Town of Natick - Board of Selectmen Minutes

Employment Opportunities

Information for Employees

Board of Selectmen Minutes - 1/26/09

Printer-Friendly Version

BOARD OF SELECTMEN

Natick Town Hall

January 26, 2009

7:00 p.m.

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman John Ciccariello at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: John Ciccariello, Joshua Ostroff, Kristine Van Amsterdam, Carol A. Gloff, John Connolly.

ALSO PRESENT: Michael Walters Young, Deputy Town Administrator; Donna Challis, Secretary

WARRANTS: Payroll warrants were signed by the Board of Selectmen on January 26, 2009 in the amount of $740,149.72. This figure was included in total warrants signed by the Board of Selectmen of $3,262.631.65.

INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF REGISTRAR

Blanche Eaton was not present
Kelly McPherson

Kelly McPherson stated that she had been a resident for 15 years and spent a lot of time working and teaching young people about the freedom we had in voting.

Ms. Gloff inquired as to Ms. McPherson’s understanding of what a Registrar did and Ms. McPherson responded that a Registrar oversaw the process to ensure it was done in fairness of the voting procedures put forward by the state.

Mr. Ostroff inquired if Ms. McPherson had any scheduling conflict to serve as a Registrar on election day. To her knowledge Ms. McPherson said she did not. She had spent time on election day taking people to the polls.

Nancy Northgraves

Nancy Northgraves told the Board that she had been a Natick resident for almost 20 years. In terms of the Board of Registrars the way it had been described to her was being available on election day and bringing the final tally results to the State House. It was her understanding there were an equal number of Republicans and Democrats to make sure the election results were fair and honest.

Ms. Northgraves added that Ms. McPherson and she have worked together on a number of campaigns and found it important to know the candidates running for office and to help support those whom they liked.

Mr. Ostroff asked the same question about scheduling conflict as he had asked Ms. McPherson and Ms. Northgraves responded that election days were known well in advance and she could make sure she was available for those times. Serving as a Board of Deacons for the Westgate Church and being responsible for counting the collection, she understood there was a responsibility to be present.

Pending Ms. Eaton’s arrival the Board moved to the next item on the agenda.

COMMISSION DISABILITY: ACTIVITY REPORT

John MacGilivray, liaison for the Commission on Disability updated the Board on the Commission’s activities.

He advised that in September 2008 the Commissioners embarked on a new and enthusiastic approach to dealing with the issues. Part of that was the number of new appointments so there was new blood on the Commission and they were enthusiastic. In the past the focus had been on curb cuts and audio tactile signals, but they looked at the State law governing the Commission and it says the Commission shall research local problems, advise and assist municipal officials on the regulations and carry out programs to meet the problems of people with disabilities. In addition to review and make recommendations, provide information and guidance and coordinate activities of other local commissions. It was rather broad.

The Commission was trying to prioritize and focus on various aspects. They got involved with the Recreation Commission to make sure the door of the skating rink were accessible. Town Meeting changed it so all handicapped parking fines go into an account set up for the Commission.

Right now the Commission was broken down into a few subcommittees. A program was being put together for April to help people learn what to do to help people with disabilities.

Commission member Kenneth Chernak told the Board that both he and another member had restricted sight with a narrow field of vision. Currently the Fire Department of Natick and contiguous towns were looking at a program of the Office of Disability to host a meeting to bring together people with disabilities in local emergency preparedness to explore how to ensure people with disabilities have the assistance they need in times of emergencies. This will be held April 16. It was a program given in other towns and has gotten a good response.

Given his (Mr. Chernak’s) technical background, knowing the web and seeing the Commission’s web page, Mr. Chernak said he felt an enhancement was needed and everybody agreed. That was what they will be doing for the next six months. People will see the Commission’s meeting announcements, minutes, special events and important links to other sites in the Commonwealth and nationally.

Mr. Connolly, also a member of the Commission on Disability, thanked the Board for allowing the Commission to be heard. It was a small group and he was proud of them. Over the past two months they had the Community Development Director, Building Inspector and Fire Chief come and give them some good information.

Mr. Ostroff asked if the Commission would consider asking the DPW to identify priority areas in the downtown for snow removal. Because of budget concerns the DPW was only doing it during regular working hours. Another area was to promote design of homes so someone with a disability can get access to the first floor. It was an awareness issue.

Mr. Chernak questioned if Mr. Ostroff was talking about bringing the ADA requirements into a private home, but Mr. Ostroff thought that was an overstatement. He (Mr. Ostroff) also offered to work with the Commission to advocate for improvements to the Natick Center station to make it accessible.

Mr. Chernak advised that as part of the emergency preparedness they will be looking at reverse 911 to pinpoint people with disabilities so they would be notified at the top of the list.

INTERVIEW FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF REGISTRARS

Blanche Eaton

Blanche Eaton arrived and was interviewed by the Board. She stated that she was a Registrar of voters and was seeking reappointment. She had been a Registrar for five years.

When asked why she would like to be reappointed, Ms. Eaton said it had been a pleasure working with the women and the officers in charge. She enjoyed it and met a lot of people.

Ms. Gloff inquired as to what Ms. Eaton saw as the responsibility of being on the Board of Registrars and she responded that it was to make sure the name was right and the person was registered on the books. In follow-up Ms. Gloff inquired as to the Registrar’s responsibilities on election day and Ms. Eaton replied that it was to make sure the pickup person was signed in and they were registered.

Mr. Ostroff inquired if there was anything to prevent Ms. Eaton from serving fully in this capacity on election day as long hours were required. Ms. Eaton’s response was, “no”.

By paper ballot the Board voted to appoint Nancy Northgraves as a Republican representative on the Board of Registrars for a term to expire March 31, 2011. Ms. Northgraves received four votes; Kelley McPherson received one vote.

Mr. Ciccariello voted for Ms. Northgraves

Mr. Ostroff voted for Ms. Northgraves

Ms. Van Amsterdam voted for Ms. Northgraves

Ms. Gloff voted for Ms. Northgraves

Mr. Connolly voted for Ms. McPherson

APPLICATION FOR COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE: CORPORATE CHEF (BJ’S)

Representing Corporate Chef was Steve Buxton.

Mr. Buxton explained that Corporate Chef provided the food services for BJ’s corporate office at 1 Mercer Road.

It was noted that Corporate Chef had been providing food services at the BJ’s location for the last 2-3 years, but were just applying for a license. Mr. Buxton noted that as soon as he was notified that they did not have a license, an application was promptly filed. It was a mistake and he apologized.

A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to grant Corporate Chef a common victualer’s license for premises at 1 Mercer Road to provide food service at BJ’s Corporate Office. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.

PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND TAXI CAB FARE – FUEL SURCHAGE

On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to open the public hearing.

Safety Officer Lieutenant Brian Lauzon noted that he had been asked by the

Town Administrator to look at what was going on regionally regarding taxi fuel surcharges and senior discounts. He didn’t find a whole lot in this area especially with communities Natick’s size. He looked at Boston, Cambridge and looked at some of the bigger cities and felt they were relative to what Natick was trying to do. With respect to the fuel surcharge he proposed two options:

Discontinue the current surcharge with the option of imposing a 90 day surcharge when gasoline prices rise above a certain price, possibly $2.90, over a fixed period of time. This could also be evaluated twice a year as is done in Baltimore, monthly, or upon petition by the local taxi cab companies. He (Lt. Lauzon) suggested the price of gasoline be based on the average for the month vs daily or weekly. AAA’s www.fuelgaugereport.com seems to be a fair barometer.
To set the surcharge in advance of the anticipated average fuel price similar to what Chicago and Atlanta does. He (Lt. Lauzon) would suggest that any surcharge decision be made considering the previous months average price per gallon. He further suggested that this decision should be made monthly similar to what Pennsylvania did.

Regarding the senior discount, Lieutenant Lauzon stated that he was convinced it would be a perfect idea given the economy. The struggle was how to pay for a senior discount plan up front. Boston adds an additional $150 fee up front to pay for coupon books and administration. He would like to see the taxi companies foot the bill by producing $10 books of coupons that could be sold at the Senior Center for $8. That would still give seniors a discount. He would propose that individuals could only buy 5 books at a time and there be a waiver that said these are for your own purposes and not to be shared and if found to be wrongfully used, the individual would be barred from further discounts. The taxi companies wouldn’t have a say whether to accept or not. It would be mandatory.

