Speaker 1: Wednesday, July 9th meeting of the Natick Select Board. Tonight's meeting is being broadcast on Pegasus and being recorded for future viewing. And it is also a you are also, you can also access the meeting via Zoom, the zoom link at the top of the agenda. At this time, I'd like to ask members of the board to stand and or members who are here in the room to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance and observe a moment of silence, Speaker 2: Pledge of Allegiance Speaker 3: To the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic stands the nation under God in
the and Justice for all. Speaker 1: Thank you. The first item on our agenda is to a vote to approve and confirm the sale of $18,555,000 of General Operation Municipal Purpose Loan for 2025 bonds. And sign the related closing papers. Mr. Townsend. Speaker 4: Thank you Madam Chair, members of the board. John Townsend, deputy Town Administrator and the Director of Finance. Yes. We're here today to approve the issuance of $18,555,000
with municipal bonds. The first item of business is we will have a vote that basically goes through an approves bonds and then we will go through each of the actual documents and have them set up for you to sign. Now, I think most of you have gone through this process previously. There hasn't been any changes with regards to the formatting on things. Now I'm gonna run through things fairly quickly. If you have any questions, please make sure you ask me or if later on you still have questions about things, just let me know. Happy to sit, either myself or Gloria will be happy to sit down with you and go through it.
So we'd like to start off with a vote, which would be part of your packet. So the vote basically is to approve the sale of the 18,000,555 thou hundred thousand dollars in in bonds to Fidelity capital markets. The price on the bond's actually 19 million 875 8 870 8 million thousand 593909 cents, which I payable from July 15th of the years. And the following, the go through, you have the actual rates here with regards to the interest rates there
and the year in which they're, they're due further with part of the vote is that you'll be approving the marketing, the OS and the POS, which are these particular documents that we send out to the market to for p potential buyers to do. So you're gonna be approving those. Likewise, you're going to be authorizing the treasurer, the town clerk, as well as yourselves to exit ex to execute the various documents that you're gonna be having to sign this evening.
So that basically is what is in the vote. If you have any questions, happy to answer them. We do need to have a majority for this particular item. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Townsend. Are there any questions or comments from the board? Mr. Erickson? Speaker 5: The only, just not necessarily comment, but the full vote is available in the agenda online, so anybody from the poll can certainly read through the entire vote as noted by, by John Speaker 1: Ms. Slager. Speaker 6: Thank you. Do we have a copy of the notice of sale in the preliminary official statement
or the marketing statements anywhere? I mean, I know that's not part of the packet. Speaker 4: Yeah, that, that's actually on our website. Correct? Speaker 7: It should be on the copy trade Speaker 8: Website. Speaker 4: So we can get you the link on that since you probably don't frequent that particular website, but the, at least the, the preliminary statements will be up there. We also have the final copies downstairs if you want one. Speaker 6: I would appreciate it. Yeah. Speaker 1: Sorry Mr. Mr. Evans, Speaker 9: Just a quick one. I know it's probably a nominal amount, but I'm just curious what the marketing cost of it.
Speaker 4: So, so one of the documents that you are gonna sign sort of goes through all that. So I'll just quickly go through that one. It's the tax certificate document, which you can tell because that's the thickest one you're gonna sign. But it does go over, first of all, certifying the fact that we are using this money strictly for government purposes, hence the reason why they are tax exempt bonds. But the breakdown on the structure of the sale is first of all, new money projects, $12,452,058 payment of refunded notes. This is refunding of the ban
that we did last year at this time. Yeah. For $7,288,265, the issuance cost on this is $136,475 48 cents. Yes, it is expensive to borrow money. And then finally the last piece of that is there is an underwriter discount of $58,661 and 86 cents. Now those both the underwriters discount as well as the expenses of all of this come from the premium premium that is paid by the underwriter to the town to,
to issue the bonds. Speaker 10: Okay, Speaker 9: Thank you. Speaker 1: Are there any other questions or comments from members of the board? Speaker 10: We approval Speaker 1: Mr. Sidney, could you just read that second paragraph where it says The way we voted Speaker 10: Move that the sale of the 18,555,000 general obligation municipal purpose loan of 2025 bonds of the town dated July 23rd, 2025, the bonds to Fidelity capital Markets a division of financial services LLC at the price of $19,878,593 and 99 cents
and accrued interest, if any is hereby approved and confirmed the bond shall be payable on June July 15th of the years and in the principal amounts and bear interest in the respective rates as follows. Do you Speaker 1: As shown in the the attachment on the agenda Speaker 10: And as noted in the attachment and there are some further voted as also noted in the attachment. Speaker 1: Thank you. Moved by Mr. Sidney. Seconded by Mr. Evans. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes 5 0 0. Speaker 4: Thank you Madam Chair. So just quickly run through the other documents that you're gonna be signing.
Just to finish up on the tax certificate. I sort of ran through what the numbers were there also in signing that you're, you are certifying that we will in the town yourselves will comply with all tax regulations, reporting requirements and record retention obligations. And that we are aware of course, that we do need to use these for governmental purposes. So that's the tax certification on documents that you'll be signing. The next one is signature, no litigation and official statement certificate. This certifies by the board as well as the treasurer that they have signed the bonds and the projects are listed are are actual bonds.
And that also contains a listing of all the various projects that were issuing bonds for. They certify that your signatures are real. You follow the old meeting laws and there's been no changes to your bylaw bylaws that would affect these particular bond issue. And then the treasurer certifies, there's no material rep misrepresentations in the documents within the debt where within the debt limit there's no adverse changes to the town's financial positions. And all of you have no financial interest in any of the projects that we are funding with these bonds. Then we find we file sign,
and actually this is the treasure signs, the IRS form 80 38 G, which basically notifies the IRS that we are issuing bonds. And then finally you'll find you'll be signing the continuing disclosure certification. It certifies the town will file its annual report with the MSRB, the municipal Security re rule rulemaking bond rulemaking board, which is part of the SEC, which basically oversees municipal bonds. And then also regarding the financial stability of the town that we do have the ability to pay these back. So that about wraps it up.
Have any other questions, happy to answer them. Otherwise we'll get started with passing the documentation around for you. Speaker 1: Any other questions or comments from members of the board? I commence signing. Speaker 10: We set up this table for you, John, so you can lay the stuff out. You can Speaker 3: Lay it out while I'll do the whole Speaker 1: Yes around. That'd be great. Thank you. Speaker 3: Way. Yeah, I was wondering that, Speaker 1: Let's take a brief recess while we sign documents. Speaker 10: No, Chris Speaker 1: Back. Speaker 3: You can always use hand signals for that. Yeah, Speaker 1: I don't wanna see that. Mr. Evans. We are going to announce the opening
of the warrant 2025 fall annual Town meeting Warrant. Ms. Clerk, Speaker 11: The elect board hereby gives public notice of its intention to call the 2025 fall annual town meeting on Tuesday, October 21st, 2025 at Kennedy Middle School at 7:30 PM All articles requested for inclusion in the warrant for the 2025 fall annual town meeting must be received. And the office of the select board, Natick Town Hall 13 East Central Street, Natick, Massachusetts by 5:00 PM on Thursday,
August 21st, 2025. The select board encourages petitioners and others submitting articles to provide such materials electronically to select board@natickma.org by such date and time. If submitting through this format, petitioners are advised to request a read receipt to verify proper and timely receipt by the select Board's office. The select board further encourages that articles be submitted in narrative format only and that maps and other supplementary material not be included as part of the warrant article.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you Madam Clerk. Next up is the, on our agenda is public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included on tonight's agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There will be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting due to the requirements of open meeting law. This section of the agenda is limited to 10 minutes and any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to three minutes. Is there anyone in the room who wishes to address the board during this part of the agenda? Yes ma'am. When you come to the podium,
just make sure the light, the green light is on, that the microphone is on. And if you could just state your name. Okay. For the record? Speaker 12: Yeah, it's on. Okay. So my name is Laura Forker. I'm a 31 year resident of Natick. And I have, well a couple of issues. The first is just to thank you for putting waste cans on Coolidge Field that you can put anything into. 'cause the last time I came up to the podium I was, I stated that the cans that were there were for recyclables only. And then the other cans said specifically no dog poop on it.
And I'm assuming that the cans that are there now are for any kind of trash. So I appreciate that. 'cause I walk my dog behind the hospital and that's a, a favorite walking route. The other thing I would like to talk about are crosswalks. I have two requests. One is to put safe safety lights, flashing lights at the crosswalk in front of family farms. I have had several experiences when walking my dog where I can only guess the traffic doesn't see me. And I, the, well the traffic from northbound doesn't see me.
So I'm in the middle of the crosswalk and cars are continuing to drive right over the crosswalk right in front of me as I'm waiting there for, you know, a chance to get across to the other side of the street. It's happened several times. So I, you know, I think it's an issue. The other area that I would like to have the crosswalk restored for some reason I was taken out is across South Maine at the intersection with Cross Street. And I don't know why it was removed, but it was one that I did use. And so, I mean now there's a fairly long distance that you have to walk to either go,
you know, down to Walcott. So that would be going past where I live or to go up to Cottage Street where that intersection is. So if I would be able to go across a crosswalk there, it would be a straight line for me instead of having to do triangular things. So those are my two requests. So there's two crosswalks, one with flashing lights and one doesn't need flashing lights, but just paint it back to where it was. Thank Speaker 1: You. Thank you Ms. Forker. What we'll do with this information is forward it to the Safety committee and I'll also give them your name
and email address so they can let you know when they will be discussing this. Okay. And then we act on the recommendations from the safety committee. But I appreciate you bringing it to our attention. Speaker 12: Okay. Yeah, I mean I'm, I know I'm definitely not the only walker in my neighborhood. I know there are some elderly people who don't drive and, you know, use these crosswalks. So Speaker 1: I also wanna take the opportunity to publicly thank you for putting your name forward to serve on the council and aging deeply. Appreciate it. Thank Speaker 12: You. Speaker 1: Is there anyone else in the room who wishes to address the board under public speak? Is there anyone online who wishes to address the board at this time? Thank you. Seeing none.
We'll move on to water and sewer abatements in the discussion and decision part of the agenda. Mr. Marshall, Speaker 13: Thank you. There are two water and sewer abatement items in front of the board this evening. Both of those had come to administration based on the materials provided and what was identified. Those were denied. So they're in front of the board this evening for appeal. Do you wanna take them in order Speaker 1: Please? Speaker 13: So the first appeal request is from
Helena Fonseca and that is 30 Speed Street and Natick. Speaker 8: So Speaker 13: If you wanna come to the podium And I can just give a high level and then Ms. FCA can provide any additional detail. But basically there was a, a spike in usage. It was the property based on what we received was vacant for about five months. There was some family that was staying in there for a period of time and then some ancillary use with washing machine and some of the other items, the
abatement came to administration. We took a look at it. There was no identified issue, there wasn't anything that was necessarily broken that needed a repair or a fix. The water and sewer department came out to take a look at the meter and confirmed that that was operating as, as it should be. So there was nothing necessarily identified. So in that case it's a instant denial from administration. So Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Marshall.
Let me scoot. Ms. Fca, if you could talk to us a little bit about your reasons for the appeal. We do have the application and your letter. Speaker 14: Okay. So you read the letter? Yes, yes ma'am. Yeah, my name is Helena. Thank you for giving me the platform tonight to just discuss this bill. It is over $4,000 and it's, I've been very stressful with this bill. The property was vacant and as a matter of fact, when I got the text for this bill, I called the town immediately 'cause I thought something was wrong. There was a typo or some sort of error.
I've been, you know, I owned a building for 26 years and I never seen anything like it. So I did, my daughter was there 'cause she had bought a place, hers was being fixed, whatever. So she was in the property for about two months and there was one toilet that had issue that was leaking. And you know, her husband said that he had fixed it after this. I mean, I've been fighting back and forth. I was gone away and then came back and did the whole letter and the whole appeal. And it's been rejected, but I don't know what to do
and I have no clue where the water came from. I did have plumbers going there and I changed all the flush. There was one toilet that the guy said, you know, sometimes we getting caught when you flush. And he said, you know, perhaps somebody, you know, it got caught and 'cause I, I had it on, Beth was shown the, the property for a little while, so maybe somebody flushed and then it got caught and, but I, I doubt it. There was no water when the town came and we went
and I, I told him, you know, just come to the house and look everywhere. There's, there's no, there's nothing. I didn't fix anything until, you know, when I got declined. And I, I, you know, and then they said that it, I don't know where the water is, seriously. I don't know. And I didn't fix anything and all of a sudden the problem was fixed. So I have no clue. I have no clue. Speaker 1: Have you received a subsequent bill to this? Speaker 14: Yes, I've been, and I have three bills here. I have the ones prior to which
I got one here. This was the bill from nine six was only $300 and there was a person living there. And then I got one in December for 1 74. They said that the, the water leak was in December or January. They can't pinpoint exactly what month. And then in three 12 that went a spike to $4,136 and 81 cents. So that's absurd. And then I got another bill, I have one here for June 2nd and it's 1 55.
Speaker 1: So sometime between this bill and June 2nd, whatever it was that was wrong, either self-corrected or, Speaker 14: Yes, yes. Pretty much Speaker 1: Members of the board questions, Speaker 14: We've been there twice. The town came in and looked at the, at first they did the meter outside and then I, I came back 'cause I was overseas, I came back and then we went in and they checked the wame inside Speaker 1: Ms. Slager. And then Ms. Pope, Speaker 6: Thank you. I asked Mr. Marshall for some additional detail today and he said that it, it looks like the June bill was normal,
as was everything for this year. So Speaker 14: I have no clue. Yeah, I have no clue. Speaker 11: So I, I guess my question is, did the problem correct itself? Pretty much. Did anybody know that Speaker 14: If like, pretty much, Speaker 11: That's interesting. Pretty Speaker 14: Much. Okay. I went back and what the plumber said, 'cause and even he said even if it was a leak from the toilet, it wouldn't have flushed $4,000 in a month. So I have no clue. Speaker 13: Thank you. And if I could Yeah, go ahead. A running toilet is basically, for lack of a better term,
it's an open, it's an open, open pipe in a, in a running water. So that's draining. You know, it's coming from the, coming from the main, going into the toilet and then draining into the sewer system. So, you know, it, it might not seem like a lot, but if you have a running toilet, it can certainly add up. And especially if it's running for a long period of time, that's not uncommon for other issues that have been brought forward in years past. So, Speaker 14: But what he said when we went there, there was nothing running.
And then I said, I want you to check every toilet, keep flushing and flushing. And he had one of 'em, he said, you know, it's one woman was getting caught, whatever. So I don't know if that, I just, I can't afford to pay $4,000 in water. Yeah, Speaker 1: I understand. Mr. Evans. Speaker 9: Yeah. Just following up on Mr. Marshall's point, Speaker 8: I, Speaker 9: It is surprisingly large the amount of water that a open or a to a toilet tank that is not properly closing puts out.
'cause I, I had a problem like that in my house and I, I had the water smart or actually my 360 now. So that flagged it. And I noticed, you know, that there was a prodigious amount going from one day to the next. So I took a walk around, looked at the, the various or the couple of toilets and I, I could hear the, the one that was running pretty well and if it's stuck in an off, or I'll call it an on position, it's wide open
and it's a tube like this big, it will get a prodigious amount of water out in it. So a lot of them have metal chains to that. And if you don't have enough slack in them, it can not close all the way. So for people at home, as well as just, if you hear it running and you know, you go back in a couple hours and it's still running, that's likely what's happening that it's not closing fully. And you need to Speaker 14: I know, but have someone Speaker 9: Look at it. Speaker 14: But I, I wasn't there, I wasn't aware of it.
That's, I understand. And I'm thinking, you know, was there any way that the town, I mean if you see a, a property running Yeah. Water, Speaker 9: I understand you Speaker 14: Weren't there. I I, I don't know what, what else to say. I, I did see it, I would've taken care of it. Speaker 9: No, I understand. And that's, that's more for people out there not to run into this than Speaker 14: I appreciate. I appreciate your Speaker 9: What I, what I, the last question that I wanted to ask is, is the property occupied now? Yes. Speaker 14: Okay. Yes. Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you. Speaker 14: Thank you. I appreciate any Mr. Speaker 1: Sidney. Speaker 10: Yeah, let's take a moment to plug my 360,
the current version reports over usage. If you've got one of the modern meters, it reports it on a daily basis, I highly recommend you sign up for it because even if somebody else is living there and they don't notice, you can get alerted. And this is for the rest of the public as well. If you don't notice that a toilet is running and you've got my 360, you can get an alert that says, Hey, you use too much, you're using more water than usual and you can go find out what's going on. Speaker 14: I appreciate that feedback. I look in, I will definitely look into it Speaker 9: And it's free.
Speaker 14: It's free, free. Oh, that's even better. True. Speaker 9: Favorite four letter work, Speaker 1: Ms. Fca, I wanted to know if you, when were you not occupying the home? What dates? Speaker 14: I had someone left there August 31st and then my daughter was there from When did she leave? Till November? Yeah, the end of November. Speaker 1: So nobody was living in the house on January 1st? No. So looking at a consumption history report on that property going back to 2009,
the spike in units 159 units in, in that one day. That's pretty much the, the sum of where the loss is. That's the $1,124. And that was an actual reading on January 1st, 2025. So Speaker 14: Yeah, they left, they left November 'cause they moved into their place in November and then they would, because the house was being renovated and they, they did some laundries, they kept coming back 'cause they were on Virginia Road and they kept coming back and doing laundry. Speaker 1: They would've had to do a ton of laundry on that one day
Speaker 14: Day. I know, that's what I'm saying. It, it was Speaker 1: Just absurd like laundry for all of Speaker 14: Us. It was just absurd that, and they were, they were coming in and out. So if there was something running, if there was water, you know, they would've notified or they would've hear it or seen it. Speaker 1: If you didn't have a subsequent bill that showed that you were down to regular usage, I would have con, I would have some concern about an abatement because we would be in the process of abating every bill going forward until the problem was resolved. But it looks like based on this, your consumption usage,
which was ga on or about the January 1st, 2025, that's where the big hit was. And the fact that it's now resolved to a regular water bill, I'm willing to, to entertain an abatement of sorts, Mr. Erickson. I mean, not Erickson. Mr. Bruce, Speaker 9: You got a demotion to Mr. Bruce. Speaker 1: Sorry, Mr. Bruce. Speaker 9: I would move to offer an AB abatement in the amount of $2,277 and 22 cents. Second, Speaker 1: We have a motion and a second discussion Mr. Evans?
