under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Good evening. Welcome to the Monday, June 1st, 2026 meeting of the Westport Select Board under Mass General Law, Chapter 38, Section 20F. This meeting is
being recorded. Um, I do want to make a note there was an executive session uh prior to this meeting. Um, so we did go we did open the meeting and we went into executive session. um the uh council who we're talking with had a fire alarm. So
it is so we recessed the executive session. Uh it is possible that we will return to executive session at the end of this meeting. Um so I wanted to um just start with some acknowledgements. I want to thank um the people who participated in the memorial
day events that we had last week. um particularly the veterans organizations, the American Legion, the VVA, the VFW, the Honor Guard, um that were there. I want to thank the cemetery department, even though we didn't have the ceremonies in the cemetery, um there was
uh quite a bit of work that went there. And then the scouts, of course, and all the volunteers um who placed the flags on the graves. I want to thank the band. I want to thank I Brigadier General Hastings, was that her name? What's her name? >> Hasty. A hasty
>> a hasty. Okay. So, brigadier uh brigadier general hasty a hasty. And then especially Carol Freighus. Um Carol Freighus, our veteran service officer, who's the one that makes sure that um the events all get organized. Um and everybody who came. It was really uh
nice event. If I encourage you to um watch uh on the video if you haven't seen it yet. We do want to acknowledge the passing of a couple of prominent uh Westporters. We have the passing of Ralph Urban on May
12. U Mr. Urban was 79. Um he had lived in Westport um since 1972. Um from 1995 to 2006 he worked for the town of Westport's board of health department. Um he also worked for the town of Aushnet as their senior health
agent. And then he operated a owned and operated a land surveying business for over 40 years. So our condolences to the family of Ralph Urban. I also want to acknowledge the passing of Ronald Costa
on May 18. He was the age of 92. Uh he was an Air Force veteran. He served for 22 years. um he had a number of really interesting I really encourage you to go read his obituary because he's quite a phenomenal person had quite an experience in the army but here in
Westport um he began his second career in public service as the veteran service agent and um the later the veteran service director he served for 29 years in that role in those roles before retiring in 2011 he also served for many years as Westport selected commissioner
of trust funds served on the board of commissioners of trust funds Um, and I just want to read this from the obituary. As veterans agent and director, he wore many hats and became the trusted person veterans turn to for guidance. From his office and town hall,
he helped generations of veterans navigate benefits, housing, medical care, burial services, and state resources. Always treating each person with dignity and compassion. He worked closely with state officials on behalf of veterans and their families, ensuring
they received the support and benefits they had earned through service. His dedication to veterans was not simply a job. It was his This is repeated um calling. So, our condolences to the family of Ronald Costa. I should have asked, did
either of you knows these gentlemen or want to say anything specific? >> All right. Um so the first item that we have on the agenda is um public hearing. So the first public hearing we have is a request to set the water rate at $8.70
I don't know what CCF stands for something cubic feet. >> Yes. >> Um as of July 1, 2026. Um so do you want to tell us what this is about Chris? >> Uh certainly. So in your packet you have a memo from myself as well as a uh recommendation from the IOC with regards
to uh proposed water rates for um fiscal year 2027. Um, so as outlined within my packet, um, what is before you this evening for consideration is a 5% increase, um,
taking it from what the current rate is of 830 per CCF, um, to 870 per CCF. So, um, the proposal before you is a it it
is not in alignment with the IOC's recommendation. Um, however, I felt for the board's consideration, it was worthwhile to have the discussion whether or not a rate increase this year um was uh warranted. So, uh you know, essentially over the last
several years, the account has been operating a structural deficit. Um the town has been using retained earnings to balance the budget. Um, I will say uh based on the last time I looked and the current trending, it looks like this will be the first year in several years
that we are going to end the year with a balanced budget slightly. Um the recommendation of the IOC is to hold rates for this fiscal year um while we h start having discussions with regards to the W rate study which was recently
approved to town meeting um and continue to have conversations about the overall program itself. Um again, what's proposed before you is a 5% increase um because we do know that there are some items that um will warrant additional
funds over time with regards to administrative capacity. So this would start that process. This would also um help to avoid uh large increases and um more or less propose incremental increases over time. Um so I think uh
just to summarize you know it's really a conversation of do we want to kind of take the short-term approach you know because I am aware that there was a rather large increase this past year um you know or is this something that the board would
like to you know consider for this fiscal year and I'll turn it over to you. >> Thank you. So we have before us Bob Daylor and Mory May of the Infrastructure Oversight Committee and then Jake, you're the select board representative committee, right? So we want to >> So I I'll take this. You want you want
to introduce this? you want to introduce? >> I um as uh the administrator said we were our recommendation was to hold the rates flat this year particularly since we had
raised them last year and Mari chaired I was away and Mari chaired the committee meeting and so he'll go through the points that we discussed and and why we based our recommendation as we did. >> So good evening everybody. Um the IOC
held a meeting on April 29th of this year to discuss a number of things and one of the things that we discussed was the waterline rates and to make a proposal for fiscal year 2027 uh starting July 1st and the IOC voted
unanimously to recommend holding our waterline rates unchanged at $8.30 for the next fiscal year. The reasons were five-fold. First of all, the Fall River held its rate steady at 424 for its fiscal year going forward. We
usually jack our rates up off of their rate and they did not increase their rate. Uh second is Fall River and Westport signed a new water supply agreement that was uh worked on extensively by our previous town administrator uh which is an improvement
for us. Uh the third thing is uh the IOC projection, actually my projection, uh is that we will have at current rates $8.30 a CCF. Um we will have a small surplus as we go forward. And I think
Chris just mentioned a surplus that we um had in the in the backward-looking fiscal year. Um, and that surplus really was because of the 14% rate increase that we installed last year when we went from 720 up 8 728 up to $8.30. I worked
with the previous administrator on that one. And um, so we want to avoid rate shock. We had a 14% increase last year. Let's not have a rate increase this year. And the last reason is the town meeting. As Chris mentioned, uh, we've
approved $15,000 for a consultant study on water rates. Now, we've Chris and I have talked and I'm aware of where he's coming from and the fact is he has a very valid uh point of view uh because the current rates while they cover all the water costs and everything and other
things from Fall River, they do not cover, you know, all the work the highway department does on the meters, it does not cover uh all the work that Paula has sending out the bills. And um we do pay the accountant a little bit out of the enterprise fund, but those
two things are not covered in in water rates. And going forward, you know, as this little water utility we have grows, um you know, it should it should cover all the cost. And I would assume that if you're going to pay $15,000 for a
consultant that we're going to, um get a broader study on the rates. But we recommend holding the rates steady at $8.30 30 cents a CCF for fiscal 2027. >> Thank you. Jake, did you want to add anything? >> No, I I think my uh covered it pretty
well with respect to kind of the rates. I mean, we're beholden to Forever this year. They did not increase the rates at all. Um my is well aware where I come on on the water rates and probably would not have supported an increase um even at the Iowa level. Um so, you know, with
a 14% increase last year, keeping it flat right now. Um I I agree with IOC and and where we are with that. >> I I move we accept the recommendation uh for of the OC for maintaining a level rate structure for the coming fiscal year.
>> I second. >> Is there any more discussion on the board before we open it up to the public? >> I have a couple questions. >> So the 424 referenced, is that what um a for resident pays? >> Yes. >> Okay. and the 870 um is more than double
what they're paying. Talk about the 5% above the residential rate at the 20 million gallons. At what point do we hit 20 million gallons of usage in this town? >> Well, we go from 55 to 25 to 5% over those rates at uh 20 million gallons as
you mentioned. 20 million gallons is about 26,800 ccf. >> Okay. And we are about there right now and we have added 50 customers. We added the school of course Mackamer as well as some commercial customers on Route 6
that had PAS problems and along the way we added you know quite a few additional reh residences and what we call the Mack loop and um so we now have up about 215 218 customers up about 50 from a year
ago. So that should push us over that 20 million gallons and um so that is something going forward that is very favorable for us and our previous administrator negotiated that. >> So if we get above the 20 million gallons our per unit cost is going to drop which means water rates will
eventually drop. This isn't a >> the markup the markup from >> Fall River drops at that it's one of the thresholds in which the rate drops the rate to us drops and in probably we we have the two federal grants the
direct congressional grants and um when we implement those we'll probably push ourselves right over that when we do the next extension uh we'll push push ourselves into that category.
>> No, thank you. >> Okay. >> Anything else from the board? >> This is a public hearing. Is there any comments or questions from the public? >> Seeing none. So, we have a motion and a second to um retain the current to make
no increase in the um uh water rate. All in favor? I >> I That's unanimous, right? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. The next item we have is a request to set the user rates for municipal electric vehicle charging stations at 28
cents per kilowatt and $2 an hour idle time effective July 1, 2026. So Chris, you want to tell us about this one? >> Uh certainly. So, um, you know, as the board is aware, over the last several months, the town has been looking at,
uh, its service charges across its various departments and workflows and permits. Um, you know, one of the things, um, you know, that I've been reviewing since starting, uh, is how the town handles its EV charging stations. Currently, the town doesn't charge a fee
for people to, uh, connect here at town hall or other location at the annex. Now, um that is something that um is a cost to the town that we are uh subsidizing about $11,000 a year. Um and
that is expected to go up. Um currently for this last year, um the most recent data I have is we had 1,335 1,345 charging sessions um with an average session length of uh
just under 9 hours. So um these stations are getting use. Um I expect them to to get increasing use. Um in looking at what the cost is to the town as I mentioned uh through our electricity account we
are absorbing that right now. Um, the idea behind this proposed fee structure would be that this would cover operating costs as well as help support whatever the ongoing maintenance and service charges are. Um, because we have a
subscription that lets us join the charge point network that we pay annual fee on as well as just routine maintenance on that. Um and then in addition to the charging rate, uh you know, just an idle fee that's being proposed of $2 per hour after the first
30 minutes. So, um it does provide a grace period, but because we do have a limited number of charging stations, this would also encourage people who are utilizing them to um move their vehicle once their vehicle is fully charged or it's been disconnected. So, um happy to
answer any questions on this proposal. >> So, I have a question. So um do we need to make any changes to our charging stations to accept um payment? >> Um no. So uh right now um connectivity uh is through the chargeoint app through
their interface. Um we would establish through um our existing package this pricing structure and that's how it' be implemented. So when you know when people go and they search for availability um you know the fees and the rate structure would be incorporated into that. >> So we don't we don't have to add a
credit card machine or something like that to the No, we don't. >> And then um for so what's the mechanism for the town vehicle to be charged? So, uh, there is a way for us to set up a permission in there, a user group, um, you know, or as an or code for example,
for employees that will be able to, um, um, >> avoid that charge. Yeah. By partard pass payment. Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any questions? >> I just couple question. How many, you might have said, how many charging stations do we have in town right now?
>> So, we have two with four ports. >> Two with four ports. So, each has a couple two different ports. >> Well, I'm I'm 100% in favor of this. Um, I used to leave I would leave the town hall and saw an individual that would park their car here for the evening for their morning commute the next day,
obviously getting their charge for free and I it was consistent. Um, so the fact that I'm already subsidizing the electric car one way or the other, I don't need to subsidize again with my taxpayer money. >> Anything else? So, this is a public hearing. Is there
anyone from the public have anything? >> Okay. What's the pleasure of the board? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> So, the motion is to set the user rates for municipal electric vehicle charging stations at 28 cents per kilowatt and $2 an hour idle time effective July 1.
>> That was your motion, right? >> That was >> okay. >> I'd go a lot higher, but I'll go with that one. >> All in favor? >> I. That's unanimous. >> Um, we have one more public hearing. We have a request from John Rodriguez, uh, Rodrigz, sorry, for a six-month seasonal
trailer per permit for recreational purposes to locate a trailer at 95 Moer Lane. The property is shown on assessor's map 76A, lot 95. Um, can you tell us about this one?
I'm not sure where Moer Lane is. >> Um, yes. So, the application includes a standard trailer permit. um including removal at the end of the permit period um non-permanent electrical hookup uh and board of health requirements. Um my
recommendation would be to approve uh subject to the standard permit conditions required from building in board health. >> So typically um so typically when we approve trailer permit so first of all typically is the East Beach trailer. This is not an East Beach location. And
then um we also typically approve them for the event of like a fire that someone's rebuilding for construction or something. Do we have any is is there a reason like that in here for that? >> So uh let me just take a look. I did not
see that. >> Is the applicant here? >> Okay. >> Yeah, I didn't see like a like a reason. Is it >> you just said he was in a butter? >> You're in a butter. All right. So, we'll get to you in a second then. >> So, I do not see a stated reason here uh
in the application. >> Yeah, I didn't see one either. All right. So, um but this is still a seasonal trailer permit. Um Okay. Um so, this any questions from the board? No, I I would just echo your sentiment because we're pretty strict on the last one when
we approved that permit for um a camper with respect to them rebuilding their home after fire. So, um I don't know what the exact reason for this one is. I'm just reading through the application where they'll be using the dump station at the beach campground um and various
other things. So, I'd agree if there's more information. So, we can certainly follow up with the applicant uh if the board did want to continue it until it got more information. >> Um >> well, because I would also want to know if they're they're proposing occupying
it, right? So, there's it seems like they are. That's why they're applying for a permit. So, a little more information. Good. But yes. >> Um I know we have at least one butter. Did you want to make a comment or ask a question? You have to go to the microphone. Douglas Davis, lot
>> battle. Is that on? >> It is. Okay. Go ahead. I I couldn't hear you very well. >> Uh Douglas Davis, lot 77 John Reed Road. >> Mhm. >> So, is it required to uh go before the board of appeals to get a variance for a
trailer permit? No, it's required to go to the select board. So, the the select board has the uh the select board is the one that authorizes uh trailer permits. So, like I said before, typically um it's the East Beach trailers have a process. Typically, we approve them when
there's like a fire and someone's rebuilding their house or something like that. We don't typically just approve random trailer. It's not impossible. We're the authority that could do it. >> That's East Beach Road. So, it's right along John. >> Oh, so it's close to the beach. >> Yeah, that's East Beach. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Well, in 86, 1986, it was required my
dad get a variance through the board of appeals. According to this paper right here, if you want to see it, >> I believe you. >> Well, >> I don't know what the changes of laws are now. >> I'm sorry.
>> I don't know what the You could be right. It's possible. Well, >> because >> can do you have but I think I think what you're saying is he doesn't have a variance, right? You're concerned that there is no >> I don't know if the applicant's not here, you can't ask him, I suppose. >> Yeah. Did you have other cons that
that's one >> I have other I do have another concern. >> Yep. Go ahead. >> There's a summer road that his lot is on. He has a house now. He has a lot where he wants to put a trailer. They consider that a summer road in the back.
It's a skidley lane. Some people call it Mojo, whatever. But since 1920, it's been in my family, the property, and the summer roads always been open till he moved in and he closes
the road. So, I was concerned to see if he's going to have a trailer, people are going to come in and out. He didn't want people driving down this easement. It's an He doesn't own it. It's an easement. call it a summer road, but he closes it off. So, I wanted to
ask him personally what he was going to do. What is the requirements? I mean, >> so is it looks like, if I'm looking at that right, it looks like there is a public roadway. >> Well, >> so one would not be allowed to >> I thought so.
>> Roadway. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, this this is a piece of state. This is wants to put the trailer on. He blocks it. This is a lot here. Blocks it right.
And then it's only block one. But I'm not, you know, I'm just question >> that would be Yeah, that's a different issue. Also an issue, but a different issue. >> Yeah. Well, I thought the would have to be here to answer questions, but
>> Well, we haven't taken a vote yet, but I'm guessing he's not going to get it approved right now. >> Well, thank you. >> But but but but I think it's important to know the questions and concerns we have because if we if we continue the hearing for another time and get back with the applicant like we suggested
maybe we might do, um it's good to hear the issues that we'd want addressed in the next hearing. So you're concerned about um the access um on the roadway and concerned about whether he has the proper variances to or whether he needs variances.
