BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Natick Town Hall
October 4, 2004
6:30 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman John Ciccariello at 6:30 p.m.
PRESENT: John Ciccariello, Jay H. Ball, Charles M. Hughes (arrived at 6:40 p.m.), Paul R. McKinley, John Connolly.
ALSO PRESENT: Philip E. Lemnios, Town Administrator; Donna Challis, Secretary
WARRANTS: Payroll warrants were signed by the Board of Selectmen on October 4, 2004 in the amount of $1,375,282.28. This figure was included in total warrants signed by the Board of Selectmen of $2,216,242.86.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Ball, seconded by Mr. Connolly, moved to enter into executive session for the purpose of discussing matters pertaining to collective bargaining. A roll call vote was unanimous and the Board so retired at 6:30 p.m. after announcing that the meeting would return to open session.
The open session was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
WELL WISHES: METROWEST DAILY NEWS REPORTER SARAH MACDONALD
MetroWest Daily News reporter Sarah MacDonald, who was leaving journalism to pursue a different career, was presented with a letter in recognition of her balanced, fair, and articulate reporting of news stories over the past year.
COMCAST CARES DAY
Mr. Ciccariello extended the thanks and appreciation of the Board to Comcast employees who participated in Comcast Cares Day. Sixty-five employees spent the day at the Recreation Center doing a major cleanup of the site.
Mr. Hughes requested that the Recreation Commission be asked to join the Board in sending a letter of appreciation to Comcast.
Mr. Lemnios noted that he had stopped by the Cole Center to see the effort being put in. In addition to 65 employees, they had two buckets trimming along the edge of the field. It was his understanding that the employees worked from early in the morning until about 2:00 p.m. and the work included painting, tree planting and shrub clearing. Finance Committee Chair and Comcast employee Frank Foss was there participating. This was part of the national day with Comcast doing similar projects across the country.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Ciccariello announced that an Armory planning charette was being held at the Library on October 7, 2004 at 6:00 p.m.
The State Treasurer was holding a meeting on SBA funding at the Wilson Middle School on October 5, 2004, 3:00 p.m. to explain the new School Building Assistance program.
MINUTES
With corrections as noted, Mr. Hughes moved to approve the minutes of the June 21, 2004 meeting. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. Ciccariello, Mr. Hughes, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Connolly voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Ball abstained.
MASSACHUSETTS HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: REQUEST BANNER
Mr. Hughes reported that following the last meeting he contacted the Mass Horticultural Society and they had agreed to donate 10 tickets to the Natick Garden Club. He recommended and moved approval of the
Massachusetts Horticultural Society’s request to hang a banner across Main Street for the period November 3-7, 2004 in advertisement of the
Massachusetts Orchid Society’s Annual Plant Show and Sale. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
KIDS CONNECT: REQUEST TO HANG BANNER
Before the Board was a request from Kids Connect to hang a banner across Main Street for the period December 20, 2004-January 1, 2005 in advertisement of the Annual Family New Year’s Eve Party. It was Mr. McKinley’s recollection that the Natick Center Associates sponsored the First Light celebration and they may want banner space. Mr. McKinley moved approval with the qualification that should Natick Center Associates come forward, the two groups could split the time. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO NATICK CULTURAL COUNCIL
a. Avigail Shimshoni
Avigail Shimshoni stated that she had been a resident of Natick for three years and was discovering a lot of good things in Natick and one was the arts. She was from Israel with dual citizenship and by profession was an architect and city planner. She was looking for ways to reach out into the community and had worked in the Chabbad Center and was involved in the schools. In addition she was a member of Natick Center Associates and had helped with the recent charette.
Mr. Hughes moved to appoint Avigail Shimshoni to the Natick Cultural Council. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
Mr. Hughes asked about the number of vacancies on the Council and was told that there were two. Mr. Ball suggested that the Board continue to post the vacancies.
NATICK HOUSING AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: SECTION 8 PROGRAM CERTIFICATION FORMS
The Board held off discussing this matter awaiting the arrival of Mr. Santos the Executive Director.
PUBLIC HEARING: VERIZON: NORTH MAIN STREET: 22 FEET CONDUIT
Representing Verizon was Chris Parella, Manager – Rights of Way.
In a memo to the Board, DPW permits engineer William DeRosa advised that the DPW had no objection to the petition.
Mr. Parella stated that Verizon was seeking approval for 22 feet of conduit from an existing manhole to an existing telephone pole. Fiber optic had been brought off Route 9 to that manhole and now they were seeking to bring it off the pole. The manhole encumbered the driveway adjacent to it, but at no time would the property be inaccessible.
In response to an inquiry from Mr. Hughes, Mr. Parella acknowledged that he was aware that a permit would also be needed from the state.
Mr. McKinley moved approval. Seconded by Mr. Hughes and unanimously voted.
PUBLIC HEARING: NSTAR ELECTRIC: POND STREET: ONE GUY STUB POLE
The Board was in receipt of a letter from Nstar dated October 1, 2004 withdrawing this petition.
PUBLIC HEARING: STREET ACCEPTANCE – LIBBY ROAD
On a motion by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Ball, the Board unanimously voted to open the public hearing.
Town Engineer Mark Coviello explained that Libby Road was off the intersection of Scarsdale and Rockland Street and was part of a small five-lot subdivision. All the work in the subdivision was done in accordance with the Planning Board rules & regs and on August 11, 2004
the Planning Board voted to release the remaining performance bond and recommend putting it forward for Town Meeting approval.
Mr. Hughes asked if there had been a winter with the street as built. Mr. Coviello advised that it had, noting that this road had almost gone through a full year and a half.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired if Mr. Coviello had all the as built plans as required, and Mr. Coviello replied that he had all the required plans.
There was no one in the audience wishing to speak.
PUBLIC HEARING: STREET ACCEPTANCE – LIBBY ROAD (contd)
Mr. Hughes moved to accept the street layout for Libby Road and to sign the appropriate plan and layout document. Seconded by Mr. McKinley and unanimously voted.
Mr. Hughes then moved to have a written layout document and plan of Libby Road on file at the Town Clerk’s Office. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
THE CENTER FOR ARTS IN NATICK:
a. Application for One-Day Liquor License
Mr. Ball recused himself and left the table.
Before the Board was a request from The Center for Arts in Natick (TCAN) for a one day liquor license for their second annual gala celebration at 14 Summer Street on Saturday, October 16, 2004. They had hired TIPS trained bartenders and would be serving liquor from 7:00 p.m.-11:00 p.m.
George Fiske, President of TCAN, noted that this was similar to the request made last year. Last year’s gala was so successful that they were having it again this year.