Speaker 9: Yeah, I just wanted to explain actually, Mr. Marshall, if you do a better job of explaining than I won't ever do. Speaker 13: So just for the public's knowledge, the number that Mr. Evans Ref Evans referenced, if this was an abatement that administration could have approved, you know, based on the criteria, what we will typically do is we'll do a calculation. We'll look back at the prior quarters during the same period. So we'll do a three year look back
and we'll see what the usage was during that time. We'll look at the highest use and say, okay, that's, that's what it would be. We'll calculate that and anything in addition will get rolled down to the lowest tier. And basically you're still paying for the water, but you're not paying at the higher tier. Typically when water goes through, the more you consume, the higher it costs you. So by reducing it down to the lower tier, you're still paying for the water that went through the system, but you're getting a significant
reduction in, in what the cost would be. Recognizing that you're typically not using that volume at that highest tier. So that's where the, that's where that number from Mr. Evans Speaker 14: Came to. So what was my highest tier? I never used 4,000. I you debating you. Speaker 13: So what what basically what happens is we calculate what the usage is at your highest, highest usage during that period, which was 35 units. But then there's a remaining amount of units out of the 159
that were used, which is 124. That all gets reduced down to the lowest tier. You still have to pay for it, but it's at the lowest tier, which is less than what it would be. So, you Speaker 10: Know, when he talks about tiers, it's a rate tier. So you pay a certain amount per gallon, say, I'm not sure what the unit is, but you pay a certain amount and if you use too much water, you pay more for the next, whatever that unit is. And by reducing the Speaker 14: Highest whatever Yeah, Speaker 10: By reducing it to the lower rate tier,
you're getting an abatement paying for the water at the, at the least expensive rate. Speaker 14: But you wouldn't go, I mean as far as a dollar amount, I'm still responsible for $2,000. Roughly. Speaker 1: Yes. Let's look, Speaker 14: Do you think you can go a little higher on that? I just thought I, I think that's still high for me. Speaker 6: So Mr. Marshall, when you say includes the ready to serve fee, is that the new rates or the old rates? Speaker 13: That would be the old rates that was based on the, what was billed during that period of time.
Speaker 1: I'm just doing math here. So Yeah, please entertain my, I mean just patient with my slowness. So that would leave a bill of approximately $1,858. Would you have Correct. It is a very difficult decision for us because what we're essentially doing is, even though you're paying for the water, we're putting the displacement of that, including the sewer charges onto the other rate payers. And I think I'd be When did you enroll in the Natick? My 360 program. Speaker 14: When did I Speaker 1: Enroll in the Natick? My 360 plan. Your application says that you're enrolled.
Speaker 14: Yeah, I was, I tried to go back in there. I couldn't because it, way back I had, I had a burst and I did, I I enrolled but I couldn't log back on. I forgot my password. I know that I'm in there, but I never used it. I Speaker 1: But you would've automatically gotten a notice saying that your usage was over? Speaker 14: No, no, no. I never used, no, I don't think that they had that feature. Speaker 1: No, they, they do. I I get one at least once a Speaker 14: Week. So when did, because I know this was way back when I was, there was another build
and it was when my neighbors, they were working on Speed Street and then I had to give her the water and then that, that quarter the water went up and I thought that it was the town, it was because of the marinas using my water. And that was, and I was fighting with the water. I never pursued anything else. And I think it was like $600 water bill or some large amount. And that's when the town said, oh, you can use this to see. But I didn't know that there was a Yeah, Speaker 1: It will alert you. Speaker 14: No, I, I guess I wasn't using it into full capacity.
All I could see was the wa the, the usage of the water. If you Speaker 1: Logged Speaker 14: In. If I logged, yeah. Yeah. But I, you know, I did put it there 'cause I remember that it was on my computer that I had it sounds, Speaker 10: Sounds like she was signed up for water smart and Speaker 14: Oh, maybe it was a water smart, I don't Speaker 1: Know, maybe I got it. And we since migrated to 360. Speaker 14: Okay. And yeah, maybe it wasn't a 360. Speaker 1: So I strongly suggest you enroll in my 360. So it does send you an alert. I can send your tenant an alert. It can send you an alert. It does it by text, email, however you choose. You set the threshold.
So I I I have a very low threshold and I tend to get alerts quite frequently. Yeah. Members of the board. Speaker 11: Well it seems like right now we are the, the next question is whether or not we can give a a deeper abatement, like a, a deeper, I mean it sounds like a, Speaker 1: I mean it's within our power to abate the entire bill. We have that as the water and sewer commissioners. That's something it is within our scope of powers. The question is, on what basis do we make the abatement to ensure fairness to all rate payers? Right.
Speaker 10: And chair? Speaker 1: Yes, Mr. Sidney. Speaker 10: I just wanna point out that we generally follow administration's guidance on these abatements and that being seeming the fairest to all the rate payers. Other, other abatements that we've issued that were a bill of this size, were abated about the same. And those people were really grateful to, to have that abatement. You know, we're already in special case territory where we're giving an abatement for usage. I don't want to make, I I'm disinclined personally
to make it a double special case. Speaker 14: I am grateful. I like to point out whatever, you know, you're willing to do. Speaker 1: Mr. Evans, Speaker 9: Without, without going into Lori's detail are on your financial situation, how much of a hardship is this bill? Speaker 14: It's a lot. Speaker 9: It's a lot. Not the 4,000, but with the 1800, Speaker 14: It's the lot for me to pay for. Speaker 9: Are you retired or on fixed income or anything like that? Speaker 14: I'm, I am working but I don't make this.
Speaker 9: All right. Okay. Speaker 1: Is this a rental property? Speaker 14: I'll, yeah, I'm gonna be renting it. Speaker 1: Okay. Any other questions for members of the board or comments? Mr. Erickson? Speaker 5: I'll just note this is, I mean we always try to give the most consistent recommendations to the select board for consideration. And the approach that, that Mr. Marshall put together is very consistent with how we've done these in the past, especially with the updated rate policy, the updated abatement policy, which we've adjusted about three times the last five years because of getting these types of information to try
to provide the most fair and balanced approach to these re to these requests for the board's information. An abatement of more than 50% on a bill is fairly significant just in its own right as a percentage. But it is really up to the board's discretion if you choose to go above and beyond. I mean, we're just providing it as recommendations or as a, as a guiding recommendation. But it's really up to the board's discretion. Speaker 1: Mr. Erickson, one of the requests from the applicant was, is it possible to, to stall is the wrong word, but cease interest on this amount if, if she would make payments Speaker 9: Prefer?
Speaker 5: No, unfortunately we don't have that, that ability. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 13: Un under mass general law, we can't do anything related to interest on a tax bill on a water bill. Unfortunately we can't pause. We encourage when there are bills we encourage everyone to pay them so that they don't have to pay the interest and then go through the process. Speaker 14: Yeah, I would've paid if I had that cash $4,000 to pay. What's the current interest? Nothing on that yet. Speaker 1: Is there any member of the board that wants to continue this to a future?
Is there more, is there any member of the board that needs more information that you do not have at your fingertips tonight in order to make a decision? Looks like No. Speaker 14: No. No. Speaker 1: Okay. We have a motion and a second. The motion is for a $2,277 and 22 cents abatement. Are there any other motions? I'll take a vote. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nope. Mr. Marshall will be in touch with you about how to, how the bill is changed.
Speaker 13: Yeah. Tomorrow someone from the office will reach out to you will notify the treasurer collector's office of the abatement that the board has approved and we'll be in touch tomorrow. Speaker 14: Alright. I appreciate everything. Thank you so much. Speaker 1: Sorry we couldn't do more, but thank you. No, that's okay. Speaker 14: I'm grateful. Speaker 1: The next water and sewer abatement is the estate of Mona Thaler 45 Charles Street. Speaker 13: And just to provide a little bit of context, again, this was a, certainly an unfortunate situation. I know that they've, the,
I know the board has all probably looked at the information on this request. This was related to, by all likelihood, something that was left on and running again in that instance because there was nothing that necessarily failed or nothing that broke. That's typically an instant denial from administration in that case, believe we encourage them to file, file the appeal, which is why they're in front of you this evening. I'm happy to let them share some additional information. Speaker 15: So, hi, I am Kira Marette
and this is my mom's property. She got ill in January and hadn't been feeling well. She passed away in early March. So in cleaning out all of her things and going through her mail, I don't remember if we had, if the bill had already been there. The Speaker 16: Bill arrived? Speaker 15: Yeah, Speaker 16: The bill arrived pretty much the day after, a couple of days after she passed away. Her normal bill is around $125.
This was about a $4,400 bill. I called the Department of Public Works, they told me that it was right on the meter and that it was correct, that I should look around the house and just see what was leaking. So I looked around the inside of the house and there was nothing in the outside of the house. I tightened the speed and that did turn, and I assume that was resolved, resolved the issue. But the bill period was through February. And so by the time that this was resolved, another bill had had been received now to the tune
of $9,000 of water owed. And that's the amount we're asking for the abatement on. Speaker 1: I just see the one bill here dated Speaker 16: You have the more recent, do you have the most recent bill? Speaker 1: I have nothing. The most recent bill we have is, and the only bill we have is three March 6th. And it looks like it's for the 4,000 that was due to a reading on or about November 1st of last year when there were 151 units. But it doesn't look like there's looking at the, what is this called? The consumption history report.
Speaker 16: Okay. I, the date that I resolved this was about April 17th. So I do assume that there will be another two months of water running. Probably that bill will arrive any day now. Did we, Speaker 15: Do you, do you know what it is, Mr. Marshall? The, Speaker 13: I actually don't have that, so I, I apologize. Did, was it submitted into the office? Speaker 16: I don't, I don't remember where I saw that. Maybe it was at the front desk and I just spoke to someone and maybe that's how I got that number in my head
because you're right, I don't have a paper bill for that amount either. Okay. But I do, I do predict that from February until April, that same amount of consumption will be used. Speaker 5: Yeah. The, the request here is dated four 14. So it sounds like you've maybe learned of this after the four 14 date that you submitted the Oh, so maybe initial abatement request. Yeah. So Speaker 16: Then maybe it was the 14th, not the 18th. Speaker 5: Yep. I'm just the, just putting the timeline together sounds like there might be an additional request coming. So it was really the board's discretion. Do you wanna handle this one now or do you wanna wait until that one comes in and handle
Speaker 10: Altogether? Speaker 1: That means interest accrues and actually, yep. Yeah, I, Speaker 10: Yeah, that's what I was about to say. Speaker 15: Yeah, we're just, we're trying to get everything settled, you know, so any taxes we've paid, any, anything like that and we don't want to get, have more interest, we want to get this taken care of. So if there's another bell, I'd rather come back again and deal with it at that time again. Like let's do this and then if there's anything else we can make another appointment. Speaker 13: If, if I could just before the board gets into conversation about what it
chooses to do, if there's an approach that's applied today, maybe the recommendation would be for administration to apply the same approach with the next bill that comes in and potentially save them having to come back. That works Speaker 15: For us. I like Speaker 1: That idea. Ms. Sla, Speaker 6: Thank you. First of all, sorry for your loss. I would encourage you to sign up for the, for the money. Oh yes. My, Speaker 15: This Speaker 6: Was, I that you Speaker 15: Heard, I didn't know about that. The yellow Speaker 16: Letter came the same day as this Speaker 15: Film. Yeah, I'm in like for her house and for our house.
Like that sounds amazing. I was like, if only there could be something that could do this. And it sounds like we're already doing it, so that's Speaker 6: Great. Yeah, it would be, it would be great if you could do that just to verify that, that you actually have fixed the problem. Yeah. Because that's something that you verify it was fixed, Speaker 15: But how did you verify that? Speaker 16: Oh, I, I mean I'm fairly confident 'cause Speaker 6: I turned it. Speaker 15: Oh, but you didn't get another bill to verify it. Speaker 16: I feel like I went to the front Speaker 6: Desk. Okay. All right. So you'll be able to see the day, the, you know, the the daily water usage Yeah.
To see if you still have a problem because just because you turned off one faucet, it doesn't mean that you necessarily have fixed the issue. So, you know, I would really like you to do that very soon. So, Speaker 15: Oh, that sounds good today. Speaker 6: So that we, so that we know that, that the problem has been resolved. Sounds Speaker 15: Right. Thank Speaker 6: You Speaker 10: Madam Chair. Yes. And just to make our lives easier and administration's lives easier, you're gonna be doing another request for an abatement reference this one. Right? So that we can tie it together
because I, I don't know about other people in the office, but I have a short memory and it would be useful to re be reminded that Speaker 15: Absolutely. No, that Speaker 10: Makes perfect sense. Know this is related and, and that we've talked about it. Madam chair, Speaker 16: I have one more point, if I may. The water usage is the $1,100 portion, but the sewer usage is 29 92. If the policy is that this was an outdoor leak, then perhaps that sewer usage wasn't used and that could be reduced in full. So I'll just throw that out there. I don't know how it works, Speaker 1: Mr. Marshall.
Mr. Erickson. Speaker 13: So because this is a main meter and not an irrigation meter, that hasn't been the practice from when we've looked at these and reviewed them in the past. The reduction is to the lowest tier for both water and sewer. And as part of the policy, that has not been the case. So, Speaker 1: And could you clarify the, so the, the sewage rate is not a rate set by us, it's set by the MW MWRA and they charge the town based on our water usage. That's not metered with an irrigation meter. Is that correct?
Speaker 13: It's not, it's not metered at the property level. But there is a collection of the sewage and a a, it's not an exact science, but some type of measuring when it goes into the MWRA sewer line when it leaves the town. So there is some type of measuring that takes place, but it's not the detailed measuring that happens with, I see. The water and sewer or with the water meter. With a water meter. I've actually done a couple of ride alongs and I've had the water
and sewer department take apart a meter. So I can see actually the parts inside and how everything works. But basically as the water go through, it spins and it creates that spinning of the dial. With the sewer it's, it's different because the flow isn't necessarily the same. So it's less accurate from a reading standpoint when it goes into the MWRA system. Speaker 5: Yeah, we, we have several entry points to the MWRA system, but they're all metered at by the MWRA and then we get charged a fee for that. But when we do our billing, since we don't have access to that and we can't get it down to the rate payer level,
we just do all the rates based on how much water's going in it and versus coming out. So our only way to reasonably separate water and sewer charges is when we have an irrigation meter because we know that that's an irrigation meter for the purpose of irrigation. And there's nothing from that meter that in theory is going into the sewer system. Whereas a general water meter, we can't separate out what's going into the sewer system versus not. Speaker 16: But if you do stipulate that the faucet that I turned off was outdoors and that resolved the issue that it should follow that
that sewer use was not consumed by us. Speaker 5: But we don't know if that's all the sewer use or just a portion of the sewer use. Sure. Or and since we don't have a sewer meter at every property, we cannot distinguish that perhaps the difference, the general practice of the board has been you reduce just the overall rates down to the lowest tier should you choose to give an abatement. And we don't try to guess what portion may or may not have been in the sewer versus the not in the sewer. And we typically have not, the board has typically not abated at those types of approaches. But again, it's the board's discretion.
Speaker 1: Comments, questions from the board. This, this most recent water bill should have gone to the address on record. Speaker 10: We're checking that Speaker 1: The first week in June. So if you first week in June, if you don't checking that, if you've not received it, I, we Speaker 10: Must have gotten it. I just don't have it with me. Speaker 1: Okay. Where would they get the duplicate for that bill? The DPW or the treasurer collector's office? Speaker 13: If, if you reach out to the town administrator, select board's office, we'll be, we can get that for you. Great. Speaker 1: Because I think the sooner that you start on that abatement the better. Okay. Mr. Marshall, do you have any recommendations for the board?
Speaker 13: So similar to how the board has looked at abatements in in the past, and again, if this was something that administration could have approved, the process would be to do a, a look back in terms of prior usage in this case, when you look back through prior the, the past three years, during the same quarters, 'cause sometimes the quarters are different if it's, you know, winter versus summer, the high was four units. So when you go through and you do the calculations on that,
the abated amount would be $2,730 and 61 cents. That basically is the calculation of the four units through the tier system, which everything would go at tier one and then all of the excess, the 147 units dropping down to the lowest tier. Speaker 1: And could you repeat that figure Speaker 13: The abatement amount would be 2,730 and 61 cents. Speaker 10: Madam Chair, Speaker 1: Mr. Sidney, Speaker 10: I move that we abate $2,730 and 61 cents. Second
Speaker 1: Moved by Mr. Sidney, seconded by Ms. Pope. Is there any discussion? All in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? I'd like a second motion to instruct administration on following the same methodology for future abatements that come in for this particular property based on for Speaker 10: One, for this time. For one one Speaker 1: Abatement. For one bill. For one bill. Speaker 10: So moved. Second. Speaker 1: Moved by Mr. Sidney, seconded by Mr. Evans or any questions or comments? Speaker 10: Just Speaker 1: A question. Yes. Speaker 10: Does that mean we would not have to hold a hearing on it?
Speaker 1: That is correct. We would be assigning our responsibility, giving guidance to town administration to follow the same methodology we adopted on this abatement. Okay. Speaker 6: Then can I just ask town administration to send us that information so we have it so we know Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 5: Well, but in writing on an email. Thank Speaker 6: You. Speaker 5: Once we have it. But it's only gonna be for the next billing cycle. That's Speaker 1: It. Yes. And, and very sorry for your loss. Yes, yes, very much so. Sorry I've indu it's difficult to deal with all
of these things that are extraneous. Speaker 15: Yes. She was trying to keep up with watering and think made her happy, you know, and then was ill and probably just Speaker 16: Did Speaker 1: You vote on the second one? Not yet. Any other comments or questions? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? 5 0 0? Yes, sir. Thank you. Speaker 15: Thank Speaker 16: You very much. And thanks also to Billy who really helped us out here. Speaker 1: Thank you Billy. Thank you. Okay, next up is the Natick 180 annual update
and an update on the opioid settlement funds. Ms. Catherine Sugarman. Katie, welcome. Speaker 17: Hello there. Thank you for your time this evening. I'm just going to try to connect my computer Speaker 5: Just while Katie gets that going. I'll just frame this a little bit. This is our second year I believe, of doing this regular update or maybe third year for the opioid settlement funds. Speaker 17: Second. Second year actually. Speaker 5: Second. Yeah, so just for those watching from home and, and for the board's memory and we'll, Katie's been running Natick 180 for many years now, and so we want to use this
as an opportunity to sort of do both opportunities to update the board on an annualized basis. But with the, the various federal settlements, the various court cases for the, for the opioid crisis, Natick is receiving and has been receiving funds for the last several years. And on an annualized basis, it's, it, I think it's in our best interest that the board and the public are aware of what the, what happened the prior year and also what the plan is for the next year because it is multi multiple years worth of, of payouts from the, from the settlements. And it's really helping to, to, to do a lot
of good work within the community. And we wanna make sure the board's aware of that, the public's aware of that and the board just generally is supportive and endorses what it is that we're, that data 180 Katie, her team and really the town is trying to do here with this work. So Katie has a brief presentation, I'll pass it back over to her now that she's set up and, and going and just thank you to Katie for all the hard work she's been doing on this. Speaker 17: Absolutely. And thank you for that Speaker 5: And, and your team. Yes, your team is great. Speaker 17: Thank you for acknowledging our team. We do have, in addition to me another full-time and another part-time person who are part of the Natick 180 staff.