>> Yeah. I I don't know if you follow this pursuant to article whatever. I'm not a lawyer, but it it says it's required. That's why my father acquired it for this property. >> But >> did you have >> maybe it's changed. I don't know. I don't
>> I do know that this road and he knows that I don't feel I don't like it being shut off. >> He doesn't own it. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other points you want to >> No, I think that's all. But I wish he was here. I could ask him, you know, we
could get some questions answered, but >> All right. Thank you. Is there any other comments from the public? >> So, what's the pleasure of the board? I would like to make a motion to table the request from John Roberts for a six-month seasonal trailer permit for recreational purposes to locate a trailer at 95 Moer Lane.
>> I think the proper motion would be to continue the public hearing until June uh 22nd at 610. >> My motion is to uh continue the public hearing and June 22nd at 610. >> Second. >> Is there any further discussion? >> All in favor? I
>> I That's unanimous. So there we're tableabling that. >> Thank you. Um but um Chris, if you and your department can get with the applicant to address the concerns. >> We'll send another >> We'd have to send another notice for the Oh, do we have to send another notice? >> Oh, we do not.
>> No. So, we're continued the hearing. So, we're not going to send another notice. >> The 22nd at 610. >> The 22nd. >> The 22nd. Yep. >> 6 >> 610. Same. Same as this one. >> So much. >> Thank you. Thank you for your time. Um,
so license and permits. Um, is anyone from the Holy Ghost here? No. >> All right. So, um, the license and permits. So, um, Mr. Monday, you're kind of new here. We get a lot of requests from the Holy Ghost Club. They're typically in order, um, for one day alcoholic beverage licenses. Um, so we
have a request from the Holy Ghost Club at 171 Sodom Road for 1-day all alcohol liquor licenses for the following events. Um, Saturday, June 13, for a concert from 4:00 to 9:00. Sunday, June 14, a baby shower from 1:00 to 5:00.
Saturday, June 27, 2026, a memorial from 12:00 to 5:00. Sunday, June 28, a wedding from uh 12:00 to 5:00. Is all the paperwork in order? >> Uh, the paperwork is in order. um you know and if the board is going to be
considering approval just um the police did make a note that they're requesting a police detail there for those days and events. Um so just conditional approval um subject to police department's request. >> I would move that >> second.
>> Is there any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I >> I that's unanimous. We have a request from the Coastal Wine Trail of Southeastern New England for 1-day wine and malt beverage permit for their annual farmers market festival at 200
Pineh Hill Road on June 13 from 11:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Is there anyone here for that? >> This is also a recurring event, right? Is it working order? >> Yes. >> Do they have is there a police recommendation? >> Uh yes. Similar to the last request, uh
they are uh requesting at least two police details uh in coordination with their department. Um I will also note um I believe that they are still waiting to receive their approval for their MDAR agricultural event certification from
the state. So I would make any approval contingent on them receiving the necessary approvals from from MDAR. >> What's the pleasure of the board? Motion to approve. >> Second. >> So it's a motion to approve subject to police department recommendations and MDAR certification. Is that what you're
saying? >> Yes. >> All right. Any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I >> I that's unanimous. We have a request from Police Chief Christopher Dunn who's not here, but we have Officer McCarthy.
proper title is. Um, so we have a request from police chief Christopher Dunn to appoint Tagan Silera to full-time EMD dispatcher. >> Yes. So, um, Tan Solar has been part-time dispatcher. She's completed all of her training. Um, there's an opening spot available and we would like
to have her um made her full-time effective June 2nd, tomorrow. >> All right. Thank you. >> So desire. >> Chris, do you have a recommendation? recommend approval. >> Second. >> Are you moving that?
>> Make a motion. I make a motion to appoint Taylor to full-time EMD dispatcher effective tomorrow. >> Rick moved it. Dick seconded. Is there any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I >> I That's unanimous. We have a request from Police Chief Christopher Dunn to
appoint the following to community service officers effective May 31st, 2026. Jacob Mock, Kayn Daz, Ryan Suave, Eric Madonna, Robert Dashens, and Howard Wong. >> Yes. Um, so I'd like to talk about uh
Jacob Walk and Kaylin Days first. Um, they're already town employees. Um, Jacob Mark, who couldn't make it here tonight, um, is currently a full-time night dispatcher and he's been here for two and a half years. He resides in Westport. Kaylin Days, um, she's also a
full-time dispatcher. has been here for 2 years. Um like I said, they have backgrounds have already been completed. Their uh appointment would be uh upon completion of their training for uh CSO.
>> Okay. What about the other ones? We don't have to. So we can move them all together. >> Okay. Uh so we have uh four retired uh members of law enforcement. Uh the first would be uh Ryan Save. Um he has over 31
years at the Ber County Sheriff's Department and he retired at the rank of captain. Uh Eric Madonna from he's from Fore River. Uh retired from Forever Police Department. He was also served in the United States Marine Corps in the Army. He had two deployments in support
of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Uh Eric also lives in Westport. He's married with a daughter. Now we have Robert Nachines. Uh he is also retired after 29 years as a police officer in the city of For River. He also proudly served in the United States Coast Guard and he is also
uh lives in Westport with his wife uh Howard Wong who cannot attend tonight has extensive law enforcement experience. He has over 38 years for the town of Dartmouth and he also retired at the rank of sergeant.
Can you just tell us what a community service officer is? >> So, a community service officer um is not a police officer. They have no police powers. They don't have a gun. They have zero equipment except for a radio. Um they serve to assist traffic
enforce uh traffic direction uh intersections, road construction. >> All right. Anything from the board? What's the pleasure of the board? >> Motion to appoint >> uh that would be effective uh June 28th as well too.
>> Motion to appoint. Oh, go ahead. >> And uh just with the uh conditions that they candidates are subject to a successful background check, physical and required training. >> And you just said June 28th, but it says May 31st here. This what's the date it should be effective? >> I think that was a typo.
>> Okay. >> Um so I'll refer to you as to the date the proper >> I I spoke with the chief. It's going to be uh that second date, the uh >> June 28th. >> June 28th. >> Okay. >> Yeah. June 28th. >> June 28th. Okay. >> Motion to appoint uh the following to
community service officers uh on June 28th pending obviously uh passing a background check and any uh required training >> and physical requirements. >> In physical requirements. >> Thank you. Sorry about that. >> Did you say physical or physical? >> Second. Physical.
>> Physical. Is there any discussion? All in favor? >> I I That's unanimous. Anything while you're here? Anything police department wants to share with us? >> I think I'm up next for the uh national night out. >> Oh, yeah. Let's do that. So, we're going to move down to 6A.
So, 6A, we have a request from Police Chief Christopher Dunn to host an annual National Night Out on August 4th. Want to tell us about that one? >> Yeah. So, this will be the second annual uh National Night Out. Um last year was a great success, the first
time doing it. Uh we had volunteers, fire department, obviously from the police department, um highway department. We've already been in contact with the hobby master. They want to be involved. Um we had representatives from the opioid task force there, local food trucks, vendors.
Um it was a great time and um we would like to use the old high school again. Um I know the chief has already been in contact with Dr. Fran Roy. She's fully supportive of it and we'd like to have your approval to have it there again. >> That was a great event last year. That was the first year. >> It was It was a really good time. I was I was impressed with the turnout of
people who showed up. >> Any questions? >> I move I approve uh first night out. >> Second. >> Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I That's unanimous. Thank you. Anything? Are you here for anything else?
Um on behalf of Chief uh Chris Dunn, I'd like to thank Cal Freighus uh for her, uh Memorial Day events last week. It was a good time. Um also, uh he would like to talk about the Westport drone unit, how um we continue to use it. Um almost
weekly now. Um we just had that huge fire over at Mid City. Um Officer Cory Mack and Detective Turner Ryan spent numerous hours. I think Cory Max spent over 24 hours there continually flying the drone up and down, up and down. Um, putting the thermal on the hot spots,
fighter pom could hit it with the cannon. Uh, it was it was good. Um, also just last week the uh MSP had a crash on 195 in Westport. Uh, when they showed up, vehicle was unoccupied, fearing that the person might have been injured. Uh, Cory Max have to work an overtime shift
that night. They called him out. He flew the drone up and within 10 minutes he he had the person on on the thermal image and on the end taking into custody. >> That's great. Thank you. Great work. >> Right. Anything else? >> Right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Next, we have a request from the recreation director, Dana Stewart, to accept the resignations of the following members from the recreation commission effective June 30, 2026. Amanda Mazaferero, Olivia Carrero, and Tim Gillespie. Did you want to come up? You
I know you have a few things on my agenda here. >> Yes. Thank you. Dana Stewart, recreation director. Um I couldn't let this opportunity pass without thanking these members. Um so I wrote a little something if you'll indulge me. Um I
Olivia and Amanda both served for the past three years and were extremely helpful with many of our large-scale events and planning of the two new playgrounds. Um they both have families both with three children each and both work full-time. So I really appreciate
their commitment to helping the recreation department grow and just want to thank them. Um Tim Gillespie, I think a lot of you know Tim Gillespie. um he's a longtime resident here in town. And um I've I started here over 7 years ago to
help form the recreation department. And Tim Gillespie was on the recreation commission before I even formed the recreation department. And he wasn't even sure when I asked him how long he's been on the recreation commission. Um but he thinks it's about 26 years. If I
could give him an award, I probably would. Um, so he was a constant support to me and very knowledgeable about all things Westport. His calm, friendly manner and likability factor are unmatched, making him an absolute pleasure to work with. He helped with
setting goals and dreaming of what could be as an important part of creating the recreation department. He was there at the very first recreation openhouse event and other special events over the years. We worked together with volunteers to help erect the wall on the back of the outdoor stage which then
allowed us to do the outdoor concerts and the movies and other things with our camps. Um he was there when we planned to improve our two town playgrounds and was the leazison between the recreation commission and the community preservation committee. He made a very big difference in our community and
probably still does and will and I appreciate him in every way and he'll be very much missed and I just wanted to publicly thank him. So >> thank you. That's one thing. >> What's the um pleasure of the board or displeasure of the
>> May I say something? >> Just a minute. >> Let's get a motion first. >> Motion to accept the resignations. >> Second. >> Go ahead. >> Tim Gillespie has been on the CPC since its inception in 2002 and he's been a very important member. Uh so he's been
at least since that time. >> Yeah. and we thank him very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um any discussion? All in favor? >> I. That's unanimous. Then we have a request um from Dana Stewart to appoint
Brian Velcourt to the recreation commission. I love that you roped him in. Um and so that is also in thanks to Betty Slade. So thank you. Um Brian as a a past select board member was very always very supportive of the
recreation commission and recreation department which was very much appreciated and so we're happy to have him uh serve on the recreation commission starting the new fiscal year. >> Madam chair motion to approve. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? How many do you
do you have a number of openings now on the commission? >> Um so I have two people that have also submitted their letters of interest. um which will be presented at the next lecture meeting. >> Okay. All right. Um all in favor >> I that's unanimous. Then we have a
request um from Dana to appoint the following as camp counselors. Shelby or Tess Sylvia Jenna Eggby Khloe Baker Jenna George Elijah Gonzalez Isabella Eggby. >> Yes. So um I'm happy to say we have
returning uh camp counselors coming to us as well as some new people. um and we'll be holding or or I'll be holding a um orientation or training of sorts uh in June for them and they're all very excited to have a great summer camp season. So,
>> do we have a um date for them to start? >> Um so, the camps start uh >> for the effective >> end of June, >> effective date for their employment. >> Um so, the camps first uh week of camp is June 29th
actually. It was it was postponed due to the school starting or letting out later. >> School is out late. >> Yeah. >> Did you have >> um was the pleasure of the board? >> Make a motion to um appoint the following camp counselors pending any
required training or background checks. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I. >> I. That's unanimous. Do you want to just tell us how we can find out about these camps if people want to sign up? >> Sure. Thank you very much. Um, just visit our website at westportrec.com
or that's westport.com. You can also visit the town of Westport website and we have a link uh on that the recreation page to our other website where you can look at all of our programs and events and sign up and pay online. You can also pay by check or
come in my office and and pay that way. So, >> and I saw you're advertising for the Westport 250 concert. >> Yes. So, as part of our Westport summer concert series, our first concert is going to be on Thursday, July 2nd from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. And we are celebrating
America 250 with a Celebration concert to kickstart the series. And we have the featured band, Calamity Brain, that's going to be playing. And we're also going to have some food trucks, um some giveaways, um some arts and crafts, and hopefully face painting. Uh so it'll be
a lot of fun and just a nice day outside hopefully. this July 2nd. >> July 2nd. >> All right. Anything else you want to share before? >> Um I am also booking our in the process of booking our last band for that series. So that information will be hopefully online um this week and our
outdoor movie series is also currently online. >> Thank you, Dana. >> Thank you. >> Um we're on 5F. We have a request from the cemetery department to appoint Jared Manley as cemetery laborer effective June 2nd, 2026. Do you want to tell us about this?
>> Uh, yes. So, in your packet, you have a recommendation from our cemetery foreman, Michael Bruiard, requesting the appointment of Jared Manley, uh, as a seasonal cemetery labor effective June 2nd, 2026. He cites his landscaping experience and a strong work ethic and,
uh, recommends approval, and so do I. >> Thank you, >> gentlemen. >> Make a motion to appoint Jared Manley as a secretary of labor effective June 2nd, 2026. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All in favor? >> I I That's unanimous. We have a request
from Brian Gallagher from the Commission on Disability Chair to appoint Kaylee Vieiraa. You're the one here. >> Um do we have anything on this one? >> This is appointed to a committee. >> Madam Chair, >> go ahead.
>> I serve on a commission on disability. Um, Miss Vieira appeared before us and made a presentation and outlined her background in working for organizations that help those with disabilities. Uh, we recommended her unanimously and
highly at the same time. >> Okay. >> So, I would make a motion to appoint her uh to a position on the commission on disability. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? All in favor? >> I I That's unanimous. We have um
appointment form for the Southeastern Regional Transit Authority, CERTA. Um you're our CERT rep, right? You want to tell us about this? >> Well, the uh it has to do with the buses and um it's been a very interesting uh opportunity. I've done it now for
several years. I'm willing to do it again. We meet once a month. what's generally centers around service um civil rights issues and um budget. So I'm willing to continue to do that. Uh and I guess I have to be appointed
officially. >> Make a motion to appoint Dick Brewer to the Southern Southeastern Regional Transit Authority Board. >> Second. >> There any discussion? All in favor? >> I. That's unanimous. >> Now we're on 6B. um request for project
letters of support for grant applications, the community one stop for growth for the Westport master plan. Do you have anyone to talk to? >> Yes, I believe Jeff is here this evening. Jeff Bowl is here to talk about the uh Hicksbridge landing upgrade. Um
but I'll just go over both of these. So there's two uh letters of support for consideration. One is for a Seapport economic council grant. Uh this is for the Hicksbridge landing. Um focusing on access improvements, parking management, storm water controls. Um the boat launch
redesign and salt marsh restoration. Uh the other one is the community onetop for growth. Uh and this is focused on doing a master plan update. So um the last time it was fully updated was 2016. So um I believe we've talked about this
at prior meetings as well. >> All right. Okay. So, what you're asking for the board is uh letters of support for the grant applications for these two projects. >> That is correct. So, within your packet, you do have uh draft letters of support that have been uh typed out on behalf of the board.
>> Right. Um I thought you just said Jeff was here, but >> I believe he was going to be speaking, but >> no. All right. >> All right. Well, that those are the two projects. >> I move I move we submit um these applications.
>> Second. All right. So, we have a motion, a second to um submit the project letters in support of the grant applications as they were u presented in the packet. Any discussion? >> I just have one comment on that. Uh on the Hicks Bridge landing, um a few
people have reached out with concern and I've brought this up in the past that, you know, obviously getting the grants at least from the state that it still allows local control over the Hicksbridge landing. So, I just want to make that as a part of the record that I will approve it, but I still want to make sure that Westport still exercises
control over that Hicks bridge landing no matter what grants end up coming through. Thank you. >> All right. Did we have a motion? >> Yes, >> we do. All right. All in favor? >> I I That's unanimous. Um, we have a request from the highway surveyor Christopher Gonzolves to
approve the 2026 phase 2 paving project intention to award notice to be issued to PJ Keating Company. Want to tell us about this one? >> Uh, yes. So, as you noted, uh, this is a request for attempt to award. Uh, this project covers paving related work on
nine roads here in town. Uh, which is approximately 6 and 12 miles. Um and the proposed award amount is1,271,515. Uh recommend approval. And just for the um public, so the roads for this one are
Sanford Road from 595 to Route 6, Davis Road from Route 6 to Old Bedford Road, Idola Street from Davis Road to the dead end, Donna Street, SN, I guess, south of North dead ends. Um Mason Mass Street um
south and north dead ends. Reed Road from Old County Road to Dartmouth Town Line. Old County Road East, House 533 to House 497. Old County Road West, uh, Main Road at the Old High School to Route 177. And
Mouseill Road, Old County Road to Route 177, >> Madam Chair, >> and then there's some alternates. Yes. >> And and I know Chris brought this up uh before at a previous meeting. This was actually a grant that usually doesn't go out to, you know, very many communities. So, it's great that Westport was able to
get that. And then I know some people have reached out to me with concern about sidewalks and their road on Sanford Road. And this will be used to address uh those safety issues with uh the sidewalks and handicap uh accessibility with those sidewalks. >> That's it.
