Town of Natick - Selectmen's Minutes

Officer Fitzpatrick thanked the Board for the honor, noting that to be placed in the same selected company as previous recipients was a humbling experience. He thanked his wife and family, Chief Mannix for providing him with the opportunity to serve, Officer Richard Donovan for his direction and assistance and all members of the Natick Police Department.

Administrator to suspend certain Town employees. However, make no mistake, the Board fully supports the decisions made and the actions taken by the Acting Town Administrator. Know also that the Board has not lost sight of the fact that the Town is well served by its employees. In fact the problems that the Town has had with its water & sewer collection system was brought to the attention of the administration by Town employees. The Board is proud of the work ethic and the integrity of its employees. We will continue to support our employees and the work they perform for the Town and its citizens and express our thanks for their ethics, integrity and hard work on behalf of all the citizens of our Town.

Mr. McKinley moved approval of the Rotary Club of Natick, Inc.’s request to hold the Clyde Beatty Cole Brothers Circus at the Natick High School on July 4&5, 2001. Seconded by Mr. Ball. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. McKinley, Mr. Stern, Mr. Ball, Mr. Ciccariello voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Hughes abstained.

A motion was made by Mr. McKinley, seconded by Mr. Ball, to approve the Rotary Club’s request to hang a banner across Main Street for the period June 25-July 5, 2001 in advertisement of the circus. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. McKinley, Mr. Stern, Mr. Ball, Mr. Ciccariello voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Hughes abstained.

The Board unanimously voted to approve the Natick Days’ request to hang a banner across Main Street for the period of September 3-15, 2001 in advertisement of the Natick Days Celebration. The vote was taken on a motion by Mr. Ball, seconded by Mr. Ciccariello.

Mr. Ball was a little uncomfortable approving this request without specified hours and suggested that the Board approve it with some limitation on the hours. Mr. Ball moved approval of Ms. Mooney’s request with the hours set at 12:00 p.m.-8:00 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Ciccariello and unanimously voted.

The Board unanimously voted to approve Regan Dowd’s request to close Franconia Avenue from 11 Franconia to its intersection with Overhill on June 3, 2001 from 12:00 – 7:00 p.m. for a block party. The vote was taken on a motion by Mr. Ball, seconded by Mr. Ciccariello.

In her letter to the Board, Fourth of July Committee Chairperson Debra Sayre listed several other events including a July 6th concert on the common. Mr. Hughes asked that the response to Ms. Sayre indicate that the Board was approving the parade only and she would need to apply for any approval for a concert on the Common.

The Board was in receipt of the following six letters of interest from individuals interested in serving on the Design Selection Committee for the Golf Clubhouse and maintenance building: Mysore Ravindra, Peter Garland, Michael Dank, Edward Salamoff, Barbara Chinetti, Frank Pepi.

Mr. Ball nominated Frank Pepi as a member of the committee, noting that he (Mr. Pepi) was responsible for the design of the police and fire station. Mr. Pepi was a long-time resident of Natick and served in numerous capacities. He (Mr. Pepi) was willing to serve the Town and Mr. Ball said he would like to see someone from outside the Golf Course Advisory Committee.

As Chairman of the Tax Classification Task Force, Michael Dank reported that the task force had met four times, the most recent this morning with the Assessors. A lot of information has been generated some of which dealt with the surrounding towns that have classified their tax rate and some that classified and returned. At this point the task

force was not in a position to make a recommendation. They were waiting for some more information from the Assessors. Unfortunately the Assessing Department was understaffed for a long period of time and they were now in the process of getting out the tax bills for August 1st. Mr. Dank said he didn’t anticipate receiving any further information from Bill Chenard, Director of Assessing, until the middle of August.

Mr. Hughes asked if there was anything the Board could do to help the process, and Mr. Dank’s response was, ‘yes if the Board had some money’. He noted there were five members on the task force, all volunteers, getting the information in order to make an assessment. The information is available not only in Natick, but in surrounding towns. If there were an employee who had this (gathering information) as a function, it would be helpful.

Mr. Ball mentioned the tax help program, but then realized that there were already a lot of jobs waiting and no applicants. A member of the audience, Sue Salamoff, however, noted that sometimes there were jobs in the tax help program that don’t fit the qualifications and somebody might be interested in doing this type of job. She suggested advertising and maybe somebody would come forward.

Mr. McKinley thought this might be an ideal project for a college summer student. Given the significance of this project, he couldn’t imagine that the Town couldn’t come up with a few thousand dollars to hire a summer student. Mr. Hughes proposed investigating the possibility with the Finance Committee, and Mr. Cohen advised that there may be some money in the administration budget.