So thank you for that introduction, Jamie. So just for kind of reference for the public, for folks who might not be familiar with Natick 180 or myself, as Jamie mentioned, my name is Katie Sugarman. I have worked for the town in a couple of different capacities for more than 11 years now, but Natick 180 in its current format has been around since about 2019. It came out of a combination of a grant funded substance use prevention coalition that existed in town for many years called Natick Together for Youth, as well
as the, the opioid task force, which was commissioned by this body around 2016 or so to look at the opioid crisis that was facing our community and trying to identify some strategies to address our local needs. And around 2019 we merged those two bodies to try to approach the substance use issues in our community across a 180 degree continuum. So from prevention through access to treatment to support for recovery. Hence that 180 name. We also had members of the community who recommended
that name because they liked the idea that 180 that anyone can make a change. So a 180 is always possible. So that's what where that came from. John's gonna advance the slides for me, but, and I can't quite see them, so, so essentially tonight I'm gonna try to give you just a quick reminder or refresher about kind of what the approved uses are for the opioid abatement money is. I'll also just give a quick summary of some of our engagement efforts. Oh, thank you so much Mr. Sydney. That is helpful. And also try to just provide some highlights from this past
fiscal year that just ended. And then talk a little bit about our proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year. So just as a, a quick snapshot, the opioid abatement monies, these were legal, these are legal settlements between municipalities as well as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and various opioid pharmaceutical companies, distributors, as well as pharmacies. And so as these are legal legally binding agreements, there is a very set
and restricted use for these funds that are outlined here on this slide. So we can only use the funds for initiatives that provide treatment to folks with opioid use disorder support folks in treatment and recovery, connect folks to care, implement harm reduction strategies. And when we say harm reduction, we're referring to evidence-based strategies that help reduce the sort of real time health impacts of, of substance use so that we can try to mitigate some of those harms and ultimately help folks get to,
to a healthier place in reducing or ceasing their use of substances. We can use the monies to address the needs of individuals who are involved in the criminal justice system. We can use the funds to support par pregnant and or parenting women and their babies, including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome. And we can also use the funds to prevent the misuse of opioids and implement prevention education. So I will say we've done over the past few years, and I'll, in a few slides, I will talk a little more about some of our community engagement efforts.
But through the course of a strategic planning process that N Gwen 80 undertook from about 2022 to 2023, alongside a number of listening sessions and opportunities for community input, we have prioritized a lot of, most of the opioid abatement funds in spaces around prevention, connecting books to care making more harm reduction services available in our community, and also supporting folks in treatment and recovery. Those are some of the priority areas that came out of those community engagement sessions.
Do you wanna go to the next slide? Speaker 8: I'm trying, Speaker 17: Sorry. That's okay. Pause on. That's all. Well, I can, I can still talk, I can talk about it a little bit while it's coming up. There you go. Thank, thank you. So we, we do have, so Natta 180 is a community coalition, which means that it brings together multiple sectors of the community to look at these issues together and to plan strategies and interventions to address them. The health department is the sort of host or sponsoring Depar municipal department for this. So I, and the team that I'm a part of, we
sit under the health department. However, we have a leadership team for Natick 180 that includes all the different entities that are on this screen. So we've been very intentional in trying to bring a balance of both municipal leadership and community leadership so that we can ensure that we have, you know, really grassroots input from community organizations that see the direct impacts of substance use. So that includes, so Natick, which is a local family advocacy group that came together in, in light of the opioid crisis in our,
I'm sure many folks are well aware of the Purple Flag project that sits in front of the First Congregational church every year. That is coming up again at the end of August. And Srna is the lead sponsor of that, of that display Spark Kindness, which does so much work in our community around mental health, educating parents and caregivers about how to promote healthy development in their, in their youth and teens. We have representatives from Newton Wellesley Hospital as well as Metro West Medical Center. We also have a representative from the Interfaith
Leaders Association. We are in the process of trying to refill the recovery organization role because we had a member of an organization who left their position. So we're in the process of refilling that position. And then we have at large members from the community so that if somebody is interested in this topic but they're not officially affiliated with one of these organizations, they can still be a part of this leadership team. And then of course we have amazing representation from our police chief as well as one of his designees from his department, our fire chief,
a delegate from the superintendent's office, our public health director, as well as liaisons from this board. Thank you Mr. Evans for representing this board for the past couple of years. We have a representative from the Board of Health and also a representative from the school committee. So we've been very intentional in trying to make sure that we are balancing our approach to this work as much as possible. We have far more organizations and everyday community members who are involved in this work than what's on this screen. Just, you know, coming to the top of my mind, I think of folks like the Natick Rotary Club,
which has been incredibly generous when we, I've been contacted by a member of the community who is looking for, say, financial support because of some barriers that they're facing in their early recovery. Before we dip into our opioid abatement monies, we've reached out to s Natick and the Natick Rotary Club because both have funds specifically for that purpose. And so we've helped to both connect folks to those organizations as well as we've used some of our opioid payment monies to replenish the funds that those, that sate specifically
is giving to some of those folks. And that's to try to reduce these barriers, which in early recovery in particular, can really hamper a person's progress. So if they're facing a fine, an outstanding fine, perhaps from when they were actively using or they're trying to get their first month's rent together so they get into sober housing, these kinds of funding opportunities can be a real game changer for them. So I, I think organizations like Natick Rotary Club and store Natick for doing that. We also have rec parks involved in our work and the Natick Center Cultural District has been generous
to us in giving us space at community events to table the Natick. The Tecan recently donated space for us to hold a recovery event in this past spring, which was focused on trying to educate folks on how to use Naloxone or Narcan to save a life. So we are really fortunate in this community to have so many people in organizations who are willing to roll up their slaves and be a part of this process. This, this slide's just highlighting some of the community engagement that I already referenced in terms of who has
provided input into this process over the years. It is a constant and ongoing process though. So we're actually in the pro process right now of planning with a couple of local treatment organizations, a focus group or key stakeholder, st key stakeholder interviews. We're trying to figure out which is going to be easiest for the population we're trying to reach, but for individuals who are still actively using drugs or who are in early recovery, that's a population that can be really challenging to engage, given that we're not direct service providers. And so we're in the process of planning something for August
and we do have, in addition to that steering committee, which meets monthly, we have a couple of subcommittees that meet to plan a lot of our initiatives. So we have over 30 regular participants in those meetings collectively that happen monthly, which gives us kind of a constant flow of input and information. I do wanna acknowledge too that our police and fire departments are very generous in terms of reporting at those monthly steering meetings, updates on how many calls have occurred in the last month in terms
of number of overdoses, as well as updates on other calls, de-identified of course, but giving us updates on other types of drug trends that they're observing, as well as information about some of the general behavioral health DR trends that they're seeing. As I'm sure many of us are well aware, mental health continues to be a challenge for our community. And so we are also tracking now in addition to overdoses, more information about attempted suicides and other behavioral health information like that. Again, all de-identified. So, and this is just a kind of a snapshot of
that 180 degree continuum I was referencing earlier, our abatement monies, which are not the only monies that are funding initiatives that Natick 180 conducts. We also have a small operational budget here within the town, and then we are very frequently grant writing. Jamie probably gets tired of me emailing him to say, do you mind just signing off on an application that we're submitting for a grant? Never get tired of that. But we, we do try to spread our initiatives and again, these are ones that are specifically funded
through the abatement monies. So it's not an, it's not an exhaustive list of all the different initiatives that Natick 180 conducts, but in the space of substance use, youth, youth substance use prevention, we are looking in particular at medication storage and disposal. So if you've been to our table at some of our community events, you might often see us handing out locked pouches, encouraging folks to lock up their prescription medications at home. I will also just encourage the public, if you have a young person, a young adult who might be going off to college in the next month
or two, great idea to get one of those locked pouches from us so that they can safely store any prescription medications they might have while they're in their dorm. We also host, organize, and host a lot of community and educ and parent educational events around topics around mental health youth development and how to talk to your child about substance use. And we do a lot of youth education as well. So over the past two years, we've been going into middle school health classes every trimester at both middle schools to do,
to present prevention education that supplements what the health teachers are already doing. And we now have a model two where we have high schoolers from Natick High School that we have trained who come down and conduct those sessions with us, particularly for eighth graders, so that they can try to help set some healthy norming for those eighth graders so that they can be better prepared going into ninth grade at Natick High School, understanding what to expect, and also practicing some drug refusal skills in some role playing that they do with the students. We also work closely with the schools
around early intervention and early support. The schools have an eye to side diversion program that we have worked with them. Mass General Hospital actually developed the curriculum that is part of that program and we work with the schools to try to help them with updating the program. The Natick Service Council is also a part of that program as well. So students can either participate in that diversion program model through a trained administrator or teacher at the high school who can deliver the curriculum or through a social worker at the Natick Service Council,
who's also been trained in the curriculum. We also work closely with our harm reduction partner over in Framingham, which is program rise out of JRI Health. They help with Naloxone training for our own staff so that we can train members of our community. They've also provided us with information on, we have now, we now have Xylazine and fentanyl test strips that we put in all of our Naloxone kits that go out to the public. Our fire department has also been one of particularly innovative model that they've created in terms of actually providing Suboxone,
which is an A medication assisted recovery medic. It's a medication for recovery on scene in the course of transporting someone to the emergency department. There has been emerging research that really shows that the sooner you can get a person utilizing a medication like Suboxone, the longer term outcomes in term of a, in terms of a person engaging in services is much higher. And as far as I know, we are one of the first, if not the first fire department who has adopted that model. So I give our fire department a lot
of credit in terms of their innovation. And then of course, connection to treatment is really important. The town has funded for a number of years now a co, a referral service interface that many people might be familiar with, which will connect folks to, to out outpatient counseling for mental health challenges. We are also part of a regional hub through the behavioral health partners of Metro West, which will not only connect folks to mental health treatment, but also substance use treatment as well. So we're constantly trying to promote that information. And then we host a number
of different events throughout the year about recovery as a topic, how to access it. Some of the new and interesting supports that are out there that many people might not know about. 12 step groups are what most people think of when they think of recovery, but recovery is much more expansive and comprehensive now than it ever has been before. So we're constantly trying to familiarize folks with some of the different supports that are out there. We've done art therapy, we've done some mindfulness events,
and so constantly just trying to inform the public about some of those opportunities. Just a few highlights from 2025. We did actually in 2024 and early 2025 have our longest stretch of zero fatalities since we started tracking the data around 2016 or 2017. We have unfortunately had one fatality so far this year. So it's still a downward trend from when you look collect collectively over the past several years. But unfortunately, it's not the zero fatalities
that we would obviously prefer. Overall, though, we have seen about a 31% decline in total overdoses, both fatal and non-fatal since the highest that we ever saw, which was in 2021 in FY 2025. We also distributed about 43 boxes of naloxone to private individuals, and that's in addition to the several dozen boxes that we distributed distributed to the police and fire departments for their emergency response uses. Our partners in the police department collected about 400 pounds of prescription medications at the two medication
disposal dates that we had, and we will have that coming up again at the end of October. So please stay tuned for that as well as we still have the ongoing 24 7 drop off that kiosk that is in the police department that the public can access at any time in FY 2025. We also, our team conducted 72 unique visits to native public schools to deliver that prevention curriculum that I mentioned, serving over 1200 students, and we tabled it over 33 community events
where we were giving out resources, having conversations with members of the public. It's rarely an event that we don't have somebody who approaches us and shares with us that they're in recovery, that they know somebody who's struggling, that they just want to talk or get some direction as to where to go. And so we do take that. We do, we do understand the importance of being as present and available in the community as possible, especially since our office is here at Town Hall, and that it can be sometimes intimidating to come to town hall for some of these types of issues. So we're happy to, to be able to, to reach
and connect with folks when we're out in the public. And then just a few other kind of highlights here. We did put out a community mailer that went out to more than 15,000 natick addresses last summer that had resources on how to get into, how to get access to treatment, how to tips on how to talk to your kids about substances. So we do try to put out those mailers periodically and are planning on a postcard mailer for this summer, which we're in the process right now of working on. We have over 1500 recipients of our monthly newsletter, which is a great way to get information about events
that we're sponsoring, new resources that are available. If anybody in the public wants to join that mailing list, please feel free to email us at Natick one eighty@natickma.org and we'd be happy to add you to our mailing list. And over the past fiscal school year, we also got about, we, we got over $131,000 in new grant monies. A good chunk of that came from some of the matching grants grant monies that we got from the Rise Mosaic Grant. So that was a grant that was put out specifically for communities that have opioid abatement monies to apply for.
So the, so the, the Rise Mosaic folks would provide a certain amount of money, and we had to match that using our opioid abatement monies. But that could include some of the funded time that we are using because our opioid abatement monies help fund our staffing, so that time that they're putting into the projects can be part of that match. We also have some very innovative students who are part of our youth group at the high school who went for several different grants that were around vaping prevention and tobacco prevention. And so some of those grant monies included some
of those monies that the students got. So one of our, I give a lot of credit to our Natick above the Influence group at the high school for one of those grants. They applied for $10,000 and they got $15,000 instead, which is not a problem I've ever had before of applying for money and being told, no, no, no, take more please. So I give our high schoolers a lot of credit. They're a very compelling group of students for sure. And actually, as part of one of those Rise Mosaic grants in the next couple weeks, we are gonna be taking a group of those high school students from, as well as two members from our team
and a staff person from one of the middle schools. And they're gonna be taking students to Memphis, I'm sorry, Nashville, I apologize, Nashville for a national conference that's going to be training them as youth leaders to bring information back to our community to do peer-to-peer work. So it'll be training them not only to talk to their peers, but also to talk to middle schoolers. The Rise Mosaic Grant is also giving us funding to start up two youth groups at both middle schools as well. So the idea that we're trying to engage people younger and younger to learn about
how do we have conversations about substance use, how do we have conversations about mental health and the connection between the two, and then how can we be positive messengers to our peers and to people younger than us on those topics. Just a quick snapshot of our expenditures from FY 2025 in terms of the abatement monies. You can see that we ran a surplus in our personnel in fringe line item. That was largely because we actually had a federal grant that we were able to continue to use in a carryover capacity because we didn't spend on the grant entirely by the end of
that particular fiscal year. And we were approved to carry those monies over. So it meant that we didn't have to dig into that into the abatement monies quite so much for our staffing levels. We did use some of those monies instead in the contract and consultant line item, which is why you might see an overspending there. But that's because we had such a surplus in the personnel and fringe line item. And so in that contract consultant line item is where we pulled some of those matching monies for the RISE grants that I was referring to, as well as some
of the funds for maintaining one of our referral contracts. And then in terms of supplies, we did not spend as highly as we expected. You we're actually still in doing some research on a po, a possible pi, two possible pilots, one around nal, a Naloxone kiosk in the community, which would allow folks to access Naloxone outside of regular town hall hours. And there's some emerges emerging research around kind of what the best model is for that. So we did not spend in this fiscal year and anticipate doing so in the next year.
And we've also been approached around a possible sharps disposal pilot that could actually put a Sharps disposal unit in the community in a secure location, but where somebody could access it without having to come here to town hall to dispose of it in our kiosk here at Town Hall. So my last, last slide for you here is just on our proposed budget for FY 2026, we're projecting a personal infringe line item of around $113,000.
Our contract and consultant line item would maintain some of the initiatives that we started during this current fiscal year, including a a you can save a life campaign that we started here as a region in partnership with Hudson Medway. I'm going to forget some of the communities that were involved. North Borough, south Borough Framingham. So we we're going to maintain that campaign into this fiscal year. We do still have some funds to expand as part of the Rise Mosaic Youth Engagement grant that I mentioned.
We do also anticipate reapplying for at least one more rise Mosaic Matching grant at the end, actually around February of, of 2026. One of the other grants that, one of the other Rise Mosaic grants we applied for already in this fiscal year was to provide transportation to folks who are in early recovery, but who are seeking either treatment. They need to get to medical appointments, they need to get to a courthouse appointment, they need to get to a DCF appointment to resolve some
of their custody challenges. And we know transportation can be such a barrier anytime we do a community assessment on anything here in, in Metro West, transportation and housing always does always emerge as two of the biggest challenges. So we do currently have a pilot already in place being run by our harm reduction partners over in Framingham that I mentioned, program Rise, if somebody is impacted by the opioid crisis, so they, again, they can be in recovery themselves, they can be still struggling with use, or they could be a family member who's impacted by a loved one's opioid use and they're trying to access appointments around the topics
that I just mentioned. JRI can actually provide an Uber, an Uber Health ride for that person. Either their point of origin has to be Natick or Natick, Framingham or Hudson, because those are the three partnership communities that are part of this pilot. Or their destination has to be in one of those three communities. But as long as one or the other, their starting or end point is one of those three communities, they can be transported to anywhere here in Massachusetts to get to the appointment that they need to get to. So that could include getting to a treatment center in Springfield if that's where the open bed is. So we do anticipate reapplying for
that grant again at the end of this upcoming fiscal year because right now the early stages of the pilot, we're seeing some promising outcomes. And then lastly, we, we anticipate needing supplies again to support our Narcan, our Narcan kits, the Naloxone and Sharps kiosks that I mentioned. And then we do also sponsor a bereavement group here in town that meets monthly over at the community senior center. The Journey Bereavement Group has been around for, I think, close to seven years now.
