I think I sort of raised this at our last meeting that for anything like this, we can say there should be different things like when you were saying Mr. Hasha was saying, "Oh, I wish
it also had this. I wish it also had that." If I'm looking at this and saying, "Should town meeting pass it or not? I'm not really asking myself, oh, I wish it did more. Like, if this gets you halfway there and it's fine, and if I wish it did more, I'd still might say
town meeting should pass it. That doesn't those two aren't in conflict to me. Uh, but I I guess when asking myself, is this is this a coherent article that could be passed by town meeting? Uh, I I'm I'm closer to yes than some of you, but I've got a
problem. If I look at this, it's it's not up on the screen, but now the first part says, you know, what does the what does the article say? The first part says um pretty much are we going to direct the select board to measure progress on greenhouse gas. I understand that.
Second part says authorize the select board to direct relevant boards and committees to achieve the goals. I understand that. The third part says Milton's climate action plans recommends policies and if we were going to be a green community,
we would have to do these three things. This article doesn't say the town should do these three things like eliminate fossil fuel use, develop a road map, and prefer clean cars. As I read this
article, it does not say we need to do those things. It's just sort of commentary saying these are things we might want to do. So I don't know and I apologize for those of you who don't have it in front of you. I don't know what that last third or half I don't
know what that is. If town meeting passed this what do those what does that last paragraph do to me it does nothing. That's right. I can assume what I mean in my mind I'm assuming that it's going to continue the climate action planning committee and they're going to start enacting this roadmap and working with
all it but it doesn't say that anywhere. So that's just my assumption and I could very well be wrong. That's sort of a technicality like I'm nitpicking you know maybe the paragraph should say and direct the select board to do blah blah blah but it's not saying that now. Yeah. And if it's just commentary and if it's
just saying here's how things go. I know um again I I talked to Mr. Hasha about this and he says and you might have had a similar conversation with him. He looked at a lot of other towns and their town meeting passes things that say whereas
climate change is bad whereas we want to be a climate leader whereas we want to get to this reduction by this year then town meeting does this well Milton town meeting doesn't do that. So I don't know if this is trying to put in some commentary and an article.
Yeah sounds like it just needs a little bit of help to tighten it up. We can say that, but who's going to who's going to provide that help? Who's going to Well, it's not our we not our place to draft the language, right? I don't disagree. And I I don't see how I could support
passing the recommending the article as written. Okay. Because it is so vague and we do not know what we are binding ourselves to do financially as a town. Um and to the extent that we are clear that
what does adopt a zero emission vehicle first policy actually mean we're practicable. Does it mean that we're going to make best efforts? And if we can't for some logical reason, then we're still we made our best efforts. We
can't adhere to this at this point in time and it's not going to happen by 2030 40 or 50 for XYZ reason, then I'm okay with that. But if we are saying that we have to develop a road map and it's not clear that what our obligation is do
we need a 100page like document that has been vetted by a third party consultant that could mean material dollars or I'm not sure that uh the town would I guess the town would
have to figure the commit the town meeting members would have to figure out whether or not they're they willing to bind us financially to that. Um because we're talking about town rather than obligations unlike the green the
green communities 1.0 which was largely passed on to um water or increased standards in terms of building code and energy efficiency. So um that that's a cost borne by individuals not by the
town as a whole. So Ryan, I don't know if you're raising your hand or just No, but I'm gonna looking at must must be intelligently. These are really heady goals. They're tough to make and it's going to be a problem for most cities and towns in the
state to do this. Things might change, who knows? Technology, but um my suspicion is Massachusetts might amend the law at some point because it's so hard to get. And if they do, we should have some language in it that says this can be a, you know, I don't know if you
could if it would change. We should be there should be something in there that says that if the state law changes, this would follow it or something like that. That's my only point I'd make. Okay. Recommendation. Yeah. I guess my thinking in response to
Andrew is largely you said you wouldn't be comfortable passing this as it is. I go back to the money. What do we need to do to get the money? You know, $150,000 for technical assistance and a million dollars in project funding. What's what's the minimum here that we
need to do? Like like I said, the first two paragraphs I thought had substance. If we just had those first two paragraphs and got rid of the third because it maybe doesn't do anything, would we be eligible for those grants? I think that's it. That those terms are
embedded in the climate leader community certification program. Okay. So um those those targets um are clarified elsewhere in an existing document from the DOER.
Okay. Maybe that's and I'm I'm partially speculating. I'm partially remembering a conversation I had with Mr. Hasha. To be a climate leader community, we have to do several things. One is passing a bylaw like this. Another one is these three other bullets.
Yeah. And don't take that as gospel truth. No. And as written, it says the remaining requirements that we have not adopted yet are those three bullet points that you see. Okay. Uh commit to ch eliminating on-site
fossil fuel use by 2050. Develop a roadmap for decarbonizing municipal operations. Yep. And adopt the zero emission first policy. Okay. Um Yeah. And I've got one more quick
thought and then and I guess I would want to have presented to us so that we can present town meeting. Tell me more about this money. 1 million project funding. Paint me a picture that's going to buy the council on aging a new electric van. I don't know. No, I'd want some more.
Paint me a picture of what this money is going to be used for. So that's maybe a takeaway, Julia. And then Yeah. Um, I was just going to say I think like I'm I think I'm in agreement with you in that,
you know, I don't I don't interpret this article as binding us to doing anything. It seems very like aspirational. So, I'm not I don't think I'm as worried as Andrew is about, you know, are we implicating the town in any sort of, you know, are there any financial implications that we're committing to?
Um but so you know I don't think there's harm in passing this but I think the flip side is I don't think it you could just do nothing except check that box towards becoming I guess climate leader a climate leader community and maybe
that's what we need to do but so I guess I don't see harm in passing it as written. I also just don't know that it gets us any closer to achieving any of these things necessarily because it doesn't seem like a real commitment. I mean, I I I disagree with that from
the standpoint that I haven't actually read the climate leaders community certification. So, I don't know what develop a roadmap for decarbonizing municipal operations actually means. Does it mean that we have to engage
someone and that there's some I this these are words that that they that they put in there but this says that the town work to achieve. It doesn't say we will do it. It just says recommends you know that we
work to achieve this climate leader community certification. So we're not committing to actually getting the certification. Right. Uh, by that logic, we shouldn't even mention the the grant grants because that's like
contingent upon doing this. And so that really muddies your waters. Um, I think yes, it makes sense to try to do this, but um, we have to look I think we
have to look at it as if we're actually going for that certification. And the only way to do that is put re real numbers on at least the things that we're aware of because otherwise what's the point? And I I I think I'd be much more excited
about this if that's what it was doing. Committing us to becoming a climate lead. I don't know if you can do that via an article, but I mean I I agree with you. I think that would be that would might be the teeth that Alex is hoping for. I mean the other thing that's missing
from there is that um measuring prog reporting on progress is very different than measuring progress. Measuring prog progress has a material cost to it. And I think when I asked him that question, he said it would his best guess was like
$50,000 a shot. So what are we committing to over um between now and 2050 every 5 years? $50,000 time every 5 years plus whatever cost increases. And that that's just a sunk
cost period just just to measure it. Just to measure it. How I'm just can I challenge that? I don't understand how that could be because you could just make it part of the budget process for like every department of town or every department in the town
to like do like an I don't care what's called energy something energy on it. Uh, no, but it's a um it's a program, a federal program just to make it as part of your thing and just and I don't know if it it mandates that
there's a third party and that's a question we should uh write down and reserve to ask um um committee or or Alex when comes I think it's a good conversation. I'm we're at the half hour mark. I'm not cutting us off just because we're at the
half hour mark, but I think we've raised lots of issues. Um, and if anyone here, I mean, Andrew, can you are you the funnel for people to if they go away from this meeting, send you their questions and No, I think we should ask him when he comes comes in.
Okay, that is three weeks from now. I think maybe we could make some progress before then. Okay. I think we should send him the questions in advance for sure so that he can start to prepare and also somebody should reach out to the town council if nobody in this board knows but I don't think we can actually
compel another entity in town to achieve anything by a specific date. That's not something that the warrant committee can do through a warrant article. So I think work to achieve might actually be language used on purpose because we can adopt an intention but we can't we can't
force uh or we can't require somebody to do something by a certain period of time. That's my recollection. Okay. Yeah. I'm sort of confused about that last point because we're not requiring anything. This isn't this is an article that's requiring
No. Several people were mentioning earlier that they wanted it to have more teeth and I'm not sure that it can have more teeth. Okay. So, yeah, I would and as I said, I've talked to Mr. Hasha about this. I'm
happy to talk to him also, but if you know, I don't want to take away from you. If people want to final questions to me, I can forward them to Okay. All right. So, next on the agenda is the school
building committee article. And I believe we have a guest or possibly two guests to speak to this. Morning. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Okay. Are you uh set up for microphones, both of you? The mic.
Ask our friends in the back of the room. All right. Thanks. Um so, yeah, just for the record, uh Seor, uh 27 Quarry Lane, chair of the school building committee, also town meeting member, precinct 8. Uh with me
is uh Mark Luring, my vice chair on school building committee. Your vitals. Uh Mark Luring, 546 Randolph Avenue, uh town meeting member and school committee member, vice chair on the school building committee. So uh Mr. Chair, I have a presentation
if it's okay to share. Great. Yes. There we go. So uh school building committee uh was formed in uh February 2019. Uh so the the com it's comprised of uh nine
members. Uh the five of us at the top are appointed by the uh uh the town moderator. So these are essentially the original five. So we've been on school building committee now for six and a half years. Uh the other component of it are two appointees by the school
committee at the bottom left. Uh and two appointees from the warrant uh from the select board. Glenn Hoffman's also been on the entire time. Um was school committee and obviously uh select board u uh members. Those rotate at different
times. So that's why we have that. Um those are all the voting members as a component of the committee. The other members that we had to augment the committee this past uh town meeting uh was to meet MSBA's requirements for certain roles.
So th this is a graph that we update each year. So this shows the overall enrollment from prek to fifth grade uh for the district. The horizontal yellow line is essentially uh the capacity of the elementary schools that we have. So roughly after the last school building
project completed around 2008 we started going over capacity um and then the past couple years probably about seven uh we've been operating essentially one grade level above what the capacity is. So the component or the makeup of the
district right now comprises of four elementary school. Uh two of them are K to fifth. The other two are preK to fifth. Uh middle school that does 6th, 7th and 8th and a high school that does 9th through 12th. What we came up with is a committee or
what our recommendation was is to build an upper middle school and this one project then addresses multiple levels of the district. So, at the elementary school level, what we would be doing is pulling out prek and fifth grade. And by doing so, we free up space at the
elementary school without the need to redistrict. Um, the Pierce Middle School would now house only fifth and sixth grade. So, essentially, we' be pulling another grade level out of that, freeing up space at that level, and then creating an upper middle school that basically is right size along with
preschool. So when we go back to the graph and you look at that, you look at fifth grade and preschool, you pull those out, it basically brings us below the capacity line that we were talking about previously there.
