Town of Natick - Board of Selectmen's Minutes

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman Charles M. Hughes at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: Charles M. Hughes, Paul R. McKinley, Jeffrey A. Stern, Jay H. Ball, John Ciccariello

ALSO PRESENT: Paul E. Cohen, Deputy Town Administrator; Donna Challis, Secretary;

WARRANTS: Payroll warrants were signed by the Board of Selectmen on August 20, 2001 in the amount of $180,624.73. This figure was included in total warrants signed by the Board of Selectmen of $412,549.34.

With noted corrections, Mr. Stern moved approval of the minutes of the June 18, 2001 meeting. Seconded by Mr. Ciccariello. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. Hughes, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Stern, Mr. Ciccariello voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Ball abstained as he had not attended the meeting.

CYCLE FOR HAYLEE: BICYCLE TOUR

On a motion by Mr. McKinley, seconded by Mr. Ciccariello, the Board unanimously voted to approve the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation’s Cycle for Haylee road race through Natick on October 6, 2001.

NATICK 350TH ANNIVERSARY COMMITTEE

On a motion by Mr. Ciccariello, seconded by Mr. Ball, the Board unanimously voted to approve the 350th Anniversary Committee’s request to use Natick Common on September 22, 2001 for an historical military enactment.

PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION FOR ALL ALCOHOLIC COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE: DAH MEE, INC.

Before the Board was an application from Dah Mee, Inc. for an all alcoholic common victualer’s license for premises at 25 Washington Street. Representing Dah Mee, Inc. was the manager Young H. Lee.

Mr. Ball asked if Mr. Lee had taken the TIPS course. Mr. Lee responded that he had not taken it as yet. He had just been informed by Joyce Moss, Downtown Manager, this afternoon that he was supposed to take it. He registered and will take it (TIPS course) on August 25, 2001.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that the building occupancy permit in the application states that it is a temporary 60 day permit from May 11-July 11, 2001. He didn’t see a permanent one. Mr. Lee advised that he received the permanent occupancy permit although he didn’t remember the exact date. He would get a copy.

Mr. Hughes noted that the seating chart on the plan shows that seats 29, 30, 31, 32 were the sushi bar. Mr. Lee indicated that that was not correct that there was an updated seating assignment and that (sushi bar seats) was eliminated. The Building Department counted the seats and there were 101 seats.

Mr. Hughes stated that there would be no seats at the sushi bar, and Mr. Lee confirmed that as correct.

Mr. Ball asked about the stock ownership and if the 51 and 49 reflected the percentage. Mr. Lee advised that it did.

Mr. Stern inquired as to Mr. Lee’s plans for educating his wait staff on the rules and regulations of the service of alcohol. Mr. Lee responded that he would hire a consultant in the profession and have them train his staff.

PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION FOR ALL ALCOHOLIC COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE: DAH MEE, INC. (contd)

Mr. Hughes noted that because the restaurant was within 500 feet of two churches, the Board has to specifically note the churches and indicate that consideration was given on the impact on the churches.

Mr. Ball questioned if the Board had any obligation to notify the churches. Mr. Hughes explained that there was an obligation to notify all abutters and that was done. Mr. Hughes then asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on the issue of the churches. No one came forward.

Town meeting member Susan Salamoff told the Board that she voted in favor of the article to permit the reduction of seating for restaurants in Natick (to have a liquor license) and when she did, she had this particular restaurant in mind. She has eaten at Dah Mee and had a wonderful experience eating there. If Dah Mee meets all the legal requirements, she urged favorable action.

Mr. Hughes clarified that this was not a liquor license that has anything to do with reduced seating. Because they (Dah Mee) have more than 100 seats, they qualify for a full liquor license.

Mr. Hughes referred back to the impact on the churches and noted that there were also two other liquor licenses within 500 feet and the churches haven’t raised any objection.

Mr. Ball moved approval of Dah Mee, Inc.’s application for a common victualer’s all alcoholic beverage license for premises at 25 Washington Street conditioned upon Mr. Lee’s completion of an alcohol awareness training course. Mr. Stern proposed and Mr. Ball concurred with adding the requirement of educational training for the staff with certification of such to the Board. The training and certification to be done on an annual basis. Seconded by Mr. Stern and unanimously voted.

An amendment had been made to the motion that there be no seating and no service of alcohol at the sushi bar, but after further discussion that amendment was dropped.

In discussion of the motion, Mr. Stern noted that the Board had previously discussed including educational requirements for staff. The applicant had indicated that he would bring in a consultant and Mr. Stern wondered if there was support for making that a requirement for the license and an annual requirement with certification to the Board. Mr. McKinley indicated his support of such a requirement.

Ms. Moss told the Board that it was her understanding that there were seats at the sushi bar, but those seats don’t count toward the 101, therefore, the appropriate motion would be that there be no service.