Mr. Ostroff noted that he was interested in hearing from the taxi cabs on the workability of the proposals.

David Stone of Natick Cab thought this may be a workable beginning and everyone could work together to come up with something that will work for the companies and the seniors. He had no problem working with the number for the fuel surcharge.

Mr. Ciccariello inquired if a fuel surcharge had to be charged and Mr. Stone responded that he had called the Town and was told it was mandatory and something he had to do.

Timothy Kelly, owner and president of JFK Transportation, stated that he was for the kick in of the fuel surcharge and would be happy with whatever the price. He had suggested $2.70 but would have no problem with $2.90 once it stayed at that price for seven consecutive days.

On the senior discount, he didn’t understand the coupon language. There was already something similar at the Senior Center and he thought everyone needed to sit down with the Senior Center and figure out the voucher program.

Former Council on Aging member Jerry Pierce noted he was advocating for the seniors and encouraged the Board to be as liberal as it could for the seniors. The cab companies have always been senior friendly. Usually the vouchers at the Senior Center run out half way through the year. He appreciated what had already been done and encouraged the Board to continue to be senior friendly in Natick.

In considering the different alternatives, Mr. Ostroff inquired if Lt. Lauzon had a sense for how much work it would be to monitor and if it was appropriate to be using someone in the Police Department to keep checking the gas prices and notify the cab companies.

Lt. Lauzon noted that the Police Department was already responsible for taxi enforcement and adding this piece wouldn’t be a big burden to the workload and it gave the Department more contact with the cab companies. He thought it was a good thing for the Police Department to take on the job of monitoring and notifying the cab companies.

In follow-up Mr. Ostroff asked if it would be part of someone’s normal responsibilities, and Lt. Lauzon responded that right now it would be his responsibility.

Mr. Ostroff stated that he was confused as to why the Board was talking about a senior discount with the fuel surcharge. Lt. Lauzon responded that if there was a fuel surcharge the idea was to encourage the seniors and disabled to use the cabs and the thought was the coupons were more user friendly. If the fuel surcharge went away a service could still be provided to the seniors and disabled.

A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to close the public hearing. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.

A motion was then made by Mr. Connolly to remove the mandated fuel surcharge. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.

Mr. Connolly suggested that a meeting be scheduled with the cab companies, Lieutenant Lauzon, Council on Aging and Human Services Director Moira Munns, and the Town Administrator to tweak the fuel surcharge and senior discounts. Everybody seemed to be on the same page and maybe just a little tightening up was needed.

Ms. Gloff agreed with Mr. Connolly, noting that she thought this was the right group to work out the logistics.

Deputy Town Administrator Michael Walters Young reminded the Board that when the fuel surcharge was developed there was a basic working group of Lt. Lauzon, Ms. Munns, the taxi operators and himself and that group could be pulled back together.

An update was requested for February 9.

NATICK CAB: APPLICATION TO ADD ADDITIONAL CABS (2)

David Stone, the owner of Natick Cab, appeared before the Board to request two additional cab licenses. He noted the two additional cabs will help him maintain the vehicles and better serve the public. He presently had six licenses, but it didn’t mean there were always six on the road.

Mr. Connolly referred to a memo from Lt. Lauzon advising that one of the vehicles did not have the meter sealed and the other had a cracked window. Mr. Stern advised that both were now done. The meter was sealed at 4:00 p.m. this afternoon.

A motion was made by Mr. Connolly to grant Natick Cab two additional licenses for a 1997 Ford Taurus Station Wagon MA Registration TA6855 and a 1997 Ford Taurus Station Wagon MA Registration TA21680. Seconded by Ms. Gloff with an amendment that issuance of the license be conditioned upon the two vehicles passing inspection by Lt. Lauzon. Mr. Connolly accepted the amendment. Unanimously voted.

Lt. Lauzon noted that he met with Mr. Stone earlier and both vehicles would be re-inspected tomorrow.

APPLICATION FOR COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE: MASTER WOK

Before the Board was an application from Natick MW, Inc. d/b/a Master Wok for a common victualer’s for premises at the Natick Collection, 1245 Worcester Street in the food court. Representing Master Wok was the manager.

The manager was asked if Master Wok presently had a license and his response was, “no”. As to when he planned to open, the manager responded that they opened last Wednesday. The Board of Health had inspected the premises.

Ms. Gloff moved to grant Natick MW, Inc. d/b/a Master Wok a common victualer’s license for premises at 1245 Worcester Street. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.

Following the vote Ms. Gloff expressed her frustration with places at the Mall opening without a license and suggested the Board should go back to General Growth and explain yet again that they need to be making it very clear to their tenants what they needed to do to open various businesses. Perhaps a letter from the Chair.

Ms. Van Amsterdam agreed.

Mr. Ciccariello thought there was a lot of language in the lease agreement about what a tenant was supposed to do, but he would be glad to sign the letter.

APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE FROM MCDONALD’S OF NATICK TO MD MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC D/B/A MCDONALD’S (WORCESTER ST)

David Yee, the owner of MD Management Company, appeared before the Board to request the transfer of the McDonald’s at 290 Worcester Street from the McDonald’s Corporation to MD Management Company. Mr. Yee noted that he currently operated four stores.

He explained that the business was open and he was scheduled to take over the business on February 6. The business will be operating exactly as it was now. The structure would not change and the management would not change.

Mr. Ostroff distributed an e-mail concerning lighting at the McDonald’s on the Turnpike, noting that he had an issue with both this and the next agenda item for the transfer of the McDonald’s at the Mall. This was a transfer of a common victualer’s license from McDonald’s to a local businessman and his (Mr. Ostroff’s) comments were not to impugn Mr. Lee’s business. McDonald’s Corporation owns a business on the eastbound side of the Turnpike and some years ago installed 70 foot high poles that illuminates people’s homes. Because the Mass Turnpike was almost a sovereign entity, his (Mr. Ostroff’s) hope was to find a way to connect this.

If other Board members were agreeable, Mr. Ostroff said he would like to table this application for one week, not to interfere with the transfer, but to give a McDonald’s representative the opportunity to come and hear from the Board. He hoped to give some feedback for people that have no other recourse.

Mr. Yee was asked if he was leasing the premises, and he responded that he would be operating the franchise, but McDonald’s continues to own the site.

Mr. Connolly inquired if Mr. Yee was aware of the signage on the Mass Pike and Mr. Yee responded that he was made aware of it when he came in tonight. He thought there should be some discussion about the lights with McDonald’s, but as an individual franchisee he had no input. It was a separate business and he hoped it wouldn’t impact him as an independent franchisee.

Mr. Ostroff noted that he mentioned that maybe someone from McDonald’s management might be available. Mr. Yee suggested that the Board request the general manager to either come in or have a representative from the construction company come in.

Mr. Ciccariello didn’t see what would prevent the Board from asking McDonald’s to come in even if these two licenses were granted. Mr. Yee was looking to lease and operate the McDonald’s on Route 9 and in the Mall and he (Mr. Ciccariello) didn’t want the Board put in a position of preventing someone wishing to engage in a business by delaying this.

Mr. Connolly noted this could be an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone, but Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that the issue had been there for a number of years even when it was a Burger King and he (Mr. Ciccariello) wasn’t sure how much control the Board had since it was the Mass Pike. The Town’s representatives have tried to pass some legislation with no success.

Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that according to the documents Mr. Yee will be leasing the premises February 6 with or without a common victualer’s license. She understood what Mr. Ostroff was trying to do, but she would just see if McDonald’s would come before the Board. She didn’t agree with holding this up.

Mr. Ostroff again proposed that the Board delay this for one week and ask McDonald’s to come and listen to the neighbors who have suffered for years. The Board has no leverage and these license transfers may give a tiny leverage. He would like to try and if McDonald’s said no it wouldn’t be the first time.

Mr. Ciccariello responded that the meeting of February 2 was to be a special meeting and not to be big.

Mr. Yee asked that the Board not hold the common victualer’s license just to have McDonald’s come in. There was nothing to prevent the corporation from coming in at a later point.

