Will you join me in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Good evening. Welcome to the Thursday, February 26th meeting of the Westport um board of selectmen. the uh under Mass General Law Chapter 38 section 20F, this meeting is being recorded. I just want to note so this MO meeting was
rescheduled from Monday the 23rd due to the storm. Um but we did remove the agenda items that had to do with the public hearings because we didn't have time to notice them properly. So it's basically the agenda from the 23rd minus the public hearings. And I know we all want to hear from town administrator on
the storm update. >> Yes. Um so first I just want to take a moment to you know thank the members of our department. Um so starting out with highway Chris Evan Austin who has been
manning the phones uh and the full highway department team. Um they have done an exemplary job um outstanding. I think um the analogy I've been using is they've been punching above their weight class in terms of how they've responded
to the storm uh you know in comparison to the other communities on the south coast. Um also um want to thank Chief Bowwin who is our fire chief and emergency management director. Uh Chief Dunn um health director Matt and uh the
whole public safety team. Also, uh, thank you to the additional crews that have come in, uh, Franklin County Sheriff's Office, Stanley Tree Service, um, you know, the local AJ P and Sons, um, as well as the support, uh, through MIMA, and the countless other
contractors and volunteers, uh, who lended a hand so that we could, uh, be where we are today and be back up and running today. Uh, which is phenomenal. Um, you know, like I said, I was over in Fall River and I've been traveling back and forth the last few days between, you know, other communities here on the
south coast and where we are at. Um, you we should be very proud of the team that we have here in Westport. Um, you know, as you know, we put the local state of emergency into place on Sunday evening ahead of time. um anticipation storm, we
called in our crews um so that they were here and ready um to get out on the roads and they really have been working around the clock since. So um as of now over 96% of the accepted
public streets are passable. um you know as we head into uh the end of the week and the weekend and on to next week um you know there's still going to work that needs to be done. So um widening roads um making intersections better
from a visibility standpoint. So that work is going to be ongoing but you know really over the last several days our focus has been making sure that people can get out and do what they need to do um across the community. So,
um, you know, with that, I know that an agenda item is, you know, talking about the state of emergency that we're in. Um, you know, I am continuing to coordinate regularly with, uh, our emergency management team and also just I've been out looking at the conditions
on the ground just to make sure that we're on the right track. But, you know, again, we should be very proud of the work that's been done the last few days. >> Great. Thank you. I'm going to go through a list of thank yous, but are there any questions for Chris about that? >> I would like to thank Chris for his
efforts, which have been herculean to say the least. It's a sort of a baptism by fire here in Westport, but it's cold kind of fire. But >> I was joking with him before the meeting that this is he now knows all the streets in Westport. >> Well, that has value. >> Thank you.
>> I'll just say it was not me and um the team made it very easy for me to be able to do what I need to do. So, I appreciate their work. >> So, so Chris mentioned a lot of these people, but I just want to on behalf of the select board, I want to thank Chief Baldwin, the emergency management
director, Chris Gonzal, the highway department in Austin in particular for all the angry calls he got. Um, I want to thank um the police department, the fire department. I really want to say how much I appreciate how closely highway police and fire were working
together. when you saw early on in the storm when the plows were going out on the ambulance runs and um just how great it was that they coordinated with each other and also kept the public informed on the police uh Facebook page, the fire department uh Facebook page and the town
of Westport page, Chris, that you were updating. I think that was really super helpful. Um I also want to thank the dispatchers. I know they were getting calls for a lot. Um he mentioned the board of health also the custodial staff the um the uh all the town buildings
needed to be cleared out. So we had um custodial staff and um other people at the each of the town locations including the school department. Um again thank you to the Franklin County Sheriff's Department, the Stanley Creek Company, AJ Potter, Mass DOT, the Massachusetts
Emergency Management Association. Eversource did a great job of u responding to we had very few power outages. I was very surprised. Um and then all the uh the mass DOT um and then also you Chris. I think it was just did
a phenomenal job. But um and I say the other thing that I really we get caught up sometime on social media with the people complaining and saying where isn't my street done yet? But I was just so encouraged by the community spirit of people that came out and um shoveled for
their neighbors. They plowed driveways for their neighbors who took care of each other. Um when they had a call out in case anybody had snowmobiles, there were people right there that were volunteering. So it's just that's really one of the things I think just makes Westport so great is how hard our town
works and and the sense of community that we have. So just thank you to everyone. we can do with some less precedented times in the future, but this was an unprecedented um storm and I'm sure we'll be seeing repercussions later.
Uh anything else on the storm before we move on to the regular agenda? Okay. Um so we have a request from the Aoxic Club um and the Aoxic Club Inc. and the AOI Club Inc. doing business as
the pro shop to approve the change of officers directors for the liquor licenses. Betty Jill Tate manager and president Duncan Law Jr. vice president Matthew Forbes treasurer Rebecca Merchant clerk directors Peter Briggs William Barnes senior William Barnes Jr.
Mary Berg Thomas Kevin Howley Elena Mlac Shawn Melany Elizabeth Opie Scott Patterson and Lindseay Tommpkins. So this is just their routine changing around of directors for the liquor licenses. >> Motion to approve. >> Second.
>> Is there any discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> I. That's unanimous. We have a request from Village Pizza at 760 Main Road to amend the wine and malt beverage license to include the outside seating area. Did you want to talk about
that? No. All right. So, this is a request to um ex extend the wine and mall out to the outside seating area. I did have one question about this. So, the health department was okay so long as it didn't reach over the max capacity, but did the police department sign off? I might have missed it.
>> That I have not seen. Carla, do you have any update on if the police made any comments on this? >> We did not receive a response from >> Okay. Um, >> so the the police department, my understanding on the alcoholic beverage licenses from the police department, and I could be wrong, so somebody correct
me. um is that they want to make sure that there are egress that there it's uh like roped off so that people can't just come and go. Um maybe someone smarter than me can explain that but but they usually want to make sure that it's confined. Um >> sure, >> but I don't know. Do we do we is that
true? I mean, do we need the police recommendation? >> I was asked to contact the police at least, you know, send them the notification, but we didn't get a response. >> Right. Okay. So, yeah. So, we didn't get a response. Um, you know, if the board, um, you know, would like to make this an
contingent approval, I can certainly follow up with the chief and just see if he has any questions or concerns on the proposal that's in front of you this evening. >> That's fine. I I don't have any concerns about it. I think it's great. But, um, I just want to make sure because I know sometimes they they want them roped off. >> The village pizza.
>> Yeah, this is for village. >> Oh, yeah. No, I don't have a problem with that. >> Yeah. All right. So, >> important off anyways. It's really >> It's kind of hard to access. Yeah. No. >> Yeah, you can't because >> from the street >> you can't just come from the backside very easily. Yeah, I think I think it's probably fine. It's just we usually
>> I'm not aware of a requirement. >> Okay. You don't think? All right. >> Yeah. >> Um All right. So, what's the pleasure of the board then? >> You want to do it pending? >> I don't know. What do you think? Do you think we need to do it pending the police or >> Yeah, I guess we can do it pending >> police. >> West police approval. I mean, if there's
no disapproval, if they don't No response. >> Yeah. So, let's um I think I'd be more comfortable with that if we um approve it uh contingent on the >> uh motion to approve uh based upon um pending uh Westport police approval.
>> Second. >> Is there any discussion? Did Were you about Were you saying something? >> I I was just saying pending Westport Police approvals, >> right? Okay. >> No need to I don't think there'll be a problem at all. >> No, I don't think so. >> They never Yeah. Um any further
discussion? All in favor? I >> I that's unan or we have one absence. >> Thank you. You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you guys. Have a good night. >> You too. >> Um under appointments and resignations, we have a request from Christopher Dunn,
the chief of police, to reappoint Tristan Costa to the position of full-time police officer. >> I have a motion to approve. >> Oh, motion to approve. I didn't know if we're waiting. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? All in favor? I >> I. That's unanimous.
Um, we have a request for the preliminary approval of the East Beach trailer permits pending board of health and conservation approval. So, this is one we typically do um kind of blanket approve once all the paperwork is in. So, that'll let um Carla manage them as they come in rather than have to wait
for meetings. If there's any that don't get the paperwork in, we can always handle them separately. >> Okay. Okay. So, this is once I go through both and get conservation and they're approved essentially, >> right? So, I think I think the motion we'd be looking for is to um
>> pending board of health and conservation, >> right? To approve the East Beach trailer permits pending proper >> motion to approve East Beach trailer permits pending a board of health and conservation commission approval. >> Second. >> Any discussion?
All in favor? I >> I that's uh four in favor and one absent. We have a request from Martin Costa from Clean Our Westport Cow to approve the annual spring cleanup day, Saturday, April 11, 2026, and to place a banner on Main Road in late March.
