Needham Select Board, 10/29/25

Levy, Levy,

Good evening. Calling to order the select board meeting for, this is our regular meeting, not on Tuesday, but on Wednesday, October 29th. and I'm just going to remind everyone that this meeting is being recorded by the Needham channel for the town's YouTube channel and is being broadcast via Zoom. and is likely being recorded by the Needham Observer and perhaps the Needham Local. If anyone else is recording this meeting or would like to record this meeting the time to tell us is now. Anyone online? No. OK. So in that case, I believe we have a couple of folks who wanted to come up and make a public comment. I don't see Rob Partridge. Perhaps he's online? Okay, great.

So Rob, we're going to bring you over and I'm going to ask you to remember to state your name and address and then we have about three minutes for public comment and I'll just remind everyone that this public comment is for listening. we don't generally respond in the moment to public comment so rob hi hi can you all hear me we can but not really well do we have a way to turn up the volume Let's try again. Rob, can you say hello?

Can you hear me now?

We're working on it. Hang on just one sec.

Okay.

Much better. Okay, go ahead.

Okay so I'm Rob Partridge 38 Sutton Road in Needham and I'm a member of the Needham Board of Health and I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank the select board for their attention to alcohol regulations. But I have a couple of concerns about the proposed update to alcohol regulations which your board is considering today. The first concern is extending the hours of sale from 11pm until midnight. Research has shown that extending the hours of availability of alcohol is associated with higher rates of injury, violence and impaired driving. I've been an emergency physician for 35 years, so this is more than just numbers for me. When bad things happen from alcohol consumption, it harms patients, loved ones, families,

and frequently people who haven't even been drinking. And it also uses and stresses police, EMS and hospital resources. And although it may not be preventable, it is possible to take steps to mitigate the risks of injury and violence from alcohol consumption. which is why I believe that extending the hours of sale from 11 PM to midnight is not in the best interests of the residents and community of Needham. My second concern is about holding penalties in abeyance for first time compliance check failures. If a penalty for a compliance check failure is held in abeyance for up to one year, it's essentially a slap on the wrist to non-compliant vendors

and a step back from the progress that was made in the updates to alcohol regulations in 2023 when stricter penalties were put in place to incentivize licensee compliance. We know from the Metro West Adolescent Health Survey that underage Needham residents have access to alcohol and that 10% purchase it themselves with or without a fake ID. Compliance checks are important because they are the main way we can determine if licensees are following proper procedures to prevent underage sales. The Board of Health believes that removal of the abeyance language and stricter penalties for compliance failure will reduce the likelihood of underage sales and protect the health and safety of our younger Needham residents.

And finally, I want to say that the Board of Health appreciates working with the select board to make sure that town regulations serve the best interests of the residents and community of Needham. Thank you.

Thank you, Rob. excellent um and then i know we have another charlie nanda do you want to come on up and i'll remind you hi i'll remind you as well let's have intros and addresses and then about three minutes okay

Hi. Hi. Thanks for having me, Select Board. Good evening. I'm Charlie Nonda. I live at 38 Fuller Road. I'm Kate Linsmeyer. I live at 7 Stonecrest Drive. We're both town meeting members on Precinct H, and you are?

D. D. We're not going to do this vaudeville act alone.

We are here on behalf of the Act for Needham Committee that's building a community auditorium and theater for Pollard. were a neighbor-led volunteer group that's advocating for a right-sized auditorium. What we would really love to see is a sixth through eighth grade school at Pollard with a 750 seat theater auditorium. So basically, we want every student to have access, both sixth, seventh, and eighth, to an auditorium throughout the day. Sixth graders at HIRAC, do not currently have an auditorium at their school. So we would like them to have access to one during the day. We also want a space that the community can have that's reliable for evenings and weekends to be able to perform in. You've heard from some of our student advocates a lot of cases why they would want a new space for

6th grade through 12th graders I think have come by this summer and we recently wrote you a letter prior to the all board summit we've been tracking public input sessions. We've been to tons of these community meetings. I think the only person who's probably been to more than us is Peter O'Neill over there from The Observer. who actually, if you haven't seen it, the Needham Observer wrote a fabulous article this week. It's called Pollard Project Offers Needham a Chance to Prioritize Performing Arts. So check it out. It's very comprehensive, lays out all the issues of our spaces and how our current facilities are falling short of our students and our community's needs. So we've also been listening. We've gone on some listening tours. Kate and I have done coffee talk at the Center of the Heights. We did a booth at their fair. We also went over to the Harvest Fair and was supported by the Needham Community Action Network who endorses our work and gave us their booth for the day.

So we really enjoyed meeting with community members and seeing that this performing arts need is definitely spanning the aisle, the theatrical aisle and the aisle of Needham, I think. So our committee aligns also with the town's Arts and Culture Action Plan, which we run the working group that the town has it in their website if anyone wants to see it. and Objective 2.3a basically says that it's called to improve access to arts facilities. for All, and convenes a committee to explore new and upgraded performing arts spaces for the Needham public schools and community groups, which is sort of what the Act for Needham committee has done. So we're actforneedham.com.

We tonight just want to respectfully request that the Select Board supports a 750-plus seat auditorium at the Pollard Project as it moves forward through their project's preferred option. And thank you for your time, for championing spaces that help our community and our students learn, perform, connect, and get out of the house.

Yeah, and in closing, especially for anyone listening, we have a meeting coming up on November 5th. Everyone is welcome to join, learn more, help us get the word out about this and engage with the community further. And you can also visit actforneedham.com.

thanks right thank you thank you okay those are the two public comments that we were notified in advance about are there any others Come on up, Ed.

17 Laurel Drive, Needham. and I'm Chair of the Needham Board of Health and I'm just here to support all of the statements that Rob Partridge made and just to emphasize that both the Centers of Disease Control and the World Health Organization support limiting the hours for the sale of alcohol and reducing the availability of alcohol to prevent Abuse, and below-age drinking. So I just wanted to say that. And again, we... also enjoy working with the Select Board, particularly on this issue, but on many issues. So thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right, so our next order of business then we will move on to our 2025 Veterans Day Proclamation by our Vice Chair.

Town of Needham, 2025 Veterans Day Proclamation. Whereas on Veterans Day, our nation comes together to honor our veterans and commemorate their legacy of service and sacrifice and whereas Needham residents have answered the call to duty in every war and expedition in our nation's history, to ensure the security of our country and its ideals and whereas returning veterans contribute in important ways to the civic life of our town and whereas Their service, performed with a sense of duty and honor, reflects great credit upon themselves and upon our community. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Select Board of the Town of Needham does hereby recognize Tuesday, November 11, 2025, as Veterans Day.

and asked the citizens of the town to join in appropriate observance of those who have served in uniform to preserve the principles of justice, freedom, and democracy. Signed this 29th day of October, 2025.

So moved Second

before we go to a vote i just want to remind everyone that the town will be having memorial day observance on uh tuesday yeah sorry veterans day veterans day observance uh tuesday november 11th at 11 a.m. at Memorial Park. So please join us if you can. All right. So any other discussion? All right. All in favor? Aye. And the motion passes. Excellent. Any discussion? Okay all in favor? Aye. and the motion passes um okay so our next uh order of business is a public hearing a grant of location for 160 uh country way and we will be joined by Joanne Callender Our Eversource representative. Hey, Joanne. Good evening.

Hi, how are you?

Good, how are you?

Very well, thank you. So yes, Eversource is seeking a grant of location to install approximately 10 feet of conduit from pole 344 over 16 onto the private property at 160 Countryway. And that is to provide electric service, underground service to the new home there that will be all electric with EV charges. Thank you.

Great, thank you. Madam Town Manager, is everything in order? It is. Okay, excellent. Any discussion for the board? Okay, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone in the room or online who wishes to make public comment?

I think I see a hand up.

Okay, great. Any comments from anyone in the room? No. Okay. Well, in that case, I would welcome a motion.

Madam Chair, I move that the Select Board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately 10 feet of conduit in Country Way.

second all right all those in favor aye and the motion passes thank you thank you thanks Joanne

Have a great evening. OK.