Mr. Hughes pointed out that the other restaurant in town (Hiro Sushi) can’t have seats at their sushi bar. Mr. McKinley, however, felt that typically people sit at a sushi bar and were served fresh sushi. He didn’t understand why Hiro Sushi was denied that and inquired if Dah Mee’s sushi bar was intended and designed to serve people.

Mr. Lee advised that the sushi bar was meant for serving but doesn’t count as the 101 seats.

Mr. McKinley questioned if what was being proposed was to deny serving alcohol at the sushi bar and deny seating at the sushi bar. Mr. Hughes noted that under the by-law serving alcohol at any bar or counter was prohibited. The Board issued a previous license and required the applicant to remove the seats from the sushi bar. In the interest of fairness, having addressed this in another restaurant this should be the same. He (Mr. Hughes) felt it was extremely difficult for a restaurant to avoid service of alcohol anywhere where there was seating.

Ms. Moss said she understood the issue of sushi as far as serving alcohol and thought it was reasonable and consistent, but it was surprising that they (Dah Mee) wouldn’t be able to have sushi at the sushi bar and no alcohol. This was a specially demarcated area and why someone would not be allowed to sit there was mysterious to her.

Mr. Hughes responded that the Board has tried to be consistent with the service of alcohol.

PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION FOR ALL ALCOHOLIC COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE: DAH MEE, INC. (contd)

Mr. McKinley, however, felt that the whole cultural experience of eating sushi was sitting at the bar. If the Board wanted to include not being able to serve liquor, a simple sign could make that a simple process to administer, but if the Board wanted to ban seats, he would vote against it because he thought it was unreasonable and he would like to revisit the rationale for whatever the Board did at the other place.

REVIEW FALL TOWN MEETING ARTICLES

Mr. Hughes reported that the Finance Committee starts their hearing tomorrow night on the warrant articles for Fall Town Meeting, and he would speak on behalf of Article 17 (appointment process for a Town Administrator).

Mr. McKinley inquired if there were any efforts to negotiate a mutual agreement between Article 17 & 18 (Article 18 also dealt with the

appointment process and was submitted by the Charter & By-Law Review Committee). Mr. Hughes advised that that was being worked on. The Board filed the article rather late in the process. The Charter & By-Law Review Committee made note of a need for a change and drafted and filed an article before the Board’s was filed.

Mr. McKinley was of the opinion that presenting an article jointly would be preferable.

Mr. Hughes inquired if there was a figure for Article 34 (Golf course clubhouse & maintenance building). Mr. Cohen advised that the figure was not known. The Golf Course Advisory Committee was meeting Wednesday and there would then be a better handle on it. The only facility to be constructed this coming season would be the maintenance building and the clubhouse would probably be another year.

Former Selectwoman Susan Salamoff asked to speak on Articles 17 & 18. As the former chairwoman of the Charter Commission, Ms. Salamoff noted that the provision (for the appointment of a Town Administrator) in the charter was a transitional provision and was based on the dynamic of the time. In 2001 she would support the recognition that the Board of Selectmen should have the power of appointment and it was appropriate for them to choose their screening committee.

In response to Mr. McKinley’s inquiry as to the dollar total of all articles relative to available funds, Mr. Cohen stated that at this point he didn’t have an answer. Free cash hasn’t been certified and there wasn’t a state budget either. The staff was still waiting for some cost estimates to come in and still developing the capital items that will fall within 2-l/2. Because this is a Fall Town Meeting, the plan was to do minimal essential capital only.

Mr. Cohen continued that there was an estimate of state aid but it was very likely that Fall Town Meeting could start without an approved state budget. That doesn’t exclude certain borrowing items such as the high school renovations which is a temporary borrowing and no cost in this fiscal year. The same thing with the water meter program. There was some tweaking of the operating budget and some extraordinary capital needs on this warrant, but that was all. The administration had enough of a handle on the state budget to know we have to make up some ground. The education reimbursement was not what was forecast and not what it was in prior years.

Mr. Hughes asked about the courthouse repairs, and Mr. Cohen responded that the administration, along with court personnel, was in the process of doing a capital assessment of the courthouse. There have been some expressed improvements desired by the court and some Town improvements. Before anything happens, the Town will propose a new 10-year lease, which would fund those two aspects (improvements wanted by the court and improvements wanted by the Town).

Mr. Cohen noted that when the building was first renovated the rental from the court paid for the investment. Now the Town has to make some investment to continue that facility, i.e. HVAC, the flooring. A state

grant was being received to re-roof the building. The lease payments will increase to fund what was considered to be tenant improvements;

i.e. new holding cells. An architect has been hired to help do the evaluations, but it was questionable whether that will be completed by Fall Town Meeting. It may be seen at a special or spring town meeting.