Now along with the enrollment that we're doing, you know, for the early parts of uh our while we're formed, we had to figure out where we're putting this. So the committee came and this is what our um um uh warrant article is basically
about tonight the land. So we identified some parcels on Gal Road and we came up with what was called the land swap. Uh so the land swap what it's doing is taking Gal Road realigning it and then merging two of the parcels together to basically uh create a larger parcel that
we show here in yellow. So for us, you know, he this is kind of an overall timeline. That's kind of a recap of where we are right now. Um the article we have before us tonight is in regards to the land swap that was there
and the reverber associated with it. So as I said, you know, we're formed in town meeting in 2019. We spent a couple years studying school programs, land searches that, you know, those last couple slides, that's kind of what we culminated at. We arrived at Gal Road
and then in the town meeting in 2022, we actually had an article for a land swap uh ready to go at that time and then we pulled it back, delayed oursel a year, revised it to come up with a land swap that you saw uh on the previous slide.
And then when we we executed that, we agreed to a five-year reverter clause. And at that time the intention was that you know the school district was not going to get accepted to MSBA. And anyone that's remembers the previous school project the previous school
project was reimbursed at 90%. It was a very high reimbursement rate for all the schools. So the reality of us getting accepted to MSBA again was very low or at least our our anticipation of it was very low. So we said listen we'll give it five years. We'll work on our own and
we'll come up with this in five years. Now the reverta clause is triggered for funding of the entire project not the construction of the entire project. So that's another thing I just wanted to uh make aware of. So what happened during
those five years? So we passed the land swap in 2023. It took a year to go through the house and the senate to get the governor to sign it. She signed it last year on July 31st. So essentially it was a year delay that we had there.
Surprisingly, in December, uh, we got invited to MSBA. So, up to that point, we were working towards a schematic design. We had a cost proposal. We had everything ready to go to start voting on this. Once we got invited to MSBA, it was essentially a hard reset for the
entire project. We we basically had to stop everything. We went on pause. We were only allowed to start again in May of this year. So when you look at that, we passed the land swap in 2023 May and now May 2025 we're starting. So it's an
inherent two-year delay to be that we got there. The other component of this too is now that we're working with MSBA, it's a state agency. They are anyone's worked with state agency before they go in their own timelines. So perfect
example is what in the blue box on the first one there for module one which was the module we entered in May eligibility period there was a number of um deliverables we had to hit we had 270 days to do it we did it in 90 um the
tough thing with that now is we're at hurry up and wait I've talked to MSBA they've got us on board for their next kind of process on this which is an enrollment meeting which is happening roughly in October So even though we finished July 30th, we have to wait till essentially October
for this to start. Following that, we have to get approval from their board meetings which happen I think once a month or every two weeks. So the it what it does the black box for module one shows how quickly we worked as a town. The blue boxes over to the side just
show kind of dead time that we're we're dormant. The other parts that come in after we get through module one is module two where we onboard an architect and OPM. We go into module three which would be feasibility study where we have to study a renovation to Cunningham, a
new elementary school and a new middle school. Those are essentially the three options. We'll pick one of them run with a schematic design and then build it out to a funding article that at that point will look to do a vote. The votes associated with this, there are two
votes. So you have to have a town meeting vote to approve it and then you also have to have a townwide ballot for a debt exclusion. So all of this would have to happen before that time you see there in 2028. Now the boxes that you see here that we have you know from a chart like this is kind of high level.
So what we did is we worked um with MSBA's data that's out there and we looked at other schools or other comparable projects that are there. So Canton school we looked at that. We took their timelines that are published there, their durations for each module and then we plotted that on the bottom
essentially for our starting timelines and looked at what we would do if we were to match what Canton had. Yes, we would hit as you can see at the bottom. I'll see if I can navigate to it. Yep. This red line right here is the reverter clause in 2028. With going through their
modules, we would be able to get to a vote, one vote for the project in in 2028. The next one we looked at was Marorrow. Marorrow had a similar timeline, similar durations, and we could potentially get to a vote for that again coming up near
that 2028. The one thing to keep in mind on some of these, we had our assumption we did these in July. We're thinking we'd be able to start in August, maybe September. Now, we're looking a little bit further out. I I wasn't able to update it for those. The other two that we looked at was
Denim. So, Denim had a longer duration that they had there and it went well past um that reverber timeline and then similarly uh Quinzy's uh Squantum Elementary School, same thing, a longer duration. So, when we took this data and looked at
it, two of them got us right up against the Rivera clause. Two of them got us past the clause. Um if anyone's aware of the past school building project, they didn't pass on the first vote. So, you know, to anticipate that everything would be perfect and pass on a first
vote, um, I would be a little nervous about that. So, having a vote and a reverter clause that would come in right after that kind of gave the overall committee some pause when we're looking at it and we wanted to look at this a little bit further. So, the article
that's before you tonight, we're hoping is going to be one of the more simple articles for this now meeting. It's basically taking the date from June 30th, 2028 and revising it to June 30th, 2033. Again, for the reasons that we were describing before, mainly due to MSBA
and the associated timelines we're going to experience with that. And with that, I think that is my end questions. I would like to look at the two warrant committee experts who I believe talked to you, Elaine and Brian. Would you like
to tell us what you learned from Dr. for us? Can I just thank you for meeting with us last week and very helpful and thank you for giving me all the information I asked for. I appreciate that. Um, but I had two two questions and I have some comments, but um,
and just let me know if you need me to share the screen again. I I shut it off so the audience could see it. Uh, that's okay. I'm good. Uh, you said they I've heard this and I refresh my memory. They say the capacity of the elementary schools is 1900. Correct. Where does that come from? So, I think originally it came from DRA
architecture and really looked at the number of rooms that were constructed and u uh baseline enrollments that they have there for each room. So, that was the number that I I've always been given for it. Is it 92 classrooms in elementary?
I don't know the exact number. Yeah. Okay. So, that's a question. I'd be curious what's behind that. And and maybe I missed this too, but they're going to renovate Cunningham. You said in Colott, correct? I was up there the other day. It looks good. Oh. Oh, you're talking about the fourth floor or No, so another renovation. The library the library. So in the
library of Kolikott Cunningham. Town meeting passed last at the town meeting. Uh funding for the construction of that. So they started that in one school got out in June and Mark can definitely talk to this better. Uh but it's it's basically ready to go. I think it added
three or four classrooms and some office space. And then what it's doing is removing the library from where it was and putting it up on the fourth floor. It's not that's not ready yet. That's phase two. So I think it was supposed to be four classrooms, right, Cunningham?
Uh it's three classrooms in a teacher work space. Oh, okay. It's currently on the fourth floor which will go away. And then again, offices and pull out space, things like that. Yeah. and and those additional spaces there wouldn't build into that baseline
uh number that I had there, but obviously that 1900 capacity number would increase because we we just created new classrooms. Yeah. I guess I was sort of hoping Brian and Elaine could tell us what you learned from your earlier conversation with John.
Uh okay. No, go ahead. I I I was just going to say that we we met um and had a a good discussion, a long discussion about um a number of things that um really go
beyond the scope of the actual article. Right? So the scope is just the the article is just asking for another five years. Um, I think it's very easy to get into lots of things that go back into history
and um and sort of relitigate the whole thing that we did at town meeting. Um, so I I think this is a tricky article for that for that reason. Um, I I don't have any questions about what's happening with MSBA. John
explained that to us the other night. they are notori I work for the commonwealth um and this is the case with any school building authority you know whether it's K12 level or higher ed that you have to go
on their timeline it um he showed us the projections from the other towns and um I don't have any question about why why um the extension is necessary Okay. So, my questions and my issues are
should we be doing this in the first place? Okay. And uh one of the my biggest issues is with the student population because when this was originally done in 2019 there was a high estimate for student population was going to grow so
much in 10 years five years that did three year and 10 year analysis and the school population in Milton actually has been flat for like seven years and um
uh New England school development or whatever it is is actually projecting a decrease of 3% over the next 10 years in population. And so if you looked at the student
population what it is estimated to be at versus it's it like the number of classrooms we were going to add with this school. It's completely different. It's probably like, if I had to guess, maybe like half of what it should be.
But that's a but but let me just say this, okay? I think somebody needs to look at it. A consultant should be h my I would recommend that a consultant be hired and really look at this and look at the options because if it's the student population isn't going to grow that
much, then maybe the right thing we should do and you don't need 25 classrooms or 26 classrooms. We got a whole committee of people right here. Why don't we just ask them? Yeah, I'm asking the question now. Thank you. Um, and if we only need like, you know, 14 classrooms or whatever it is, then
maybe we could, we have four at Cunningham, maybe we could do add-ons to Glover. Maybe we could do an add-on to some other schools. So, that would be my question. Did that I guess I understand what I'm thinking is with the article that's in front of us. You said your question is, should we be doing this at all? Right. And I want
to be focused on how does that affect the article in front of us. Do you see what I mean? Yeah. Well, that's what it's all about. Cool. I mean, the article in front of us just says instead of the land swap reverting
what four years from now, you know, give it another five years to let me say what I think is I don't know the answer. I'm not sure many people do because the population student population estimates different from what we thought it would be and somebody should do it. Somebody should look at
it. Maybe we should do the land swap in the meantime just to hold the land just in case we need to do it. That might make sense to me. I think that we should we just ask them if they have
they've been working on this for years. They may have some of the information. So just to to answer your question about hiring consultants, that's exactly what's going to happen. So with MS with with the MSBA process right now, they they're doing their own enrollment study. That meeting I'm talking about in
October, they take all the data that we give them. So part of module one that we had to give them was how many building permits we're pulling, how many births are going to be there, are there any construction projects coming up, is there anything that's going to feed into future enrollment that's there? and they're going to look at the numbers
for, you know, even though it's leveled off, it's still, like I said, a entire grade level above where we were. It hasn't gone down. It even ticked up last year. So, the the ask that you're that you're asking to have consultants look at this to really give it a third party
look. That's essentially what MSBA is doing. That's the meeting that we're going to have in October. So, all that's going to be done and then part of that, as I mentioned, we have to look at three different options. An addition to Cunningham because that we submitted an SOI to Cunningham, um a new elementary
school and a new middle school. So, we're looking at a number of options there and then they're looking at enrollments for each one of them. So, the state's going to look at what the estimated student population is. Yeah. So, the state has their own hired consultants. I think STV uh engineering
or architects are consultant that they use. So it's an independent consultant outside of them. So they hire their own call like we hire a owners project manager. They do similar for their consulting side to do these enrollments. So the NASDAQ um estimates that they do
every year those will be part of the those will be considered by the state when it goes through MSBA. They will they do my understanding is they do similar to what NASDAQ does. So NASDAQ's an independent organization that the district hires do their enrollment
projections. Every disclaimer they give is great. They say our first couple years it's right on. It's very accurate. 10 years out not that accurate. And it's the disclaimer they put right on there because the reality is they can't um um guess or have an educated guess at
real estate transactions. How many people are going to move out? How many people are going to move in? They basically take birth rates in a town. They extrapolate it out six years and they say those are the kids that come in plus or minus a few. The slide that I was showing before with those, you know,
the spikes that we're getting. It all happened right after last school building project that Milton became very attractive. They just built all their schools. That's why I'm here. That's why I'm sure some of you are here, right? And it it was just something that came in. So, um, you know, for us
to essentially answer your question, they're going to take the data that we give them. They also use Desi I I think for their enrollment stuff. So the package I sent you guys was all the literature that we sent to MSBA. We had to upload to them. They're taking all that data that's there and developing their own enrollment projection on
there. Okay. Lee Michael, you have a question. Yeah. Thanks. Um, is the dash before June purposeful? I didn't I couldn't hear. That's a question that I don't want to ask for. There's a dash before the very last June
30th. Ah um I think I would defer to town council on that. I don't know. I I knowing that one has apostrophes, the other doesn't. I I don't know. So there's a lawyer in the room. I'll defer
to them. There should all probably be quotations before June 30th and at the end of the period of 2033 since you're you want to insert the following words. There should be quotations throughout. I agree. I would I would I would like to
make a motion that we change this recommendation to have quotations around June 30th, 2033 and remove that dash mark. And with those changes, I'd like to make a motion that we recommend the town vote yes as written.