So the next item on our agenda is Eversource Gas proposed winter work. And for that, we welcome everyone up. So we have Kara Slustig. our Director of Public Works and then from Eversource Gas and Electric we have a crew. Come on up. Don't be shy. Peter Bowman. Kyle, Ian, and Dylan online, and Kyle online. Okay, super.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am here today, it seems to be on an annual meeting that I have to discuss winter work that Eversource is proposing to do within the town. This year, it's both electric and gas. And I think I'll start with electric because I think this is a little bit unusual, a more unusual request. We have a request from Eversource. They're currently doing work, as I'm sure anyone who has driven on Webster Street knows, in order to add electric conduit underground on Webster. That conduit is actually going to go all the way down Webster and down Highland. but the portions of Highland that they're doing work on are not currently under the jurisdiction of the town. They're actually under the jurisdiction of MassDOT. So for permitting purposes, they are only looking at doing Webster Street in Needham because all permitting related to Highland Ave goes through the state.

They have been working very closely with the town to try to make sure that the work that they're doing helps accommodate the utilities that we have within the roadway on Webster Street. it is a relatively tight developed right of way and so making sure that we have appropriate clearance from our water and sewer so that we can continue to maintain them should we have any issues is important. One thing I will note, we have reached out to the neighbors who are adjacent to this area, but there are One or two blocks of Webster Street where they're going to be going under the sidewalk instead of going under the roadway. This is largely because they couldn't get appropriate clearance underneath our utilities. and in order to get appropriate separation, we needed to use more of the right of way, including the sidewalk. is part of this project. There are three Norway maples that are impacted. Eversource by right is not required to go through a street tree hearing.

When they do work, they are empowered to do that under the Department of Public Utilities. But they have committed to the town that they will be replacing those trees with 12 new trees, some of which may be placed along the right of way. We will be walking the area with the neighbors who are impacted to see if they either would like to do setback plantings on their own property or if there are appropriate locations to do street trees there. If they don't fit within the right of way, if all 12 don't fit within the right of way there, they will either go in the nursery or be used for other setback plantings in town.

Karis, I know you have a lot to say, so I don't really want to... ruin your flow. But I do recall when trees were taken down at the high school, even though we gave a lot of notice and we put it in the newsletter and so on and so forth, people were still taken unawares and so i'm wondering um at the time we talked about maybe putting up a sign like at the site that explains or has a qr code so that people can find out what happened to the trees um can we maybe Do something like that. Absolutely. Yeah. So people can answer their question right away when they have it.

And I just would remind the project that they're doing there is for the MWRA redundancy project, which Needham is a partner to and a beneficiary of, which will bring enough power to the interchange. at 128 to power two robotic tunnel digging machines that will help us get better redundancy as now Needham currently only has one connection to MWRA that is of significant age. But yes, we can certainly improve the communication to the general public as well. Thanks. So that is what we have for electric. What I will say, we have been asked and have tentatively agreed to providing two crews at this particular location that would be within close proximity of each other and Eversource has committed as you'll see there is another segment on Highland Ave that is

not quite parallel, but pretty much they're in close proximity to each other to coordinate between the gas and electric component to make sure that we're not unnecessarily detouring people on and off either Webster or Highland and then back on to Highland or Webster. So that is part of the conditions. As well, we have additional conditions that we put on all of the utilities who do work off season. Thank you so much for joining us. and that they are responsible for snow clearing in any area where they're doing work. So we are doing and they're not leaving any equipment on the road again in order to make sure that if we have to do snow clearing we have appropriate space. So those are the conditions that are part of the ability to do work off season.

And the work on the sidewalk? Will the sidewalk be impacted or are they just going under the sidewalk?

The sidewalk will be impacted and they will restore the sidewalk after they are completed.

What standards will the sidewalk be restored to?

So it'll be the town standards and ADA compliance.

All right. Driveways for residents have been cut in two. Will those be patched up permanently in the spring?

Yes, when they do the permanent pavement, and I'm not sure how long we'll wait for trench settlement in order to do the permanent pavement, we'll repair all the driveways to make sure they connect appropriately to the street.

maybe in the newsletter or someplace we could talk just a little bit about that waiting period and why we do it because you guys disappear and people are like they forgot to repave the street and not understanding that there needs to be some settling time and then you do it so if we could maybe explain that to residents I think that would be helpful

So that's for the electric side. On the gas side, Eversource Gas is a... Can I just ask one other thing?

Will we be notifying abutters of what will happen with more detail and what will be restored at the end?

So I know Eversource has already been charged with notifying abutters about the specific path of construction, impacted trees, impacted sidewalk, and we can certainly ensure that they continue to update the... The residents, one thing we've had the privilege of for those of you who have been on the board for longer, our former highway superintendent, Ryan Hoyland, has actually come back for the summer to provide oversight for Eversource. And I actually think it's been a really positive experience. I think a little bit for the utility, but primarily for the abutters. And he's been very helpful in helping negotiate concerns that the abutters have had.

Okay.

Thank you, Ryan. Oh, go ahead.

What's the timeline for this work?

So the work that we're talking about today is simply for the off-cycle work. So our permitting goes from April to November. So this is doing construction December through March.

So like the Webster, for instance.

James McDonald or Jamesy.

When was that Webster work? Is that in December?

No, that's going to take longer. So the work that's under this condition, which would be outside of our normal street opening permit, will be done in March. But the project is going to be a longer time horizon.

I do have a schedule here for everyone if people want to copy so thank you great thank you and on the sidewalk standards is that um repaved with asphalt or concrete or how so

outside of business districts our preference is asphalt I think there are a lot of challenges with using concrete in a residential context first and foremost trees is a concern So if you have any tree roots, it lifts up an entire panel of concrete, which is much more dangerous from a tripping hazard. Whereas if you have tree roots that bust through asphalt, you simply just remove that one little section of asphalt and replace it. also there is an issue with the concrete mix in the New England area and it it doesn't react well to salt so if you have to put down salt which Presumably most people would do on a residential road. It actually corrodes the layer and the concrete spalls and unravels and they haven't been able to resolve that issue. So outside of business areas, our standard is asphalt.

Is that different than what's currently there?

It's asphalt currently. Okay.

Can I ask, now that you've handed this to us, can you please send a soft copy to Karis so that it can get two things one is added to the select boards packet so if members of the public want to find it especially since I see it has a resource for email updates and also to the DPW website for the project and thank you

Okay.

Back to trees for a minute. I know you want to get going. Other than the trees are cut down, other trees along the right-of-way where the roots will be cut either the trench or the sidewalk or whatnot. We probably won't know until spring if they've been damaged, if they don't come back. What do we do in the spring? Can we make an assessment? Do they get cut? Do they get pruned? Do we save them somehow?

or might we be getting advice from our arborist?

So I know Ed has been working with some of the abutting neighbors who have concerns. Ed is also working with Eversource to make sure that they're using the correct techniques that will be the most I also know they're meeting with the arborist who is providing them other insight about the health of the trees that are along that corridor, right? If you have a young tree, it's more likely to bounce back from sort of a minor impairment versus a tree that might already be unhealthy, might already have some complications or be older. So we're working with every single resident on that neighborhood who has reached out.

Thank you.

So the other item that Eversource has requested is to continue its gas main replacement work. We have had, I think, three seasons now of allowing them to do work off cycle. I will say I think the relationship between Eversource Gas and the town has been overall very positive. And I think they've been very collaborative with us in how to approach some of our streets, making sure that they're staying ahead of our road repaving schedules. they're not cutting into roads that have been recently paved and they're addressing issues that we're sort of bringing to them. So in order to help them in their requirements of replacing a certain mileage of gas main on an annual basis, and as well as upgrade the gas main in town to ensure that it it's meeting the new safety regulations. We have allowed them to do work off season. Again, not having a massive snow season, I think, has had a huge advantage for the past three years.

if we do have snow obviously none of this work will continue and will not continue until the roads not only are clear but are fully clear curb to curb and safe to pass so we don't anticipate there being a conflict between snow removal and and this type of work again the work that we've seen in Needham the past seven years we've never seen construction work of this magnitude from a utility and it's all directly related to the Department of Public Utilities mandate that they replace I'm going to say the high pressure main in the community. There's three locations that they're looking at addressing this year with, like I said, two crews at two separate locations. One is at the inner One starts at the intersection around where the library is present on Highland Ave and goes all the way to May Street. When we have talked to public safety,

they do have their own challenges in staffing police details and so doing some of the work on major roads during off-season has an advantage because there's just less competition for police details so they have a better Chance of meeting the full detail requests that Eversource has. And then the other two projects are on smaller roads. And again, they're trying to get ahead of our paving schedule.

um can i just ask you've been doing this now for three off seasons in a row and this will be the fourth How far are you getting? What's the progress report? How much more do we have to do?