Mr. Fiske told the Board that he had another request, which was to ask permission to erect a sign at the corner of Main Street and Summer Street placed on an existing pole at that location. The sign would be double side and fabricated by the DPW to ensure that it would comply with the Town’s standards and TCAN would reimburse the DPW and Town for any expenses.
Mr. Ciccariello suggested that Mr. Fiske put his request in writing, and Mr. Fiske advised that he had a letter that he would leave with the Board.
Mr. McKinley inquired if the liquor license was for all alcohol or beer & wine. Mr. Fiske believed it was for all alcohol.
In response to Mr. Ciccariello’s inquiry, Mr. Fiske confirmed that they had hired a TIPS trained bartender.
Mr. McKinley moved approval of granting George Fiske, on behalf of TCAN, a one day all alcohol license for October 16, 2004 from 7:00 – 11:00 p.m. for the gala opening of The Center for Arts In Natick at 14 Summer Street, Natick, MA. Seconded by Mr. Hughes and unanimously voted.
b. Permission to Use Sidewalk
Mr. Fiske noted that a fair number of people were expected for the opening and the thought was that it would be safer to close the sidewalk to foot traffic.
In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Fiske advised that he was looking to close the sidewalk in front of TCAN from the building out to the curb. There would be no service of alcohol and with respect to a Police detail they would conform to what they did last year. They would like to close the sidewalk from 6:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m.
Mr. Hughes moved approval of closing the sidewalk in front of TCAN on October 16, 2004 from 6:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m. as part of the Gala celebration. The specific area of sidewalk to be blocked off was the brick walkway from the north wall of the building to the curbstone, from the alley on the east of the Firehouse extending to the far side of the TCAN driveway to the west. Seconded by Mr. McKinley and unanimously voted.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES
Mr. Hughes moved to open the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. McKinley and unanimously voted.
Mr. Ciccariello referred to the draft rules and regulations prepared by Town Counsel and highlighted the provisions of the legislation as follows:
1. The approval of the Board of Selectmen is subject to approval of the ABCC
2. Each function or fund raising activity shall be sponsored by a member of the club, which seeks the permit. The sponsoring member shall be present at the function or fund raising activity.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES (contd)
3. Each permit issued pursuant to this legislation shall be subject to such conditions as the Natick Board of Selectmen may impose, and shall be subject to regulations made by the Board of Selectmen.
4. All proceeds from the sale of alcoholic beverages pursuant to any permit issued under this legislation shall be used solely for the charitable purposes of the club, which holds the permit.
5. The application procedures under Section 15A of Chapter 138 of the Massachusetts General Laws shall apply to permits for the sale of alcoholic beverages issued under the provisions of this legislation.
6. Each permit issued by the Board of Selectmen under the provisions of this legislation shall expire no later than December 31st of the year of issue, subject, however, to revocation or cancellation within its term.
Mr. McKinley referred to II Procedures #2 of the draft rules & regs that stipulated that the board shall not act on any application for a permit, or for renewal of a permit, unless the applicant submits to the Board of Selectmen a written plan for compliance with laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts regarding the sale or service of alcohol. He didn’t believe the Board had required that of the general alcohol license and questioned why it was necessary now to require a written performance plan for granting this license.
Mr. Lemnios didn’t know why Mr. Flynn (Town Counsel) had put it in, but Mr. Flynn could be queried as to why it was included. It be could based on his conversations with the ABCC.
Mr. Hughes noted that the clubs, when operating under their license, were less likely to have minors in the clubs; however, at these functions it was more likely to have minors present. He thought that
was what Mr. Flynn was driving at – that there be some kind of plan to deal with being sure minors were not served.
Mr. McKinley felt that Mr. Hughes may well be right but pointed out that these clubs hold a general license and all licenses were required to have all of their servers to be trained under TIPS, AIM or other suitable program. A written plan dealing with minors could be nothing more than a written statement saying they won’t serve minors. It was more important that any individuals serving alcohol were aware. This requirement (written plan) seemed more than necessary.
Mr. McKinley then called attention to #3 under Procedures requiring the submission of a quarterly report itemizing the total revenue received from each function or fundraising activity held under that permit, each expense paid out of such revenue, the amount of money used for charitable purposes out of such revenue, the specific charitable purposes for which the money was used, and if applicable, the name and address of the entity to which the money was paid. The statement shall be certified by a Certified Public Accountant. In Mr. McKinley’s opinion this seemed a little more onerous than necessary. The Board requires every licensee to submit an annual statement, which includes gross revenue and percentage of alcohol sales, and he was not sure why there was a need to do a quarterly much less certified by a
CPA. He expected that most of the clubs didn’t know which charity they would be donating to and asking them to state on a quarterly basis may be unduly burdensome.
Mr. Ciccariello believed that all of the clubs had a Board of Directors or manager and for them to hire a CPA would be an expense that most of these clubs couldn’t afford. He would not have a problem if the Board of Directors or manager submitted the report.
Mr. Hughes inquired as to what was required from the restaurants and Ms. Challis advised that a CPA statement was required unless it was a large corporation with a CFO.
Mr. Ball agreed with Mr. McKinley on the written plan, but disagreed with him (Mr. McKinley) on the quarterly report. One of the driving forces for the passage of this legislation was that these organizations will donate the profits of the activities to one or more charities and unless there was some mechanism in the licensing to ensure it happens,
it was an open loop. The reports didn’t necessarily have to be quarterly but annually. Mr. Ball asked if annual would be OK, and Mr. McKinley responded, ‘yes’.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES (contd)
Manager of the Natick Elks, Paul Carew thanked the Board, Mr. Lemnios, Representative Linsky for getting the bill passed. Over a year ago the clubs got some bad press and it came after the Elks had just spent $237,000 renovating their hall. The loss of rentals for last year cost them $15,000.
Mr. Carew continued that the clubs would not survive on membership alone and membership rentals alone. He didn’t think the Board would ever have a concern that a club in Natick would serve minors. All the servers were TIPS certified and knew the rules and regulations. The
clubs weren’t breaking any laws any more than any public places and would comply with the rules and regulations of the State. They were looking to open their halls a little more and if they didn’t, they (clubs) wouldn’t survive. The clubs would give a report every year. That was very easy. They just wanted to be able to pay their operating expenses. They had to pay the mortgage and the bills and would still give the same amount for charity.