>> Okay. And you recommend approval? >> Yes. >> All right. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Is there any further discussion? >> All in favor? >> I >> I That's unanimous. Madam Chair, should we congratulate uh Mr. Bull uh on on
passing his late >> item today? >> Mr. Bull, your your your your letter passed. >> Maybe better without me. >> That's what they said. >> That's good. >> We don't usually have this many people
here. It's kind of animated. It was um We have uh six. We're on 6D. A request from highway surveyor Christopher Gonzolves to approve a chapter 90 town paving improvement phase two. This is a different one. Um
of years 2025 and 2026. You want to tell us about this one? >> Uh yes. This is through uh chapter 90. Um this is for the 2026 as you said uh phase 2 request. Um this is again for nine roads includes paving, line painting, uh drainage replacement and uh
signage improvement. in our packet. This is the same streets. So, >> so I believe my understanding is both projects are um are packaged together from a funding standpoint. So, um just different funding sources here that
they're pulling from. >> Okay. There any discussion? >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I That's unanimous. >> Um, now we have a request from the Westport Democratic Town Committee to
host a food drive at the town hall annex on July 11, July 18, and July 25. Is there someone here to speak to that request? >> Yes. >> Good evening everybody. My name is uh Timothy Kaitton. Does everybody have this uh packet information?
>> We do. We have the letter. >> Okay. So, everybody's seen the letter and um I don't know if there's any concerns or not with it, but the uh Westport Democratic Committee in the last few years has really uh stepped up
in doing some good public service for the town of Westport. you know, um whether it be with Betty Slate cleaning the cemeteries or we did some, you know, clothing drives and boot drives. We've done, you know, we we did kind of on a
small basis some stuff already for the uh for the food pantry. Um, and we're in the parade and we just, you know, just figure that doing good services for the town is is is a good deed uh in terms
for the Westport Democratic Committee. So, I'm in support of this and and and and hopefully we can get your support, too. >> So, the request is to set up a booth in the parking spot um during the hours that the um
>> the the uh summer market is happening. Um, and we've gotten you've we've gotten confirmation from the mark farmers market that they don't have any objections. Um, we also just want to note that there's no sign that indicates um who's hosting the food drive. It'll
just be a sign, a generic sign. This is for the food drive, right? >> But that members would be wearing um t-shirts um with their uh and advertising for the um >> advertising for the event would go out with from the Democratic town committee
advertising. Correct. Through the media and all that. Yep. >> Okay. And then um we also had uh you also ran by the economic development committee. >> Correct. >> And then the um recreation department said it wasn't um under their purview because it's not renting the gym. It's out of the parking lot. So that would
put it under the select board approval. >> Right. And we're not going to interfere um at all with the services that normally go on those days. We're going to be back set up back closer to the back parking lot by the foot I mean
football fields by the basketball courts and all that kind of stuff. Yep. >> Right. Thank you. Any questions? >> Just one comment. I appreciate you presenting before as I've spoken to a few members of of the Democratic uh town committee with respect to this and I
appreciate you from the standpoint of not doing a lot of advertising obviously since it's a town space. Uh, I appreciate everything you're doing for the food pantry and the other stuff you do, but as you know, everything is a contentious issue. Uh, whether it's, you know, Republican, Democrat, or whatever with respect to what you're doing. So,
we I appreciate you taking the opportunity to to raise uh funds and raise uh, you know, bring in food for the food pantry and then do it in in the fashion that you are doing it. So, thank you for that. And, uh, if anyone else on the other side wants to come, we'd be more than happy to approve them as well. So, thank you.
>> I move approval of of the committee's request. Second. >> Is there any further discussion? >> Um, I would just like to publicly thank you as well. I am the volunteer board president of the Westport Food Pantry and I appreciate your efforts. Thank you very much.
>> All right. So, we have a motion, a second to approve as mentioned. All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? That's unanimous. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. I just want to say before you guys all get up that please if you're you're welcome to
stay this is a public meeting and there's a lot of important work going on but if you choose to leave please do not congregate in the hallway and chat it's lovely outside go outside and okay thank you >> I think that's directed at me Shauna I
stay >> don't stand in the hallway and talk outside >> thank you very much You can stay. It's a democracy. >> David, you now you get the whole road to yourself. >> You don't have to go home, but you can't
stay here. >> Okay. We have uh we're on F now. the notice of preliminary permit application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FERC to request for comments regarding the Cuddy Hunk test range project feasibility study. So, can you
tell us about this one because this one was kind of odd. >> Yes. Uh it was new for me as well. So, uh FK is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Um and as you mentioned, this is a request for comments. Um this
is for project cuddyhawk test rates project feasibility study. Um this was submitted to this federal agency by the marine renewable energy collaborative. Um the proposed project is about 2,000 ft off of Kuyhunk Island and um this uh
study this project would be uh really done in order to give them a priority for a future license application. Um, so the project itself, uh, there's a few different elements to it, but it would consist of a wave energy converter structure with a buoy, uh, second buoy
for data acquisition, um, anchored mooring system, and a buried submarine cable, um, and a couple of other elements to this, including a solar battery system and cellular and satellite communication system for
receiving data from that system. Um the proposed project would have a annual uh energy generation of 200 megawatt hours. So uh you know again this was uh something that our office received. The
request for comments um is at the end of the month, June 29th 5:00 p.m. Um this is something that if the town were um looking to weigh in on, we can certainly do so. Uh but I did wanted to bring it to the board's attention because it does
seem like a rather uh large project that's being proposed or being studied. >> Okay. So the the question here is whether we want to um uh submit any comments or motions to intervene in this project. Okay. >> Yes.
>> If I may ask the question test range implies weaponry of some kind. Is there anything related to that or is this >> nothing that uh is in the materials that were sent to us? Um I I don't know the purpose of >> So this is a um marine renewable energy
collaborative. So the um from from what I can tell here this it's a I don't know why they call it a test range because yeah sounds military but but um it's it looks like there it's a wave energy converter structure. So they're trying to capture renewable energy from
wave systems. So then the associated infrastructure to go with that and this is off Cotty hunk. It's not super close to us but we're I mean it's out in our waters here. >> Did you have more? >> No. >> No.
>> There's no weapons. >> So does the board feel like they want to make any com? Does anyone from the public have anything that you want us to comment? >> Okay. I don't I mean I don't think we need to take action unless >> and I'll just note this is a feasibility study so I I don't think they're going
for the full >> project right now. So >> Okay. >> Keep us posted. >> I'm excited. >> I hear offshore wind committee can can >> No, we do not need to we don't need to do waves now too. >> Wind and waves. All right. So, we're
taking no action on F. Um, for G, we have a request to approve the contract amendment number five for PAR Corporation for the Route 177 roundabout design project. So, you want to tell us about that one? >> Uh, certainly. Um, so as the board
knows, this project uh has been ongoing for several years now. Uh, PAR has been contracted by the town to do the design work. uh this is going through uh the mass DOT uh um project um process.
So over the years we have entered into or continue to enter into design agreements with PAR you know as we uh do the full design of this proposed roundabout um and as we accommodate the requests that come from Mass DOT. Um,
PAR recently completed 100% design, submitted into Mass DOT, received comments back um and has really been working with Mass DOT in during that process. Um, you know, it came to my attention that we were nearing and we
have since fully expended the funds um that we've allocated for this last round of uh work that PAR did. So uh you know here a while back I uh reached out to Mass DOT informing them of this um to
see if this would be something because we are very close if they would be willing to take on uh the rem remaining administrative responsibility associated with this project. Um and I will note that just um my understanding is over time uh the goalpost has moved a little
bit with regards to what Mass DOT is looking for, what the permitting process has been from their side and so you know I think um that was went into part of our request is hey you know we've put a lot into this. Um I received back
correspondence very firmly saying that this is uh something that the town uh has committed and is obligated to do. Um based off of the approval the town received in 2020. Um I went back to par to say what do we as a town need to do
from a scope of work standpoint uh for us to fulfill the obligation that we committed to um several years ago. And uh essentially within your packet you you have that summary is um finishing the review comments with mass
DOT um completing the final design based on those comments doing the specifications uh and estimates the bid documents um coordinating with mass DOT on the rightway pre-bid uh and ultimately construction administration which is not
included here. Um the proposed amendment that's before you this evening uh is just over or just under 53,000. Um and as I mentioned before, there would be um one additional addendum that would be
needed next year for the construction administration. Um but based off of um our funding now, based off the phasing of this project and the fact that this work wouldn't be uh based on Mass DOT's
schedule wouldn't be until 2027. Um you know, I'm proposing that we take that up at a later date. uh if that's something the board wants to move forward with. But um really at this point uh I have to bring it back to the board just because you know again we would need to enter
into an updated agreement with PAR um based off what Mass DOT is asking of us. >> And what's the source of funding for this 52727? Um so we do have administrative grant funds um that we are able to tap into um
through our existing uh board of health administrative fund as well as some other funds. >> Okay. So the if if I understood that correctly. So this is the final work that is needed to finalize the um plan so that it could go out for construction
bid. >> That's correct. So this would take us through um the full design and the bid phase services. Um so the only thing that this would not cover is their service hours out on the
construction site. Um looking at the work that's being done >> and then on once the assuming that it went out for bid then um who's paying for the construction? >> That would be mass dot. So, we had to pay for the design engineering and but
they're paying for any construction. >> That's correct. Okay. >> Any questions from the board? >> I know Jake does. >> Why do you assume me all the time? Um,
I have obviously been a vocal uh opponent of this project at the roundabout or the rotary at 177, especially with respect to land takings. Um and then obviously the development that has occurred there uh since this project was put in place, you know, many
years ago. I know it is obviously a result of a horrible accident that occurred there, but uh we do have a lot of accidents that occur all over uh Westport where we're not addressing it uh to this degree. And the of the things in Westport that I've gotten the most feedback from from constituents, Route
One, Route 177 Rotary, the DOC healthy trail road widening we're dealing with, and then the drift road bridge. Um, and what is the common denominator amongst all those? It's basically the state or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
running these projects. Um I think when we lose local control and we go to funding um you can actually Google and take a look at uh some uh cities and towns in Mass even in this fiscal environment have denied or tried not to use chapter 90 funds because it comes
with costs like land takings uh like future maintenance responsibilities. So I'm just I don't think that a $5 million rotary on 177 which I travel quite often as well is is necessary. Um, I think there are other ways to accomplish this, but uh, I will continue to be opposed to
this project and and and the town spending money on this project any further. That's it. >> Thank you. Anybody else? >> Rick, were you raising your hand? >> I couldn't tell if you were raising your hand or you just >> deepen thought. >> Okay.
>> I think this is a tricky one because I think that something badly needs to change where that Rotary is proposed. I don't know if a rotary is the right answer, but something needs to change at that intersection. >> Yeah, it's I I I kind of agree with Jake that it's kind of unfortunate. We asked
the DOT to put in a stoplight there is what the ask was and um then they come back and do their study and their engineering and now no, they don't want to put a stoplight in. They're putting a rotary in. I actually travel rotary at 44 and uh 118 pretty frequently and I
love that rotary. It's great. But it's also a very different circumstance. You have two very busy roads. But I'm in support of continuing um with the project because I do think that there are some problems at that intersection. I don't love the rotary, but I think that we've committed to all of this design that we should get it to the
final design. Personally, >> I'll make a motion to that effect. >> I will second it. >> Is there any um discussion from the public? Any comments from the public? You just You just need to introduce yourself. >> Yes. Rob Kzik. Um, I have a problem with
it, too, because I travel all um to Boston. >> You need to get close to that. >> Uh, my name is Rob Cros. Um, I travel a lot to Boston and I deal with rotaries all the time, especially from um, you could local Tivven, the Adabal Rotary
with the the Cumlin Farms is. It's horrible. People do not drive. It's like a racetrack. You constantly go people are coming at you. They don't know how. It's like it's a hit and miss with an accident. To me, I think it's it's not
cost effective for taxpayer dollars. It's it's ridiculous. I can't see why you can't put lights with solar. Okay. Much cheaper to monitor stop lights. Sanford Road. Everybody stops there. They don't run the light. I can't see
spending $5 million where guess what? They could put it into the schools. You know what I mean? Uh it just it's it's kind of um it's a waste of money, you know. Uh uh um $5 million for a rotary. It's it's just uh and like I said, I travel to Boston uh Brigham Women's
Faulner Hospital and they have rotaries over there and it's constantly freezing because someone's going to hit you. It's it's just a waste of money. I'm like, if if you can't hear that from people, it's like it's our tax dollars is going to this and and there's so many other ways
I mean uh to to spend our money and a rotary $5 million rotary. It's ridiculous. So, what's wrong with the You see the light, the temporary light that's on Route Six and uh what's it a gifted road? Okay. Why can't they have a solar light? Uh solar lights back and
forth. Saves energy, much more cost-effective. I'm not like a big green person, but come on. I mean, this is $5 million. How much would it be electric bill for half solar, you know? I mean, I'm just that's my opinion, you know. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Anyone else? >> Hi, Michelle Cardi. My husband Ron and I are here as we have been at almost every meeting, and I repeat the same objection to this. We live on the corner of 177 and Tickle and I agree with all the
comments just made and also believe it is a terrible decision to remove some of the wetlands there, encroach on property and make all of the other changes that are being made. Um concerned about flooding. Uh the last time we were here,
we talked about why they're moving uh wires and putting up new poles instead of moving it underground. and several other things that we were a fence to see if there could be anything to protect. He put up a barrier or anything. I
haven't heard anything back about that. Um nor any other sort of communication yet since uh January. So um I'd like to follow up on that and uh just again just feel that this is a big waste of money
that could be managed a different way. I'm wondering what other actions we as citizens can take beyond this board, not just to not pay for this $58,000, but what do we go to the governor? Who do you go to in Massachusetts to say why
are we spending $5 million on this? >> So, the decision before us today is the the extension of the contract, but do you have any thoughts about that or what you just said about who to go to? >> Yeah. So I mean just with regards to how mass dot came to the recommendation that
it did you know >> I read the whole thing and many problems. >> Well I guess just not speaking necessarily to the report that was done but I guess just the standard that they go about looking at these projects as a whole. um you know that would be mass
dot and really policy decisions coming out of that department that again flow down to us here when we're applying in there considering these um these projects. So >> I think it would be mass DOT and then your state representative and your state
senator and then probably governor's office I guess. >> Thank you >> David the Lima 418 Drift Road. My my comment is I agree with Jake. I think it's it's not an appropriate use of monies. But I think if anything the
lesson to be learned having dealt with the >> bridge >> and and DOT money and chapter 90 monies, >> the lesson learned is that we get money from the state, we lose all power. And I think if anything if you if anything
that comes from this exercise is that we should not be doing this in the future unless it's some unbelievable necessity. This clearly was not the the bridge was not a five another one of these three 4 million bridges that we don't we don't need to have. So I think
if there's any lesson for the decision makers present and future is that we really have to think twice about when DOT wants to get involved they're not open to suggestions they're very close-minded they're very authoritarian you do this or you do it my way or you
don't do it okay we don't need that kind of cooperation from the state if it's going to operate that way and I think if it goes through then lesson should be learned we won't let it happen again that would be my my comment >> thank Chris, do you know what happens if we
don't kick the money in >> as a town? >> I'm sorry to say that. >> Do you know what h what gets triggered if we don't kick the money in as a town? >> I can certainly follow up on that piece of it. Um it if we did not
hold up our end of the obligation um you know my guess is it could be looked at punitively for future project considerations >> but we've already we already took that stance with another project in town. >> Well
with the drift road bridge. So >> I mean I can certainly advise the board but and give you some specifics but I would just you know it if we start projects but we don't follow through and finish them. Um, again I just
>> the only problem Chris I have with this is that this has gone over like many projects over a four, five, six, sevenyear time frame and obviously leadership changes, select board changes, leadership at the police department changes with respect to who was looking for um this specific project
at the time. And now there are people that actually are looking at it with a different lens or through a different lens that are coming to a little bit different conclusions. And it's unfortunate that you're this far down the road, but uh no pun intended. Uh but you know, that's the problem we have is
that it takes a long time to get here and then people realizing maybe this wasn't the best bet. And I think from my standpoint is a the cost and b the taking of land and the houses that were never there until now. Um they're going to have headlights going through and and I feel horrible for these two residents
because they have nowhere to go. They come to us and ask for answers. We don't know. So, we send them to Mass DOT. We send them to and they're not going to get answers from any one of them, right? And not they're not they're just not gonna answer them. They don't have the time or the effort to actually uh answer residents in Westport. And that's that's
my opinion. And then when we have reps and senators that are trying to secure funding for this project, obviously they're probably not going to be much of help either. So, that's my opinion. >> Sir, >> yes. My name is Randy. I'm 60 American Legion Highway. We moved there, my wife
and I, Elizabeth, 5 years ago. uh we weren't informed that this was going to happen and now it's happening and this is uh we we love Westport. We moved here moved here from Fall River and we just love Westport and to know that this is
coming in um it's if I would have known this I would have never took the gamble to come here and it's too bad that we don't have a say as people how it affects our lives and how the quality of life there is going to change and no one else cares about that. What happens to
our property? Does our property decrease? What happens when you want to sell it? When you're time for retirement, you want to sell. Is anybody going to pick up the difference? I don't know where to go. Who? Just like these people here. What do you do? Sit
back and just let Mass do what they want. I mean, it's tough. Try living around that area. First thing they should do is slow it down. Try that. Put a 40 m hour instead of 50 m an hour. Who's going to go to a rotary at 50 m an hour if they
don't turn the speed around? We need to need to slow it down, but I don't think a rotary is the the way to go. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Of course, I'm his wife and I have two cents to put in. >> Why do we not have any signs? Slow down.