>> Will the snow be gone to pick up the trash? >> I don't know. >> Never. >> The snow has to be gone at some point pick up trash. >> I I I I do recall a number of uh April storms and more May storms. Well, I think Martin and his group do a
phenomenal job for Westport and I'm sure we would we can approve it now and if they have to change it, they'll change it. >> Right. Mot motion to approve. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All in favor? I >> I That's unanimous. I think they did have to they canceled it last year,
didn't they? >> No, they had they did it last year. It was in the rain though. >> Yeah, it was rain. >> Great turn. Um, uh, 4 C, we have a request to accept the proposed zoning amendments for the 2026 annual town meeting. And I believe Mr. Burrus might be here to explain them to
us. >> This is I just want to preface this by saying the scenic roadway bylaw is not one of them. And um, we do have a in your full in your um, in your packet is a uh, draft
of the warrant. So, the the text of these articles is in that file. >> Yeah, that's all ready to go. It's been well, the the final version hasn't been vetted by town council yet, but the the version that was seen before the
planning board has been vetted by town council. So, um typically what we would do is it would get sent back over to council prior to uh being finalized for the warrant. Um but yeah, there's so before you there's five sets of text revisions to the zoning bylaw and
there's one zoning map amendment as well with corresponding um zoning bylaw modifications. As you said, there was a scenic roads um bylaw that was under consideration, but due to the public response um that the planning
board received, they decided that it wasn't a right approach for Westport. And so they subsequently decided to table any further consideration of that. So it's just these um these zoning bylaw amendments that are before you and the
map change. I'm happy to talk about any of them in in further detail if you have any particular questions. >> So let's just let's just briefly talk about them. So article 28 is amendment for the accessory dwelling unit and it looks like it's a minor revision here. >> Yeah, it's a very minor revision. last
year when we passed when the town passed the accessory dwelling unit um tax amendment that was as a that came as a response to the affordable homes act new requirements for accessory dwelling units. There were some there was some
language that when the attorney general's office reviewed our bylaw, they struck some of the language and in when they struck some of that language, they just struck out by by, you know, line just some of the text. And so then um from a readability perspective, some
of it didn't really quite make sense. So we just updated that language in there um to make it a little bit more uh readable in in the bylaw. >> All right. Any questions on article 28 there? >> No. >> So in article 29 um is building height.
>> Yeah. So the zoning bylaw had two definitions for building height. And so that's an issue when the building inspector is going to apply a particular definition which one um preempts the other or not. And so we struck um one of
the definitions and then that definition also included um the if you look at the the so I'm talking about the one that says height just height um it says that the measurements will be taken at the corners of the building or structure the
the zoning bylaw didn't include a definition for structure as well um except as it related to flood plane management purposes and so we needed to introduce uce a definition for structure into the bylaw as well, just so it's clear what we're referring to when we're
talking about a building and a structure. >> So, that also didn't look like it was huge changes more readability, >> right? >> Um, then article 30 is uh dog kennels. So, you're increasing the number of dogs they're allowed.
>> That Yes. And that is consistent with a state law that I don't know off the top of my head what it's the official name of it, but it's commonly referred to as Ali's law, which increased the um number of dogs one is allowed to have on their
property before a kennel license is required. And so what we did is we synced up when a special permit would be required with when a state license would kick in. So we just increased it by one dog um for each of these particular two categories.
>> Right. Thank you. And then um article 31 is about the flood plane regulations. >> This is more of a technical um a technical piece relating to different references in FEMA flood plane regulations as well as some um some
readability issues. There were uh some repeat definitions in the zoning bylaw that we cleaned up. We also made some modifications to um particular flood plane designations and removed some
because they don't exist in Westport. So, we took them out of the bylaw. And this was at the recommendation of DCR who um oversees the implementation of uh the FEMA flood plane permit for the state. And
then there were some the the one main change contentwise is that um we had to specify that any flood encroachments on in the flood plane require a hydraologic and hydraulic analyses which is looking at the volume
of water as well as the velocity of the water. Um, and you have to do one of these analyses if you're putting fill in the floodway. Um, and you have to demon if and if you're doing that, you have to demonstrate that
there will be no adverse impact um on the floodway with the proposed encroachment. This is all standard boilerplate language that um MIMA or not MIMA that DCR requires to have in place for the town to continue to participate
in the national flood insurance program. Any questions on that one? >> Just one question. So there is no change with respect to where construction can occur because I know what conservation when it comes to for us elevation levels and various other things. So there is no
change as to what you can and can't do based upon the flood planes is more changes and technical changes to comply with flood insurance. >> Yep. Exa. Exactly. Um the the the firm maps have not changed at all. >> Thank you. Um, so yeah, all all of those
flood plane boundaries will remain exactly the same. Um, and I've been working closely with Chris on some of this stuff, too. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> And then article 32, um, table of use revisions.
>> So, >> introducing cafe and mobile food vendor. >> Yeah. Basically is adding cafe and mobile food vendor as allowed uses in the business district. Um and then separating out retail from the current
land use which is uh classifies retail as wholesale wholesale retail business research laboratory service or public utility not involving manufacturer on the premises. Um, retail can run the gamut of v variety of sizes from your
Costco to your, you know, mom and pop pizza place or I guess pizza wouldn't be a good example, but like, you know, in our gallery or something like that. Um, I just had village pizza on my mind. >> Uh, so yeah, we separated that out and
that'll become important for the next one when we talk about the village commercial district. >> Okay, so 33, the village commercial zoning district. So, this is the zoning map change and the village commercial district is proposed for the Adamsville
area. Um, if you look on the last page of the amendments, there's a there's a map showing where this district would be located, it's five parcels right on the border of Westport, um Westport's border
with Little Compton. and we're adding in this um we're proposing this zoning district um in part because there's been a a recent loss of um businesses in the in the
Adamsville area in Little Compton. Um and that's something that's something that's really been felt in the community down there. Um and we want to make sure that our zoning is making it easy for businesses to continue to evolve over
time. um because and allow them to maybe expand their uses as well um if you know if the the need arises. What exists right now is that all of the uses there are non-conforming uses. So you have to go to the zoning board of appeals which
is an uncertain process um can require a lot of time and expense um that a small business owner may not be really interested in trying to go down that that path. Um we also have a business owner who is looking to expand in that area I think as you all know. Um and
this would be a mechanism for relief for that property owner um in particular for a mobile food food vendor. Uh so that's included in the village commercial um table of uses. the the commercial
district is restricted to um that which was the historical commercial area in the Adamsville area. So there's a couple of businesses um that currently exists as well as um the there's a single family home that was once a lamp shop.
So I've been told um that's kind of at the bottom of the hill on the north side of the road. So that's and and the idea behind this is actually to use this as a um kind of a a testing ground to see if
the community would support more of these types of zoning districts in town because we have a um right now we have a a long range planning grant to do an analysis of Westport's historic commercial areas to develop zoning to
allow for this sort of flexibility. Um because what we're thinking from the planning board is that okay if these are valued commercial areas in town, why would do we put up these barriers um for the small business community when these
structures need to have turnover over time or they may need to add, you know, a small accessory expansion or something like that. But when you set up these barriers, it makes it harder for those businesses to, you know, do what they need to do to continue their operations.
So, this is one small piece of what may become a larger um well, what will be a larger analysis, but with we kept it small for this year because we wanted it one to be a test and two we need to do a
much more in-depth analysis for the other areas. This is an area that's already got commercial interest there, but they're there as right by right right now. >> Right. So, this was kind of like the lowhanging fruit of okay, what can we do right now while we're taking um a a more
a more um in-depth approach to analyzing the zoning and community preferences in some of the other areas of town. >> Any questions on that? >> M I just have a few questions on that. Uh did you you held some did you hold meetings specifically on this or any
public input on this with respect to that area and where does it stretch from? Uh obviously is it just from I was looking at that map there is >> obviously a residential street before you get into that area. Is it basically from there to the basically state line
which is at the harbor there? >> It goes from I guess it's it's easier to think of it from the state line and then go into Westport. So, um, there's the one parcel that currently has the parking on it for the Westport Land Conservation Trust as well as for the coffee shop across the street.
>> Then there's the one property to the north. That's that's the residential one that I was saying was the lamp shop. >> Um, then if you go across the street, >> go over to the auto body shop. Mhm. >> Um then the coffee shop
>> property and then the um the offices and the art gallery. Those those five properties, the ones to the south of Adamsville Road and also the one with the single family home are split zoned.