Dylan's on the line for gas, so I'd probably defer that question to and then you know a lot of what Karis talked about on the electric side is really the project we're doing for the MWRA and you know we were before this board I think back in December to get the grants of location so this is just you know to really continue that work through the winter but I think to your question if we could let Dylan comment that would be greatly appreciated.

Yes. Hi, everyone. Can I just get a sound check? Can you guys hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

All right. Perfect. All right. Yeah. So to answer that question, we have a goal of relaying all the aging and leak prone gas pipe in Needham by 2034, I believe it is right now. And on average, we're trying to replace approximately three miles per year so that that puts us around 30 miles left to replace in the town of Needham. I can double check that number and I can share that with you and the rest of the folks. But we would be looking to continue on the pace of approximately three miles over the next nine or ten years. And that's through the entire year, not just talking about the winter season.

I would also mention, which I didn't earlier, and I think it's been a testament to working collaboratively with Eversource, they don't start construction until after the buses go into the schools and they stop construction when the buses leave. So we do give them a fairly tight window in order to operate for construction as far as like it's not a full eight hour construction day, which I'm sure is also a limiting factor in what they can accomplish on a daily basis.

Sure. Okay. Thank you for that information.

Would it be possible to get, you know, sort of a map that shows what gas lines have been replaced, what the next three miles for this Thank you so much for having me.

Thank you so much for joining us. The work that they wanted to do this winter, with the exception of Highland, has changed once or twice. When they look at our schedule, they look at what their... Thank you. Thank you. they're different crews so I think it would be helpful but also with a clear understanding that the three miles that they think they're going to do like next summer may not very well be the same three miles that they actually construct but

If we at least had a view of what they're working on this winter, maybe just tell us what the next chunk is. That would be useful.

Absolutely. We can do that.

And kind of updating chunks and just...

Anybody else?

The idea that we're doing this for 10 more years, I think, is new information maybe to all of us right now. And we're trying to sit with that.

should give you honorary citizenship. All right, thank you for these. I love maps. I spent way too much time on these things, just poring over them. were abandoning gas lines. Do they stay in place or do you pull them?

So they stay in place, but they can be... So what they end up doing, particularly in the off season, they can't set up services. so they run them parallel so they have the existing service feeding the house and then they will come back in the spring when people stop heating their homes and then they'll do the transfers and then they'll abandon the old line I think we talked before about right of way and it being congested and once those old lines are abandoned, they can be demoed. So if you needed to put another utility in that area, you can.

All right. Otherwise, it's just a vestige. Okay. And then what's the assessment of risk? I mean, We're doing this now for 10 years, but what's your view to tragedy? Are we in danger of having a house blow up?

No, I don't think there's a concern. I think really a lot of the mandates came in after the issues in North Andover and Lawrence. And so the Utilities are actually mandated to replace a certain amount of miles per year in each one of their districts. My understanding is that none of the utilities are meeting the mark that they are being required to by the Department of Public Utilities. and there has been some concern that some local control could be lost because if they can't meet these goals and it's permitting regulations or other things, that are preventing them from moving forward, then DPU may step in and try to remove some of our local control capacity, which I think is one of the reasons why we've worked so clearly with Eversource to try to achieve the end goal, which at the end of the day is getting the replacements that they're mandated to do done with limited disruption to the town and as quickly as possible.

But like how many methane lakes do we have now? Do you know?

We have a list.

Yeah, we do share a list generally quarterly with the community. We share with Gabby, the sustainability director, and we look at that and we You know, we grade out the leaks, you know, one, two, and three, and ones we obviously jump on right away and repair, and then a two is something that we monitor and get to as soon as possible, and the threes we continue to monitor. you know like Harris is alluding to we're just working on the the gas you know prone that are prone to leaks yeah working on those and trying to do it in a logical manner with all the other factors of electric work as well as street work and trying to make sure that you're getting ahead and keeping ahead of the DPW and work Roads that they're going to pave, other construction projects. So there's a lot of coordination there. But it's not a risk thing to address your question, but it is really just to get rid of leak-prone piping. Right. No, environmentally that's critical. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.

What's the expected life of the new pipes you're putting in?

Dylan, can you comment on that?

I might have to defer to Kyle.

Not sure, Kyle, would you know about that? Good evening, everyone. This is Kyle Gavone. I'm a construction supervisor for Air Resource Gas, and most of my work is at Needham. These pipelines are predicted to last at least 200 years. Okay.

Out with me, you're young, I don't know. I can expect that.

That might do it.

Do you have more? That's it. Okay, so any other commentary from the board? Questions?

The underground project on Chestnut, the test pit. Oh, yeah.

oh do you want to comment on the oh yeah we're just do you want to jump in on that yes yes so if you look to the back of the first page that i gave you um the it's the underground cable modernization project it has not started we are doing test pits Test bits simply confirm what the existing utilities are down there, making sure our surveys match up with what actually is down there. And so we are actually really close to finishing up. However, we want to be considerate of the moratorium and working hand-to-hand with EMDPW. We're probably looking into late November early December to finish those test pits up and then the actual construction subject to DPU that would be late 2026 early 2027 so these are just test pits again it's not actually the work it's the prelude to the work

And we had a goal of being done on November 15th, and we just want to be open here that that might leak. Probably a poor choice of words, but it might go a little bit longer than the 15th, but not substantially. And it won't be construction. It'll just be the test pits, like Ian said.

I did actually have one more question. In your plans, you have these giant concrete manholes all through, but they're They're larger than what I think of as manholes. Is that the size of manholes everywhere? And we just don't see it from the street?

Right. You're talking about the work on Webster?

Well, it's a 6x10x8. It's a tool shed.

Yes.

Yeah. This is what I'm asking. Like, what's going on in there? Is that the size that's under all manholes on the street? Right.

I don't know historically, but clearly those are the ones we're putting in now. And it's really just to bring the power, like Kara said.

So that a person could get down in there and work. absolutely and i would say it's a little bit different than when the town does water or sewer because when we're going down we're laying pipe that then we would go camera that sort of thing they're actually going to be pulling wires through this conduit so they need a lot more space to be able to work within their space than for what we would do for just conveying water or sewer.

Okay, so it just, this looks like a lot of construction having the street open for I mean that seems like it would take a long time to do and have the street open for a long period of time I guess it just didn't didn't seem to me like regular street work where you're there for a couple of days and you're moving on. It seems like you're gonna, you know.

I'm sorry. We are building a system along Webster. So, I mean, the manholes were already in a lot of Webster. So we have seven or eight of those that you see on the map already placed.

Some of them are existing.

No, they're new, but we just installed them. And then when we went to go and work the conduit, that's when we had to work very closely with Karis and the water and sewer department to make sure We could fit it where it was going. So a lot of those manholes were already placed in this recent construction. And then when we went to do the conduit, it got a little more complicated where we were placing conduit. and that's why we're going through the sidewalk in certain places because there's just not enough room in the streets.

Okay. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. We do list the manholes, too. There's seven on Webster, eight approximately on Highland, and then three new on Graham. So those are there in the description.

And I think Harris's point is really a critical one, is we're doing the civil work right now, and then ultimately we have to come back and pull the cable but then you you're not doing real construction you're popping these manholes you're going down and you're pulling the cable through so it's far less disruptive than what's going on right okay all right great anyone else

okay and just thinking forward if um we haven't done grant street or haven't started grant um have we decided grant no we have not started grant Can we get the trees coming down there too?

So we haven't finalized again. I think we're in the earlier phases of figuring out where the layout is. You don't have that before you because we haven't figured out the layout yet. If they get done with Webster Street faster and don't redeploy them to Highland and want to go to Grant, I would come back before the board and just provide that pathway. But again, it's the same process. Limitations that we have of like having a developed right of way and figuring out, you know, you might have a 50 foot right of way, but only 30 feet of it is developed and figuring out either it goes within that 30 feet or you might end up disrupting things like telephone poles and trees.

Okay.

Just wanted to touch on the abutter notifications since I handle those. We did send one out when the work started on the Needham distribution project. We did provide an update through our constant contact email so people had the opportunity to sign up. I send those out once we have updates. It was usually weekly, and then we had that issue with the sidewalk, so we sent an update about that. I'm working with Amy Halzen, and we're going to reissue a notification talking about the sidewalk work, so just know that we are committed to informing abutters at every stage.