Mr. Ostroff questioned if one week would make a difference and Mr. Yee responded that he was here before the Board to request a common victualer’s license and where he had nothing to do with the highway and this has nothing to do with the license, it shouldn’t have an impact on his request for this license. He added that he would be more than happy to work with the Board and contact the appropriate persons within McDonald’s.

Mr. Ostroff stated that he preferred to apply leverage and moved to table one week and ask a representative from McDonald’s to be on February 2. Seconded by Mr. Connolly. The motion passed on a 3-2-0 vote. Mr. Ostroff, Ms. Gloff, Mr. Connolly voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Ciccariello and Ms. Van Amsterdam were opposed.

Mr. Ostroff advised that he would work with Mr. Yee to find an appropriate contact person.

APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF COMMON VICTUALER’S LICENSE FROM MCDONALD’S COPRORATION TO MD MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC D/B/A MCDONALD’S (NATICK COLLECTION)

Mr. Yee noted the application for a common victualer’s license was for the McDonald’s at the Natick Mall. It will be a transfer of the business and the operation would remain the same with no change in manager or staff. The hours would remain the same.

A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff to table the application to February 2. Seconded by Ms. Gloff. The motion passed on a 3-2-0 vote. Mr. Ostroff, Ms. Gloff, Mr. Connolly voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Ciccariello and Ms. Van Amsterdam were opposed.

Mr. Yee advised that he would make a request for McDonald’s to come in, but he couldn’t control their schedule and was concerned if McDonald’s was unable to make it next Monday.

Mr. Connolly said he was pretty sure Mr. Yee would get the licenses, but if the Board could help the citizens, the Board would do it.

REQUEST FOR WATER & SEWER BILL ABATEMENT: ALBERTINE LEBLANC

Pearl Street resident Albertine LeBlanc told the Board that she wrote a letter regarding a couple of water bills that were extremely high. A year or so ago a large pine tree fell on the garage and she had to do some construction. As part of the construction a new lawn had to be put in. She did not get an irrigation meter because at the time she had no idea there was such a thing, but then she received these large water bills – one for $400.00 and one for $700.00. Her plumber brought the irrigation meter possibility to her attention and suggested she call the Town. When she called the Town she was told to write a letter.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that the request had been denied by the Finance Director Robert Palmer.

Mr. Connolly stated that Ms. LeBlanc and she were classmates and he spoke with her as he did with the other two requests coming up on the agenda. He had asked Mr. Palmer for the history, but hadn’t received it.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that Ms. LeBlanc had received a $400 bill and didn’t have a problem with it. Ms. LeBlanc explained that she and her mother dealt with it together and it wasn’t until the $700 bill was received that she realized what was going on. She had watered her new lawn and didn’t use the sewer. A portion of the charges were in one quarter and the remainder in the next quarter.

If the history was available, Mr. Connolly thought the Board could see what spikes occurred. Ms. LeBlanc used the water but perhaps there was a possibility it didn’t enter the sewer system.

Ms. Gloff asked about the construction project and Ms. LeBlanc responded that she replaced a garage and redid a porch. The construction was the year before. The law was done a complete year afterward.

Ms. Van Amsterdam inquired if she had since put in an irrigation meter, but Ms. LeBlanc advised that it was no longer needed. They had put sod down and it required a great deal of water for the sod to take.

Mr. Ciccariello inquired as to the Board’s practice and was told by Ms. Challis that typically the Board would abate the sewer portion if it could be demonstrated that the water did not go into the sewer system.

Mr. Ostroff supported following the Board’s part practice, but Ms. Gloff noted that the Finance Director had pointed out that if Ms. LeBlanc had an irrigation meter there would not have been sewer charges but there would have been charges at the irrigation water rates. If the Board was looking to abate the sewer charges, she felt the Board should be looking at the irrigation water rates which were higher. Ms. Gloff stated that she would like to see the history. She would like to see at least two years of history although three would be better.

Mr. Ciccariello tabled further discussion to the meeting of February 9 and requested a copy of the past history.

If the Board was going to go back three years, Ms. LeBlanc noted that this was a two family and there was a problem with a tenant. Since the tenant moved in June 2007 the bills have been pretty consistent.

REQUEST FOR WATER & SEWER BILL ABATEMENT: SYLVIA KANAL

Sylvia Kanal, a resident of Pumpkin Pine Road, requested an abatement of a portion of her October 1, 2008 water & sewer bill. She noted that she never had this problem before but in mid October the DPW left a notice saying the reading was very high. They left packets to test for leaks. That was checked and no leaks could be found. She assumed it must have been a mistake until she got her bill for $770. Rotor Rooter came and checked everything and they couldn’t find a leak.

Ms. Kanal noted that she was baffled. There was only herself living there and one three month bill was in the neighborhood of 3-1/2 years worth of water of her. She spoke with Mr. Palmer’s office and it was suggested that perhaps she left one of the outside taps on but if that had happened she would have had to turn it off and she knew she didn’t do that.

Mr. Connolly noted that Mrs. Kanal’s son and he had been classmates.

Asked if she had done any construction projects, Ms. Kanal’s response was, “no”. She had no swimming pool.

Mr. Connolly thought the bill seemed extreme, but there was no history available. He suggested tabling.

Ms. Gloff wondered what the meter was reading now – if it was back to normal.

Ms. Kanal advised that she called the DPW and they sent someone out and he checked everything and couldn’t find a leak. He said at that time the meter was running normally according to her past history. She didn’t know if it was the meter. She didn’t water her lawn.

Ms. Gloff stated that she would like the DPW to make certain they have read Ms. Kanal’s meter and would like to know what the bill was for the last three months. She had personally experienced a leak in which the dye test did not show there was a leak. The only way she determined there was a leak was to read the meter right before she went to bed and in the morning before she did anything read the meter again and it showed some water usage. She narrowed it down to one toilet and shut the toilet off before she went to bed and again read it in the morning and it showed no water usage. She suggested Ms. Kanal may want to try that.

Mr. Ciccariello tabled further discussion to February 9.

REQUEST FOR WATER & SEWER BILL ABATEMENT: CHRISTINA RIER

Christina Rier told the Board that she was there on behalf of her father who was 92 years old and lived in his Robinhood Road residence with a full time aid. She (Ms. Rier) pays all of his bills and was notified there was going to be a very high water bill. When she received it and it was for $2,200 she was flabbergasted. As soon as she was notified the bill would be exceptionally high, she had a plumber look at the house and toilets were running. She was looking for an abatement.

Ms. Gloff inquired as to the amount of the bill received on approximately January 1 of this year, but Ms. Rier advised that it hadn’t as yet been received.

Mr. Connolly stated that he spoke with Ms. Rier and as difficult as it was to swallow, the water gets billed as it comes into the house and billed if it goes into the sewer system. He thought the bill would be what it was and perhaps spread it over payments.

In his experience observing the Board, it has been common to deny a request for an abatement when there was a leaking fixture, but he was curious to know what provisions the Board might seek to institute to address financial hardship and whether that would be considered part of the appeal process.

Ms. Rier inquired if she should call or contact any particular person with regard to a payment plan.

Ms. Gloff suggested the Deputy Town Administrator speak with the Finance Director about a payment plan. She would want to make certain that Ms. Rier’s next bill was back to normal.

Mr. Ostroff thought the situation the Board was faced with when there was a defect in the plumbing could be a serious hardship but to grant such an appeal would invite more problems and place a greater burden on an enterprise fund that was already stretched and could be damaging to the Town as a whole. The Board’s hands were somewhat tied in their duty to the Town. In the two preceding cases maybe water was discharged outside the house. Unfortunately that wasn’t the case here.

Noting the request was for staff to handle this and discuss a payment plan, Deputy Town Administrator Michael Walters Young inquired if the Board wanted the matter returned to them or just a letter in the packet. Mr. Ostroff thought just a letter would be fine, but reiterated that he would be interested in what the Board may look at to evaluate hardship.

Mr. Connolly left the room.

SPINDLE CITY PAWN BROKERS, INC.: REQUEST PERMIT TO PURCHASE PRECIOUS METALS

Representing Spindle City Pawn Brokers, Inc. was Jeff Dennis.