>> We didn't want the um you know, we wanted to keep the bounds a little bit more constrained considering that there are some environmental resources over there. And um the one on the north side of Adamsville has a really small but
skinny part of the the parcel that goes um I don't know it's like 500 ft north of there and so we didn't see a reason for it to you know continue that far north. Um especially considering it's only like 20 ft wide or something like that. But um yeah so that's it's just
those five properties there. Just another question. I And as you mentioned, there are ongoing concerns with the business owner there and ability to expand. Has this kind of will this >> clarify it and allow them to move forward with it? I know there's been issues >> with various licensing and other, you
know, food trucks. >> Yeah, I mean I I mean from a from a zoning perspective, yes, it it would be a byite allowance. um they would have to get whatever other permits would be applicable through the board of health or um for electrical or anything like
that. Um there is one issue with the property where on the plat it says that it is not a to be considered a developable lot. However, there's no reference there in the deed to the
purpose of that restriction to who is the beneficiary of that restriction or the time frame for that restriction. A legally enforcable restriction. Um they could also resubmit the plat to the planning board to have it struck from okay from there. So that's maybe one
potential wrinkle. Okay. >> Um but that's outside of the the zoning aspect of that. Um, so from a from a you know from a zoning permitting and building permitting perspective, yes, they would be in in the clear from that. >> Okay.
>> And I've I've been in communication with the property owner as well about this. >> One more question uh through the chair with respect to you talking about other resident or residential areas or other areas in Westport that you were looking at >> other test cases. Do you have any
offhand that you've looked at or or thought about that would be next in line after this test case? Yeah. So, the head of Westport is is definitely one um the point and we're also going to look at um
reworking Central Village as well. Um to give it some more contextsensitive zoning because right now the way Westport zoning works is that it's two sizes fits all. you have business and you have residential agriculture and
that applies everywhere in town um regardless of what kind of context that land is in. And so what works on Route 6 and and 177 >> doesn't necessarily work on Main Road in Central Village just because they're
>> totally different points of access, different character, different kinds of roadways going through um or road networks going through the area. Um and so Central Village will get some um probably a lot more of the attention
because it's such a large area. But yeah, we want we want to give some give some more context specific zoning. I think that would be beneficial from a from a for business zoning. Um I think it's something that also needs to be
considered from a residential perspective as well. Um because again what what works in the north end of Westport is different from the south end. We have a lot of different projects going on. So that's you know one thing in the future to think about. >> One more follow-up question. Sorry
ma'am. Sure. Um so our I guess commercial district would stretch from that Cornell road um on main road you know obviously all the way through Central Village. Um, and there were concerns many years ago that there was developments coming into those
residential areas that people probably did not want >> uh in those areas specifically. Um, would the zoning that you're looking at be more or less restrictive as to what you could do because essentially somebody came in and said, "This piece of property is in the commercial
district. I want to develop it and I want to put this there." Yeah. >> Um, there was a big push back from residents in that area um up and down Main Road. So looking at that area, is there ways that will this make it easier for people to do that or more restrictive or how how would that
address issues like such as that? >> We just kicked off the project. So I I think what we will develop will end up responding to what the public sentiment is. >> Okay. um that's going to be our number one priority because ultimately the project
is going to uh we intend for it to result in um zoning amendments and then has to go to town meeting and we want the voters to to approve what we're proposing. So, >> makes sense. >> Um >> because I think you have a it's a mix in those areas of of residents that you
know never expected would have would come into that area. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Appreciate that. Thank you. >> Yeah. So, we'll we'll definitely be that further. >> Okay. Thank you, chair. Right. >> Anything else on the articles? >> Okay. Um and then Michael, we we have
your uh request to authorize a housing choice designation application. Do you want to tell us about that? >> Yeah, this is a program through the Executive Office on Housing and Livable Communities. Um, I guess the easiest way to describe it is this is a rewards
program for communities to opt into who have met certain housing development metrics and have certain housing policies in place. Um and there's a variety of different there's five different tiers uh that
communities can you meet so much housing development but you don't have x amount of housing policies in place and you know or vice versa. Um we kind of fall in the middle of that. Our growth rate was 3.9% from 2021 to 2025. Um and we
actually meet a lot of the best practices in the program to participate in this. Um when you participate into this in this program, it opens up a lot of or uh a number of different grant programs. Um and can give you bonus
points on grant applications. And there's also no requirement that you're producing any more housing to continue participating in the program. um at least for your duration of your participation. So, it's it's a five-year
program. If in five years, you know, we were not compliant and it, you know, it would just we stop participating in it. Um I don't think it's would be like you're removed in the program, you just haven't, you know, produced enough housing or whatever. But for the 5-year
period, I think it's something that we ought to take advantage of because again, there there no requirements to participate in it. Um and so it'll give us access to things like um the housing choice grant program which is a very
flexible grant program. Um obviously you can apply for housing related things but you can also get funding grant funding for transportation like for sidewalks and and roadways. You can get funding for storm water improvements for water
infrastructure. So like the waterline project we can get funding for stuff like that. um comprehensive planning. There's a whole host of things. It's it's a very flexible program and one of the good things about the grant program is you're not competing against every single community in the state. It's only
it's exclusive to communities who participate in this. Um you also get some you get some um a boost in the rankings for uh Mass DOT's capital improvement program. So, the main thing that's going
to touch on that for us is through the um chapter 90 funding. And then there are a couple of other programs that I want to call out like the Seapport Economic Council grant. Um actually Jeff B's here today and we're we've been
working on a project with um doing some upgrades on the Hicksbridge landing and this program if we participate in the um housing choice designation would eliminate all required match for that
grant program which is pretty big because you can ask for over a million dollars if you participate in this program. So, that's a huge amount of match that we potentially wouldn't have to um put up for. Then, I know um
recreation is looking to do some um reworking of the site that has the skate park on it. And so, there's a grant program to help out with park projects that we could get bonus points for in that review process. Um highway can get
bonus points in the the state's complete streets program. Um, and then we can get bonus points in in Mass Works, too. Those are like the big the big ticket items. There's a list you can on on the memo you can look at. But, um, yeah, I mean, I think it's a
it's a really good opportunity for the town and like I said, there's there's no downside to part participating. I I think it would be um to our our we would be leaving something on the table that I think we should take advantage of otherwise.
>> Thank you. questions. >> You know, you have questions. >> Go ahead. >> Uh through the chair. So, Michael, first off, thank you for your ability to to pull these grants. I think Westport is dependent or needs to be more dependent on grants and the ability to get those.
I was just reading through this specifically is like inclusionary zoning and this and some of this stuff with um you know, affordable housing improvement and that sort of stuff. Is that stuff that we already have in place? Um, so that we won't we're not changing
anything with respect to zoning or or >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that's correct. The um I don't have have the zoning bylaw in front of me, but the uh inclusionary zoning was adopted. I don't know how many years ago, but that's been been in place for a while.
And um duplexes, I think that's the other one you're talking to. Duplexes are um allowed all across town already. So nothing in and all the I guess um to answer your question more directly the list of best practices that I have highlighted in your packet these are
things that are already exist not things that um need to change in order to participate >> so there will be no changes with respect to that it's just our ability to be a part of this program and hope hopefully open up access to greater grants. >> Exactly. >> Right. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate you.
>> Of course. >> Anything else? I'm Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Now, we need a motion. >> Oh, are we approving all them at once? >> No, we're just just the housing choice designation application. >> Motion to approve the housing choice
designation. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I. >> That's four in favor and one absent. Thank you. Anything else, Michael? While you're here, >> do you need to make a motion to place the zoning? >> We're going to we're going to do the zoning. We have a whole warrant. That's
what I always >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We item F. Discuss, review, approve, and close the town warrant. So, >> I think but I think we've got all the detail that we need. >> Okay. Great. >> If anybody's planning to oppose the inclusion of those on the warrant, please tell Michael now. Otherwise, we can >> unlikely.
>> I will not oppose them, Michael. >> Okay. >> You're safe. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> And um since Jeff Bull is here, I'm assuming you're here to talk about article 27 on the warrant. Yeah, I'm not fully briefed on article numbers and all.
>> Okay, so article 27 is overnight parking at the landing. >> All right, so let's take that out of order since you're here. Um, so this is uh this will be under the general warrant question, the general warrant topic, but the um article 27 is to amend
article 10 of the general bylaws, overnight parking restrictions and penalties. And it looks like um the change here is to increase um the parking penalty from $20 to $50. Is that about right?
