BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Natick Town Hall
June 30, 2008
06:00 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by the Chair John Ciccariello at timeHour18Minute06:00 p.m.
PRESENT: John Ciccariello, Joshua Ostroff, Kristine Van Amsterdam,
Carol A. Gloff, John Connolly.
ALSO PRESENT: Martha White, Town Administrator; Donna Challis, Secretary
WARRANTS: Payroll warrants were signed by the Board of PersonNameSelectmen on June 30, 2008 in the amount of $681,053.85. This figure was included in total warrants signed by the Board of Selectmen of $1,149,180.44.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, moved to enter into executive session to discuss matters pertaining to litigation and collective bargaining. By roll call vote the motion passed on a 5-0-0 vote. At 6:01 p.m. the Board entered into executive session after announcing that the meeting would return to open session.
The open session was reconvened at 7:15 p.m.
LETTER OF RECOGNITION: Dr. Edward A. Zullo, Animal Inspector
Dr. Edward Zullo was presented with a Letter of Appreciation in recognition of his 61 years of service to the Town as Animal Inspector.
Dr. Zullo expressed his appreciation to the Board and to the Board of Health for this honor noting that his sixty years of service as milk inspector, food inspector, and animal inspector had been a labor of love for the citizens of placeCityNatick and the Town of Natick. He stated that he had always been thankful for Dr. Vance who gave him the opportunity to serve on the Board of Health.
LETTER OF RECOGNITION: Sebastian Grupposo
Town Meeting member and Parking Clerk Sebastian Grupposo was presented with a Letter of Recognition in honor of his Ninetieth birthday.
Mr. Grupposo stated that he was back on his feet from heart surgery and planned to resume the Parking Clerk hearings although he had given up being a constable. He thanked the Board, the departments, his friends and neighbors for their support.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD
a. Jared Nesvet
Jared Nesvet told the Board that he would be a senior this year. Last week he attended a Mass Boys State program which was an introduction to government and he was elected to the House of Representatives. He felt that was a good introduction to representing the youth and wanted to get things done. Two things on which he would like to concentrate were CPR certification and making it mandatory in a gym and expanding the types of AP courses.
b. Christopher Resmini
Christopher Resmini stated that he had lived in Natick his whole life and had younger brothers in the school system. He was currently a student atFramingham State and wanted to be part of the Town.
Noting that the Advisory Board did not need to include all high school students, Mr. Ostroff inquired if the Board had set up parameters when the YAB was established.
Liaison to the Advisory Board, Moira Munns confirmed that someone need not be a student in placeCityNatick only a resident, but she was uncertain of the grade range and would have to check the by-laws. It maybe limited to through the 12th grade.
A motion was made by Mr. Connolly, seconded by Ms. Gloff, to appoint Jared Nesvet and Christopher Resmini to the Youth Advisory Board. In seconding the motion Ms. Gloff offered an amendment that if there was an age range that Mr. Resmini’s appointment be subject to him falling within that range. The amendment was accepted by Mr. Connolly and unanimously voted.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
a. Evan Pagliuca
Evan Pagliuca stated that he was a recent college graduate with a Bachelor of Science in Regional Planning and a Bachelors of Science in Environmental Science.
Mr. Ostroff asked Mr. Pagliuca to talk about his strengths and experience and he responded that in college he did a bunch of reports on placeCityNatick and realized Natick was unique because it had thriving natural resources. His passion would be good in protecting those natural resources.
On a motion by Mr. Connolly, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to appoint Evan Pagliuca to the Conservation Commission.
INTERVIEW FOR NOMINATION TO LEONARD MORSE GRANTS PANEL
a. Laura Senier
Laura Senier apologized for not being able to attend the last meeting. She noted she was a 12 year resident of Natick with a background in research. She held a master’s in public health from Boston University School of Public Health and was now pursuing a doctoral degree in sociology at placePlaceNameBrown PlaceTypeUniversity. Between graduating from BUSPH and attending Brown she worked for five years at the Natick Labs with a research team that had funding from the National Institute of Health to study to relationship between alcohol abuse and injury among Army soldiers.
Ms. Senier felt that her academic and professional training had prepared her to participate in discussions about the kinds of health problems the Foundation was working to address and her formal training in research methods qualified her to review grant applications and to judge their merit. Plus her experience in writing grant applications to federal health agencies and private foundations gave her a solid understanding of the challenges in designing public health programs
Ms. Senier further noted that her first involvement with the Foundation was in 2001 when she served on an advisory committee to the Natick Needs Assessment project and assisted in the development of the survey questionnaire and in the presentation of the findings to the community.
Mr. Ostroff recalled that at the last meeting the Board interviewed three other perspective candidates and he volunteered to reach out to the Director of the Foundation on the kind of background they were seeking. He (Mr. Ostroff) did so but didn’t pass it along to be put in the books and distributed a copy of the criteria.
Ms. Gloff felt there were four candidates that all seemed excellent and moved that the Board nominate Beth Strand, PersonNameDennis Barr, Elise Eckelkamp, and Laura Senier. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
Mr. Ostroff was impressed with the caliber of the people who had applied and and thanked the applicants.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION: ALTERNATE MEMBER
a. Marj Balcom
Marj Balcom told the Board that this past January she stepped back from a sixty hour a week job and that gave her time to pursue things in which she always had an interest. She noted that she had taken a number of architecture courses and knew how to do research. She also volunteered at the Historical Society.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if there were particular initiatives she would like to pursue, and Ms. Balcom responded she didn’t have any. She had read the web site and other information and thought the Commission was a pretty well oiled machine and she would like to participate.
A motion was made by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, to appoint Marj Balcom as an alternate member of the Historical Commission. Unanimously voted.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO COCHITUATE RAIL TRAIL TASK FORCE
a. Janice Henderson
Janice Henderson told the Board that she was an urban planner and was interested in being part of the rail trail. She had been a resident of Natick for nine years and had never been part of a committee and was interested in seeing how the process proceeds. In her professional capacity she was working on a bike path in the Longwood area and she had worked on projects at the state, city, and occasionally federal level.
Ms. Gloff inquired as to the number of applicants noting that she had heard from Harlee Strauss who said she (Ms. Strauss) was interested in both the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee and the Cochituate Rail Trail.
Mr. Ostroff explained that in 2006 the Board created four citizen-at-large positions and four alternates. The alternates vote if a regular member was not there. There were at least a couple of members not seeking reappointment so there was space as presently constituted.
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to appoint Janice Henderson to the Cochituate Rail Trail Task Force.
Mr. Ostroff wasn’t sure if Ms. Henderson lived within 300 feet of the trail, but if so advised that she would have to make a disclosure and the Board would have to vote it.
Ms. Gloff asked that Ms. Strauss be contacted to see if she could attend the next meeting.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO CABLE ADVISORY BOARD
a. Edward Hudson
Edward Hudson stated that he was currently the Senior Vice President of General Dynamics Wireless Services and prior to that had 15 years of project management for large-scale telecommunications infrastructure projects for Department of Defense and commercial customers worldwide. When his children were young he volunteered as a coach, but now they were older.
He noted that he was interested in how programming and programming sources were being considered and how franchise fees were utilized.
b. Joseph Weisse
Joseph Weisse told the Board that he found the cable system very informative and his interest starts with being a long time amateur radio operator and pleased to be on the local emergency planning council. He also had an interest in disability related issues.
On a motion by Mr. Connolly, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to appoint Edward Hudson and Joseph Weisse to the Cable Advisory Board.
INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
a. Jill Miller
Jill Miller told the Board that she was here to request reappointment to the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee and noted that she had been attending meetings of this committee since it was an ad hoc committee. In addition she attended various conferences and often met with the MetroWest Growth Management Transportation Task Force. She believed she provided some balance because many members were hard core bicyclists and she was not.
b. Ken DelPapa
Ken DelPapa stated that he had served on the Board for the last few years, but had some hesitation in applying for reappointment. In its (Bicycle Committee) current state he didn’t feel it was terribly effective; however, an incident a couple of weeks ago changed his mind. He became acutely aware of the pavement and quality of the roads and thought maybe if given a chance to serve on the committee again he could actually do something. In his opinion for the past three years, almost nil had been done.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to why Mr. DelPapa thought there hadn’t been a lot of information coming from this group to the Board. Mr. DelPapa responded that it wasn’t clear to him. It was everyone’s intention. Mr. Connolly suggested that the acceptance of Route 135 would be a nice start for this group to give the Board some feedback. Mr. DelPapa noted that comments had been submitted to different Town boards about that (Route 135), but he wasn’t sure it went to the Board.