It's facilitated by a remarkable person, Kathy Pierce, who's been very open and vocal in sharing her story as a person who lost her son Pierce. And so, I'm sorry, Tristan. And so she's been kind enough to facilitate that group for quite a few years now. So if anybody's interested in joining the the Journey Bereavement Group, they're welcome to reach out to Natick 180 and we're happy to make that connection. So I apologize if I went long, but please feel free to ask any questions and I will do my best to answer whatever I can. Speaker 1: Members of the board, Speaker 11: I just wanna say thank you
and your team for all of your hard work. Those stats about reduction in fatalities and all of the, the preventative and I guess support that you, that Native 180 provides is incredible and clearly making an a tremendous impact. So thank you for all that you're doing. Speaker 17: Thank you. It's, it's a team effort. Absolutely. So we're just really grateful to be a part of this community. Speaker 1: Other members of the board, Mr. Evans? Speaker 9: Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on Ms. Pope's comment, which is, it's, it's a small
but highly effective team that they leverage every single dime that they get, they all they apply for and get grants. Their work with the high school and middle schools are, are exemplary and effective and energizing to, to see happen. It it's a great group. The community involvement is also great individuals really working hard and making sure that we're making
progress towards reducing the harm of these terrible drugs. So thank you. Thank Speaker 1: You, Mr. Mr. Evans, Ms. Wilger, Speaker 6: Thank you. Thank you so much, Katie. I mean, what, what a variety of things that you're involved with this year. I, I'm just, I'm so amazed at, at, you know, how many different programs that are ongoing. And I learned a lot tonight and I thought I knew about Natick 180 and there are still many things that I did not realize that you were doing.
And I would encourage everyone in the community to check out the, the website@natickoneeighty.org, because I'm sure even if you think, you know, you may not, because there are, there is so much that's going on. And I just really appreciate how you're such a good steward of the money that, that we give you in, in our town. And we are so fortunate to have you and the way you approach things so collaboratively, all the various partnerships that, that you talked about tonight with other towns. I mean, that's another way really for our taxpayers to,
to leverage the money by piggybacking on efforts that are in other communities too. And I just wanna say, I really appreciate this update. It's so incredibly comprehensive and look forward to, you know, hearing more good news as we go forward. Thank you so much. Thank Speaker 1: You. I appreciate that Mr. Sidney. Speaker 10: Yeah, first of all, ditto to, for about my colleague, what my colleague said. I'm also very impressed by not only the breadth of services that you're providing,
but also how you're not only engaging other communities, but also organizations within our town. I wanna highlight that and thank you for mentioning the drug kiosk that's in the police station. 'cause I didn't originally know about it, and I walked into the station one day and there it was and I said, oh, I don't have to wait for a day. I can just drop my drugs. And I think that's important. So if you've got old drugs that 24, 24 or seven in the police right in the front of the police station. So
Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Sidney. I too would like to voice my gratitude for the work that you and your team do. It's not something that's often publicized. It's not a hot topic, it's not something that people are talking about, but it's very, very much needed work in our community and others. So I want to personally thank you. Is there anyone in the room who would like to make a comment? We have someone online. Ms. Vickers. Speaker 18: Thank you. I just, as a member of the public feel compelled to also say thank you so very much for this work. I have been have family members who've
died from overdoses, and I feel like this work is incredibly important and I felt very fortunate to see you guys at one of your endeavors last fall. I guess it was at the Kohl Center when you guys had your outreach out there. I was there and I got the Narcan and the training for it. And I felt very confident and capable after that training and I learned a lot from it. And I think that this is an incredible service
to our community and I'm really, really grateful that you guys do this. And I just wanted to for you to, to hear that publicly. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you, Ms. Vickers. Speaker 17: Thank you so much. I appreciate that. And I do wanna just thank our administration too for being supportive of this work because this model doesn't exist in every municipality. And a lot of municipalities either go all in on the prevention side of things or go all in on the treatment and recovery side of things. And Natick has been very embracing of trying to do work across that entire span. So thank you to town administration for supporting that
and to this body certainly for supporting it as well. Awesome. Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Katie, Mr. Erickson. Speaker 5: Yeah, I did not make her say that, but thank you Katie. You've been an awesome partner. I just wanna add, there was a mention about leveraging resources and Katie and I spent a lot of time together talking just about that because these opioid settlement funds are not an an, they're not an infinite dollar amount. And to the point of leveraging those dollars to the extent we can for the community is really a, a big component of what I think we talk about a lot.
But also the skillset of you and your team doing, because we, the, it's interesting the way they're distributing them. And I think it's the next seven years we're still gonna get some payments, but you'll notice in one of the slides we have, we have a balance in there. And that's very deliberate because we wanna make sure we extend these funds as much as possible to the greatest extent possible. And I just give credit ticket and your team for thinking that way and strategically and just for the dialogue and, and, and, and just work within the team here. So Speaker 1: I'd like to add one more thing. I'm really impressed with Natick one, eighty's use
of extensive research on models that work and models that don't work. Natick doesn't have to recreate the mu the, the wheel with regard to prevention all the way through recovery. There's a body, a massive body of research on addiction sciences. And I'm really thankful that you do the research to ensure that we're not just throwing money at somebody's good idea. So thank you for that. Speaker 17: Thank you. No, I mean I'm, I'm a certified prevention specialist. Our team has training to try to make sure that everything we're doing is evidence-based. So we appreciate that the town is willing
to invest in this topic and we take that very seriously. So Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Speaker 17: Absolutely. And I'll just quickly add, because I know this was a question that we had had at a previous meeting. There was a question about whether or not the abatement funds had to be used up by the end of FY 2039. I did get an answer on that this week from the attorney general's office. We are not confined by FY 2039. So if we still have monies that continue past that, because we haven't spent them down, there is no specific end date for that. So Speaker 1: That's very good news Speaker 17: To mention that Speaker 5: Again, we can keep leveraging those funds well into the many years ahead.
Speaker 17: We'll keep applying for as many matching grants as we Speaker 6: Can. Speaker 18: Exactly. Speaker 1: Thank you for your time. Thanks Ms. Sugarman. Next on the agenda is the discussion of draft rectangular draft modifying policy rectangular rapid flashing beacon draft policy mouth. It is a mouthful. Speaker 19: Thank you Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is John de Jacko, I'm the assistant town engineer. I know you have a lot on your agenda tonight, so I'll try to keep this short and sweet. As the board probably remembers, early last year, the DPW and the engineering division came to the board with a crosswalk policy for your approval, which was approved.
So we felt that the creation of this RRFB, and I'm definitely not gonna try and say it because it's definitely a mouthful. Policy, was the next logical step to, you know, ensure that the approvals of these units are, are done in using a consistent criteria and that they are, are placed in appropriate locations. So on behalf of the DPW, the engineering division and the Natick Police, you know, I'm here to provide you this draft and hopefully if deemed acceptable, receive a positive vote by the board so that we can begin implementing the, the policy. And just for the board's knowledge, the process we envision
for this policy is similar to the crosswalk policy and that when a resident would like to request a location, they would submit a form to the engineering division, we would review it based on the criteria and then submit a report to the safety committee with our findings so that we'll just help streamline it for the residents and for the safety committee and for the board. So I want to thank the board for hopefully their consideration and ask her any questions. Speaker 1: Ms. W Slager, Speaker 6: Thank you. Interesting reading and very comprehensive. The only thing that I was a little uncertain of is
what happens after the report is, is done, you send it off to the safety committee and then, you know, what, what will they use to determine whether or not it's, you know, this is a good idea or not? Well, they, Speaker 19: For the most part, they would, you know, because when we talk to them, they, you know, they understand that, you know, they're not, you know, they, they know safety, but they're not experts on like, you know, traffic and stuff like that. So when Nate, when the police department and the DPW and engineering, we we're gonna be reviewing it based upon these criteria.
So we're gonna give 'em our recommendations and they will use that to determine if, I mean, ultimately we could say it's not a good idea with this criteria and they could still approve it or, and then would come up to the board for, for your approvals. But, you know, they felt that this was a good way for them to have staff input to make sure that, you know, if it's, if something is not an appropriate location, they, they are aware of that. So it kind of just streamlines the process. So, 'cause before I used to be go to the safety committee,
then they would come to DPW, then we'd go back to the safety committee. So it's kind of making sure that we have all the ducks in a row, we've looked at it, and then submit that to the, to the safety committee for their review as well. Speaker 6: Okay. I, I was just trying to understand if I were a resident looking for, for an RRFB. Totally. I didn't get the sense from reading this what the whole process would be. So I'm wondering if there, maybe there's supplementary materials other than this. No. So I'm just trying to understand, you know, the, the big picture on this. Speaker 19: So in the, in the report there's apologize,
trying to figure out which Speaker 6: May I see that there's chapter four process and requirements. Yeah. And that just talks about an evaluation report will be sent to the safety committee. Speaker 19: So yeah, so if you look at the page six and seven, there's a request form. Yeah. So that would be what they would submit to, to engineering. And we would work with them so that it saves them, the pro the hassle of having to go to the safety committee first come to us, we can work with them, talk to them, kind of determine by talking to them and also by reviewing the policy, what are the criteria if it's an appropriate location. And then with all that information, basically they would go
to the, we would, we would bring it to the safety committee and the resident is more than welcome to come to that. So they really, the, the resident wouldn't have to do anything except for submit the form and then we would make sure that the process continued, if that makes sense. Speaker 5: One, one thing we can consider adding, I think what you're asking about is maybe like a flow chart showing the process. Yep. Entry point could be this form could be 10 administrator's, office could be the safety committee going back. But ultimately the process starts with the submission of a form, this form that's proposed or a form to be named.
And then once it's submitted, we can then show, okay, that's reviewed by the engineering goes to safety committee. Safety committee does their review, goes to select board, and then there's the decision, the ultimate decision is the select board. And then there's probably an after decision flow chart that we would need to put together as well. 'cause it's not as if the day after a select board decision or a meeting on really any of the select board decisions that come about with roadway, with any of the, these roadway type projects that's gonna be implemented. Sometimes they're, sometimes we have the money, sometimes we don't. It's usually about, it's usually funding that determines when we can do something.
I think you may recall several years ago we had a, we have a backlog. We, I think we still little bit of a backlog of crosswalks and think, actually we do Speaker 19: Update on that in a minute if you'd like. Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, sure. I I know we, we had a backlog and we've been working on that backlog, but then we can show a flow chart of that as well. Speaker 6: Yeah, that I think that would be very helpful. Just, you know, so that someone who's getting this really understands what the whole process is. Speaker 13: And, and I think a hundred percent just, I think the other thing that's important, and I always try to look at things through like the long term, right? So I think it's really important to have criteria.
I think one of the things that I heard when I started was it was a good idea, but what were we really basing that off of? So being able to go in and say, all right, this is the standard related to it, this is why we would do it. We're talking about adding and anytime there's an ad there's a cost associated with that. And it's not only the one time cost, it's the recurring cost of having to replace that down in the future. I think one of the things, and one of the challenges related to the rapid RBS or I just botched it, is
that we are funding it, but we're funding it after the fact with money that we may not have or grant money. But what does that mean down the road when those come up for a placement? I, I just think it's really important for us to have that on our mind and having something like this in place, not to necessarily limit, but to make sure we're making, you know, the best choice related to a rapid flashing beacon I just think is really important. And I give the engineering department credit for, you know, recognizing that this is something that is needed.
Speaker 6: Is, is this something that you would, if you don't already have that, consider adding to the capital plan so that you have any future expenses. You know, looked at over time had like five, Speaker 13: We we've, over the last couple of years we've added it in there. We've also gotten fortunate through our delegation to be able to get some funding over the last couple years through some earmarks and some grants. And then I know Public Works just recently was awarded funding to be able to tackle a good portion of this. So we're, we're probably getting closer.
I think we had a backlog of around 15 of these shortly in, around when I started. And I believe we've closed that down to, Speaker 19: Basically we actually just, and to go back a step, we received a shared Streets grant for $250,000. So we're in the final stages of putting together plans and specifications for, for later this summer to basically put that out to bid, to put install eight locations. So once those are installed, the backlog will be one and then, and we're, and we'll looking to see, you know, find funding for that.
So Speaker 5: No, no, we're not saying we need to add more to the backlog, but yeah, that's great. We did have a backlog coming another the pandemic and with a lot of requests around town, the engineering division, CED as well with, with Morgan support and just the support of our delegation, we've been able to seek funding as well as some capital dollars seek funding to, to really address that backlog. But what we didn't have previously when I, I don't know if it led to the backlog, but it just didn't provide enough clarity, I think, to members of the public as to why decisions were being made
to place these was the clarity around where should these go and what's the criteria to ensure it's consistent across the community as to those locations. We were, we were sort of anecdotally saying certain things or, or able to articulate it. But this really helps to provide that clarity. Speaker 10: Mr. Sidney, thank you Madam Chairman. Chairwoman. So I, I'm gonna take this up. I I, I like this. I'm, this isn't a specific question about this policy, but I'm starting to notice that we have a bunch of different policies that go to different places.
This the crosswalk policy, we're gonna talk about the use of the common later we've got the accepted, you know, how do you get a street accepted policy? And I, I wonder, and this would be something for Jay to do, assuming he has time, I would expect, but it would be nice to have a gateway where people could go and say, you know, here's what I want to ask for. How do I do it? That would take us, take them to the right
set of forms and maybe the right department with the right flowcharts and then we could link to that gateway from, you know, the DPW page and other pages, you know, that are relevant for whatever request it is. Because I get questions I get a lot are how do I ask for this? And if there's not a, if I can't point to go here and you'll find it on the, on the list, that's kind of a problem. So I, I wanna suggest that there, and this isn't, it's not, the ones I listed are not the only ones, right?
So pe you know, people call in and say, well I want a one day alcohol license. Well how do I apply for that? Well you call Donna, right? And so there, if there's a way to, if there's a gateway that says, tells people we can take some load off of some of the staff. Speaker 5: Yep. No, no, I appreciate that. And and agree. We've been working, just the board has been working to update your policies. So, and I'm not saying that we're waiting until they all get updated because there's still a lot that need to be worked on. But one thing we, we we, that I know is on j j's sort
of docket as well as just all of our dockets is to provide a location for select board policies. Now some of these, like these engineering more, more public works located policies still need to be adopted by the select board 'cause you're the roadway commissioners. So it's a little bit more of your role as roadway commissioners, not necessarily as a select board. So what we need to figure out is how do we ensure that people can find those easily on the website? I know Jay's and our communications director has been increasing and improving, working a lot with our web platform company
to ensure our search function is, is the best it can be. Is it there yet? It's still a work in progress, but it's the, it's the search function that we have available to us through that platform. So it's, it's better than it was and we are ensuring that it gets as good as it can be. Speaker 10: Yeah, I guess what I'm, I'm suggesting is if we can get on it plate and, and it's priority is up to you guys, it's not our decision on the priority, but some kind of a, you know, a how do I ask for Gateway that would, you know, it might not have all the answers, but it would have a link to
someplace that does have the answers. Well Speaker 1: Don't we have that in our portal? I don't have an fh I mean if all of these processes could be in the portal for online, we could point them to the portal. 'cause right now we do for a one day, how do you get a one day license? You go to the portal, how do you get an alcohol license? You go to the portal, how do you get a building permit? You go to the portal and that takes a lot of pressure off staff. And then if they need assistance with the portal, so how do I get a crosswalk go to the portal and the portal will have, Speaker 5: We can look at putting this one as all the others into the portal. I know engineering is already currently using it
for I believe street opening permits, street Speaker 19: Opening water, sewer, driveway permits. Yep. And as Speaker 5: Well as the built. So we can explore putting some of these new ones in there as well. But, and Speaker 1: Then, and then maybe a dropdown feature. A lot of towns have dropdown feature which says I I want dot, dot dot. Yes, exactly. So you drop down, I want a crosswalk. So it links to wherever you need to go. Speaker 10: Exactly. That's exactly what I'm kind of thinking I'm talking about. We Speaker 9: Have that on our webpage. I want to, it is literally right on the top of our webpage. I want to do,
Speaker 10: Yeah. I just wanna make sure everything, maybe we expand somebody agree Speaker 9: The backend has to be there. Speaker 10: Yeah. I'm just saying, you know, one page that anybody in the community or any developer can go to to say and and it doesn't have to have, it doesn't have to, the answer doesn't have to be on that page. It just has to be a link to where they get what they want. Yeah, Speaker 1: A little. Speaker 6: I just was going to add what Mr. Evan said. I think we already have that. And I also wanna say, if you can't, you would be surprised what you can find by asking Chad GPTI just asked it about, you know,
how do I ask for a street acceptance? And it went through the whole process, went through the criteria. It gave me the phone numbers, it gave me the forms, gave me everything. So I expect that sometime in the next few years we're gonna probably have an integrated chat bot. Yeah. On our, on our website. We're not there yet. No, we won't be there, but we will. And so I think as an interim step, he's a Speaker 9: Visionary. Speaker 6: Come on. I think is what, what Mr. Evans pointed out. I want to, I think that all that information should be there, but it, you know, if anybody's listening, you can find out a lot of, don't necessarily even go to our website, just ask chat JPT about something in Natick
and you'll, and it tends to be pretty accurate. Speaker 5: It at least gets you to a starting point and a phone number. Yeah. And where comes the worst contact select board@natickma.org. Contact me department heads, all of our information information's on the website. Speaker 11: Ms. Pope, I really enjoyed reading this. I enjoyed looking over the process and how this works and, and just the, the proposal for this to happen. I do have a question about timelines. What is the current timeline for this type of, you know, for the flashing light crosswalk, the sign
and the crosswalk to happen? And what would you propose is the timeline if, when someone goes through the request process Speaker 19: In terms of just the review process? Speaker 11: Yes, Speaker 19: That's a good question. And we kind of, the town engineer and I talked about this a lot 'cause until we start, we're not really a hundred percent sure. We don't think it's gonna be a long process. I mean, we have the criteria, so we were thinking that once it got submitted we'd be able to review it within like a couple weeks, you know, say two to three weeks, similar to the street acceptance policy
and then create the report so that then go to the safety committee, you know, wi with our, our findings. I mean I know their, they meet I believe once a month, so Exactly. Yep. We just have to schedule it that way. So it's some, some months we might be able to get on sooner because it's, you know, it's right before you know their meeting. Others like if we did the report and they had just had a meeting, so it just, we'd have to balance that. But I don't believe it, I don't feel it would be a long process. But we kind of wanted to leave it vague until we kind of understood like when we actually got into it, like how long it was gonna take. Because we do have the crosswalk policy,
we do have the street acceptance policy that we are gonna be, you know, we are kind of reviewing as well. So we didn't, we didn't want to like, give unattainable expectations in the, in the policy right now. I mean definitely I could see in the future once we have a better idea, we could modify it with kind of a little bit more information as to, you know, within X amount of time it will be reviewed y amount of time it will go in front of the select safety committee and then select Speaker 11: Board. Thank you. I think that would be helpful. I think, you know, in, in alignment with the flow chart, even like estimated times of when
of when people would expect things to be reviewed. I think it helps your office Yeah. Because people are gonna have an expectation or, and it's to keep their expectations in line and then I think it, you know, it helps them to, to know what they're, what they should be expecting in terms of their neighborhood. You know, maybe a couple of scenarios. One of that says like this is a scenario if a scenario if you were to get, if this were to be approved Yeah. And perhaps this is what it looks like if it wasn't, and here's the recourse you take if you wanna appeal,
if that's even an option. But something like that. Speaker 19: And that could go along with what Mr. Erickson said about like the flow chart and like Yes. You know, basically if if it got disa it wasn't approved. Yeah. What what's your recourse if they, they could always go beyond engineering, beyond the safety committee to the, to the board. Because as Mr. Erickson said, you guys are the roadway commissioners so you have the ultimate final say so. No, definitely I think we can include that as part of a, a flow chart for this. So thank Speaker 1: You. Speaker 5: I think that flow chart can distinguish between the review slash approval process
or an UNAPPROVAL process depending on the decision of the board and actual implementation. Because think that's actually probably the bigger expectation setting. 'cause in reality it can be reviewed and even brought to the board for discussion within three to six months depending on timing of safety committee and, and the review and, and the board meetings and such. But that doesn't guarantee, again, funding. And that I think is where we need to set the bigger expectation because it can be some, some of the, some of the flashing beacon requests that we had approved by the board took several years for us
to get the funding to implement. And I think that that needs to be spelled out very clearly for the public to set that expectation. Just because it's approved does not mean there's funding. Speaker 1: Any other comments or questions? I'll entertain a motion Speaker 20: Move to approve the draft RRFB policy. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Second. Moved by Mr. Sidney, seconded by Mrs. Ms. Pope, if you, Speaker 6: If you'll accept a friendly amendment with potential addition of the flowcharts as described by Mr. Erickson. Speaker 20: Sure. Speaker 8: Before and after
Speaker 1: Flow. I would, I would say though that the, the fact that it doesn't have one doesn't mean the policy isn't in full force and effect. True. Okay. Any other comments or questions? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes 5 0 0. Thank you very much. Thank you. Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. Can I ask John to provide a brief update on one other matter that's not on the agenda? Sure. Do you have it? Do you wanna do it? Yes. Speaker 19: The one that, the Speaker 5: One that I can see the, the lights outside. Yes, go ahead. It's very, very recent as of even today. Yes.