There is a motion on the floor. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Now, we can have discussion of this motion, which the first motion. He made two motions. The motion to amend the motion. I understood his motion to be he's
proposing we accept this as shown with the change that you remove the dash and put in quotes. Okay. Was was that your one and only motion, Lee Michael? Okay. The motion has been moved and seconded. Would anyone like to discuss it? My question is I'll say I'll say the
same thing based on student population rates what the estimate is. I'm not sure this should have been done in the first place. It's questionable. And that is my that's my issue for that comment. I'm going to say I
understand and there's no way I'm going to tell this community of people that they can't have more time to figure this out. So this article is yes. Okay. Seeing no further discussion. What are we discussing? Just adding the
quotations or we add discussing making a recommendation to the war committee. Yeah. This is the final the the second one. the the motion before us is to recommend a town meeting. So this is everybody kumbaya here. This is our
first as a warrant committee recommendation to town meeting in the 2025 uh warrant committee. We are voting on if we recommend to town meeting this article. Okay. I have one question here. So the
the um the MSBA has this 18 to 22 month module 3 feasibility. you guys did all of that work before. So, it's required by the state. So, that's the kind of delta between making the 2028 and asking for the 2033 extension. And so, I just didn't understand why that feasibility
that you guys already did so thoughtfully is required to be redone. I would love to dust it off and just hand it handed into Yeah. But the reality is with MSBA, we have to start over because we have to look again at a renovation, a renovation to Cunningham,
a um and that's an addition and as well as a renovation probably, right? Yeah. Yeah. Basically any augmentation to it, the new elementary school and then the middle school. So the good thing is what we can do is we can salvage some of the work from there, but we can't just take the entire program
partly because we have to hire new architects. So you you'd also have and so that whole feasibility is at our cost, the town's cost. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The good thing with it is, you know, the money that we're putting up for that feasibility study, we get reimbursed at roughly 45%.
And that's the that's the reimbursement rate that we're hoping to get is 45% correct of the total cost uh of cost. So what happens is 45% is going to get thrown around and it's a number that goes against eligible costs. a lot some of the project will be
ineligible costs. So you know we had our OPM on before we talked about you know what's an effective rate like how much does it dilute down to and it the number he was saying it was probably dilute to like 28%. Was the numbers that there so if you want to talk total cost it's about 28%.
Yep. So sorry I know there's been a lot of numbers thrown around. I don't know if you guys have a number, right? They're big from what I hear. But have you done the analysis of what's the difference between trying to go forward without the reimbursement at the current budget versus the benefit of getting the reimbursement and extending the
timeline? Yep. So part Yeah. So part of what we did originally again with our OPM once we got invited to MSBA, we said, "All right, listen. This is going to take longer. There's going to be escalation costs associated with it.
compare those escalation costs against the reimbursement that we're going to get. The break even time they came up with was about six years. So if it takes longer than six years, it costs us more. If we do it faster than six years, which they want to do it, actually cheaper. And you're kind of right on that break
even of that six-year window between this timeline. Yeah, we need to move fast. Yeah, that's that's my goal. I So we've been on this this committee for six and a half years. I don't want to be on another six years, right? Sounds like you're for six more. I love coming in front of Warren
Committee, but another six years. Yeah. Okay. Any other discussion? If not, we'll move to a vote. No problem. Okay. Karen, can you call the role? Did we have a second? Yes. Elaine seconded. Okay. I'm sorry, I didn't hear that.
And can we clarify what we're voting on right now? Sure. We are voting to recommend to town meeting the wording as is shown which is essentially asking petition petition the general court to make this change from
the land swap expiring in 2028 to land swap expiring in 2033 and it includes the typographical uh changes that Lee Michael and also Macy mentioned. Okay. And I will say, and this is perhaps a deviation from what previous
warrant committee chairs did. We're voting, we're voting, are we going to do this? It'll pass or fail. If it fails, we haven't taken any action. Now, in the past, people have said, "Oh, if it fails, that means you're recommending a no." If we want to recommend a no, we have to
vote to recommend a no. So, I I'm not predicting anything that's going to happen. I'm just saying, are we going to do this or are we going to see if we're doing something else? Sorry, one more question for me. Is there a reason we have to take that vote tonight? I didn't didn't wasn't really thinking we're making any kind of
recommendations tonight that way and yeah. Um, so I I don't do we have to do it tonight or can we extend that to a future meeting? I will answer I don't know if you'll be satisfied with my answer. Two things. One is on the agenda I said discussion vote because I thought we might vote and
the second one is we have a motion before this body and it's been seconded. Okay. So, you may not, you know, that's not I know that's not answering the question you asked. Oh, that's good. Where we are. Thank you. Okay. Uh Karen, I believe we're ready for a roll call.
Okay. Mindy, yes. Elaine, yes. Lorraine, yes. Larry, yes. Andrew,
yes. Julia, yes. Brian, yes. Lee, Michael, yes. Ron, yes. Nicholas,
I'm going to abstain. I haven't made up my mind. Uh, Cecile, yes. And Jay, abstain. The motion carries. Okay, that is our first recommendation
to town meeting as a body. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda is I've got sort of smooshed together two things mostly the light trespass bylaw, but I think we'll also be asking for uh wisdom from our
fines experts also. So for the light trespass bylaw, I believe we have Mr. AOR as an invited guest expert on some aspects but maybe not other aspects. So I would turn to
Ron and Nick who are warrant committee experts. Uh can you tell us what you learned, what you found out, what the article is about, what questions you have? Okay, great. So, first
I think we'd like to thank Sean for being recruited to also advise on this article. He somehow finds the time with all his other duties. So much appreciated, Sean. I think Sean will talk a little bit about the measurement techniques, more of a technical
explanation. If you look at the article, there's a certain amount of light emissions and we would say that if you go over that, that's a nuisance and there's some detection techniques and Sean could talk to that. But I think when when Nick and I looked over this article there, there were a couple
questions. This article has been before the warrant committee and town meeting before and it got uh postponed for this uh fall town meeting. I think two of the questions that uh I recall coming up when we talked
this last was around the lack of appeal process if there's a determination of a nuisance and also the amount in the fine. It's $300 a day. Um and so th those types of things I don't
think Sean will talk to. Uh those will probably have to go to the sponsor of the article which I believe is the select board. uh we asked those questions to Benzo so maybe he he may come at some point Jay or he can provide
an explanation to us by email and we'll share it back but but those I think those types of of questions we we won't need to get into with Sean I think Sean will just present on how how are uh levels of light emission detected and what's a reasonable standard does that sound right Nick
yeah I think it's great I apologize if I'm putting you on the spot, but certainly half of this body was not around last year when we discussed it. And I don't know if Mr. Oorc is going to talk about the whole overarching what's what's the idea? Why
is this coming before us? Why did it get a you know mixed but somewhat positive reception from the warrant committee last year? Yeah. What's this about? Maybe I can what I can recall from last year I think um the original sponsor was Aaron Bradley who was on the select
board. She's no longer on select board, but I think she worked u extensively on this article and without getting into details about why I think there there is an interest in town to be able to provide guidance on what's acceptable amount of light to emit from your house
to your neighbors or into public land. So, um I think ultimately this is to to help folks know if uh if there's a certain amount of light being emitted, if if there's a way to determine if it's a nuisance, and the select board would make that determination through the
inspection services department. So, um I know there's some speculation that there are specific houses that that maybe are are, you know, emitting a lot of light. I don't think we should get into that. I think we just look at this this is going to be an article that impacts all of us as neighbors. And I I would take that
perspective without thinking about any specific u families that that maybe have have case specific situations. Yeah. To me the biggest thing is the definition in the article which says light trespass means a condition in which artificial light emitted from a
luminere. And I think that's where Sean can be really helpful is understanding what you know luminary is the the technical definition there on one property is directed in such a manner that the light source or glare is visible from any other property and constitute a public hazard or nuisance. And so I think that's the key thing is
does the light that emits from whatever that source is constitute a public hazard or nuisance and there's some definition about a public hazard or nuisance in the article but I think that's the essence of what we're here to talk about. And uh I don't know Sean if you could spend a few minutes and maybe talk about some of those technical terms
and and what the brightness of the light would be I think that would be really helpful. Yeah Sean is a presentation. So one one thing we asked Sean is how do we as normal people know how much light is too much light right there you know this the measurement is a little complicated because it depends distance
from the light and what angle. So I we thought Sean could kind of educate us a little bit. Thanks. Um reintroduction again just to be safe meeting member chair of the school
building committee 274. So um you know had a good conversation with Ron and Nick the other day as they mentioned like I'm here from a technical aspect. I'm not a proponent of the article. You can't hear him very well. Is that better?
Yeah. Thanks. Sorry about that. Um, so I'm here as basically like a technical witness. I answer questions and stuff like that. Uh, as far as the administration of the, uh, bylaw when it goes through and stuff like that, I I'm
I'm not keen on that or respond to it. Um, so just share my screen again. And this is similar. So for for those of you here last year, I did a similar presentation just to kind of go over what lightness is. So
there's two things with lighting uh when you're looking at it. So there is the light that's emitted from a source, a candle in this this um this case. There's what's called illuminance and that's so the light falls on a surface. When it falls on a surface, you can
measure it and it's called illuminance. What you see is actually called luminance. So, it's based on a number of things. The type of material it's reflecting off of, uh, your eye and different things there. So, with this article, what we're trying to do is measure the illuminance when we're
talking about this stuff. And one of the things in last year's article, there was some um confusion when I was reading it. So, I I jumped in to help Miss Bradley with that. And I was probably the reason that there were a lot of edits towards town meeting, which caused it to get
kicked back. So, uh, Miss Bradley and myself, uh, worked, um, you know, to kind of refine everything and get it, you know, a little better. So, the unit of measurement when you're measuring illuminance comes in whether it's a lux or a foot candle. They're
both mean the same thing. They're just different. One's English, one's metric. So, a foot candle is a light or candle held one foot away from a 1 ftx one ft square area. That's how much light falls on there is a foot candle. A lux is a
same candle a meter away from a meter by meter square area. So they're essentially a 10 to1 ratio. So the key thing with this is when you're talking these measurements, you got to make sure you're talking the correct measurement unit because they're off by 10 to1. So
it it gets really important. So well what what the basis of this article is is you know this graphic from me kind of showed it the best. Um on the left hand side you have a light people have them all the time on the side of the lights on side of the house or
garage like a big flood light and it shines light in all directions and what you what we're looking to do is at the property boundary figure out how much light is passing across that boundary and landing on your neighbor's property. Ideally, what you want is something on the right hand side, which is a
directional light down. It's called a full cut off light, so no light going up in the sky. But you you're basically trying to push the light down to the ground and illuminate the area of your property while not spilling over to your neighbors.