At Mr. Ostroff’s request to elaborate on the incident, Mr. DelPapa stated that he was taking a ride and turned onto Pond Street and encountered gravel accumulated on the side of the road from a sealing operation and required a trip to the emergency room. It was a hazard.
c. Harlee Strauss
Ms. Gloff informed the Board that Ms. Strauss had another commitment this evening. Ms. Strauss told her she was actually interested in both the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee and the Cochituate Rail Trail.
Mr. Ciccariello requested that Ms. Strauss be asked to attend the next meeting.
d. Cheryl Byrne
Cheryl Byrne stated that she enjoyed living in this town. She and her family walk constantly and an important thing for them was to be able to walk to a downtown area. There was a divide between people here Monday-Friday and on the weekends and she thought it was important to get that divide down and for people to realize it was a very walkable community.
Noting that on her application Ms. Byrne indicated that she was interested in the Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee or other, as there were more people than openings, Ms. Gloff inquired if she (Ms. Byrne) would be interested in something else. Ms. Byrne didn’t know what other committees were out there like this. She had a lot of experience organizing people and had a financial background and felt her experience would be valuable.
Former Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee member and Chair A. Richard Miller asked if the Board had received his letter. Ms. Gloff summarized that Mr. Miller’s letter stated that he would be interested in rejoining the committee if there was an opening that was not being filled by someone being reappointed. Mr. Miller clarified that he did not want to displace the current members. Mr. Miller also pointed out that his final letter (as Chair) to the Board addressed the concerns of Mr. DelPapa. Mr. DelPapa got hurt because of something the committee asked to have changed some years ago. When roads were repaved the DPW puts on a chip seal, but when someone fell off a bicycle it was much more serious than on regular paving. The Committee has been unsuccessful in getting that changed and he
(Mr. Miller) thought the lack of the committee’s seat at the Safety Committee was a reason why.
PUBLIC HEARING DPW – VEHICLE ACCESS ROUTE
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to open the public hearing.
Referring to the public hearing notice, Mr. Connolly noted the second paragraph said it had been suggested that the practice of DPW vehicles not using the surrounding neighborhood as a cut through going to and from the DPW building was no longer effective or practical and he wanted to know who suggested that.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that would be found out during the hearing. The policy of access to the DPW facility being from Route 27 to West Street was a policy adopted by the Board several years ago.
Ms. White added that complaints had been received that the policy adopted in 2005 had not been strictly adhered to by the DPW and she was asked to remind the DPW about the policy. She thought it warranted an evaluation because there was a cost with the policy and she thought it was important for the Town to evaluate. With $4-$5.00 a gallon gas and increased salary costs, she thought it was important for all pros and cons to be weighed and she asked the DPW to do a cost analysis although there was a fair amount of guess work.
DPW Director Charles Sisitsky stated that he did a map to show the intersection of Lakeview and Pond Street and how far it was to get to that point using the policy or west on Route 135. The difference in the routes was 4-1/2 miles round trip. A number of vehicles get 4-5 miles per gallon. He estimated the cost at $10,000 per year - that was just fuel cost and didn’t include personnel. One thing brought to his attention was that trash packers having to take the roundabout route at the end of the day adds time when the personnel was getting overtime and adds cost. He thought it was important for an informed evaluation to be conducted.
Mr. Connolly referenced the mention of reminder notes to the DPW and Ms. White responded that she did it verbally but once the hearing was requested she did send a letter. She wasn’t sure that a letter had been specifically requested but she had clearly been asked to communicate with the DPW. Mr. Sisitsky said he discussed it with his department supervisors and they were asked to pass it down to other personnel. He also confirmed that a notice was posted on the DPW bulletin boards.
Asked by Mr. Connolly to elaborate on the request, Mr. Sisitsky responded that it happens periodically that complaints were received about this (DPW vehicles using side streets to access DPW facility). There would be a lapse by some of the drivers. He (Mr. Sisitsky) kept preaching to them to save fuel and it was counter intuitive to them to go the roundabout way. When a complaint was received, he mentioned it to the driver. It was posted on the bulletin board and a sign was mounted at the end of the driveway that says all DPW vehicles must turn right.
To Mr. Connolly’s remark that some drivers thumb their noses, Mr. Sisitsky replied that he wouldn’t call it that. At times the drivers were in the neighborhood. There was a complaint about a trash truck going through the neighborhood not on trash day, but it turned out the truck was going to the high school for pick up. Sometimes other red trucks were mistaken for DPW trucks.
Ms. Van Amsterdam pointed out that in all the material received safety seemed to be a paramount concern and she was curious if the Safety Committee had been brought in on any of this or if there had been anything from the Schools. She also inquired about DPW trucks traveling onto Campus Drive and if there were any limitations with regard to the size of the vehicle that would be able to maneuver Campus Drive.
Ms. White advised that referrals had not been made to the Safety Committee or the Schools, and perhaps their input would be helpful.
With regard to the size of the vehicles, Mr. Sisitsky stated there were no vehicle limitations from making a turn onto Pond Street and any of their trucks could easily negotiate this.
Ms. Van Amsterdam then inquired if any letters had been received from persons on Redmen Drive or the house at the corner of West Street. They were very used to all the truck traffic going past and she was interested to find out if their experience was comparable to other areas. To her it would be more balanced. One section of West Street was used by the trucks and on one section there were no trucks.
Ms. White responded that it wasn’t noticed where the letters were coming from, but by diverting traffic from one section, additional traffic was being sent to another section.
Mr. Connolly noted there was only one house at the corner of West and Redmen Drive was off West Street. He added that this (DPW vehicles not being able to cut through side streets going to the facility) was a promise the Board made to the residents at that time. If a promise was made, it should be kept and if changed there should be a good reason. If the suggestion was being made that gas was more important than individuals, Mr. Connolly pointed out that two individuals take home vehicles every single day 22 miles. If everyone was so conscientious about saving gas and money, he thought it would be wonderful if those individuals left their vehicles in Natick every day.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if there was any sense of the volume by different classes of vehicles and how it may have changed over the past 15-20 years.
Mr. Sisitsky responded that the fleet had grown, noting that the only time the policy creates a problem was when work was done in West Natick. At times that creates its own safety problem with a back hoe going up the hill at 5 mph. Mr. Sisitsky clarified that he was not here tonight asking the Board to change the policy. He was asked to give the Board the effects of the policy, but it was the Selectmen’s decision of whether or not to change. The DPW could live with whatever policy the Selectmen gave them. He was only here to give information so the Board could make an informed judgment.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if there were any practical reasons why consideration wouldn’t be given to going through Sherborn, but Mr. Sisitsky said that would be less practical.
The floor was opened to the public.
Tass Filledes told the Board this issue was very close to his heart because it affects the entire neighborhood. Mr. Filledes reviewed the history noting that on June 11, 1987 there was some discussion of turning the West Suburban Arena into a DPW garage. The residents discussed their concerns regarding the traffic and were worried about safety. In June 1987 the Board of Selectmen voted 2-1 to support the plan to use the West Suburban Arena and the DPW Director recommended pursuing a truck ban and stated the access road would only be open to DPW trucks.
The DPW trucks started using neighborhood streets and he (Mr. Filledes) complained. The DPW Director asked him to record the serial number. He reported many numbers and the problem continued. He met with the Town Administrator at that time about his concerns and he (Town Administrator Frederick Conley) became upset and typed out a memo on the commitment made. Since then the problem continues.
Mr. Filledes continued that since the DPW moved to the rink, two additional streets have been developed. Natick High School athletics use the streets for their training runs and he was shocked to hear there was consideration for change. It was suggested that this would save gas and he guessed saving a few gallons of gas was more important than saving children’s lives.