So that's why it's not on the agenda. Speaker 19: So we wanted to give the board a quick 32nd update on the MBTA station work in, as it regards to paving. The MBTA is going to be paving south of the, the, of the, the tracks to tonight and north of the tracks just at the Walnut North Ave intersection. They're placing binder tomorrow the water division is gonna be going in doing some final gate box realignment moving. It's not moving, but we're bringing up degrade on the northern side. And then tomorrow night, and this is all weather dependent,
the NBTA will be back to do the final paving of the north side tomorrow night. So hopefully by, if they said that if it wasn't gonna be tomorrow night, it will be the beginning of next week at the latest. So hopefully by then all the, you know, everything will be set so that we, people won't be hitting castings or having to deal with all the, the bumps. And that's been going on for the last few weeks. So Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Dimo. Mr. Erickson, would it be possible to push out an update on the Plus? Yes. Onto plus Speaker 5: We can see what we can get. I can, yeah, I can
Speaker 1: Try that. Just a short update. Update, yep. Understanding that the reason it's not on the agenda and is not in violation of open meeting laws because we could not have reasonably been able to foresee this 48 hours ago. So in an attempt to ameliorate any questions about dissemination of information, I'd like to get that pushed out by Civic Plus. Speaker 19: Yeah, no, I literally got off the phone with the representative from the M-M-B-T-A at four o'clock so that, that's when we found out. So we made sure that I let the executive director know who let Mr. Erickson know. So definitely wanted to update the board on that. So Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Deeply appreciated.
Speaker 9: Thanks for the update. Speaker 19: Thank you. Speaker 5: Thanks for Speaker 1: We're gonna take a five minute break and when we come back we'll start on the agenda item F split tax policy and move agenda item E to just before J. So we've back in about five minutes e to just before tax policy. So as many of you know, the Natick Select board in November of every year sets determines whether or not the town will have a split tax rate for residential commercial properties or a single tax rate, which applies to all of them equally.
During the course of discussions about the override, we were asked by many people to give a split tax rate. Serious thought. That's not to say that we don't every year give it serious thought, but what we decided to do is earlier on, so starting tonight, we will do some extensive research on some of the issues about in, in other communities that have a split tax policy, including issues about impact on businesses, economic development, what the assessors do,
impact on residences, where it works and where it doesn't work. And given that that amount of outside research, which is not something that we can really dump on staff g given your already very full agendas. And plus we kind of know what we, I think what we want, and this involves meeting with Mr. Kaplan who has done extensive research on that. He has a lot of information that I think that we should, you know, listen to read and, and bring back to the board prior to the vote in November to to show, you know, demonstrate to the public.
We've really looked at this and this is whatever we come up with. That's where we come up. That is not to say that that research will bind an bind any individual member of this board to a particular vote or, but it, it is, it is going to be a sizable effort to come up with more information than we normally get in the course of two weeks in November. So having said that, what I had put on the agenda was to kind of assign responsibilities and come back and there's also been discussion of a subcommittee doing it as a subcommittee. Now a subcommittee would necessarily be two people.
'cause otherwise we have a quorum. And that's a lot of research for two people. Subcommittees still need to hold public meetings, maintain minutes, publish their minutes, and publish agendas timely before meetings. So I'm looking to the board for your thoughts on how you wanna structure this. And we need to start as soon as possible because we have a number of other financial commitments that we've made to the public that we need to get underway on. Ms. Slager Speaker 6: During the analysis and gathering of data process, could we have a working group?
Like the planning board does? That's not a quorum. It's not that maybe members of this board could just gather data. Speaker 1: Mr. Speaker 6: I wouldn't have to be a subcommittee. Speaker 5: You can, but working groups still have to post meetings and hold, have minutes of their work. That's based on a legal opinion from Murphy Hesi from about 11 years ago. So even the two member working groups of the planning board still post their meetings when they meet and they meet at all times of the day. But they still post their meetings and the minutes are like one page. They're just bullet points of what they talked about.
Very, very, very high level. But they do still do that work. But it can be a working group, what do you call it? As long, if it's a designated group from the board, whether it's a subcommittee, a working group, if it's more than just one person, then per legal counsel guidance. When it's a designated formalized group, then it becomes a committee that then needs to post their times that they meet. Speaker 6: But they don't necessarily have to have other people join them. It can just be that. No, Speaker 5: Well they're open to the public. Right? Yep. Just like any other public meeting. You Speaker 1: Mean on the working group itself? Yeah. No, we don't have to.
Speaker 5: But that's the same with the subcommittee or with anybody really. Speaker 21: It's just a public meeting and people wanna show up. Speaker 5: They can show up. There's no obligation that the public speak, they just need to be able to be present. So it needs to be in accessible space, a pub, a publicly accessible space and posted 48 hours in advance and Speaker 10: Yep. With an agenda. And Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean the agenda can just be simply yeah, to review split text policy. Yep. 'cause that's essentially what you're doing. Yeah, typically like planning board, it's for a project. So it just says to review Project X and like we've had those, 'cause I used to post them
and do them when it was like a project at the mall or at a project, project site and it was at the site. You could still do it. You would just post it at that location. Speaker 1: Mr. Sidney. Speaker 10: Yeah. I wonder if it would make sense and, and I'm just brainstorming here, but I wonder if it would make sense to have a working group that one of the things they would do would be to collect all the research that the rest of us do and collate it. And Speaker 1: The working group would, would say that again. Speaker 10: So the working group would essentially be the lead
on gathering all the research and, and creating the report for the rest of us. But the rest of us could be doing work that would be handed off to the working group. I don't Speaker 1: Even foresee a report. Our agendas are so packed till November. I don't see us having time to do a report. So I think maybe what would help us make this decision is to talk about what each of us see in terms of research that needs to be done. I mean I, I have my own idea of ideas of what we need to do, but I'd like to hear from each member of the board, Mr. Sidney. Speaker 10: Yeah, so one of the things I think we need to do is
look at not only, you know, we, we've had a high level presentation by the assessor that says, you know, a split tax rate makes sense if you're exceeding or, and I don't remember the numbers, but something to do with the 80 20 rule between commercial and residential. But it seems to me that one of the things we need to do if we look at, you know, similar communities is see what the breakdown of that commercial property is. So because of the difference in assessing rules
for retail versus other kinds of commercial, the breakdown could be different because of our ratio of retail to other commercial. And so I think we need to get a little deeper dive into that relationship. Not only, you know, commercial versus residential, but what kind of commercial versus what kind of, you know, residential. And if that makes a difference in whether a split tax rate has an impact, has a positive impact.
Speaker 1: Okay. So looking at the, when, when we, when we're comparing Natick with other communities, or not necessarily comparing, but when we're looking at other communities that have split tax rate, one thing we're gonna be looking at is the different types of commercial property and how they're assessed. Speaker 10: Yeah. So for example, Burlington is usually used as an example of one where a split tax rate works, but they have a ex, they have a much larger non-retail commercial base than Natick does. And that may be why it works there. I don't know for sure because I haven't done that analysis,
but I think we need to do that analysis to see if the types of commercial in that ratio make a difference to whether a split tax rate would work. Speaker 1: Okay. So just under the category of looking at other communities, what other type of information do you expect would be helpful in informing the board's decision? I'll go tiffs. Do the communities offer tax tax incentive breaks and tax incentives to commercial properties? And if so, how many do they have and for how long Next,
Speaker 11: The businesses we usually present, I feel like in around this conversation, we usually present a subset of businesses who we have talked to and, and gotten their take on whether or not this would help them or hurt them, or, you know, what's their consensus around it. And I, I think it would be great to have a, a wider consensus, if not everybody, on how this would impact them in their business. Would they, you know, maybe even like a survey. Speaker 1: So, so looking in, in Natick, not at other communities,
but looking at Natick. So looking at Natick, we should look at different types of properties. So large apartment complexes, retail, we already know there's about 41 businesses in Natick that would benefit from a particular exemption. We know that from the research that the assessor's given us, but in Natick businesses, maybe looking at ones that have that rent with triple net leases and that impact on the valuation. Yep. Ms.
Wilger, did you have something you wanted to say? Sorry. Speaker 6: No, I mean, I, I think that makes sense. I mean, you know, consumer marketing, you talk about personas. I mean, that's what we would need to do. We would need to develop scenarios for different types of businesses that are in our community and, and understand how Natick might be different from others too. As Mr. Sidney said. I mean, I think that there's a lot of information that that needs to be done there. There's a lot that needs to be gathered to really do this justice. Speaker 1: And yet, unfortunately, we only have a few months. Right. And Speaker 11: I was wondering like, what, what it, what are we going to commit to doing?
Speaker 1: You know, the board is not gonna commit to anything. And the reason I say that is, okay, we can't do research and then say the board's gonna vote a certain way. Every one of us has our own conscience. What we're going to do is have a body of research that's available to board members to look at, interrogate, follow up if they want to, and to make their own decision based on the, that body of information and what the assessor gives us every November. Yeah. So we're, yeah, we're not gonna commit, the only commitment we're making is to actually do the work. Speaker 11: And that's what I was saying. I didn't, I didn't mean to say like, what are we gonna commit to in terms of like a binding agreement.
I'm, I'm more or less meant what? Because there's so much research that we can do. What, what are we gonna commit to? Like, where's our threshold for this is what we're gonna focus on. Speaker 9: This is what we need to make Speaker 11: That decision or to Right. To have that bench of information. Speaker 6: Yeah. I mean, for me, one of the things I think that's gonna be really important to look at is what if scenarios. So, you know, let's say we do a split tax rate and you know, 10 of our largest businesses decide that they wanna request an abatement.
What would that mean? So, you know, what, what would the impact be, potentially worst case, best case guess, you know, some of this may be information that we can get from others like the assessor's office, but some of it might just be, Hey, you know, what happens? And, and for us or somebody that, or maybe even resources when the community can take a good guess at, 'cause I, I think, you know, you, you're not gonna be able to model this and predict if you, if you do this, what's gonna happen? You have to come up with some, some reasonable attempt at a scenario. And
Speaker 1: We can also ask, I mean, the top 10 business, we have contacts at the top 10 business or taxpayers in, in the town. And we can also say, so this is what, you know, and, and they're not gonna like it. So they're gonna say the most, you know, I'm going to guess if I were that taxpayer, I would say, well, I would leave Natick, but will Math works leave with three campuses and all this construction and all this investment? Maybe not, but we did lose Boston, maybe didn't do the next project. They might not do the next project here. Boston Scientific left.
BJ's left. Go ahead. Speaker 9: Yeah. One, one of the things that I was thinking about was one of the sort of driving forces of this is the valuation of of residential property is going up much faster than commercial. So the question that I'm asking myself and I don't have an answer, is, does that change the landscape for a split tax versus a non split tax? And I don't know the answer. And that I think is a key question. 'cause that's, that's, even though
we're captive two and a half, we are also, the valuation of our properties keeps going up. So even though our tax rate is going down for some in the community, their taxes, their net taxes are still going up. Oh yes. Speaker 1: For residence is definitely for commercial. They're not. Speaker 9: Oh, right. So we need to figure out is does that alter environment at all? And I don't, I don't know the answer Speaker 10: And I should, I, I, I think about a week and a half ago I sent out a link to an article, the five
fastest increasing valuations in the state. And Natick was on that list. Yes. As one of the top five communities where valuations are increasing faster than anywhere else. So that is absolutely, I mean, I think it's a really super pertinent question because even if we split the tax rate, it's still going to, valuations of residential property is still gonna go up faster than anywhere else, which is gonna mean maybe residences don't see any impact from
splitting a tax rate. Speaker 5: And there could be unintended consequences because it could lead to devaluation of commercial properties in the long term. Because typically we value on income. And when you increase taxes, the income goes down, Speaker 10: Which means the taxes, they pay less. Not necessarily Speaker 5: It's also some commercial properties. But point is that there could be other questions. And I think a a big question for the, for individual board members to also consider is, and I think it speaks to a little bit what Bruce was getting to, is what's the goal here? Is the goal to offset residential impact like's the right question? Or is it economic development?
Or is it having worked in communities with split tax rates and now in Natick without one? You know, a big goal of mine when I was in Everett, because they had one of the biggest splits in the Commonwealth was to figure out how with that big split to encourage economic development. And tiffs were a big part of our, our complex and, and and dialogue, which I would argue is actually not the best policy because tiffs just take the burden from the biggest taxpayers and put it on the smallest taxpayers. So I actually am not the biggest fan of tiffs, even though I negotiated two or three while I was there and coming to Natick.
Once I started talking to business about Tiff and I showed what the actual impact was, they're like, oh, we don't that, that's not gonna benefit us. You already have a low tax rate, so we're just gonna invest anyway. It changed the dialogue around economic development having a single tax rate versus a split tax rate exponentially just overnight coming from one community to another. So it speaks to the, some of the stuff that comes from qualitative research, not necessarily quantitative research, and also to what is, what are some of the goals here or a goal and that it's gonna be individualized to, to,
I think your point, madam chair, the individual needs to make that decision on the board, but it's helpful to understand what is Yeah. And then, and also what are some of the unintended consequences. Well, good and bad. Speaker 10: And you know, for, from my perspective, I think that one of the things that we've all gotta consider, we've each gotta consider is, you know, what has been the impact of economic development on valuations. Because truly one of the reasons valuations go up is
because we have a good economic situation here and a good school system and other things like that. And so, you know, I think, I think we've gotta, each of us has to evaluate those unintended consequences and the downsides and understanding what those potential downsides are. And I think this has gotta go on the list somewhere, is how do we enumerate the unintended consequences and downsides of splitting a tax rate? Because we might want to take, we, we might want
to accept those unintended consequences and downsides in favor of reducing residential tax rates. Speaker 6: Yeah. And, and let's not forget this is a one year decision, right. And anything that we do, it only applies for a year. I mean, not that I'm arguing that we go back and forth every year, 'cause that's a nightmare. But I mean, it's not, it's not like it's a irrevocable one and done. Speaker 10: Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 5: I I do also am curious, and this can also be part of the research, is if a goal, for example, is to encourage economic development or to offset residential tax
impacts, what other tools are there available to also address those? Or, or, or, because tax rates, one, there are many tools though. Yeah. Not as many as may might like, and some might require home role petitions or creative other approaches. But there are some other tools out there to, to also explore Speaker 1: Your resident residential exemptions. Yep. Some properties qualify, some don't. So non-owner occupied wouldn't,
large apartment complexes would not qualify. Most of the communities that use that, or around 10%, there's small commercial exemption, which is, there's about 41 properties that would, would be able to take advantage of that. The tax break goes to the property owner, not the businesses which, you know, may or may not own the businesses. So yes, I think part of this is also looking at other tax relief for residential. Yeah. Speaker 10: Yeah. And I think, I think, you know,
I know we've adopted most optional mgls relative to, you know, senior and veteran tax relief. I wonder if there are other options that, you know, besides the residential or commercial exemptions that might be worth exploring. You know, we don't know the land. I I don't know the, the full landscape of what's available in under MGL. Speaker 1: So if I can recap, we're talking about looking at other communities, how their commercial property is classified
and how they're assessed, whether they use tiffs and the impact on of economic, on impact, on economic development in Natick, we're looking at different types of businesses and how that would affect them. So I wrote retail rent, triple net leases, owned condos, apartment complexes, large businesses. And we've got what if scenarios, how do we enumerate the unintended consequences of a split tax rate? Which I think unintended consequences are usually the things
you find out about afterwards. I mean, there's some things you can anticipate because, but some things we're just not gonna know until afterwards. Speaker 10: Sure. But I think that it's Speaker 9: Anticipated downsides, Speaker 10: You know, think it's Speaker 9: Not unintended consequence Speaker 10: In terms of unintended consequences. If we're interviewing, you know, for example, you know, somebody at MathWorks, they're gonna say, you know, if you do that, we might consider this. And that goes under, oh, this might be an unintended consequence, right? So as we interview property owners and taxpayers other than residential, we might be able
to identify some things that we hadn't thought of. Speaker 1: And then the, the, the yes. Or, you know, a developer owns two buildings downtown, one of which he just purchased in the last year. He's been very supportive about restoring the ballroom on the third floor of the Clark Clark building. It may be that his response is, I have to subdivide that into office spaces, office space. Yeah. So those types of things are the things that we should be asking. And then the last thing is other forms of tax relief for residential properties. So what else is available either under Mass general law
or even in the Municipal Empowerment Act that we can, again, petition our delegation to be looking at. So given the scope, this scope, which is still enormous, but a short list, how do you, how does the board want to proceed? And Mr. Foss, I see your hand up, I'm gonna call on you in just a minute as soon as I'm done with the board, I don't want you to think I'm, I don't see you. Speaker 6: I I think there's another whole layer of baseline data that we need to get that we don't have. Like for example, how has resident,
how has the residential property tax grown over the last 10 years versus the commercial? So, you know, I think that there's, we need a, a baseline understanding of what the picture is and what it has been to kind of define, you know, the whole ecosystem of this Yeah. The landscape. That's a better word. So there's just some basic data gathering I think that needs to be, be done to which Speaker 5: In, in comparison analysis. 'cause you might want to then compare that compared to Correct. Similar communities that both have split in, not not split tax rates as well to see how they also Yes.