Mr. Dennis stated that Spindle City was looking to come into the Natick Mall for three days – February 20-22, 2009 to purchase precious metals.

Mr. Ostroff inquired as to how this would be advertised and Mr. Dennis responded that it would be by radio and newspapers. He assured the Board there would be no signs along the road.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that were the permit to be approved Spindle City would be required to keep a log of all purchases and to make that log available to the Natick Police Department. Mr. Dennis advised that they always kept all of that information on record.

Asked if they had ever done this type of event in Natick, Mr. Dennis said they had not but they have done it on Cape Cod and would be doing it at other malls.

A motion was made by Ms. Van Amsterdam to grant Spindle City Precious Metals a permit for the purchase of precious metals at the Natick Mall for the period 2/20-2/22/09. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and voted 4-0-0. Mr. Connolly was out of the room and did not vote.

Mr. Connolly returned.

CITIZENS CONCERNS

Newspaper Story on Fire Department Apparatus

Fire Chief James Sheridan stated that he was there to set the record straight on recent articles in the newspaper concerning Natick Fire Department apparatus. A few weeks ago a lieutenant in the Boston Fire Department lost his life allegedly due to mechanical failure on a piece of Fire apparatus. A few days later he (Chief Sheridan) got a call from a local newspaper wanting to do a story on Natick’s apparatus. He (Chief Sheridan) called the Town Administrator and she said to go ahead and call the reporter back and he figured the reporter would ask her some questions.

Chief Sheridan continued that he started the interview by saying the DPW did a fantastic job maintaining the Fire Department’s vehicles and that the Board of Selectmen and Town Administrator had been very supportive of the department but now the Town was in very difficult financial times and at this point there was some old pieces of apparatus and the Town wasn’t in a position to purchase new. That didn’t get printed.

Chief Sheridan stressed that in no way did he mean to cast dispersion on the DPW, Board of Selectmen, or Town Administrator. He was very appreciative of the support he has gotten. The Town Administrator went to great lengths at the last Town Meeting to get the equipment he felt the department needed.

Chief Sheridan continued that he had asked a member of his department who was an expert on trucks to do the interview. He (Chief Sheridan) briefed him, told him what to do, and went over what he was going to say. Anything that was said, he (Chief Sheridan) was responsible. Later the Town Administrator and he worked on a retraction. Basically he (Chief Sheridan) threw his guy under the bus. Everything the Fire Department employee said was true, but maybe everything he said didn’t get printed.

Chief Sheridan told the Board that he apologized to the employee and thanked the Board for the support given to him. The DPW was fantastic and very important to the Fire Department operation.

Mr. Ciccariello read the letter to the editor prepared by the Town Administrator in response to the article. It was noted that the equipment in the article referenced the reserve equipment with no mention made of the newer equipment.

Mr. Ostroff thanked the Chief for coming in and if there was something the Board could do to develop an apparatus plan, the Board stood ready to help. As the liaison to the Fire Department, Mr. Ostroff said he stood ready to work with the Chief on it.

Shifting gears, Mr. Ostroff inquired as to what advice the Chief would give to people who want to make life easier for the department when it snowed. Chief Sheridan noted that it would be helpful if everyone adopted a fire hydrant. The guys go out when it snowed but it would be one less thing to do. Cleaning a foot or so around the hydrant would be most appreciated.

Natick Forever

Jimmy Brown of Natick Forever invited the Board and the public to attend the debate between the two candidates for Board of Selectmen on February 10, 2009, Morse Institute Library from 7:00-8:30 p.m. and the debate between the four candidates for School Committee on February 24, 2009 from 7:00-8:30 p.m. at the library.

He announced that detailed procedures could be found on the web site Natickforever.org.

Mr. Brown expressed his appreciation to the candidates who have been very cooperative.

Eliot Healthcare Center

Jerry Pierce said he could only echo the highest praise for the Police, Fire, and DPW and his appreciation for what they do.

Mr. Pierce noted that for the past three years he had been working as a home healthcare campaigner for the disabled and had to go to several assisted living residences. Whitney Place and the Mary Ann Morse Nursing Home were wonderful. They were clean and he was proud to go there. However, whenever he came across a situation where that pride was jeopardized, he felt Town officials should be made aware. One facility he could not share that pride with was the Eliot Healthcare Center on West Central Street.

He felt bad that there was such a facility in the Town that would downgrade our reputation. He was distraught at finding an unsanitary facility and with the treatment of senior citizens. A letter was written to the Board of Health but there was no response and he thought as a citizen he should get a response. Mr. Pierce noted that he also wrote to the State. Today he wrote a two page letter to Governor Patrick who was very in tuned to the healcare needs of the citizens.

Nstar – West Natick Transmission Line Project

Ranger Road resident Maureen Allain and Tournament Road resident Lynn D’Agnelli presented pictures of their concerns in the neighborhood with Nstar.

Ms. Allain noted that Nstar had promised minimum visual impact but someone would have to be blind not to see the impact. Private personal property has been destroyed and the value of the houses has been destroyed.

Ms. D’Agnelli added that she was appalled at how Nstar works with the neighborhood. They (neighbors) were people Nstar could sit down and talk to but they never received any information. Five years ago Nstar did it to her family when they took down a willow tree and blamed it on the Democratic convention. She thought the residents needed someone from Natick to help them – to be there to guide them and see what was happening in the neighborhood. The properties were well maintained and you had to see how Nstar came in and destroyed it. Her family had been there for 31 years and when she moved into the neighborhood the shrubs were there. Now it looked like they live in the slums.

Ms. D’Angelli voiced her frustration that at this point the neighborhood had no representation from the Town and the whole neighborhood was requesting some guidance. Nstar has come in with equipment that has shaken homes and foundations. She was concerned and her neighbors were concerned. The residents have taken pride in their properties and were in need of help. She proposed that the Board bring Nstar in.

Ms. Allain noted that she called the Environmental Compliance Officer Bob Bois to ask if anyone was watching and he said he didn’t have to come because the bales were in place, but when she told him Nstar was down by the brook Mr. Bois came down and she heard him yell at them. When Mr. Bois left the crew commented on a little man with a big clipboard.

Ms. Allain further noted there were statements in the documents that upon the request of the neighbors Nstar would put shrubbery back in, but that was never told to the neighbors. The neighbors didn’t receive any information. They had to gather their information from the state. She (Ms. Allain) understood the easement issues but there comes a point where it was infringing on the property owner’s rights. Nstar was out of control at this point and someone to work with the neighborhood was needed. It looked like someone mine stripped. On Melody Way 40 pine trees were cut down.

Mr. Ciccariello responded that this was a project that went through extensive review a few years back through the Conservation Commission. There was a lot of public debate and issues and a lot of things were brought up during the public hearing. Nstar also came before the Board of Selectmen and made commitments to the Board. Based on what the Board was hearing that has not occurred. He thought the Board needed to request the original Conservation Commission order of conditions and ask Mr. Bois for an order of compliance with those orders of conditions. Then figure out what was going on and set up a meeting with Mr. Bois, the Chair of the Conservation Commission and get this on the next agenda and request Nstar to attend. Some time was needed to develop the information so he wasn’t sure it would be possible for the February 9 agenda.

A motion was made by Mr. Connolly to issue a cease and desist order to Nstar. Mr. Ostroff seconded for discussion. Following a lengthy discussion no vote was taken.

Mr. Connolly read a letter in correspondence with a signed petition of neighbors upset with what was going on in the neighborhood. He recalled that in his first term on the Board he met Ms. D’Agnelli because Nstar had cut a tree in the back of her house.

Mr. Ostroff questioned the Board’s authority in terms of issuing an order. He sided with the spirit of a cease and desist order but wanted to make sure it was done legally.

Mr. Connolly countered that Natick citizens were in trouble and needed the Board’s help.

Ms. Gloff didn’t know if the Board could issue a cease & desist order but believed the message needs to be sent to Nstar that something needs to be done. It needed to made very clear to Nstar that this needs to stop and there needs to be a discussion. She didn’t like the photos and would be unhappy if it was her neighborhood.

Ms. D’Agnelli commented that what Nstar had left was disgraceful.