Warren Griffin of the Natick Elks submitted a list of the Elks’ donations for the past year and noted that the Lodge did numerous fund raisers and relied on rentals. The donations included $13,500 in scholarships, $3,000 for Veterans’ Bingo nights at the Lodge, $2,500 for the veterans holiday party, $1,500 for other veteran donations, $1,500 for the seniors Christmas party, $295 for MADD, $50 for the Everett Lodge, $150 for Natick basketball, $875 for the Hoop Shoot, $604 for the 4th of July, $240 for drug awareness, $100 for MDA, $100 for NAAR, $100 for the Heart Walk, and $100 for Lou Gherig’s Disease.
Mr. Hughes asked if Mr. Carew had seen the rules and regs and if he had any comments or concerns. Mr. Carew responded that what was sent to him was the list of provisions in the legislation. He didn’t have anything else. Mr. Hughes requested that the clubs get a copy of the rules and regulations and get a copy of what was proposed.
Mr. Ciccariello felt that it would be best to get each club a copy of the proposed rules and regs and give them an opportunity to read and review them and offer any comments. The Board wanted to be sure to get all the input from all of the clubs.
Mr. Carew felt that one of the concerns was donation to charity, but that was something they did and they were here tonight to make the Board aware of what they did and where the money was going.
Mr. Hughes said he understood and was grateful for the charitable purposes of all the clubs, but he just wanted to make sure the clubs understood the rules and regs. The special legislation required that the event be sponsored by a member and the net proceeds of the event be given to charity. Town Counsel had drafted five pages of rules & regs and the Board just wanted to be sure that the clubs had an opportunity to comment.
Mr. McKinley inquired if the clubs had not received the draft rules & regs and Mr. Lemnios advised that they were just completed by Town Counsel late Friday afternoon.
Mr. McKinley assured Mr. Carew that the last thing the Board was concerned about was the quality and character of the charitable donations. That was never in doubt. The Board was just trying to put down in writing the specifics of the rules and regs in order to start issuing the licenses. The important thing was for the clubs to have the opportunity to review this draft.
Noting that the notice of public hearing was October 4, 2004, Mr. Connolly questioned why Town Counsel waited until September 30th to fax the draft to the Board. Mr. Lemnios explained that when the hearing
was set up the bill had only been passed the week before, but Mr. Connolly countered that the bill was passed September 3, which gave Town
Counsel 27 days to give the Board a draft. Mr. McKinley pointed out that the Board didn’t ask Town Counsel to do it until two weeks ago.
Mr. Carew had previously commented that tonight was a waste of time. Mr. Connolly said he didn’t think it was a waste of time, but it was a disservice.
Mr. Lemnios noted that this was not a set of rules and regs in which there were any models so Town Counsel didn’t have an opportunity to look at the rules and regs of other communities.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES (contd)
Mr. Connolly commented that he would have thought that he (Town Counsel) would have been more on the ball sharpening his pen rather than waiting to Friday. Mr. Lemnios assured Mr. Connolly that Town Counsel had worked hard on getting this done.
Mr. Ball stated that he would like to hear from the folks who were there tonight. Through scheduling problems the Board wasn’t prepared to vote on this because the clubs weren’t prepared to give their feedback. The Board would probably have to ask the clubs to come back and share their concerns at the next meeting, but he would like to hear about the charities and he thought the public would as well.
Mr. Carew noted that his point was that the clubs need the income from the hall rentals to do the charities. The clubs were doing the charities because they wanted to not because of any rules & regs.
American Legion manager Edwin Hasgill inquired if after getting a copy of the rules & regs, the clubs as a body would have an opportunity to negotiate. Mr. McKinley had mentioned two things he didn’t agree with and he (Mr. Hasgill) would like the satisfaction of knowing the Board was flexible.
Mr. Ciccariello felt that the Board would continue the public hearing to hear any concerns after the clubs have an opportunity to read this.
James Graham, manager of the VFW, told the Board that the VFW had a few issues besides the donations. The VFW had a three-signature contract – the sponsoring member, authorization from the corporation, and person responsible for the function. He would like to see the language in II #2 say “or an organization designee”. Some clubs have a maitre D. He (Mr. Graham) was at every function to start. All of their bartenders were TIPS certified and usually the bartender and a designee from downstairs were present. It was hard to be there every single night. Most of the function hall rentals were down considerably the past 2-3 years. The sale of alcohol has been down considerably the last five years.
Mr. Graham then referenced #4 and noted that it didn’t say anything about after expenses. The clubs had heat, lights, snow removal, taxes, employees, trash disposal, water, etc. He had no figures on the charities, but the VFW had scholarships, a cook out for disable
veterans on Marathon Day, reduced rates for Police and Fire and Natick Paperboard who rents the hall for the kids in Natick.
From Mr. Hughes’ point of view when it said proceeds it meant net proceeds after expenses. He also noted that the statute as passed
required the member who was sponsoring to be present. The ABCC would not go along with it unless that was in the statutes. The Board was somewhat limited to what relief it could give. Maybe the solution would be to have the Maitre D who happens to be a member be the sponsor.
To Mr. Graham’s comment that if he was allowing an outside group, as the license holder for the VFW he was responsible and would have to be there, Mr. Hughes responded that it could either be Mr. Graham or a member designated as the sponsor. It didn’t necessarily have to be Mr. Graham.
Mr. McKinley thought the use of the word proceeds was a good point and he would ask Town Counsel to include the word “net” on page 3.
Tom Davitt, the Amvets Post Commander, told the Board that the Amvets was a very active organization comprised of veterans, sons of Amvets, ladies auxiliary, and junior Amvets. The Amvets sponsored Boy Scout and Cub Scout troops that held their meetings at the post. Each year
the Amvets sponsored the Cub Scout Soap Box Derby. They (Amvets) also provided resources in conducting Veterans Day services, Memorial Day services and Pearl Harbor Day services and worked with the Natick school system to promote American programs. Last year the Amvets provided two scholarships to Natick High School students of $500 each. The ladies auxiliary works with the Natick Service Council and during the holiday season there were cash donations given of $250 at
Thanksgiving and $250 at Christmas. The auxiliary also had a $500 scholarship. The sons of the Amvets volunteers with local nursing homes and raised funds to purchase special wheelchairs for persons
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES (contd)
unable to obtain them. Once a month they host a party for the Brockton VA Hospital.
Mr. Davitt stated that he was very proud to serve the veterans and serve the hospitalized veterans and was very proud to stand before the Board as the Commander of Post 79. This was a family post and they all believed in one common feeling. They loved their country, loved their community, and cared how the community was run. The Amvets would abide by the rules and regs, but wanted to be part of the process.
Mr. Carew asked if the draft rules and regs could be picked up tomorrow and was told that they would be available. Mr. Hughes asked that the clubs also be provided with a copy of the legislation, but Mr. Carew advised that they already had that.