REVIEW FALL TOWN MEETING ARTICLES (contd)

Fire Chief Richard Fredette was asked about the ladder truck, and Chief Fredette responded that the current ladder truck was bought as an emergency measure back in 1997. It was purchased used from Greenwood Fire Apparatus, traded in from Boston. This purchase had to be made because the 1971 aerial truck developed a crack in the extension ladder that put it out of service. It was purchased with the idea that it would be replaced within a reasonable period of time. This is a 1984 vehicle with a usual life expectancy of 20 years. The truck was approaching 17 years and he (Chief Fredette) questioned the tough service it got in Boston. The truck has given Natick excellent service with no major repairs, but he feared that our luck would not continue. It would make an excellent spare piece of equipment.

Chief Fredette continued that he was requesting that the Town seriously consider replacement of this apparatus. This issue has been postponed for the past three years because of other budget priorities, but he thought that it was now necessary to replace in short order.

Mr. Ball noted that when the current ladder truck was purchased from Boston it was 13 years old and he wondered if the Chief could recall if the truck had an excessive number of hours or miles at that time. Chief Fredette advised that there was no meter on the truck. It had 46,000 miles in Boston.

Mr. Ball then inquired as to the cost of a new ladder truck and was told by Chief Fredette that it would be somewhere between $700,000-725,000. The price was going up every year. Chief Fredette pointed out that the truck he wanted would have a pumper on it as well as a 500-gallon water tank. Right now if the aerial truck was committed, an engine is required to go out with it to supply the water. This (new) truck will be self-sustaining.

Mr. Stern asked that Chief Fredette explain the difference between the ladder truck being replaced and the engine mounted ladder that we have. Chief Fredette advised that the Natick Fire Department does not have an aerial ladder with pumping apparatus, but Mr. Stern said he thought there was an engine with a major ladder on it. Chief Fredette explained that that was a 1971 piece of equipment, but the ladder cannot be used and it would cost $80,000-90,000 to repair it and that wouldn’t be prudent. That piece would be taken out of service (with the purchase of a new ladder).

To Mr. Stern’s inquiry as to the current ladder capacity, Chief Fredette responded that there was 110 feet. Asked about the other trucks, Chief Fredette advised that the pumpers carry a 14-foot roof ladder. The aerial carries a 50-foot extension, two 35-foot ladders and a 28-foot extension and small ladders for different purposes.

Recreation & Parks Superintendent Richard Cugini gave a presentation on Article 40 which sought funds for the development of JJ Lane Park. Mr. Cugini referred to a rendering of JJ Lane Park and the proposed addition from part of the National Guard Armory property. He pointed

out that the area under discussion was 3.26 acres of the present JJ Lane Park and 3.5 acres of the old Mass Highway depot that was under the jurisdiction of the National Guard. The area in question was the 55-foot strip that was around JJ Lane Park between the Lake and the National Guard. The article asks for design fees, surveying fees and permitting for Natick to enter a five-year lease agreement to join JJ Lane Park and that piece together for a 7-acre park. It would be an active and passive recreational park.

Mr. Cugini noted that this project started when Representative David Linsky filed a bill with the House for $100,000 for JJ Lane Park. That bill passed and went to the Senate. The Senate wanted to have an agreement between the Town and the State. They (Senate) did not approve the money and it went to conference. What this article was asking for was design fees, and if there was a positive recommendation for the $100,000, the $25,000 (from the article) would be the Town’s part to hire a firm. He would proceed in the winter to start to do

some of the work on the site assuming there was a five-year lease agreement between the National Guard and the Town. Beyond that there was a final phase of about $85,000 and he felt there was a group in town that would commit $70,000 of that amount.

Mr. Cugini listed the pluses for the Town beginning with improved drainage on Speen Street. The drainage goes through the old Mass

REVIEW FALL TOWN MEETING ARTICLES (contd)

Highway property and directly into the lake. That drainage would be rerouted and put into an oil case separator unit. The water would be sent further from Lake Cochituate and at least be clean. It would be a positive for the lake.

The second plus would be additional park space. JJ Lane Park is active and what this additional land would be used for would work well. The tree belt along the homes on Crescent Street would not be disturbed.

The third plus was that Mass Highway has said that the National Guard was interested in seeing someone come in and use a site lying dormant. The intention was to properly border the area along Speen Street with trees.

Fourth – the Town needs a good working relationship with DEM and the National Guard. DEM is interested in Lake Cochituate in trying to take stuff off the lake. DEM would like to develop a small beachfront down the road. The National Guard was interested in discussing other possibilities but he (Mr. Cugini) wasn’t looking to go there now. If the $100,000 doesn’t pass through the state budget, it can’t go anywhere.

Mr. Cugini advised that in 1996 the veterans organization studied that property. A 21E was done on the site and that site is clean.

In response to an inquiry from Mr. McKinley, Mr. Cugini advised that the intent was to make all one park (from the current JJ Lane Park and the 55 strip of state property) and close the entrance at Crescent Street. In follow-up Mr. McKinley commented that if it was successful the state will come in and take over the beach. He questioned what the Town would be left with then.