>> So yeah. So I think there um there was prior discussion about 50. I know um based on and correct me if I'm wrong kind of the latest discussion is really as high as will be allowed I think was
the the recommendation I think I got from uh the landing uh not the landing commission uh the beach >> up to the expectation of either 200 or $250. >> I like that. >> Uh so so where did is 50 just a
placeholder here? >> The 50 is a placeholder. >> Okay. So what is the what is the what is the plan is to make it 200. >> So I believe that's been the discussion. I think um you know my understanding just again in our conversations to date is um you know consistency across all
the town properties um with the idea that you know it you know the groups really wanted to be at a dollar amount that um uh it deters people from doing those actions. So I think um you know again
our plan after this would be um you know run this language by council make sure that um we are encompassing all the areas that uh have been outlined by the landing commission and the beach committee and um again I think $200 is
where the discussion's been up to this point. >> So we're going to close the warrant today. So, I know that um I know that um leg we'll go through legal and update the wordings, but I'm worried about the dollars if we change that after we close it. Like what's your take on that? Should we make it 200 now or do So,
yeah. So, I would say um we can certainly amend it to 200 again as a placeholder. I did talk to council before the meeting because one of the items uh again that's not fully fleshed out is the acceptance of the street of Stacy Lane. um the board can open and
close the warrant again if there was a substantive change that we needed to do. >> Well, the floor town meeting can change the dollar amount, right? So, somebody can amend it at town meeting. I just like I just want to make sure that whatever we're publishing as the draft warrant is more is closer to what we think it's going to end up with.
>> Yeah. So, I would say after I'm sorry, go ahead. >> If I may. Um my understanding typically at town meeting is you can amend something but you cannot amend to make it more restrictive. >> Usually >> you can amend it to make it less
restrictive. So you might want to go with 200 now. >> That's what I'm thinking. I think if we want to if we think we're going to end up at 200 it is much easier to go down than it is to go hop up. Right. So that's why >> and then you can back down if there's some legal reason you can't charge that
much. Yeah. >> Right. >> Yeah. So, I would say, you know, tonight as we go through the warrant and all the articles, if there are um edits that, you know, we, you know, decide to make or the board decides to make, um, you know, we can approve the amended, well, it's not even approve. We're not really
approving the warrant tonight. So, um, I can make those edits um, for the draft that we publish for the public and then that will be the draft when we send to council. That's what they'll work off of. >> Okay. I I I know I would be more comfortable with putting the higher number if we think it's 200. But can you
just I didn't give you really the chance to talk about like can you talk about why we need to raise the parking fee or it's not a parking fee it's overnight parking ticket basically. Uh we're beginning to see uh campers in town and uh and there have
been complaints issued to the police department and asked for enforcement and the police department hasn't really had a way to enforce. So part of it is some clarity and um I think it you know there's
complications with some of this too um because you know part of it is parking some of it also is tenting which is happened occasionally now at head of Westport. So the other thing I think this board
needs to face is what is the penalty for overnight on street parking? And this is typically something that's usually enforced when there's a complaint. It's not something like in a neighborhood if someone's
having their relatives over and it's there's snow on the ground and there isn't a parking ban that it's not going to be enforced perhaps. But it's more an issue of when there is a developing problem. Uh because
these folks are pretty intelligent. They will figure out pretty quickly that if it's a $200 fine, for example, across from the life-saving station, if they just move about 20 ft down and park not at the life-saving
station, I mean, not at not at the quote beach or landing, whatever we're going to call it. Well, then it's 20 bucks. >> Yeah. So, I would hope that you would also address what is the fine for just on street parking overnight in town. I believe
there's a regulation that disallows that even though it's rarely I don't I don't think the police are driving around looking for people that are parked overnight on residential streets. I mean, I think that goes on a lot. It's when there's a problem. Um, and you
know, certainly that goes into your, you know, Airbnb and stuff if a bunch of people are sharing a property. And so, uh, there's larger ramifications. My understanding speaking with the chief of police is that it this may not be
something that we can get going this year because he says his ticket books are already printed and he's a little bit not excited about reprinting the ticket books. But that's something you can take up with him. Um and given the
amount of revenue here certainly is something that we might you know the beach committee has money. we have a little money if I don't know how much it costs for ticket books but so yeah there's larger issues here obviously um but it's
uh part of it is just to send a message to the camping community and that it's not that easy just to plop down in Westport for a weekend. So if I'm so I'm reading the article, Chris. So the um so
the the first part of it is to change so the general bylaws article 10 town landings has $20 in here and then we're proposing changing it to 200. >> Yes. >> But then it's also inserting a section that allows um the landing commission or
the select board to establish restrictions. Um, so it looked like it looks to me like that is giving us the ability to kind of do this outside of town meeting to change some of the rules. Is that right? >> Yeah. So, you know, I know that the kind of conversation's been ongoing and I
know that um, you know, just, you know, my meetings on this topic. There's kind of a few different problems that I think we're trying to address. Um, >> yeah, there's particular, if I can help with that, there's particular clarity >> needed and probably in the warrant
because if not, someone's going to try to amend it. Even I would, uh, that this would not apply this year to Westport Point Landing that uh, fishermen, commercial fishermen go out for two or
three nights. They're used to parking there. Uh I I know there's talk about developing some other way of authorizing parking at the point uh but that's going to take months if not years to figure
out and I think that it would be a big mistake to start saying that fishermanmen can't park there overnight. >> Oh yeah. No, no one trying to stop fish but the specific language you're referring to. So, you know, as I was going through and and starting this, again, you know, we'll be working with
council on this, but um I think my goal was to try to capture, you know, what they were looking for out of um the proposed article for the warrant. And I think in review of the warrant, um there was a little bit of vagueness with regards to the roles and
responsibilities, who, you know, who was issuing this, who had the ability to enforce this. And so, um, I think my intention was to try and offer a little bit of clarity into that process. You know, obviously, um, you
know, I'll say this is as of now our best shot at a rough draft to make those changes. Um, I do intend to sit with council and have a long discussion about I think, you know, what's currently in place, what needs to be in a bylaw versus maybe followed up with a
regulation or a policy. >> So, this might get adjusted. So, we're we're closing the warrant, but we can still amend the article. >> That is correct. >> And again, the on street parking is something to think about. It's just because, you know, people could just park on
Bridge Street if >> So, I I would just say for the purposes of this year and how it is on the warrant. Um, obviously that would be h crafted a different way because it wouldn't obviously be within this this
article or with this this section of the bylaws. So, um, and also I think my understanding about on street is and I'd have to do a bit of additional research, but I also think it's tied to the zone within town. I don't necessarily know if
we're in a position to um you know create an overlay district for I mean there's just more conversation I guess. >> No. So this so article 27 specifically talking about the landings. >> That's correct. >> So I think that's ahead.
>> I have a lot of questions on this so I don't want to take up everyone's time. Um but I agree completely with with Jeff. I think it's come anecdotally back to me and from people asking about drift road what you're talking about specifically um parking not the landing it's off of drift road
where we provide parking so then it becomes a question as to whether that's on street off you know off- streetet parking so that I know you're what you're talking about specifically but dealing with the landing does this include cherry and web beach parking is that would that be included in this mix
>> so unfortunately I don't have that answer in front I'd have to just like web is not the landing though, is it? >> No, but this the beach committee I know was asking for an increase uh because they're they're faced with people from
New York, from Boston who show up. >> We don't need I don't think we need a bylaw change to change the beach. >> And I just I think >> when since we're opening up this can of worms, I think we want to probably be consistent across the board. I think there's an issue with the boat landing with Terry and Web. I mean, we have
residents that get down there. And like you said, and we discussed even prior to the meeting, people aren't they don't care about a 40 $25 ticket because it costs $40 to be out of state to go to the state beach. So, it's a cost of doing business. So, I think I just if we're going to go down this road, it
would be great to be consistent with the various landings and areas because, you know, if you hit somebody, I mean, technically the landing bridge road is a no parking zone. The the boat ramp is no parking and should be a tow zone. Unfortunately, no one ever gets towed because of the liability and concerns
with that. But I mean, you tow one car, a word would get around, it would go pretty quickly, but getting hit with a $200 ticket may also >> So, I think Chris, to that point, I think um I think that I think that some of those things that we talking about like the beach uh fines and that sort of
thing, I don't think we need in the warrant, right, or in the in the bylaw. So, if you can in the next couple of meetings, like sometime between now and town meeting, >> yes. um just kind of rationalize the other types of parking tickets that we have. So, we just have a visibility into that. >> Yeah. And I think just the fact we we have met um I think that's the intent is
we're trying to get there. You know, how um you know, whether it's again in a bylaw, you know, specifically stated or if it's more outlined within a policy, we'll make sure that, you know, we outline those and that there's some consistency
there. Yeah. And then definitely follow on the um if it's a if the at the part of the the part of the point um if we need to figure out a way to give permits for fishermen or something. >> Well, but that's not going to happen this year. That's like so complicated.