Mr. Walters Young offered to talk to the Conservation Commission agent first thing in the morning in order to understand what permits have been granted and what recourse could be taken to suspend or revoke. If there was any action taken by the Board of Selectmen that too could be revisited and brought back. Given the timeliness of this, the staff would do its due diligence.

Preferring not to have to wait a week a motion was made by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to authorize the Deputy Town Administrator to take whatever legal action was appropriate and to send a letter and make a telephone call. This needs to stop. Unanimously voted.

In discussion of the motion, Mr. Ciccariello noted that the Board could have the Deputy Town Administrator craft a letter and even if legally the Board couldn’t issue a cease and desist order, a strong letter could be sent saying Nstar’s letter to DTE was reviewed and apparently many things in the letter they claimed they would do, they were not doing including crossing over private property and request that Nstar appear before the Board.

Ms. D’Agnelli noted that it had been said that one reason most of the shrubs were coming down was that Nstar didn’t want to maintain any of it. She had been there for 31 years and Nstar never maintained it. The last time it was done was with Boston Edison in 1986. In her opinion Nstar had other plans they weren’t forthcoming with.

In addition to a strongly worded letter, Ms. Gloff suggested that the Deputy Town Administrator make a telephone call tomorrow morning. Ms. Van Amsterdam suggested that before making the telephone call it was important to read the order of conditions.

For purposes of clarity, Mr. Ostroff noted that the Board wanted Nstar to stop any further action until there was a meeting of the minds. Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that the Board couldn’t control the Conservation Commission but if a copy of the original license granted by the Board was available for next Monday, the Board could see if any action could be taken. Ms. Gloff responded that she didn’t want to wait a week, and Mr. Ciccariello explained that everything should be sent out but once the Board could see what was granted maybe the Board could push the point.

Ms. D’Agnelli continued that there were other issues in the neighborhood. The question remains in everyone’s mind why Natick ever allowed Tournament Road to be built. Most of the homes were under electro magnet electrical wires that should have been covered. It was a small street and out of 12 homes 8 have diagnosis of cancer. She thought it was the obligation of Nstar to come out with a meter to see what was emitting from the high tension wires.

After School Workshop – Entertainment License

Michael Williams told the Board that his entertainment license for the After School Workshop on Washington Avenue had expired. Last September the Board granted him a license with the hope of having a place for the kids to go. It worked great for the first five weeks. The Friday after the School bonfire was the first day he told the kids that he would have to charge them and they haven’t come since.

Mr. Williams noted that right now he was looking to change things and was in mid stream. He was hoping to attract the parents, particularly the mothers to see that it was a place that was safe for the kids to come for clean fun. One drawback was that he had been told the hours of operation would be 2:30-8:00 p.m. He shouldn’t have asked for those hours because it impedes him in terms of an entertainment license so he was asking for the Board to consider making his entertainment license more in line with others in the Town so he could hold a singles night. He was going after a different core of people during the day and maybe some adults at night. He was trying different things. His sister was looking to get something going during the day with the women. It’s been a tough 3-4 months and when the kids didn’t show up and his Dad got sick, he just shut it down.

Mr. Williams continued that he received a notice from the Police saying his license was expired and he was now before the Board asking for a renewal of the license and an expansion of the license.

Mr. Ciccariello advised Mr. Williams that he could not renew the license tonight. A formal application would be needed and he (Mr. Williams) would have to pay the late fee. Mr. Ciccariello suggested that Mr. Williams allow that license to disappear and apply for a new license specifically stating what he wanted to do under the new license. Once the application was filed it would be put on the agenda and the Board would take it up.

Mr. Williams suggested that he could get his common victualer’s license and continue operating without an entertainment license, but Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that the common victualer’s license had expired and Mr. Williams would have to pay the fee and the fine unless he let it go and came back with a new application.

Mr. Williams responded that that was what he would do.

If Mr. Williams was to looking to expand the business, Mr. Ostroff wanted to be sure it was in an area that was zoned for it and didn’t want to make Mr. Williams any promises. Mr. Ciccariello responded that no promises were being made. When the application was filed, the Building Inspector will tell the Board if it was allowed under the zoning by-laws.

Following a ten minute recess, the meeting was again called to order at 9:40 p.m.

RETIREMENT BOARD: APPOINTMENT OF BOARD’S REPRESENTATIVE

The Board was in receipt of a letter from David Given who served as the Board’s appointee to the Natick Retirement Board. Mr. Given’s term expired as of January 2, 2009 and he was seeking reappointment.

Mr. Given was asked why he would like to stay on the Retirement Board and he replied that he was an actuary and would love to stay on. There was a lot going on and he was trying to do what he thought was right. There seemed to be some diverse opinions on the Retirement Board and he was looking to have his voice heard.

After thanking Mr. Given for his service, Mr. Ostroff asked Mr. Given to talk about where he thought the Retirement Board had gone in the areas of overseeing the investments and transparency to all stakeholders and taxpayers.

Mr. Given responded that he didn’t have a lot to see on the general administration of the plan. He thought the office did a fine job and had never heard complaints from retirees. On the investment front the Retirement Board voted earlier this year to go from a self-maintained investment portfolio to a management firm and hired SEI to do all that work. This was the Retirement Board’s acknowledgement that they were not investment advisors or consultants and decided to let someone with a lot more buying power do more for them.

Mr. Given noted that the fifth member of the Retirement Board was selected by the other members of the Board and he would like to see Michael Reardon get appointed. Michael Reardon worked for the State in their investment group and he (Mr. Given) thought it would be a good idea to get him on the Board. There was a meeting of the Retirement Board this morning that he (Mr. Given) could not attend and he would like to ensure there was a true democratic process and the right thing happened.

Mr. Given noted that every system in the Commonwealth lost a lot of money last year and what the Retirement Board was going to do about it has led to some interesting discussions.

Mr. Ciccariello inquired if the fifth member had already been appointed. Mr. Ostroff questioned if he (Mr. Ciccariello) meant this morning or three years ago. Mr. Ciccariello didn’t want to get into the Retirement Board’s meeting of this morning, but Mr. Ostroff said he did. There was a public meeting this morning and he (Mr. Ostroff) believed the Retirement Board took an illegal action and he thought the Selectmen needed to respond.

Ms. Gloff inquired as to the term of the appointment and was advised by Mr. Ostroff that the term was not established in the Mass General Laws. The last appointment was for three years, but Mr. Ostroff advised against a three year appointment as it would end up with a situation where the terms of three members would all expire within a few weeks of each other. His suggestion would be something ending in June.

A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to appoint David Given as the Board of Selectmen’s appointee to the Retirement Board for a term to expire June 30, 2012. Seconded by Mr. Ostroff and unanimously voted.

Mr. Ostroff reported that he attended this morning’s Retirement Board meeting as did Town Counsel and Michael Reardon. In the Board’s packets was an opinion from Town Counsel stating that on a five member Board when one cannot vote, two did not constitute a quorum. This morning two members were not present and the Board voted 2-0-0 (to reappoint John Mahaney as the 5th member). Had the Retirement Board failed to make this appointment by February 2, the Board of Selectmen would be in a position to make an appointment. Last week the Retirement Board had a meeting with four members present but Mr. Mahaney was not there.

Mr. Ostroff believed the Board of Selectmen had standing, as did others, to appeal through the court and he would ask Counsel to prepare an injunction for the Board to decide whether to file. To him this violated public transparency and openness and for good government it was imperative it be overturned. Mr. Ostroff further noted that since Mr. Given was not there, the other members moved to overturn a motion he made last week because he was no longer on the board.

Mr. Ostroff moved to authorize Town Counsel to prepare an injunction to be filed in court. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.

Speaking to his motion Mr. Ostroff noted that in Counsel’s opinion he made it clear that PERAC could be asked for an opinion but it wouldn’t be binding. PERAC could file a suit to challenge the action as could Mr. Reardon, the Comptroller, Mr. Given, the Board of Selectmen, or a member of the retirement system. The cost could be a couple of thousand dollars; however, felt the Town appropriated $5 million plus in part because of investment activities they have made and he (Mr. Ostroff) thought it was owed to the taxpayers.