Mr. Cogley distributed a handout including a report for 2000 and a letter to the Board updating the Chamber’s activities for the first quarter. He noted that there was a lot of interest right now in brownfields as it was property underperforming from a tax standpoint. The Chamber offered a brownfield forum and just completed a three-part seminar on brownfields.

Mr. Grossman noted that a final license was signed over a year ago, and RCN was constructing their lines in Town. They were building a brand new system that will provide Natick with an alternative. RCN will provide digital TV, cable, local and long distance telephone, internet access. There will be 172 nodes serving 100 addresses each to ensure maximum bandwidth.

Mr. Grossman continued that RCN will be coming to Town in July, and he would like to schedule a meeting to give a presentation of all services and products and how they were going to market the product and how they will go about doing the marketing. For $33.95 people will get 79 channels of basic including Disney and NESN.

Referring to Mr. Grossman’s statement that there will be 172 nodes serving 100 homes each, Mr. Ball said he understood that cable modem speed is a function of the number of the people utilizing it. If all 100 subscribers were simultaneously downloading at the same time, would the system slow down substantially. Mr. Grossman advised that that would not happen with 100 homes per node. He noted that this system was built and designed in 2000. It has not been retrofitted.

Rod Feak, a member of the Cable Advisory Board, requested that people from the Cable Board be invited to hear RCN’s presentation to the Selectmen. Mr. Grossman replied that he intended to come to the Cable Advisory Board’s next meeting and give the same presentation.

Mr. Cohen prefaced the discussion by noting that the Board has had a request from residents of Charles Street about improving the intersection of Charles Street and North Main Street. He referred to a diagram showing the current and the proposed, and noted that the

Mr. Allen told the Board that he was representing a group of neighbors on Charles Street along with the Whipple Company and the Natick Mills. He noted that every once in awhile, there was a project whose pieces fall together because it makes sense and the Charles Street neighbors thought this was one. The neighbors on Charles Street have been having more children and were worried about the traffic coming off North Main Street. The traffic comes off North Main very fast, easily at 35-40 mph plus. The concern is for when kids are playing or crossing the street that a car will come through there quickly and there will be an unfortunate accident.

Mr. Allen continued that the neighborhood was lucky enough to have an architect and he took the first shot at drawing a plan and ran that by the appropriate Town offices. The suggestion was to first go to the Safety Committee. It was presented to the Committee and they requested that it be reviewed by the Town Engineer. That resulted in a number of changes to the plan which were acceptable to the neighbors. The result was the plan now before the Board.

Mr. Allen continued that the plan went back to the Safety Committee and they concluded that this proposal would improve the safety in the Town. By slowing down the traffic it would have people coming through at a more reasonable rate of speed. The next step was to figure out if there was land available to make it work. Mr. Socrat volunteered to give the Town a little piece of his property which would allow for the proposed intersection.

Mr. Allen noted that they then had to figure out how to get it approved and the money. The neighbors talked to Mr. Cohen who suggested that the most likely way to get it moving forward would be to appear before the Selectmen to see if Chapter 90 funds could be used. Mr. Allen also

noted that there was going to be a significant pavement project on Grove Street which was just north of the intersection and he was led to believe that there could be some significant economies to the Town if this project was done at the same time as that one. It was the neighbors’ understanding that in the not too distant future, the state will be putting in granite curbing in that section of Town, and if this project was done before that, the granite curbing would be done by the state. He hoped the Board would approve this project.

Police Chief Dennis Mannix reported that the question came before the Safety Committee several months ago and the Safety Committee has been having ongoing discussions. The Committee knew it would be a funding issue. There was no doubt that it would provide a greater measure of safety on Charles Street, and the Police Department speed surveys indicates that it is higher than it should be. Chief Mannix explained that the Safety Committee makes recommendations based purely on safety and not on the financial implications of making those decisions.

Chief Mannix told the Board that he couldn’t say this project should be done first because there were a lot of other projects that need to be done, and he thought the DPW had a Chapter 90 plan. This project was estimated to cost around $25,000 as drawn. The project previously mentioned to the Board at Everett Street was around $30,000, and he (Chief Mannix) would venture that the residents of that area would consider that equally important. The Safety Committee has not been asked to prioritize these projects. It was not a matter of enforcement. It was really an engineering question as it was at Eliot and Everett Street.