So, one of the questions that came up, I threw this slide in for, you know, relevance. So, and it's tough because the measurement that we're we're at right now for the boundary, I believe the article has it as one foot candle or 10 lux. Um, most things aren't typically
lit to one foot candle because, you know, it's too low uh for safety. Most of the time you do artificial lighting, it's for safety for people to navigate around walkways, train stations, parking garages. Uh, but typically I think the walkway is probably the safest one there. looking
about two foot candles that's on there. The other ones vary because you have what's called um it gets into ratios of max to min. So if you look at the parking garage, parts of it are very bright, parts that are very dark. Um so the the walkway is probably the best,
you know, one if you were trying to equate low foot candles. The other one that comes in too, and it won't play into the intensity, but it it deals perception, how people see light. Um, they have different color temperatures. So, anybody shopped at
Home Depot, you put the wrong light in, you have like five lights that are blue, one light that's yellow. It's, you know, that's color temperature when you talk about it. And the key thing that comes in, like I said before, um, everybody sees light differently. So, you know, a
neighbor might see it and look at it and say, "The light's too bright." And it's mainly because, uh, lenses on your eye yellow over time. So it filters out different lights different ways. So those color temperatures tend to shift. Um the other
part that comes in too is at night time when you're looking at lights at night time you're in the what's called a scotopic re region of vision and getting nerdy there are things called rods and cones in your eye. They react differently in different vision ranges
to different colors of light. Um, one of the key things I tried to do here because this this bylar isn't going to capture every available instance for what they're going to be asked to look at there. Uh, but we tried to make it as as modular as possible that they, you
know, it can be worked with. Um, one of the things that was missing on the previous one is like most lights are on or off like they have a manual switch to them. So, if there is a nuisance that's there, um, see if the neighbor would shut it off and then shut it off. I think the ones that this article is
looking to really do is ones that are just on 24/7 or on continuously overnight that if they switch off um you know it shouldn't be considered a nuisance. The one last thing I'll end with this was the way we wrote up the measurements
on there is for example I'll go back to the property boundary one just for so the light on the right the way the way we crafted the the article is at the property boundary on the right they would go over and take a measurement
then they would shut the light off and they would look at how much it reduced down and if it reduced down by greater than 1 ft candle, meaning that light was contributing more, it would be considered a hazard, uh, a nuisance. But the, you know, if if it's the lights on
intermittently, you know, if it's on a motion sensor and happens to go on and get latched for a minute or two and then shuts off, I don't believe that would constitute, you know, like like trespass or anything like that. I think it's more of a judgment call of how long it's on
for and um other things like that. So that was one of the things when you look at the article, the kind of equation, if you want to call it that, the reason we did it that way is to tell how much a singular light is contributing to it. And I think we also the one that you didn't see last year, we have five
points of measurements on there. And we look at all five points when they do it. And I say I I mean the the town there are exceptions and one of them is for motion activated. Yep. Lights or security lights.
That is okay. Uh I'll look back to Nick and Ron. Do you have more to say either in response to that or other thoughts for the warrant committee? Yeah, I I had no clue what alux is. So
hearing from Sean a second time, I I think I understand it a little better now. But um I think there were some concerns about how will this be measured? Who's going to do the measurements? Um you know, I think there was some talk last year that you can get
a device for $1,000 was the recommended device, but you can also go on Amazon and get a $50 device. Is there a difference in quality? Probably. So there are a lot of things for the select board which was would be the the body kind of owning
this enforcement and then the inspection services to to go decide because there has some protocols that would still be written. That's not included here all the detailed steps. But um I think for the warrant, I think for me at least the key questions were
if if there's a determination of a violation, $300 seems high and then there's no ability to appeal it. Those are really more for I think the select board to decide if that's what they want to propose.
I I think it's fine, but I would just say we should probably make an informed decision before town meeting if if that's what u the warrant committee is comfortable with. Seems high to me. But Nick, yeah, I agree. I I have four questions. I think one of them is the size of the
fine. I think I know I think Lee Michael's presentation next might help that put in context. It seems given the work that he's done, this might seem on the high side to me. But um the other question and I think a really important question is there doesn't seem to be any ability for somebody that's deemed in
violation to appeal that decision. Um so that seems unfair to me that there's no opportunity for that appeal. It seems like it should be worked into this. Um and then I had two other observations from the way the bylaw is written. You know, again, the comment is about uh a
natural hazard um to to people or property. And two of the articles, two of the elements of this, one is about wilderness area habitat or reserves. I don't understand how that would affect people or property. So, that seems like an overreach and potentially um makes a
lot of people uh vulnerable to being accused of um kind of like trespass. And the other one is light trespass on the waters of the United States. Um, and I don't understand why the town of Milton thinks that they can uh mandate a requirement on the waters of the United
States. I would think that Coast Guard would have something to say about that. So, those are my four things. The size of the fine, the right of appeal, which to me is the biggest issue, and two parts of this that don't seem quite align with the purpose uh of the article, which I think I'm supportive by. We all want ability to have our
privacy and enjoy our properties, and that's the intent of this, and I think that's great, but I think the devil's in the details. [Music] I would like to throw out one thing. You both mentioned appeals. Do you know do either of you know are other bylaws in our other Milton bylaws
have appeals? I don't know the answer to that question. We we try to get Sean and you know he was gracious enough to give us his time and he's like I'm the technical escort of lighting who really helped me on that and I think we need to hear from somebody on the select board about some of these other details u because I think
they're important like if if you get deemed to be in violation they've spent out the inspectional services they've you know measured from five different places presumably at night you know that's been a meaningful amount of people's time and investment and if you get deemed to be a violation you're going to get charged $300 a day you know
you should be able to have a thoughtful discourse about why that may or may not be the case can especially given what you know Sean shared with us or some of the technical variations about how the measurement could take place um and you know that that there's some subjective
criteria to that you know they're laid out in this in a relative objective manner but what I understand is different experts could disagree on some of those objective criteria and so it should feels like there should be an opportunity for somebody to kind of push back if they get judged in violation.
Okay. Yeah. Only build I would have I mean we're talking about appeal, but when I look at the the article, I don't really see where the the homeowner can even go to Select Board to to argue their case. It it looks like there's a potent there's a complaint. Complaint gets
filed within a certain amount of time. Select Board tells the inspection services, go out there, take a look. They take their measurements. I don't know if the owner has to be there. I guess they do if they turn the light on, but maybe they show up at night and the lights just on. And this could all happen after someone just gets a piece of mail, you know, and they maybe don't
read their mail. I don't read my mail. But this could all happen after 40 days and then they start getting the fines start tallying up. They may not have have had a chance to go talk to someone at the select court to explain I I have vision impairment. I need extra light. Maybe that's an explanation that we would say that that seems fair. So, it
could be that we don't need to have an appeal, but there's got to be some way that someone can present their case as a resident to say, "Hey, I need this for my own personal reasons." And so, I think if even if the select board add that the select board has to talk to the
homeowner or give them a chance to come in, maybe that could suffice. I don't know. Okay. I think we've heard good concerns from the two of you and I hope that you can connect with Mr. Zul, maybe Mr. Milano. I don't I don't know. Someone track those down. I'd like to throw this open to the body. I don't know if we're going
to answer questions tonight, but to the body of the warrant committee. Do you have other questions, concerns, thoughts? I'll phrase this a different way. If you don't raise questions, concerns, thoughts now and we come back in two or three weeks and have answers
to what's been raised, are you okay with this? So, questions, concern, and we we will get to the fines. I will be calling on my fines experts in a minute. But um but before that, do other members of the body. Yes, Brian. I have a few. Um this is one reason why
I was kicked out last time was because there was no appeal process. And I think other mass towns do have appeal processes for this. And I think that's important. I think $300 seems high, you know. I mean, per day. We'll get to the fines in a second.
Per day, you know, so I think that's excessive. And um I I don't really like a lux, you know, it's 10 lux, right? And I don't what is that, you know, but that's like a street light. So technically is the town of Milton in violation.
There's some exceptions for Yeah. Street lights are not an exception. I looked at this a couple times. So So you know, emergency lights are, construction lights are, but street lights are not an exception. So I kind of wonder about construction lights be well because if you had a water man break they need to be able to see in the
dark so they could fix it without you know be I was I thought but if they're building a building you wouldn't want the lights on. What do you think? That's my other big question is do any thoughts about how many people are in violation across the town on this? Do we
have any idea how many people this would affect? It requires a complaint, doesn't it? Yes. So right now zero. No, but I mean like but but that could be in violation of the 10 lux rule. Like do you have any idea? That's a thought. I think the most pragmatic part of this
was the fact that if you have a motion sensor light, it's exempted as well. Um so, you know, for people to have them for security or safety getting out of their car, walking out of their house, you you have a motion sensor light might be irritating your neighbor, but you know, it's temporary and you know that that seems like a really thoughtful
exception exception exception. Um, so there's a lot of practical parts of this. It's just a couple that I thought needed a little bit of help with. Yeah. I I I thought the street lights would fall under exception three, which which
reads, "Any form of lighting whose use is mandated or otherwise governed by any legal jurisdiction with broader authority than that of the town." I I just thought that somebody must tell us how bright these lights are. I maybe no one and we just decide let's go brighter
or dimmer. I don't know. But um I mean the funny thing about the motion sensor lights is I could think of a case where I wouldn't be okay with that exception. Like if somebody has a motion sensor light that points into my bedroom
and it goes off every time a raccoon goes to the yard. That to me is a bigger nuisance than somebody whose backyard light extends one foot beyond the boundary line. And so not that I'm advocating that we eliminate that
exception, but I think there just needs to be some mechanism for reasonable people to look at things in a reasonable manner. And one example would be we shouldn't start finding on day one as
soon as it's measured and we should give an opportunity and remedy owner some remediation period. Um, and which they do have 30 days to rectify. Okay, I agree with you, Andrew. I have a super
wonky backlight that like is triggered by I don't know what. So, I don't even use it because I'm thinking probably drive my neighbors crazy. So, yeah, if every time a squirrel goes by, your motion sensor light is activated. And to your point, it's like in your bedroom window. I'd rather have it on all night
than So, not to get nitpicky, but Uh yeah, it'd be nice to have some like you said uh language around just like reasonability. I don't know. I don't know. Appeals process makes sense to me also.