Mr. Filledes requested the Board to vote to continue the policy and assure the neighborhood the DPW would fully comply with the regulations.
Lisa Kelleher, a West Street, resident told the Board she was a parent and educator and loved where she lived. She was concerned about a blind corner next to Memorial Beach and worried about stopping. There were a lot of young children and a lot of traffic in terms of bikes and runners. In terms of finances, if something negative were to happen it would affect all the residents and taxpayers.
Collins Avenue resident Ed Johnson thanked the Board for addressing this issue and said he would like a clear understanding. Ms. White said she wanted an informed evaluation and he questioned to what extent the residents were made aware of the hearing.
Ms. White advised that the hearing notice was posted in the MetroWest Daily News, there was a blurb in the Globe, and it was on the web site.
To the question of where complaints were coming from, Mr. Johnson said he spoke with a number of residents in the area and he had a list of 38 signatures opposing the removal of the ban. There was also a box to check if people wished to be notified if this was put on a future agenda.
West Street resident Mary Johnson stated she had lived there for 30 years. She worked at the high school and every day saw dump trucks and packers going up West Street. The trash at the high school was picked up by BFI. The Town had a small dump truck that empties the trash on the athletic fields.
Mr. Sisitsky advised that BFI picked up cardboard dumpsters and the Town picked up the trash.
From what Steve Howard of Windsor Avenue saw it’s never been much of a ban. The trucks went up and down there regularly. There are no sidewalks on Windsor Ave and the Town says it is an unaccepted road and won’t pave it. The lighting along the street was poor. He found it funny that brick sidewalks could be put downtown but sidewalks can’t be put on Windsor Ave.
Hudson Street resident John Strucyzi said that sometimes he saw trash trucks going 30-35 mph and those roads were narrow with tons of kids. If the policy was changed, there would be 2,3 or 4 times as many trucks.
Another Hudson Street resident Richard Parisi stated that for the last two weeks large buckets have been going up and down as well as dumpsters. That was something new in the past months.
West Street resident David Ordway noted that he was at Town Meeting when this subject came up. When the plan to put the DPW garage at its present location was approved, Redmen Drive wasn’t there and it was wide open.
Mary Brown, also a West Street resident, believed what brought this up was the Town Administrator saving the gas and she would appreciate notices in writing. The residents had a right to have a letter sent to them. Not everybody watched TV and not everybody had time to look this up. When this (DPW trucks not using side streets) came about, West Street was one way because it was so narrow and people walk the beaches. She thought the bigger trucks cause more of a problem. There wasn’t one truck coming through. There were many. It was all done for a reason and it worked so why cause a big problem. If the Board was going to do something, everybody should be invited to participate.
Mr. Ostroff stressed that he didn’t know that anyone was advocating for a change. The Board was trying to hear from people and evaluate how well the policy was working or not working. He never heard the Town Administrator advocate for a change. She just wanted to continue to make sure the Board had the right information.
Patrick Hayes of Sassamon Road stated that he was a parent and had empathy for the points made. He too lived near a busy street and thought the Town was at a point in time where there were issues of traffic all over the place. The points he wanted to make were: Safety was a big issue, worth considering were the number of vehicle accidents since 1987, the number of deaths from accidents in that area, the number of traffic citations, what was the structure of the road and what it should be. At some point the policy may need to be revisited and at some other point what would make the road safe may have to be revisited.
Mr. Ciccariello referred to a memo suggesting that besides the DPW trucks belonging to Framingham Asphalt were in the DPW lot, but Mr. Sisitsky advised there was no connection to Framingham Asphalt and they did not use any Town parking lots.
Mr. Connolly said he saw Louis Tree park on Town property and Mr. Sisitsky acknowledged they parked in Town lots when doing work in Town. Asked if that was an accepted use, Mr. Sisitsky didn’t know. It was a public parking lot and it was not posted. If someone was parking in the Town lots that should be stopped and the Town Administrator or Police Chief should be advised to take action.
Ms. Van Amsterdam again emphasized that the Safety Committee and the Schools were important entities that should have a voice in this as well as Recreation given that Woodtrail was at the pond in order for the Board to assess the policy in place. The Board should also hear from residents on both sides as well as get data from traffic incidents. She inquired as to how many bucket trucks trash compactors vs pick up trucks were in the DPW fleet.
Equipment Maintenance Supervisor Tom Collins listed five rubbish packers, 1 bucket tree, two street sweepers, but was asked to provide the Board with a complete list.
Mr. Ciccariello asked the other members if the Board wished to close the hearing or continue it noting that even if a decision wasn’t made there was still a policy in effect and the Board can advise the Town Administrator and DPW Director to enforce it and hold them both responsible.
Mr. Ostroff supported closing the public hearing. If the Board were to consider a change in policy, it would be appropriate for a new public hearing.
Mr. Johnson asked if the Board would commit to notifying the residents who signed the forms if another hearing was going to be held.
On a motion by Mr. Connolly, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to close the public hearing.
Mr. Connolly then moved to notify all abutting streets in writing if the Board were to have a subsequent hearing. Seconded by Mr. Ostroff and unanimously voted.
Mr. Ostroff moved that the Board ratify the 2005 policy that would preclude DPW vehicles from traveling through the Oakland Street area unless there was specific work to be performed on the roads or water and sewer mains in that neighborhood. Seconded by Mr. Connolly and after some discussion unanimously voted.
Mr. Ostroff further asked the DPW Director and Town Administrator to come back with a report in 60 days if there were any proposed exceptions they may wish the Board to consider and if so the Board could have a public hearing.
Speaking to his motion Mr. Ostroff stated that he thought the Board had a policy that was designed to uphold a commitment made to the neighborhood. Unless there was a reason to change it, there was no reason to change and he didn’t feel the Board had been presented with any information to change the policy. He noted the need to address a mechanism for the policy to be enforced and that was up to the Town Administrator and managers.
When he was on the Board previously, Mr. Connolly recalled the Town Administrator recommending an officer be put up there to write citations for people who did not adhere to the policy. He appreciated the citizens coming out tonight.
Ms. Van Amsterdam stated that she was not opposed to ratifying the policy. She felt as though the Board hadn’t collected enough data and offered her apologies to the DPW Director and his staff because they were just asked to come and provide information. She reiterated that she thought some input was needed from the Schools and the Police. To have a productive discussion she believed the Board needed to make certain to bring all facts to the table and she was interested in hearing what Mr. Ostroff anticipated discussing in 60 days.
Mr. Connolly said he would apologize to the citizens and the residents for the traffic. He applauded this coming out. The Board worked for the citizens.
Mr. Ciccariello stated that he too would support ratifying the policy. There were several things brought out by the neighborhood and he agreed with Ms. Van Amsterdam that this was something the Board should pursue further not only to ensure the safety of the neighborhood but next week there would be a meeting of the Natick High School Building Committee and the changes at the High School will be significant and impact the traffic throughout the neighborhood. The price paying for fuel today vs next year was no different than 1991. Gas prices have increased and there was never any talk about gas being an issue in terms of vehicles traveling back and forth. It did add up and the Town was looking for cost cutting measures and a commitment was made to look at revenues and expenses. It was an area to look at as
well as the vehicle policy which would be put on an agenda in the future.
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff to request the Town Administrator working with the Safety Committee and DPW Director to come back in 60 days (later amended to 120 days) to identify what if any changes may be proposed – accident data, demographics, schools, other factors that may influence this policy. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
Mr. Sisitsky stressed that the DPW was not asking for the policy to be changed. They appreciated the opportunity to discuss it and the opportunity to come back. He assured the Board the best efforts would be made to enforce the existing policy and regretted there was so much violation of which he was not aware. He gave further assurance that every vehicle would be uniquely marked with its own number and whatever action was appropriate would be taken to ensure it didn’t happen again. He needed to sit down with the Town Administrator and Personnel Director to see what the options were in terms of discipline to the drivers. Again Mr. Sisitsky gave assurance that all possible efforts would be taken to make sure the policy wasn’t violated and he apologized to the neighbors.