Mr. Cugini responded that if it works well and was successfully managed, the state would like to sit down and develop the beachfront for Natick residents and anyone in the Commonwealth under their guidelines. The state is interested in creating beach spots and access along the lake.

Mr. McKinley then noted that the Town would spend $25,000 and the state was to spend $100,000 for a five year lease and somewhere in there the state may discover it was a success and the Town may lose control over it.

Mr. Cugini explained that the beach would be DEM. The National Guard was 3.5 acres in the front. This would be going through National Guard property to get to the DEM property at the lake.

Mr. Ball inquired if there was any possibility of a boat launching and was told by Mr. Cugini that the state was hopeful not to launch boats at this point. The state was thinking more of swimming.

Mr. Hughes questioned if this would change when the gates were locked and unlocked. Mr. Cugini responded that what was being talked about was dawn to dusk. If the Memorandum of Understanding was approved the Police could come in and go through the parking lot area.

Article 24: Ms. Salamoff called attention to Article 24 which would reduce the qualifications of the Town Administrator. She noted that she was not concerned with reducing the idea that only a chief administrative officer can serve, but she was concerned with the reduction requiring just a bachelor’s degree. She pointed out that in the most recent Beacon, Walpole with a population of 23,000 a person need to have a public administrator master’s degree. Arlington says 3-5 years experience in public administration. Rockport wants a MPA or MBA.

Article 23: Recreation & Parks Commissioner Peter Garland pointed out that Article 23 refers to Recreation & Human Services, but should be

Recreation & Parks. Mr. Hughes advised that he would bring it to the attention of the Moderator.

NATICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT: HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION

Representing the Schools were Superintendent Dr. Jerome Goldberg, and Assistant Superintendent for Fiscal Affairs James Connolly.

Dr. Goldberg began by stating that Natick High School should be the flagship of the system and education program and should have the physical plant to conduct a 21st century education program. He talked about the standards on which the Natick School was based, noting that they were Massachusetts and national standards. Students at Natick

NATICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT: HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION (contd)

High School need the same opportunities as students in other Massachusetts communities. Framingham has launched a $54 million project and Holliston, Hopkinton were working to renovate their high school.

Dr. Goldberg continued that Natick has a fifty-year-old building. He noted that the Town has been very responsive by allowing a new science lab to be built and there was a tremendous difference in what can be

done. If the Schools are to compete and prepare our students, a facility was needed that can meet the needs. Article 15 will allow the schools through a renovation project to provide a building that will allow that for the students. The Schools were seeking the Board’s support for design fees for a $42 million project. The process will be similar to that used for the Wilson School. Dr. Goldberg also noted that there had been some small discussion of the issue of a swimming pool.

James Connolly acknowledged members of the School Committee Peg Broekel and James Freedman who were in the audience. He then explained that essentially this article was for design fees to bring the project up to bidding phase. The project was estimated at $42 million, with approximately 7% for fees or $2.1 million. The $2.1 million will bring it through schematic and construction documents. What will be remaining was the actual bidding phase and construction phase.

Mr. Connolly recalled that in April 2000 Town Meeting appropriated $100,000 to study Natick High School and established a committee. Between the summer of 2000 and March 2001, an architect was hired and a report was presented to the Board of Selectmen and School Committee. As a result of the presentation to the School Committee and Board of Selectmen in March, the next step of the School Committee was getting a proposed schedule for renovations. The School Committee approved the following: August 2001 submit article

October 2001 Town Meeting approves, a building committee is established, and architect selection begins

December 2001 schematic design begins

April 2002 Design development begins

November 2002 Override vote for construction funds. Mr.

Connolly stated that he wanted to make it clear that a project this size can only go forward with an override vote. This was approximately double the Wilson project.

February 2003 Project is bid

April 2003 Bids are awarded

June 2003 Construction begins

September 2005 Construction ends

Mr. Connolly advised that the architect estimates that it would take three summers and two school years to complete the project so timing is crucial. If a summer is missed, a full year of construction is missed. If construction was to be started in 2003, an article had to be put before Town Meeting in August 2001.

Mr. Connolly noted that one question by the Finance Committee was why not wait until Wilson was complete. Mr. Connolly explained that by moving forward now construction of the high school will start when Wilson was complete. This was a building that was very solid with a wonderful location that was close to 50 years old. Basic systems in the building need to be replaced if the Town hopes to get another 50 years, a comprehensive renovation was needed. The building does not meet codes.

Mr. Connolly continued that it was important to structure the project to have the state as a partner with a reimbursement of somewhere around 55%. They (Schools) were also looking to have a building committee

similar to Wilson’s. Mr. Connolly gave a brief update on the Wilson School, noting that sub-bids would be opened on August 30 and the general bids on September 20th. If a comprehensive renovation plan was not done, Mr. Connolly advised that the Schools would be presenting the Finance Committee with a list of other options. It would, however, take a much longer period of time and it would not be less expensive, probably more doing it piecemeal. It could only be done on a wing by wing basis.