Under the Procedures section Mr. Ciccariello questioned if the Board was anticipating that every time a club had a special function that they would have to come before the Board. Mr. Hughes replied that it was an annual license.
Mr. Ciccariello then asked about the name of each member to sponsor and be present throughout the function, but Mr. Hughes thought it would just be a list of the members. Mr. McKinley added that all those who were authorized to be sponsors of events would be listed.
Referring to II(g), Mr. Ciccariello questioned if the clubs would have to list each function and the charity to which they would donate. It was his understanding that a lot of times the clubs didn’t decide that until year’s end. The way he read the draft rules, the club would have a function and after the function they would have to decide where the proceeds went.
Mr. Hughes felt that the intention was that it would be done at the end of the year similar to the other licenses. Each club would say they made $30,000 on private functions and this was what they did with the proceeds from the private functions.
If always talking about cash, Mr. Ball thought the kind of accounting Mr. Hughes described was correct, but there were other kinds of charitable contributions that weren’t cash like the Cub Scouts and would those be considered charitable contributions. There was a lot of that that went on which wasn’t the handing over of money. Mr. Hughes noted that the statute said the proceeds from the events and that amount needs to go to a charity. Mr. Ball questioned if that meant that if a club made $30,000 on a function could the club count anything
they did that was not a cash contribution as being a charitable contribution under the statute.
Mr. Lemnios expected that the annual report would have a list of events on what dates, club sales “x”, expenses “y”, available for charitable contributions “z”. The second part would list the contributions made. He did not envision an inkind contribution.
Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that there was really a dollar value to an event where the club paid for all hamburgers and had a picnic for veterans. He would consider that a charitable event. Mr. McKinley noted that if there was going to be a column of “x” of income from
people who paid to use the some, some amount of expenses, and some additional amount for inkind expenses such as hosting a Cub Scouts, it would be an expense and would take care of itself. Mr. Ball stated that he was trying to make it clear whether the Board would consider those kinds of expenses and Mr. McKinley responded that it was a charitable donation.
Mr. Hughes requested that Town Counsel revise some of the language in Section II #3. Right now it didn’t limit the revenue used to just alcohol sales. It was all revenue, but the statute was the sale of alcohol. The amount that needs to be used for charitable purposes was the sale of alcohol.
Mr. Connolly noted that Governor Romney signed the legislation on September 3, but the notices didn’t go out to the clubs until this past
Friday. He was very disturbed that none of the clubs had this information available. He was sure that Town Counsel worked hard but he (Town Counsel) got paid well by the taxpayers.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF RULES & REGULATIONS FOR CLUBS HOLDING ALCOHOL LICENSES (contd)
Addressing Mr. Hughes’ point, Mr. McKinley pointed out that the Act said all proceeds from any sales pursuant to this permit. It didn’t say just proceeds from the sale of alcohol. Mr. Hughes noted that the permit was to sell alcohol, which prompted Mr. McKinley to ask if Mr. Hughes was saying that the clubs only needed to account for revenue generated from the sale of alcohol. Mr. Hughes pointed out that a permit wasn’t needed to sell food and this statute was a permit to sell alcohol to non-members. Mr. McKinley requested a clarification from Town Counsel.
On a motion by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. McKinley, the Board unanimously voted to continue the public hearing to October 18, 2004.
UPDATE SPRINGVALE TREATMENT PLANT
DPW Director Charles Sisitsky had submitted a memo on September 2, 2004 on the status of the Springvale Treatment plant construction and told the Board that he was happy to be back tonight with an update and pictures of what was going on out there.
In April 2002 Town Meeting appropriated $5.8 million for the project with an anticipated completion of May 2005. Mr. Sisitsky explained that the purpose was to enlarge the capacity from 4 million per day to 8 million gallons per day to ensure that the Town would always have an adequate supply of water for the residents and in the future never be required to have a water ban.
Using a power point presentation, Mr. Sisitsky showed an air photo of the plant and outlined the three basic pieces of the project. l) A new filter building with four new sand filters to increase the water that could be treated; 2) A new storage building for vehicles and a new operation center; 3) A new well put in and a fourth air stripper to accommodate additional water. The money was coming from the Mass Water Pollution Abatement Trust in the form of a 20-year loan.
Mr. Sisitsky noted that Methuen Construction was the low bidder at $5.1 million. The contract was awarded in October 2003 and construction began in January 2004 and was on schedule for completion in the summer of 2005. The project cost to date was $3,472,000, which represents approximately 67% completion.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired if the back foundation was waterproof and Mr. Sisitsky’s response was, “yes”.
Mr. Sisitsky continued that the only change order signed was $51,500 for additional structural steel that was outside the contract. The filed sub-bid did not include it. He (sub-bid) thought the general contractor had included it, but neither did. There was one other pending change order for $30,000-40,000 to do modifications at the office and conference and storage area. An area was identified where space could be increased at a minimum of cost and in consultation with the Town Administrator they decided it was appropriate to do that. To date $25,000 of credits had been accumulated. He noted that to date the change orders were less than 1% of the total cost.
Mr. Sisitsky continued that the filters had not yet arrived. Delivery was expected this week. Mr. Sisitsky reiterated that it was on schedule and still looking at a May 2005 opening. The expansion will double the capacity of the treatment plant and there should not be any future water supply problems in the Town.
Mr. Hughes asked about the house on the property and was told by Mr. Sisitsky that it was just being used for storage.
Mr. Hughes then asked if all the work was finished to bring Evergreen water across Route 9 so once this was finished you just turn on the valve. Mr. Sisitsky advised that that was correct.
Mr. Ball inquired if there had ever been any complaints about noise, but Mr. Sisitsky advised that you couldn’t hear anything even if you were standing next to the filters.
When asked what vehicles were housed at the treatment plant, Mr. Sisitsky responded that there were pickup trucks used exclusively for people who worked out of that operation. They were garaged there now but outside.
UPDATE SPRINGVALE TREATMENT PLANT (contd)
Mr. McKinley inquired if there was an estimate as to what percentage the construction would impact the average citizen’s water bill and was told by Mr. Lemnios that a $5.2 million bond over a 20-year term at a 2% interest rate was about $300,000. Mr. Palmer noted that all of the debt cost would get added to the water rate, which was about 8%.
Mr. Ciccariello asked about the change order for increased office space and Mr. Sisitsky advised that they were going to build the space out, but they were also going to expand the bay next to the office space which was a lot higher than needed so the office space could be expanded. There were about six employees at the site.