Um I I think it's better than the first time this came around but not fully baked in my mind. Um, and I won't I don't even I can't even think of how to craft the language right
off hand around the exception for the the motion sensor lighting, but I could if somebody had a 10,000 Kelvin light that right into my bedroom every night, then I'd be pretty
pissed. I'll I'll play I don't know if devil's advocate is the right word, but right now we have no lighting bylaw. So, if we put in a lighting bylaw that covers a lot of things, but doesn't cover that. And the question that the town is asking us to recommend a town
meeting is, should we pass this or should we not? I I I I feel bad because I feel like I'm shutting down discussion, which is not my nature, but it's sort of this is what's in front of us. If we can think of an amendment, that's one thing. But, uh,
but is it sort of like the climate the climate bill? Some of us around this table said, "Boy, we wish it had been tougher." But yeah, I I mean, I can think of an amendment. One is to have them amend one put in a mechanism for appeals. Y uh and
yeah, I think um some sort of reasonable accommodation clause um with regards to the motion sensor, maybe an exception on there in the exception to the exception in the event
that the mo the motion sensor light causes reasonable nuisance or a nuisance to a neighbor. They have x number of days to resolve. I I hear what you're saying. Can I recommend you work with our two experts
who are going to be working with Yeah. We're going to try to talk with Ben. Yeah. And then we can propose amendments. I'm sure he may also see things that he thinks that they want to modify. Yeah. So, if they if they would modify it, then we maybe don't need to propose an amendment. We can see if the select
board wants to modify and we can bring it back. So, this might be a good time. We keep talking about fines and we have two fines experts on this group. A couple of hands up here. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you for speaking up. Uh,
who's first? I I'll let Macy talk first. We're going to hear from you a lot, Michael. My bit delayed at this point, but I concur with both Andrew and Nick that the process Okay.
Um because other um areas of biolog came in my mind but um my other question is I know we're undefined. Um but is it really our role to create amendments to what I consider to be a blog article? I mean is that
something that that needs to be done for us? Uh I will answer that question to the extent that I can and here's how I think about it. This may this will this something will go in front of town
meeting. Town meeting can make amendments. So as a strict answer to well as a very strict answer to your question yes we can make amendments. As a slightly less strict answer to your question if town meeting can make amendments then we can make amendments
to what we're suggesting. Now what I so I think it's but we can make like typographical striers type amendments but substantive amendments such as rewriting the article
to provide a compellent process. I don't think I don't know that's on rule J. Okay. I don't know the answer to that. I'm just wondering because I you know we're looking for something that's typographical. I would say yes. The answer to this question
um it is our role definitely um we can write what we want in our recommendation and um frequently like a citizens petition for instance they'll submit something is pretty rough around the edges because they don't know how to write an article. the warrant committee
can then work with that person on what the best possible language is and what the warrant committee would would would accept and then you put that language into the recommendation. You don't go back and change the actual article generally that was submitted. It's just reflected in your recommendation. Um,
and the rule is you can make articles that were submitted more narrow or more restrictive, but you can't expand them and make them bigger and apply to more things. So, in this case, if you were to put an appeals process in, I kind of think town council or whatever,
sometimes the moderator determines what's in the scope out. I would think that putting an appeals process in uh makes this a more restrictive article, which would be allowed rather than making it less restrictive. Excellent. Okay. Thank you for Thank you, Michael. That that last part
you made is interesting because um I I I believe you're I take your word for it, but it's not what I thought. What I thought the rule was was something's printed in the warrant and everybody in town gets to read it and talk to their town meeting members about it. And so if
our recommendation is printed in the warrant, uh I don't know. I'm I'm sort of rambling. I I didn't know we were restricted in that way, but You're right. Our recommendation gets printed after the article. The article gets written in the warrant and then it says
the recommendation of the committee is and then our recommendation number. Okay. And I guess I would respond to Macy's question about amendments in a different way. I agree with what Lee Michael said. I would say let's say we want to change. Everybody's going to be
happiest if we go back to the select board and say we want this change and they say we agree and they change it. That way everybody's happiest. But let's say, you know, let's say we're not shooting from the hip, but let's say we talk to town council, we talk to town administrator, we talk to some expert and the expert says you should do this
different thing and the select board says we disagree. Well then what's going to happen if we decide to go ahead with that? What's going to happen is the warrant committee would stand in front of town meeting would say we want to do A. The select board would stand in front of town meeting would say no the warrant
committee is wrong. You should do B. And that's perfectly fine as long as we're willing to stand in front of the town meeting and say here's why we think you should do this thing that's slightly different than what the uh what the um select board recommended. But then somebody has to make a motion
at town meeting to adopt the amendment that the warrant committee is proposing. No, because the the motion before the body is the warrant committee's proposal. So, if it's different than the there's the you know the the light text which is what we'll get into at our at our summit. There's a light text which
is the recommendation and the bold which is sorry the light text is the article. The bold is our recommendation. Okay. And that's the motion before the body. I'm sorry. You're saying we can change the language to a what? We can um Well, we can propose an we can propose
an amendment, right? We can't change the warrant language. No, it really it really is our recommendation. You can take whatever was submitted in terms of an article and then we craft from that what our recommendation is and it doesn't have to
match word for word what was submitted and we can make it more restrictive if we want. So if we want to say it's only going to apply to you know half these things instead of all these things then then that's an option of the committee can it's not an amendment process that's this is the discussion where we're
saying okay somebody submitted this article do we want to recommend this article yes or no then we don't do anything yes but we want to make some changes to it so here's our recommended changes in the last couple of town meetings there was a ton of pink sheets that's where or the green sheets or whatever that's where the warranty
recommendations sort of came in at the last minute Those documents frequently don't match what was in the warrant. They should ideally be printed in the warrant right after the original article, but they frequently are very different. Yeah, the um the select board should
could propose an article that says we think the official ice cream flavor of the town should be vanilla and we can say we think it should be chocolate. What be printed in bold is we recommend the town adopt the official ice cream flavor as chocolate. That's the motion before the word. So the recommendations though it's not
we don't change the word the language. Well again there's there's the sort of normal font which is the article. There's the bold font which is our recommendation and then there's the italicized font where we explain our recommendation. So
it it's what goes before the body. That's what they vote on. Yeah. If I read 124, maybe we should look at this, but uh how I read 124, the bylaws, it just says uh I don't think we can change it. No, we're not actually changing.
We're not changing the the art. I mean, part of the purpose of recommendations, part of the purpose of having these conversations with the the authors of the warrant articles is to discuss what we think are flaws and in hopes that they make revisions to the warrant
article language and um no, we cannot, my understanding, we cannot edit or change the actual language, but we could propose, which is this has the same effect as somebody else at town meeting presenting an amendment. Correct.
Proposing an amendment. It just so happens that we get to put it in print before the meeting happens. But then that effect is the same. And hopefully we're able to provide the feedback before the meeting so that the
authors can either decide to adopt our language. And I'll give teaser. This is the sort of conversation that I want to have at the summit. This is the exact sort of topics that I want to cover at the summit which will be in two weeks. So, so get excited.
Um, oh, I I will also say for our friends remotely, I think I've said this before, I view you as equal members to the people in the table. So, if I'm ignoring you, take yourself off mute. Speak up, please. Um, Seal, did you have
a your hand up? No. Okay. Uh, Lee Michael, did you want to vote? You say what you Okay. Yeah. Go ahead. I had something on this article. Okay. Um I agree an amendment process should be considered. Uh we should look to see if any of our
other bylaws have process and see if we can Did you mean appeals process? Yeah, sorry. Appeals process. Thank you. And then secondly, I I did some quick searching here as to why I that the language also struck me funny as the about the wilderness natural areas and
the waters of the United States and apparently those are very common. um things that are included in bylaws like this in communities because they're recommended by the dark sky association. The whole point here is to try to decrease the amount of light that's
escaping from people's private property and so you don't want it going on water where it shines and uh etc. and you don't want it illuminating wildlife areas or whatever. So if the experts could look into this, it would be wonderful to know how many towns around
us have those two provisions around the wilderness and life tax and what those numbers are. Um my my brief research showed that 10 blocks going onto your neighbor's property actually might be kind of excessive compared to to what some of the other towns are doing. Um
and my last point is we should tighten up that um motion detector thing. That's a a giant hole in this article that we can make a little more reasonable. When you say tighten up, what do you mean? A person should not be able to have a
motion detector that exceeds the lux levels written in this article that can go on and off an unlimited number of times because if achieving the same thing that the article is trying to uh restrict. So, I would think that you you
would not want your neighbor's light like it was pointed out earlier pointed into your bedroom window and going off every time wildlife went by or a car went by or whatever the h the case may be. I think there should be some additional language there that says what's reasonable and isn't reasonable
with regard to a motion detector. Okay. Just Oh, Sean, Mr. Sorry. Uh just to the the comment on the value of 10 lux. So when you look at dark sky dark sky basic as as Lee was
talking about these um um the language here is they they have a template that you can use the the the baseline that they use for the property was one lux and you know talking with Miss Bradley we wanted to bump it up to 10 lux so it wasn't you know to the
point that was raised earlier that everybody in town would be in violation if it was one lux my based on my judgment everybody would by bumping it up we We tried to provide a higher threshold. So it wouldn't be something that would be um uh continuously done there. As I was saying too, 10 lux as
you know just from the examples we were looking at is still not a high level of light. So it's not going to be you know very bright or anything like that. You know if they're below that that number. Okay. Um, what's up? I apologize to interrupt, but I think
Macy needs to drop soon and wanted to get on to the voting on the minutes if possible. Oh, um, if we could take a slight detour and vote on the minutes. Okay,
Macy, is that uh, correct? Would you like to address voting on minutes right now? No, I appreciate that. I just need a log off to um get some rest. Um Okay. So, I submitted five sets of minutes um to Karen and I understand that she
distributed them this morning. Um they are the ones from August 11th, 2025, my last meeting. Um and then May 7th, 2024 and three really old sets of
minutes. Um, this is uh May 1st, 2023, May 2nd, 2023, and December 11, 2023. I'd like to see if we're ready to vote um on these minutes and get them polished
as soon as possible. I move to accept meeting notes. Okay, we have a motion from Brian to accept all five of those. Is there a second? Second. Second from Andrew. Any discussion? We're going to do them all together.
One of the That was the motion and the second. Uh if no discussion, I only feel comfortable voting on the meetings that I attended. Exactly. Yeah. Can we do it by warrant committee year again? You know, uh like we did last time.
Nope. I well I think the bulk we run into the I I actually had a discussion with Macy about this a while ago about the historic minutes and the number of historic minutes that we are backlogged on. I think um given that we're going to
try and vote on the minutes uh more quickly and in a more timely fashion that going forward it makes sense to review them and vote on them. uh uh with more deliberate consideration
than the historical ones. Uh Macy was trying to spare us from having to digest I I forgot what she said. It was either 40 or 50 sets of minute. I mean it was a long series of back historical minutes. Um and we can either leave them in
perpetuity or leave them to the one or none of the current committee members that can vote on them. I would advocate that we just adopt all the historical ones, go clean slate, and be more deliberate about the ones going forward. Um, given
that I was only present for the last for the the May 7th. Uh, okay. 24. Uh, actually, I wasn't even around for that one and the only one set one of the five sets of minutes. So,
we have a motion. Do we have a second? We can go by that if um if members are more comfortable. So, we can start with August 11th of 2025. That's the most recent one. Uh Brian and Andrew, are you okay with your motion and second being split up into five? Yes. Okay.
No, but yes, let's do it. All right. Um Macy, do you want to tell us what we're voting on? And then Karen, you can call the vote. Uh yeah. Um, I am requesting a vote of approval for the August 11th, 2025
minutes. Okay, are we ready? Um, Macy, yes. Elaine, yes. Lorraine, yes. Larry, yes. Andrew, yes.
Julia, yes. Brian, yes. Lee Michael. Yes. Ron. Abstain. Uh, Nicholas.
Yes. Cecile. Yes. And Jay abstain. Okay. The motion carries. Can I make a motion that we do the other four together? Those divided up too.