H. Great. We appreciate that. Of course.

That's actually how a butter's heard about it from you. Doing my job. Perfect. Thank you. I was caught unaware as well. All right. Thank you.

All right, super. Thank you. All of this. All right.

Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Okay. next item on the agenda is multi-layered it's our town manager's report and we're starting with proposed updates to alcohol regulations yes thank you madam chair

This work is before you for the third meeting in a row. So Miles Tucker, Support Services Manager, presented the recommendations. two meetings ago, and then there was a public hearing at your last meeting. And just take a personal point of privilege that Miles is not here to present this himself because he and his wife welcomed Emerson Tucker. to the world. So we're thrilled for him and he is on leave. But for the proposed regulations in front of you, there are no changes than were originally presented. And I did want to just maybe flag one thing for context, particularly given the concerns by the Board of Health. If it's helpful to look at the PDF page 117 of the red line, I just wanted to make one clarification on the violations in your regulations. Violations are kind of broken into two categories.

The first is violations of The Select Board's regulations itself and of ABCC regulations and Mass General Law. and the chart for the suggested penalties for those violations are on the chart listed on PDF page 117. Compliance checks are a different set of violations. Compliance checks are viewed by the ABCC as educational in nature and so they are split out in your regulations to reflect that and to reflect council's guidance to the board over the years that because they're educational in nature they're kind of viewed with a different set of penalties and so the first violation being held in abeyance is just recommended for the compliance checks failure, not violations of the regulations itself.

in practice, I think you all have seen that often when there's a violation at a compliance check failure, there is also a violation of your regulation. So if a scanner is not used during a compliance check failure, there's actually two violations there. And so the board can look at both tables of penalties when you're reviewing those failures. So I just wanted to put that into context before you take your vote. But happy to answer any questions.

Yeah, I'd like to just talk about the issue of the late close, allowing alcohol purchase until 12. The point of this, as far as I understand it, was to bring us into agreement with our own practice so we have allowed certain places when they requested to stay open later for one reason or another and it always sort of makes sense. What is the, you know, but hearing the Board of Health's commentary and and other recommendations, World Health Organization, whatever. It does make me wonder how would it work if we were to, not allow that? I mean, it means that we're out of step with their own regulations, which I really dislike. So what would the what could a remedy be?

And I guess how many establishments have we allowed to stay open past 11? I'm not sure I have a count of those.

Sure. That's in the memo.

There are 15 establishments that have a midnight closure and seven currently that are before midnight. your regulations currently and under the proposed changes have language in there that say there's kind of a sentence, unless otherwise determined by the select board in terms of those hours. So really the board has discretion case by case, and you can decide the hours, you know, whether you change kind of what's written in this section to 11 p.m. or have it at 12 p.m. you couldn't take it case by case as the applications come in and by

if you were to change the language in the regulations to midnight there's no change to any existing licensees their current license would stay at the hours that would also be true if you did not make this change and you kept it at 11 p.m. current licensees even those that go to midnight would retain what you approved when they got their liquor license so I think the the reason to change and what why it was recommended was that the majority of your licensees already hold licenses that go to midnight and so updating the policy would align it but in practice whether you keep it or change it you have discretion on the closing hour.

Okay.

I have a question about that. Would we expect that those seven who currently closed before midnight may request to extend their hours to midnight?

They could potentially, but you've already gotten licensees that have requested midnight even with the language at 11 p.m. So I assume they just applied for what their preferred hours were at the time. But they certainly could come back and ask for a change of hours.

Can I just ask, I guess, of the board, what do we want? Because in my mind, the inconsistency is not preferable. And the discretion that we afford some of these establishments may be contributing to that inconsistency.

It's not contributing to the inconsistency. Although I have to say that when the licensees had come in, they, you know, they had they do have a reasonable plausible story want to stay open till the end of the game you know not sending people home at the 11th hour or whatever there have been a number of different situations

and similarly with people who have chosen who have elected to close at 11 they also had rationale for their business that said we just want to close then we don't want to be open later than that so it really varied I think

I guess, though, to the point of consistency, I would rather have a policy that we stick to rather than maybe this is what you were getting at, Josh, rather than us exercising discretion. Somehow that just. feels more fair and if if in fact it really is midnight why don't we say it's midnight you know rather than saying it's 11 and then some people kind of know to ask for something more and other people maybe don't think I don't know so I guess I'd The consistency to me, I'd rather have the policy say what we actually do.

So I think that's the way this has been written, is to do that.

I think that what we actually do is evaluate each situation. and make sure that it's appropriate. that there's a good reason. I mean, that seems to be what we have done. Although I agree that it's not optimal to have people with different... Well, I mean, I think it's fine if they're different.

But like if the policy were... Midnight. But if the people who have 11, that's because they only wanted 11. Is that what I'm hearing?

I mean, they can still close early if they have 11.

Right.

At 12 o'clock.

Sure. I mean, I guess I'd rather do what this policy is saying and just make it midnight because that's what, in fact, it really is. You know, if more often than not, we are making an exception. you know, then let's change it to be what we are actually doing, which I think is what you were saying, Katie. Being mindful that I don't think we want to encourage them to stay open later, but it doesn't seem that this policy is making any difference at all in what these businesses are actually doing. Is it? They're either asking for 11 or 12 for their own business reasons. This is kind of a housekeeping thing. I don't know that this is impacting the opening hours. Really. do i have am i misunderstanding this no i think you're right

No, you're correct in the sense that the policy has been that closing will be at 11 p.m. unless the board decides otherwise. And in the majority of cases, the board has decided otherwise.

and and Katie I think you're you're indicating that if the board were to change to go to a policy of 11 across everything, that there would also need to be another set of work with ABCC to reset operating hours for everybody?

So in the past, when the hours have changed in your policy, they have not applied reactively to the existing licenses that you've issued. The hours you already issued have remained. So if you were contemplating kind of rolling back People's Hours, I would ask that we kind of hit pause on that, get more information from Council.

yeah so i don't know that that was actually understood at the point that the change was made to 11 coming out of the pandemic i i guess i would just say um because I do think if the reality is that most of the institutions out there do have the hours that they have, right? And I don't think there's been that many that have been approved since the last change, right? I think somewhere it said three, but again, we've read so many different things, I'm not sure how many are in which bucket. Yeah. I just think we should have a policy that matches the practice. and if the practice is that they're going to midnight, I think that's what the policy should be clear about.

And then they do have the right to set operating hours that are less than because it matches their business operations.

I guess I would say, further to the concerns of the Board of Health, it sounded like the concern was if restaurants were extending their hours. If the restaurants were today at 11, and basically we were changing our policy and then all the restaurants were going to serve until 12 that this would cause problems that this could lead to more drinking more violence more accidents more bad things, right? And that, I buy that. I mean, I think that makes sense. However, I'm not sure that that's what this is doing. From what I understand, this policy change would not By itself extend anyone's hours.

would enable it or not necessarily.

I mean, it's enabled now.

Yeah.

Right. I don't know that that's the thing. I mean, I don't know that it makes a material difference in the actual serving of alcohol in restaurants in Needham.

I think the only material difference is if the board were to make a decision that we want to go back to ABCC to change everybody's hours. to 11. To 11.

But that's rolling back from where we are.

Correct.

So we're not, I guess just to be clear, we're not contemplating saying to Needham restaurants, okay, you're all serving till 11, now you can all serve till 12. and we're going to have that that's not what this policy change is doing which I can understand the concern of that but from a real world practical matter it's not actually doing that.

Okay. Does anyone, do you have more to say on that particular subject? Because I think there were others within this.

It's been years since I've closed a bar. And so I did, through the time manager, ask the police department for some data and a look back of two years of what does it look like when they close. And in 25... This year there's only been one OUI and some coming off New Garden. and then there was one other in the 24 and then otherwise the cases seem to be intoxicated parties are falling asleep in cars or in parking lots. One was taken away in an ambulance, another was a protective custody. and that's over the last two years.

And they're not necessarily tied to the restaurants, as I recall from... Yeah, yeah.