Noting that along Route 9 there were some concrete jersey barriers and gravel that spills out, Mr. Ciccariello inquired if that would be taken care of. Mr. Sisitsky explained that the jersey barriers were to protect the integrity of the site in case of an accident and part of the plan was to beautify that area with landscape. Mr. Hughes questioned who would take care of the landscaping noting that there had been calls about the parking lot next door to Town Hall and the streets along the new sidewalk. It was Mr. Sisitsky’s hope that the landscaping put in would be maintenance free. The things Mr. Hughes was talking about were labor intensive, and the kind of landscaping being proposed at the treatment plant didn’t require a lot of maintenance. It would get done.
Mr. Lemnios assured the Board that the DPW and in particular Mr. Perodeau had a great eye for detail and he (Mr. Lemnios) knew that Mr. Perodeau would ensure that anything under his responsibility would be functioning and maintained properly. His (Mr. Lemnios) hat was off to Mr. Perodeau and Mr. Sisitsky and others in the DPW working on this project. It’s been significant and there haven’t been any hang-ups in the process. This was estimated at $5.7 Million, but the bids came in significantly lower and these gentlemen were doing a good job of keeping on top of the contractor to make sure the Town got its value.
To Mr. Ciccariello’s inquiry as to how close the water meter replacement program was to being completed, Mr. Perodeau responded that of the 12,500 meters to change he thought there were about 1,500 left. It was almost right on schedule.
UPDATE SASSAMON TRACE GOLF COURSE
Finance Director Robert Palmer referred to his memo of September 17, 2004 regarding the preliminary July and August 2004 year-to-date revenues and expenses at Sassamon Trace golf course.
He noted that a comparison of revenues from last year to this year showed slightly better revenues. At August 31, 2004 the net revenues were slightly ahead of last year and that reflected the fact that revenues from cart fees were down slightly and greens fees were up slightly. Expenses were up and part of that was from some small costs related to merchandising which the Town hadn’t had in prior years. However, the bulk of the expense increase was explained by the retirement/fringe costs and $4,000 for a gazebo type building. It (golf course) still ended up slightly better overall and the course was doing OK. The counts were up slightly and he thought that was because there were more season passes.
Mr. Palmer continued that the expenses were normalized to get a true picture of the costs. There wasn’t anything deferred. Last year because there was a (management) contract, the expenses were much clearer. Mr. Palmer noted that he had attached the individual line item accounts to his memo and everything seemed to be tracking reasonably well. He intended to report in this manner through the rest
of the season and then report on a full season so the Board could see the difference. The course wouldn’t close until Thanksgiving. He would probably be reporting the September number at the next meeting. Right now revenues were exceeding expenses but there were some high expenses such as debt and there was a projected deficit. Hopefully there would be good play in the fall.
Mr. Hughes inquired as to what happened to the employees after December 1st when the course closed. Mr. Lemnios responded that there was one full-time employee who will continue and work on course preparation. All the part-time employees have already begun to be phased out and there will be a big difference after the switch from Daylight Savings time.
UPDATE SASSAMON TRACE GOLF COURSE (contd)
In follow-up Mr. Hughes asked about unemployment expenses and Mr. Lemnios advised that it was carried in the budget. Mr. Palmer noted that $10,752 had been budgeted.
Mr. Ball inquired as to when in the calendar year debt service was paid. Mr. Palmer believed the first payment was in November and the second in May.
Mr. Ball recalled that the Board had voted to keep the course open for one year so when would the Board be voting on it for the following year. Mr. Lemnios noted that last year that conversation was started in November and the ultimate determination was made in January. He was looking at the same kind of timeframe for this year. At that point the
Board would have the benefit of seeing the May-September period completed.
Mr. Lemnios continued that he was happy with the revenue performance. The projection had been 3% and it was pretty much at that number even with a rainy August. From talking to other courses he knew that their revenues were down. He also thought the course was doing well on the expense side. Mr. Lemnios reiterated that the presentation would be within the timeframe of last year which was November to January and in the November timeframe he would also present a recap of the pro shop – the cost of goods vs items sold so there was a clear sense of whether it was working as a profit center.
Mr. Ciccariello questioned if the water expense was low because it hadn’t been billed. Mr. Palmer explained that there would be one bill for the season that may have gone out in the last couple of days. It would be a big bill because it was billed every three months although water consumption was actually down.
Mr. Ciccariello asked if the outstanding water bill had been taken care of, and Mr. Palmer advised that it had been. He explained that in April there was a transfer from available funds from the landfill.
Mr. Hughes inquired if there had been a hearing with Sherborn for reduced testing and Mr. Lemnios responded that it was originally
scheduled for a couple of weeks ago but had been put off. Mr. Bois (Environmental Compliance Officer) was talking with his counter part in Sherborn and they were interested in having more analysis done by a consultant other than the original consultant who drew up the plan. The fourth hole was designated as an environmentally friendly hole and the only type of insect control permitted was environmentally friendly. There was a minor grub infestation and the Town wanted to talk to Sherborn about incorporating that hole in the whole plan. The Town had agreed to that hole as an experiment and it has not worked. When the Town agreed to that, within the golf industry there was a thought that it (environmental pest control) was something that could be accomplished but the industry has moved away from that
thought.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that the Friends of Sassamon Trace were holding a big event. Mr. Lemnios didn’t know the dates but believed it was the weekend of October 15 & 16. He added that the Friends was a newly formed group that would function much the same way as the Friends of the Library or the Friends of the Senior Center.
Mr. Ball inquired if water was being billed to the golf course at a residential rate or irrigation rate. Mr. Palmer advised that it was billed at the irrigation rate.
LOCAL 1707 UNION PRESIDENT: PURCHASE OF AMBULANCE
Before recognizing Local 1707 President Daniel Hartwell, Mr. Ciccariello reminded everyone that under the Charter the Board of Selectmen did not make the decision on the award of the ambulance. That decision rested with the Town Administrator. Mr. Lemnios confirmed that as being correct.
Firefighter Daniel Hartwell thanked the Board for having the firefighters here tonight. He noted that about 6-8 months ago the Chief extended to the paramedics an offer to take part in the design and layout of the new ambulance and that was appreciated. The paramedics had some great ideas and made some good design layouts to serve their needs and make their total process easier. It seemed that somewhere along the line their concerns and needs were pushed aside and he was here tonight to ask the Board to consider what the paramedics
LOCAL 1707 UNION PRESIDENT: PURCHASE OF AMBULANCE (contd)
designed on the compartment layout. He introduced Lieutenant Levey, the paramedic coordinator.
Mr. Ciccariello believed that Mr. Lemnios had gone through the 21 items listed in Mr. Hartwell’s August 5, 2004 letter and he would let Mr. Lemnios respond.