Are we? Those need to be divided up too. They do. There are some people here who could Okay, ask a question on those. There's only three people that were here then on this meeting, right? You three, I think. Yes. I don't think anybody else. We were not here on the
51 and 52 23. Oh, and I usually abstain. All right. Um, rock paper scissor. Which is why I I think we should clean slate those, get them over with, and I I for the record um they're minutes. I
would prefer you vote on them. Okay. I I don't see any reason to abstain on voting on minutes. My my other thought is just instead of going through all the names, just your three names on those. Okay. Just everybody else should theoretically abstain, right? I want to clean slate it because I like
I I want to abstain from 2023 and say yes to 2024. Like I wasn't part of the 2023 meetings. So I cannot Oh, sorry, Julia. Did dent help you with some of these three? The the the last one.
Still there? There's nobody nobody for the May 1st, 2023. Nobody here was in that meeting. I wasn't there. These these happened during town meeting right before. Oh, Jay was Jay was the only one there.
So, yeah. So that makes it difficult too because there's no record of these meetings for for me to go back on um to confirm and Karen um is in the town meeting or preparing
to uh to participate or the town meeting. So when we're at the high school and I imagine these four four meetings occurred um based on the high school there is yeah there's no one taking notes on that. Um, so they're based on Karen's and others collective
memory and I think that makes it difficult. Um, I So, so anyway, so that's I just wanted to inform everyone of that. These are from the county. For efficiency sake, can we vote on all four as a as a group? I agree. Um,
second. I know that goes I know that goes against what Pete said a few No, I mean it I I understand in principle why you would want to do them, but from a practical standpoint, I think we should um if you want to split them up, fine. But I I'd like to do
something. Okay, I've got a question. What happens if you vote no on like a set of minutes? That that goes in my opinion that goes back to what I said a few minutes ago. If we vote no, nothing has happened and then we will have to later vote on those
minutes to approve them. Like if the if the not if you individually vote no, but if the body votes no, that doesn't mean the minutes get burned. That means later we'll have to come up and do it again. And if we vote abstain, how many people need to vote? Just a majority of the
people that actually vote. Yeah, probably. We could do all four and I can be the only voter. All right. I I hate to go back on what I said just five minutes ago, but can I'd like to do all four as a group as a batch at this point.
I'll second that if anyone feels the need to abstain then. Okay. All right. Macy, can you remind us of the four we're voting on now? Of course. Uh May 7th, 2024,
May 1st, 2023, May 2nd, 2023, and December 11th, 2023. These all occurred um in the basement of the high school I imagine um prior to county. Thank you. Okay, Karen, can you call
roll please? Mason. Yeah. Elaine, abstain. Lorraine, abstain. Laren, abstain. Andrew,
yes. Julia abstain. Brian abstain. Lee Michael. Yes. Ron abstain. Nicholas
abstain. Abstain. And Jay. Yes. The motion carries. Thank you. We're we're putting we're putting the pass behind us. Thank you. There's more to come. Don't worry, there'll be more next meeting.
Thank you, Macy. And thank you, Jay, for allowing me to be gonna walk on. Okay, so if we could all mentally switch back and this is a good time of transition. There were concerns about fines, and we've had Lorraine and Lee Michael look into fines. What are the
fines we currently have? What might be reasonable? Uh, would one of you like to take it away? Lee Michael jumped into it and did a great job. So, go for it. Thanks, Lorine. Yeah, I'll pick this up. Um, I sent via email a document um to
everybody. Am I able to share right now or do I need permission? You should have permission to share. All right. So, can you see the built analysis on the screen? Yep. Yes. Great. So, um I did use chat gutt to put
this together. I did spot check it many times in many different ways. So I'm fairly confident of the of the content here, but I just wanted to disclose that I use GBT to analyze our bylaws and the bylaws of of nearby town. Um quick reference the big summary here at the
top is that we kind of have two two different approaches to fines. It's either something that starts low at around $25 and then escalates up to $100 or $200 after three violations and then we have the track where it's basically
just a $300 violation every day every time uh a violation is assessed. And I didn't see a lot of things in here about people being able to appeal them or go through some other process. That's that's kind of why I said let's go and find it. we can get other language out
there somewhere because I didn't see any when I was looking through these bylaws. Uh basically if the town assesses a you know violation I think you probably have to fight it in court. Um but anyway, so uh there's those two levels um starting
at 25,500 100 or 200 and then the second um level is pretty much $300 first offense and then every offense thereafter and every day is generally there are some slight nuances or tweaks that don't fit those two um but for the
most part that that is what most of our um our articles uh include. And in looking at neighboring towns, we are remarkably consistent with what those towns have um for fines as well. 300 is
a very popular number. And that gentle escalation from 25 to 50ish to 100 is also pretty common. More common with um things like animal control. That's where or leash laws or uh noise complaints, etc. That's where you get those $25 ones
that start out. And then um you can see the other ones listed here. General code, board of health, sewer, storm water management, wetlands, some zoning. Um and then down here, I think Oh, no, that was it. Uh and that was it. Those
ones are all $300. This our noise ordinance one is a little bit different. This its first offense is um $100. So that one's kind of an aberration from the rest of them. But in the back of the document here, you'll see what some other towns have done. Here's a whole
section that compares other towns animal control laws. You'll see, you know, $50 first violation, 100 up to 150. That is pretty consistent. There's um some other towns that have exactly what we have, but they're all kind of in the neighborhood. Um when you look at
plastic bags, there's a tiny bit more variation. Newton has $200. Um they're working up to $300 a day, which is pretty steep. But um a lot of them, you know, those numbers escalate right up to around $200, $300 mark. Um for light
trespasses, I knew we were talking about that. I just happened to look up with some of the towns near us had. And several of them do have this up to $300 per violation. I think that most of them allow for remediation within the first 30 days, which is what the bylaw that we
looked at. So, no uh fine within the first 30 days and then if you exceed that amount of time, um you get assessed $300 for every day that the that the violation continues thereafter. Um and then there's just some additional research here that I'm not going to go into now, but I put this in here for the
folks who are trying to be um experts on law. So, long story short, uh I was surprised at just how consistent our biods are with each other with having those two different tracks and how consistent we are with the town group as I kind of thought they would be more all
over the place. I agree. Thank you. So, tying the discussions together, there was concerns about the fines in the light bylaw. Now, we've seen what Lee Michael has.
Uh thoughts, questions, comments? Yes, Julia. Uh I feel like all of the comments so far about the $300 violation has been that it seems like a lot. So, um I certainly I like the step-wise, you
know, first offense is X, second is Y, third is Z. Um that seems more reasonable and sort of fair to me. Um, so that's those are my thoughts upon seeing the comparison data,
which $300 fines. Um, if we're talking about the light tres light trespassing, light trespass fines in particular, but I don't I think whenever we've seen fines of $300, we have all felt like a
day we have felt like that is a lot. I think also so from from the research it says up to 300 per violation. So maybe there's some dis like some decision-m by the whoever's running
these programs for Boston, Cambridge, and Somerville. I think our proposed article just says 300 a day every day. There's no perspective or or judgment. It's just you're in violation after 30 days. You start tacking up that $300 and it doesn't say is to be assessed. It's just
every single day in theory you owe $300. So, but we can we can talk to Ben. I think we can see I I generally agree with the comments. I just want to point out that you're going to very quickly get to that $300 because if somebody, you know, you get a warning
or whatever, then you're still in violation 30 days later. So, fine, assess a $20 $25 fine. Then the day after that, so that's day 32 or whatever. the day after that if the light still exists, you assess um a $50 fine. And if the light still exists on
the third day, you assess a $100 fine. So I it's going to accelerate very fast as one point because each subsequent day is a new violation. Yep. But I don't mind starting with a low number. Um I agree with those comments. Um just
to echo and I think 300 is excessive. I think um also I don't there are some appeals for some things here and there in the in the bylaws but um I don't know why there's not more but I do think there should be an appeal process cuz I
don't know where this is going to go but you know people can be small sometimes and I think there should be an appeal process to it and this was brought up last time and yeah wish they had added it so my opinion does everyone think that we've given Ron
and Nick enough information to go back to go out get answer these questions and if they get satisfactory resolution then we're okay. I mean not committing anything but we're talking about the lighting bylaw now. Sorry. Okay. If we're going back to that
I think the big biggest difference there is that there there is a 30-day remediation period as opposed to um the storm water violations. I that's the
fundamental difference to me. Um I think fines in general should be large enough to discourage someone so that a wealthy person can't just pay it and ignore it and say it's
worth it. Um or there should be some deterrence. Do I think uh unleashed dog should be fined? $300. No way. Um, I I see some sort of stratification looking at these and zoning is u
something pretty material as opposed to animal control um and board of health violations. I would hope that your board of health is setting a fine schedule large enough that restaurants are
and other health oriented uh other commercial entities that have uh potential health impacts are incentivized not to to do something. So I'm I'm conflicted. I as long as there's
some degree I'm always of the thought that as long as there's some degree of discretion that is allowed to give reasonable flexibility to the finding authority
um then I'm okay with it. And so I'm reading this and it says up to $300 a day for storm water violations. Like what warrants $10 versus $300? I don't know. But um Mhm. I only comment
if you look at the zoning is 300 per offense every two weeks which is nothing. Yep. If you have a real zoning problem, $300 every two weeks, $600 a month, probably not going to make a big impact, but who knows? That's I mean, the new people may not have heard my heartwarming inspirational story, but Nick, I'm sure you're in town
meeting for this. When I was a new town meeting member 10, 15 years ago, and they proposed for zoning violations, $300 per day, and town meeting rose up and said, "That's that's ownorous." And then they came back a year later and said, "Okay, $300 per 14 days."
Fortnite. Per Fortnite. I didn't want to use the fancy British word. Um I I think we've covered this issue and the experts will take all your inputs into consideration. Okay. An appeal process, right? Since we're
talking about the lighting trespass, one thing that uh I wanted to point out that there was a comment about the dark sky language. And for people that weren't here last term, warrant committee term, there were two separate articles proposed. One
was a light trespass and one was a dark sky initiative. And so, um, I'm mindful of Nick's comment regarding, um, what right do we have legislating things that
affect, uh, wildlife and trespass into US waters as opposed to affecting directly affecting taxpaying town town members, towns people. So looking at that, so I appreciate that comment.
No, and I made note of what Lee Michael said about the dark sky stuff and why I'll take that on board, get some clarification and and come back. Yeah. No, I know. So they commented on where that language came from, but does it make sense to have that language in
this article? I'm not sure. Okay. So I I agree with your It's a great point. Discrep look at it. Okay. So, for the last item or the last article on the agenda is the sign bylaw,
which we have a guest here to speak to us about that. Uh, Larry, your buddy dropped off. I don't know if you were in the room when Oh, yeah. Well, you know, she has had some personal problems today, so she wasn't really able to. Thank you. Would you like to introduce yourself?