One, I think there's a case where there was an intoxicated person, but the establishment said that wasn't our customer, that we didn't serve them. I think the takeaway is that I think restaurants are doing a good job tracking their customers and not over serving. So to stay at 11 or not to go to 12, I'm not sure. I'm not sure that makes that change. So I'm still okay keeping the policy, going to 12 to make it consistent.

Okay, I'm noting that the members of the Board of Health who are here would like to speak, but it's also not a public hearing. So I'm going to ask that since all of you have made comments, I'm going to ask you to leave it at that so that we can continue into the discussion. The other bit that the Board of Health brought up was the compliance checks that Katie spoke to earlier. I think One of the things that we did in 2023 was make our penalties have a good deal more bite. I think those penalties, especially as you mentioned, relate to our regulations about scanner use etc are part of why

our violations have been up and down this year. And I feel like we have addressed that a good deal this year. I would not like to see our penalties Reduced, but I understand from the memo that there is case law that sort of talks about what is generally considered acceptable, and that is the source of the abeyance language. And I wonder if we could hear a little bit more about that, because I don't want to put you on the spot. Town Council.

While council is coming up, I just would just say to this point, the adding the language about having it it may be held in abeyance for one calendar year again is to get at your current practice so um you can always hold any of these violations in abeyance whether that language is there or not and this is just to clarify that that is an option available to you and is one that town council has invited advised us to use for first compliance check failures because they're perceived as educational in nature and not a violation of the regulations.

Okay, so is that basically it, that case law says that they're educational?

Yes.

See, that was easy. She did all the work.

Can I ask a question, though, Chris? Case law says they're educational. maybe part of what's different is the fact that we have also put a penalty in place for not using the scanner right and I don't know if that's common with other towns Part of what I've been thinking about is it effectively doubles the penalty time, which, again, I don't know that that's in common for other towns for a first offense for a compliance check issue. and it was making me think more about that penalty and whether keeping both in abeyance. I was trying to think back. Did keeping both in abeyance make our case with the James harder because Then we had two days that were actually in abeyance, not one, plus the increased penalty there. It was a lot of time.

So do you have any insight about other communities and whether they similarly have put penalties in place for things like scanner use?

I personally do not, but I have colleagues in the office who could answer that question for you. So I'm afraid I can't answer it tonight, but if you would like me to come back with more information, we can certainly do that.

And I think to the policy question you're raising, there have been at least the recent violations that this board has handled. I think in all instances if my memory is serving correctly there have been multiple violations so compliance failure in some instances but then multiple regulations so we are bringing before the board kind of that matrix of kind of all of the penalties and part of that decision is kind of are you stacking them and are they additive and so I think it is rare that there would be a first offense compliance check failure held in abeyance where you're not also considering the penalties under the other section.

that's what we've seen, I agree and I'm wondering again if that is a common practice across towns or not and I don't have a sense of that but I've been thinking about that

Are we able to get that information?

Well, I think other colleagues who practice in this area.

Happy to come back at your next meeting.

Could we maybe just postpone taking a vote on this?

Yeah, I think that's where we're at. Because we all have some questions. I mean, generally speaking, I would like to make these changes. I think it makes sense to have our policy and our practice aligned. And while I appreciate and participated in making our regulations stricter, I do think it behooves us to have some flexibility. We are here to have our licensees behave according to the law, not to put them out of business or hamper them significantly if we want them to succeed and to change their behavior. The goal is to change their behavior. So I do think that having that flexibility when we have so many regulations that they have to follow is really important. So it'd be good to see how we stack up.

Great. We can do that.

I would also be interested, Katie, and I don't know if this is something that Chief might be helpful on, but Given that I now understand this disparity in different restaurants having different close times and end times, are we aware of individuals in town who actually bar hop to follow closure times? I mean to what extent do we have some understanding of that phenomenon? I'm just curious. and how does that impact it and how do the operators with later close times think about that responsibility in the last hour? It may be interesting even to talk to some of the restaurant owners who are in that case.

Right.

okay so it sounds like we're gonna just hold off on this

all right so the next thing i i do want to thank the board of health for coming and talking to us because i do think it's led to a more careful conversation and that we continue to have yes thank you marianne and thank you to

all of the members of the board of health who have showed up appreciate it okay so next thing Pollard Pollard

I just wanted to provide an update of the activity that's been happening since largely since the last the all boards summit. So I just have a lot of kind of verbal updates to share and then happy to answer any questions there was a slide deck in your packet that I just gave a lot of context I'm not going to go through the slides but for the public and for you I think it was a good snapshot of what's coming ahead and some of the key points So since the all boards meeting last month, the permanent public building committee serving as the school building committee has continued to advance all seven options. We are in the preferred schematics Rappaport phase, which is the second half of the feasibility process with the Mass School Building Authority. And because we are in the middle of feasibility, I guess I would articulate that it's the point at which you ask all of the questions and try to map out all of the answers to the questions.

So there are a lot of questions and they are being processed, but I wanted to share First forthcoming information that folks can anticipate and that the design team and our building design construction staff are actively working on. Those include further exploration of building options on each site, so both Pollard and DeFazio, the traffic studies on both sites, Stormwater, and not just kind of what are the challenges for stormwater, but what might mitigation look like or what would be necessary to meet our stormwater requirements. updated cost estimates and kind of answers to additional questions from the MSBA themselves about process questions that we need clarification on. So I'll share a few more thoughts about that. in a bit. events that we're preparing for.

In the packet, there are the upcoming community events. There's been a lot of opportunities for engagement, tours at the Pollard, sustainability workshops, a number of forms and workshops. I want to just flag two upcoming events that are particularly include select board participation. um these are already on your schedules I hope um but November 17th there's a public hearing um at the Pollard at 6 30 and this really is um for folks to be able to share any of their thoughts directly with you as the elected board the school committee as the other primary elected board and then with the school building committee ppbc so again november 17th public hearing and then on Monday November 24th we have the second all-board summit and the first summit really was focused on where we were

Looking at two sites, Pollard and DeFazio, did we want to continue advancing both or just to advance the feasibility for the Pollard site? and the focus for the second all boards meeting I think I would summarize is two key questions the first is is there clear consensus at that point for one option and if there's not do we want additional time within the P.S.R., this part of the feasibility process in order to get there. And so just to give you a sense that that is kind of what I expect the discussion to be focused on at that all boards meeting.

Is there extra time?

I'm sorry, what?

Is there extra time?

Well, so let me come back to that. Yes. And the other thing we're planning for is with We're advancing all seven options and any option that ends up being the chosen option will require some action of town meeting. Both sites will require zoning amendments. if DeFazio is the chosen site, it will require land transfer votes and votes around Article 97 requirements. And so we are kind of mapping out the process for a potential special town meeting in January. And this will show up on board agendas soon, given the kind of legal timelines that we need in order to process zoning changes and get Warrants opened and processed for for a special town meeting. So just to flag that in November.

right around the all boards meeting we will have to start the process with the planning board discussing the zoning amendments and here at the select board you all opening a warrant and the other conversation that is underway and will have to continue is really about the land transfer that would be required at the DeFazio site. So the school committee has requested to start kind of formal discussions with the Park and Rec Commission and the select board would be able to engage in that working group to discuss what might the details of a land transfer look like. And so that request from the school committee to Park and Rec Commission is currently pending. and that is something that I will keep you apprised on.

Katie, I'm sorry, can you just say again when we would have to start the town meeting process? I'm just looking at all these dates in November. So I missed.

Right. So at your second November meeting, the select board would open the warrant. And what's the date of that? That's November 25th.

So the day after the all-board summit.

I feel like we're going to need more time.

Okay, good to know. I'll say that for right now. Good to know. Interesting.

I mean, I guess this is my concluding thought, which gets at the previous question, which is I think time is our largest challenge. And The reality of being in feasibility and advancing both sites and both grade configurations is that you're trying to answer all of the questions that are good and necessary and need to be answered kind of on one timeline. And so the actively gathering the pieces of the puzzle. And I'd say, you know, I think of it as kind of two parallel tracks that we're working on in concert. There's the actual construction engineering track that the traffic and the stormwater and the building design itself and then there's kind of the governance pieces the land transfers and the zoning and all of that We're kind of moving both of those trains forward in parallel together. And it makes it challenging in the sense that at that all boards meeting, I think we're working as fast as we can to get

answers to as many of the questions as we possibly can have for you all as decision makers to have at that point. There's not a lot of time there from when the information will be fully vetted to when we have to kind of pivot to those governance timelines. both under kind of a special time meeting timeframe, but also the MSBA as well. So the question about do we have more time? I think we are fleshing out kind of all of our list of questions for the MSBA to fully understand kind of the domino effect of if we were to extend the preferred schematic report beyond the current timeframe. So right now the plan is to have the school building committee vote in early December, submit it to the MSBA by December 18th. That is all to meet timelines that the MSBA then has for their board to process our submission.