Mr. Lemnios acknowledged receipt of a letter from the paramedics indicating items that were of concern to the paramedics relative to items that should be in the ambulance. The Town received two bids for a new ambulance. A third was received that did not conform to the bid specifications. The Town had provided any bidder the opportunity to provide an alternate as long as it was equal or better than the item in the spec.
Mr. Lemnios continued that Town Meeting appropriated $125,000 and bids were received from Pierce in the amount of $129,205 and from Greenwood Apparatus for $119,857. Quality Emergency Vehicles was the third bidder at $113,270 plus an additional $3,000 for items the Town asked for which had to do with not using wood cabinetry. It wasn’t known if Quality’s was a conforming bid because an apples to apples comparison couldn’t be done. The Greenwood Apparatus bid satisfied most of the items listed by Firefighter Hartwell.
Mr. Lemnios reviewed the list of items in Firefighter Hartwell’s August 5 letter and advised that items 1-6 were included in the Greenwood bid.
Item 7 indicated that the there was no drug drawer specified under the telemetry area in the spec. Although there was a drug locker specified, the convenience of a drug drawer located in the telemetry area in addition to the drug locker, could be crucial when treating a patient. Mr. Lemnios reported that he talked to the Chief about this and there could be an issue of whether the drug drawer could slide open during an accident.
Item 10 expressed the wish to increase the aisle space to 52” in width in the new ambulance, but the width of the specified ambulance looks to
be as limiting as the current ambulances. Mr. Lemnios advised that the spec called for 50” and the two conforming bids had that. QEV (Quality Emergency Vehicles) had three different widths and it was difficult to tell if it was 50”, 51”, or 52”. He noted that he brought that up because some of the paramedics wanted Osage which was what QEV had, but it couldn’t be bid like that.
Mr. Lemnios noted that the biggest items that remain were the request that the rear window light should be 900 series LED. That was great when looking head on but when looking at a side view, it may not be as great. All lights on the vehicle meet federal and state standards.
With regard to the request for Corian countertops that were being put forth as being easier to clean, Mr. Lemnios noted that a counter was spec’d that would not be open to infection and the Corian was a $500 difference.
Of the 28 issues, Mr. Lemnios advised that 20 were in the low bidder’s response and the Town was unable to address the balance either for cost or other reasons.
Firefighter Hartwell responded that the paramedics spent an extensive amount of time with one of the manufacturers doing the layout that suited them in the past. They put together the compartment and the layout. As far as the drug drawer coming open, it was locked at all
times and it wouldn’t be any different than any other drawer. The way QEV spec’d the vehicle was how the paramedics spec’d it. The Town had the right to reject or throw out any bids and he would think what was in the best interest of the paramedics would be in the best interest of all parties. He wasn’t speaking for QEV but that was why the bid came in the way it did.
Mr. Lemnios noted that the bid process originally started in April and the first bid was scheduled to be open on May 25. QEV came to the administration concerned because they didn’t think they could bid on the ambulance because the spec had elements they thought were proprietary, but the administration had a letter from a second vendor saying they could meet the bid specs. They (administration) met with QEV and addressed their concerns the best they could, but QEV wanted
LOCAL 1707 UNION PRESIDENT: PURCHASE OF AMBULANCE (contd)
the Town to use their specs, which the Town couldn’t do. A new bid spec was put out and he was chagrined to say that QEV didn’t follow the bid spec.
Mr. Lemnios further advised that every bidder was afforded the opportunity to bid exactly as put forward or put forward an alternative and explain why the alternative was equal or better. This bidder (QEV) did not submit a bid on the Town’s form. He (Mr. Lemnios) agreed that the Town reserved the right to accept or reject any bids, but bids were rejected if they did not conform or if the Town changed its mind and didn’t want to do it, but it wasn’t designed to allow a bidder to create their own bid form and create what they wanted. The flaw was giving a vendor the impression they could create a design exactly as the paramedics want. The Town was bound by public bid law. He felt that the administration had taken a lot of time and listened to a great many of the concerns the paramedics
had. The point made earlier and Mr. Lemnios thought it was a good point was that this was the first time the paramedics have ever been asked to be involved in the process. He was looking to improve upon the process and solicit input, but they needed to comment on items they liked but not a specific brand. The Town bid for an ambulance with certain characteristics and ended up with two conforming bids and one non-conforming.
Mr. Ciccariello commented that if the Town were to entertain a proprietary spec the Board would have to vote to have a proprietary spec and have legislative approval.
Mr. Lemnios added that there was allowance for some proprietary purchasing either for an emergency or if there was no other reasonable
item available. This did not meet that and the evidence was that there were two different vendors who met the spec. Two manufacturers met the specifications and the third submitted a non-performing bid. If QEV had followed the form maybe the third would have met it.
Mr. McKinley remarked that he was trying to figure out the problem. Most of the important design specifications the paramedics want and
gave input on were in fact included in the preferred bid. Most of what the firefighters want they were getting so what’s the problem.
Firefighter Hartwell replied that he wasn’t sure that all of what Mr. Lemnios said was in the bid turned back in. He didn’t think what the paramedics wanted was proprietary. They had a certain layout they wanted. Mr. Lemnios disputed that by quoting from Firefighter Hartwell’s letter, and firefighter Hartwell responded that the Osage was the truck the paramedics felt was the best and added that Mr. Lemnios was just taking one part of the concern.
Mr. Lemnios pointed out that QEV and the Osage might have been an option if they had a performing bid, but there was no way of knowing if it was a performing bid. The other vendors waited long and hard for an award and it was at the point where it was a $2,000 difference between a QEV vehicle and the other. To put it out to bid again would be a disservice to the other vendors who submitted a bind on the form and the third bidder would know their numbers. It was not something the Town was supposed to do – to go fishing for bids. It would be a disservice to the Town in terms of future competitiveness.
Mr. McKinley asked if what was trying to be resolved was that the firefighters’ preferred brand would be the Osage. To Firefighter Hartwell’s response that that was the company the paramedics did their layout with, Mr. McKinley pointed out that that violated Chapter 30B. If most of the important things were in the successful bid, wasn’t that
a reasonable base even if it wasn’t exactly what the firefighters wanted.