Mr. Connolly recalled that the idea of including a swimming pool was raised by the Board of Selectmen at the last meeting and the building committee would have to look at that. The Department of Education says that if you don’t have an existing pool, they will not reimburse for a

NATICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT: HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION (contd)

pool. If that was the case, the cost of the Town funding the pool needs to be investigated and determined as viable.

Mr. Connolly acknowledged that doing a renovation project in an occupied building was more difficult, but pointed out that there was no choice. Using some modular classrooms, they hoped to free up a wing at a time. Mr. Connolly advised that the Schools have been in close contact with Framingham as Framingham has been in the process of doing an occupied renovation and hoped to learn from their mistakes. The article before this Town Meeting was to start a process. Construction in 2003 requires the process to begin now and there was a significant expenditure to get up to a position of doing a $40 million project.

Mr. Connolly continued that the Finance Committee raised the question of whether the full $2.1 million needed to be spent now of if less could be spent. Mr. Connolly noted that the Schools could not spend any more at all and go for an override but people would have a number of questions that only an architect could answer. The other option would be to get to the point where the documents were ready and then go for a vote (on the override). He felt that was a political question.

Mr. Hughes stated that the money being asked for now doesn’t include construction documents, and Mr. Connolly responded that it doesn’t include bidding or construction management. Mr. Hughes then noted that that money would be asked for in the override vote, and Mr. Connolly confirmed that as being correct.

Mr. Ciccariello expressed the opinion that there was a risk in doing a complete set of construction documents, spending over $2 million and getting a ‘no’ vote (on the override). He had some reservations about that. If the Schools were looking to go through schematic, you were looking at 15% or $435,000 as the risk to the taxpayers. He pointed out that in doing the Wilson School, the Schools although the money was appropriated by Town Meeting, stopped the architect at schematic before it went to the override vote. In his (Mr. Ciccariello’s) opinion that was something for the Board to consider and how that impacts the overall schedule. The estimated cost was based on a very conceptual design study, and getting through the schematic you get a more detailed estimate of the cost. He would like to know what the SBAB’s final decision was on the reimbursement.

Mr. Connolly replied that this project will be under the new SBAB reimbursement, whatever that was. The project at Wilson was under the

old rate and Natick was grandfathered at 59%. The difficulty in determining the exact rate was that the SBAB was in a transition year and there were different factors such as community wealth, energy efficiency, use of a project manager, previous maintenance. When the report was presented last March the reimbursement rate was estimated at 56-62%, but they were using the conservative estimate of 56-57%. Mr. Connolly noted that that question will have to be answered before going to an override. The estimate was in the mid 50 range.

When Mr. Hughes questioned if Mr. Connolly attributed any of the higher cost estimates for Wilson due to not going past schematic (before going for the override), Mr. Connolly advised that Wilson was designed up to the state reimbursement limits. When they started, they put in everything wished and hoped for in the building. It became obvious that some common areas and classrooms not directed to any particular program had to be reduced. Basically what was reduced were spaces that

were nice to have but couldn’t be afforded. The concern of the School Committee was the need to have Wilson come in on budget so the building committee made some decisions to make some reductions in the building. The final cost estimate showed it to be back on target. He didn’t think it was a result of not having full estimates.

Mr. Stern referred to page 6 of the handout and inquired as to the meaning of the statement that any emergency work done prior to the project will be utilized as part of the completed project. Mr. Connolly explained that any emergency work being done now would be part of the renovation, i.e. fire alarm system and some accessible issues would not be lost doing the renovation.

Mr. Stern then inquired if there was any comparison and projections of current operating costs vs projected operating costs of the renovated building. Mr. Connolly advised that there wasn’t, adding that if the

NATICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT: HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION (contd)

building was brought up to code on lighting there would be a higher use of electricity.

Mr. Hughes commented that the architect wouldn’t necessarily be KBA, and Mr. Connolly confirmed that to be correct. He noted that KBA would apply, but the Schools would go through a process of designer selection.

Mr. Hughes then asked if Mr. Connolly foresaw bringing the override issue in front of Town Meeting or just asking the Board of Selectmen to put it on the ballot. Mr. Connolly replied that that was something the Board of Selectmen and School Committee would have to talk about.

Mr. Cohen noted that what was being talked about was the November 2002 election which meant the question would have to be in by August. Next summer the sitting board would be putting it on (the ballot) around the close of the warrant and then go to Fall Town Meeting. The fast track ballot would be Town election next March and then to Town Meeting next April.

Mr. Hughes asked about the work being ready for the Town election, and Mr. Connolly responded that the answer would be at what point would everyone feel comfortable to go to the electorate. It could be done (override) at the end of schematic or design development and not spend

the $2.1 million, but would it be at a special election or local election. Last time the debate was to have it at a national or state election where the most voters would participate. The politics is what is the best time to go before the voters, but you want to be sure the project has enough technical data available so it wasn’t being presented with some holes and questions.