Mr. Socrat noted that all of the children on Charles Street were in the 3-7 year range. He was not sure about Everett Street, but he wasn’t sure this was a choice. Charles Street deals with this every day, and it seemed to him as though the speeds were 40-50 mph. It is a cut through over to Oak Street, and the speed couldn’t be enforced all the time. The neighbors were looking to the Board for some remedy and because of the timing at Grove Street which was going to be done this summer, there will be some economies. The land is there, and Mr.

Mr. Cohen advised that one avenue for potential funding was to go for a special article or if the Board deemed appropriate, to use Chapter 90 funds. He spoke with DPW Director Charles Sisitsky and Town Engineer Mark Coviello and was informed that there was no funding for this project in the budget, and if this was funded, the question was what falls out the other end. He was, however, then informed that there was a possible mechanism. The Town has been setting aside approximately $l4 million of Chapter 90 funds for Route 135. If the Board chooses to do so, the money could be borrowed from that set aside and the funds replenished from future Chapter 90 funds since it doesn’t appear that the Route 135 project will be undertaken this season. The Charles Street intersection could be added to Grove Street and if included in this scope of projects, it would be covered under Chapter 90.

In discussion of the motion, Mr. Ball asked if there were any estimate as to the cost if the project were done in conjunction with the Grove Street project as opposed to a separate project. Mr. Socrat responded that there was a written estimate from Mr. Coviello of $24,000 including police detail. He believed it would be less than that (if done with Grove Street), but he had nothing identifying that.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that he understood that the applicant has agreed to do all landscaping at their cost. Mr. Allen replied that there was an aesthetic aspect and perhaps a Welcome to Natick sign could be placed in this area. The intention was to landscape it and maintain it.

Myron Coplan noted that he read an article in the ‘Daily News’ that said the manganese in the water was not toxic. That was absolutely not true. It was his belief that the cause of the black in the water system was the injection of the fluosilicic into the wrong place. Mr. Coplan explained why he believed that was what was happening, and noted that when he asked the engineer, and the engineer didn’t have an answer as to why he was putting it there.

When asked by Mr. Ciccariello if he thought it was a design issue in the treatment plant, Mr. Coplan responded that it was a chemistry issue that could have been obviated had the fluosilicic acid been injected in a different area. It is a combination of chemistry and engineering.

Mr. Cohen noted that he was requesting a mandatory odd/even water ban at the suggestion of the DPW. In March there was flooding, but unfortunately it has been a season of extremes and since then there has been the driest April on record. The water ban would be in effect until mid-September. Elm Bank had to be shut down.

Mr. Cohen commended Water & Sewer Supervisor Jack Perodeau and his crew and Building Maintenance Director Corey Lovett for their action during the re-appearance of the manganese. Their steps enabled Town facilities and other businesses to stay open and operable.

Mr. Hughes noted that Town Meeting authorized redoing part of the treatment plant to avoid this problem by piping Evergreen through the plant. Once Evergreen was piped through the treatment plant, it would be less likely that a water ban would be needed when Elm Bank was turned off. Mr. Perodeau confirmed that when the plant was expanded, the chances of needing a water ban would be a lot slimmer.

Mr. McKinley commented that it was his understanding that once Elm Bank was shut down, the Town was required to put a water ban on. Mr. Perodeau didn’t know if a water ban was required when Elm Bank was shut down, but once the ban was put on, the Town was required to keep it on until September.

Indian Ridge Road resident Mr. DeBruyn asked if it was mandatory to shut down Elm Bank once the Charles River got below a certain level. Mr. Hughes advised that that was correct. In follow-up Mr. DeBruyn questioned why, when three towns share Elm Bank, does the law apply to Natick and not Wellesley or Dover. Mr. Cohen explained that it was not a law. It was a condition of the Town’s permit.

Irma DeBruyn noted that one of the houses was recently built within the last couple of years on Glen Street. Mr. Cohen explained that the house was built in Dover, but part of the land was in Natick. Ms. DeBruyn suggested that the Town cease and desist adding any other non-residents to the water supply.

Mr. Stern asked if it were safe to assume that flushing hydrants would be suspended during the ban. Mr. Cohen advised that it would, and added that when the manganese problem reoccurred the fire chief was asked to cease with the flushing program. The only caveat was that the chief was going through a recruit training program and needed some limited use for training.

Mr. Cohen reviewed a memo he had written to the Board outlining the results of his limited investigation into the operations of the data collection and billing practices for water & sewer. The memo reviewed the current system and identified shortcomings of the current system which he listed as absence of ownership, insufficient analysis of the data, absence of account audits, difficulties in collecting data, no pursuit of monies owed, and a lack of adequate written policies and procedures.