>> Well, but that's a land. You said that was a landing, right? >> It is. But you could in the warrant, I suppose, just spell out Adamsville Landing, Emma Trip, and head of Westport and and omit the Westport point.
>> All right. So, well, so you >> I'll work on it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. >> Just one more question. And I think there's been some discussion in the past that mass general law a you know basically is the one that drives some of these fees not necessarily on our local landing. So if we can get clarification
as to what we can do yeah >> as a as a town with respect to on street parking with respect to boat ramp parking I know there's a memo of understanding where we're going to share some revenue with the state. I'd be more than happy to you know with parking violations spend you know share $200 as
opposed to $25 or $20. So, it makes sense to at least get that consistent across the board. >> Great. >> Okay. So, that's the the article on the landing. Anything else while you're here that you want to talk about? >> Uh, just to know also this would include
the new West Hicks bridge landing and still it's a little unclear and I hope we will over time deal with the reality of who's responsible for the East Hicksbridge landing. you folks or the landing commission
because historically we have not been responsible and we're not excited about becoming responsible but I want somebody to be responsible because the town's growing and there's more use and uh stuff has happened there in the past
that has not been well followed through on and so that's an ongoing >> okay >> item on your >> All right. Thank you. >> Anything? All right. Anything for Jeff? >> All right. So, thank you. >> You're welcome.
>> So, I since I'm going to just ask the board's indulgence, we're going to skip the budget for a second and just go to the warrant because we've been talking about so much of the warrant anyway. Let's just finish up on on the warrant. So, um we have item F is discuss, review, approve, and close the town meeting warrant. So, I just want to quickly run through
um the articles and then I know there's some we've talked about most of them that are highlighted here, but um article one is prior year bills, article two is transfers, um article three is the stabilization
fund. So the next few articles we have an appropriation to the stabilization fund, the capital stabilization fund, the step special education stabilization account and the stabilization for collective bargaining and then
oh that so we're creating the fund to to do it for the collective bargaining and then we're appropriating to the collective bargaining. >> So let's just talk about those stabilization funds. So I think at our last meeting >> um Dick had pointed out that we didn't have an appropriation to just like the regular stabilization account, right? capital stabilization.
>> Oh, the capital stabilization. Okay. >> Yes. So, in this updated draft, um you know, I did include that in there along with the uh 5%. Um so, that comes out to $182,68. Um so, that's consistent with um past practice. So, that has been included in
there. Um for the special education stabilization fund, um what's currently being proposed is a 2.5%. Um I know, you know, I just want to make a note of um uh the practice that's been
in place of trying to get 5% uh included in there. Um so that that's certainly open for discussion this evening, but as proposed, it's 2.5%. And the new proposed stabilization fund for um helping support collective
bargaining and non-UN agreements, uh what's currently been proposed is 108,000. So, from the last time we talked, uh, that has been cut in half. >> So, your current, um, budget proposal that you had that will I know I just skipped the budget, but the current budget proposal has the 91,000 for the
for the special ed stabilization, right? >> 91,34, right? Yes. >> All right. Any questions on those stabilization funds? >> Okay, moving on. Article eight is um reg uh for the borrowing. Article nine is
the capital improvement planning report and the current version of the budget includes the dump truck and the plow. I think this is a really good time to be adding to our fleet in the highway department. So we talked about that last time >> at the right price too. >> Yeah. Um then we have article 10 is the
regular salaries for elected officers. to this just the regular whatever the two two and a half% increase. Um, article 11 is the budget. So, we'll talk about that in a minute. Article 12 is marine service enterprise. 13 is the
waterline enterprise. 14 is the beaches. Um, 15 is um the special revenue fund for the cable television. Um, 16, so these are all standard articles. Article 16 is the revolving
accounts. 17 is the community preservation report. So this is the open space and various other projects. >> Um all right. So article 18 is
appropriation for waterline enterprise rate study. So this is um I think we talked about this at a previous meeting. We did >> and that's included in your current budget. >> Yes. Um, article 19 is for a replacement for the or equipment for the uh transfer
station. Um, article 20 has to do with um the acquisition of foreclosed tax title properties. >> Yes. So, within your packet, unfortunately, Sue was unable to attend tonight. However, she did include a brief summary um within the packet, I
guess, just to go over it. And I also just um can also just summarize it as well for continued discussion. So uh so recently mass tax title law changed and it requires towns to act
after foreclosing on property. So if we foreclose and we determine that we want to keep it for municipal use, uh we have to pay the former owners the excess equity. um we have to make that determination within 60 days. So that is
you know again within 60 days we have to decide whether to sell or retain the property and then we have to notify the former owner. Um and if we retain it we have to obtain an appraisal and have the funds available to pay the excess equity
amount. So you know obviously um unless we had the funding in place that would be a very difficult you know turnaround time frame. um you know to come up with the money. So this proposed article would create a funding mechanism similar to the past agricultural open space
articles which would allow the town to borrow the amount needed and when necessary to pay the excess equity if you know we decided that the property was beneficial for town use. Um because
the borrowing would affect the tax levy. um we would require or we look for a debt exclusion. If the article is not approved, the town would not have a funding source in place um to purchase
foreclosed properties that the town felt were beneficial. So, I apologize that was long-winded, but I guess that's the purpose. And we're not trying to purchase any of these or there's none that are really coming up, but this is a mechanism now to comply
um to to to comply with the law if we do end up foreclosing. That's right. >> That's correct. I you know I at least you know in the immediate future there is not however um you know we have properties that do have back taxes. You know, I think what this would really
give the board the opportunity to do is make the decision at the time a property was going to be foreclosed on. It gave you that option to purchase or not. Um, you know, again, depending on where it is in town, the size of the property,
um, you know, how much, you know, the town would need to or want to borrow and have a set fund for. Um, you know, I think is certainly open to discussion. Um, you know, however, I think this is more
um of something to bring to your attention of whether or not the town wants to, you know, start the process of exploring something like this either this year or for future years. Um, >> so is there a sum of money that's being
proposed or is there because right you have it highlighted in here. >> Yeah. So, um, you know, I think there wasn't a a set dollar amount. I mean, I think, you know, I think it was a placeholder dollar amount. I don't think there's a real sum
of money specifically. I think um really any sum of money would be beneficial, uh, you know, as a starting point for the town. Um, you know, I think it could be, you know, a million, you know, as a, you know, as a debt exclusion article. you know, obviously as you go, you know,
further south into the community, the property values, you know, do tend to get a little bit higher depending on how much land we're talking about. Um, >> but this article in itself is not a debt exclusion article. This is just this is authorizing the borrowing but not a debt
exclusion. >> Yeah. So, this would require subsequent action, >> right? If you're Yeah. >> I was just going to say the article the motion itself would include a dollar amount. So it wouldn't be necess I highlight the sum of money because I just I guess just from a discussion standpoint I wanted to bring that up.
>> Um but you know at town meeting if this was something that would be on the warrant you know at the time of town meeting there would be a dollar amount that we would include in that motion. >> Okay. How how often is that even has that even been an opportunity for the
town to >> do we know I mean Sue is not here but I don't know we used that in the past for any properties that we're aware of? >> Not to my knowledge in recent history you know and again the law has changed on this so now we have to >> pay that excess equity and we have to
pay within or be prepared within 60 days to make a decision. >> But what what do most cities and towns know? They would just auction off the property and pay the proceed. How does how does that work if there's a >> Yeah. So, you know, essentially um you know, if the property got foreclosed,
the town would receive the amount that was owed to it in back taxes >> and that's it. And basically >> and that's it. >> Okay. Okay. I mean, I think this the only way the only benefit this would be is we're not going to get obviously into the landlord situation. It's if there's a larger piece of property, probably
open space or >> Yeah. You know, >> well, something that affordable housing >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean we we think the at some point the property that we used that we developed uh Noachchoke village on um had been foreclosed and
>> yeah so I mean this could be open space um it could be recreation it could be uh access to the water um >> sometimes that it was a combination cuz we >> or a combination >> we did affordable housing but most of a good chunk of that land was all used for
the land trust >> I mean it's come from the treasurer. So obviously she knows more about it than I do. So she's probably obviously I'm supportive of that from that stand. >> Yeah. Go ahead, D. >> Uh also involved here is uh there's two things. The change in the law which was
mentioned by Chris >> that made it more complicated for the towns to to get into tax title. But on top of that, the town auditor has mentioned this as part of the management letter from time to time. not in terms of criticism but to say that we we need
to look at this and see if we are in so many words leaving money on the table and do we have procedures in place. So Sue is gathering that all together and I think this is part of that. >> Okay. >> And I I think at one time u when he was a select board member Steve Wlette
brought this up and we had Sue come in and talk about it. She comes in all the time to talk about it with the audit committee. So we're conversant with this but at one point uh Stephen had been asking about it and I believe she appeared and and went through this to talk about
the the emerging u new procedures to uh get at the tax title. It's a very it's very complicated to even talk about but >> we're kind of dissecting it little by little here and this is part of that program. I just want to um make sure that whatever public education we have
to do because I don't want people to think, oh, we're going to like if you put a million dollars in here, though, the town's going to try to spend a million dollars, which is not really what we're trying to do. We're trying to comply with the law and then we're trying to keep our options open in the event this sort of circumstance happens. >> Yeah. And I think um at least with this, the other important thing to note is um
it would be when a property was available. Yeah. >> So, in terms of, you know, that could be a, you know, a year, it could be 3 years, it could be longer than that. Um, but I think the idea is when there's a property that the town finds, it's in
the best interest to acquire it, the money's there in the bank. >> All right. So, you but you'll work with Sue to get the number that's because there is that needs to go in here. >> Yeah. So, um I'll talk to her and I think it also would be good um just from a you know how many properties have been
foreclosed on or uh in recent years or if there has been a recent history where you know foreclosure has occurred and the town's purchase it. Um I'll see if she's available for the next meeting to maybe provide a little more history in that area. >> All right. Thank you. >> You're welcome.