Mr. McKinley asked if in Mr. Connolly’s judgment the 55% would be the minimum SBAB reimbursement. Mr. Connolly responded that he would say it was 55-57%.

Mr. McKinley suggested going for the full amount based on best guess but try to get the $40 million override into the April election. Spend what’s necessary for schematic. He suspected there was a lot more empathy for renovation at the high school. He questioned if the Town should be spending $2.1 million without knowing the override would pass.

Even with putting the whole thing out there in April for the town election, Mr. Connolly noted that some appropriation would be needed at Fall Town Meeting to get to schematic. He noted that with the high school there wasn’t the debate of whether to renovate or build new or where to locate it, and he hoped to get some consensus quickly on what needs to be done and the cost estimate. Last March $42-43 million was talked about and normally a year wait cost $1-2 million. Mr. Connolly cautioned about making sure that whatever number was gotten was sufficient to go out to construction a year later. There was a risk if the money was gotten too far in advance of construction. If construction was going to be 2003 and we wait for the override, the cost will be known.

Mr. McKinley pointed out that the first Wilson override failed.

Mr. Connolly felt that an April election was reasonable if there was an agreement between both boards that this was the way to go.

Dr. Goldberg thought this raised an excellent question and he would bring it back to the School Committee for discussion. He remembered that in some of the meetings he attended (on the Wilson override) one of the factors that came out was that there was lots of opposition to the Wilson School because there was concern that the high school should be first. People understand the merits of the high school and the question was how to pay for it and not if it needs to be done.

Mr. Cohen reminded the Board that if the project were designed and did not take place, whatever money was expended would have to be paid back over five years. He also pointed out that the actual ballot vote does not put a dollar figure in. If there was a ballot question in March and the understanding was $42 million and 18 months later it was $48 million, it doesn’t go back to the ballot, only to Town Meeting. Generally it only goes to the ballot once with the best estimate and if it does fall short, it returns to Town Meeting.

NATICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT: HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION (contd)

A member of the audience Jeffrey Phillips inquired as to total dollar amount for a $2.1 million bond and where would the money come. Mr. Cohen advised that without an override it would come from the tax levy.

Mr. Palmer added that $80,000-100,000 would be in interest and a principal payment of $700,000 for three years making the cost probably $2.6-2.7 million.

Mr. Cohen noted that the fire apparatus can only be borrowed for five years.

350th Anniversary – Letter from President

Mary Leavitt presented the Board with a letter from President George Bush congratulating the Town of Natick on its 350th anniversary.

AGREEMENT WITH NATICK PEGASUS, INC.

Representing Natick Pegasus, Inc. were the President Jackie Ladd, Treasurer Stuart Pologe, Secretary David Kahn, Randy Brewer.

Mr. Cohen advised that the agreement between Natick Pegasus and the Town was not quite ready. Attorney Peter Epstein wants to consider the issues of copy rights a little further.

Pegasus Treasurer Stuart Pologe noted that Pegasus was now a corporation recognized by the State of Massachusetts and they have put together the first state of the company report. They acknowledged and recognized that the last time they came before the Selectmen, they were remiss in not reporting and they were trying to rectify that. In the report they tried to cover the various areas of the corporation. There were many areas that were still being defined and they hoped to keep the Selectmen abreast of those changes.

Mr. Pologe noted that the date of the report was July 31 and a few things had happened. Most notably was Pegasus’ first press in the MetroWest Daily News.

In looking at the draft agreement, Mr. McKinley called attention to the lettering on page 3, noting that it went G,H,I,A,B,C rather than J,K,L. He also noted that there was a lot of language in the agreement on non-discriminatory behavior that has to get cleaned up.

Mr. Hughes called attention to Ms. Ladd’s memo with regard to changing Section 10F to eliminate worker’s comp insurance and said he didn’t think that could be done. If there was an employee, the corporation had to have worker’s comp.

Mr. Pologe responded that as soon as the corporation was legally formed, Pegasus was responsible for having worker’s compensation coverage for the three officers and he believed that they were currently in violation because they don’t have any funds as of yet.

Mr. Ball recognized that there were no substantive issues with this agreement, just dotting the i’s and t’s. He asked if there were any kind of temporary funds that the Town could give Pegasus to cover this kind of nitty gritty item (worker’s comp, etc.)

Mr. McKinley stated that he understood there had to be worker’s comp on the payroll, but this says worker’s comp for the three officers. He

asked if it was being proposed that the officers be covered by worker’s comp even though they were not employees.

Ms. Ladd responded that it was their understanding that as soon as an entity was incorporated, it would be in violation of the statutes if there wasn’t a worker’s comp plan. Mr. Pologe responded that it was his understanding that no matter that the officers weren’t paid, they must be covered. Mr. McKinley requested an opinion from Town Counsel.

Mr. Cohen noted that he was hoping to have a meeting with Attorney Epstein over the next week and talk about these issues.