Following a ten minute recess, the meeting was reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION: ACCEPTANCE OF CONSERVATION RESTRICTION
Representing the Conservation Commission was the Environmental Compliance Officer Robert Bois.
Mr. Bois explained that the land, 294 Eliot Street Lot F owned by the Massachusetts Audubon Society, would be held by the Conservation Commission and added to the 800 acres of the Mass Audubon Society. This was a two acre lot that would be maintained by the Audubon Society. It was a great natural resource with a prohibition of any development or disturbance activity. The restriction was reviewed by the Planning Board and Town Counsel and the final stage in the process was a state process which was to have the Board of Selectmen approve.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired if $10,000 was paid to gain this restriction and Mr. Bois advised that it was paid out of the Conservation Fund. The property was sold to the Audubon Society for $100,000.
Ms. Van Amsterdam moved approval of acceptance of the Conservation Restriction for property at 249 Eliot Street, Lot F. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
POLICE CHIEF
a. Appointment of Auxiliary Officers
Police Chief Dennis Mannix introduced Sean Tayler and David Cavicchi to the Board and requested their appointment as Auxiliary Police Officers in the Town. Both were 2005 graduates of Natick High School and have been training with the current auxiliary officers.
Asked to provide an overview of what an auxiliary officer did, Chief Mannix responded that auxiliary officers were established by the Civil Defense laws after World War II. They had no police powers unless activated in emergencies. The Natick Police Department trained them in traffic control and they helped with parades.
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to appoint Sean Taylor and David Cavicci as Auxiliary Police Officers in the Town of Natick. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
b. Special Police Designation
Chief Mannix noted that Chapter 93 of the Acts of 2008 allowed certain retirees to work police details to help with some work the Department was unable to fill from the current ranks. The following retired Natick Police Officers have indicated an interest in being appointed as Special Police Officers for the purpose of working paid police details:
Officer Howard Harper
Officer Leonard Jennings
Officer Arthur Peros
Sergeant Richard Douglas
Sergeant Lawrence Fleming
Sergeant Thomas Lamont
Lieutenant Alfred Grassey
Lieutenant Alfred Morgan
Lieutenant Peter Mason
They will have complied with all provisions of the Act.
Mr. Connolly thanked Chief Mannix for his efforts and recognized Mr. Ciccariello for following through.
Mr. Ostroff inquired as to how soon this would become effective and was told by Chief Mannix the bill was signed in April. Because this was a special act Town Counsel advised that the Town could implement immediately. Once the officers provided the appropriate documents and had the appropriate certification, they could begin immediately.
A motion was made by Mr. Connolly to designate the list of officers provided by Chief Mannix as Special Police Officers for the purpose of working paid police details. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
c. Safety Committee Minutes
Police Chief Dennis Mannix as the Chair of the Safety Committee reviewed the minutes of the Safety Committee’s meetings of February 26, 2008 and May 27, 2008.
February 26, 2008
Request to change traffic signal sequence at the intersection of West
Central Street and Kendall Lane: The committee agreed to continue to wait for the state to make a determination on this issue. No vote was necessary.
Forest Street two-way status: In May 2004, the Safety Committee voted to recommend removing the one-way restriction on addressStreetForest Street during the period of reconstruction of Rte. 135. Since the construction is nearly completed, the committee needed to revisit this issue. The committee VOTED to recommend Forest Street as a two-way street.
Request for Stop Sign at Highland and Middle Streets: The committee VOTED to make a request to the Planning Board that they make the recommendation to include a stop sign on Middle Street at Highland as part of their approval process for a planned subdivision.
Request to properly mark handicapped stalls in Middlesex Avenue parking lot: The committee VOTED to ask the DPW to place appropriate signage in the handicapped parking places.
Ms. Van Amsterdam moved approval. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
Route 9 at State Street Signs: Mass Highway recently changed the signage that restricted motor vehicles from taking a right turn during certain a.m. and p.m. hours, eliminating the p.m. right turn restriction. The committee VOTED to ask Mr. Reffett, the town of Natick Community Development Director, to coordinate with Mass Highway to resolve this issue.
Natick Collection Traffic Plan: The committee was asked to review the traffic pattern in the area of the Lord & Taylor store. It was agreed to allow more time to monitor this area.
Request to move the taxi stand on North Avenue at Walnut Street further east: The committee VOTED to recommend relocating the taxi stand to the first place at the end of the crosswalk to eliminate the existing taxi stand and convert this area to a bus drop off area.
Mr. Ostroff inquired as to the number of spaces and was told by Chief Mannix there was one. Mr. Ostroff wondered if that was adequate. Chief Mannix noted there could be two taxi spaces further up the street. Should the Board vote to make the transfer, the Safety Committee could review the number of taxi spaces. A sign would need to be installed and he (Chief Mannix) would ask the Board to direct the DPW to do so.
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff to affirm the recommendation and ask the Safety Committee to consider whether any changes need to be made at their next meeting.
Intersection of Hayes Street and West Central Street: The committee was asked to consider fully signalizing this intersection. It was VOTED to discuss this issue with state authorities before making a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen.
May 27, 2008 Safety Committee Minutes
Pleasant Street and Park Avenue Intersection: In response to residents’ requests, an increase in traffic on both Pleasant Street and Park Avenue, and the presence of a school bus stop on Park at Pleasant, the committee voted to recommend placement of a stop sign on Park Avenue at the intersection of Pleasant Street. The sign is to be placed on the west side of Park Avenue and the northern side of Pleasant Street where they intersect. In a related safety matter, the committee voted to recommend making the intersection of Bacon Street and Park Avenue a 4-way stop, where it is now a two-way stop
for vehicles on Park Avenue. Visibility for vehicles traveling south on placePark Avenue through the intersection at Bacon Street is the primary reason for this recommendation.
Ms. Van Amsterdam asked if the plan was to have police officers at the intersection when the new STOP signs were put up. Chief Mannix gave assurance that it would be properly marked and maybe a warning sign would be put up. There would be an education period.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if the Safety Committee considered the placement of street name signs as the placePark Avenue sign was well south of the intersection. Chief Mannix didn’t recall that coming up to the Safety Committee but if someone brought it up they would look at it.
Ms. Van Amsterdam moved approval of the placement of a STOP sign on Park Avenue at the intersection of Pleasant Street. Seconded by Mr. Ostroff and unanimously voted.
Ms. Van Amsterdam then moved approval of making the intersection of addressStreetBacon Street and placePark Avenue a four-way stop. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
Willow Street Request for Crosswalk: The committee declined to recommend a crosswalk across North Main Street at Willow Avenue. The committee recommends waiting until reconstruction of North Main Street before making any recommendations regarding crosswalks.
Request for the installation of a path from Tamarack Road to improve access to the West Natick Commuter Rail Station: The Town has no right-of-way through the land from Tamarack Road into the MBTA parking area at the West Natick T Stop and therefore declined to consider this request.
Request for change of address from 47 Union Street to 47 Eliot Street: The Director of Community Development, Mr. Reffett, will send a memo to the assessor’s office indicating that the legal address for the property in question is in reality 47 Eliot Street and not 47 Union Street.
Neighborhood Pizza Safety Concern for crossing pedestrians: The committee reviewed the matter of safety concerns of pedestrians crossing from Neighborhood Pizza (Union Street) and the Sovereign Bank parking lot. A crosswalk exists at the intersection of Union Street and addressStreetEast Central Street and should be utilized by crossing pedestrians.
Rte. 135 @ Washington Street: The committee will review the gridlock situation that exists from time to time on East Central Street as vehicles attempt to turn east on East Central Street from Washington Street.
Mr. Ostroff questioned if the Safety Committee had a view on the hazards of crossing Route 135 at Town Hall. Chief Mannix thought it would be advisable to have yellow flashing signs at the crosswalk and he would assign an officer in the afternoon.
In follow-up Mr. Ostroff asked about the process by which the Town would request the State to install the flashing lights before the Town accepted the road. Chief Mannix thought it was certainly something that could be brought up. The Board previously voted that all crosswalks have the double back signs and he didn’t think the State would have any objections
particularly if the Town paid for it.