>> All right. Anything else on that? >> Nothing on that. >> Uh so article 21 is appropriation for public safety training. We talked about that. out of previous that's in the current um proposed budget. Article 22 is an appropriation for grant matching funds. We also talked about it as part
of the budget. Article 23 is an appropriation for school technologies. We talked about this last time about um uh approp instead of just appropriating the 81,000 to the school department for
in their budget to instead appropriate it for the purchase of of technology. So, they don't have to put it in their budget. We're going to they'll fund it out of this line item. >> Um, article 24 is the personal property tax bill
exemption. I think this is if you have a low value property to >> That's correct. >> All right. Article 25 is amend the personnel bylaws. Um, I think we did talk about this at a previous meeting, didn't we? >> We did. >> We did.
>> We did. All right. So, um, any questions on that one? We probably need to talk about that again before town meeting. Um, just to make it more clear what we're trying to do. Article 26 is the designation of the tree warrant warden. So, this would just
designate the highway surveyor who's been effectively the tree warden all this time. It's just not officially. Articles 27, 28, 29, 30. We already talked about um we talked about through 33.
So um article 34 was a placeholder for the I old high school reuse proposal. So um the uh the long-term building committee did not make a recommendation for a potential warrant article and um I think there we
don't we don't have a potential warrant article in mind here. So, I think my opinion is we should strike this article because I don't think we have enough there. Um, but what do people think? >> I agree. I mean, I think we still we approved the um funding for more
analysis on the old high school for the council of aging to use a certain amount of space. I think that was the $3,000 we approved. >> Yeah, that would. >> So, that would be Yeah, that's still in the process. So, I don't think >> Yeah, I don't think we have anything >> to go forward with >> to go forward with. >> Yeah, I agree, Madam Chair. And I think
there's a lot more to come on the old high school. >> Yes. >> And it's our it's ours now. It will be shortly. So, but there's nothing that I could see that would be necessary for the upcoming town meeting. It just the timelines are not satisfactory. This
going to have to be sort of a a reook at where do we go back? Where do we start again? Where do we restart again, I guess, and then strategize going forward. but nothing for this upcoming town meeting. >> Yeah. So, I don't think that the I don't know how widely published the warrant
is. There's only one more article after this. So, I think we just want to just strike 34 and I don't think we'd need to leave it blank. I think we just strike it. >> Yeah. So, what I'll do um after this evening, obviously close the warrant as amended. >> Um you know, I will remove it and obviously renumber that last article to
move it up one >> um >> and then we'll go from there. >> All right. So, then the new article 34 is the exceptions of Stacy Lane. This is just a typical roadway acceptance. >> Yes. And I'll just make one note on that is that was supposed to be on for Monday. So we did have to push that back um just because of the timing. It'll be
on the second meeting in March. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um so we are going to talk about the budget in a minute, but I'll entertain a motion to close the annual town meeting warrant. >> Motion to close town meeting warrants. >> Second. >> All in favor? I
>> I That's unanimous. or sorry, one four in favor, one absent. Um, anything else you need action on the warrant? >> Um, no, not at this time. I know at the next meeting um, you know, we will take a vote to forward it over to the finance
committee and then at the, um, meeting at the end of March, you know, we'll approve it. So, >> all right. And I do I did have someone ask me for the when it was going to be posted on the town website. So, can we just as soon as as like in the next couple days? Um, >> so the first draft of it is actually
posted on the website and then this draft will be up there. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> All right. So, let's go back to the budget. >> All right. Yes. So in your packet uh you do have
some updated um uh you know revenues, expenditures um and you have a line by line breakdown. So just as an update from our last meeting as we discussed uh the town revised its revenue projections uh that
made uh if you just want to go to the next slide. Perfect. uh 308,000 available um to reduce the variance between the town and the school budget as we previously discussed. Um that also made some additional funding available on the town side. Um so if you can just
you know look at the table here, the new net revenue uh is 2,12,466. um you know 54% of that is allocated to the schools at just over 1.1 million and 971,734
for the town. Um so on the expenditure side the change from um the last budget that was before you to now um just a couple changes. So, the first is just based on our discussion at the last meeting, um this budget is proposing a
mid-year hiring of one additional full-time police officer. So, just based off of the recruitment schedule, um the chief does not need the funding for the full year because the officer really wouldn't be in place until uh late fall, early winter. Um so, the full annual
salary um you know, would be taken into consideration in FY28. So um you know the change in that budget's about 53,000 and then within this budget um the proposed budget there is a new personal
cost provision line item. Um and this includes the relocation of a salary account that was previously under the building department. Now it's just it's a separate line item. So I think um you
know as we look at um you know non-unit increases as we look at um you know across town um uh turnover expected retirements you know the idea would be that we have funding available um to
take those into consideration and really complement the stabilization article that's in place. Um, you know, the other thing to note is that within this budget, you know, we're also trying to take into consideration expected salary increases like the police department for
the future fiscal year. So, we have a placeholder in the budget. Um, so those are the two changes on the town side. Um, I guess before I go any further, any questions on that piece of it? >> No. >> Okay. Um, on to the school side. So,
um, the school's budget that was approved was >> Is that your screen? I think he's got it. >> Yeah. On the next slide. >> Sorry about that. Um, so the school committee's approved budget uh for
FY2027 was 24,962 960,000. Wait, 24,9632. Um, you know, the base budget from this past year, um, that we're working off of was 23, uh,254,943.
Um, and as I previously mentioned, um, you know, we also looked at the 54% new revenue of just over 1.1 million. So, as of now, when you look at those numbers, we had a budget variance of $564,658.
So you know that is from what we can sustain within what we're getting for new revenues and um you know without free cash. So that that's what you know we are working off
of. So in order to reduce that um what we had proposed was taking uh 81,000 from the proposed school budget and setting that aside. So, it reduced that total budget that the school had um approved by 81,000 and
we'd be moving that to a separate warrant article um for that amount. The other thing um that we would be recommending is deferring the uh proposed service delivery increases of 135,000. So, you know, within the budget
that was approved uh by the school committee, um you know, there was three positions that were proposed. Um, one of those positions was partially funded with opioid funding, which, um, I know as of this time, I don't believe that,
um, there has been a final determination made on that in time for town meeting. Um, so with that, um, you know, if we were to defer that, you know, proposed service delivery increase, the variance that we
would have to address is $348,658. Um, so what is proposed within this budget is to um utilize free cash. So I know in prior fiscal years the town has used free cash to help supplement the
school budget. Um, last year was 480,000 that was allocated. You know, I think um just based off our prior discussions, the goal is to reduce that over time so that the budget um is not in a structural deficit. So this would be um
you know a good start to that. So you know with those numbers above um you know as proposed that would be a level service budget for the schools. It would retain $80,000 that was made available for reorganization by the the superintendent
and the team over at the schools. Um that would allow them to fund an additional position as they uh deem necessary. And you know, like I said earlier, it actually in addition to the level service, it'll also u make available $81,000 um to support school technology
purchases. So um that is um what is before you this evening um you know for the budget and you know with that. >> So just to kind of word it differently. So >> yeah and I apologize tried to >> it's hard to I I like I appreciate that you and it doesn't line up. So just wording it a little bit differently. We
had the school committee proposed a budget. Our proposed budget that we're going to talk about tonight um is $135,000 short of what the school department asked for. Yes. >> So we um we are supplementing we're
taking whatever we had used um we are recommending 348 658 from free cash. Yes. For the budget and 81,000 for technology. So, we're $135,000 different um than what we're recommending, unless you want to change it, the current
recommendation versus what school department wants. So, I I like it's like we're saying they can do it by deferring service delivery increases. So, that's the logic that we used, but it's really we're just appropriating less than what they have asked for.