To address the problem Mr. Cohen stated that efforts must now be taken to restore the public’s confidence in the accuracy and the integrity of this Town operation. Water and Sewer customers should have the belief that all are paying their fair share of the cost to consume these essential resources.

He (Mr. Cohen) recommended outside assistance in the form of financial and management auditing services, and the auditing assistance must be accompanied by the good faith efforts of those town officials and employees who participate in the management and operation of the data collection and billing services. Policies and procedures need to be established to clearly identify how these operations are to be conducted and audited. Additional human resources may ultimately be necessary to responsibly run the water billing system. He pointed out that if the Town were to achieve a 1% improvement in the collections from this $9 million operation, then the additional resources invested would more than pay for themselves.

Mr. Cohen told the Board that the next steps were to present a $10,000 Reserve Fund transfer request to the Finance Committee, obtain outside financial and management audit assistance, and have the Town Administrator’s Office report monthly to the Board on the progress that is being made to address this problem.

Under the section of pursuit of monies, Mr. Cohen mentioned that allegations have been raised with respect to the failure to collect the revenue owed to the Town from final meter readings. At the time of the transfer of ownership of a property, the seller often makes a final water and sewer payment. This requires sending a meter reader to a residence to obtain an actual final read of the inside meter. Often the bills derived from the final meter readings can be in the hundreds or over a thousand dollars if the homeowner had not been receiving an actual, accurate water bill during the period prior to the sale of a

property. In some instances the practice has been for unauthorized town employees to waive revenue owed to the Town of Natick. The basis for waiving the collection of these monies has been that it was not fair to the property owner to receive such a large bill, since it was not clear that it was the property owner’s fault that such a situation had occurred.

Mr. Stern then inquired as to how the $10,000 figure was arrived at, and Mr. Cohen replied that the $10,000 was just a round number. Mr. Stern was of the opinion that if the Town put out $10,000 and solicited proposals that may be suggesting to a potential vendor what the Town was willing to pay. Mr. Cohen noted that he didn’t have a full handle on the proposal and will need consulting services. He didn’t know how deep it went and what needed to be done. He planned to contact

Mr. Ciccariello questioned if the present software was not capable of reading past events or was it the user who didn’t know how to use the system. Finance Director Robert Palmer explained that there were two different software systems. The billing was separate from the meter reading software. He emphasized that no one was waiving fees off accounts. Consumption was being under-estimated because the reader was using the lower vs. higher number when it was being read. It was not a

Mr. Hughes stated that he was not talking about those waivers. If people were waiving bills because someone gets a high bill at a real estate closing, he wanted that to stop. Mr. Palmer reiterated that that was not the problem. If the reader uses the read on the outside as opposed to the real read on the inside, the outside meter may not be working correctly, but the actual inside meter is fine. There will be a variance and those were the times where people doing the reading adopted a policy that it was not the homeowners’ fault and only bill out what’s on the outside meter. It was not a case of people waiving huge bills. It was underestimated and those were the policies that have to be voided.

Mr. Ciccariello again asked about software capability, and Mr. Palmer responded that the software was generating a proof report that says this is the last report and this is the new report. Mr. Ciccariello questioned if it could do 6-7 billings, and Mr. Palmer advised that it could produce a report of that on an individual basis.

Mr. Hughes noted that you would have to know the account you were looking for. The software couldn’t generate all the accounts where there has been no usage over the last four billings. Mr. Palmer concurred and noted that it wasn’t necessarily the billing software, but the software for the consumption analysis itself.

Mr. McKinley inquired as to what it would take to have the capacity to do a trend analysis either at the accounting level or meter reading and ultimately flag that a particular account after 2-3 years suddenly appears to be very different. Mr. Palmer replied that the current system has no capacity to do that.

Mr. McKinley then inquired as to the life expectancy of a meter and was told by Mr. Perodeau that it was 10 years. Asked if the meters were changed every 10 years, Mr. Perodeau replied that the Town tries to do it. It was his goal to change 1,000-2,000 per year. When asked by Mr. Stern how many had been installed for the last 4-5 years, Mr. Perodeau said he didn’t have an exact amount, but could find out. He has a budget of $30,000 for meters and the average meter was around $45. However, a bigger meter such as for the hospital will cost $5,000 and he had already replaced a couple of those this year. He didn’t know the average age of the meters replaced.