Yes. Hello. Good evening. Um, Meredith Hall, the chairman of the planning board. Okay. Um, here to discuss our signed bylaw. Okay. Thank you, Miss Hall. And as I I think you've seen, we're doing things a little bit different than last year. Last year, we had you come in and do a
very full presentation on all your bylaws for us. Uh, we were delegating that to our experts. And so, if you could just maybe give us the quick highlights of what you're proposing and then we can Sure. I I always think um it's good to start with the intent and the purpose of
um why we are here and we are suggesting this bylaw. So I'll just refer to that section um to initiate conversations. So the intent of this bylaw um is it is recognized
that signs perform an important function important functions in the community which are essential for the p for public safety general wear welfare such as communicating messages providing information about goods and services available and providing orientation. It
is further recognized that because of their potential potential detrimental impact to the visual and perceptual environment, signs must be regulated in order to prevent hazards to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Prevent
conditions which have a blighting influence and contribute to declining property values. Provide for easy recognition and legibility of all permitted signs and other uses in the immediate vicinity. Preserve the
amenities and visual quality of the town and cur and curb the deterioration of the community environment and support business vitality by avoiding burdensome procedures and restrictions. Um, it is the intent of this article to protect property values,
create a more attractive business climate, enhance and protect the physical appearance of the community, and encourage the appropriate use of land. So, having said that, we we have had um a number of changes. We have
currently have a signed review committee in place um which Larry is part of and um can speak to. But a lot of it um this was really the body of work uh that Tim Zwinsky had prepared um years ago and it
just had gotten sort of put aside and never really addressed. um he actually wrote it when he was assistant town planner and was surprised it never got imple it just never got put forth um and had been tabled. So this gives a much
more clear um sort of like this if you recall the site plan approval that was recently approved at town meeting. It gives a clear map for anyone who's putting a sign what the application materials that need to be. Um these are currently the materials um and the
application process that the town has in place. So nothing is changing. Nothing is um this still the application would go through the building department. the building department would then send it to the um to the sign review committee who does an excellent job. Um many of
them are architects or have design um knowledge and understanding and so really can interpret and work with whoever the um business owner is to create something that would would fit in with the character of the town while
giving them meeting the needs of of what that um business might need. So, and it also this just clearly spells out um whether it's residential district because we have a lot of pre-existing non-conforming commercial um properties
but they're in residential areas. Um the fruit center being one of them. You know, different um certain areas that are in residential districts but they are um commercial buildings. So we just this clearly um lines up um and lays out
clear definitions um pro and the process um for a signed applicant to come in. And what it also does is we have a a sign review um handbook that's been given out which is just ancient. It's
it's not updated. And what's been happening is what is prohibited in the handbook is actually not in our bylaws. So this aligns what's in the handbook with what our bylaws state. So because we there is an appeal process, we do
allow um that um this is one of the changes was it had been going to the select board for the appeals process. um when years ago it was dis suggested and it just never happened that because the
zoning any any special permit um appeal process goes to the ZBA. This this aligns with what our special permit process is in all other um zoning um would go to the ZBA. So that was just a small change. And then we made some of
the timelines a little bit more lenient to allow the sign review committee to perform um to be able to do the approval. They can always approve it sooner, but um sometimes what happens is somebody may not have um understood what
was what was required or what was um what was allowed and so they have to go back and make some changes or there's some recommendations that the sign review committee will make. So they go back to their designer and come back. And so it takes another meeting to follow up, but usually it's within a
meeting or two that um the signs are approved. It's not a lengthy process. So and sometimes if there are no sign applications, the sign review committee might not meet that month. So yeah, and and Larry can probably add more detail and and help to answer
some questions that you all may have. I did find a few in in our um updated version. There's a few scrib um periods that are missing. I've I've noted um and but I I'll we'll read through that. I'm
um any questions that I guess now I'd like to turn to Larry sort of when when you were looking into this when you were reading it over when you're talking to Miss Hall what questions did you have or if you can turn your brain you're you're a sign expert and turn your brain to the rest
of us. What questions did you have or what questions would you have had if you were in our shoes and what did you learn about this? Um the only uh questions I had uh everything else everything made mo most of the time frame changes made a lot of sense to me and a lot of the ch most of the changes are things that are
just making the the bylaw you know reflect what we actually do you know so for example I don't know there was a thing in there about you know we were appointed by the building commission and we're actually appointed by the select board that sort of thing and then uh so you know a lot of those things were corrected that was all pretty minor
pretty pretty fine um I was sort wondering what the role of the planning department was. Um but then you know I had a discussion with Meredith and and that all made sense. The planning department um is sort of the you know the arbiter of everything that comes through. Um the building commissioner
and the planning department work together with the sign review committee to you know get these signs in front of us and things like that. The only um open question that I had which I wish I had asked last night was um it was the overlay districts. Um, so there's there's a there's some wording in there
about if there's an overlay district that has its own sign um sign bylaw or not not necessarily bylaw but its own sign directions directives or whatever. Um that um does
that supersedes our town by then I guess right? I would think it would. Um it's it's it's really um being consistent with the sort of our goal and I I think we said we didn't say shall I think we said should probably um which is very
different. So we are we are trying to guide them to follow we have we've put in place design guidelines um recently in the Milton Village overlay and the East Milton overlay and within those we had um worked with our consultant and feedback from the community and it's
just guidelines to the types of signs. So, it's not it is still um it's encouraging them to um to look at those guidelines, but it's certainly it's the sign review committee and the bylaw
which supersedes. Yeah. Okay. They're guidelines, not um you know, not necessarily um requirements. Yeah. bylaws or whatever. Yeah, that makes sense. Exactly. And we just tried to give, you know, indicate, you know, some
indications um of what would that they could look at those design guidelines. Yeah. And the other thing too I just didn't mention is I did go through this very closely with John Ziggitz who's the chairman who's been on the sign review committee since the beginning because
he's seen the problems and Larry's been on it for 10 years too. So very experienced. So to find out what are the what are the issues and where do people you know applicants get hung up and so hopefully this this is going to resolve those. Yeah I think it's great. Yeah. Yeah.
Larry, can we step back just a minute to put yourself in the rest of our shoes? Can you give us the twominute version of what happens now if somebody business wants Sure. Yeah. Yeah. No problem. Um so yeah I actually wrote up a little summary that I sent to you guys about
that too. just it's okay. It was like a few hours before the meeting. So, um so you know, an applicant subsign an applicant submits a signed application to the building commissioner. Um the building commissioner will forward it to the sign review committee and then we'll schedule a review using our monthly
meeting. Um you know, if everything's if all the design materials are required, there's a lot of specific you know, materials that they have to include. the size, you know, the size of the sign, a a plan layout, you know, they have to have a plan layout where the sign's going to be, things like that, with the materials they're going to use. Um, if that's all included, then I'll forward
it to the sign review committee. We'll meet. Um, if it conforms with the sign bylaws, then we generally, you know, just it's usually a pretty quick meeting. Occasionally, we'll make some aesthetic recommendations, but those aren't b, you know, those aren't binding. It's just sort of a recommendation. Some of the guys are
pretty good. You know, the aro said they're architects. We had a sign guy for a while. He was great. Um and um he um but you know those don't those aren't binding. So they they can take it take it or leave it. Take our recommendations or leave it. Um
if there's any issues with the sign uh like it's not conforming somehow uh we may make recommendations for them to make some changes and then if that happens they take it back and then resubmit at a later date to the sign review committee. Um and then
so we can either approve a sign conditionally, say if you make these changes, you agree to make these changes and resubmit your application, we'll approve it at a later date. Um and then we have to get back together and approve it at that point. Uh if it's if you know, we can also reject a sign and then it's pretty much the same process. They
can either come back, they can also appeal it, they can go to the zoning board of appeals if they want to appeal our decision. um in which case the zoning board of appeals can overrule essentially our decision which is usually in some some cases overruling the signed bylaw which is how you wind
up with things like the um you know the sleepy the old sleepy's mattress sign which is something else now I mean that's that that's a non-conforming sign that gets approved every time it comes up and um trying to think what else maybe some of the gas stations there's some non-conforming signs around so that's basically the
process and I I know I may be asking a big question asking you to narrow it down But so what changes does this what what changes are we talking about? The changes are essentially um time frames. So in some cases we have in the bylaw listed 14 days for approval, 30
days for approval. In most cases we've increased those to a more reasonable time timeline or I'm sorry not weird has or the planning board has increased those to a more reasonable time. That's the biggest changes. Um there's some corrections, you know, like I said about
the uh select board and appoints the sign review committee and not the building commissioner. Um and then there was the uh let's see here. And then the business about the overlay districts was good. Uh that's about the
um if there's a if there's guidelines for the overlay districts, they weren't included in the original bylaw. So um that clarifies that and then there's some clarification about the um internally lit signs. So we have a lot of discussions about internally lit signs and the sign review committee as
you guys can can imagine and um the uh wording is clarified in the U article about what sort of internally lit signs well internally lit signs are generally never allowed. Um, oh, was that what type of sign? Internally lit. So, think like a LED or
like a neon. I mean, nobody uses neon anymore, but like a neon sign from the 70s. Yeah. You know, um, we allow lit signs, but they have to be externally lit like say, you know, from gooseseneck lighting or something like that or halo lit, which means that the light comes around the words.
Um, um, it also clarifies that illuminated signs require a dimmer switch. That's something that we've uh brought up in um you know many of these sign review committee meetings and now it's codified into law which is great. Dimmer switch. It means that the lights can be dimmed
at late at night if they need to. So if the light needs to be on at all times which occasionally they do then it needs to be on a dimmer. I mean they can be dimmed but if I'm the business owner I would just choose not to. You're saying you're saying they're required to. Uh yeah, I mean well
actually no the bylaw just says that it requires that they should be they have the ability to be dimmed. It doesn't say that they actually have to. I guess I'd have to look at that. That was a request by John. He said sometimes you don't realize how bright,
you know, depending on where in context to relationship to other properties. So it might be I'll just use the example of um Elliot physical therapy. if they had put an, you know, if they had an internally lit sign that came on and the neighbors were really, you know, were
upset about it. Going back to all the light trespass, you know, if it was an issue, they would have the capability to keep that sign, not have to remove it, but they could just reduce the um the the brightness of it. Um because sometimes you don't know until it's
actually installed how bright it's going to be. Okay. Right. Um, there's another one, too. You know, murals, works of art, things like that, um, that are painted on the side of buildings, like the mural on the um, what's that? Tucker. Oh.
Oh, I I I was thinking Tucker, but Yeah. Yeah, I guess. Is there a mural at Tucker? It's new. Oh, go see it. I probably should have had it approved. Is it art? Sorry, I'm getting off topic. Mural. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So murals, you know, require
approval from the sign review committee, which we've never really been clear about that before in the old bylaw. So that's been included. And then um there's also an issue with signs painted on windows. People often come to the sign review committee thinking that signs painted on windows don't count or they can paint whatever they want on their windows because it doesn't count
towards the overall square footage. So we clarified that. I keep saying we I'm sorry, Meredith. It's you guys clarify. I was just going to ask you, are you on the side? I am on the side of you. I do attend some I do attend some of the meetings because it's funny people will call the
planning board and say how did that sign go up like what why did that you know certain sign and you know how did that get through and because it wasn't clear in the bylaws sometimes and it gets appealed so some things have gone through but um but they do a great job the sign
review committee except for the sleepy sign we just can't get rid of that thing just hangs around for this will help this will help yeah hopefully if they change the exceptions are are helpful to to read. Um because I had a question about like town politics signs and every
couple months you see a bunch of signs but so you can put on the sidewalk because I thought you can't put signs on the the grass of the sidewalk but it says signs may be erected in town's right of way by a homeowner in front of
his or her own property provided doesn't protrude into public walkway or roadway. placement doesn't damage plantings, blah blah blah blah. So So you're allowed to put signs on that grass area on on private property. On your own property, it has to be on your own property.