At the same thing happen. At the Speaker 9: Same very Speaker 6: Exactly. So I I there's Speaker 5: Probably a lot of just DLS website Speaker 6: Research. Yeah, there's, there's, there's a lot of research there. And, and I think we also need to be careful with anecdotal information. I think, you know, it's, it's great to talk to people, but I, you know, it's, you can't necessarily extrapolate the future based on, you know, talking to, you know, a dozen businesses in town. So I, I think it's certainly worth doing, but we have to Speaker 10: Yeah, yeah. But it, my my point was not to say, you know, what he said, but to, to listen to what they're talking about
and saying, oh, he might not do this, but somebody else might. And here's a possible, you know, downside consequence that we can just, like here by listening to people not, not to extrapolate this will happen, but to say, here's a possibility, but Speaker 1: Qualitative DA data, as long as we understand it's qualitative has its place, it does. Speaker 9: They both are needed. Speaker 1: So, yeah. Mr. Jacobs, did you wanna speak? Give me, just give me one minute. I wanna finish with the board, then I'm gonna go to Mr. Foss and then I'll call on you. Does, does anyone have any ideas about how you wanna proceed?
Do you want a working group? Do you want a subcommittee? Do you wanna have assignments and report back in, in a month with what you've found and then parse and figure out what else we need? How, how, how would you like to proceed with this Mr. Evans? Speaker 9: My personal opinion is giving us assignments would work better. I think the startup of doing a working group would take too much time. That's a fair point. And I, and I think if we can, I think we'd be more capable of hitting the ground running if we each
took on a, I'll call it a set Speaker 1: Of questions, small Speaker 9: Questions, and, and then we do a report back. And it doesn't have to be anything. You know, we're not looking for a big formality formal thing. It just, you know, here's, here's what I was asked to do, here's the summary of what, what I, I have found. And then we all compare notes and then we, I think if we need to form a working group, it would be at that point, you know, once we've gotten the initial Yeah. Round done. Speaker 1: Okay. Ms. Slager,
Speaker 6: I guess I'm seeing it as kind of an iterative process as long as, I don't think this violates OML in any way, but let's say like Bruce suggested that, you know, we each have specific things that we're gonna commit to doing. We send that the preliminary information out to the board, and then if anybody has any questions, you know, they get back to the individual person who then can flush it out a little bit more. Because I, I, I see this as sort of an iterative step, but that there's nobody that has all the information that you just keep whatever you, whatever subject area
that you've done, you keep everyone's comments, but don't share it with everyone. I don't think that's a violation. Speaker 1: I, Speaker 5: It might be, Speaker 1: I think it's serial. Speaker 6: I don't know how, if it's serial, if it's not Speaker 5: The, the nuance of that, I think we need to discuss a little bit. Speaker 6: But yeah, so that's, that, that's, Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. It's part of the challenge of a public body doing its own research rather than assigning it to an entity or an outside agency or, or an individual or working group that then posts meetings. Speaker 1: So one of the things we could do is just set aside 20 minutes on the agenda for each meeting going forward, except for Monday's meeting and have our assignments,
and then we just post them on the agenda and we, we get that two days ahead of time and then we just email in the questions. Speaker 5: Yeah. If, if it's coming back to a public meeting, then I think you avoid that OML type concern because Yep. These are the questions that were brought to me, I'm gonna take these questions and run with them. Yeah. Speaker 6: Or if, what if we just had updates for, you know, each of us that is doing something at a Speaker 5: Regular meeting, every meeting suggesting that's the point. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: That's, have an update. And then I can say in addition to those baseline figures, Linda, did you ask about such and such? No, no. You will have, you will have foreseen that question and done that in ad nauseum. Addendum 10, I'll have addendum 10. But yes, I think that if we do it in that vein and it's all public and it's, but here's two caveats. Speaker 22: Time. Speaker 1: Our agendas are four hour agendas, and we're meeting in two off cycles during the summer. So I can't stress enough that we need to take that 20 minutes and keep right on target.
Laser focused. No unnecessary words. I'm gonna, right now, before we settle on anything, I'd like to hear from Mr. Foss and Mr. Jacobs and Ms. Vickers. So Frank, if you could, you'll be unmuted. Speaker 23: Did I unmute? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 23: Excellent. I'm, I'm glad you're having this discussion early, but I've always, as, as this has come up historically, year after year after year, I, I've heard boards talk about, you know, the political impacts
and the economic, their anecdotal information, but it has never been a discussion or research that has been done that is really a qualified reefer research. And the question comes to mind, and I, I think the town administrator, Jamie, you mentioned the work that you did when you were Everett. Did you use a third party or someone outside that would have assisted you in this, in your research? And can that be something that Natick does so
that you don't spend all your time doing this and that you have someone you can direct to do as you wish? Speaker 5: We did not, but we, when I was there, it was a relatively speaking short time span span, three years. And so when I got there, it was really already at the max. And they, in Everett situation, they had negotiated a tiff with the power plant. And that power plant was structured in a way that was favorable to the community in the first part of the years, and then not favorable to the community in the later part of the years. And I was there in the later part of the years.
So their tax burden was just getting slammed in a different way. So we were trying to mitigate that impact to the greatest extent we could, but we didn't have an downside firm. I, I'm sure there are firms that would be willing to do some type of research on this. I just, one, we'd have to understand the budget for that. And two, the timeframe would still be challenging. But we did not have a firm specifically for that. I just worked really closely with the town, with the city assessor in that case, almost on a weekly basis, trying to figure out how to, how to soften the split and encourage economic development.
Speaker 23: I would strongly, if, if you don't mind, Madam Chair, I would strongly urge it that you, you consider getting additional assistance as the town administrators just mentioned, because there are economical impact, economic impacts. There's, there are all kinds of impacts and, and, and things that, that you fought five folks, six or even, you know, some other staff of the town are just not going to be able to do, nor have the capacity to look at from a very broad view
and also from an unbiased view, whether we like it or not, we are biased in this whole thing. So I, my my one thought when I heard you all talking about this in the magnitude of this and the dec the importance of this decision, because this is not just one year, I beg the differ. This is something that once you open up the door, you keep, you keep running with it and you stay with it and you modify it, but you, once you split it, you split it in my envelope opinion. Because businesses and,
and people need to have some idea of, and, and to anticipate year to year as, as you know, on a part of our retail real estate trust, we needed to understand what the town of Watertown was going to do five years and 10 years and 15 years out, not just one year. So there are some impacts and some consequences that are too huge not to get somebody in that can do a full fledged research on this. And I think it would be money well spent if you,
if you could certainly your decision. But I, I would urge you folks to, to consider that. Speaker 1: I, I think it's an excellent idea. Mr. Fos. Thank Speaker 23: You Madam Chair. Speaker 1: I, I do have a question for you before you go. Speaker 23: Yeah, sure. Speaker 1: This was part of the financial commitments that the select board made to the public in light of the override. Yep. So here's my question to you. If we spent a year reviewing this, which is really what it needs, and not Speaker 23: Two and a half months, Speaker 1: A couple of months, a couple of months when half of the municipal staff in every town
around us is on vacation. Speaker 23: Totally agree. Speaker 1: How do you think, I'm just asking your personal opinion, as somebody who's been involved in this town for many, many years, and you have your finger on the pulse of a lot of things going on, how do you think that would be received, received by the voters? Speaker 23: I think it would be, personally, I think it would be received well by those reasonable people that folks are out there rather than those that just want an impact and a fix. Because whenever we do anything, and it's, it's done in quality when it's done with, with great care, when something that is done that has,
has taken the time to analyze it. And then you don't have to put out a huge report. People need to understand that you're doing this with great care and concern. I think, I think it would be welcomed personally. I would welcome it because it is a huge, this is one of those crossroads and it is a huge decision that you folks would be making not only for the year, but as I said for for many, many years, maybe even decades. Speaker 1: Thank you so much. That was very helpful. You, Mr. Jacobs, if you could come to the podium.
Speaker 10: Did you, Speaker 5: I was just gonna quickly note what Ms, what the prior speaker noted about opening once a community, in my experience, once community does go split tax rate, it's extremely, extremely challenging to un un split it at that point. So to the point of, of what the prior speaker noted, it is a Speaker 9: Long Speaker 5: Term, potentially decades long sort of potential decision, unless it's like, like changed right away the next year. It's a potentially long term. Speaker 10: Yeah. But one of the problems with splitting then uns splitting is that residents get hit extra hard that second year. Yep.
Speaker 9: They pay the price. Exactly. Speaker 5: Which is why once you do it, you're kind of locked into it. Yep, Speaker 9: Yep, Speaker 1: Yep. Mr. Jacobs. Speaker 24: Yeah, just a couple of points. I, I want to actually start with this because it's just picking up on what Mr. Foss was saying, but I definitely 100% agree with the encouragement about not necessarily thinking about November as a hard deadline to think about this issue. I think, I think it's great and you should con like, you know, whatever form it is, whether it's hiring a third party or your own research, I think it's, it's awesome that you're thinking about this now and working on it now
and following through on that commitment to the voters. But I mean, you know, to me, as someone who has advocated for a, a split tax or considering a split tax before, I would, I would take it, I would not take it as a failure of falling on the commitment if you got to November and said, well, you know, we haven't, we haven't, we don't feel like we've done enough research and we don't know, so we want to keep this single tax for, for now while we continue that process and do a thorough process. I think, I think that is what you, the commitment you made to the voters in, in my opinion as I read it, is that you're gonna do a thorough
process and really look at this. And I think if you, if you rush and then you end up kind of, you know, potentially as Mr. Foster have alluded to, you know, you could kind of fall back on your priors or things like that. And it's not, it would, it wouldn't, to me, it would seem to me like you're actually falling through more if you take your time. So, you know, to me, I don't necessarily think, again, that's not to discourage hitting the ground running now, but I I don't necessarily think November should be treated as like the deadline to ever think about this. Right. So that's one thing. And then to the question of different things
that could be considered by the subgroup or, you know, each of you researching this or whatever format it takes. One thing I, I think it was sort of mentioned, but that I think would be good to consider is just comparison of new growth between, you know, the over, as Ms. Shr alluded to, like between the last, you know, 10 years, five years and just how that, how commercial growth rates compare between our town and other towns. And then to the point about tiffs, like right, like what, what percentage of that is actually attributable to those, those tips that have been awarded. Right? So I think to, to make an apples
to apples comparison, I think you'd, you'd want to know that. So I think that should be on the list Also, I think the, you know, it, it's great to have the kind of anecdotal, or not anecdotal, but what did you say, Quala qualitative data of like asking businesses about, you know, what, what, what they would do. But I think, I think the same needs to be for residents as well. I think it would be great to ask people who are, you know, who need tax relief. Like how much would this mean to you? Would this help you stay in Natick for the next 10 20? You know, would this help you stay rather than move if it's someone who wants to, you know, re retire, you know,
stay here who's retired, you know, I think, I think you have to look at both sides of the coin, obviously with any, with an issue like this, you know, as, as people alluded to, right? You ask someone, do they want to pay less? They're gonna say yes. You ask someone they wanna pay more, they're gonna say no. But I think those conversations can, can reveal other, other things as people alluded to. So I'd like to see residents included in that. The other thing is related to people who own businesses and live in Natick that are double taxpayers. Because if you think about the valuation issue, you know, you think about a split tax where more, because there's so much more commercial residential than
commercial property, you know, for every dollar you're, you're cutting from residential, you're raising the commercial one $5 or something like that. But I think when you get down to the actual valuations and you think about the, the, the median home price here versus of, you know, maybe a small business owner lives here versus the footprint of their building and what they're actually paying and commercial taxes. It's, it's not so clear as that. So I think that's one population to, to look at and do the math on. And then the final thing is, is not actually a hundred percent related to this,
but hopefully it's enough that it's within the scope of this discussion. But when I was reviewing the materials that Mr. Kaplan submitted last, you know, earlier this year when during the override discussion, one thing that I'd, I'd like to see more explanation about or looking into is the issue about the commercial valu, the commercial valuations. There was, there was a thing in there like kind of comparing the commercial valuations of certain similar businesses here to, to Framingham. I think, and this really doesn't have to do with the, the split tax, single tax 'cause either way you, the, the valuation is what it is, but just kind of understanding like why, like
what our process is and why those might have come out differently. I think that's, that's really important too. And again, maybe that's a separate, separate issue because I don't think it really has to do with whether you have a single or a split tax. But anyway, thank you very much. I appreciate the board looking into this. Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Jacobs. Ms. Bri Vickers. Speaker 18: Hello? Am I unmuted now? Can you hear Speaker 1: Me? Yes. Speaker 18: Oh, thank you. So I actually have similar comments to the previous two speakers. I was curious about getting help because it really does seem like that is a
huge burden to put all of the research on the five of you or, or less than in addition to liking outside help. Curious if you are able to use community for help. Like if you guys are able to actually reach out, reach out to people, abilities, people who work in other municipalities who have experience or expertise with this particular type of thing to help with the homework. Like even between now and, and November before you're making the decision about whether or not to use a, a, a third party in their homework
and, and their help. It, it seems like there's an enormous amount of wealth of expertise in our town. And so I I know for instance when you, you guys at previous board had a charter subcommittee type, I mean a community committee. So I'm not really making that suggestion. I'm just saying, are you able to actually just put an outreach to the community to say, has anybody done this research? Can anybody fill in these answers for us? Can anybody help with this? So
that perhaps you guys aren't burden overburdened with so much of the homework. And then my other question is, is there a way to put into the next time this comes up homework for those of us who are interested in this, what the options are for split tax? Does it have to be straight up, this is what business does and this was, and this is what residential does a a link to understanding tiff. Can there be differences for the businesses? Can it be based on the number of employees or the gross net income or the type of business? So I, I'm wondering as we're going through this process,
as if there's also a way to have a little bit of public information in there, some links for the public to do their own homework. So for those of us who are following along and paying attention, we don't feel behind the eight ball in, in what you guys are doing. Thank you. Speaker 1: I think the, the best thing for the, the latter comment is that every time we have this on the agenda is to have the last three years of the presentation by the tax assessor who lays out all of the possibilities. So he, you know, he has very good case studies on if you shift 10%
of the tax burden from residences to businesses right now, based on the commercial and the residential mix, or based on last year's, it a 10% decrease in residential tax results in a 40% increase on the businesses. So just having those there for reference might be a really, might be very helpful for the public. I mean, I, I have them bookmarked in my, on my phone so I can bring 'em up real quickly. But I think that's a, a very good suggestion and I appreciate,
Speaker 10: I also think we should, we should point out that it's really, there's no granularity to this. It's either we split, you know, onto or off of, because we could split the other way the commercial with, but there's no granularity to type of commercial. It's just a splitter a not split Speaker 5: Yeah. Mgl, you can't do that unless you get home repetition. But the, the, the, a lot of those resources are currently available on the town's website. But to the point, can we add links or can we have 'em attached to the agenda?
We can certainly work to do that moving forward. Speaker 1: Yep. So when it's on the agenda, we'll just post those and that have Speaker 5: Links to, to the ones that are currently there. 'cause if you just, you know, do an AI search or G jet GPT search on Natick classification, assess assessor classification, tax classification, it'll probably take it right to the page and there's five or 10 years worth of information on there. Speaker 1: But if you don't even know what question to ask, like if you don't even know what it is you're looking for, if you're looking for like, as, as Ms. Vickers said, you know, is it straight up? Is it this, is it that if you don't even know the question
to ask, I just think it's, it'll be easier. We'll, we'll we'll attach that to the agenda and it'll be fine. So right now, given the time and the rest of our agenda, I'd like to ask the board for your thoughts on making this a one year process and hiring an outside firm. Now, I did just look at the Collins Center, they don't work on this, but there are other municipal consulting firms that may be able to answer some, some of the, some of the notes I've Jo Jot down about things we want to know should be something they can do. So Ms. Wilger, then Mr. Evans, Speaker 6: I, I think it probably would still help the board
to do some preliminary research, maybe not as extensive as we talked about tonight, to help us inform what it would be, what would be the best consultancy absolutely to use. Because yes, if, let's say as an example, we can get all the background data by looking at, you know, the DLS website, then we wouldn't need to have somebody do that for us. So I think, you know, some research on our part might help us better define who would be best to, to potentially hire.
And then also, you know, how much is this gonna cost? Speaker 1: And we do need a scope of work. So we do, we do need a scope of work. And so yes, that's something the board would work on, scope of work, choosing a consultant, and we do have a consultancy budget in our current and, you know, we'll we can figure that out. So Mr. Evans. Speaker 9: Yeah, I was just thinking along the same lines as Ms. Walsh Walker, just we, we need to do a certain amount of baseline stuff. But the other thing that I was thinking also is let's
I identify a few, not a few, a couple sample communities who, who have looked at into this and have switched to a split tax and maybe they've done some consulting work. Find out who's the, who's who. Yes. In that realm. Speaker 1: Agreed. Mr. Sidney. Speaker 10: Yeah, I ditto to both of my colleagues. I also wonder, and I don't know, and I haven't looked yet, but I wonder if DLS might have some resources on this kind of thing to help us do this analysis.
And I'm certain it, I would imagine that there's an assessor's site somewhere that Eric has, can point us to that would have some resources that we might be able to dig into. Speaker 1: So I can, I can tell you now, no, I, I went to Eric to ask him, because when you go to the MMA web website and the assessor's group, there is no information on it. I mean, there's, there's, there's nothing of substance. There are some chat rooms where they talk about recent tax board decisions, but,
but we can look, we can Yeah, no, we can definitely do Speaker 10: That. Yeah. No, and I, and I'm, I I I'm just gonna, like I said, I I, I think that it's really, I agree we need to do some preliminary research just to help us define the scope of work and Absolutely. And then, and then I think that if we can find a consultant to help us out analyzing this, you know, not necessarily in time for the next tax classification hearing Yep.