So, um and yeah, >> I was refresh our memory. Is it 3.5% that this school budget is higher than it was in the prior year? Is that the number you used last time? >> Yeah. So, I don't have the updated, but it was approximately 3 and a half%.
>> Um, might be a little bit less because, um, you know, when we did the revenue split, there was actually a little bit more than I originally anticipated by a few thousand dollars. So, it is hovering right around 3 and a half%. for an increase. >> But if we made up the gap, that would
raise say 3.5 or whatever it was to some something higher, 3.7 or something, whatever. >> It would be higher. Yeah. >> Yeah. I think that kind of puts it into perspective. >> Well, it doesn't look like you have a slide, but the proposed use of free cash, you had a there was a table in in
the um packet. So, the in order to if we were try to make up that 135,000, we'd have to take it from something else. There's not enough remaining free cash. So you'd have to reduce something else in one of the stabilization. >> That is correct. As of now, um you know, based on the proposed articles, um the
remaining free cash allowance when we take into consideration the other financial policies of the town would be about 19,000. >> All right. Any question? Any comments on that? I mean, if the schools don't agree to that, the school committee doesn't agree
to that, aren't they, they're just going to go to town meeting and try to >> so that way >> historically is I mean, so first we're we are we are supplementing the budget that we that we would calculate by 350
plus $81,000. Right? So, we've already made the we've already said that we're agreeing with that, but remember that our job is to propose a balanced budget to the finance committee. The finance committee is the one that makes the recommendation to town meeting. So, um
my experience has been in recent years that the school committee we've shown a little give that we was like, hey, we we're not saying no free cash at all. Um we're just trying to reduce the amount of free cash. is consistent with what we told them last year that we were we were willing to supplement with free cash but
we wanted to start reducing the need. So I it's anyone could go to town meeting and ask for anything but um I don't I >> I wouldn't worry about that. >> Yeah. My only concern is that we >> they took a pretty big haircut from 470
480 to to 380 basically the $100,000 in the free cash decrease. I mean, I know we want to decrease the dependency on that free cash, but 100k seems >> I think they did because they they was 450 last year and it's 350 is 360 plus
81 this year. I think they're actually getting more free cash. >> Yeah, I mean I I I will just note that, you know, the budget um again kind of, you know, I think the schools did a very good job. Um, and I I credit them for really looking at their numbers and, you know, figuring out, you know, where they
could, you know, make their operations more efficient and really identifying those specific needs. Um, you know, I think, you know, first and foremost when you're considering the use of one-time funds, um, you know, my
recommendation is it's really a last resort and really it's so that you can maintain level service, right? I think what you don't want to see and what a lot of towns utilize onetime funding for is if there was, you know, severe cuts,
right? we have to cut, you know, multiple teachers or we have to cut, you know, make cuts in multiple departments. Um, you know, I think, you know, as a recommendation, I would just say, you know, if we, as the town, you know, if
the board felt using one-time funds, you know, was appropriate here, I would say utilizing it for level service, you know, so that we can again begin a plan to phase out that over time, you know, you know, I think that that's
understandable, but using it to bring on new service delivery, I I think that's really where um again it it just increases that structural deficit, you know, or extends that structural deficit for a longer
period of time. Um we have been fortunate with the amount of onetime funds that we've had. Um and we've had a couple of good fiscal years and a lot of the work and credit to Jim again for putting us in a position where um you we
have been able to get new revenue in. Um but I think you know again my recommendation just you know based on the budget I submitted was um you know we're increasing that you know our revenue estimates to be a little more conservative with the idea that you know
we're really trying to reduce that free cash allowance over the next couple years. I think I think the other thing to note is it's we're relatively new to the special education stabilization fund too um because that's one that really can hit the school department very hard um if they get a significant need. So um
I think that's another thing that we've been doing as part of just the regular financial planning to make sure that the school department doesn't get hit um as badly as they have in the past. >> So I I think we're doing a pretty fair job of trying to meet their needs while balancing with the rest of the town.
Anything else on the budget? Anything any other changes or questions before we finalize this and send it to the finance committee? >> I had one question. I just couldn't find the OPED. The did that go down this year, that recommendation? >> Yes, it did. So, uh, we're recommending
100,000 for this year. >> Yeah. Uh, did you have any chance conversation with the finance committee on that? >> Um, I did. Um, they felt 100,000 was appropriate. >> Yeah. I' I'd rather see it stay the same. However, as long as we're
contributing to it, I think we're within the spirit of of doing that. >> It's important for the town. Something a lot of people not really aware of, but more we fund OPED, the less it is in the long run for for all. So, we don't want
to lose that. But I think 100,000 is there going to be years when you don't have the same what you had the year before. So, I think that works. I thought I thought it was 100. I just wanted to confirm that. Of course. >> All right. So, I do want to thank the finance committee for their patience.
Um, we were supposed to give them the finalized budget on the 20th of February. They allowed us to extend it till the 23rd and them for their patience that uh I I believe you did send it to them um earlier this week, your your version. So, uh thank you to
the finance committee for allowing us to delay. All right. So, I don't think we need do do we need a a motion on that? Um yes. So I would ask for let me just >> to approve the FY27 budget as discussed.
>> Uh yes and um you know forward to the finance committee. >> Okay. >> So moved second. >> Any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I >> I that's four in favor and one absent. Thank you.
Um, so now we have G discussion to vote and rescend the local state of emergency declared on Sunday, February 22nd in response to the blizzard. So, um, I failed to mention this at the beginning of the meeting, but we did have a special meeting. You all were there, um, to declare a state of emergency. I'm
really glad we did that. Um the big advantage of declaring the state of emergency, it opens up funding sources to us. Um so that we can um uh recoup some of the money that we're going to lose here. Um but also it just um comply with the governor's orders and that kind
of thing. But um the the agenda was to to vote to rescend, but I know Chris from talking to you earlier that you think we might need a little bit more time. >> Yes. So um you know, obviously we set this agenda a few days ago. um wanted to see where we were in terms of progress
in the community. You know, as of this evening, as I mentioned earlier, we're about 96% of the way there in terms of having roads be passable. Um crews were out this afternoon and into this evening to continue that. Um, you know what I would ask the board um of this evening
is if we can maintain the local state of emergency um for now, but authorize me to resend the declaration on behalf of the board um you know when we find it appropriate. I expect that to be over the next several days um you know
hopefully in the next 24 hours. um you know, but you know, obviously I want to make sure that as long as there's a need here, as long as we're pulling resources from other communities, um and we're really just tracking the event as a whole, that that order stays in place for now. So my my recommendation would
be to vote to authorize u the town administrator in consult in consultation with Chief Baldman, the emergency management director um to authorize them to resend the order >> to determine when to resend right the state of emergency.
>> Yeah. >> And I would just say that that will also uh help so that we don't have to call an emergency or special meeting of the board um if that is over the next few days. >> Okay. Are you moving it? >> What? >> Are you moving that? >> Yeah, I did. Second.