So it can't be on town, right? Land. So that that that portion of grass in front of my house between the road and the sidewalk, is that mine or is that the town? That's typically the town's. Oh, really? I'm responsible. You're responsible for maintaining it. For maintaining it, right? It's called the devil strip.
Yeah. Got it. Well, then what does this mean? It says signs may be erected in the town's right of way provided blah blah blah. The town doesn't own the right of way. The town has access to the land, but the land is still owned by the land owner.
So, it's private property, but the town has the right way over it, I think, is what that's saying. Okay. Which is different than the other side of the sidewalk. I had a question. Um, and I was looking particularly at the prohibited signs. I
was trying trying to think of what those meant and I was actually had to Google what openf face channel letters are. Um but the one that was confusing to me and trying to understand the logic and also triggered another question was
uh nine window signs which cover more than 25% of the window or which obstruct the middle third of the window or door door door such that eyele view through the window is blocked and it posed two questions for me. One is
what's the difference between a sign and an advertising? And two, why why does it matter that it's like I'm an advertising agency. I want you all the name of the agency across the entire
door. Like why can't I have that there? It's visually not please. It's Yeah, it it detracts from the look of a community to have big if we had all of our windows covered cuz if you could do it then everybody could do it and it's consistent
that you wouldn't want to cover your windows completely. Yeah. But what's the difference between that and a painted solid door with the name of the entity written across the middle third. And so you were asking if you are you saying you want a sign
across like the entire front of your building? No, a door. Yeah, it says a window or door. This more than 25% of the window or which obstruct the middle third of the window or door
that eye level view through the window is blocked. I I understand what you're saying and I'm trying to understand what this is saying. And so if I have the name of my business through the middle third of a glass door for example
and it's blocking view through at eye level then I'm in that's prohibited. Are you talking about the signs erected to obstruct any door? Uh X is that the one? Uh 10 nine I guess. Can I can I jump in here? Um
I we're never going to find a perfect balance. No, I'm trying to understand what this is actually saying. No, I'm sorry. But okay. Okay, I'll I'll let you go, but then I sort of want to it's I mean it's it's it's aesthetics, you know. I mean, you could ask the same question. Why don't we allow internally
lit signs? LEDs. Many many other towns allow internally lit signs, but we here in Milton don't, you know, it's aesthetics. So, and a political sign can't be more than 25% of like if I wanted to advocate for Jay and
he had Jay's running for some office, it can't be more than 25% of the window. I can't have a life-size Jay. That Yeah. I mean, no. I mean, you be doing, you know, you're just doing us a favor not having
a life-sized J in your window. Yeah. No, I'm like I'm and I'm not trying to be facicious. I'm trying to I know what you mean. I'm trying to understand that one. It's a weird one. I know. Now that I think about it because if you think of if you think of a t typical political sign, it's of a certain size. If you were to put that in your window, it
would be more than 25% of the window. And so that would be in violation of Yeah. I mean, according to the bylaw as written. Mhm. I mean, this is this that's the original bylaw from 2002. Yeah. So, I'm I'm reading things like this and I feel like I understand what
it means to maintain an aesthetic of a town. Mhm. And this borders on uh overreach from my perspective and I'll defer to experts to to sort of draw a line
somewhere, but I'm trying to make sure that I have an understanding of this clearly to to figure out whether it makes sense or not. Like so I mean the nice thing about this is that we do have the appeal process here. you know, unlike, you know, some of the other bylaws, we have an appeal process here. You can go to the zoting board of
appeals and say, you know, make a really good case for why you want your life J picture. Yeah, but I want to put up a simp simple No, I know what you mean. In my place of business, I shouldn't have to appeal it because it's not a reasonable standard. Yeah. I I'd sort of like to jump in. I
mean, we have multiple pages of very interesting things and we could have lots of very interesting discussions. What I'm going for with this process and I won't be perfect is to sort of minimize the discussions around this
table of you know this sentence this paragraph. I'm hoping that those sorts of conversations can go through Larry and Macy who are the experts on this get you answers. Yeah, it's going to be a balancing act between we want to be thorough so we can present
something thorough to town meeting but you know we could you know we could all find interesting things here that lead to interesting discussions but we have a limited amount of time but that's true how do I get to the point where I pose that question if I don't really understand what the language is here and
so I just got I'm getting clarification on that now and okay I I I think that's a problem with this halfhour artificial time block that some some
articles are require far more time than others as we're discovering and so um you're right it's going to be a balancing act. So that's why I'm not I don't like cutting people off but I'm just trying to encourage that's a
good question. Can you bring that to Larry and Macy? Yeah. get answers and then you know we maybe we could ask because um Larry and you can ask John and I can ask John. I don't think there's ever been a problem w in our bylaws. I don't I I've never
heard of it being an issue for a business owner or a homeowner. I've never had that come up. No. Yeah. I think it's a valid question. I'm just Yeah, but I appreciate Yeah. Yeah. For sure. But I mean, you know, it's it's it's good that you bring that up. That kind
of gives us a taste of what we're going to face at town meeting, you know. Absolutely. We don't want kind of the goal here. We don't want to just all vote yes around here and then get blindsided at town meeting. So that's absolutely I think we're probably going to have a lot of discussions. I guess I would open it up to the rest of the group and encourage sort of what
I said at the beginning. Can you raise questions even if there aren't going to be answers to those questions? What questions are you going to have such that if Larry and Macy and Miss Hall come back in 3 weeks, we've all got the answers to all of our questions. So, do
are there other questions that could be raised can be raised now can be raised later with emails to Larry and Macy? Miss Hall, I just was going to add one thing too. I didn't mention that Kathleen O'Donnell did come to one of our meetings when we were discussing this and she did think
that this is the proper process for the appeals and now she's currently the chair of the ZBA. So she thought this this is would be proper procedure and I also talked to Katie Conlin who was very involved with this as a select board member and she also felt that this was a a better process.
Okay. Yeah. 100% I agree personally. But yeah, and the only thing that's difficult about this whole article for me, it's really dense and so trying to figure out
what does it mean in practice and and that's we can't I don't know if it's the perfect solution, but that's why I wanted two people to really dive into it. We've got one of our lawyers in it and our sign expert. They're diving into this super deep
and uh and I'm that's not to discourage anyone else from diving into it, but uh I'll have another discussion with Macy about it. I haven't actually talked to her about it, but Okay. Yeah, going over it with a lawyer would be a good idea. Yeah, clearly. I mean, Miss Hall said there are some, you know, scriveners errors to check
and, you know, and the other thing is we also um are circulating copy with the building department because it is it is sort of a dance between the planning board, the planning department um and the building department and and the sign review
committee and how they work together very well with this. Um but one of the things that we've also um we've wanted to review is there's um towards the end an insurance policy requirement for a
liability um just above 13 that last paragraph. We're not sure. We wanted to get legal counsel's opinion on that. Okay. So that was something that we're waiting for while we kept it in there but we're waiting to hear on that. Um the liability insurance um Macy may want to weigh in on that. We
also just um had a discussion on keeping the bed and breakfast um under special provisions 13. We thought we're putting it in. We do not allow currently bed and breakfast in Milton, but should we ever decide as a town that we would want one,
it's the language would be in there and we wouldn't have to go back to town meeting for it. So, is there a No, that's a different subject. I was going to ask if I mean, are you guys working on the on the short-term rental? Uh, in Airbnb, we actually it's
prohibited currently in um in our uh current zoning that we don't don't allow short-term rentals, anything less than 30 days. Yeah, I I I always hate to cut off conversation, but it's No, that's fine. So, yes. So, we we we we're thinking about it, but we're we don't think it's
necessary. So, Okay. So on this article, are there other questions, concerns? Again, I'm I'm sort of hoping questions come up even if answers aren't coming back right now. More questions, more concerns people would like to raise to Barry or Miss
Hall. If not, I encourage people to take a look at it. Sort of, you know, we'll meet and talk about this again. And I'm not saying we're not allowed to have questions next time we meet, but it's a lot better if we get the questions out between now and then. questions, answers, and we are ready to go next
time we meet, which will probably be three weeks from now. Yeah. So, Jay, if we do have questions, should we just email it directly? Yes. Yeah, you can email me directly to any of the experts. That's Yes. Yes. Email them directly. Feel free to copy me, but if you don't want to,
that's fine, too. So, just out of curiosity, is Milton Fuel sign is that in or out of compliance? Milton Fuel, which one is that? the gas station near Oland Rink, right? Right now it's it's lit. The one by the
cleaners and the fruit center. Oh, Eastman. Um that was a very controversial sign. So there's a there's a backstory. It was that was an appeal um that was on appeal. was denied, I believe, and the neighbors were really upset about it,
but there was some they came together and there was some negotiation um and it ultimately was allowed and so it's a lit sign, backlit sign, but that would be prohibited without an appeal by this language. Is that correct?
That's right. Okay. Internally lit. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Most of the gas stations go through that appeal process. Okay. Yeah. Brian, I have a question. thinking pre first subject was climate control. Um, is there any way to put any lighting on
the signs that they have to be LED or Yeah, that's a good that's a good point. It's like a takeaway. Yeah. Yeah, that's a good one. Yeah. Okay. It's a good It's a good suggestion.
Yeah. rather than a specific technology. I'd recommend energy efficient if you wanted to go down there. Oh yeah, good point. LED may be here for another month. Who knows? Okay. Uh I don't know if there's more discussion about the sign review bylaw.
That takes us to the end of our agenda. I said other fall town meeting articles. Thinking of some of these dropped off. We might have other things to talk about, but no. So that brings us to the end of the agenda. So next week is Labor Day. The week after that is going to be our summit where we're we'll sort of get
oriented. Um I'll be planning that over the next two weeks. Nothing like a deadline to make you make things happen. I think it's going to be in the new new old fire station, old new fire station. Oh, cool. Um conference room just a change of pace. Feels like we're on a on a
vacation. So that'll be the Monday and Tuesday following Labor Day. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Aside from that, I believe it's time to entertain a motion to adjourn. Yes. One question. Can you send out a schedule for the rest of the year, you
think, on that? Sounds like an ambitious project. Yes. So, kind of can plan. Yeah. Well, didn't we say every other we were like holiday issues or anything? I don't know. I don't know. And I've already said in thank in September, we're going to have to break that
just through the end of October because that's when the town meeting is, right? Late October. Yeah. Yeah. sketched out a uh a plan through at least the end of September last week. And it's pretty much we take off Labor Day and then the next three weeks, but yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Um feel free to remind me if you don't see that in a couple of days, which you probably won't. Is this summit a potluck? I was that that's a good qu um not as a meal, but maybe as snacks. I'll just put that out there for you.
Does it have to be telev? No, it doesn't. It doesn't have to be. Okay. No. That way we can ask all the dumb questions we have. Yeah, I know. It's an open meeting. Anyone can walk by and watch us ask dumb questions. Yeah. Okay. So, do I have a motion to
adjurnn? Uh, Lee Michael, are we saying ajourn? Yeah. Okay. Second. Great. Good night. All right. Thank you. [Music]