But definitely in time for the one after that. I think that that would be a good thing. Speaker 1: Ms. Pope, do you have any comments Speaker 11: Overall? I agree. I agree that we should, you know, source outside help source the resources that we currently have, do the preliminary work and, you know, perhaps even while we're committed to the one year, still have, maybe still have a target towards the November meeting for the preliminary, that, that be the target for the preliminary, you know, not the very deep, but something that we put together
that can lead us to a conversation or to a scope of work with. So that I, I think that continues to keep our finger on the pulse so that we don't relax altogether knowing that we're going to hire outside work. But we could, you know, begin to answer some of these questions that will, that will even help inform us as we're making our decision when we come into the November classification hearing. Speaker 1: I think that sounds good. So if, if there are no objections, I'd like to move on to the use of the common policy. That should go relatively quickly.
Speaker 10: Yes, Madam Chair. Do, do you want to have us volunteer to do a certain initial? Not Speaker 1: Right now. Speaker 10: Okay. I just wanted to ask question. Speaker 1: I'll send an email out to the board with, with these notes and then we'll discuss next steps. Okay. In a public open Speaker 10: Meeting. I, I just wanted to make sure we're closing the loop on that. Speaker 1: Thank you. Mr. Sidney. Has everybody had an opportunity to review council's comments on the use of the, the common policy and her suggested changes? Speaker 11: Yes. Speaker 1: Does anyone have any objection to her?
Her changes? I spoke with her about this today. The, the, the constitutional questions are gonna arise on the staff level with procedures, and that'll be something that she'll work with town administration to, to come up with in terms of ensuring that, that we are in compliance with the Constitution and the First amendment. So Speaker 11: I just had a question Yes. About the policy. I wanna make sure I word this right. Okay. My question is specifically about stipulation
around inclement weather and if a requester experiences inclement weather or has to move their date, is that somehow covered in the policy Speaker 1: That will be covered in the procedures? So that's a very good question. That'll be covered in the application, not the policy. Speaker 11: Okay. Speaker 1: Because some may choose to have a rain date, some may not. And, and that's something that would be in the application at the bottom of the draft decision is a list of the necessary information for permit as suggested by counsel. And that'll be hammer hammered out on, that's, those are not policy decisions, those are procedures.
Day to day counsel has commented whether it should be a written request, an application, or a permit. We should choose just one and be consistent. So application, I think is, we're not really granting a permit. There's an application and then we grant the application. I think, yes, Mr. Sidney, Speaker 10: The only thing I would like to ask about, I, I guess is, you know, for, for a small event or one of these, you know, sudden protests that happen, we can't really do anything about cleanup. But for, you know, a large event that is
permitted, you know, I'm wondering if there should be a, the ability to charge a cleanup fee if necessary. Speaker 1: I, I think so. If there's less than 10 pe 10 people, Speaker 10: Obviously not, but, Speaker 1: Well, no, but we can, because the, the policy says that in order for, for that grouping to not conflict with a town use of the, somebody wants to do something on Natick days, the entire common is taken up. So the answer is no. They just notify us. The person who notifies us should be able to be billed.
But that is a procedure and that's something that's gonna be handled by Speaker 10: Right. But doesn't the policy have to state that this is the circumstance under which we will charge a fee? Speaker 1: Nope. We Speaker 10: That could there also be in the application? Speaker 1: So the, the, the policy should state very clearly that the only reasons for denying denying an application to use the are applications incomplete contains a misrepresentation. A permit's already been granted to an earlier applicant. The applicant has violated the terms of a previous permit and the intended use would present an unreasonable danger
to public health or safety. Speaker 10: No, and and I understand that, but what, see, one of my concerns is if we stipulate, you know, and, and the this is, you know, not a problem user, but the farmer's market, right? They use the common every Saturday in the summer they clean up after themselves. We don't have to charge them a cleanup fee because they do it for themselves generally, however, somebody could argue in my opinion, that the act
of charging a cleanup fee is a, a restriction on First Amendment speech rights. And yet if we don't have a, some kind of a policy consideration involved, then the town is absorbing all the cleanup costs that aren't that, that are necessary. Do you see, do you see Speaker 1: What I'm, I understand what you're saying, but the, the memo, which I, I don't have at hand, it was written over four years ago to a prior board about our, our use of the common policy being unconstitutional. And the board should sh should change it forth with, which was four years ago, said that fees can be charged
as long as it's the same fee across all types of groups. So for example, if somebody needs a PA system, wants to use a PA system, and we have to have staff out there to run electricity, a fee can be charged for that. What we had before was Natick nonprofits are charged one fee. Natick businesses that charge another outside community, outside the needed community are charged another fee that's unconstitutional because it's charging base, it's charging for speech cleanup, electricity. If they need public safety, if they need a police, you know,
once you know, you send it over to the police department and they say, wow, they, they expect 200 people we're gonna want. So they get charged whatever the prevailing charges, that's not charging for speech, it's charging for services. So the policy is only concerned with the reason for using the, the common, all of those other things are gonna be hammered out by administration and town council to make sure that it doesn't violate the constitution or town bylaws or Massachusetts general law. And in all cases, whether it's rapidly occurring events
or events that have less than 10 people notification to the town is still required. So Ms. Wolfer, Speaker 6: I don't know if it belongs here. I mean I know that we have other parts of bylaws that address this, but in nowhere does it say, what if somebody doesn't ask for one? I mean, what's the enforcement mechanism? Speaker 1: And if there's a problem they call the police and the police department checks with Jamie or the town administrator and the town administrator says, no, we don't have one. And then he asks them to leave. The chances of that happening are minuscule because you would have to have a complaint from somebody
about people being on the common. And I when was Speaker 5: They have had that happen and the police basically respond and, and they do have to one, confirm, do you have permission to be here? And then usually they, they, well typically we actually have a master calendar that all these events go into. So everybody can see that. And the approval process includes those other agencies that that like, like the police, police fire. But we have had instances where it hasn't been for several years, we have where somebody was using the common for an event and we actually had to have the police go out there and, and basically,
and stop it because they didn't have the permissions to do it. Now we would be apolitical in that it would be just, do you have their permissions and, and move that forward. But there have been instances where we have Speaker 6: Had that. So the reason I'm asking that, and I'm wondering if it could be, if there could be some issue of selective enforcement, let's say for example, I noticed a few weeks ago a bunch of people on the common looking at their phones and I realized that, and these were adults, that they must be playing Pokemon Go. And sure enough, that's what they were doing and there's like 20 of them and they walk around.
I mean, I'm sure they don't have a permit. They're there on the common Right. So, you know, no one's gonna call the police on them. They're not disruptive in any way. But, you know, is that potentially setting a precedent of like some, sometimes people can use it without having a permit and other times an an organized group can use it without having a permit. And other times, I don't know, I, that's why I was wondering if Speaker 5: Yeah, in the, in case I'm talking about it was actually in a conflict Speaker 6: Addressed in here in any way. Speaker 5: Yeah. In the case I was talking about it was actually too conflicting. Like we had somebody who was permitted and somebody who tried not to.
And, but I mean that that, that's, there's Speaker 1: Always gonna be selective enforcement because the police are not on the common every single day, all day, 24 hours a day asking people. Right. So selective enforcement is going, it's a fact of life, it'll be a Speaker 5: Threshold. So what, and a gathering of people who are using the common as the common is one thing, whereas an event that's specific that is using the common as a hosting gathering ground is something different. Like, I don't know about the Pokemon Go. I don't know enough about that, but Speaker 1: I do Speaker 5: Point is like, we're not gonna like,
have teenagers who are throwing a Frisbee around having to be 10 of them. Like yeah, that's a gathering of 10 of 10 people. But come on, they're using the common as the common. Yeah. Whereas a gathering of the Frisbee club who's doing a rally because they want to encourage people to throw Frisbees around, that might be more of a gathering in which case, yeah. Do you have a permit Speaker 1: Or somebody who sets up a table? Speaker 9: Right, Speaker 1: Please. Mr. Evans? Speaker 9: Yeah, this is a very quick question and I'm, I'm not sure it it sound, it'll it is gonna sound like a stupid question.
So I'll just say, do we need to define what the boundaries are of the common Speaker 5: We, we already have that it's, it's the, it's the parcel. Okay. Basically to the sidewalks, but roughly, yeah. Speaker 9: Okay, good. I thought it would be covered, but I wanted to be Speaker 5: Sure. I mean we could potentially put a little bit more of a definition in the policy. Speaker 9: I, I just wonder, you know, if somebody says, well, you know, I'm using the common but I'm on the corner, that might be closer to 1 35. You know,
Speaker 5: We have had instances where people are gathering on the common, even though they're really just on the sidewalks and the sidewalk is technically not the common and that's allowed. So they don't need a permit as long as they don't obstruct use of the sidewalk use of the sidewalk. But it is a different category. So to your point, Bruce, it might be we can certainly explore that. Yeah. Speaker 9: Yeah. I Speaker 5: Think we can also put that into the procedures to make sure that people understand it from That's what Speaker 9: I'm wondering is where it belongs. Yeah, either way. If it's covered, it's fine. Speaker 5: May I suggest that we, 'cause we do, I believe we have, we talked about doing draft. Do we have draft procedures already?
I think we, I think we have a draft, working draft that we'll put together and we can certainly bring that back to the board. So you can see what it is that, that from a implementation perspective we'll be implementing. It's a lot of, it's mirroring what we currently do with practice, just trying to streamline that process. So for example, we do require, we do review it with the rec and parks department, with police, with fire, I believe for certain scale ones definitely with Elephant R you know, there's an internal review process and then we get that report back to determine Okay, are there any concerns from that perspective?
Because we just have standards that we need to ensure are applied to any use of the common one, conflicts with existing planned events. But then two, also, like we don't allow tents that need to be staked into the ground 'cause it could impact irrigation or other systems in the common. So we do review it from those perspectives. And then we also have other requirements like proof of insurance, things that just apply to any organization. And that's also true with use of really most any town property, but especially the common.
So we can certainly put that together and bring it back to the board for your, just for your knowledge so you can see what, what the typical applicant will see. Speaker 1: So why don't we pun punt this to the end of August. I'll accept all the changes except for the commentary in this so that we have like a, a clean draft to look at for that meeting. And I, that would be at the end of the second meeting in August. That'll give time to town to put together town administration time. So we'll, Speaker 5: Just to confirm, did you say commentary? Speaker 1: Did I say commentary? Yes. Oh no,
Speaker 5: I ignored it. Speaker 1: I think we should have a rule that dads are not allowed to speak unless spoken to Speaker 25: Dad jokes. No Dad jokes after 9:00 PM Speaker 1: Bad. I thought it was bad. Oh no, it's Speaker 9: The best time for dad jokes. Yeah, I Speaker 1: Was really bad with Paul Joseph and my hickey Speaker 25: That was hickey Speaker 1: Worthy. Oh my. Yeah, it was Speaker 5: Too easy. Speaker 1: So two quick things and I can move through these really quickly. Item e review of article 22, this is not for this town, for fall town meeting. This is the beginning of a year long review of
the overall goal is to, and I I talked to town council about that this, this morning. The, the overall objective is to determine whether or not having in-house counsel and our retainer services with Murphy Hess or an outside firm makes financial sense and makes sense in terms of streamlining workload for department heads, et cetera. The red line ver so this is not, we're not voting on anything tonight. The only thing I wanted to, to discuss with the board was section five C where I'd made some changes. And again, this is gonna be the beginning of a,
a year long process of looking at the use of town council and what we might want that to be. And we may keep the model we have, Speaker 10: I don't see they, did you upload a new copy of 22? Speaker 1: Yeah, I just opened it. It's, it's called redlined if you, Speaker 10: Okay. Speaker 6: Oh, it's not on the, Speaker 1: If you look at the agenda packet, it's on, Speaker 6: Not on the one I downloaded. So you Speaker 10: Must, yeah, it's when these go in late, you gotta tell us so we can It says Speaker 1: Article 22 redline. Yeah, Speaker 6: It, yeah, well it wasn't on there. It wasn't on there earlier too. Oh, okay. Speaker 1: It's now though. Speaker 26: Yep. It's, Speaker 1: So in order to keep the cost for town council access
to town council down, we work on a retainer where we pay a retainer, a monthly retainer. And that covers town services, it covers everything except litigation, labor relations and litigation is paid for under the retainer until such time as a lawsuit is filed. So while there's negotiation and there's those that's covered under the retainer, labor planning board and zoning bylaws and chapter 40 matters are not covered under the retainer. And I'm missing one other one.
Am I missing, can you Speaker 5: Labor litigation they use, Speaker 1: Maybe that's just it. Those are Speaker 5: The primary ones. And really, and any hiring of special outside counsel, right. So, or, or, or even counsel for special projects. So for example, negotiations of host community agreements or other cannabis related legal services. We, we would be above and beyond, or we've hired outside Speaker 1: Council before, right? So we Speaker 5: Pfas litigation, Speaker 1: PAS litigation, et cetera. So right now there's a whole group of people
who have access to town council. And what I've done is just suggest this, this cleanup language. So for example, department heads should be going through town administration. I've discussed that with the town administrator. I've discussed it with, discussed it with town council. They agree, chief of police, fire chief comptroller, town moderator, and then the chairs of the boards and committees should have access with the authority of the majority of their members. So select board assessors school committee has its own council, retirement board is a separate legal entity
and they have their own council personnel board is advisory. So that could go through Mr. Erickson. And the one thing I didn't know about and would want to look into the history of the superintendent of schools, they have their own council. So I, I would just wanna know more before we struck them, I'd wanna know more about why the superintendent of schools was included in this paragraph. So basically what this does is, is just narrows it so that somebody in a line of authority knows what's happening. Speaker 27: That's great. Speaker 1: And that's the only,
that's the only thing that I, I, you know, other than some formatting cleaned up, we, if we're going to look at bringing in, in, in-house counsel, then we would wanna know exactly what that person would be there for and what would be the benefit, especially if the person is working more than halftime, because that's an, that's an impact on our pension. So it's not just the salary. We wanna look at the whole ball kit and caboodle. I spoke with the town manager in Franklin. Franklin has the same, roughly the same
population as Natick. And they are a city form of government, although they're the town of Franklin with the town manager, they have somebody who does all of their legal work for 18 hours a week. A part-time employee that doesn't put any, now I asked them, what do you do for litigation? And they said, oh, well I guess if we got sued, which was so novel, we would hire outside counsel. So a community, the size of Franklin does not have the same legal challenges. So it's not apple's, you know, it's, it's not, it wouldn't be helpful for us to compare
because of different cultures, history, labor relations, et cetera. So I'm not suggesting we undertake a massive, I want us just to be thinking about it and what kind of questions we would ask Speaker 10: To, I did notice there was a lot of this comparison that was done in that report from one, was it 2011? Speaker 1: 2021. Speaker 10: 2021, yep. And I think that was really useful information. And I think there were a couple of bylaw options in there that we might want to consider putting in, but we can discuss which ones in detail later. But I think, you know, I read through that report
and you know, pretty deeply, and I don't agree with everything they're suggesting, but I think there's some stuff in there that's worth considering. Speaker 1: I think it should help shape the questions we ask and how we interrogate Article 22, how we think about it. And so I'd like to have us read this, think about it, and in two months come back and say, okay, here's some of the questions I would want answered. And we can bring those to council. We can bring those to other towns. Again, this is not, what's the word I'm looking for?
It's not deadline driven. It's more something that we've needed to do in terms of looking at, we've needed to do this for a number of years and every year we unceremoniously, reappoint the same outside counsel in June pursuant to the bylaw. So maybe it's time we take a look at Speaker 10: I know, I know. It's something what's possible previous town administrators have wanted to do is bring in in-house counsel of some at some level, you know, and I understand why, and I think it's something, you know,
I think it's worth considering, but I do think we ought to be really careful about it as well. Speaker 1: There is an unintended consequence that has been, that is showed, shown up in case law. And that is if you have in-house counsel, an in-house counsel disagrees with outside counsel on a particular matter who resolves that. And so that is in the case law with Wellesley in two different cases. Board of Selectmen versus town administra, the, the town administration and the Board of Selectmen versus the department,
not department the, they call it something else. Public works commission. 'cause they have their own Speaker 10: Electric plan. Yeah. And I, I, I also wanna point out that, and I think it's in our charter, it might be in the bylaws, I don't remember, I haven't read them in a while, but there is specifically a, a a a, at least a, a section of an article, if not a whole article, about how those things are supposed to get resolved between different departments of the town. Speaker 1: Yes. And the case law is very clear that individual boards
and committees cannot hire council without permission. It depends on the role of government. So without permission to select board and or town meeting. So yeah, there's a, there's a whole bunch of things to think about. I just kind of wanted to open the conversation, say this is something looking at with an eye towards fiscal responsibility and streamlining our legal services and ensuring that things get done timely In efficiency. Yeah, in efficiency. So I can send you the Cambridge memo. It's called the Cambridge Memo. It's about four pages long.
I'll just make a note and we'll upload it for the next time. We have this discussion which outlines some of the case law on the conflict between council. This should be relatively quick. I'm gonna go ahead and do the commercial counts. Just commercial kitchen's rezoning request to the planning board. I know that Amanda has been working on this to give you the background of what the issue is. It started with request about two years ago from the Sons of Italy who had put in $150,000 kitchen and they wanted the ability to rent the kitchen as a commercial kitchen.
I was informed, I, not correctly, but I was informed that they couldn't do it because they're a nonprofit. Yes, they can. They just have to report the income. And if it's a not, I mean they get taxed on that income. So the IRS and the assessor's office, that all worked out. That's not a matter for the select board. Speaker 10: Yeah. There's a church that was considering the same thing and I talked them out of it. 'cause for exactly those reasons. Reporting the income and, and changing the nature of the, of the kitchen. Speaker 1: Okay. Well Sons of Italy would really like to do that. And they are in a, they're in a RG zone
and they're a commercial class. They're assessed as a commercial class. Natick Elks is another one that might want to, and they're an RSA, which is residential single over on Speed Street, but they're also a commercial class. It's also possible that there are buildings, restaurants in the commercial commercial two district industrial one and two. They may have kitchen space center, gateway, downtown mixed use. My suggestion is that we ask the planning board to come up with a special permit. So, because if, if we don't, we don't wanna spot zone, right.