Referring to Mr. Cohen’s memo, Mr. McKinley stated that he would like to see the scope refocused. He was less interested in auditing history than getting in place clear and defined policies and procedures. He wanted whatever adjustments were necessary so staff can spot trends and have the training so everyone can understand the functions and obligations. He preferred setting aside the cost associated with auditing history and used the analogy of being in a leaking boat and spending the money on fixing the hole rather than buying baling buckets. Sometimes collecting what was believed to be revenues owed the Town can be time consuming, expensive and not always successful. He felt efforts needed to go to tighten up systems.

Mr. Stern felt that collection of back water bills was a different animal. He pointed out that not a lot had to be done since once it was billed after a period of time, it goes to taxes. Mr. McKinley responded that he was not arguing that an effort shouldn’t be made to go back, but it was not a priority. What he wanted was to put in place the necessary software and systems so there wasn’t this problem going forward and in the process of doing that, there may be a system put in

Former Selectwoman Susan Salamoff said she thought the big issue before the Board was confidence with the residents that each one has a water gauge that fairly records their water usage and from there they get the bill that goes with it. She supported anything the Board could do so every resident has an updated water meter and gets the bill that goes with it accordingly.

The first was from a homeowner, Jeffrey Snyder, who had a leak and was seeking relief because of a large spike in his bill. The Water Department heard water under the slab of his house and it was repaired. In accordance with the Board’s policy that if it goes through the meter the homeowner is assessed the cost, a note was sent to Mr. Snyder saying it was not anticipated that the Board would honor his request for an abatement. Mr. Snyder wrote back again requesting relief.

Mr. McKinley noted that the last time this occurred he had a lot of empathy for the homeowner and could agree with the argument that it didn’t go down the Town sewer system. He couldn’t see abating the MWRA charge because it still gets billed to the Town, but he thought it would be reasonable to abate the $137.60 for the Town sewer.

Mr. Cohen noted that this request for an abatement of water & sewer charges involved another water leak for a ranch house with no basement. This one was from a retired senior on a fixed income whose water bill increased over a period of time from 25-50 units to 142 units.

In looking at these two incidents, Mr. Ciccariello noted that they were both located in the north side of Natick and both were slabs on grade. He asked how this could be dealt with before getting continuous requests. Mr. Perodeau responded that there were a lot of these types of problems in Wethersfield coming from the heating pipes in the concrete floor. The meters are in the boiler room and people probably don’t hear the water running. The only way to fix this is to put baseboard heat in.

Mr. Ciccariello thought it would be advantageous for the DPW, knowing which residents own slab on grades, to send a letter to those residents advising that they should be paying attention and aware that they may be facing leaks. Mr. McKinley thought that was a good idea, but he wasn’t sure sending letters was the way to do it. He wondered if the press could make people who live in those types of structures aware that they need to be judicious about their water bills – that they were vulnerable to a pipe in the slab starting to leak.

Mr. McKinley noted that a $72,000 fire alarm system was on the capital plan for the high school and questioned if the Schools were assured that that system can remain and won’t be affected by any further work at the high school. Finance Director Robert Palmer gave assurances that it wouldn’t be duplicated in any renovation. In follow-up Mr. McKinley wanted to be sure that the renovations wouldn’t compromise the system in any way, and Mr. Palmer advised that it wouldn’t.

Mr. McKinley then asked about the $45,000 handicapped ramp. Mr. Palmer responded that James Connolly, the School Business Manager, had been asked that question and he (Mr. Palmer) recalled that Mr. Connolly said that the ramp wouldn’t be torn up with the renovations. It was within the building to make one section accessible. Mr. McKinley pointed out that $400,000 had been spent to put in an elevator.

Mr. Ciccariello questioned why the Eliot Montessori School was asking the Town to invest $78,000 for a fire alarm. He assumed that when the Montessori School occupied the building, they had a certificate of occupancy and the building met requirements at that time. The Town isn’t required to go back and bring it up-to-date. Mr. Hughes noted that the Montessori School wasn’t asking for it. This was a proposal from within the Town to improve the building. The tenant was not asking the Town to do anything.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that taking all the various line items there was a proposal to spend $225,000 at Cole School, and it seemed like there was always work that needs to be done at Cole. He proposed getting a better handle on what needs to be done at this facility and then the Town can decide if any more money should be invested or should alternatives be considered.

Mr. Palmer explained that the administration wasn’t recommending going forward with this ($225,000 for Cole). Department heads are asked to put in their requests for their departments. He agreed that the Town wouldn’t want to make a major investment at Cole. Probably there

should be some input from a multi-faceted group looking at all the Town’s infrastructure. There was some information from an insurance survey and there is a requirement under Gadsby 34 to have an inventory and depreciation of the Town’s buildings. That will allow for more insight on the condition of the structures.