GOALS & OBJECTIVES/PENDING ISSUES

Mr. McKinley explained the format he used in putting together the proposed goals & objectives. He noted that he tried to filter out those items that probably weren’t an objective and some may not be appropriate as an objective of the Board of Selectmen, i.e. development of a 3-5 year financial plan was under the Budget Subcommittee and

GOALS & OBJECTIVES/PENDING ISSUES (contd)

Finance, and the Board only needs to monitor and remain cognizant. He highlighted the ones in the noble category that included obtaining the $3.1 million from the Army, high school renovations, gravel pit, water & sewer meter billing system, and downtown parking plan. If the Board agreed, he thought it would be appropriate to entertain some discussion of prioritizing those and they would become the Board’s objectives.

Noting that most of these were 3-6 months items, Mr. Ciccariello questioned why a couple of other things couldn’t be squeezed in. For example establishing a Town Maintenance Department. He knew the Board had gone to battle with the School Committee before but it seemed to him common sense that in reality all buildings were owned by the Town whether school or municipal. He felt it was worthy of going back and looking at why there should or shouldn’t be one maintenance department with one supervisor overseeing all the Town buildings.

Before discussing individual items, Mr. Hughes asked if everyone agreed that the framework developed by Mr. McKinley and Mr. Conley accurately reflects the goals the Board wants to accomplish.

Mr. Stern asked for an explanation of why some items had been dropped, i.e. settlement of patrolman’s contract. Mr. McKinley responded that he viewed that as all other labor negotiations. It was the responsibility of the Town Administrator and the Board can encourage settlement, but it was not protocol to get involved. Mr. Hughes noted that the police union recently changed representation in the middle of a binding arbitration and was now back at square one. Mr. Cohen advised that the administration was available and willing to meet at any time with the union. He wanted to assure the Board that the fact that nothing was before them did not reflect that the administration was not interested. Mr. Hughes agreed that it probably should be listed as something the Board was moving toward. Mr. Stern felt this was a priority item.

Mr. McKinley noted that since the list was printed and distributed one other objective came up. There was a disparity among pay scales of senior people particularly Town vs School, and he thought it would be appropriate for the Board to direct the Personnel Board to survey the

salaries paid to key management positions. Mr. Cohen advised that it was on the list for this fall, and the work would take place this fall.

Mr. Ball noted that there was another issue and that was the resolution of the EPA fine. Mr. Cohen pointed out that there was an article on the Fall Town Meeting warrant although the Town was still in discussions with EPA and to speak further, he would prefer that it be done in executive session. Mr. McKinley advised that he had dropped that from his list because it was perceived as being essentially done and after Fall Town Meeting there was little left for the Board to do. Mr. Hughes suggested putting it back on if it was not resolved in Fall Town Meeting.

Mr. Hughes asked about the goal to study consolidation of the satellite fire stations, and Mr. McKinley responded that it may be difficult to engage in that until there was a new chief.

A motion was made by Mr. Ciccariello, seconded by Mr. McKinley, to accept the framework. Unanimously voted.

Mr. Hughes pointed out that decisions would be reached on a couple of the items listed as ‘high’ shortly as they were the subject of Town Meeting articles. He suggested assigning a report back date to some of the others and revisiting the matter at the meeting of September 24th.

As to the Pending Issues list, Mr. Hughes noted that Mr. Conley’s memo indicated that it was a work in progress and that too should be revisited on the 24th.

WELLESLEY SEWER TIE IN

Before the Board was a request from the Town of Natick Director of Public Works requesting that Natick provide sanitary sewer service for sections of River Street and Schaller Street which were located within Wellesley.

Mr. Cohen advised that the administration was requesting to move forward with the tie in of the Wellesley residents and for authorization for Town Counsel to draft an agreement with Wellesley for the residents to proceed forward with this project. Natick residents

WELLESLEY SEWER TIE IN (contd)

were being assessed betterments, and it was felt that Wellesley residents should pay either a municipal lien or a hook-in fee. The other issue for Natick would be that Natick would have no responsibility to repair any sewer lines in Wellesley public ways.

Mr. Hughes asked if the residents got Natick water, and Mr. Cohen advised that they did on River Street. When asked if the other houses would get Natick water, Mr. Cohen responded that they would if they requested it. At this point that has not been requested.

Mr. Hughes questioned why Wellesley would be charged the same as Natick residents. Natick residents pay 75% under the betterment. There was no obligation for Natick to provide Wellesley residents with sewer other than they were close to the river. Why wouldn’t Wellesley pay 100%?

Mr. Cohen advised that Wellesley could be charged 100%, but pointed out that Natick won’t be putting the mains into Wellesley. The infrastructure was there and the marginal cost was essentially zero. Natick will be collecting the 75% but truly the cost to Natick was virtually zero unlike in Natick where the cost was running it down the street.