There's children on the road. Slow down. There's their crossing. Slow down. There's turtles. There's turtle signs everywhere in Westport. But on 177 there isn't one sign that warns about children crossing or deer. And a deer did get hit in our road and we did see it and that
was terrible. And I called Westport and I got rerouted to DOT and DOT just rerouted me to someone else and told me to call back to Westport which routed me right back to DOT. So no answers. I was just looking for signs. That's it.
>> Westport does not have the authority to put signs on 177. I'm not sure if you can speak to >> you can >> um how about I don't know who that directs and deals with the state and stuff. How about reallocating those funds to route six so you're not kind, you know, potholes.
>> There is a root six project underway. I don't know the current status, but there is >> million dollars can go towards that, you know. So, >> I So, but the frustration the frustration that we have, which is not the same as you. All you are directly affected, right? We asked them to put a light there,
>> right? That's what we asked them to do is to put a light there and they >> in the traffic engineering universe and their policies and regulations and things they determined that this was the best approach. >> So you all spoke about the Hicks big
bridge project. How did that end up? Where is that sitting right now? >> It was a drift if it was a driftby. >> Yeah. Kirby Brook Bridge replacement. We were not as a town far enough down the line. I mean David's laughing. I mean, we dealt with the amount of calls that
we had with Mass DOT, PAR Engineering, and others. Laughable. Essentially, they were just doing what they had to do to plate us and have a call and still move forward with what they were going to do no matter what. I mean, we're talking about guardrails that would have crash barriers that were equivalent to what would should be on the Mass Pike because
it fit within the guidelines uh and, you know, a drop in situation. So, uh last year there was a vote on the board not to move forward with that permitting and engineering process. Uh so it was at that point where we made that decision not to move forward. So that project has
uh basically not moved forward. Now I don't know like I think you asked a question of Chris if if he were to look at that if we did not approve the 53,000 what happens with respect to that. I don't know. I'm not going to vote for it no matter what. But um it's where I'm at.
>> Yeah cuz it's tough because to be clear something has to be done there but this isn't necessarily the right answer. >> Thank you. I I agree something should be done. I wanted to bring back because you weren't here the first time that I spoke about this. You weren't here the first time that I spoke about this. It is important to note that when they did the
original survey that made the decision to put a rotary there, there were not houses there. My house was not there at all. All the houses up and down that street, the fact that it is 50 m an hour on that road was made when there were not houses up and down that road. They should lower the speed limit. They
should do other things. They've already put up lights. They did a study for years and they have looked at it and there have not been an increase in accidents at that and it is not different than any other intersection the number of accidents that happen in
that area. It's not great when the sun, you know, whatever. There it is. There are some things that could be done, but I just really wanted to point that out. So, you were aware that when the planning happened, when Mass DOT made these decisions, the town was not the way it is right now, and it's not the
right decision for us right now. Uh, and music is coming to support me. >> Awesome. What is that? >> Continue on. >> Very tranquil. Okay, but you're running out of it. >> One more. Yeah, real quick. Um, is
anyway uh is this at the planning stage or as the voters, do we have even have a say like a petition or putting it on the ballot to stop this and maybe considering the light? Do we have a say in this or it just stay, you know?
>> So, I mean, well, one, we could not fund the rest of the design and then it would stop, right? Um but uh but there we've done that on another project. It is possible to do that. The we asked I mean I appreciate you're right that
circumstances these projects take so long and so much happens around them, right? That the circumstances are different. So they the DOT had hearings. I'm sure you attend to those too, right? The DOT had hearings. They had public input. They they had a whole process for
over years where they were proposing this. Yeah. So >> if all what what we're being asked tonight is to continue to the to the final design just to al is to approve the the previously made commitment to get to final design to ask we're being
asked to approve that final amount of money to get there. >> How about one word? >> Deny. The town of Westport is not I mean this is not a constellation because it's all taxpayer money but the town of Westport it doesn't go on the ballot for us because it's not an that exclusion or
anything. So >> all right anything else from the board? So we have a motion in a second to extend the contract with PAR. All in favor? >> I >> I opposed. >> Opposed. Opposed. >> Were you in favor or opposed? >> I >> So we have three in favor and two
opposed. So the motion passes. And once again, if you're going to leave, just don't talk in the hallway. All right. Um the uh next item we have in the agenda is a review and discussion of the old high school property, the planning proposal, and possible action
regarding next steps. So, at our last meeting, um we had talked about uh we had talked about um potentially dissolving some committees. We've put that um those off to uh the next agenda. Um but we wanted we asked the town administrator to solicit input from uh
the different the the board members and to kind of put it together and summarize kind of the because we can't talk amongst ourselves, right? So we were talking to Chris. So Chris put together a kind of a summary of where we are and um kind of a proposal of a possible next step. So do you want to explain that?
>> Certainly. And um I don't know if you just want to switch to the next slide. Just a few slides here. So just for this evening, um my goal is just to summarize the efforts to date. Um talk a little bit about the conclusions and the findings from the prior studies that
have been done. Um understanding that they all had a little bit of a varied different uh scope of work. Um talking a little bit about the barriers to reuse in general. Um talking as you mentioned to my one-on-one discussion with with each of you. uh and then recommended
next steps just based on that. So, next slide please. So, um some of these and I don't think uh any of these should come as a big surprise. Um but we have done extensive review of the property. Um we've looked at the building condition.
We've had hazardous material reviews. Um there have been accessibility reviews for the building, co-compliance uh studies. um various uh reuse concepts, you know, including the community campus, um housing and uh there has been
uh community input in the form of uh public workshops where um members of the community could weigh in on, you know, what they felt was the best use of this building going forward. Uh in addition to that um you know since the last
meeting uh I had contacted uh a separate firm uh to have them uh and they provided a complimentary review of the studies that have been done to date. you know, really with the goal of understanding, you know, do we have
everything we need uh in terms of uh evaluating the building uh to determine what our next steps are, right? To make sure that we have the information um regarding our baselines. And what they came back to us with was, you know, yes,
this has been studied and we really do have the information we need to make the next decision with regards to the building. Um this is a significant town asset. Um you know both its size and scale and how it's currently being used.
Um you know but as we have known from the prior board discussions and presentations you know full reuse of the building uh is going to be a major expense on the town. Um, in addition, I mean, not just looking at
from a getting it to a current state for code compliance, but also any improvements you want to make to the building for whatever program is being proposed in there. Um, so all that to say that the prior studies didn't really come out with any clear preferred
option. Um, so moving on to the next slide. So, you know, building off of where the long-term uh building committee left off, uh I wanted to start there because again, similar to, you know, what I've
done, you know, they worked off the past studies that have been done and the feedback that's kind of been solicited to date. And you know really in conversations with the board um there seemed to be support with the current path that was uh being proposed by the
long-term committee uh in the sense that um you know potential uses could support uh you know expansion of senior services there uh the recreation department um the potential for the school administration and then uh currently the
after school program is there. So, um, you know, the possibility of continuing to have that there as well as potential community spaces if it's compatible with the town's programmatic uses of the space. Um, I'll also note the board um,
you know, felt that a phase approach would be more practical based on cost limitations, based on timing and goals for the town. Um, and with that, just the next slide. So talking a little bit about the
barriers and the things um that the board really needs to think about going forward. Um so the first is and I'm going to go off a little bit off the slide out of order here but um you know when it comes to and I believe Sean you had mentioned it you know at a at a
prior meeting you know you want to hear from the insurance agent you know you want to hear from the co- compliance person and then you want to hear from the attorney. So uh I talked to all three of those. So, uh, for insurance, they are fine with any of the proposed uses that we've been talking about here
collectively. Um, their big concern is whether or not the building is vacant. Um, the fact that there is life in the building, there's activity going on, it's continued to get used by the school department and the after school program is fine. So, uh, there wouldn't be any
change. And I did propose a couple of those other potential options as well. Um, the second is just with code compliance. So, this is something that's going to be ongoing. So, you know, depending on obviously what ultimately
occurs in the building, it's going to determine whether or not that's going to trigger an upgrade. And so if it doesn't trigger an upgrade, you know, the state building code, it evaluates newly constructed
facilities versus existing facilities. So, you know, if there is a safety issue that's determined through that co-compliance process, we would work through the building commissioner and the co-compliance agent to identify that
and make sure that it's addressed. So, that's something that I think as we go on, you know, that's going to be an ongoing discussion to make sure that what we're doing, of course, is safe for people occupying the building. Um, the last one, uh, is something that's going to require a little more due diligence
on behalf of the town. So, uh, I did seek a recommendation from town council, um, and he did provide, uh, an opinion that this does require town meeting action. Um while the building is under the control of the select board, it's
not under the control of the select board for general municipal uses. Um so that is something that we will have to go back uh you know again should the board you know proceed and want to go down this path. Um the board would need
to vote um that the property is no longer needed for its prior use. um place a warrant on town meeting and then that would have to get a two-thirds vote at town meeting. So I think that's one of the things um that we can talk about. You know the other items that are up on
the screen um again depending on whatever the programmatic use is for the building. It's things that um are considerations. So you know with the new facility with multiple entries with multiple different programs in there you know how is that operation going to
work? What are the security considerations? You know, if there are uh school age children there, uh especially right now with the after school program, that's controlled access. So, um you know, that's something that I think uh requires
further discussion and understanding um and really just an overall programmatic review to say, hey, is this going to be compatible based off of what we anticipate the use to be? So, that's just something to keep in mind. Um so if you also want to move on to the
next slide. So you know just as some next steps uh you know again I think um just in talking with the board there's you know it's a big facility. It's a significant asset to the town and really
I I'll say that there's there's a lot of nuance to the conversation. So me talking to each of you, I really tried to whittle it down to, you know, some clear, you know, goals. So the first is, you know, just working off of what the
long-term building committee had put together. Um, you know, really just reaffirming or confirming um that we want to proceed with the current idea, which is um the public and municipal use um for those programs that I previously
mentioned. um you know a second recommendation if that's the path that the board uh would like to continue on um working with town council to prepare an article for town meeting um for consideration.
Third would be um you know again even in the short term we would need aou with the school department. I know right now um they're occupying the facility, but as we go on um if this is something where there's going to be different
types of programmings going on um anou will help to make sure that there's synergy with the activity going on over there. Um the fourth um again this has been ongoing but continue to work with our co-consultant to evaluate ways for
senior programming um within the building in the near term. Um, and lastly, um, and really just I would say an all-encompassing last step is, you know, working, uh, as I mentioned with
Brewster Thornton, um, what was the next step so that we weren't, um, going backwards and that we could build off the conversations and the time and the investment that the town's done to date. And so, you know, we know enough about
the buildings. I think one of the things that hasn't really been touched on as of yet that we would need to do before we could even get into design is really looking at the programmatic uses of the space by the various departments that
are we're considering. So, you know, again, how much square footage, what type of, you know, uh, you know, office space, um, uh, activity space, you know, connectivity between the various spaces.
Um, I think, you know, storage needs, you know, I could go on, but essentially, um, you know, that conversation would need to take place, you know, as we continue on and look into, uh, investing. If again this is the you know first priority of the
board. Um you know the other thing you know that we learned from you know this recent planning effort was you know it is a big building and at least when it comes to the municipal use of it um
you know there's excess space that the town it doesn't appear from what has been done to date the town has a need for. And so, you know, when the town thinks about long-term operating costs, you know, I think one of the goals would
be to try and rightsize government to our assets and what we're expending. Um and so I think you know there is an opportunity to you know and I think we talked about a prior meeting you know looking at our facilities master planning looking at our footprint across
town and saying hey you know what is compatible based off the findings to date and what are other things we might want to retool or get some additional information on. So, you know, that's captured within the proposal before you. But, you know, again, um I
realize that there's a lot of nuance to this. I realize this has been uh studied over the course of many years uh with many views. Um so, I appreciate the board um providing me the opportunity to kind of synthesize it and you know, with
that open to questions and feedback. So, I just um you didn't have it on the slide here, but I wonder if you can talk a little bit about the um the master plan proposal. This was a $29,000 effort. It's not a big proposal here. Can you just talk about what what we would get out of that?
>> Absolutely. >> As a next because this was the recommended next step, right? So, I I I do want to just back up. We have a pretty detailed letter from um BTGA um that showed their summary of all of they showed I don't know if anybody
wants a copy Chris will give it to you but um it had a summary of all of those uh studies that have been done to date to kind of give an overview. It kind of did a nice job of rounding it up and then they put together this this is what we think the next part is. So can you just talk a little bit about what the ne that next part would be?
>> Yes. So, as you mentioned within your packet, you have a proposal from them um building off of uh again their evaluation. So, uh the proposed scope would include a update code analysis. Uh I know we have someone right now that's looking at a part of the building. Um
but we would need again unfortunately because of the time lapse we would need an update code analysis for the full structure. Um it would talk about um space needs. So it would actually look at the programmatic function of each of the departments that we're talking about here um for senior services, recreation,
school admin, um and other compatible municipal uses. Um it would evaluate options to improve space utilization here at the town hall property. Um again for some of the functions that um were
taken out of the scope of the old high school property through those ongoing efforts. Um it would develop preliminary designs and space options. Um and then the other two things that I think would be very helpful are uh phase
implementation strategies um with the goal of minimizing uh disruption and obviously looking at the funding availability piece of it and lastly cost estimates to that. So um you know I think to date it's really been discussed
as a all or nothing upfront project cost you know but again depending on the board's priorities this may be something that we could phase over time and leverage outside funds so it's not you know you know going and you know requesting a borrowing for the full
project. Um so that's what they would be looking at. >> So then the possible um actions that we could take tonight. So one you're looking for whether we're reaffirming the the priority the the directional approach we want to take is for public and municipal use. So this would be not
the housing approach that we've talked about before. Um and then um whether we want to move forward with the a potential town meeting article and then whether we want to engage this and and anou the school department and then whether we want to engage um the plan.