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to authorize the placement of crosswalk signs with state approval. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
School Street Extension @ Jefferson Street: The committee voted to recommend replacement of the street signs indicating Jefferson Street and School Street Extension.
Request for stop sign at the corner of Middle Street and Highland Street: The matter of the stop sign at the corner of Middle Street and Highland Street has been addressed through the permitting process, according to committee member and Director of Community Development, Mr. Reffett.
Mr. Connolly commented that the last time he had a senior citizen bring him an issue he forwarded it to Lieutenant Brian Lauzon and Lieutenant Lauzon took care of it within a week.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if the Safety Committee was fully staffed. Chief Mannix noted that Joan Craig was an at large representative who left. He spoke with Ms. White about the vacancy and how it would be filled.
Mr. Connolly raised the possibility of having the vacancy filled by a Board of PersonNameSelectmen liaison, but Mr. Ciccariello said he would prefer not to have a Board representative on the Safety Committee because the Board votes on their recommendations.
c. Taxi Cab Issues: Inspection Form, CORI Checks
Lieutenant Lauzon noted that when he began the process of investigating cabs he had nothing to go by. With his predecessor it was a very subjective process. He (Lt. Lauzon) consulted with a number of cities and towns and put himself through a license course to come with the form he now used. The form was given to the taxi companies and they were told that in 12 months these were the standards with which the Town would like them to comply.
Lieutenant Lauzon believed the contention had to do with advertising and he believed that much like the fuel surcharge the Board had not approved any advertising. If the Board was going to allow advertisement, he assumed there would be some direction from the Board on where it would be placed. MGL also stipulated where stickers couldn’t be placed. The statute said so as not to impede vision. As to the bumper stickers, the thought was to have cleaner cabs.
Mr. Ostroff didn’t think it was uncommon for taxi tops with advertising, and Lieutenant Lauzon responded that no one ever told the cab companies they couldn’t have something mounted, but there was never any direction from the Board of Selectmen allowing it. He needed some guidance on what would be permissible.
Mr. Connolly asked about the Natick Radiator sticker in the briefing books and Lieutenant Lauzon advised that was something JFK Transportation was doing.
Tim Kelley of JFK Transportation noted that the regulations didn’t say the cabs couldn’t have advertising. The regulations were the cab companies’ rules and they needed to conform to them. He thought the inspection was great, but the form was more geared to Boston, i.e. medallions.
Mr. Connolly proposed having the cab companies and Lieutenant Lauzon sit and chat and find something reasonable. Mr. Ciccariello saw no reason that couldn’t be done.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired as to what was in the cabs to identify the driver and Lieutenant Lauzon responded that that was a problem. The Police Department didn’t physically have a means to issue a license to a driver. The Department was working on that now but it was still very patch work. The Police Department did CORI checks on everybody and if there was a problem, they contact the cab owner.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that an issue was that the Cab companies never get anything in return (on the CORI). Lieutenant Lauzon advised that he had a file in his office and if there was a problem, the cab company would be notified.
Mr. Ciccariello stated that he felt when someone got into a cab there should be something in the front so that if something were to go wrong they could take the information down. That was probably a change to the rules & regs that needed to be made.
Chief Mannix agreed there should be some identifier. If it was being done everywhere else, he didn’t see why they couldn’t contract with someone to make up the license cards if it was the Board’s wish to do so. The Police Department would look into it and come back to the Board with a suggestion.
With respect to the issue of advertising, Ms. Gloff suggested delegating someone to look at the pros and cons. Lieutenant Lauzon stated that he just wanted to be certain it was consistent with the General Laws. Mr. Kelley pointed out that Framingham allowed advertising.
Allison McFarland of Natick Cab stated that she had some conflict with how licenses were doled out and would like something more well written. Mr. Kelley ran livery and taxis and the way it was being done she didn’t see how the livery differed from the taxi. Asked if she had some suggestions, Ms. McFarland said she didn’t have any suggestions. She wanted some clarification and would like the livery license issue looked at.
PUBLIC HEARING: METROWEST HOME CONSORTIUM: DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to open the public hearing.
Community Development Director Patrick Reffett noted the Town receives a HUD grant on an annual basis which provides the Town the ability to address some housing needs. The grants have an expirability and notification was received that 07 funds would be eliminated if not contracted for or used in some other fashion by August 31, 2008. Since there weren’t any active projects now for which those funds could be used, the idea was to protect those funds by loaning them to another MetroWest consortium member for an eligible affordable housing project for two years and they would then be paid back. It was about $78,000.
Before the Board was a memorandum of understanding prepared by Town Counsel. Mr. Reffett noted the Board was being asked to authorize the Chair to undertake this and loan these funds to Watertown. Natick has created a trust fund which he thought would have a great ability to target how to utilize the HOME funds better than in the past. In the interim he would like to protect these funds and use them at a future date.
Ms. Van Amsterdam inquired if in the future HUD and Trust Funds funds could be co-mingled. Mr. Reffett’s reply was, “absolutely”, but they had to be targetd toward a HUD type project. In follow-up Ms. Van Amsterdam questioned if the money couldn’t be put into the Trust Fund and was told by Mr. Reffett that if there were a HUD type project there would be the ability to do it in that fashion, but it wasn’t at that point. Ms. Gloff added that it would have to be contractually committed to that project and we weren’t there yet.
Trust Fund member, Randy Johnson, noted that a recent Trust Fund meeting this was discussed and they supported the concept of doing the loan to Watertown with the understanding these funds would come back to the Town in the Trust Fund. In the future the Trust Fund envisioned being the recipient of the HOME funds when received.
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to close the public hearing.
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to authorize the Chair of the Board of Selectmen to execute the Memorandum of Understanding between Natick and Watertown with regard to the HOME Consortium funds available to Natick in 2007. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
DIRECTOR COUNCIL ON AGING & HUMAN SERVICES
a. Rental Fee Schedule for Senior Center
Director of Human Services and Council on Aging Moira Munns presented the Board with room rental policies/fees for the Human Services and Council on Aging facilities. She noted that Spring Town Meeting passed Warrant Article 28 establishing a revolving fund for Senior Center Building Maintenance & Improvement. The article was brought forward to create a mechanism whereby the Senior Center facilities might be made available for use by the community – space for committees, clubs, civic groups, and various other organizations and businesses.
Ms. Munns noted that she had reviewed the policies, procedures, and fees of the other departments in the Town of Natick that allow use of their facilities for non-departmental use, i.e. the Morse Institute Library, the School Department, and the Recreation and Parks Department. For the Board’s review she included draft documents for rules & regs for use of the Human Services/Council on Aging facilities; application for use of the facilities; and proposed rental fee scheduled. Ms. Munns advised that the documents had been reviewed by Town Counsel and approved as to form.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if the fees were consistent with what was charged by other departments and Ms. Munns responded that they were not out-of-line although they might be slightly more modest.
Mr. Ostroff then asked about the mechanism for donating funds. Ms. Munns thought it was easier than the current system which was a non-system.
Mr. Ostroff commended the inclusion of a cancellation policy.
If a task force had no space in Town Hall, Ms. Van Amsterdam questioned who would pay the $10.00 per hour. Ms. Munns wasn’t sure who paid those fees in other circumstances, but Mr. Ciccariello felt it should be free of charge for the Town of Natick. Ms. White thought it would depend on the group.
Ms. Van Amsterdam questioned if in that circumstance a fee was paid to the library. Ms. White didn’t recall that occurring, but could recall some cost. Ms. Gloff pointed out that the difference with the library was that the library was open.
If the Board of Selectmen appointed a task force and the task force wanted to spend money, they would have to come before the Board and he didn’t think that would work successfully.
Mr. Ciccariello suggested taking the use of the gymnasium off the schedule since there wasn’t one.
Under the food & beverage section, Mr. Ciccariello suggested there be a #3 that if someone was seeking a liquor license, they would have to apply to the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Van Amsterdam pointed out that Item #14 under the Permit Process said no liquor. Mr. Ciccariello noted that was up to the Board and proposed a #3 under food & beverage rather than #14 that said no alcoholic beverages. Otherwise that meant Ms. Munns had made the decision and no one could come before the Board. Ms. Van Amsterdam voiced her support for moving #14 to under food & beverage.