Ms. Gloff commented that she skimmed the letter and found it totally mind boggling that there was a meeting in which all four members were present last week and yet the Retirement Board chose not to vote the appointment at that time but chose to vote today when there was no quorum. Like Mr. Ostroff she thought the Board of Selectmen had some obligation to the citizens to request the injunction. She didn’t know what was going on but it didn’t smell right to her.

Mr. Connolly questioned why not sit down face-to-face with the Retirement Board, but Mr. Ostroff countered that once someone lied to him he didn’t see the point of sitting down. Mr. Connolly responded that he was not big on involving the attorneys.

From what he had read and heard, Mr. Ciccariello thought there was a difference of opinion between the Retirement Board’s attorney and Town Counsel who strongly believes having two members did not constitute a quorum. He (Mr. Ciccariello) didn’t see where a quorum occurred, but the only way to find out was for a judge to rule.

Mr. Connolly again suggested sitting down with the two members, but Mr. Ciccariello didn’t believe that would accomplish anything. The Board has invited the Retirement Board to meetings and they have sent letters back saying if the Selectmen wanted to meet with them, they could come to their meeting. Mr. Ostroff agreed noting the Retirement Board had voted to make the appointment and wasn’t going to change.

Mr. Connolly believed the Retirement Board could vote to reconsider, but it appeared to Ms. Van Amsterdam that Town Counsel made an effort to talk to the Retirement Board’s attorney and spoke to the members present. There were two opportunities for Counsel to make the case there was not a quorum and in both instances they chose not to agree with what Counsel was saying.

COMPTROLLER APPOINTMENT

In a memo to the Board, Town Administrator Martha White recommended the hiring of Charles Panagopoulos as the Comptroller subject to agreeing to terms of such employment. The recommended terms include that Mr. Panagopoulos would start at the starting step of the comptroller’s pay grade and that he agree to complete certain training within his first year.

Mr. Walters Young explained that in accordance with the terms of the Charter the appointment would be made until June 30, 2009. At the request of the Town Administrator and Board he had a discussion with Town Counsel this afternoon on the question of whether the appointee fills out the current position or if starts the clock new. The only place ‘resignation’ appears in the Charter was 6.3.c and there was no delineation that someone fills out the remainder of the appointment. The recommendation was to appoint a temporary Comptroller until June 30, 2009 subject to Mr. Panagopoulos agreeing to the terms in Ms. White’s memo.

Mr. Ostroff commented that during the temporary appointment he would want to talk about some things that would be undertaken. Asked to clarify, he responded that to uphold the Charter a Comptroller was needed. The Board didn’t get as wide a pool as would have been liked, and he didn’t think the Board was in a position to jump up the salary. He was looking at someone with a lot of credentials but someone who was relatively junior on the job.

Ms. Gloff noted that she had intended to speak again with Mr. Panagopoulos, but hadn’t had the time. She wondered if the Board would hold off making the appointment until next Monday.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that Ms. White wouldn’t be back until Friday and he understood she needed the opportunity to make arrangements to meet with Mr. Panagopoulos to talk about salary, benefits, and when he could become available. Waiting to next Monday was only a couple of days and he wanted everyone to feel comfortable. At the Town’s request the candidate came and spent some time with the Comptroller, Finance Director, Deputy Town Administrator and Ms. White with the intent to have him understand what the job was and he was still interested. Although Mr. Panagopoulos didn’t have every credential, Mr. Ciccariello saw some upside and potential. He (Mr. Ciccariello) had no objection to waiting.

Ms. Van Amsterdam requested an elaboration on the types of training the administration saw needing to take place and how much time Mr. Walters Young thought would be spent working with this gentleman.

Mr. Walters Young responded that the memo came from the Town Administrator, Finance Director and himself and they all saw a candidate with a very good upside and the proper education. They wanted to be sure he (Mr. Panagopolous) was set up to be successful and there were several classes they would like to send him to. As far as the time to be spent, until Mr. Panagopoulos was here he couldn’t say what that would be. The Town Administrator and he tried to make a commitment to be there whenever staff needs them and they will be there to mentor Mr. Panagopoulos as they would with any new department head.

Mr. Ciccariello requested Mr. Walters Young to put a memo together on the training.

SPONSORSHIP/ADVERTISING POLICY

Mr. Ostroff advised that the Revenue Enhancement Task Force discussed advertising and sponsorship as a revenue source for the Town. This has been happening in the Schools and the Task Force has set up a sub-group to work with the Schools to draft a policy that would address things like pricing, sales, and permissible content.

One thing there will need to be consensus on is the revenue realized for advertising would help fund that activity. For instance if the Town established an Adopt a Highway, people could have confidence that funding would help roadway maintenance and repair. Likewise with sports. There was some great talent on the subcommittee. They wanted to make sure it works right and if someone approached the Town about advertising they would be able to deal with one person and not get conflicting information.

Ms. Van Amsterdam was pleased there would be a discussion on content and pricing, but asked that reconsideration be given to tying the asset associated with the advertising to supporting relevant services and programs. The reason School Superintendent Peter Sanchioni has cited the sports fields and score boards was that advertisers want to have their products sold at those venues but she would caution having any revenue that came from that having to go back to a recreation or sporting activity. She would rather see the revenue generated be available for the broadest use possible as opposed to being turned back to sports. She felt the same with signs on the roads and tying the hands of the decision making entities. To her it was a mistake.

Mr. Ciccariello noted the number of revolving funds that would have to be established if the revenues were to be broken up into all those areas.

Mr. Ostroff thanked the Board for their input, noting that this subject would return.

BUDGET UPDATE FY09 & FY10

Mr. Walters Young noted there was a news story from MMA with regard to the speech given by the Governor on proposed 9C cuts of $128 million for the current fiscal year. The exact dollars would not be received until Wednesday. The Governor would unveil the actual dollars with the introduction of his budget.

He then referenced a memo in the packets that would be distributed to the Finance Committee tomorrow. In the Fall of 2008 the Town Administrator started providing revenue forecasts which showed a deficit in FY09 of about $275,000. State aid was anticipated to be cut about $460,000 and adding the two there was a deficit of about $3/4 million for the fiscal year. The memo before the Board began to answer the questions of how to resolve this deficit. In order to close the initial deficit, staff had prepared to use departmental turn backs. For Fiscal 2008 the municipal departments turned back over $750,000, the Schools turned back over $600,000 and shared expenses turned back over $415,000. That was the chief component of free cash for this year.

To maximize free cash for the next fiscal year, staff has started to institute the following:

Voluntary work week reduction. Implemented in the Fall of 2008 this program allows employees to voluntarily reduce their work schedule. To date 3 individuals have taken this voluntary reduction at an estimated savings of $14,000.
Hiring freeze. Also implemented in the Fall of 2008, vacant positions are not being filled without the prior approval of the Town Administrator and the Board of Selectmen. To date four positions have been not hired at an estimated savings of $153,000.

The following actions are to take effect as of February 1, 2009:

Purchasing restrictions. Any purchase in excess of $1,000 must be reviewed and approved by the Town Administrator; immediate suspension of all discretionary spending of less than $1,000 for office supplies, paper products, inventory items; immediate freeze on all conference expenses, training, and non-essential travel. The Schools have implemented a purchasing freeze across all departments as well.

Should the actions taken prior to February 1 be insufficient to close the ever-increasing declines in available revenues, staff is contemplating a variety of different measures including, but not limited to, layoffs of personnel and the reduction of hours worked in all municipal buildings.

Mr. Walters Young continued that currently the staff was working on a five year average of turn-backs. That amount of money at this time will exceed the projected deficit. The turn-backs have averaged between $1-2 million. In terms of closing the deficit for the current fiscal year, it can be done but doing it will diminish free cash for next year. The Town can get through this year and FY2010 with a reduction from layoffs and some service reductions, but the recurring free cash will be much reduced. It was also likely that state aid may not be retained in 2011. For FY10 the decrease in state aid will be 7-8%. The good news was that in the forecast a 10% decrease had been put forward so the decline was lower. Whether the administration would choose to take that savings now or wait to see what the House did, it will continue to be monitored.

Mr. Walters Young advised there was a new version of a municipal relief bill which would give the Town the ability to raise 1% on meals and 1% on hotels.