Right. >> Yes. Yes. And I'll just one note about I guess the housing piece of it is um you know just based on the feedback that I have received um and looking at the evaluations that have been done to date you know considering housing um
it's you know the priority appears to be municipal use first and if if we can't get there or you know if if you know if that ultimately does not happen or doesn't get the support or town meeting, you know, then we would consider housing
for the site, but the primary goal seems to have been, you know, how can we utilize it for what the town needs are. Um, so yeah, so but your summary about next steps is >> all right. Thank you. >> The board,
>> go ahead. >> You sometimes you wait for other people. >> Do you want to go? >> I'm going to be a while, so I don't know if you want to go first. >> Let me go first then you go. Um, so Chris, I don't think any of those I first off the fact that we're at this point is a great testament to the work
that you've been able to do, you know, since reaching out to all of us and kind of getting everyone's opinion. Um, the public wants to see something done with this building. I would say the majority of people want something done. I think it needs to be. uh it is a asset to the town as I've stated and I think um the
only thing I do have an issue with your last point I don't think mutually exclusive that you're talking about phased approaches but I also think there's a phased approach that could have a small component in there um for housing or something along those lines in the future but I think >> it doesn't close the door >> correct but I I don't want to just close
the door but I also want every everyone to understand that I think it needs to be a part of the town and I think in my opinion I think the vote tonight should The select board will make a should or someone should make a motion to keep the building under select board
control and use it for essentially town purposes. Get that on the table so that from a messaging standpoint, the public understands this building is not going anywhere. Nobody's going to knock it down. It's not going to get demolished. Um and that way they have they know they have buyin from the select board to continue to move forward with this. um
the the point you had up there with senior services and senior programming going to there, you don't believe that that would necessarily need a town warrant at town meeting next year. We could probably based on the code analysis do that prior to a town meeting?
>> So, uh unfortunately not. Um that is something again I I kind of laid out the work that's been done to date. Um, you know, unfortunately that that is council's opinion based off of the proposed activity that's there or being proposed for there.
>> So that's council's opinion that because I I just read your bullet point that says continue code review for possible near-term senior programming. So >> yeah, so I think so. Yeah. So I guess um and I apologize for the near-term description. >> Okay. you know, so I think,
you know, going down the path that we're currently going down with regards to code review, you know, we'll get that assessment back, there would be improvements that would be made to the building and obviously that can work concurrently with what we need to do should again this move forward. We go to
town meeting and get those approvals. Um so that again once that authorization's in place you know theoretically the the activities we could have um >> I do >> earlier than I guess the full
>> we can call a special town meeting so we don't have to wait until May to call a special town. There's rules about how much notice you have to give and stuff but it doesn't necessarily mean it would have to wait till May. >> And I appreciate that Madam Chair because I I think we can't let another year go by. I I mean I think there needs to be we've
studied this to death. We have a great this is a great document. You were able to work with obviously consulting firm that you knew before that was able to aggregate everything and kind of come to a great document that that basically tells us what a lot of people in this room want. Um a facility that can have
the recck department and they have council of aging and they have all the school facilities that are currently in there. So, um I think this is great because this is what we need to get to and it also doesn't have a $70 million price tag on it. Um but I just think that there may be other ways before or
if we do a special town meeting maybe in the fall um if that's the direction we want to go in. But I >> Well, I think the Sorry. >> Yep. >> But I think the other thing is um if we were going to expend money on any kind of repair to the building, um that would also need a town meeting vote, right? So
that would be you I think you're looking at more than one thing on the town meeting vote because any kind of spending money that because we this particular um proposal we can fund an already existing funds that we have for this purpose but any kind of repair or
something like that we would have to fund. >> So just that I know uh friends of the council of aging and the council of aging has come forward and said that they do have funding available like three or 400,000. So maybe that would be a situation where we could start that process if it was within again we don't
know numbers but is it 10 million is it half a million is it um you know but there is funding there that maybe would be useful I'm still hesitant with council but I didn't go to law school so I guess not >> so I've spent well over a 100 hours
since the last select board meeting on this project um fortunately I had the time to do it this month and I'm not exaggerating well over hours. I've looked at every piece of paperwork I can find in regards to that building. I've looked at any piece of paperwork I can find in regards to all the other
municipal buildings. I've talked to every stakeholder I can find and I thank all the stakeholders for interviewing with me and working with me on this. Um, I interviewed a large portion of the previous long-term building committee members.
Um, I'm I also did a lot of research on mass fire laws, mass fire code, the international building code, and the Massachusetts addendum to the international building code and have talked to the consultants working with the council on aging. And for the
Council on Aging piece, I'm hoping that the consultants report has an a viable ability for the Council on Aging to use the space that we've discussed with them for no money other than the cost of several fire doors,
which to me is like a great thing. Um, that building is in a warm status. It's not in a cold status. Like, you know, if you put something in storage, cold status, you shut everything down, you got to bring it back up. >> Warm status means everything's inspected. Everything is maintained to an extent. There's two two furnaces
there. One furnace is down for maintenance. You only need one for it to operate. Uh, one of the water water holding tanks is just in a cold status. Couple of the the water pumps need some stuff like little things here and there. But overall, it's a great building and um I think full use requiring major
investment is not an accurate statement and I think I've done my due diligence to back up that statement. Um I think uh governments get addicted to studies and I think the master plan proposal will not provide much information for the value of it that we don't already have
available to us. I feel the phased approach is the best option to fill that building. I feel that the uh an organic infill would be the best method. So phasing what needs are required for there whether it's the council aging the
school department the town hall annex organically find space with discussion of stakeholders in the town to fill it fill the outside portions of that building first work our ways towards the center find out how much excess space is in that center and then we can use that
excess space to figure out further plans whether it's housing whether it's a sublet to a n not forprofit whether it's an expansion of services within the town but that number will be determined organically because right now many of the functions within the town we cannot
use an adequate estimate of their square footage requirements because their square footage is so constrained because mo many many functions in this town have no ability to grow based on the current building situation. Furthermore, if we start filling the old high school,
um, we start talking about opening up buildings within the town that need maintenance, need love, and we have potential divestment decisions there and cost savings elsewhere that were not addressed in the long-term building committee's proposals that would make
that old high school a more financially viable option for the town in many ways. Um I can speak on and on about it but that's kind of just my uh points. >> I have a question for you. So um with the So what we're trying to do here is
hire the expert or what this is proposing to do is um to hire the expertise to put the phase plan in place. Right? If we don't hire the expertise to put this phased plan, who do you who would do it? So I picture you
know um it's like anything else you provide an input to the system which is the master plan proposal whoever whoever we hire for that they provide an output for our input but I think that the inputs that we put in are common and sense enough inputs that we don't need to spend $30,000 for somebody to say hey
the when you walk in on the door on the right where they used to have the school admin area there's a window there that's a perfect spot for their clerk there's back office area that's a perfect spot to feed in the workers for the clerk area. Hey, we have an assembly area over here. It makes sense to have some sort
of assembly function in the town. >> Okay, the uh um the VSO in the town probably works heavily with the seniors. Let's move her office next to where the senior services are. School admin should probably move back to where school admin used to be. And all those are are
functions that happen on the uh perimeter of that building so you can inflow that organically. >> I I like your idea. I think it's great. My question though is who if if we don't hire the expertise to do that planning, we don't have anyone else available to
do that work. >> I think >> so I think maybe what I'm hearing is that maybe a volunteer committee or something. >> Yeah, I think a committee might be the answer there. But >> but I think that I think that um I I I think it's we do not have a town engineer. We do not have a dedicated
project manager. Chris does a lot of work, but he's got more than this on his plate, right? And so I worry a lot about if we haven't hired someone, it doesn't have to be this particular group, but if we haven't hired someone specifically to manage that project, I think we're going to get mired down.
>> My my concern is that if the uh significant amount of work isn't provided to give the correct inputs to a firm to give us the outputs off a master plan proposal, we're not going to get a master plan proposal we are happy with. and any value we spend for providing
substantial inputs will give us the answers that that proposal would prov provide. >> Just uh I guess just one comment. Um you know I've I I appreciate you know the input on that. Um, I've done a couple master plan studies and you know, I
think one of the things that I've always found was a takeaway from it is when the department and the professional staff can engage with people and they can get asked questions and you can pull answers or pull things that maybe wouldn't
otherwise come up as part of the discussion to advance what it is that they really need, right? what they really need out of the space or what maybe they're not necessarily considering from the space. And so I find at least at those levels when they
could have that discussion um you're ending up with a better product from the um the user group standpoint. But what I would say is with a master plan, you know, it's not necessarily that they're going to go and all right, here it is
and go figure out and come back to us with a proposal. You know, it's an engaging process with the stakeholders, the board being one of them. And so, you know, certainly what is before you here this evening if it's that you know you
you know want to make sure that they're understanding and scope and how they're going about that um again you're you're getting a good work product a deliverable that might be something or could I I expected would be done as part of that
scope of work anyways but I think you know I'm always of the opinion. I don't want to do a report or a study that I'm not going to get value out of. So, um, you know, if that is the feeling again, if that's something that the board wants
to continue or you entertain or continue to talk about, well, what in the scope, what would we want to modify, need to modify to to again have it be something that is a value added? So, >> Chris, I don't see in here the um proposed time frame. Do you do you know
if there's a like for the the work that I mean $30,000 is not that much um from a work product but the the um do we did they talk a lot about a time frame? >> Um so they didn't give me the full duration of what how long this would
take. Um however they did say that they would be available immediately if it was something the board wanted to move ahead with. I'm happy to follow up with them uh for a time frame if this is something that the board would like. My I guess my background on this um doing prior
studies is the process is usually 3 to 6 months total. Um from the time that they come in again, it also is they they'll cater it to whatever the you know if there's a set deadline the board wants to make you know they can expedite it. You know they could do longer
conversations. they can have, you know, user groups together versus individually one-on-one. So, you know, there there's flexibility there just again working on prior studies like this. But >> I think I think again we're removing the
cost component. Um I think we're going to have another issue with getting bogged down with studies when if you form a committee, you can interview all the stakeholders in the course of a week or two weeks. You get a big myar of the blueprint of the building and you get all the stakeholders in there and you get Sharpies and you start going through
and figure out who wants what parts of the blueprint and you go through and you can figure it out like that. Boom. Just go fast and go hard on it and you can knock out a lot of the stuff that we'd be trying to pay money to get done over the course of six months. >> We had a committee. They didn't do it. >> Well, clearly they didn't. >> I mean, yeah, but the
>> I'm not saying it's not a good idea. If it's a private sector, I'd say yes. You're 100% right. But madam chair, I think you mentioned maybe another committee, but that committee could be such that is so vested in that whether it be two select board members. You have
the recck department, you have the school committee with the superintendent, maybe Chris with COA right there. I think that's right off the bat, you know, departments that probably would use that. I mean, >> and you could form the committee to say, hey, it has to be dissolved within a
month or has to be dissolved within six weeks or two months. I mean, I'm of the mindset, not to step on your toes, Rick, of the mindset of we should be having an update on this uh facility in this every every week or every meeting, so twice a month as to
where we're going and where where it needs to go. Um, I don't want it to fall flat after tonight and just, you know, wait for another 3 months or 6 months for another study to come out. I think, um, I think I want the public to know that we're keeping the building. we're
going to move forward and find the best way to um get departments in there or or use it to the best of their ability. To >> to to piggyback on what Jake is saying, um in all my research, and I can go into as much depth if he has any questions on it, I don't think it is the it is a good
financial decision for this town to divest that property. I also think if we divest that property, it's going to open up a massive can of worms in regards to other uses for that property and expenses that we're going to have to foot in order to cover those uses. >> So, just to be clear, I know I have been vocal about wanting to sell the
property. That is no longer my position. Okay. >> All right. >> So, I I am 100% for affirming that the public and municipal use is our direction. I am 100% for affirming
getting whatever the legal tells us we have to do to use the building if we have a town meeting vote 100% for the developing a memorandum of understanding with the school department 100% for putting a phased approach together so my
concern right now is if we don't hire someone with the expertise to put that phased plan together then I worry that it will not be done adequately to give the vote voters enough information on future town meetings to be able to to
appropriate money for it. And so I I don't I what I liked about this particular proposal is that um it actually comes up with the phases and starts with phase one and gives you a place to go for. I think we do not have
the expertise. I we have some amazing expertise here, right? some of the people on that long-term com building committee did a heroic efforts and something happened right and it didn't end up great. So, I worry a lot about forming another committee because the
last one didn't work out so great. Maybe we charge it differently. You charge it better. You you more crisp and clear about requirements to be on the committee. So, maybe there is a way. I I do think you need a committee to work on this, right? I I do think that you need the committee. I just am very concerned.
I think we should approve moving forward with that master plan proposal and start right now and I think we should have it on every subsequent meeting from now. I think the next meeting should be forming that committee and who it's cons comprised of reaching out to the
different boards and um and see whoever we if if we think we need someone from the planning board let's reach out to the planning board and tell them we're talking about so I am absolutely for moving forward. My my concern is doing it without a professional who knows how to do this. Now, if that's my concern,
>> my my sorry, >> I haven't had you. >> Go ahead. >> Okay. Uh, two things. One, I I I support the idea of using this as a multi-use municipal facility. Um, that there are
some deficits in uh existing facilities. I I think the annex is is is not suited for for the 21st century in terms of of programming and and and in and places and and offices. Um I also
think that um we need to um the fact that we have had the school administration building there in the past and some other functions that could be put back in the facility. Um, I'm also supportive of of expanded senior
programming being part of it because the demographics of this town are going to be older and not younger, you know, in 10 10 years from now. Um, I'm disappointed that we haven't spent enough issues on this seeing this
building as well as the grounds um as an opportunity for affordable housing. And I think that's a filter. As chair of the affordable housing trust, it's our concern that uh housing wasn't uh wasn't
adequately cons uh uh considered during their their their time developing the project. Um it has continually been uh not considered to be within the realm of possibility. Yet, in addition to that
large building, you have lots of land on that building uh around that building. Uh and and it can be done used for more than just athletic fields. Uh and it would be easier to um to to uh put into
use than some of the other u municipal property that we own such as the old campground. That's my two cents on this one. M >> um we have to remind ourselves of a couple of things. We had a a firm called
UTIL who did I think think some very good work five or six years ago. Uh for whatever reason a lot of people disparaged them and thought that it was too expensive or they weren't being realistic. When I look back on that, I I would say it's worth a second look
because they did start with the assumption that it was a fool's errand to try to keep the whole building unless you want to spend some money, some real money. RBG did put a value on that. That's the $70 million that Jake was
referring to earlier. But RGB also did some good work for us in terms of outlining several uses. And if you recall from the presentations, there was so-called adaptive reuse and community campus. But
the one I think we should focus on is what they call the 1970s edition where you would keep that part of the building. That's the south part of the building which has the recreation uh facilities of the gym and work from that as as our focus and accommodate all of
the needs of say the council on aging in the school or the after school daycare or the recreation department and I think it's big enough and RGB looked at that and said you can even put some pictures together are quite attractive but their
recommendation was to get rid of the rest of the building And in my opinion, we should do that. We should not try to keep the whole building. I think it'll cost us too much money and it will never pass muster at at uh at the ballot. But we should keep alive the idea of
housing. Now, you notice I didn't say affordable housing or senior housing. I just saying housing because I don't know what the economics of that is. I don't know what works and what doesn't. But I think that that's one of the biggest needs of this town. We've talked about that again and again. Chris, you
mentioned here that housing reuse has been studied. Well, I don't remember who studied it. It certainly wasn't the long-term building committee, and that was one of the criticisms we had of that. And I think we should continue to have that discussion. Now, I say that knowing that we might not get anywhere.
It could be that for economic financial reasons or reasons because it doesn't have uh sewer or city water. It may not be feasible from an engineering standpoint. It may not be feasible. And if that happens, that's the way it goes.