Mr. Hughes inquired as to how much capital there would be at Fall Town Meeting, and Mr. Palmer responded that based on some of the other requirements, he would say the Fall capital would be fairly sparse. There were public safety needs and some emergency items, but he didn’t see a lot of capital items being moved forward. Mr. Cohen added that the snow and ice deficit will have to be funded from cash reserves and there will be funding from the EPA enforcement action and some environmental work from that. Plus the Board of Selectmen previously heard concerns about the migrating contamination from Lilja and the School administration feels this is now in the hands of the Town since it is now away from their building. Another major capital item was the planning money for the high school renovation.

Mr. Ball inquired as to how much of the $10,000 appropriated at Fall Town Meeting for the design and specifications of the pumper had been spent and on what. Fire Chief Richard Fredette advised that the only cost was for advertisement in the local newspapers and that was approximately $110. There was $9,000+ left and that was still in the account.

Mr. Ball stated that his understanding and the understanding of Town Meeting members to whom he had spoken was that the intent was to hire an outside consultant to prepare the specifications. He felt he had been hog swaggled. Chief Fredette responded that at no time has the Town spent money to draw specifications for a fire engine. He believed

Mr. Ball noted that he had raised the issue that the specification in the RFP to which there was one responder was clearly done from the specification of a single manufacturer. It was not identical but subsections of the RFP were word-for-word for specifications of an Emergency One pumper.

Mr. Ball quoted from the law and stated that contrary to Town Counsel’s opinion, he believed the spec was made in a fashion, which allowed only one dealer for one manufacturer to respond. He was distressed by this. To him it violated the law and the Board was bound to uphold the law. He didn’t deny that the Chief knew better than the Board what his Fire Department needs in terms of equipment. What concerned him was that to him the issuance of this RFP has violated Chapter 30B, Section 14.

Mr. Ball pointed out that the sole responder was Greenwood and the Town has purchased all its fire equipment except the ambulance and ladder truck from Greenwood. Chief Fredette made the correction that the ladder truck had also been purchased from Greenwood. Mr. Ball asserted that the Town has only dealt with one vendor of fire apparatus in 16-17 years and again Chief Fredette made a correction that it was closer to 22 years.

Mr. Ball noted that the intent of the public bidding laws was to protect the public from sole source procurement unless it was closely defined as being such. One part of the specs says only a dealer within 100 miles may bid. Without regard to what brand of vehicle you were seeking to purchase, not only was it being restricted to one manufacturer but to one dealership. You can’t even get two bids from one manufacturer, and he (Mr. Ball) didn’t have confidence when there was one bid and they know that is the sole bid that the pencils were as sharp as they could be. Mr. Ball stated he was distressed by that and distressed by Town Counsel’s opinion, and he would vote against it.

Chief Fredette pointed out that the Town was not buying a family automobile. This was a specialized piece of apparatus that will serve the Town for 20 years. The Department got a bargain one time and within four years it was rusting out. It was so poor that it was decided that any money put into it would be a loser. He didn’t know any other company that makes custom fire apparatus with aluminum.

Chief Fredette continued that the reason for putting in the radius was that it enabled him to get the apparatus down there, get it repaired, and get it back. It was not unusual to get sole bids and it was not an uncommon practice when building a fire truck to go with what works. This was right in line with what other communities are paying. If the Board wanted to rebid, that was the Board’s prerogative, but the Board

Mr. McKinley followed-up on Chief Fredette’s comment that this was the only company to make aluminum, and Chief Fredette responded that to the best of his knowledge that was true for custom fire apparatus. Noting that all manufacturers protect their dealerships, Mr. McKinley asked if

the radius was expanded to 250 miles, if another dealership would be able to bid. Chief Fredette advised that another dealer would be allowed to bid, but it wouldn’t be efficient to the Town because of the travel for warranty or specialized service. When asked how often, Chief Fredette responded that it was generally every 12-18 months and when it goes, he has to send a mechanic and a firefighter.

Mr. Stern questioned if getting warranty service on a fire truck was different than the Ford Mr. Ball bought, and Chief Fredette replied that it was. Greenwood was in North Attleboro and the next closest was in Connecticut. Mr. Stern then asked if the geographic restrictions were spread and the bid from the dealer in Connecticut was lower, could

the warranty service be provided by Greenwood. Chief Fredette responded that if it were bought in Connecticut, and he called Greenwood and said I have a truck that has a warranty issue, he would probably be told that the closest appointment was 3-4 weeks out.