So the things that we know about extending that timeline, I'd say one is if we extend our submission to MSBA past December, We then ultimately would not go to a November ballot. We'd be extended into the spring of 27. Or later.

Is that an option? I don't even know if later is an option.

So the second piece is that is an outcome that we know that delay would cause. and then we are actively going to be discussing with MSBA kind of the other dominoes that may also be impacted because they have strict time requirements throughout their process.

could there be a special election if we don't make it spring?

I don't know. All right. So this is part of the feasibility process to kind of map out the eventualities here.

and there is also a possibility that we would lose MSBA participation. or no. I don't think we are phrased that as a statement, but it's a question.

Sorry, I do not believe we're at a position right now where I'm worried that we will lose the partnership. I think if we don't have a project funding agreement with the MSBA when we go to the voters we would have to say that their support is conditional but that is

Wait, actually, I'm confused about that. So there's a possibility we would go to the voters to vote on a project that we don't yet have MSBA commitment to?

that is a possibility so if we don't have kind of fully concluded the article 97 process the MEPA process if there is zoning amendments that are still pending kind of all the site control Details, the MSBA board votes on our project as conditional until those things are secured.

I guess I'm not comfortable with that because then we don't know what would the voters be voting on? What tax increase would they be accepting? We don't know.

So this is the, you know, all of the questions that we're mapping out so that you have kind of full information.

Yeah. Am I right though, Katie, that that is a DeFazio concern, not a Pollard side concern?

So Article 97 only applies at DeFazio. So that's correct. And Article 97 automatically would trigger some level of MEPA review. on our list to confirm though is if there is a possibility that MEPA could be triggered at the Pollard site so we'll get that answer but article 97 is not a factor on the Pollard site

So it is still an open question if MIPA could be triggered on power. I'm gonna, yeah. Great.

Okay, and so we expect all of this information to come in mid to late November. I don't think.

The 24th.

A lot of it will come mid to late November, yes. And if things are done earlier, traffic might be earlier, we will get it out as it comes. But, you know, we're working furiously.

Yeah, yeah. No, I...

but it would be fair to say that we're not, at least I thought I understood that we're not expecting the MEPA answer in November or December. Right, that the MEPA review is longer than that. Oh, yeah. Okay. And we wouldn't expect to have jurisdictional issues.

I guess. No, but I think we would know by then or we should know by then what we're entering into. So if there's going to be a land transfer. and what parcels that would involve, whether MIPA would be triggered by Pollard, potentially, if that's a thing. We would not have started any of those processes. So we would at least know what we have to investigate further. I don't think we would know how long the MIPA review would be. I don't know that we're ever going to know that.

and we wouldn't enter into the MEPA process until the one chosen site is selected and then we advance into schematic design so the chair is correct what we would know in November is kind of what level of MEPA review, if any, applies to each option, an anticipated timeline for, you know, our best guess for how long that review might take. And then if the review is still pending, what does that mean for the town within the MSBA process?

Can I ask about the questions that MSBA had had? You alluded to those about process.

questions the town has for the MSBA just about these timeline implications.

Can I add some more thoughts? So in this discussion, when we had the original school master plan, the idea was in the master plan to do an ad reno to Pollard and it wasn't conceived to do like a new building it's fine to do things differently but that was the reason for why we had a six through eight school because there would be no place to put Mitchell when we were having a you know for swing space Now that we're considering a new building, I'm not passing judgment on that, but considering a new building, it occurs to me that we're going to now have Potentially three buildings that are underutilized. Hillside, High Rock as swing space for some part of time, but not full time. And then the old Pollard building.

I think would be demolished.

Well, all of these things. I just I think I want to know what we're getting into and know how we're dealing with these underutilized buildings. If it is demolition, that's an option, but I just want us to understand that. Sure. and then the second question is what is the timeline for Mitchell? Because I keep hearing that going six through eight is the least expensive option in the long run. But that's implicit that we're doing Mitchell soon, I think. I don't know what the timeline for Mitchell is. I guess one of the questions, go ahead.

It's on the map. That's addressed on the map.

Oh, no, I've seen that. I've seen that. Has that changed? Because a lot of things have changed since that master fund. So has that changed at all? and when it comes to costs, I just want to make sure that we have enough debt capacity to get to Mitchell.

and I would just ask also I mean I think we've discussed this before but it's important I think for the project holistically to include the cost for those impacts which are you know officially out of scope of a building so not included in construction costs but like if there was a land transfer or if the building is built in the backyard of Pollard and we have to clear the building as as discussed and then you know make fields I think that those costs need to be incorporated into the site project costs, because we're going to need to cover them. I mean, I think that we can't leave that out. and evaluate the costs if we don't have the entire picture. And I don't think it's fair to the...

community to not plan for those costs and then have to go to a town meeting having just done this big project. So I think for the evaluation, it really all needs to be included, even those projects that I think that the PPPC isn't directly responsible for, but we need to evaluate. So if I'm just trying to just sort of say that reading back.

In order to compare, in order to make a fair comparison, we need fully loaded costs.

Well, I don't know that fully loaded is what you're saying, but it needs to include a complete picture. So if fields are required to be replaced, that's what we're asking to have some actual... Or if traffic management includes...

are changing the street or something. That is what I meant by fully loaded.

That is the entire cost.

I just want to understand what the impacts are.

Not just the cost for the school. The entire cost.

yeah so so there's been a lot of you know pictures of the various buildings with cost per square foot and i just all i'm saying is i don't think those are the entire cost of the project and we need to make sure that roads and fields and whatever all else is included you know if there are impacts to DPW or if there are any other impacts we just need to know about them and if evaluate those costs and include those costs so that we can really do apples to apples right yeah the cost of making parking that cold

after all the fields.

I wouldn't call them included costs, but they're presumed costs. Presumed costs, yeah. Understood. We're not going to necessarily know in advance, but the best estimate that we can make.

if I could just comment on that to say this will become more clear when we can outline all of those costs for you but there are costs MSBA Regulations dictate what costs can be in the project that goes on the ballot, which ones they reimburse versus don't. So we can give you the full view. But just to say that we will also need to talk about what are the allowable things in the ballot question, etc. So it'll be a both and, but I just don't want anyone confused by that, that we can't, you know... Traffic mitigation costs off-site are not eligible project costs, things like that. But I hear the point that you need a full view.

I mean, I think the ballot language is very important, clearly. But before we get to the ballot language, we need to evaluate this for the health and economic security of the community. And we can't do that without understanding what all of the the total ticket is gonna be

I have a question, but I think Josh has a question too.

Thank you. It was related to what both Kathy and Marianne were saying about the total costs. And if they can't be in the override, because of MSBA regulations, that means they're going to have to be probably within the levy, which means they're competing with all the other things that we have. So I... In some ways, if it's fields, for instance, that disadvantages those fields because they could get pushed back.

is that is that what you said though it i mean is the language of the balance i mean this is maybe a question for later but um the total project cost and the reimbursed cost is are is that not something that we can explain

So this is on the list of information that we will provide. Yeah. Fair enough.

but I do concur that MSBA language is very prescribed about how the project gets described and my concern is that if there were in fact a presumption that there were another override to make some of these other things happen I think we need to be thoughtful. Frankly, they ought to come together. All right. And people ought to understand what that whole picture is, because otherwise I do worry exactly as Josh does that if it's competing with other things in the levy. you may end up with no fields depending on what else is there in that particular year. So it's... Yeah. Lots we need to learn.