>> Is there any second? >> I second. >> All right. All in favor? I >> I That's four in favor and one absent. And um just to that point you just mentioned um we are tracking the storm related expenses separately um for potential reimbursement. Right. So um
the uh Chris was telling me earlier that um some of the departments have asked about overtime money. This is this is a separate budget item. We'll have to address it soon some some point. >> Yes. So, we are tracking it because there is a potential for federal reimbursement. Um, you know, it was a
high bar to hit in terms of the disaster. Um, but based on the snow accumulation, we appear to have hit that and more. Um, so we are going to be working with our state partners on that process over the next, you know, coming weeks and months. Um, so we're going to
track it separately. Um, you know, obviously the more we can get reimbursed, uh, it will really help us on the town side, but, um, you know, we'll also look at options if we did have to incur some of those costs. >> I believe the theuda conference call last week and I believe
that the previous record for Bristol County was either 25 or 28. >> I think it was 28. Yeah, 28. >> And we just blew right through that. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, um, but a lot of accounting having to go on there. So, I appreciate Thank you to the accounting
department, the un under underrated heroes of the All right. Um, we had an item down here for, um, Bill Cheese. Do you want to defer that or do you want us? >> Uh, I would recommend we defer that this. >> All right. So, we'll we'll move >> we'll skip over that one. The town
administrator report. >> Uh, yes. So, obviously at the beginning of the meeting, I talked a lot about the storm. So, um, you know, we're on it. Um tonight we'll send out uh another update, you know, just like we've been doing for over the last number of days. Um again, just hats off to the whole
team. Um so the final budget that was voted on tonight, um you know, I will work to put together a memo on behalf of the board and we will get that over before the end of the week to uh Karen and uh the finance committee so that they can continue their discussions on
the FY27 budget. Um, we'll also get the uh draft warrant that we discussed this evening on to the town website tomorrow and we will uh forward this over to council so that we can also uh get their feedback on the language that we
currently have. So, um, one thing I want to bring to your attention in addition to, um, what we've talked about, the town treasurer is tracking some state legislation,
um, that would prevent the town from, um, blocking license or registration renewals for residents who haven't paid their motor vehicle excise tax. So, you know, currently the town has more than
500,000 in unpaid bills tied to these. So, you know, under what's proposed, you know, when um you know, they're going to renew. Right now, there's a hold on it that says you can't renew until you pay the town the fee. Um what this would do
is it would lift that hold both going forward as well as for all the holds that we currently have in place. Um, you know, there is concern that we it would make enforcement and trying to collect some of the dues owed to the town even
more difficult. Um, you know, based off of the early analysis, it could, you know, reduce compliance down to about 50 between 50 and 75%. So, um, it is something that she wanted to me to bring to your attention. It's something that
I'm tracking. Um, I think it is currently in the House 2 bill. um up at the state. But um this is something that also has been uh commented on through MMA and our partners as well. Just um more or less in objection of that, but
um we're keeping track of that. >> I just have a question. >> What's what's the genesis on that? I mean, obviously there that it seems to be punishing cities and towns and municipalities in their ability to collect that if you can't >> they can just register the ve vehicle and not pay the taxes.
Yeah, I'm not sure. Um, >> well, I mean, you're trying to improve because >> on if if you don't allow them to register the vehicle, they're going to be driving unregistered vehicles. I think that's probably why. I'm not saying I agree with that. I'm just saying that's the benefit to the the
benefit is you'd have a registered vehicle on the street that's getting inspected and that sort of thing. Well, if if they're not paying their taxes, the only people that are getting their money in that situation is the state. Yes. Because the state's getting their registration. The town's not getting their excise tax. >> Yeah. I think there's no how how in the
world I mean, how in the world can you even collect on an you can't foreclose on an excise tax bill, right? >> So, so the one thing we had in our power >> Yeah. >> want to take away. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> That's a fun one.
>> Yeah. So there's multiple groups that are more or less tracking this and talking to the state and advocating on behalf of the towns. But um something I just you when we talk about revenues I want to bring that to the board's attention. Um you know lastly just in terms of um you know meetings I've been
in I've been in the finance committee meetings uh I attended infrastructure oversight committee meeting. Um, and I've, you know, I continue to have regular meetings with, you know, members of our different boards and committees and, uh, departments as well. So, >> the long-term building committee had a meeting.
>> Long-term building did. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend, but I I did watch it and I did also attend the public presentation as well. So, um, to listen to some of the the latest options that were proposed. >> And I know you've been very busy this
week. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Um, all right. The minutes. >> Motion to approve the minutes from >> February 9th. >> February 9th. >> Second. We got it. >> All in favor? >> I. >> I. Those four in favor and one absent. A
report on the bill warrant. >> The bill warrant was signed in February the 18th and it was 200 $2.1 million. Everything was in order. It was fairly cut and dried and fairly usual. uh for this time of year. This is not a
actionable item. It's simply information. So, all is in order. >> Excellent. Thank you. Uh we have liaison committee reports and suggestions for future agenda items. Jake, you want to start? >> Um I just had two meetings. I think
Chris was at both of them. I think you're at one of them. Obviously, the long-term building committee I attended. Um and then also the infrastructure oversight committee. I know you touched on that a little bit. essentially looking at the ongoing uh
waterline project, possible um you know uh connection with Dartmouth and various other things, but I think there's a little bit of um unsuredness with respect to funding and and grants. Um I know there's stuff out there just as to
how when we're going to get that and then also we did have a discussion on uh engineering firms to bring them on as well and again where to pay that. So nothing was really finalized in the in that IOC meeting but uh continuing on
with with the projects as is. Um the only thing on the future agenda items I think what we talked about on the is it March 9th next meet? When is the next meeting? >> The 9th. Yes. um was with Westport Ya um doing a presentation on obviously their facility
with the pickle ball courts and the money they're raising for that. So that'd be the only thing if we could add that to the next agenda. Thank you. >> Um so I was looking on Friday um uh Chris and I I don't remember were you there Craig? We had a meeting on the um
we got a briefing on the barrier beach plan. Um, so, uh, I was a little disappointed in the recommendations from the very to be frank. Um, but they are making some recommendations to change the way we clear East Beach Road when we have
overwash. Um, so I'm sure we'll hear more about that. Were there any specific issues that you had with I mean >> well I mean I didn't like the it it's like the the gist of their recommendation is so the change that we
made recently was to move to the extent that we can to move cobble and sand that has washed onto the south side I guess that's south but onto the beach side right because the idea being that the water has deposited from that side to push it back on that side
>> correct >> the recommendation from the barrier beach perspective is not to do that. Instead, basically split it down the middle. Um because the ocean is trying or mother nature is trying to put the the sand on the north side and so it's healthier for the barrier if you let
mother nature do its thing. So that's not super popular with people who have property down there. >> Uh because then they would have to replenish with brought in um material. Um, I was hoping for I don't I think I was just hoping for a better answer. So, we'll but we we're
not changing the policy right now. >> Okay. I just wanted because I know I' I've had some people reach out to me concerning that because I think the policy is to at least give it back to where >> the policy is kind of it's like I was and and they also kind of reinforced there's a lot of public perception that
the Gooseberry causeway if you open that up that would help. The people doing the studies the geologists are saying no it wouldn't. So, it's a couple things are counterintuitive, right? Like it's it's kind of counterintuitive to move the sand onto the north star instead of back where it came from. But I'm not a
hydrogeeologist, but it makes kind of sense when they explain about the the more you make that steep incline, the worse it starts getting. >> Correct. >> Um, if I may. >> Yeah. >> So, I I heard from Mr. Kurt of the East property owners
>> and and his point to me was we have a contract which we do >> and would there be flexibility to review uh the coastal management work and he didn't say make exceptions but not just to go and do it but to sit down and
discuss it and also make coastal management aware I think it's coastal zone CZ >> Castal um >> aware that we have a contract in place and we should honor honor that. We must honor that. But these things can change, but they should change for good reason
and it shouldn't be changed willy-nilly. That that seemed to be what they're concerned with. >> Well, I mean, in the during the briefing um that we got, they they did talk about that you're trying to balance competing needs, right? You have the the property owners, you have the public infrastructure there, you have the emergency eress. Like, there's a bunch of competing needs down there. So,
there's no I was hoping they had like some magic wand and you could wave it and be >> anyway. And I think the other issue with that is obviously from a state standpoint there's retreat right there. There's right pushing retreat from a state standpoint. So they don't
necessarily agree with you know maybe how we're doing things with respect to the >> but the briefing didn't include any kind of you have to do this or anything like that. We're still in the control of our own policy. So >> um I also attend I was just trying to check my calendar to see what I to remind myself of what I did last week.
So, um there was also a meeting of the bike committee on um the 19th. Um not a lot going on because it's not really the right season for that, but um Gail Rodri is just force nature and we're very lucky to have her. She's getting all kinds of stuff going with bikes. >> Um
the All right. Those were the meetings I went to. All right. Those were my meetings. What do you got, Dick? Uh I didn't have any meetings uh to report on, but in terms of future agenda items, it's obvious that we need to be talking about the old high school now. Um maybe
not at the next meeting, but at some point say what do we do to get this uh looked at again and decide what what we do next? Now it's now it's our it's our baby as they say, >> but that can be at a later date. I don't have anything else.
>> Thank you, Craig. I did attend the last opioid settlement uh committee meeting on the 17th I believe. Um and uh the affordable housing trust, their last meeting, but we uh with one that was scheduled for this week has been
postponed and it'll be we decided rather than going and try to do a an infill meeting. We're just going to meet next on the 18th of March, which is what our March schedule meeting was anyhow. So that that there was going to be an
attempt to make a change, but uh it was only a matter of a little over a week. So we we made that. >> Okay. Thank you. Do we have any comments and statements from the public? >> Happy birthday, Valerie.
Um so seeing none, we don't have any unanticipated topics. All right. So everybody stay off the road if you can. They're still clearing. Please have patience with our public safety and highway department crews. They're working really hard to get the streets cleared off. Maybe mother nature will
give us a break and not snow this weekend. That would be lovely. >> All right. I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Second. >> All in favor? >> I. That's unanimous. >> Good night. >> Uh four in favor, one absent.