If we going back to the the building part, I see the need for a debt exclusion. And the number there is 25 million. No, it's not 70, it's not 40, but it is real money. But I like the idea of the the people voting on that. If the people want that building, if we
we're believing uh all of what we're what we hear what we're hearing, uh then let it go to the ballot. If the voters say yay, then let's do that. That is the least expensive recommendation of the consultants, the
two that we've had, and I haven't seen anything yet from the new one, BG, whatever it is. Yeah. >> Uh that that goes against that. Now, lastly, but importantly, is time frame. I talked about this at the last
meeting. We can't be doing this for another few years, and we should work backwards from the date of April, whatever it is, for the for the town elections. And we should want to, if we're going to do a debt exclusion, and I hope we don't have to, or I hope we have other funding, or I hope a debt
exclusion is far less than $25 million because obviously the lower the debt exclusion request, the higher the probability of passage. And I think this has enough peel appeal that it could pass. We do occasionally pass debt
exclusions. Uh overrides are a different story. But anyway, working backwards from that, we would have the vote on that in April. So that's the end. After that, then somebody else will have to decide what they're going to do with the building. Uh and I don't like the idea
of selling the property. Property is hard to come by. I was a strong component and and uh supporter of the campground acquisition and spoke at that town meeting amongst others because land is precious and it's hard to come
by and this is land we already have. We don't want to give it up. So I would focus on that. Oh and by the way to finish that thought preliminary to that we would have a special town meeting. So that would have because we're not going to wait till May because then we'd
we wouldn't miss the ballot date until 28. That's too that's too long. So we would have a special town meeting. I would suggest that be in the fourth quarter, say after Thanksgiving or something. Uh and that we have to work toward those dates and we should keep the dates in mind because that'll
that'll drive us. So, in conclusion, I think we should continue to study the senior housing or the housing uh component to see if it's viable. If not, if it's not, but I think that that would have appeal among the
voters. I'm I'm recommending that because I know that a lot of people in this town feel strongly about housing. So, I don't want to leave that off the table. And I was impressed with the presentation made by Jim Whiten uh when he talked to this issue and said he has
people that he knows who will tell us whether it's feasible, how much it will cost, how much the town will have to pay because there are people who've told me that if you do it right, you get somebody else to pay for that component. I'm talking about the housing component.
So I suggest we focus on those two areas. I think they have the most potential. I think they're doable and I think that there is a possibility that a well- constructed plan using the the newest part of the high school is the
most practical and could actually pass a debt exclusion muster and then we that would be the future. So that's what I'd say that that's my two cents to this. So, so Dick, how would you propose that we get h what how how would you propose we the steps? What are the steps that
get us to, you know, a December town meeting with a a debt exclusion? Like who who puts that plan together or who how how do you go about putting that together in the next few months? >> Okay. Well, I'd first summon I I use I
would talk to the new consultant, but I would also talk to RGB about this, particularly about the the viability of using the 1970s edition and can that accommodate what what we're looking for. I don't think that would be a hard discussion. I think it it's very obvious
to me that that could work. I think there's 35,000 square ft. Then we and check with our new consultant and say, does that does that meet your approval? Maybe I shouldn't say approval. Is that your recommendation? Can is that doable? And then begin talking about that
because then we're sending a signal to the town. We're not giving up on the property. We want to use it. We want to put some functions in there that are important to the town. Uh so that's how I would start that piece. The next part of it, the housing piece, I would call Jim Whiten and say, "Jim, do what you
said you could do for us when you came and presented to us. talk to the people or tell us direct us to the people the experts who are in this business to tell us about the feasibility of housing and do that immediately. >> So, but are you proposing in there the
the hiring the BTGA master plan and giving them that direction? Like I you talked about the new consultants that I didn't hear. >> Do you think we need new consultants? Like like who do you >> like it's one thing to say, okay, Jim,
put together your RFP, right? That that Craig and Jim had talked to us before, but um how are you who's doing the work to define, you know, what that 70s edition is? So I I think I might have heard you say that you're h you're hiring someone to do that as part of the
phase, but maybe I'm not understanding. Well, I didn't just fully understand the question you're asking. >> I'm trying to understand who's doing the work to put that together to get you to the to get you to December for a town meeting. >> Well, we would have to decide if we want to hire this consultant. Do they do
that? And is that what we need? And they they might be the ones to move this forward. >> The other thing >> potentially hiring a consultant to do that? >> Well, yeah. I mean, you've gotten a proposal from them. they would uh they could have at these issues on behalf of all of us not just
what I'm recommending to see what the feasibilities are and what the costs are um and to look at what work has been done and to say how that would be employed uh in the end it's us and you know we could have a committee I don't know if that really is needed here I
think the housing discussion or the housing investigation if you want to put it that way or feasibility that is in the hands to somebody else. We've got to get somebody in that business to do that for us. >> So, that part is easy. >> Yeah. >> Can I No, Craig was
>> I would also note that the um affordable housing trust has been over time accumulating funding funding that could be used for development of affordable housing and that would include predevelopment costs,
feasibility studies and things of that nature. So, a couple points. Um, in one of our stud one of our many documents and studies, these sports fields cannot be converted to anything while retaining the building. The building must be demolished to to put any development on
the sports fields. That has to do with the water and septic for the building as long as well as a couple other things. There's been um numbers put out showing that it's not financially viable to put single family or multif family occupancy on the sports fields or the former
building. For the cost of developing the building for uh a housing component, it works out in 2023 numbers, I believe, to $12 a square foot more than doing a housing conversion in any other building that's a smaller size because the size
of the building is a liability. the um $20 million number, the $35 million number, all those numbers are all predicated in the assumption that we either um demolish 30% of the building, or that our costs to move in were 30% of
the assessed replacement value of the building, which was $5.1 million in 2023. So, if you move in at a renovation cost of under $5.1 million, you do not have to bring that building up to code. you only have to bring the sections of the building that are at a higher risk
activity than the current use up to current code or you have to if it's a lower risk activity, you're fine. There's certain spots you might have to put fire sprinklers in or firewalls in. Um, but a lot of the places because the way that building was constructed have
fire barriers in place, it's possible to move in at almost zero cost to the taxpayer. I say almost because that's not really the case. Like you do have to do work on stuff. Um, I think that hits all those items, but yeah, I don't think the $20 million is
accurate if we stay below $5.1 million of moving cost renovations. >> May I respond? Where is this information coming from? >> The 2021 International Building Code, the Massachusetts amendments, and all the paperwork from the ver all the long-term
building committee. >> But doesn't somebody have to, if I may, >> yeah, >> have to look at that like our consultant and say, "Yay, that's that's right." I have I've been talking to the consultant that's been working with the uh Council on Aging and I'm hoping their report comes back for them in regards to the
cafeteria and um kitchen area showing that the only cost is going to be updating a couple fire doors. I'm assuming the auditorium is going to be a similar situation. Same thing with the gym. For other sections of the building, you're talking about moving from an E educational space to a B space, which is
a s uh less risk area, but also significantly less amount of people that are allowed in there. And those areas potentially are zero cost to the town to move into um assuming that the fire doors are in the right spot. Um I had one more other point too and I forgot.
Uh so bear with me. But oh um the other thing too is as far as the housing component goes, if we fill the sides and have the center empty and we say, "Okay, let's put housing in there at a future use because we have this much empty space left." You can always build fire barriers in there and now it's treated
as a I can't remember if it's structure or building. Basically, even though it's one contiguous space, it's a separate building of its own in there. And at that point, you could renovate the inside of it and say, "Okay, when the town moved in, we had 60,000 square feet of extra space. We could fit in x number of housing units here. Let's put an
entrance in the back. It's completely segregated from the rest of the town's uses. Here's the housing component. Answer after everything else has been figured out. M >> just I don't want I'm not saying I need to be the last word on this, but I'm hearing a lot of agreement here. We're talking about how to get the thing done
that we want to get done. If if it can be done for less than $25 million, I'll sign up for that in a minute. >> I I make a motion that we um commit to retain the building and move in as many municipal uses and other uses within the
town as makes sense and sees we see fit. >> Second, >> Madam Chair, >> discussion. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Uh when you say the building, uh Rick, you talking about the entire building? >> I'm talking about the entire building. I believe that it's going to be more
expensive long-term and short term to demolish any portions of the building than to retain the whole building and understand that there's excess square footage that needed to be left in warm state or cold state. >> Okay. I would be opposed to that motion because that I think that's contrary to
what I'm proposing. >> So the when you talk about the 1970s edition, are you talking about both the gym area and the auditorium area or you just talking about the gym area? Uh, it's not the auditorium. It's it's
shown on these presentations that RGB put together and it's clearly the south portion of the buildings. I'll say the south third of the building. So, the auditorium is gone. >> Not the auditorium and not the central part of the building, but the >> that's gone too. >> Okay. Got it.
>> Any more discussion on motion from the board? Then we'll take some public input. So, so a problem I see with demolishing the center of the building is all of the utilities and other items are on the right side of the building. So to take out the center means you have to basically build everything from scratch on the left side again, which is
a big cost. And then once you hit the trigger of 30% of the assessed value, you run into the issue of having to bring the whole building up to code. And at that point, it doesn't make sense financially, and that's when you hit the $20 million number. So, it's cheaper just to have classrooms that you lock
the door on and um leave in a cold status until you need them or find a tenant for than it is to tear it down. Madam Chair, let me just appine on that. RGB gave us the answer to that question, including the demolition of the twothirds of the of the of the building.
It's $25 million. That's in that's in the cost >> that was in the RGB. >> That's right. So the motion that we're discussing at the moment is to can it was affirming that it was the the use of the building for municipal use.
I >> keep the entirety of the building keep the entirety of the property >> affirm for municipal use. So we we're not discussing anything about the contract the right now there's nothing in there about the proposal for theou or the town meeting or anything. This is just basically that bullet one. That
bullet one. All right. >> All right. Anything else from the board before I open this up to the public? >> Okay. Anybody from the public want to comment on that specific thing? That's point one about reaffirming the public
municipal use in the near term. >> I just have a question. When you say municipal use, um, can you rent out part of the building? >> Yes, that would >> you would be willing to rent out to private? >> Okay. >> Yeah.
>> Hi, my name is Deborah Chi. I serve on the Westport Historical Commission. I'm also Betty Slates vice chair at the CPC. I've spoken to a lot of folks both in this room and in the audience um about this project and from my perspective I think housing is a important component
to this uh reuse of this building. I agree tremendously with many of the things Rick has been talking about tonight. But one of the overarching things that I think the select board needs to consider obviously is the cost. the more you can lay off the costs to others that might be interested in using
portions of this building, you'll start to bring the cost down. So, the town will only have to afford the things that the town will use. So, I think if you look at this building in chunks that are able to be reused over time and phased as Rick is talking about, you can
warehouse the center of the building with firewalls and you can explore housing at a later date when you know what the rest of it looks like. The auditorium, from what I understand from Gene Defo, who's here tonight, the auditorium is a very special building and can't be compared to the auditorium
that was built for the middle high school. If that auditorium could be saved, which I'd love to know what the code requirements are for that assembly use, very different than the other uses, that may be a very good asset for the community without a lot of investment. The left side of the building, if you're
looking at it from the main road, is the gym. It's the newest part of the building. And I agree with many of the things that Dick is saying about that part being what you start with. If you look at this in chunks and you keep the fields intact because you have to have those fields, then this town could lease
out portions of the building for the different uses and keep those that it wants for itself for its own uses. I think you have to look at this as an overarching complete building in its different chunks. You can't look at it all at once. I think a lot of the studies that were done in the past looked at all
ornone uses especially around housing and I don't think they looked at it as you know what number of housing could be used you back into the number I spoke to another expert in the field David Annis who I think has met with some of the people in this board David looked at this building toward the building his
attitude was you look at what can be done within the building envelope and with the septic and water uses that you have available to you back into the number you don't say oh let's look at this whole building and put housing in all of it. You have to approach it in a
practical way. And I think if you get the right people looking at this, you will figure out what the best uses are at the lowest possible cost. That's my opinion. I'm not an expert, but it's just everything that I've heard from different people and I think you should cons reconsider how you look at the
reuse of the building. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, I just uh the I see this all the time planning millions of dollars and stuff like that, but you guys have assets here. You have a lot of intelligent people in this town that are retired. They're engineers. They're
electricians. They're plumbers. I meet them all the time. Uh, I mean, from very good schools and stuff. And you have assets in the town. You do have electrician, a a building inspector, and uh a town engineer. Correct. Am I wrong? >> We do not have a town engineer. Okay.
Well, that can be I'm sure I'm sure that our retirees would would step forward for a town project such as that if they have that much passion. Um, far as low-income homes, I'm sorry people, but I'm totally against it. Um, you look at
the studies and stuff, low income comes in, it was meant for elderly. I I'm fine with elderly, but what happens is it comes in, they can't fill it with elderly. So, what happens? They bring low income housing. You hire more police, you have to hire more fire, and
you have more crime. It's a proven fact. Just uh uh just when they built the Dotman facility, that whole high-rise, I talked to Dopplin police. They had nothing but problems. What happens is a girl moves in, she has a child. Oh, but the dad is I worked in corrections. The
dad is in for armed robbery. He gets out, but he has drug relations. So, he brings the drugs to the that area. I I'm so No, I'm just saying I'm so against uh low-income housing in the town. You want low-income town, go to
the city and look at the city right now. Look at look at uh Los Angeles. Look at Foriva, New Baffford. Look, that's all you see is crime. We don't want that. I I just want to I just want to say that our our mo our our two affordable
housing facilities that I'm aware of in town, we have >> they're small. >> We have Greenwood Terrace and we have Noachchoke V. Noachchoke Village. They neither one have a crime problem. Neither one have brought children in. Neither one of them have caused any kind
of concern for the town of Westport. >> Why don't Why don't you investigate? >> Sorry. village has 55 units. >> There are there are 55 units at Noachchuck Village >> less than 10 years ago. >> Yeah, that's just 55 units. What about
the the um what do you got? Roden Street in Fall River where they built that whole facility and they had they had to tear it down river. >> No, I'm just saying you don't have to yell. >> You don't have to yell. >> You're interrupting. >> No, I'm sorry. I didn't see that. >> You're out of line.
>> Y very good. >> All right. Um >> Go ahead. Um, I think I'm listening to um, Shauna's comments most importantly here and I think it's well taken how who's organizing this because I think
this idea is a good idea and quite frankly I think housing is an important component. My original proposal included housing. I don't think housing should be the predominant. I I'm just getting this feeling that when we started this
process a long time ago, municipal buildings was the driving force for what we were going to do with the old high school and it way laid and moved us off the merry ground to another place where we couldn't get any direction. I don't want housing to do that. I think housing
is important and it needs to be part of this process, but it should be at the back, not the front. And it shouldn't be delaying what needs to be done now, which is getting in the building now. And I think how you do that to me is the
question that Sean is asking. Who's going to organize this? And I don't know. It's a good question whether whether we take Rick's point of view, which is I think we have the talent and the knowledge to get people. We could get council on engineer tomorrow if they said okay, we don't need anybody to tell
us what else to do. We'll move and we'll pay for it. Okay, I think we could start that. Personally, I think we could start that process, but as it moves forward, I think Sean is right. It's got to have somebody directing the traffic here. And I don't know who that is. I don't know
which contractor it is, but I think the fear I have with that is we go back to where we always end up. We get a committee, they ask 50 questions, and then all we're doing is asking questions and nothing's getting done. If if you can if this group can give some
direction to some group of people that says, "I want these five places in there as fast as possible. You tell me how to do it and I'll give you a time frame and if you do it faster, I'll give you more money. If you do it longer, I'll give you less money." We just we need to move
on this process here. Somehow we have to if you I think collectively can agree that we keep the building that's a huge step going forward to the town. It means that we care about this town and we're going to do whatever we can. And I think
the more you talk and the more you move into housing, I find you going off into a detour. Personally, that makes me anxious. I'm I'm getting, you know, hives listening to Heising housing because housing is long and complicated and and yes, it pays for itself. It's
true. Why do it first when you have needs that need to happen right now? Council on Aging supporting the school system that needs that process. We all we why not just keep what we have? the town will appreciate that you've taken
this seriously and tried to come up with a plan to do that. And I would say find an organization that can make that happen fast. I don't know who it is. Maybe that's Chris's job to find out, but someone needs to come up with this. or do we have there are local people who
could help organize this volunteer, but you need a professional group of people that are going to answer to you at a time frame so that when you have meetings, you can have them sit in that chair and you can grill them and we can too. That's it. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. I just wanted to first echo a couple of the points that were so well made by Mr. Lima. Um, but speaking as someone who was both on that long-term building committee, uh, and was on it for a few years, uh, I understand the frustration and share the frustration. I've been on board with municipal use
for the building from my start on that committee. Um, and I also see the use of that building every day. I know that the the school department uses of it, our facilities department, uh, the recreational sports that use it outside of just a school department, um, in all
seasons. Um, I know that also the needs of the of the Council on Aging, uh, the Recreation Department, which which I know has growing programs and and does great work in town. Um, so I support uh the motion that that's on the table that the board reaffirm the municipal use as
a near-term direction. What I would caution, having been on that long-term building committee that studied this to death and looked at it for a few years, and I think a lot of valuable information was gleaned from that, as Mr. Brewer alluded to. Um, but what I would caution is letting near-term
disagreement halt progress on what could or could not be done in the future as part of a potential phased use. >> Um, so I would I would caution that. I'm not saying that this board doesn't understand that, but that's something, you know, having gone through this process of of studies on the long-term
building committee that I think was was an issue that or one of the issues um that stalled progress there. So, I would I would just caution that, but I I appreciate the board's the board moving forward in this direction. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'll try to make it brief. Uh Jane
Dufalta, I just wanted to talk a little bit about that um theater, that section of the school. I know um the gym is extremely valuable. The field uh the schools are using um they're all using it. and the theater, what we have at the
new school is not sufficient at all for productions. And if you've seen the production these kids are putting on, they're topnotch. They need they need a theater and that um that auditorium is beautiful. Um one of the teachers has gone through with somebody just to get
an estimate. We would need new lighting, new sound, maybe $100,000. Um and there's other things that would have to be repaired, but we're willing. there's a group of us together willing to write grants, willing to get money so that this isn't coming from the town. Um
right now we have a lot of um outside groups that are coming in and using our stage. Um they're using it sometimes Mr. Nunes is there two three weekends out of a month because people are coming in and using it. So we know those groups are
going to come in and use an auditorium and use it's it's almost twice the size of what we have and the same thing with the size of the stage. So you would be bringing in revenue also. Um just the the council on aging that the kitchen
the cafeteria uh area can be used. Um the food pantry had even talked about um being able to use. So I I would want I I agree with that whole phase. um uh program and I would want that other
section, the auditorium, the the cafeteria, the kitchen. Uh there's classrooms back there that were used for photography, TV production. Um they could even be it could be an art center, community arts center where some of these rooms are rented out to artists.