With regard to the estimated $153,000 in savings from the hiring freeze, Ms. Gloff inquired if that was salary or if there were any savings from benefits. Mr. Walters Young advised it was salary only.

Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that the Governor said he was looking for communities to develop health insurance plans that were close to GIC and communities that failed to do so could see reductions in state aid. Mr. Walters Young advised that there was no indication of what the penalties would be, how they would be assessed, who would be the arbitrator to decide if the GIC would save the Town money. The other unknown was the term ‘that is at least as economical’.

In terms of measures moving forward beyond what was listed in the memo, Ms. Van Amsterdam was curious if the Board would see reform not just cuts. Would the Board see some creative ideas to re-invent what was going on now?

Mr. Walters Young responded that the short answer was, “yes”. He couldn’t give specifics of what they would look like, but the reality was it was highly unlikely there would be as many resources to dedicate to municipal government. To provide the same level of service there needed to be a re-invention of services and likely there would be new ways developed but there will be a reduction of services and the staff will be looking at partnership. Collaboration between the Schools and the Library were things that had to be done, but the reality was still sitting at $4.5-$5 million for this year and the Town may barely have the same amount of resources for 2010-2011.

Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that the Expense Control Task Force put together lists and some recommendations for the Board of Selectmen and School Committee and the Task Force would like to find out if ideas from those lists were being discussed. Would the Board of Selectmen like follow up from the Task Force with additional explanation of some of the items?

Mr. Ciccariello’s response was, “absolutely”.

There having been mention about the potential midyear cuts, Mr. Ostroff stated that he wanted to get clarity whether it was likely or possible the Town would be looking at layoffs in the fiscal year.

Mr. Walters Young responded that it was the administration’s goal within the next week to prepare a Fiscal 2009 projection. The reality was in the last four fiscal years there was an average of $1-2 million in money unspent in the budget in all departments. That money closes to the bottom line. At the end of the fiscal year the Town will be running a surplus but the question was how much of a surplus and what level of sustainability can be maintained. If the Town wanted to maximize for future years, then there would have to be layoffs. We could see how the storm develops and maintain the level of service for this fiscal year but the resources to maintain in the future years won’t be there.

Mr. Ciccariello found what was being presented to be totally unacceptable. To suggest that because money was turned back every year everything would be comfy and in the meantime deplete potential for free cash next year was not good financial planning. The Town will have some serious cuts next year and now was the time to start thinking about those cuts. There were individuals recently employed going through training and to keep them on the payroll knowing at the beginning of the new year they would be history to him was not good financial planning. $2 million has been set aside for next year from free cash and with this program the $2 million will be depleted.

Mr. Walters Young explained that the free cash that will be used for FY10 had been certified by the DOR and was cash in hand. The draw down was what would be certified for FY11. For next year (FY10) $2 million in free cash was being used and the $2 million was on hand.

Mr. Ciccariello couldn’t believe the administration wasn’t considering taking some drastic steps now to get rid of this deficit and not get rid of it by hitting up free cash. There was no question that come June 30, there will be substantial cuts, layoffs, changes in services, and he thought the time was right now to take some steps toward that direction. He couldn’t see letting everyone believe we were going to make it through this year. He (Mr. Ciccariello) didn’t have a lot of confidence in that direction. In his business when revenues start to drop, he starts to cut expenses.

When talking about what would be seen in the future, Ms. Van Amsterdam felt the Board should be presented both options. One would be to wait and see if we could eke out this fiscal year, but both scenarios should be presented.

Ms. Gloff noted that she was at a social event this weekend and three different people talked about two different projects in the Town where they were coming up with creative ways to fund things the Town has been funding. She appreciated the fact that citizens have been thinking of creative ways to assist and she encouraged everyone to think of creative ways that things that have been funded by the Town could continue to be funded. Everyone was in this together.

Mr. Ostroff noted that it was about 10:30 p.m. when the Governor announced the 9c cuts and this information was put together that same day and he felt the administration was on top of what was happening. He liked the fact the Board would be presented with some important policy options and thought it would be done quickly and deliberately. The Town Administrator had announced that she anticipated it would be presented on February 9.

Mr. Connolly commented that the Chair had asked several times for the proposed cuts and here’s another week gone by, but Mr. Ostroff pointed out that the answer had always been February 9.

TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES

Before the Board was a proposed list of articles for inclusion on the warrant for the Annual Town Meeting.

Mr. Ostroff recalled Mr. Connolly mentioning an article about Level 3 Sex Offenders, and Mr. Connolly responded that he had two articles he was trying to get together and that was one of them.

Mr. Ciccariello noted that any fees being proposed to change that required Town Meeting action needed to get into the warrant. He then asked about the revolving fund for the Sassamon Trace golf carts. The last time the Board met with them they were to come back to the Board. Somebody needs to convey to the golf course people that they need to come back so the Board could evaluate what it was going to do.

Mr. Walters Young advised that he was meeting with Recreation & Parks Superintendent Richard Cugini. They were scheduled for tonight but it was bumped.

Mr. Ciccariello requested an update on what was remaining in the Mall inspection revolving fund.

ELIOT SCHOOL DISPOSITION

Mr. Walters Young referenced a memo from the Town Administrator outlining the plan she would like the Board to consider and come back for a vote on February 9.

In the memo Ms. White suggested the focus be on a short term lease. The current tenant, the Eliot Montessori School, was interested in remaining in the location beyond the current lease term and anticipates responding to the Town’s RFP for a long-term lease or sale of the property when such RFP was issued. In the meantime, however, they were in a quandary as they did not know if they would be the entity selected through the RFP process and need approximately 2 years to find a suitable alternative location. The School was presently developing contingency plans for a scenario in which they were able to remain in the Eliot School as well as for a scenario in which they must relocate all operations.

A short-term lease would benefit the Town as well. Absent such action, the Montessori School would have no choice but to relocate, and the Town would lose the one certain bidder for a longer term solution.

Attached to Ms. White’s memo was a draft RFP to solicit proposals for a one-year lease with the option of two one-year extensions. Further, the current lease would be modified to, at a minimum, ensure that the tenant paid the cost of all utilities. Once the process was complete, the administration could move forward with undertaking a comprehensive analysis, with a committee as envisioned by the Board, for developing the longer term RFP. Ms. White pointed out that even if the committee existed now, and they were able to expedite the preparation of an RFP for the long-term lease/sale, it could not be issued until the necessary legislative authority had been granted for the long-term lease.

Ms. Van Amsterdam inquired as to the status of the legislative authority, but Mr. Walters Young did not know.

Ms. Van Amsterdam was curious whether Ms. White’s meeting with some citizens prompted the short-term lease to come up now. The last time no one determined it would be in the best interest of the Town at the point and she wondered what had changed.

Mr. Walters Young believed what had changed was the realization of the timing involved. It was January 2009. The lease expires June 2010 and the current tenant indicates they need two years and it was now 1-1/2 years until the end of the lease. It was the ability to retain that tenant.

Beyond utilities Ms. Van Amsterdam questioned if anyone had run any numbers to back up the content in the RFP in terms of the monthly lease fee. How was this saving the Town? She noted that she was not as concerned about who was in the building at the moment. Her job was to focus on the Town and she would like to see something that said this was what would happen if the lease ran out. She was focused on the financial.

Mr. Walters Young responded that he knew the initial analysis had been done to arrive at the number in the document. He would make sure everything was done prior to the next meeting.

Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that under Chapter 30 for a sale or lease if it exceeds $25,000 there had to be an appraisal which meant that someone had to appraise the value of the rental property and the allowed use under the zoning regulations had to be stipulated. In addition to the utilities he thought an assessment needed to be done on how much money had to be put into this place in the next three years in terms of the roof, windows, etc. June 2010 will come up real fast and he thought it was a good idea to put out the RFP and thought it was a good idea to have a couple of options. Given where the economy was now, he thought if there was an appraisal for sale it would be substantially less than thought in 2003. This was probably not a good time to sell.