We can't make a good decision unless we understand. the entire cost to the town of these different options. So we do need to grapple with that. And it might look different than what we see here.

yes okay thank you for that update all right and so next we have fiscal year 2027 budget consultation with our fearless director of finance yes

So I'll kick it off and have Dave chime in. but I'm going to quote Dave to say that we started the budget season with staff and Dave said it's not bad but it's not good either. So I think that's kind of our starting point for this budget season. And this is my sixth budget cycle with Needham, but obviously my first as town manager. And just looking forward to a lot of work in the months ahead to get us where we need to be on the budget. and I thought it would be helpful to do a check in and just share kind of some initial thoughts, things Dave and I have been talking quite a bit about in terms of trends that we're monitoring on the cost side and on the revenue side, and then talk a little bit about the timeline and what the board can expect both on the capital and operating budget side.

and let me start just we are currently in fiscal year 26 and that largely was a maintenance budget So meaning we didn't add much in terms of kind of new investments in staff or programs or services. It was largely kind of what was the cost in FY26 to do what we were doing in FY25. and kind of I think that's the starting point for I think how I'm viewing the likelihood of an FY27 budget. But we've asked departments to submit what they need, what they would like. all of us to consider for added services, but obviously we'll be reviewing those within the context of the current economy. So a few thoughts on cost trends. And Dave, chime in when I miss something. But you all are fully aware of our outstanding labor contracts that are coming due. So we will be talking with

the police superiors office police superiors again the police union for this is for fiscal year 27 contracts potentially multi-year the fire contract is up at the end of 26 and BCTIA, which is our union for trades and custodial staff within building maintenance. So those are four contracts that we'll be working on and getting underway in the coming months. We also had funding from Annual Town Meeting to do a classification and compensation study for all nonrepresented Sorry, nonpublic safety personnel. So union and nonunion. This is where we hire a consultant to take a look at how we are

classifying positions, comparing like duties and how we are comparing to our municipal counterparts in terms of pay and we're remaining competitive. So we are procuring that study now and that will be something we'll be working on in the year ahead. Health insurance is a cost that we're monitoring. Obviously, it's in the news almost every day. The town is kind of no different than and any other player in the health insurance market. We're part of a consortium, West Suburban Health Group. We do cooperative purchasing and we have a study underway looking at our participation in that Cooperative, along with the other alternatives that we would have available to us. So that's to join the group insurance commission or to participate in the Maya's insurance program.

and so we're evaluating those options to make sure we're understanding the impacts for us. and the last cost item that we've been discussing of course is tariffs and the deputy manager's guidance to staff was to not budget any higher don't make any kind of default across the board assumptions but if we've heard directly from a vendor that they are including in their pricing any adjustments due to tariffs, then that would be reflected in what we see submitted. Let me pause there and see, Dave, anything else on costs?

No, those were all the key components. And Town Manager also explained this to the Finance Committee as well. and they thought that was a good roadmap.

Then on the revenue side, obviously the majority of our revenue comes from property taxes, but the things that we're watching really around state aid and federal budget, I just want to make note of. We had discussed at one of your earlier meetings that the governor had kind of proactively sought authority to make mid-year budget cuts, including to local aid. The legislature has not taken that request up, but we are kind of just monitoring the discussions at the state level. and much of their discussions are around the impacts to cuts at the federal level would have on the state budget and so generally for the federal budget we do have some direct grants that support health and human services, some funds that go to the schools. And so we are actively monitoring all of those. But I think the bigger

picture is that just generally volatility at the federal level makes planning hard. That's just the concluding thought there. And so we will continue to be watching and understanding the impacts to us locally based on what's happening at the federal level. That was it on the trends side. And take questions before I dive into timeline.

Ask what projected revenue growth you're using for 27.

I won't be in that position until we finally wrap up the tax recap process, which happens through November and comes before the board the last week of November, the first week of December.

Do you have it for this year, 26? 26.

We were working on an assumption of about 5% overall.

Okay.

and then on the capital side I was just looking at what had we had plans for May town meeting and including that the quiet zone whatever placeholder. That was a $4.5 million placeholder. We have $15.6 million in debt financing for various projects. Are those going to be recommended to go forward on schedule if it's Center at the Heights, Cooks Bridge, Public Works Phase 2 Design, Water Supply.

The deadline for submissions just passed and we're just correlating right now. We don't, as the board's aware, timing of capital projects, for instance, changes from year to year. and specifics. And then specifically to the quiet zone, there are other factors impacting that up and beyond workload. So again, Over the next four to six weeks, a lot more will be in terms of timeline will be known. But in terms of where we are in total revenue and stuff, our revenue forecast to come out in January with the budget.

Thank you. Thanks, Dave. So that's a good segue to what you can expect ahead. Budgets have been submitted from departments, capital and operating. We're starting our meetings with them and meeting all of this month to vet and review those. finance committee liaisons are also participate in those meetings and we'll be bringing to the board discussions around priorities that you want to set for the budget and also at your next meeting the initial list of the capital requests that were submitted just to give you a sense of what's come in. But we'll review those kind of ongoing at your next few meetings. Ultimately, you'll vote on the capital priorities December 16th. So we and then the finance committee really starts robustly their review starting in December.

So we'll work towards a final CIP release of the capital plan in early January. The time manager, my operating budget, that will come to you later in January. Thank you.

This actually kind of feels like we're opening day for baseball.

I mean, yes.

And I look forward to the priorities discussions.

Great.

Thanks, Dave. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there other things? Keane, tell me the jurors report.

just to say I don't want to steal thunder for any board discussion but I just wanted to thank the park and recreation team they put on the family the fall family day including spooky walk and they had just under 600 kids register for that and they had a wonderful day weather-wise you can share your personal experiences being there but I just wanted to thank them for their hard work and planning on that and Just a general public service announcement. The town's been notified by residents that people have been receiving fraudulent emails that look like they're from the planning department basically saying, did you apply for a permit? You owe us some money. Unfortunately, scams are getting very sophisticated and it sometimes can be really challenging to catch something when you see it. So our advice to folks is particularly if you've have no permits submitted to the planning department, that's your first thought that we would not be asking you for money.

But if you're ever in doubt, please just call. the town call town hall call the department and just ask you know i got this email was this really from you and we'd be happy to clarify and we just don't want anybody sending money or wiring money based on a phishing scam so

Katie, I wonder if we should think about offering fishing type training like at the CAF for people. Interesting. It just feels like maybe there's a service that the town could provide to help on that.

To avoid it, not to do it.

To avoid it, yes. Not to help people create fishing. requests but but it seems to me like generally that's the population that doesn't know that that's the time to pick up the phone and call directly and and just check that's great

that's it okay so the next thing on our agenda is the board discussion of an open meeting law complaint Mr. Heap join us thank you thank you

hello everyone welcome back thank you glad to be here Okay, so on October 14th of this month, the Select Board received an open meeting law complaint filed by Judith McIntyre. The complaint concerns the meeting held on October 9th. and this meeting was held in memorial park field house and was held between several town representatives a representative of the stephen palmer associates and the current residents of the stephen palmer building the purpose of this meeting was to directly inform the residents of the Stephen Palmer building of efforts that the town expected to undertake to manage the The time between now and when the ground lease with Stephen Palmer Associates expires in May of 2027. That meeting, again, was held on October 9th.

Attending that meeting on behalf of the town were the town manager, the deputy town manager, Kathy, Mary Ann, the director of planning and community development, the town's housing specialist, and two representatives from housing to home, which is the town's outside consultant engaged to help manage the expiration of the lease. So the complaint filed with the board asserts that the meeting was held in violation of the open meeting law because it was not held with prior posted 48 hours notice of an agenda. Minutes were not kept and it was not otherwise conducted in accordance with the procedures required of an open meeting under the open meeting law. in response to that, I've reviewed the complaint and I don't believe that this was a violation of the open meeting law. And I don't believe that the meeting itself was subject to the requirements of the open meeting law for several reasons.

First and foremost, the meeting was a town manager's meeting. It was arranged for, conducted principally by the town manager, and town officials and elected officials who were selected by the town manager to attend and help facilitate the meeting again primarily town manager meeting not a certainly not a select board meeting Number two, the group that was arranged to participate in the meeting from the town side was not a subcommittee or other type of public body within the meaning of the open meeting law. It was the attendees on the town side were again selected by the town manager. not by the select board or any other public body in town. And finally, although there were two select board members in attendance, that's less than a quorum. and the open meeting law only applies to the select board, only applies to a quorum of the select board, not to less than a quorum.

So for those three reasons at least, in my opinion, this is not a violation of the open meeting law. and I'd suggest that in accordance with the board's recent prior practice, the board authorize me to respond in that manner to the person who filed the complaint. Just procedurally, what the board is required to do is meet to discuss the complaint within 14 business days after receipt and provide the complainant with a written response and a copy to the Attorney General's office. that's what we've done in the past and what I suggest we do again in response to this complaint but that's the recommended approach for me but I'm happy to answer any questions about the complaint or my proposed response

Sure. Any discussion? Kevin? Kathy?