Lieutenant Ken Levey told the Board that he was a little confused. The Town’s best interest had thrown him off. He had worked in 30 communities on every piece of apparatus you could think of. The Osage was a 12-1 vote for what to go with. What they (paramedics) spec’d out
was a nice looking ambulance and it came in under bid. It was a nice ambulance and it was what the paramedics wanted – the E series. It was in the Town’s best interest to receive this ambulance. The only people who will be driving the ambulance were the 14 paramedics and this was what they thought was the best for the Town. The paramedics had a vast expertise on the subject, and this (purchase of new ambulance) was two years behind the ball. The ambulance was needed and the paramedics
LOCAL 1707 UNION PRESIDENT: PURCHASE OF AMBULANCE (contd)
would have liked to see the Town go toward the Osage as it was exactly what was needed and what they want. He questioned who would need a certain ambulance beside the paramedics.
Acknowledging that he understood that the Osage was the layout the paramedics wanted, Mr. Ball pointed out that the Town was bound by Chapter 30B which strictly prohibits what the paramedics were trying to accomplish. In talking about the Town’s best interest, Lieutenant Levey was looking at it from the paramedic’s point of view, but the
Board was looking at having to obey the law. It was said that the paramedics worked with one vendor and Mr. Ball inquired if they had met with the other two.
Lieutenant Levey advised that they (vendors) met with several other members, but he never spoke to any other vendors. Currently the Fire Department has a Horton.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that reference kept being made to layout and he assumed when the spec went out to bid all the design elements offered by the department and the chief were included by all bidders with the exception of the 20 items listed in the letter. When referring to layout was it the inside of the cab or the things that were missing. Lieutenant Levey advised that it was the layout of the inside–the width.
Firefighter Hartwell clarified that the firefighters weren’t degrading the Horton. Greenwood Apparatus was probably the finest company around for fire apparatus. The gentleman who sold the Town the Horton was a local businessman and had served them for 12 years.
When asked what the gentleman sold now, firefighter Hartwell’s response was ‘Osage’.
Fire Chief James Brien told the Board that he welcomed the firefighters’ input into the process. For himself he would have preferred the F series since it was a four-wheel drive and had more weight, but he went along with the paramedics. Perhaps a better job of communicating could have been done with each other but he appreciated their (firefighters) participation in the process and welcomed it in the future.
Mr. Ciccariello asked if Lieutenant Levey didn’t want a four-wheel drive. Lieutenant Levey responded that for the paramedics it was the ride and the Osage had sensitive monitoring equipment. In follow-up Mr. Ciccariello questioned if it wasn’t common to have a four-wheel drive, but Lieutenant Levey replied that he wasn’t saying that.
Other than the fact that the paramedics’ preferred choice was the Osage, to Mr. McKinley it sounded like the Horton, of which the Town already had two, had 99% of what the paramedics wanted.
Chief Brien told the Board that the Fire Department had an excellent history with the Horton. The last three ambulances had been Horton.
Mr. McKinley again inquired as to what was the problem, and Firefighter Hartwell replied that the firefighters didn’t pick up as many things as Mr. Lemnios picked up. When asked if it was possible that a lot of the firefighters’ concerns were addressed, Firefighter Hartwell said he didn’t know that unless he had the bids in front of him. Mr. Lemnios noted that he was meeting with Firefighter Hartwell on Thursday.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to whom the last ambulance was purchased from and was told by DPW Equipment Maintenance Supervisor Thomas Collins that it was purchased from QEV. Mr. Connolly then asked a series of questions to which Lieutenant Levey responded that the relationship
with QEV was good and he felt like his (Lt. Levey’s) opinions were solicited and dismissed. When asked if he felt insulted, Lieutenant Levey responded that there was an incredible amount of knowledge the Town could tap into with the paramedics and he thought it was
dismissed. Mr. Connolly commented that he would think the administration would consult an expert and he would think that Lieutenant Levey knew the best.
In response to Mr. Connolly’s comments, Mr. Ball pointed out that Chapter 30B required bids for equipment and services such as this and the RFP was written in such a manner not to direct the bid to a certain
manufacturer. Given their druthers Firefighter Hartwell and Lieutenant Levey would direct it to QEV, but the Town couldn’t do that.
LOCAL 1707 UNION PRESIDENT: PURCHASE OF AMBULANCE (contd)
Mr. Connolly questioned why the QEV bid couldn’t be considered and Mr. Lemnios explained that part of the bid process was to create a uniform bid document for everybody’s use. Two responded in the same format and the third did not.
Mr. Connolly then questioned why this discussion was being held and Mr. Lemnios advised that Firefighter Hartwell had requested an opportunity to speak. He (Mr. Lemnios) had had ongoing discussions and letters from these gentlemen. The last month or so had been spent identifying those concerns and whether they could be met and the majority could be met. All of them couldn’t be met because some were based on a certain company. A person who used to be a member of the Board of Selectmen was a partial owner of the company and he (Mr. Lemnios) believed that person was applying some political influence.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that two out of three conformed to filling out the bid documents and the third automatically disqualified himself because he did not conform.
Mr. McKinley reiterated that it sounded like a lot of what was important to the paramedics was incorporated and he would like to table discussion until Mr. Lemnios, Chief Brien, and Firefighter Hartwell had a chance to review what was being proposed – if the successful bidder addressed the things that were important without violating the state law. There was only so much the Town could do.
Mr. Hughes inquired if the bids were still compliant with the timeframe. Mr. Lemnios advised that there was a 60-day award period. It was coming up against that but there was still time.
Mr. Ball didn’t see the point of tabling the discussion. He felt that the Board had listened and that was all the Board could do. Mr. Lemnios had agreed to meet with Firefighter Hartwell and Lieutenant Levey and he (Mr. Ball) thought it should be taken off the Board’s calendar because the ball was in Mr. Lemnios’ court.
Given that the 60 days was coming up and the Board was not meeting for two weeks, Mr. Ciccariello recommended that Mr. Lemnios meet with the Fire Department and go over these items.
RATIFICATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING CONTRACT
Mr. Lemnios requested the Board’s ratification of a collective bargaining contract reached with the Recreation employees. The contract covered a three year period beginning July 1, 2004 and contained the same salary increases as the other contracts previously approved: 2-l/2% for Fiscal 2005, 2-l/2% for Fiscal 2006, 2% for Fiscal 2007 on June 1 and 2% on January 1. In addition there was a $100 education stipend. The total value of the contract for FY05 was $9,068.48. The contract was retroactive to July 1st with the exception of two positions that were being upgraded and would be effective after Town Meeting.
Mr. Lemnios confirmed that the union had ratified the agreement.