As to what it meant if the lease expired and it wasn’t rented, Mr. Ciccariello noted that either the building would be kept open and heated in the winter or once the building was shut down come to realization that it will never be occupied again. In his opinion looking for a lease was a good thing to do, but it didn’t mean the other committee shouldn’t be formulated to look at the future. He didn’t want to be paying for capital unless a lot of rent was being generated and he was afraid given the market conditions the Town wouldn’t get a lot of rent.

Mr. Ciccariello suggested that each member look at the draft lease and put together any comments, thoughts, or ideas.

TCAN: REQUEST FOUR (4) BEER & WINE LICENSES

Mr. Ostroff stated that he was a member of The Center for Arts in Natick and had a statement on file with the Town Clerk. He had no financial interest. Ms. Gloff stated that she too was a member with no financial interest.

On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to grant TCAN four one day beer & wine licenses for performances on January 31, February 7, February 15, and February 28, 2009.

2009 GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Mr. Ostroff noted that the draft goals had been before the Board three weeks ago. Since that time he received input which was incorporated into the draft now before the Board He advised that the Town Administrator was comfortable working within this framework.

On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to establish the following goals & objectives for the Town Administrator in 2009.

1. Financial Management The Town Administrator provides leadership, timely updates and prudent advice on financial matters, gives effective assistance to the Board of Selectmen and other committees as appropriate, promotes coordination and cooperation among the town’s financial departments, and develops capital and operating budgets in line with sound municipal practice and the town’s bylaws.
	Executes a well-organized budget development process
	Timely updates to operating and capital budget programs
	Effective coordination among Administration, Comptroller, School Department and state agencies

2. Communications The Town Administrator maintains and improves communications with the public and among town committees and departments, identifies and pursues opportunities for effective public communication, and is responsive to public and official inquiries.
	Timely notification of issues that require Board attention or action
	Public communication, such as web site and newsletter, is timely and comprehensive
	Town departments are responsive to citizen communication

3. Operations The Town Administrator identifies opportunities to improve productivity, innovation, staff development and cost efficiencies; promotes a positive work environment, encourages accountability and cooperation within and between departments, and provides status reports while working to further major projects and initiatives.
	Identifies and proposes specific areas to improve productivity, service and cost-efficiency
	Proposes staff development, training and accountability initiatives
	Meets deadlines and provides advance notice of changes and delays
	Delegates responsibility to department heads and staff as appropriate
	Coordinates Natick projects with legislative delegation, state and regional agencies, etc.
	Establishes and reviews progress on departmental goals and objectives

4. Long Range Planning The Town Administrator participates in the Strategic Planning Process, and acts in a way to protect the long-term financial, social, economic and environmental interests of the community.
	Coordinates development efforts to involve appropriate boards, departments and the public
	Provide a management response to the approved Strategic Plan
	Executes aspects of the Strategic Plan as directed by the Board

5. Short Term Response The Town Administrator responds appropriately to unexpected and unforeseen conditions and events
	Board members are informed of issues and consequences
	Town and department level response is appropriate
	The Town’s response is coordinated with state and regional agencies

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

Mr. Ostroff reminded the Board that the formation of an Economic Development Committee had been discussed at the last meeting. The Revenue Enhancement Task Force was looking to provide a long-term view for how to attract industry into the community. Rather than keep it within the task force, the recommendation was to form a committee.

When this was considered in December, Mr. Ostroff advised that it was sent to the Charter & Bylaw Review Committee. The Vice-Chair of the Charter & Bylaw Review Committee reviewed it and the consensus was that it did not need to be in the Charter and By-laws. Tonight he (Mr. Ostroff) was asking the Board to agree to advertise and see what kind of response was received. He added that this had the support of the Community Development Director.

The proposed membership was: The Community Development Director (ex officio), Town Administrator (ex officio), 2 members of the local business community, 3 citizens-at-large, one member of the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Van Amsterdam inquired if there had been a discussion about not having a member of the Planning Board on the committee with any members of the Planning Board.

Mr. Ostroff’s reply was, “yes”, adding that it was discussed with a couple members and the Community Development Director.

With regard to the makeup of the committee, Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that neither the Community Development Director nor the Town Administrator would have a vote which left six people. To him it would be better to have 9 rather than 8. He also questioned what was meant by 2 members of the local business community. There were a few industrial parks and the Mall so perhaps it should just be 2 members of the business community. Mr. Ostroff had no objection, noting the intent was not to have a Natick Center bias.

With respect to the membership Mr. Ostroff proposed putting the posting out there without being specific and see what comes back. An odd number may be good, but this was more of a working group than a group that would be doing a lot of voting. He suggested the posting say the Board of Selectmen was seeking to appoint a committee up to 9 and specify the areas.

A motion was made by Mr. Ostroff to advertise the vacancy and say the Board was looking for interested citizens and members of the business community. Letters of interest to be submitted no later than February 17. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.

Ms. Gloff commented that this was probably a groundless concern, but she wanted to be sure the members of the business community understood the goal was to look at the good of the community and not from a standpoint of competition for their business. Mr. Ostroff thought it was a good point, adding that he thought the ethics regulations and good public process had to be there to ensure that and the member of the Board of Selectmen really needs to look out for the Town as a whole.

ACCEPTANCE OF RESIGNATION: BACON FREE LIBRARY

With regrets the Board unanimously voted to accept the resignation of Jeanne Cosmos from the Bacon Free Library Maintenance Committee. The vote was taken on a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Ms. Gloff.

MINUTES

On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to approve the minutes of the June 30, 2008 meeting.

AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY; BICYCLE EVENT, BANNER

A motion was made by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to approve the Relay for Life American Cancer Society’s request to hang a banner across Main Street for the period of May 18-June 1, 2009. Unanimously voted.

A motion was made by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, to approve the American Cancer Society’s request to conduct a cycling event, Bicycles Battling Cancer through Natick on July 26, 2009. Unanimously voted.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR NOTES

Stimulus Package

Mr. Walters Young informed the Board that Natick had submitted 15 projects that were believed to meet or fall close to shovel ready in 180 days. An e-mail was received from the Lieutenant Governor providing an update on where the stimulus package stood and advising that municipalities look at all the projects to be sure they met the 180 days and to prioritize the top 3.

Mr. Ciccariello inquired as to when the 180 days started. Mr. Walters Young didn’t know and thought it was likely that no one would know until there was a bill in Congress.

SELECTMEN’S CONCERNS

Upcoming Finance Committee Presentations

Mr. Ostroff noted there were upcoming presentations on February 4 and February 12 and he requested that the Board get a copy of whatever presentations were made.

Mr. Ciccariello responded that he was just giving an update of the Community Senior Center and School Business Manager William Hurley and School Superintendent Peter Sanchioni were giving an update on where we were in the process for the Natick High School. For the high school a project manager was hired and they were working on the feasibility study. There was a meeting next Wednesday with SBA. There was not a lot to present at this time.

Mr. Ostroff noted there was a whole page on the high school on the web site, but nothing about the community/senior center and he would be willing to help with that.

Appointment of Boards, Committees

Mr. Ostroff suggested advertising in March for the Board, Committee appointments to be made in June. He volunteered to assemble a list.

Regional Group

Ms. Van Amsterdam requested a status report regarding the group the Town Administrator belongs to that was looking at public safety and regionalism. The group hired a consultant and she wondered if anything had been produced beyond the RFP.

Water & Sewer Retained Earnings

Mr. Connolly referenced a letter in correspondence from the Comptroller to the Board of Selectmen concerning an update from the DOR on the water & sewer retained earnings.

Mr. Walters Young explained that when the DOR certified retained earnings they certified an amount that was incorrect. There were a series of reductions that should have been taken. The DOR certified an amount that did not have encumbrances included of $675,000. When the submission was put in, it was certified incorrectly.

Mr. Walters Young noted that it was important because if the Town tried to spend $1.3 million, it would end up with a negative.

Mr. Connolly thought a similar situation occurred in 2007 and Mr. Walters Young advised that was correct.

Crosswalk Safety

Mr. Connolly noted that he planned to attend the next Safety Committee meeting regarding safety concerns with crosswalks and would report back on what the committee was doing.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.

_________________________________

Kristine Van Amsterdam, Clerk

Natick Town Offices 13 East Central Street, Natick, MA 01760
Phone: (508) 647-6400 Fax: (508) 647-6424

Virtual Town Hall Website