No, there was a thought about deliberations were held at the meeting, but there were no deliberations.

the meeting I believe was primarily intended to share information directly with the residents of the building about what the town was planning to do and what the town was planning to propose to town meeting um which was then scheduled to occur a week a week or more uh after the meeting the next monday yeah okay

I agree that it's not an open meeting law violation for those reasons. I think in reading the complaints, one of the things that struck out at me is that the subject matter should have occurred in open session. I do agree with that. But I think in general when we get open meeting law complaints, it's indicative of frustration or people who feel like they did not have enough information. and I sympathize with that because there was no information that was publicly available at the time.

Yeah, although I would say that it was because we were in negotiations and the Select Board hadn't had the chance to discuss it in public. Mary?

Well, the Select Board hadn't discussed it in public and the goal was to discuss it with the residents actually before it became public so they would not hear it from something else yeah so it was an attempt to do the right thing and of course it occurred because of the timing of negotiations concluding only just before that, so it was scheduled at the very first possible moment, which happened to be the very last possible moment. Both were the same. Frankly, the fact that we were coming up on that possible moment I think was part of what helped to get negotiations to close fine like that.

Yeah.

you know your your comment is is taken i mean unfortunately it is it was not anyone's wish that everything takes so long so that we couldn't give more notice and have discussions in public. Unfortunately, that's the way it worked out. But as to Marianne's point, I mean, the intention was to share privately with the residents and not in a public meeting that the public could have attended.

To my recollection, part of what the meeting was called to share with residents of the building was the arrangement that the town had hoped to come to with Stephen Palmer Associates. And there had to have been an agreement in principle with Stephen Palmer Associates before there was anything to share with the residents. the agreement in principle was reached with stephen palmer associates i believe the prior this meeting was on a thursday i believe i mean that agreement was reached the prior tuesday evening um so there was uh the the meeting was held less than 48 hours and pretty close to 24 hours after the agreement had reached with the Stephen Palmer Associates.

So, do we have, does someone want to tender this motion?

Sure.

Madam Chair, I move that the Board authorize Town Council to prepare and submit a response to the open meeting law complaint.

Second. All right. Any more discussion? All those in favor? Aye. The motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, so now we move on to committee reports. So who wants to start? Kevin?

Sure. On October 21st, I went to the Tower Ave. neighborhood meeting. General consensus was the project was beneficial. There was appreciation for the DPW's many iterations.

Hang on just one sec. Let's just wait for the room to quiet.

Don't stop when Mark comes. Didn't forget you before.

OK, maybe you want to start from the top?

All right. So on the 21st, I went to the Tower Ave meeting, the neighborhood meeting. There was general consensus the project was beneficial. There was appreciation for the DPW's many iterations. There was disappointment from some residents that the project would be delayed until spring. They weren't done soon. There was thought that they wish there were sidewalks on Paul Riviere, but that's another project. and so general thought is go ahead with it.

And could I comment on that? Yeah. So Kevin and I also attended another meeting earlier in October. And I sent the town manager 26 comments from residents at that meeting. Would the town manager, would it be OK for you to circulate that on the Slack board? I think the concerns that were raised were not about not doing the projects. The concerns were sidewalks and crosswalks. As long as we're doing it, can we make it safer than what is proposed?

yeah but i i appreciate that that a few people did say that um i think they're about the same number of people at each meeting and definitely there was some concern about the validity of the petition that had been sent around. None of the abutters had known about it and so I think then there were some people who did want the sidewalks on Paul Revere but that at the last meeting was sort of seen as like that is another project and it's a sense that the perfection cannot be the enemy of good so In conclusion, I think especially the abutters and the neighbors are in favor of this project, so I hope we do it. and then next was envision.

Envision means discuss the select board feedback and understanding there are no parklets and survey questions are coming out in mid-January.

Kevin, can I ask a question? I know that I had hoped and I thought I had expressed that hope at the last meeting that we would let the committee do a walkthrough of those plans kind of block by block to be sure that everybody understood what was going on in those. And as far as I can tell, that hasn't happened yet, at least. It's not clear to me that there's an anticipation that that would occur.

No, I want that to happen, yeah. That would be a good one to walk through almost block by block.

Block by block.

And understand the distinction between the three plans.

because I do still think there's confusion and I think being able to have that video available for members of the public too who are similarly confused would be quite helpful.

Ultimately, I think the committee will be giving us a list of pros and cons of the options. And from there, we'll have to sort through.

Well, and I think I'm just using as a point of comparison. I know other board members have seen it as well. We all had the opportunity to do a block by block through the Highland Avenue project. but I found that really helpful and it gave me in that instance, the opportunity to engage about pros and cons. And again, I think for the committee, to have that opportunity to engage about pros and cons may help everybody to think about this from a little bit different perspective.

I think that's on the list for the next meeting.

Okay. Thank you.

um okay sorry that's all i got i went on a little tangent in my head um that's all you've got okay kathy i do not have updates okay uh josh

No, I do not have updates.

Marion? Large House met Monday. I'm thinking Monday this week. and they are at a stage of having discussions about they spent time on Monday again looking at the fiscal impact of different options and trying to understand what that would look like based on reductions potential reductions in the total size of the house that could be built on different size lots. And then starting to have a discussion about How could they focus on considering certain size reductions? Were there any size reductions that could be eliminated as too much or too little to be worthy of consideration and further discussion? I'm not completely sure that we were able to eliminate two, the top and the bottom. I'm not sure where that landed. I think we eliminated the top.

I'm not clear if we eliminated the bottom yet. But at any rate, the goal is to be narrowing the options so that they can focus discussion or we can focus discussion on what some of these reductions might mean and what they effectively might mean to a neighborhood. in preparation for talking to the planning board and for a public hearing on November 18th.

I believe. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So I would say all of that obviously is correct but also that the large house committee will be presenting to the planning board on the 4th which I think if people are interested and want to get ahead of the public forum might be a really Good chance to see what the fiscal impact is looking like and sort of what the parameters are that the committee is considering. But then again, there will be a large house review opened public forum in Powers Hall on the 18th.

And we should probably be clear, when we're talking about fiscal impact, the reason there's a fiscal impact is because The town, if smaller houses are built, would experience at least briefly some reduction in new growth. So it's really just the new growth amount because the building is smaller than it used to be. I mean, that's really... Thank you. that potential loss of new growth might be.

Okay well I will just take a few minutes then to congratulate our town manager on her first solo special town meeting. in addition to that evening the select board went to the MWRA rock core core rock Sample Facility on Friday. We had a fascinating little field trip to understand the work that the MWRA is doing in preparation for the massive tunnel project. saw really long pieces of rock. It was much more official and scientific than I'm making it sound. Saw the the really detailed map that they're building of the underlying ground conditions all along the path of the and the proposed tunnel, which will start in Needham in both directions.

So it's going to be a huge project that is very much in the public good, I think. And they were kind enough to sort of give us a lot more detail about how they are conducting this research and then what happens next so that was fascinating and we appreciate them hosting a public meeting the spooky walk was mentioned by the town manager Kevin and I were at the Spooky Walk all day and we were both dressed up and we were awesome. Kevin was wearing armor as a stormtrooper very exciting costume and really got just the I thought my costume was really good but I was standing next to a stormtrooper and so didn't I didn't get as much appreciation for it as I might have liked.

The costume was great.

Everyone loved it. I do want to call everyone's attention to we have a week of upcoming public forums and it's not next week, but I just I feel like everyone should know. So I'm going to say it at every meeting. at every meeting. On 11-17, that's on Monday, we have a big hearing on a big public forum on the Pollard project. the next night we have a big public hearing on the large house review project and the night after that we have a large public forum all of these in Powers Hall by the Tree Preservation Planning Committee on the proposed tree bylaw and other events that the tree committee is coming up with. It's a long week. It's a lot of public forums in one week. And unfortunately, that's just sometimes the way it shakes out.

But with advance notice, hopefully folks will be able to attend those forums that they feel most strongly about. and then one more time I'm just going to say that the town's Veterans Day observance is 11 at 11 at Memorial Park. So come and join us. And that's it. Anybody have anything else?

Move to adjourn.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Good night.