Mr. Hughes moved approval of ratifying the collective bargaining agreement covering Fiscal 2005, 2006, 2007 with the Recreation employees. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
NATICK HOUSING AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: SECTION 8 PROGRAM CERTIFICATION FORMS
Mr. Santos had not as yet arrived and Mr. Hughes moved to table discussion of this item and send Mr. Santos a letter asking him to attend the next meeting. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
2005 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES: SCHEDULE HEARING
The Board was in possession of a survey of present liquor license fees for surrounding communities.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that the Board had raised some fees in 2003 and according to the analysis it appeared that Natick’s fees were pretty consistent with surrounding communities and in some cases slightly higher. The package stores were at the maximum of $2,000 and couldn’t be increased.
Mr. Hughes stated that he wasn’t suggesting raising the fees but was suggesting that annually the Board should still have the public hearing to take input to see if anybody thought the Board should raise the
2005 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES: SCHEDULE HEARING (contd)
fees. The license holders didn’t think so, but the Selectmen were the Commissioners for alcohol and should consider the fees annually. Mr. Hughes also noted that one of the things on the agenda for the new club license was whether the Board was going to charge a fee for that. He suggested scheduling a public hearing for October 18 and deciding at that time whether to raise the fees.
Mr. McKinley disagreed. He thought the fees were reasonable. The Board checked them every year and he couldn’t imagine that anyone would come in to raise the fees. Someone may come in to lower the fees and he couldn’t imagine the Board going along with that. He would move to approve these fees for next year.
If the Board was going to set the fees for next year the same as this year, Mr. Hughes felt that a public hearing was still needed. Mr. McKinley questioned what would be the point of going through the work of having a public hearing unless there was something to address. If the Board felt that one or more (of the fees) was out of line and worthy of consideration, then have the public hearing. The Board had a lot on its plate and why waste time on something that nobody wanted to change.
Mr. Ball agreed with Mr. McKinley.
Mr. McKinley moved that the Board do nothing with the liquor license fees. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES
Article 3 – Collective Bargaining
On a motion by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Ball, the Board unanimously voted to support Article 3 for the Recreation employees’ contract.
Article 14 – Citizen Petition- Westlake Road Drainage
It was Mr. Hughes’ recollection that the citizens who proposed the article would be requesting no action because the drainage issue had been addressed.
Mr. Lemnios advised that he spoke to the citizen this morning and he was preparing a letter to give to the Finance Committee Chair.
Article 15 – Rescind Golf Course Borrowing
Mr. Hughes moved to support Article 15. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
Article 13 – Clubhouse Lane/Saddlebrook Sewer
Mr. Hughes inquired if there had been any feedback on whether the residents were going forward with the sewer. Mr. Lemnios advised that the residents were scheduled to report to the Finance Committee tomorrow. They (residents) were waiting for one resident to get a test done on Title V, which would just give them a simple majority.
Article 18 – Designation as Economic Opportunity Area – MathWorks
Believing that the Town’s designation as an Economic Opportunity Area had received favorable action from the state, Mr. Hughes moved that the Board support Article 18. Seconded by Mr. Ball and unanimously voted.
Article 19 – Tax Increment Finance Plan – The MathWorks
Mr. Hughes advised that there were some ongoing discussions with The MathWorks on the TIF agreement and he suggested the Board wait until the next meeting to take a position.
Mr. Lemnios reported that the Finance Committee heard Articles 18 & 19 and when Article 19 came up the Planning Board took the position that in lieu of the Board of Selectmen as the final authority that a subcommittee be put in place made up of the Board of Selectmen, Planning Board, Assessors, Moderator, and Finance Committee. There was a great likelihood that the Planning Board would rescind that recommendation. The Finance Committee asked staff to come up with a proposed motion that would include some specifics for the agreement, i.e. not to exceed 20 years and to seek the advice of the Planning Board and Board of Assessors while crafting the agreement with the ultimate approval resting with the Board of Selectmen.
Article 21 – Home Rule Petition – National Guard Armory–Negotiated Sale
Mr. Hughes moved to support Article 21. Seconded by Mr. Ciccariello. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. Ciccariello, Mr. Ball, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Connolly voted in favor of the motion. Mr. McKinley abstained.
Articles 8 & 9 - Commission on Disability Handicapped Parking Fines, Increase Handicapped Fines
Mr. Lemnios advised that Article 8 changed the amount of handicapped parking fines going to handicapped purposes from 50% to 75%. The Finance Committee had voted favorable action on Article 8, but he was not sure where they stood on #9.
On a motion by Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Ciccariello, the Board unanimously voted to support Article 8.
Article 28 – Conservation Wetlands Revolving Fund
Mr. Lemnios told the Board that Town Counsel had asked for this article to be put on the warrant, but he (Mr. Lemnios) needed to meet with the Comptroller because she didn’t think it was necessary and he wanted to get it sorted out.
SELECTMEN’S CONCERNS
a. Winnemay Street Streetlight
Mr. Connolly inquired if there was any feedback from the Safety Officer regarding a streetlight at Willow and Winnemay. Mr. Lemnios advised that he had received nothing as of yet.
b. Oriental Pearl
Mr. McKinley noted that Oriental Pearl was past due on submitting certification of alcohol awareness training for their staff. Mr. Ciccariello advised that a letter had been sent and their TIPS certification had been received. There was, however, an issue on the manager. When Oriental Pearl came before the Board the manager indicated that he would be there 40-50 hours a week, but in fact he may not be there that amount of time. Another letter was being sent with the request for further information.
c. 34 North Main Street Drainage
Mr. McKinley referred to correspondence and documents relative to the continuing issue of drainage at 34 North Main Street. The developer was concerned about the lack of resolution, but if the documents that
were attached reflect the professional opinions, they saw nothing of value. Was there an update?
Mr. Ciccariello informed the Board that there had been several meetings and there were several pieces of correspondence between the Building Department, the developer and the ZBA and the developer has to go back before the ZBA. The ZBA has to agree to the design changes that were made. They were not consistent with the original approved decision and part of that will be a review of the engineering. They were going before the ZBA on October 18 for an amendment of their original variance.
Mr. McKinley presumed that the ZBA would require a discussion and comprehensive study that the drainage would be done. Mr. Ciccariello assumed that the ZBA would make that decision.
d. Removal of Vehicles
Mr. McKinley called attention to a letter from Building Inspector Michael Melchiorri purporting that significant progress had been made on a complaint with car repairs being done on East Central Street. Supposedly it was to have been taken care of by September 27th and Mr. McKinley inquired if that was resolved.
Mr. Lemnios stated that he would check on it.
Mr. Connolly commented that he knew a lot of automobiles had been moved.
e. Letter of Thanks
The Board acknowledged receipt of a letter from the Natick Center Associates thanking Local 1707 Union President Daniel Hartwell and the firefighters for putting up the welcome to Natick banners.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
_________________________
Charles M. Hughes, Clerk
| 