Ms. Munns noted that in the building as it was now she didn’t see alcohol consumption being a workable consideration.
Under building capacity Mr. Munns had four rooms listed and Mr. Ciccariello asked if she had confirmed with the Building Inspector what the code allowed. Ms. Munns said she knew the Fire code allowed for 120 people in the large room, but she would check with the Building Inspector.
The proposed rental fees were:
Town of Natick Non-Natick Business/
Natick Groups Groups Private
_________________________________________________________________________Weekday
8:00 a.m.-
4:00p.m. No Charge No Charge $10/hour $25/hour
Week Night No charge No charge $25/hour $50/hour
4:00-10:00 p.m. if another if another
2 Hour Minimum group/other- activity/
Wise $10/hr $15/hr
Weekend & $15/hour or $20.00/hr $35/hour $75/hour
Holidays no charge if or no charge
Another if another
Activity activity
Scheduled scheduled
Kitchen (in $25/hour $25/hour $35/hour $75/hour
Addition to
Room rental fee)
Mr. Ciccariello inquired the rents were sufficient to cover the cost of the building being open at night. Who had to be there and the cost of utilities?
Ms. Munns advised there was a building monitor position that had been reviewed by the Personnel Board. The position pay was around the minimum wage or this leads into property tax work off. The answer to whether the rents were sufficient to cover the cost was yes.
Audience member Michael Linehan thought the classification of exactly what a Natick group was should be clarified. Mr. Ostroff pointed out that it was clarified on the application form.
A motion was made by Mr. Connolly, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam to approve the room rental policies/fees for the Human Services and Council on Aging facilities. Unanimously voted.
Mr. Ostroff applauded Ms. Munns for bringing this forward, noting this would primarily benefit organizations in Natick that need meeting space.
b. Amend Property Tax Program
In a memo to the Board, Ms. Munns explained the Property Tax Work Program under which senior citizens provide volunteer services to municipalities in exchange for a reduction in their tax bills. The program in Natick was administered by Council on Aging staff under the direction of the Director of Human Services and Council on Aging.
She noted the law allowed great flexibility for local officials in determining the program guidelines for their individual cities and towns. Having observed the program more closely for the past years, Ms. Munns said she had identified a few points on which the guidelines might be clearer or more equitable or more beneficial to the participants and/or to the Town departments. She suggested three changes:
1) Eligibility Requirements
Add language to allow for the volunteer tasks to be completed by a surrogate worker if the property owner meets all other eligibility requirements, but for physical reasons was not able to participate. Surrogates might include but not be limited to another family member, a friend or neighbor, or a student completing required community service hours. Up to 3 of the 50 positions could be filled by a surrogate.
2) Selection Process
Add language specifying that the applicant or surrogate must have appropriate skills for the position and agree with the Department Head that work assignment was an appropriate match.
3) Benefit Limits
Increase the number of Property Tax Work position from 35 to 50.
Ms. Munns advised the funds used for the tax credits earned in this program came from the overlay account. The Treasurer has assured her there would be sufficient funds available in this account to accommodate the proposed increase of 15 participants. If the program were full enrolled with the 50 participants allowed, the increased expense would be $11,250.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to who set the participant assignments. Ms. Munns responded that it was administered through the Council on Aging. The jobs themselves were through other departments and the schools. If the number of positions was increased, she would request the Board to encourage departments to look for opportunities. At this point everyone was just about matched now. In the spring the Town made a big effort to inform people of benefits available. She believed the Town had an obligation to make sure these programs worked and part of that was encouraging other departments to find opportunities.
Asked if 50 were enough, Ms. Munns thought it would be a good change at this time that might be looked at later. She would have to make sure there were opportunities and the Overlay account had to be watched.
Each participant was eligible to receive $750 and Mr. Connolly questioned if that was the maximum allowed. Ms. Munns advised that it was the maximum allowed by law. Mr. Connolly countered that Concord and Sherborn did more, but Ms. Munns didn’t know how that was done.
Mr. Connolly favored increasing the amount to $1,000 and increasing the number of surrogates to 10. Mr. Ostroff applauded that suggestion but wanted to find out if Sherborn went with a home rule petition. Ms. White agreed that before increasing the number the Board needed to find out the mechanism.
Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that Town Counsel was silent on any liability that may occur as the result of the surrogate and requested something be put in there should the surrogate not finish. It was Ms. Munns’ understanding the volunteers were considered Town employees for purpose of insurance.
Mr. Ostroff was concerned with the last stipulation as he could envision a situation where someone could work 30 hours and then couldn’t finish it. He suggested letting Ms. Munns handle this as best she could and if changes were needed she could come back.
A motion was made by Mr. Connolly to increase the surrogates from 3 to 5 and to increase the number of participates from 35 to 50. Ms. Gloff proposed that it be up to five. The amendment was accepted by the maker of the motion. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
c. Acceptance of Donation
Mr. Ostroff moved to accept a $250 donation from the Massachusetts Chess Association, a $250 donation from the Natick Junior Redmen Youth Football and a $1,400 gift certificate for a one week stay at Whitney Place Assisted Living Residences for respite care of a family member or a family caregiver and authorized the Town Administrator to send a letter of thanks to these organizations. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
TCAN: REPORT OF INKIND SERVICES
David Lavalley, Executive Director of The Center for Arts in Natick provided the Board with a partial list of services to the Natick community in 2008 as a demonstration of TCAN’s ongoing commitment to the community. Those services included:
· Donation of their facility for 7 concerts as the backup location for Natick Recreation Department summer series for children
· Donation of their space to Morse Institute Library for a community reading program
· Donation of their space to Natick Education Foundation for their Shining Light awards
· Donation of space to Kids Connect for their annual fundraiser
· Donation of space to Woodtrail Camp for their Camp Counselor Talent Show
· Donation of space to Allegro Music School for recitals and their annual fundraiser
· Worked with Natick Service Council to host canned food drives at their concert events
· Donated over $5,000 in tickets to PTO groups and booster clubs as fundraising items
· Hosted free outdoor community concert on August 1
By way of background, Mr. Lavalley noted that TCAN’s petition to amend the P&S agreement was passed by Town Meeting in 2005. Prior to that the Board requested inkind services in exchange for the reduction of PILOT payments, but the article failed to pass. There are no inkind services. TCAN agreed to appear annually before the Board, not as a contractual condition but as a fulfillment of their goal to serve the community.
NATICK CAB – LICENSE RENEWAL
Ms. Challis reminded the Board that the Board had voted to renew Natick Cab’s taxi licenses conditioned upon the license fee being paid, all paperwork for the renewal being submitted, and the cabs passing inspection by the Natick Police Department. The licenses expired as of May 1, 2008. At that time the licenses were not issued because the cabs had not been inspected. The cabs have now been inspected and in the interim an application for the transfer of the licenses had been filed.
Allison McFarland of Natick Cab reported that everything was all set. There had been a couple of postponements on Lieutenant Lauzon’s part due to sickness but everything was now all set.
Mr. Connolly was of the understanding that the Sealer of Weights & Measures had also given them a clean bill of health. Ms. McFarland advised that was correct. Based on the fact there was a good go through with the Sealer of Weights & Measures and Lieutenant Lauzon, Mr. Connolly noted that Natick Cab was hoping to see the transfer of the license dealt with tonight.
Mr. Ciccariello responded that the Board had to hold a public hearing for the transfer. There had been some confusion with the motion made. He (Mr. Ciccariello) was under the assumption the Board was going to try to deal with both, but there had been a mix up and there was nothing the Board could do about it now. The only action that could be taken tonight was on the present licenses.
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff to approve the renewal of Natick Cab taxi licenses. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
Mr. Ostroff then moved to schedule a public hearing on the transfer of license for July 14. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
CITIZENS CONCERNS
a. Talent Show
Nancy Kelley spoke of the horrific fire on Pond Street and the loss of the small mom & pop businesses and wondered what she could do to help. All her life she taught dancing and she thought of a show. She thought of celebrities of Natick and she was thinking the Board of Selectmen, School Committee, Fire Department had some kind of talent and that was the way to get the people of Natick to pay for a ticket to benefit the businesses of Pond Street. She asked the Board members to consider participating.