We don't wanna do that. That's not a good idea. We don't need overlays. We don't need one more overlay for this unique purpose. We just need a use allowance. And a use allowance can be done by special permit for those are. And so you may have someone who runs a commercial kitchen in their own home, which they're allowed to under the cottage law in Massachusetts and they're in a residential neighborhood. So what do we do about that? Well, we already have in the zoning bylaws in section three a 0.1, section B, under the use regulations, special permits can be denied for things like, let's say you live next to somebody who wants to
make and bottle Swedish smoked herring, which is supposed to be one of the worst smelling foods on the planet. This planning board could say reasonably within our bylaws, this is not gonna be an accepted use your neighbors. It's just not. So there's a whole list of exemptions, smog, smoke, noise, smells, noise, et cetera, that are already nested. So what I would like this board to do is to direct town administration to work with the planning board to get a, an article on the fall town meeting to allow a special permit use in any
or all zones. I, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I would like to make sure that the residential general would be accepted because that would include Sons of Italy. Speaker 28: Do you need a motion? Speaker 1: I do. But I wanted to ask Mr. Erickson if he had anything to add. Speaker 5: Nothing major. I've already talked to Angela, Angela, Amanda about this. And it is on her docket for this upcoming fall town meeting. It's just the nuance, like how do you ensure that it's truly applied to what you want it to apply to and doesn't have the applicability to other things you might not want it to apply to.
And there's those safety provisions from a neighborhood or a butter character preservation in mind. So she and I have already talked about how, how to do that and there's like two or three approaches that can be taken given this current state of our bylaws, which to Amanda's credit has improved immensely over the last astonishing Speaker 1: Three to four years Speaker 5: Ing Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 5: Astonishing. So I know it's something that she has definitely been talking about, but it would certainly be helpful to have just the select board to say, yep, this is something that, that, that we think is a good thing. Because I think it would just help encourage the process along a little bit.
I don't know if I need a formal vote from the board tonight, but if you wanted to take a formal vote to say, yep, we think this is a good idea to explore, then that would be helpful. Speaker 1: Ms. Slager, Speaker 6: In your conversations with Amanda, I mean, given that in order to do something before town meeting, it has to be part of a planning board hearing right? And all that other stuff. I mean, is there a time I know Speaker 5: That I think it's already on the docket of the planning board as well. Okay. So I don't think they've posted the hearing yet, but I know she was already. All right. So she's got a list of things that she reviews with them usually well in advance, right? Like as, as soon
as she finishes up the town meeting stuff from the time meeting she goes to the planning board, said, okay, here's the next six things we're gonna work on. She's already had that dialogue with the planning board, I wanna say like two months ago. And so this was part of it. Just for, for purposes of, of just general understanding, this was part of the bigger use table rewrite that the planning board has been working on. But because this is new, the planning board really wanted to get the existing set of uses set and then start tackling some of these new ones so
that it wasn't, they just understood how the new table worked and the public understood a new table worked and town meeting ultimately voted on the new table and then brought forward some of these additional ones that are new to, to the community. We have been talking about this for many years though. You know how to encourage the smaller scale commercial kitchens in existing spaces. They're typically these, you know, non-profit and, or what's the term for the license? Social clubs? Yeah, social clubs. If use the term typically a nonprofit meaning like churches or other places that would have a commercial
kitchen located Yes. Typically in residential areas. Is that a bad thing? I, I personally don't think so, but it does depend on how you ensure proper uses are handled in those spaces, you know, and, and then there's a very large board of health component to it. Like one thing for example, that a use would need to consider is in food prep. There's a lot of health code requirements, a lot of storage of product requirements. Typically what I've seen in places like a kitchen that's in a social club is what you take in,
you take off in the same time, so you're really just renting it for an hour or two while you prep. And then you bring in everything, you bring everything off. Typically you don't leave stuff there because you actually require it to be properly locked and stored and, and separate, separate from everything else and secure. And so there, that's a, that's an investment that a facility would need to, to put in. But those are health code requirements that would not come into play from the zoning perspective. But you have to first hit the zoning checkbox first and then health code kind of is indifferent from the zoning perspective. It's more about the health code Speaker 1: Is Speaker 11: Poe that the, I think that might have been leading into what my question was is agreeing with the permit,
there is like a, there is also like a checkbox of things that you need to Oh yeah. Meet and require even to have, you know, the permitted, the one day permit or the special permit. There definitely will have to have like a clearance that you can even qualify for that type of a thing. Speaker 1: Yes. So the special permit would be granted by the planning board and then they'd have to get inspected by the health department, the fire department, I mean there Speaker 5: Building code requirements, Speaker 1: Building come to play, building departments, all of those things. And in terms of enforcement, I would imagine it'd be the same enforcement for all
of the other kitchens that we have in Natick restaurants. We have inspections we have Speaker 5: Typically, yeah. Yep. Speaker 1: So I mean we have the infrastructure. The question is, and, and we've been hearing about this in terms of economic development, the need for commercial kitchens for small, the donut guy. The donut guy who, what's his name? He has a donut truck. Donut truck. The donut food truck. He was looking for a commercial kitchen for the sole reason to dispute what had a, something that had a grease trap
so he could pay to dispose of his grease. Couldn't find anybody who could take that on. That's, that's unfortunate. Yeah. Speaker 5: And there are great examples around the commonwealth of, they're typically non-profits. Yes. Commercial kitchens. But they're programmed and maximized with the proper infrastructure of ensuring cross food contamination and just control of the product. You know, locked refrigerators, things like that. Worcester has a great one. Malden has a, has a very sizable one. I, I know there's others that are more local, but those are two of the bigger ones.
But, but because of the in upfront infrastructure costs of a kitchen. 'cause it could be six figures to install a proper commercial kitchen easily of any scale minimum. That's for one small, you know, independent person or couple people that are just trying to make a food truck living or sell a farmer's markets. They can invest in that. So they do need to have economies of scale or an existing facility that they can go into and then leave once or twice a week or maybe every day during the week to make their product. But come and go. So
Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Erickson. Did anybody else have any questions about that? I'll take a motion. It sounds like we don't need one. I'd like a, a motion to direct town administration to direct. So moved Speaker 11: Second. Speaker 1: I mean we don't need one. Yeah, but it that'll be helpful. It's an extra 30 seconds. Speaker 10: Kristen seconded. Speaker 1: Kristen Seconded. Moved by Mr. Sidney. Seconded by Ms. Pope. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstain One. Abstention. So it's 4 0 1. Yeah. So we have, it's nine 40. We have review board and committee charges, town administrator review policy
and the consent agenda. I will turn to the board as to what you wanna do next. I really don't wanna be here past 10. Speaker 10: Can I suggest we take care of the consent agenda? Then we can take up those other two for as long as we're willing to stay and then we don't have to worry about one last thing. Speaker 1: Okay. Madam Clerk? Speaker 11: Yes, the con the consent agenda reads a counsel on aging appointments for terms expiring on June 30th, 2028. Jeanette Sewell and Laura Forker. Item B appoint Jessica Elaine to the historic district commission
for a term expiring on June 30th, 2028. Item C approved plant collective's application for one day liquor licenses on July 10th, 2025 for plant trivia night. August 20th, 2025 for plant bingo. Item D, accept the resignation of Connor Carney for the NA net zero committee. Item E, accept resignation on Glen Kramer for the affordable housing trust fund board. Item F approve request to occupy a public way. Second annual Weathersfield block party
item G approve ambits post 79 application for a one day liquor license on July 12th, 2025 for a family reunion. Does anyone wanna pull anything from the consent agenda? Speaker 1: Item E. Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 10: E Did you say Speaker 1: EEE as in Edward. Edward. Madam Clerk, have you moved? Did you move? I Speaker 11: Didn't. Do you wanna say anything about E? Nope. Speaker 1: Okay, just pull it off and I'll discuss it later. Speaker 11: Okay. I moved that we approve the consent agenda minus item E. Speaker 1: Second moved by Ms. Pope seconded by Ms. Slager.
All in favor, please say aye. A Aye. Any opposed? Passes 5 0 0. My only comment on item E is it should read not accept resignation on Glen Kramer. It should read, accept Glen Kramer's declined declining appointment to the affordable housing trust fund and it's not a board. So that's all I wanted to do is to correct the record. It's not a resignation. And while some people think that splitting hairs, oh, I'm sorry. It has a distinction. Speaker 10: I may, I, since we pulled it,
I I wasn't gonna say anything, but I really appreciate its willing to willingness to serve and, and also the comments he made in his letter, declining the acceptance. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Sidney. Anyone else? Speaker 5: Can I ask the logistical question after you vote this? Speaker 1: Yes. Okay. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Speaker 10: Do a motion. Speaker 1: Oh, so I, I move that we changed the title to read except Glen Kramer's Speaker 10: To decline Speaker 1: Of appointment, declining his appointment
to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and scratch board Speaker 10: On a second. Speaker 1: And the vote was 5 0 0. Thank you. Logistical question. Speaker 5: Just next steps. 'cause the, sorry, just next steps. 'cause the, the board obviously just voted to appoint several members to the affordable housing trust fund. And you know, I, I don't, I don't think anybody knows whether those votes would be, would have been different with the, with a different makeup or, or without any one of them not running, not, I'm not saying changed who's already been appointed.
But for this, because this you said effectively leaves an open seat, would you like to do a recall or bring back folks and then do another count? Or how, how would you like to handle that? Speaker 1: I've asked town council for advice. Okay. Since the seat is vacant but not vacant through resignation, what is it that we need to do? So when I have that answer, I'll report back to the board. Okay. Alright. We have 15 minutes before I will entertain a motion to adjourn. What would, what Speaker 5: If I may, Madam chair? Yes. Can I do a quick TA update? Yes, please.
Speaker 1: Okay. Why don't you do, that's important. Let's do that. Speaker 5: Sure. And this update's regarding the deputy TA for finance hiring process. I just wanted the board to be aware of what we are, where we are in that step and where we're looking currently, where it's gonna be going, but subject to change as we get more into the process. So this is for the position that Mr. Townsend, who was here earlier tonight will be vacating upon his retirement. We wish him obviously, well he's here until the middle to end of September, September 23rd. And mapping back from that date with that as a target date is what we've roughly done.
So we actually posted the position about a week and a half, two weeks ago. We've already received, I wanna say about 11 applicants, 12 applicants. So we are still seeking applicants. Anybody watching? If you're watching, I'm sorry, but if anybody watching wants to apply for the job, please apply. So we are, you know, pleased that we're already receiving applicants, which is great. We are have a couple more sites that we want to post to. We didn't wanna do it over the July 4th week, so we're doing it this week. So we're hopeful that we can have additional applicants in the pool, but our intent is to, by the end of July,
start the first round interview process and likely have at least two rounds of interviews. And maybe even like an exercise as part of that. Not exercise like running, but exercise like situational. Tell us how you would handle X, Y, Z or here's a question, write something for us on how you would respond. We're, we're still figuring that out. I think we wanna get through the first run interviews to see what some of the skill sets we're working with to then see what we would want to maybe test with second run interviews. With that said, the intent is to target an offer by the end of August because we figure anybody of that caliper
and that level would need to at least give three weeks to a month notice to their current employer and or to have that time for transition. So preferably early than that. I think we're actually targeting August 18th ish, but by the end of August for the interview process, we are hoping to have inclusion of board members. So I'll work with Catherine on that as well. Obviously we can have a quorum, but at least one or two board members in the process. I'm gonna be reaching out to the chair of the finance committee as well. And then engaging with staff department heads, some of the division heads in the finance team.
I've already talked with many of them already just to seek their input. We just wanna make sure that we get the input of, of those who regularly interact with that position. Speaker 1: Mr. Erickson, could I ask that if they're willing to serve in that capacity, Ms. Vice, vice President, Ms. Vice Chair and Mr. Evans serve in that capacity? Speaker 5: Sure. During the interview process? That's great. Yes. Speaker 1: If you could coordinate with Speaker 5: Them directly. Yep, I'll go directly to 'em. That sounds great. Okay. Mr. Erickson? Yes. Speaker 10: Sorry. Given who this person is gonna be, and this is purely a suggestion, maybe one
of the exercises is have them do a short presentation so that we can see their presentation skills. Yeah. Which has been, Speaker 5: That's one of the things that we've contemplated. Yeah. But we want to give them, we wanna give him a targeted question or, or something. Speaker 10: Yeah. But let's see how they Yep. You know, how they stand up and, and present themselves. Certainly. Ms. Speaker 6: Wilger, just a question after he retires, is Mr. Townsend available for any consultant services if things come up that, you know, maybe he has a skill set that the person that we hire doesn't, has that been broached with him?
Speaker 5: Not directly. Not yet. Although I suspect it might be in limited capacities. He has, he has plans. I don't wanna, I mean, he, he, he's, yeah, Speaker 6: I'm aware of that. I just was wondering if, if that had been discussed. Speaker 5: Not in a formal capacity way, but we, but we cons, we are always, when, when somebody retires and, and the this CEDI had Mark Coviello former town in town. So it's definitely something that I'm a big proponent of when we can utilize that expertise for targeted work for. So it will certainly be a dialogue. One thing I am working with Mr.
Townend on is just how can we best utilize his time here now to wrap some things up or at least advance some things to a point where we're not leaving a lot for anybody new coming in and the existing staff, they're well taken care of as well between now and when a replacement comes in. So that's really what we're trying to, to target in, in the time that he, that he's here. 'cause even though it sounds like it's a, it's a ways off, it's gonna come fast and, and then that I think will help determine what additional a, after that retirement date would he be able to work on. There are also retirement implications
that the individual needs to be mindful of. Meaning under state law and under retirement law in Massachusetts. If you can, I think you have to actually take a pause for three to six months before you can actually come back in any capacity. Even a part-time capacity. And then there's only a certain number of hours that you can work for a municipality. So those will have to just be some, some considerations as well. More for, for John than for us. 'cause he's the one that could be penalized if, if he works over those limits. Alright, Speaker 6: Thank you. Speaker 5: Yeah. Speaker 1: Ms. Vick Vickers to what, why are you seeking the floor?
If you could just let me know. Speaker 18: Thank you. I was just hoping to make a quick comment on that update. Yes, Thank you so much. I, I am sure that you're already doing this and considering this, but I, I just thought I'd throw out there, but I, but I do hope Mr. Matt Gillis is a part of that conversation because I have really been enjoying over the past few years, our school department and town department working together work. You know, as we move forward and as we move forward, I hope that
that continues to happen. And so since Mr. Gillis will ultimately be working, I hope closely with the new hire, I I, I do am grateful for any inclusion of him in the conversation. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you Ms. Vickers. Speaker 5: So I have already talked to the superintendent of schools about their involvement and we've actually partnered with them already on two to three other hires. One on the school side, one on the town side. So that, that the expectation is that the school department will have a part as well.
I'm gonna leave it to the superintendent on who she assigns, Matt or otherwise, but likely be Matt or somebody on this team. Speaker 1: At this point, I'd like to request that the board go through the board and committee charges that are in your packet, which you got late. We could go through it now, but we are kind of coming to the end of our, Speaker 9: Let's Speaker 1: Just time together. Let, just Speaker 9: Send a comment. Speaker 10: Can, can you send that out electronically? It Speaker 9: Is, it's on, it is, it's there. It's on peak. Speaker 10: It is on peak. Okay. Speaker 1: So I'd ask that you do two things for the next regularly scheduled meeting.
One is, you'll, you'll notice there are a lot of them that we really don't have any, shouldn't have any comment on because they're established or set by Mass General Law or the bylaws and where that's the case. It's noted automatically assume that anything that says selectman is gonna be changed to select boards. So we don't all need to comment on that. So looking at the charges, if there's anything that you'd wanna clarify or language to be more clear, the only one of these that has been reviewed in the last five years was the,
and we, we updated it this year, was the transportation advisory committee. So that's just there for you to look at. And then the second thing I'd like you to, to just make a note of is how often you want the representative from these boards and committees to come before the board and do a presentation. Then we can schedule them throughout the 12 months so we're not jammed up one night with 12 or 15 of them. Some I assume are gonna be annually. Some you may want more than annually. There may be ones with, you know, particular, there may be ones that you don't necessarily need an update on the Leonard Morris Grants panel.
Maybe I'll leave that to, you know, your discretion if you can. People Speaker 9: Advisory board comes to mind Speaker 1: Or the, the Open Space Advisory Committee. Oh no, I'm sorry, I'm thinking about something else. In any event, I'd like you just to look through that, mark it up and have it ready. And the same thing with the Town Administrator Review. Yep. Policy concrete ideas and how we can make it first make a policy that we're actually gonna follow when we do this because we've been using different documents and, and we need to, we need to clean that up.
Speaker 11: Is this like a, could I use like a for instance? Like for instance, and I think Bruce, you're probably Mr. Evans, you're probably best to speak to this like the math work scholarship committee. Is it right to say that this has been bumped up from 10 to 15? Or where it says here it's 10,000, so we need that needs to be updated. Yep. I can say for certain that I definitely want the Council on Aging charge to be maybe more spread out. 'cause I feel like there's just a, there's often questions about the charge of the Council on Aging. Yeah. Speaker 10: And I just want to point out, although it's definitely set in the bylaw, the audit advisory committee charge has been reviewed
in the past two years by myself and town administration and last year by the CBRC. So the bylaw has not been, no proposals to change. The bylaw have been made and the charge is, is reasonable. Speaker 1: Okay, great. Cool. Speaker 10: So just so you, Speaker 1: That's one of the things I, I presumed we weren't going to discuss because it's defined by Natick bylaws. Speaker 10: Yeah. Well in fact, the bylaw has been reviewed for reasonableness, so that's great. And nobody's come up with any changes. So, Speaker 1: Wonderful Speaker 5: For clarity, those at home,
these are select board appointed boards and committees? Speaker 1: That is correct. We do have appointments to other committees, but they're minority. For example, we appoint one of the nine or 11 on the CPC at this time I'm working with council to determine what the select board's authority is to direct boards and committees to adhere to certain practices. And so I'm waiting to hear back from that and we'll inform you when we have more information.
But in the meantime, if everyone can look at the charges and come up with ideas, if you could mark, mark it up and send to Billy so that Billy can upload them on Novus. And then we're all looking at the same documents and the public is looking at what we're looking at. Speaker 5: One thing for clarity, the personnel board's on here, that's actually appointed by the ta. Speaker 1: I, I, I had to talk to you about that. So just ignore the personnel board, but I need to talk to you about that. Speaker 5: Yes, sir. And it's a, it's a bylaw section, so it's one that is on the docket to revamp Anyway.
Speaker 1: Alright. I'll ask you this Speaker 5: Question. We can talk about this offline. Okay. Speaker 1: Yep, that sounds good. I'll entertain a motion, Speaker 5: Move to a chair, Speaker 1: Second move by Mr. Sidney, seconded by Ms. Pope. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? 5 0 0. Thank you and goodnight.