Mr. Ciccariello commented on the Title 5 requirements and Mr. Cohen acknowledged that that was part of it, but there was also the environmental consideration. The preference was to tie into sewer systems, but if Natick were to say no, the house would not be condemned. They would have to go to an alternative technology.

Mr. Ball inquired if there were any other homes beyond the ones mentioned in this letter that may want to do the same thing. Mr. Cohen advised that he was not aware of any. Mr. Hughes noted that there was a 5-10 acre piece of land down there for sale. Mr. Ball stated that he didn’t want to be in the business of providing sewer service to Wellesley, but Mr. McKinley noted that the reality was that the Town borders don’t always respect geography. He (Mr. McKinley) didn’t see the number of requests getting out of hand.

Mr. Stern questioned if there had been any discussion relative to the mechanics to securing a municipal lien to property not within Natick’s borders. Mr. Cohen noted that Counsel was recommending an agreement with the homeowner. There had been some discussion about getting away from that and requiring a hook-up fee. That hasn’t as yet been resolved.

Mr. Hughes asked about the MWRA fees, and Mr. Cohen advised that there would have to be an agreement with Wellesley.

A motion was made by Mr. McKinley, seconded by Mr. Ball, to direct Town Counsel to move forward with the Town of Wellesley’s request to tie into Natick’s sewer system for sections of River Street and Schaller Street and draft a proposed agreement for the Board’s review. Unanimously voted.

SPECIAL MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE STATUS

The Board was in receipt of renewal applications from Elliot Goodman and John Merritt for reappointment of special municipal employee status.

Mr. Hughes noted that in response to several questions raised by Mr. Stern at the previous meeting, Town Counsel provided the information in the packet. Mr. Stern found the information to be a partial answer to his questions, but he still questioned why these two individuals needed to have the special municipal employee status.

Mr. Hughes advised that Elliot Goodman in his career has represented various individuals before both the Planning Board and ZBA and although Mr. Goodman was not as active, he still represents people. He is on the Morse Institute Library Board of Trustees.

Mr. Stern responded that as he read the information, the Board cannot grant Mr. Goodman the status individually unless it was granted to all the trustees.

Mr. McKinley noted that Mr. Merritt’s rationale was that he was a Town Meeting member which would mean declaring all Town Meeting members as

SPECIAL MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE STATUS (contd)

special municipal employees. In no time everyone in Town would be declared a special municipal employee.

Mr. Ball inquired as to the impact on Mr. Merritt and Mr. Goodman if the special municipal employee status were denied. Mr. Hughes thought the impact on a Town Meeting member would negligible if at all. With regard to Mr. Goodman, he (Mr. Hughes) didn’t have an answer other than Mr. Goodman does represent some people before various Town boards.

Mr. McKinley didn’t think it was obvious that the Morse Institute was a Town board or commission, but it was pointed out to the Board that Mr. Goodman was also a member of the Historical Commission.

UPDATE BUDGET PLANNING SUBCOMMITTEE

Mr. Hughes reported that he planned to schedule a Budget Planning Subcommittee meeting once Town Meeting gets underway and suggested that an update be put on the Board’s agenda for September 24th.

SELECTMEN’S CONCERNS

Mr. Ball noted that he did not receive the information he requested on the use of Town vehicles. Mr. Hughes advised that he had asked Mr. Conley and Mr. Cohen to have it to the Board on September 10th.

Mr. Ball noted receipt of a memo from Board of Health Director Roger Wade on the Board of Health’s dead bird policy. He explained that this issue had been generated by a citizen who found a dead crow, called the Board of Health and was told to call the state, get a number and pickup the bird and bring it in. The policy of the Board of Health was not to respond to citizens who say they have a potentially infected bird, and he (Mr. Ball) would like an explanation.

Mr. Hughes asked that the Board of Health be asked to attend the next meeting to address Mr. Ball’s question.

Mr. Ciccariello thanked Chief Mannix and Lieutenant Mabardy for their work on Natick Night Out.

With summer drawing to a close, Mr. Stern felt that it was time to begin to discuss plans for purchasing and storing sand since the gravel pit is supposed to be closing.

Mr. Hughes requested that DPW Charles Sisitsky be asked to attend the September 10th meeting.

Citizen Tax Problem

Mr. Stern reported that he had been contacted by a resident who had a tax lien placed on his property for unpaid taxes. He (resident) has been able to demonstrate three years worth of payments, but can’t make up the other two years. The mortgage company records have been destroyed and he paid the mortgage company. The resident has signed a

P&S and is attempting to convey his home the end of September and may have to double pay his taxes. The resident has been dealing with Mr. Palmer and called him (Mr. Stern) out of frustration suggesting that the Selectmen may have the ability to investigate the matter independently, waive the tax or another mechanism. Mr. Stern felt this was something the Board should begin discussing and put a policy in place.

Mr. Hughes requested an opinion from Town Counsel as to the Board’s authority.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.

__________________________

Jeffrey A. Stern, Clerk