Mr. Connolly thought it was a wonderful idea.
LEGISLATION – LEASE NATIONAL GUARD SITE
Ms. White noted that the Deputy Town Administrator had reviewed the status of legislation authorizing the Town of Natick to lease a portion of the National Guard site on Speen Street at the last meeting. The form of the legislation has been varied considerably from that which the Town submitted and the Board asked Town Counsel to summarize the key differences. The Board received a copy of Town Counsel’s analysis in the briefing book.
Ms. White pointed out that the current version of the legislation assigned all costs both before and after execution of a lease to the Town. While the administration had not as yet had the opportunity to assess the nature and magnitude of unanticipated potential costs, they would include at a minimum environmental assessment as well as remediation if warranted. In addition the current legislation required an appraisal to determine the full and fair market value of the lease and stipulated that the lease payments be based on this value.
Ms. White suggested that were the Board to weigh in to Representative Linsky, the comments would be that it was not envisioned that any environmental costs would be with the Town and that they should stay with the State. As revised the lease payments were assessed at full and fair market value, but the Town never envisioned there would be lease payments in any substantial amount. That was a shift in policy and she would suggest the State should partner with the Town in providing recreational opportunities.
Ms. White continued that Town Counsel and she shared a concern that in these two substantive ways the legislation had changed so dramatically it was no longer consistent with Town Meeting’s vote. She suggested the Town try to get those revised and if not and the legislation was passed, it would have to go back to Town Meeting
Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that the home rule petition had been very specific as to the parcel and it sounded like the legislature increased the size. What size parcel would the Town potentially be leasing.
Ms. White didn’t think the size had changed at all. She believed it was about 3.3 acres. Counsel didn’t think that was fatal and that part of it could be negotiated.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if the legislation had been reported out of committee in this form and was told by Recreation & Parks Superintendent Richard Cugini that it was out of committee and at the third reading stage at the House. This was the key point in time where Representative Linsky needs to know how the Board felt. He (Representative Linsky) would support efforts to have the legislative delegation consider changes in the costs associated with assessing and remediating environmental contamination and that the Town should not have to pay full and fair market value.
In response to an inquiry from Mr. Ciccariello, Mr. Cugini responded that under MGL if contamination was found on the property it was with the owner of the property. He (Mr. Cugini) thought it made sense for that point to be emphasized. On the lease payment not only should it not be based on full market value, but if this were approved the Town was talking about improving the property up to $500,000. There was a 30 day emergency clause. To try to get full market value when the Town was putting that money into it and the National Guard could take it back in 30 days, wasn’t right. It was important to get the points across but Mr. Cugini thought the Town wanted Representative Linsky to push it forward but wanted it clarified.
Ridge Avenue resident John Wadsworth noted that everyone had been working on this for over two years and he urged the Board to let the legislative process take its course rather than ending up not having it get passed this year. This was a park in West Natick that the residents were very excited about. The Mall has given plenty of money for open space and there was not a lot of open space in West Natick. The bill was modified quite a while ago and an appraisal had to be done to lease for the full and fair value, but based on the fact this was a lease of land that could only be used for Town purposes and essentially dismantled in 30 days, he suspected it wouldn’t be that great. If it came back and it was outrageous, then the determination could be made if it had to go back to Town Meeting.
Mr. Wadsworth continued that if anything was going to be done this year, it would have to be in the next couple of weeks. The legislative session ends July and if the Town tried to make wholesale changes it wouldn’t happen. As to the remediation issue, Mr. Wadsworth noted that the Town didn’t own the property even after the lease. The Town could do some Phase I and if there was contamination and there needs to be remediation, the Town goes back to the National Guard. They were the owners and this bill would not obligate the Town to remediate. He recommended that the Town suggest changes without wholesale changes to the bill, allow it to pass, and then go forward and if it works, then it works and if not, start over again.
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Mr. Connolly, to convey to the Town’s delegation the concerns stated. Unanimously voted.
RATIFICATION AGREEMENT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT – POLICE SUPERIOR OFFICERS
Ms. White advised that the terms of the contract with the Police Superior Officers for the period 7/1/07-6/30/10 were very similar to the settlements of all other Town side unions - most notably the 3% COLA each year. There was an increase in detail work consistent with increases in the Patrolmen’s union.
Mr. Ostroff moved to ratify the collective bargaining agreement between the Town and the Police Superior Officers with the correction of a type on page 12. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam. The motion passed on a 4-1-0 vote. Mr. Ciccariello, Mr. Ostroff, Ms. Van Amsterdam, Ms. Gloff voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Connolly was opposed.
A recess was called at 11:45 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 11:50 p.m.
APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS: SPECIAL MUNICPAL EMPLOYEES
a. Town Moderator
Town Moderator PersonNameFrank Foss advised that he was employed by Comcast that had a license with the Town and in his position he needed to interact with other Town officials.
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, to appoint the Moderator as a Special Municipal Employee. Unanimously voted. Ms. Gloff proposed a reconsideration of the vote to include the term to expire June 30, 2009. Mr. Ostroff so moved, seconded by Ms. Gloff, and unanimously voted.
b. Cable Advisory Board
Ms. Gloff moved to designate the Cable Advisory Board as Special Municipal Employees to expire June 30, 2009. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
c. Constable
A question arose as to the necessity of granting the Constables Special Municipal Employee status and the Board decided to table discussion to the next meeting.
ELIOT SCHOOL: SHORT-TERM LEASE
Ms. White noted the current lease for the Eliot School was scheduled to expire June 30, 2010. The current tenants would like to be a bidder for a long-term lease but an RFP couldn’t be issued because the Town didn’t have legislative authority to do so. The current tenants need a two year lead time and would have to be looking at an alternative. There had been talk about doing a short-term lease for the interim. The Board would have to issue an RFP even though there may not be other bidders given the short-term but you had to encourage bidders.
Ms. White suggested a lease term of one year with two one year options. That would carry it through getting the legislation approved, putting out an RFP, and selecting a bidder. It was difficult to have a process that was competitive and treated the Eliot Montessori School fairly. She proposed bringing back a draft RFP and lease for the Board’s approval that at a minimum would shift the utility costs to the tenant.
Asked if she contemplated the renewals being by mutual agreement, Ms. White said she did.
Ms. Van Amsterdam recalled that when the issue came up before it was two one year terms and now the Town Administrator was looking for a potential of three years. Ms. White explained that it was her understanding the home rule petition probably wouldn’t be filed right away. If it were filed now, the legislature would recess, and Town Meeting would have to vote again to re-file in the fall. It may be better just to wait to file it.
Ms. Van Amsterdam inquired if there were other components than the cost of the utilities, and Ms. White responded that she would want to look if there were any capital needs and who was responsible.
Mr. Ciccariello requested the Town Administrator to draft an RFP for the Board to review.
VOTE ACCEPTANCE OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT – 88 ROCKLAND STREET
Before the Board was a request for the acceptance of a drainage easement at 88 Rockland Street. Ms. White explained this was per the approval of Town Meeting and would relocate a municipal drainage easement to facilitate the owner who wished to build an addition to his home. The property owner was paying for all the costs associated with moving the easement.
On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to accept the new drainage easement at 88 Rockland Street.
APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS
a. Lock-up Keeper
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to reappoint Police Chief Dennis Mannix as Lock-up Keeper.
b. Director of Veterans’ Services/Burial Officer
A motion was made by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Ms. Gloff, to reappoint PersonNameJohn MacGillivray as the Director of Veterans’ Services/Burial Officer. Unanimously voted.
c. Bacon Free Library Maintenance Committee
Mr. Ostroff moved the reappointment of Timothy Donahue and Ruth E. Fox to the Bacon Free Library Maintenance Committee. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
d. Cable Advisory Board
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Rod Feak and Ron Ordway to the Cable Advisory Board.
d. Cochituate Rail Trail
Mr. Ciccariello advised that the Chair of the Finance Committee would like to speak with the rest of the FinCom members and if none of the members would like to be the FinCom’s representative, then he would like to do an appointment at large.