Mr. Ciccariello commented that he was at Town Meeting the night the $10,000 was approved and he was under the assumption that the Fire Department was hiring an outside consultant to draw up plans and specifications that could be put out to bid. Now that $9,000 of that hasn’t been spent, where would the $9,000 go. Since the $9,000 was spent, shouldn’t it go back to Town Meeting and not expend those funds.

Mr. Hughes responded that there was no reason to spend that money and it would probably be cashed out to free cash. Mr. Ciccariello asked if there was sufficient funds remaining to pay for the low bid without using the $9,000, and Chief Fredette advised that that was correct. Chief Fredette added that he didn’t believe he spoke on that particular issue at Town Meeting and any assumptions made were exactly that – assumptions.

Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that if only one company makes an aluminum body, that makes it a proprietary specification. In the future if there was a situation where there may only be one manufacturer of a specified product, the awarding authority is supposed to vote prior to putting it out to bid. Permission is supposed to be received to do that and you are supposed to state why it is in the best interest of the Town. He felt this was a proprietary spec, but Town Counsel has ruled that in his opinion it is not a proprietary spec.

Chief Fredette again pointed out that in the bid instructions there was a paragraph marked exceptions. Nobody filed a complaint or took exceptions to this bid. If another bid was received and took exceptions, then by law he (Chief Fredette) would be required to consider that bid.

Chief Fredette responded that there was no problem with another 6-8 months, but he did not think it would be financially advantageous to the Town. There will be a price increase in June and he believed this was the best price available. Chief Fredette believed if the bid was thrown out, it would cost the Town $5-10,000 to rebid it.

Reading from the spec, Mr. Ball highlighted the components identified by brand names. He noted that he could understand if the Chief wanted a particular kind of siren or brand of pump, but did not understand why the Chief was insisting the vehicle use a particular axle. Chief Fredette responded that that was the best on the market. To people who service these vehicles, these axles were an industry standard. Certain systems were specified because they were proven to be the best on the market. Mr. Ball noted that in his research the majority of people who make first quality equipment use Rockwell axles. Chief Fredette acknowledged that there was nothing wrong with Rockwell, but Meritor was considered to be a step ahead. Mr. Ball responded that that was his point – that the Chief was saying that he (Chief Fredette) was going to throw out a bid that doesn’t have Meritor. Chief Fredette

wrote his opinion in concert with the Chief and with all due respect to Town Counsel, he (Mr. Ball) did not agree. His research says there are a substantial number of other companies that make aluminum bodied vehicles. Chief Fredette countered that Mr. Ball was not an attorney and has no experience in fire truck apparatus.

Mr. Ball moved that the bids be rejected and be rebid with specifications to be written by an individual in concert with the Chief and payment to come from the unexpended $10,000 appropriated by Town Meeting. Seconded by Mr. Ciccariello. The motion failed on a 1-4-0 vote. Mr. Ball voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Hughes, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Stern and Mr. Ciccariello were opposed.

A motion was made by Mr. Stern, seconded by Mr. Ball to table for two weeks (June 11) or to June 18th to allow additional time for investigation. After some discussion, two votes were taken – one to table to June 11 and one to table to June 18th since Chief Fredette was unable to attend the meeting on the 11th. The June 11th motion failed on a 2-3-0 vote with Mr. Ball and Mr. Stern voting in favor of the motion. The June 18th motion failed on a 1-4-0 vote. Mr. Ball voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Hughes, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Stern and Mr. Ciccariello were opposed.

In discussion of the tabling motion, Mr. McKinley expressed the opinion that if the Board could find a way to develop consensus, tabling would be good. From the previous meeting, Mr. Hughes recalled that it was the opinion from Town Counsel that everyone was waiting to see. Mr. Ciccariello thought that if the bid were delayed the only option would be to send it to the Inspector General for an opinion. He didn’t know what investigation the Board could do to convince everyone one way or another.