You can bring in money. So, I think it's that part of the building also is extremely important and I'm thrilled to see that we're finally getting to the point where we are keeping it because it really is a valuable asset. So, I
applaud you for that and um I can't wait to see things happen. And again, there's a group of us that are really willing to work hard and make improvements and raise money and such to try to um you know, maintain especially that that
auditorium. Thank you. >> So, the motion on the table right now is whether Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> I didn't see you. You're kind of I'm sorry. Stand up. >> Uh Eileen Mine Creef and uh I'm on the
board of the Council on Aging as the chair. I don't know if I can add any more that's already been said tonight. We've really explored I think and and heard a lot of different perspectives. Um I can only say that I think
personally and I think what we have heard is that a phasing in approach makes sense. Um, it's something that the Council on Aging, I think I have said before, we are ready, willing, and able to move very quickly. We don't have that
much really to move initially. Um, boxes of weights and healthy balls and the like. Um, but you you've heard and we've studied this ad nauseium. We know that there's many
many things that we could be using and and I agree housing is what is one of the points that was in our original recommendation for um a community campus and I think that's something we have to keep in mind. We're talking about this
as being a community campus for everyone for all parts of the town. Um, so can I urge you also to call the question? >> I was going to and you stood up.
>> I don't know. Does Eileene is it okay if Dana says something? >> Go ahead. >> Dana Stewart Recreation Department. Um, I I love all the conversation here. I think it's really wonderful. I think something that I've spoken with Chris
about a bit too is the program pro programmatic purposes of the space of this building and that it's not just going to be for you or for you or for you. It's going to be a shared space for a lot of different groups, a lot of different departments and a lot of
different people. So, I would just like to um remind the select board that there needs to be some conversation about how that is organized. I I totally respect what's on the table right now with the motion. Um, but I just wanted to say that because I feel like, you know,
there's a lot of eagerness with wanting to use the space, but there needs to be some real thought about the different programs, the different ways to use the space, who's using it right now, and what those the purposes, the time frame, all that kind of stuff. I think needs
some thought. So, that's just what I want to say. >> Thank you. All right. Okay. So, the motion on us right now is whether to reaffirm the public and municipal use as a near-term direction for the building. Does that adequately summarize the motion? I didn't write it down. Okay. All right. All in favor?
>> I was going to ask Go ahead. >> I'm sorry. >> I didn't mean to interrupt, but I wanted more clarification on just what we're voting on. >> Yeah. Can you do you did you write it down? >> Yeah. >> I wrote down keep the building for municipal use >> to reaffirm the public and municipal use as a near-term. What is that? It'll be
public and municipal would be the key. >> Yeah. >> Because municipal is limiting. >> Yeah. Public and municipal. Keep the entirety of the building and the property. >> Does that accurately reflect the intent of your motion? And the second? >> Yes. >> You guys are okay with that? Okay. So,
Madam Chair, I early indicated I'd be opposed to this, but I don't hear any wording in this motion that gets into the issue of how much of the building you keep, how much you get rid of, or if you keep it all, if you can make that work. I mean, I'm not opposed to a
solution which includes the whole building. I do think that's going to be expensive, and I'd be wary of that. But since the motion does not include any prohibitive language one way or the other on that, it simply says the
building, then I would I would vote for that. >> Okay. >> Just want to be clear on that. >> Thank you. Sorry I rushed that. All right. All in favor? >> I I Any opposed? >> So that's unanimous. So, I think I think the other bullets I think that
we can direct the town administrator to continue to work with council for a potential town meeting article as they described because they I don't think we need to really vote on that. I think we'll vote on that whether we have a town meeting or not. I don't think we need to vote on the the work that's
already in progress with the code review for the near-term programming. I think that's already underway and I don't think I don't think we need to do anything with that. Um, so I guess the question is whether the board tonight wants to direct the town administrator to start working with the school department on anou and whether the board
wants to um approve going forward with that uh BTGA proposal or not. So I think those are the two things if we might want to address tonight. >> I ask you one further question. Did council advise at all as far as recreation use for the department of
recreation? >> They did. Yes. So all the so the proposed uses that we've been discussing. >> So everything but everything but uh school department use requires timing. Okay. >> I would like to make a motion that we develop anou with the school department
to expand their use of the building. Maybe phrase that a little differently. But >> so I so we um just for background so we we at one point did have anou with the school department or at least we negotiated one. And I don't know that we
ever finalized it. Um but um that contained it wasn't just like expanding use. It was like who's paying for what and who has control over what and there was probably some other stuff in there but and if there's repairs who's paying
for it. So um I think that um if the motion would be to start negotiating anou at school department I think that would be right. >> Yeah. Make a motion to start negotiating with the school department. Do we have a second for that? >> Second.
>> Is there any discussion on that? I think it would start with the the previousou, but I think that was also pretty complicated. I don't remember. >> We'll try and Yeah. >> Okay. Um and I from my perspective, I wouldn't want to preclude any kind of
phased approach if we, you know, we'd want to I don't know to direct him to ask or start the conversation, I guess. All right. Any discussion on that on theou? >> I have a question. >> Yeah, >> you have to go to you have to go to the
and it has to be specifically on whether we should direct the town administration. >> I believe it's about theou >> and I'm what I'm concerned about and with history when we start integrating the school with the rest of the town. We've already had this once. I would
like very clearly on the record that there's we're going to have to negotiate sharing a building with other with children, okay? Where we've had problems historically. We know they're well documented, but we couldn't go in the upstairs track. We
were we paid for, but we weren't allowed to use it. Okay? And we had personal issues when we tried to go into the old high school when the after school program was there. They didn't want any part of us having conversations and being in the building. So I would be
>> part of how to cohabit the space. >> Yes. I I would be remiss if I didn't put it on the record that if we're going to share space in a community building, we're going to have to reconcile the notion of children with seniors and adults. We we have to reconcile that.
And I don't know how, but it needs conversation and it needs clarity and it needs enforcement because I think quite frankly the seniors have been short shifted shorted on this concept and if we're going forward now with this idea
of a community whether children are there or not I mean it's silly that we can't be in the same building with each other just silly in n 2026 that we can't be in the same building. So I think somewhere in thisou has to be reconciled this issue.
>> Yeah. I don't think the town administrator highlighted this but in his in the report that came back that was absolutely one of the um one of the things that needed attention was how to have a safe space for children while also allowing other uses. That was absolutely in the report we got
>> and and I don't know if that situation if you work with the council of aging on that I in in those discussions with the school department because my concern is is similar to David's is but I mean a lot of the timing is probably not going to be the same anyway, right? I mean the
COA is going to probably be in there from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and then most of the after school care would come in at a different time. So, I just want to make sure that those, you know, lines aren't blurred as to who's using it at what times. Um, you know, similar to as
David pointed out with the new school and and, you know, not being able to use the track without a Corey check. >> I think I think also that that will come back to the board. So, any any concerns those issues can be surfaced and be part of the discussion and the record uh for
that. >> I look at Kodunk at the annex. It's pretty simple. So, you just have a section of the building that's locked to access for adults. >> Yeah, >> I do. >> Um, I just want to say you have to consider the summer season as well when um children are out of school and also
seniors still want to maybe use the space during the day as do the camps or children as well. Again, my point about like figuring out the planning of a shared space. Also, um, if the old high school is not used as a school, I believe there might be different
regulations or rules regarding that. If I liken it to a community center, um, like we've kind of discussed where you might have senior programming and school programming or or you can have different ages in the same space. Again, just, you know, putting thought into it and
figuring it out with that shared space. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Apologize. I realize I didn't introduce myself the first time. Evan Jendro, uh, school committee chair. Could I ask a clarifying question? Um, how does the the discussion that just happened on
the, um, use of the building, how would that how would that be worked into anou if we also need like absent a town meeting vote for transfer outside of school use or is that not the same issue?
>> I I think a lot of the school uses are grandfathered under the use of that building. >> But I think I think but even the existing arrangement that we have, we don't have a clear like um we the the town has care and control of the
property, but you all have practical control of the property, right? But we do we don't have a memorandum of understanding of how that's going to work. So I do think that might be a little complicated because >> we don't know what's going to be a year from now, but um I think we at least need to start surfacing the
conversation. Um because I mean you heard what they're saying. We got to figure out a way to to get more groups in there, but we also need to um affirm um responsibilities for the building. >> Thank you.
>> No, he's leaving. No. Um, Julie Jonowan Cross, I just wanted to add that as you define these responsibilities, I really want you to think about students and adults with disabilities and to think about access
and who's going to pay to retrofit those spaces because I've personally have worked in buildings that have been retrofitted and um, very often the the strategy is let's keep our numbers down so we don't have to retrofit anything, but then the building and the
programming isn't really accessible to all of the students. and it's not accessible to all of the adults. So, if you can really think through who would be paying for that, I wouldn't want a student to be denied access to go into the building because it wasn't accessible or
>> Okay. So, um the motion on the table is to direct the town administrator to work with school department to develop anou for use of the building. And he's heard our multiple inputs here. I'm sure he'd be happy to take more inputs from us
individually as he works that through. All right. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Opposed. >> So, we have four in favor and one opposed. So, then the um the last item there is whether we want to move forward
with the master plan proposal. I personally think we need to do that because I think we need to hire someone to create this phased approach. I think if we don't hire somebody to do it, it's going to get lost again. We have very talented people in this town. We have
very eager people. We thought we could do this with the committee before and it did not work. And I'm very wary of not hiring somebody to do it. >> Go ahead. >> Madam Chair, you'll have my support on that if we put a kind of deadline on it.
I I'd prefer a shorter deadline than a six-month. I mean if you if you maybe if you speak to them and say do we have a 3month window >> 6 months I mean I it's won't be six months. >> Yeah. >> But I mean I I would think 3 month is reasonable. I mean it's summer time maybe they're vacationers or whatever but I think if you had a three-month
window working with a group that we had discussed with COA recck department school committee um you know they'll obviously be interviewing those or working with with people as to their needs. Um but I would like that window to be a lot shorter than
>> so then maybe instead of act like approving the proposal is going back to them with um uh so considering that the conversation that we've had today is um that we want to pursue a phased approach to get in as many services as quickly as
we can. Um we want to look at the bu you know in sections of use not all at once. Um that we want to get something done. I would say if so if we want to target a town meeting vote in December then I'd
say we'd need to have at least a first report by the beginning of September um that we could then build on. Um so maybe see what they can put together from a proposal that gets us into like a you know a September time frame for the
deliverables. Um and then I think um also the um I had a thought about this. So the um basically what are they what would they take to get us to that proposal though gets us to something that we could go to
a fall a winter town meeting. >> Okay. Um and I suppose you know this piece of it hasn't been talked about but you know let's say that you know we go through this effort and we uh again have
a phase approach it comes before the board general consensus on that approach um would in addition to I suppose calling a special town meeting for the transfer of the property uh to your point that you
were mentioning earlier Dick is um you know the next funding on this would be for potentially full design if there is things that need to be done based off of the recommendations. Should they be working towards that potential goal as well? >> So I think so I'm going to let everybody
weigh in, but what so what I see as a potential town meeting in December is the use of the building that we just talked about. um interim repairs that we that may be necessary, funding for interim repairs if there's some that are discovered during this other um this
other code review that we're doing. >> And then um uh specific uh costing of to to get to final design and an estimated approach. I don't know that we're gonna
like I don't know if you can like if we if if let's just say for example that they come up with uh you know it's going to cost you $200,000 to get to final design and we think it'll be $25 million at the end. I don't know if you can go to town meeting for that $25 million
right then or if you have to get the final design first like >> I don't know. >> Yeah, I don't know. >> Like because you're not going to like you won't have specifics for the voters. Um but you might have enough of a ballpark or you might have enough of a
>> Yeah. So in terms of you know especially when you go for the full borrowing >> you know when you go through the full design process you're gonna have a ballpark right but you know this is a rough order of magnitude estimate right and as you go further into the design
and they you know up we thought the wall was going to go here and it's really going to go there or whatever the improvement is then you're going to be able to go with a real number to tell me and say this is this is the cost. Um so I would say in terms of a funding goal
you know again assuming you go through this process and we have design plans and the phase approach it would probably be for design with the you know the bigger phase you know ask at a later date that would be my thought on >> yeah because because I worry a lot I
mean I hear people talk about right so I worry a lot about another study that says we need another $100,000 to do the next piece right so like But but that's also kind of the way it works, right? You have to get to your final design because you're not going to be able to go out to bid with whatever they're
going to come back with in September. I don't think maybe maybe you can. I don't go out to bid, but maybe maybe if you're doing a phase. Yeah. >> So yeah. So maybe that's right. So maybe you do get >> phase one. Phase one is this limited
portion >> and this is how much it's going to cost. We project overall it'll be this but phase one is g so >> and once the public sees success right the voters sees success with small increments and see activity in that building >> so I think do you have enough to go back and kind of negotiate with them or re
revise the proposal >> uh I do yes so I can absolutely follow up with them the board's goal the timeline um you know what you're looking for in terms of the short term working off of the co-co compliance work that we're doing right now um if the board is
comfortable with me if again assuming that I can uh negotiate that if the board's comfortable authorizing me to sign a proposal um with the understanding our next meeting isn't for a few weeks. Um, Madam Chair, just just real quick, and I don't think this probably doesn't need to be a motion,
but I think, as I mentioned earlier, I think it needs to be a standing agenda item. This this project, obviously, with a three-month window, it's basically we'll hear about it six times, but I just clarify with their, you know, with the consultants that we probably want an update that would be provided to you,
that would be provided to the board and the public at each of those meetings. Whereas, who' you, you know, short synopsis, who'd you meet with, you know, what what was discussed? did we get any anywhere with, you know, code compliance or or actual uses of the of the building? I think and then that'll
obviously lead to the messaging that we would use for a town meeting. >> Um, but I think that if it's a standing item, it it can't be forgotten and we can kind of uh address that each time and and hopefully they provide us with kind of their progress. I want I don't like to leave consultants on their own
>> without having deliverables. Yeah, that's something I could definitely add as a standing item if the um >> but the part that um Chris was just saying is that one of the options that we have is for them him to negotiate a proposal and come back to us for approval. But another option we have is
to authorize him to enter into an agreement not to exceed some amount and then you could get started faster before our next meeting. Oh, no. >> I guess it's a matter of do you want to authorize him to negotiate and not to exceed number and he can go forward or
do you want him to come back with the revised proposal? >> I'll make that motion. Um I don't know if anyone's going to say I'm going to make that motion, but I just I just wanted Chris to be clear when he speaks to them what we're looking for so that we're not just you know >> No, no, no. The elements you want him to
negotiate. Yes. I make a motion. >> Motion not to exceed >> $30,000. >> What did you say it was? >> I think it's the proposal was 29500. >> Yeah. >> $30,000 not to exceed. Make a motion to allow Chris Vitali to enter into an
agreement with the consultants not to exceed $30,000. You know, >> does that hit a procurement threshold? Is there a number that hits a procurement threshold? >> 30,000. >> 30,000. So maybe >> 29,9.99. and see how good your negotiating skills are to see if we can get a list.