Mr. Ostroff noted this was a situation with four boards that appoint members. All have difficulty finding members to make the additional time commitment and he (Mr. Ostroff) would like the Board to amend the composition such that it may be a member or designee by the appointing Board. Mr. Ostroff so moved. Seconded by Mr. Connolly and unanimously voted.
Ms. Gloff requested the matter be tabled and Mr. Ostroff agreed if the Board would continue the terms until the members were replaced. There was no objection.
e. Conservation Commission
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Kathy Rehl and Jason Makofsky to the Conservation Commission.
f. placeCityNatick Cultural Council
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, to reappoint Teresa Pagliuca to the placeCityNatick Cultural Council. Unanimously voted.
g. Open Space Advisory Committee
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Georgia Gojmerac-Leiner to the Open Space Advisory Committee.
h. Recreation & Parks Commission
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to reappoint Stephen Carty to the Recreation & Parks Commission. Unanimously voted.
i. Recycling Advisory Committee
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint John Gaziano to the Recycling Advisory Committee.
j. placePlaceTypeTown PlaceTypeForest Committee
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Michael Linehan and Ann Marie Regan to the placePlaceTypeTown PlaceTypeForest Committee.
It was noted by Mr. Ostroff that the Town Forest Committee had not filed a report for the Annual Town Report and to him that raised a concern on the lack of transparency.
Mr. Linehan, a member of the Town Forest Committee, noted it was not the most active committee and thought it would be useful to send a note to the Chair.
k. Walcott Fund
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Reverend Seth Asare to the Walcott Fund.
l. Representative to placeSouth Middlesex placeOpportunity Council
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff to reappoint Dorothy Kennedy to the Elderly & Disabled Taxation Fund Committee. Unanimously voted.
m. Community Development Advisory Committee
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Paul Mulkerron as the real estate representative on the Community Development Advisory Committee.
n. Council on Aging
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Charlene Foss and Matthew Siegel to the Council on Aging.
o. Elderly & Disabled Taxation Fund Committee
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Stephen Roche to the Elderly & Disabled Taxation Fund Committee.
p. Historical Commission
Mr. Ostroff moved to reappoint Elliot Goodman and PersonNameMaureen Sullivan as regular members of the Historical Commission and Nancy Lavash as an alternate member. Seconded by Mr. Connolly and unanimously voted.
q. Historic District Commission
On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Michael Collins and Matthew McCue to the Historic District Commission.
r. Information Systems Advisory Board
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, to reappoint PersonNameJohn Bradford to the Information Systems Advisory Board. Unanimously voted.
s. Katherine L. & Waldo Kennedy Trust Fund
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Reverend Seth Asare to the Katherine L. & Waldo Kennedy Trust Fund.
t. MathWorks Scholarship Committee
A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to reappoint Lenore Freitas and Howard Wilcox to the MathWorks Scholarship Committee. Unanimously voted.
u. South Middlesex Opportunity Council
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to reappoint Dorothy Kennedy as the Town’s representative to the South Middlesex Opportunity Council.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR DEPARTMENTAL GOALS & OBJECTIVES
Mr. Ostroff noted that the Board of Selectmen did not do a review of the Town Administrator in 2007 because of the transition period. The question now was whether to do a formal review or an interim review and his recommendation was for each member to meet with the Town Administrator and do a public review process in November and December.
Ms. White had provided the Board with a copy of the Town of Natick performance evaluation policy and explained that it was developed by herself, Personnel Director Elizabeth Dennis, and the Personnel Board and would apply to department managers.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired if Mr. Ostroff was proposing using the same forms for the Town Administrator. Mr. Ostroff responded that he would make up a form based on the existing goals and objectives for member’s individual use.
Ms. Van Amsterdam asked if the department performance evaluation applied to the Police Chief and Fire Chief. Ms. White advised there would be some funny quirks. For example she met with the Comptroller and that was a Board of Selectmen appointment and she thought the Board should weigh in on those goals. There were some that the relationship was such that committees should weigh in, i.e. Board of Health.
WEST NATICK COMMUTER PARKING GARAGE
In a memo to the Board, Community Development Director Patrick Reffett updated the Board on a meeting with representatives from the Executive Office of Transportation and the MBTA to discuss the possibility of the state constructing a commuter parking garage in Natick. The Town’s interest in having a garage developed at the West Natick commuter rail station was expressed and Natick appears to be on a short list of communities in the running for such a project, which would be fully funded by the state. It was advised that a letter indicating support for the project would help the chances of being selected. Accordingly, the attached letter was drafted for the Board’s review and consideration.
Mr. Ciccariello noted that none of the Board members were notified of this meeting that was supposed to have taken place.
Ms. White explained that Mr. Ostroff put together a list of parking related issues and there was a meeting with MBTA officials and EOTC and the West Natick site was the one emerging to be feasible. The State has mandated the MBTA to build 1,000 spaces within a tight timeframe and Natick was on a short list for a commuter garage. West Natick was emerging because the “T” owned the property. By expressing a commitment to the project, Natick could stay on the short list and she would ask the Board to support the draft letter and authorize the Chair to sign.
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to authorize the chair to sign the letter addressed to secretary Bernard Cohen as drafted.
MINUTES
Ms. Gloff moved to approve the minutes of the January 14, 2008 meeting. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam. The motion passed on a 4-0-1 vote. Mr. Ciccariello, Mr. Ostroff, Ms. Van Amsterdam, Ms. Gloff voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Connolly abstained.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR NOTES
A. Lease of Monopoles
Ms. White noted receipt of a letter from Metro PCS who were before the Planning Board regarding the installation of wireless communication facilities for an application at 11 South Main Street. They were interested in determining if Natick had any monopoles for lease particularly across the street (at Police & Fire) and were looking for an answer in two weeks. They (Metro PCS) were even interested in constructing a higher tower for the Town. There was a procurement issue and there was no way to provide an answer by July 9, but something like this was worth looking into.
Mr. Ciccariello suggested Ms. White send a letter saying the Town may have an interest but due to the statutes, an RFP would have to be developed.
Mr. Ostroff commented that this was one of the things the Revenue Enhancement Task Force had identified as a potential.
SELECTMEN’S CONCERNS
a. RFP for Middlesex Garage Design
Mr. Ostroff inquired as to the status of the RFP for design services for the Middlesex garage. Ms. White advised it was being worked on.
b. Article 40 – Increased Liquor Licenses
Mr. Ostroff reported that Article 40, which would increase the number of liquor licenses for the downtown, had been reported out favorably and should pass this month.
c. Conflict of Interest Seminar
Mr. Ostroff reminded the Board about having a seminar on the conflict of interest. He thought Town Counsel would do that and it would probably happen in the fall.
d. Speen Street Gas Leak
Ms. Van Amsterdam requested a follow-up on the potential gas leak on Speen Street. Residents have called Mr. Coviello and Lieutenant Lauzon. Neighbors were also trying to find out at what point bids would go out for road work on that section of Speen Street.
e. Verizon – Town Drops
Ms. Gloff noted an e-mail from Verizon wanting to begin installing their free drops and looking for the Town to provide the list of locations. Ms. White advised there was an internal meeting Tuesday.
f. Sunshine Avenue
Ms. Gloff referenced a letter from the Planning Board about possible intrusion of the right-a-way at Sunshine Avenue and thought it was something to look into.
g. Natick Housing Authority
Mr. Connolly noted that on Friday he called the Deputy Town Administrator regarding an issue with the Natick Housing Authority. Mr. Young was very quick and thorough and did a nice job.
Ms. White asked to speak to the Chair and Mr. Connolly about Friday’s incident with the Natick Housing Authority. There seemed to be multiple versions of how it occurred and she had some concerns.
h. Pond Street Fire
Mr. Connolly thanked the Fire Department for their quick response to the Pond Street fire and the home fire.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12:55 a.m.
_________________________________________
Kristine Van Amsterdam, Clerk
| 