Mr. Stern noted that one additional investigation the Board could do was to see if a specification can be developed for a vehicle, which will meet the aluminum vehicle performance, made out of a different material. He thought the Board hadn’t given itself a chance to investigate and see how many vendors were located within a 100 mile radius who sell vehicles made out of premium steel as opposed to aluminum. Mr. Hughes pointed out that that type of investigation was to rebid the fire engine. Mr. Stern responded that he was not

Mr. McKinley felt that the fact that the firefighters were all driving the same type and that all the engines use the same parts was a benefit. He noted that the Board had heard from Town Counsel that this was a legal bid and it was suggested that it was a fair bid. The Town might save $5-10,000 but will not save $50-100,000 (in redoing the specs) and get a piece of equipment that was worthy. He doubted that much savings would be found and the Board will be sitting here in 3-4 months doing the same thing. As for referring it to the Inspector General, if there could be an answer by June 11th, he would support that and the bidder would have to extend the bid to June 11th.

If the vendor agreed to an extension, Mr. McKinley inquired as to the purpose for tabling. Mr. Stern responded that the purpose would be to determine whether an alternative spec can be developed which will allow a more competitive bid and accomplish the process objectively. Mr.

McKinley pointed out that that would be asking a vendor to extend the bid to June 11 while the Board considered throwing out his bid. Mr. Stern countered that he thought the vendor had gotten the benefit of being one bidder, and he (Mr. Stern) was a little uncomfortable with a bid situation where there was only one responder. He had no idea if the Town was getting a fair price. Mr. Stern added that he was all for giving the Chief the equipment he needs. Mr. Hughes countered that that was assuming the guy making the one bid knows he is the one bidder.

Mr. Stern asked Frank Foss, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, if the Finance Committee considered any of these issues. Mr. Foss replied that the FinCom did not consider specifications about the particular pumper. They considered whether the funds were available and met the recommendation to Town Meeting for the appropriation.

Mr. Ciccariello stated that he thought it was inappropriate to table discussion solely for the purpose of trying to go out and find out if there were other bidders who might have an interest in bidding this. He noted that he has been involved in too many public bid jobs where only one bid was received and sometimes you have to make a gut judgment. Sometimes when it goes out to rebid, you have to spend extra fees and there was no guarantee when the next bid comes back that there will be two bidders or a lower bidder. He would not support delaying it any further than tonight.

Conservation Commission Chairman George Bain explained that the reason the Conservation Commission did not include the Community Preservation Act was that he personally felt that the timeframe for any possible ratification was so far in the distance that adding this (Community Preservation Act) to it would dilute the effect of what the committee was to do which was to increase open space for passive and active recreation. Mr. Bain stated that he felt strongly about that and felt that perhaps having another working group do the education part might be a better route to go.

Mr. Hughes didn’t think Mr. Ball was proposing that this group be the campaign committee to convince the Town yea or nay. He didn’t see it as involved as Mr. Bain. To get it started someone has to start it, and he (Mr. Hughes) didn’t want to jump into a committee and put it on the ballot now.

Recreation & Parks Superintendent Richard Cugini noted that as of yet a final draft of the open space plan has not been brought back to the Board. He was hoping to have this done so that by summer it could be approved. The Open Space Committee would then use that to proceed.

Mr. Stern asked if any of these roads were included in the underground work that RCN will be doing. Mr. Cohen advised that he had not seen any requests from RCN, but he did not believe these were in underground areas. Mr. Hughes asked that Mr. Cohen send a letter to RCN representative Steven Grossman saying these were the streets that the Town was going to do.

In view of the expected return of the Town Administrator, Mr. Hughes noted that it was not appropriate at this time for the Board to consider doing a performance appraisal of Acting Town Administrator Paul Cohen. Normally it was not the Board of Selectmen’s job to do an appraisal of the Deputy Town Administrator.

Mr. McKinley pointed out the Town Administrator would be hard pressed to give a qualified review of Mr. Cohen’s performance, and he felt the Board was obliged to Mr. Cohen to do it. Mr. Hughes cited the need to get started on a process and suggested that in the meantime Mr. Ciccariello and Mr. Stern discuss it and he (Mr. Hughes) would get them the forms used last year.

In a memo to the Board, Board of Health Director Roger Wade noted that the Board of Health was considering the purchase of a wheelchair for use as may be needed from time-to-time in Town Hall. He believed it would be used in first-aid situations and that it would be available for temporary use in the Town Hall workplace by employees who need such assistance. The wheelchair would be purchased by the Board of Health and stored in their office.

6. Each certificate and policy of insurance shall provide that should any of the above policies be cancelled or materially amended before the expiration date thereof the issuing company will mail thirty days prior written notice thereof to the Natick Board of Selectmen.

Mr. Ball, seconded by Mr. Stern, moved to enter into executive session for the purpose of discussing matters pertaining to compensation of non-union personnel. A roll call vote was unanimous and the Board so retired at 11:00 p.m. after announcing that the meeting would not return to open session.