>> I I took off $1. >> Okay, everybody understand that motion? >> Second. >> Any comment? >> So So my concern is like looking at the current proposal as written >> the document review building valuation phase. It's all stuff provided from
existing um assessments and uh reports. So, it's just we're just going to get the same stuff back we've already gotten, but we're going to pay five grand for it and wait however long it takes for the schematic design. Um, I think the high school design options are good. It's good information. Town
hall edition. Um, again, I was looking two nights ago at what Swansea's done with their town hall edition, uh, their annex edition as well as a library edition. And you can see like, okay, a ballpark on a town hall edition is probably going to be 13 to$19 million. I mean, that's just
Kentucky windage, but it gives you an idea. So the I'm just saying that we're going to burn time and burn money to get answers we already have. >> Well, I think I think part of what I would like to see in the proposal is a specific like at the end a specific
phase one cost that we could present to town meeting in December. >> Like I I I agree like I just uh that we need to have an outside agency looking at this. I just don't know how to crack that nut. I don't know if getting like a project management firm in to handle this stuff is a better use of that money
and a quicker use of the time aspect of it. >> I think the finding a project management company to do this is going to take you longer than going with these folks. But >> unless we're going to get a cut from it, right? I mean that's >> I mean >> I mean moneywise for them for them at least. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I mean I think the other element of this too is that you know this is intended to be a continuation of the discussions right and I think some of that is going to be again when you're
talking about the phasing right and I think there's kind of the two elements here that are at least include in this proposal is the first thing is you know what do we do about the high school how do we phase that what's the next step how do we obviously get that occupied based off the needs the The other thing
that I think is um also a point that was brought up tonight is you know a longterm facility strategy for the things that have been taken off of the chopping block to date based off
of the cost limitations. Now obviously that's going to get further vetted through this process but at least then you can really go and say hey looking at all the options looking at what you know the needs are now we you know have a real phased approach and we can put dollars to it.
So >> I guess but like I'm just looking back on the process I've done recently with the council on aging. Let's say we identify the town of LANX as something we want to divest from just as an example. >> Okay. What spaces in the building make sense for them? Boom. Okay, let's talk
to our consulting firm. They provide this information. We go back and forth. Okay, we agree on this. Ralph, do you think this makes sense for a certificate of occupancy? Yes, it does. Okay, they move in. It just seems it's that simple of uh A plus B equals C type of thing versus going down this rabbit hole
again. >> Yeah, I think we don't want them. I mean, I I kind of agree like we need to have some idea of long term, but I don't think you're gonna I I think we want really the focus to be on this first part, the the the school and senior uh the senior services and the recreation.
I think if we narrow the focus and say we don't know about the rest of it, we don't need to spend a lot of time talking about the rest of it, but how do we manage these services? >> Yeah, I agree with that. if we just chop everything off the proposal other than to say, "Hey, what what's it going to take to get recreation?" Um, >> back to the $30,000 proposal and the
motion on the floor. >> So, the the motion on the floor is to direct the town administrator to negotiate and enter into an agreement with them and we're just giving him input and what we would like to see in that proposal. >> I'm not calling the question, but I'm
suggesting the chair may want to vote. >> Okay. >> Um, all right. Anything else before? All right. All in favor? >> I have any. Any opposed? >> Okay. Um,
anything else on the building that we need to address tonight? >> Okay. Um, the next item we have is a discussion and possible vote to establish a director of senior services. David, you're leaving. I'm talking about senior services.
>> Senior services. Sit down. >> David, did you forget >> why you were here? >> It's like a one track. I have an agenda. >> You can leave. I'm not forcing you to
>> discussion and possible vote to establish a director of senior services screening committee and hiring process. Mr. Vitali. >> Yes. Uh we posted the director of senior services position May 15th. Um, we have begun accepting applications. The first
review deadline we set is June 15th, so a couple weeks away. Um, you know, because, uh, Bev is retiring at the end of August. Um, we want to just establish the process now. Um, you know, with the goal of having a transition period.
>> Um, so this evening in your packet, you have a memo from me outlining the recommended structure and timeline of that. Um I am proposing a uh five member screening committee um that would
include myself uh one member of the select board uh the council on aging chair or a design uh the recreation director uh or another department head at the board's discretion and the town clerk. Um
the goal uh again would be to go through that process uh through a have a opportunity for a couple round of interviews um with the goal of having a board action for their August 3rd meeting. Um it is early in the month of
August but um you know I will note just with regards to the timeline in general depending on you know obviously the candidates their timeline their notice period um you know this is aggressive but you know again we ideally we're working we're
trying to work to uh have at least a little bit of overlap. Um but happy to take any questions. So Dick, I'm sorry. Do you did you have you have anything to add or have recommendation here since you're our liaison?
>> No, no. I I think the outline is good and we do need a select board member. Uh I think that's the issue for us. >> Well, so the the issue is do we want to create this screening committee and then comprised of how he's recommended and then does one of us want to be on the
screening? >> Yeah, that that's my understanding and I think that makes sense. Okay. So move >> second. >> Any discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I So we created the committee. So we're charging them with what's outlined here
is like hiring of the director of senior services. And then um go ahead. >> I move we appoint Mr. Brewer to the committee given that he's served in this capacity already as our lesson on to the council on aging. >> Do you want that Mr. Brewer? >> Sure.
>> Sorry. I was going to second it. I just >> I second it. >> All right. So, all in favor? >> I All right. So, we'll reach out to the council on aging um chair or design and
reach out to the town clerk and um the recreation department director. >> Um because it's late um I'm the chair of this. So the next item we had is the authorization of the comm uh community composible fiber grant. I am the chair
of the internet advisory committee and I did not know about this um in advance >> it. >> We were going to disband it but we have not yet disbanded it but I'm still the chair but I'm recommending that we pass over this um and table it for another night.
>> Um I just with that um to accept the grant we do have to submit the documentation by June 12th. >> June 12th. June 12th. It was uh unfortunately we were made aware of that at the end of last week. So,
>> so, so my concern with this, so um >> okay, >> what exactly is it? >> So, all right. So, the >> trying to understand >> now I wanted to pass over this conversation. All right. So the um the uh IT director has um through a series
of grants and other uh town meeting boats has installed um municipal fiber lines. So the first kind of round of that was connecting all of the town offices. So there's a loop there's a fiber loop that goes down main road like all from the harbor master up to the
station, right? So there's a fiber loop there. Um there have been some additional loops that have been created for um I don't remember where they are exactly but there there's a loop um that I think includes the school department. There is a loop that um was in in kind
of northwestport um that was in one of the economic I forget what they call it but it's the dis disadvantaged groups. It got under a grant for that. Nobody except the town offices. The town offices are using this municipal fiber now, but nobody else is connected to the
fiber. But the plan for the municipal fiber project was to to use grant funding to extend these fiber loops um to different locations in the town with the idea that to deliver it to the home
um the more the municipal fiber is already in place, the less expensive it'll be for a provider to come in and deliver it to the home. This is why we don't have broadband internet right now is it's incredibly expensive to deliver highspeed internet to everybody's home.
So um the internet advisory committee had looked at some like public private partnerships and said hey if we if we are contributing to this partnership uh first the loops that we've already established and second our ability to use municipal rightway on the w on the
lines on the poles um that we would bring that to and we could find a private partnership that would come in and kind of you know get that last mile to the homes. So that was the idea. Um for a number of reasons that did not really go anywhere. Um the public
private partnership um incent the incentives for municipal fiber that the were the state ended up going to companies and not municipalities. So there's a lot of complexity in this and it wasn't really in my awareness that the IT direct I understand the the the
purpose of these loops. Um but it's also a loop that isn't going to is not delivering any value other than contributing to the asset that we have or a potential future partner. So,
I I am not comfortable recommending this, but I hate to I hate to lose out on. So, this is a grant award for $237,500. Um, is there any matching? There's matching that we have to do.
>> So, my understanding it's 5%. I will note uh that as part of that 237,500 there is some equipment just that if it weren't through these funds we would have to replace anyways to about 50,000
um which would come as you know separately as a capital request or another expenditure. So um you know in that case we are getting that through this um grant project. Um but yeah
>> yeah I I I have mixed feelings. I can't I can't strongly recommend this but I hate to lose out on the grant but I don't >> I don't know and I don't know if >> that's your recommendation. I I'm of the same opinion uh that you
know I I'd hate to leave 237,000 on the floor and I will say that um I guess echoing maybe the past conversation we had. Um this does give the board the flexibility in the future if there was an opportunity if it did
make the sense that you have the infrastructure in place. Um, you know, with that I would recommend moving forward. >> I Yeah, I >> I think you maybe Betty has something.
>> Maybe Betty. Betty. >> Maybe >> Betty who lives with the municipal fiber expert. >> No. Um, who is uh giving the grant? >> The town. >> You're getting the Who's giving it? Where's it coming from? Where's the financing? It's the community compact
municipal fiber grant. So it's coming from the state. >> Who who's that? >> The state >> governor state communities act. >> What would be the limitation of not doing it? You can't can't ever get one again. >> No, I think it's just um if we're
awarded the funds and we do not follow through, >> it won't make us competitive for future rounds. Also, there's never a guarantee that they're going to award you these funds again if this is something the town were to pursue. You know, like I said, I think the match is, you know,
let's just say 15,000. Um, but if we weren't even looking at the project itself, we're getting about 50,000 of value in capital expenses. So, I mean, there is a net benefit, but again, you do have to put some skin in the game.
>> Yeah. So, but um so the the grant, what would we be authorizing right here? >> Is it for what's it used for? >> So, >> we're authorizing the signing of the community compact fiber grant, right?
But what is that um committing us to? Like, do we have to spend it? I think we probably do, but let me just look. on and on what specific >> just note what Jake had said. Sometimes get money from the state and >> Oh, Betty.
>> I I just >> Does it was it impact your future activities? >> Yeah, I don't think it hurts us in any way, but I'm just not I'm just not comfortable advocating for >> Yes. >> at the moment. But but you're there's a there's a component in here of $50,000
that is equipment that we would need. >> Yes, that's uh what our IT director said is just in addition to obviously the expansion, there's also some replacement of equipment. >> So if we accepted the grant, do we have to use it or can we just use it for the I mean we it would still have to come before this board to enter into an
agreement to pay use it. Right. >> So for the community compacts uh typically they look for the deliverable. So when we spend the funds they're looking for, you know, at the end of their performance period, you know, they look for documentation that we've completed the project, you know, as
intended. >> Madam Chief, just question, do we have a specific guidelines as to what this can be used for? So you're saying basically the $50,000 comes off. So we have $190,000 that we'd be using for like I know there's issues in town
with communication between fire, highway department and police and in that kind of network after it was struck by lightning and various other things. Can it be used for that? I mean or are we talking just laying cable for fiber optics? >> Yeah. So I don't have no it's it's not just fiber optics but it's based off of
what the what you know our director submitted >> as our project and what components of that are I don't have the application in front of me >> actually is it in was this application in here >> it's the contract >> the contract is contract
>> so the contract is um >> I mean we have you have to use the funds for it talked about one building out one of six loops >> um for the purposes of redundancy.
>> And >> I'm not a big supporter of the town becoming a utility company in any any facet. So, I'm probably not going to have to vote for it. >> I like I Yeah, I don't know. >> I I wish the IT director had reached out
>> Yes. >> to the internet committee. Um, probably because we haven't met in a while, you might have forgotten that we still technically exist. Um, but uh, yeah, I think does anybody want to move forward with
it? >> Madam Chair, this degree of doubt would suggest it's not a good idea. >> Okay. All right. So, I don't hear a motion to authorize a signing, so we're not going to take action. Um in the interest of time because it's we're
having lots of long meetings lately. So um >> the uh I if it's okay with the board um I want to um table the discussion on the policy handbook although I wouldn't encourage everybody to read it. >> Yes. And that was the only thing for
tonight is uh this is a draft. Um I know this was something the board had requested for this meeting in anticipation of doing the renewals at the end of June. Um, if you review it, if you have any comments, suggestions, I'm gonna continue working on it. Um,
again for consideration at a future board meeting. >> Right. So, feedback to the town administrator on that one. >> The draft. You want >> the draft? So, we can make that available. >> Yeah, I can send that to you. Yeah, >> it's a pretty detailed um like expectations of committees and charge
and things. It's pretty it's pretty good. >> Sure. >> All right. >> Yeah, send me an email. I'm happy to forward to you. Thank you. >> All right. Um, anything you wanted to briefly highlight in the town administrative report?
>> Uh, I will just say one sentence. Uh, the town has received grant funding uh for a multitude of projects. Um, tip of my hat to the staff involved and always appreciate um their hard work on this. >> Thank you. We give more detailed update
at another time. Um, so the minutes of May five, >> I make a motion to approve that 26 minutes. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All in favor? I >> I. That's unanimous. We report on the bill warrant. >> Uh, there were two, 515 and 529, both in
the $2 million range. All in order. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Dick. Um, the, uh, committee reports or suggestion for future agenda items. Anything Craig? Nothing news. >> Dick,
>> just quickly, I did have a meeting with Certa, speaking of Serta, earlier this evening, uh routine meeting to go over budget recommendations. Uh I did attend as the layers on the landing commission, but we talked about
that earlier. But in terms of future agenda discussion, I was going to ask Chris, I was appointed to the group that's going to deal with the teamsters as respects the town, all employees >> and uh haven't heard anything further on that. Is that something that's going to
be happening soon? >> Uh so their representation has to reach out to us to begin and engage in that process. Um they have not done so yet. Um but once I hear back from them then we'll definitely >> Yeah. Okay.
>> sit down and prepare. >> That's all I have. Madam chair. >> Um so I had a meeting at the bike committee. The bike committee is now on summer recess and won't be meeting until August. But um one of the things >> the uh I have a bike now. I >> Okay. >> Um
>> careful. The uh one thing I asked them to consider when they um meet again is whether um they could provide some advice on um policies that we might set for future uh bike race. It's the bike walking path committee um that I know we
had some uh issues with the recent marathon um that happened. There was a lot of community concerns there. So, I asked the bike committee to take up uh recommendations for um bike races in town, like rules and restrictions or policies that we want to put in place for them. So, we'll probably take that
up in the fall. And that's all I have. >> I don't have any committee updates. >> Okay. Rick, anything for you? >> Nothing to add. >> Okay. >> Um any comments or statements from the public? >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, we had previously uh we don't have any unanticipated topics, right? >> We do not. >> We started this evening at 5:15 uh with an aborted uh executive session. Um I'm assuming that it's okay with council if we schedule that for another time.
>> I think you'd be okay. I've been texting him just giving him updates throughout the night, but I can certainly reschedule. >> All right. So um so so what I would like to do is um we're gonna we're gonna What's the order we have to do this in? I'm I I'm gonna propose in a m in a
moment that we go into executive session for the purposes of adjourning that executive session and then um then we have to come back and open, right? Can we do that all in one vote or do we have to do that? I think we have to adjourn the executive session. I don't know how
how do we most efficiently accomplish that? >> I think we could do that in open session because >> I I do not believe you need to. >> Okay. So I will entertain I will entertain a motion to adjourn the executive session that was previously
resource re recessed and to adjourn this open meeting. So >> I think we have to roll call this one. >> I Craig Ducha. >> Hi Richard. >> Hi Shauna Tease. >> Hi Jake Mcwigan. >> Rick Mundy. Hi. We are a joint.