Needham Select Board, 6/9/26

Thank you for watching!

Recording in progress

calling to order this left board meeting for Tuesday, June 9th. This meeting is being broadcast by the Needham channel for the town's YouTube channel and via Zoom and is being recorded for publication and later viewing by the Needham Observer and Needham Local. If anyone else is recording the meeting, time to tell us is now. okay so uh we'll get to public comment in just one sec but i wanted to open the meeting this evening in memory of a town employee who we recently lost John Buchanan was known to Bucky as his friends and coworkers and passed away in May. Bucky was a public works employee for nearly 40 years, serving as a heavy motor equipment operator in our highway division. He was a dedicated member of the team and will be missed. and our thoughts are with Bucky's friends, family, along with our appreciation for his commitment and many contributions and years in Needham.

all right um so we have a number of public comments today so i'm going to just remind everyone of our norms here which are that we will call you up i'm going to ask you to introduce yourself first and last name and say your address and then um you can speak for approximately three minutes. We try to keep it to three minutes so that we have time to get to everyone and every other thing that we have to follow. and that's it. So our first first on our list is Tina Burgos. Welcome.

That is freaking me out. Turn it that way. My name is Tina Burgos. I reside at 31 Fairview Road and I am a member of the Needham Human Rights Committee. Good evening members of the board. I appreciate all of you and your time and I want to start by clearly stating that I am frustrated with this new committee member nomination process, not with individuals involved with its inception. I believe less than minimal conversation about the open positions for the Human Rights Committee has been carried out. This is very concerning because we are resetting the committee with four new members and are substantially realigning our goals. I do not recall any select board members attending any of our meetings and actively participating in our discussions this term maybe you have watched one or two meeting recordings but even so you would not have gained full insight into where we have been this past year and where we are attempting to go in the future. And our future will require a rigorous level of commitment and defined skill sets to achieve our community-based objectives.

To me, this new nomination process is not well considered. I understand open meeting law requirements and agree the conducting of public interviews is highly inappropriate. However, it is also inappropriate to appoint committee members unilaterally without necessary guidance from those who are entrenched in the work. I do not see why open and public meetings between the select board representative responsible for the nomination process and committee chairs and even members could not be scheduled to discuss the specific needs of each committee and to follow up for feedback after interviews have taken place. From my standpoint, this would be a critical and welcome step in the process so prospective volunteers have a distinct understanding of their expectations and their roles as committee members. I would rather have vacant seats than members, while well-intentioned, who are not a right fit for the committee. Many of you in this room know it has taken us years of extreme dedication and hard work to reestablish the Human Rights Committee as a truly legitimate organization. And it would be extremely disheartening if we regressed, particularly in the challenging climate in which we are currently living.

So I'm respectively asking you to take a pause in the nominations. So since submitting this initial statement, we were approached by a candidate that had troubling experience. During their interview, they were led down a path that felt like they were being asked about their personal views about a very complex and divisive issue involving religious beliefs. They expressed that when the quote unquote correct answer was not provided, the interview abruptly ended. This unprompted personal account, which I imagine was very difficult to come forward with, raises serious concerns regarding bias profiling and the risk of nonpartisan committees being used to carry out individual political agendas. This claim, along with my previous points, highlights the need for a process overhaul that puts transparency first. I can urge you to pause the silo nomination process until a clear, open and consensus driven path can be fully evaluated to guarantee the sanctity of committees is protected. Thank you.

Thank you, Tina. I hope you'll stay till the end for the discussion.

Did I make it?

Plenty of time.

All right. Our next public comment is from Bert Herlock. Thanks for coming.

Hello, I'm Bert Herlock. I reside at 100 Edgewater Drive, Needham. I'd like to begin by thanking Katie King and the Development Review Team for the extraordinary work that went into the submission they have prepared for MEPA regarding the campus at 128. it's comprehensive and professional and fairly captures the concerns of both Needham and Dedham residents as well as raising questions we should all be asking so thank you Katie your report demonstrates the town's firm commitment to its residents and makes me grateful to have lived in Needham for the past 31 years. I'm asking the Needham Select Board in the strongest terms to approve this submission to MEPA. To put our concerns and this submission in context, one has only to watch the Minitown meeting that the Dedham Planning Board held on November 10, 2025, in which the Vice Chair of the Dedham Planning Board discusses Dedham's plans for a development zone in the residentially zoned corridor between 128 and the border with Needham.

The campus at 128 is not an isolated endeavor. It is the first in what Dedham hopes will be at least five more parcels in the same vicinity. To put the importance of Needham's response in context, during that meeting, at about 1 hour and 57 minutes, if you care to listen, the Vice Chair of the Dedham Planning Board says, and I quote, One of the questions that I have specifically about that project, referring to campus at 128 and the existing traffic challenges, I think of that project or most of these projects would have actually a greater impact or negative impact on Needham than they would on Dedham, but don't tell anybody that. It's hard to fairly convey how important it is for Needham to take a stand now and for the developer at the campus at 128 and subsequent developers along that corridor to be held to account for, in the town of Dedham's words,

the negative impact that these projects will have on Needham's quality of life, environment, water resources, safety, public transportation, taxes, property values, and mutual aid.

Thank you. Okay, our next public comment is from Aiden Boney. Welcome back.

Thank you.

Hello, everyone. My name's Aiden Boney. I live at 13 Nichols Road. And I am coming here to represent the Safe Streets Needham organization. Just a few weeks ago, a driver lost their life on Washington Street in Wellesley. That road carries more vehicles than Green Plain Avenue and had zero injuries over the last three years and a crash rate ten times lower than our downtown. Great Plain Avenue through downtown carries fewer cars in double the lanes and recorded 61 crashes, 11 injuries over that same period. Again, nearly 10 times as dangerous as a road where someone just died in our neighboring town. And two weeks ago, I believe, this board voted to rebuild Great Plan Ave essentially as it stands today, a plan with no meaningful safety improvements. A two-lane plan, in my opinion, offers real benefits for its limited downsides. carry long construction period that will disrupt our downtown. Why are we going to endure that disruption without meaningful safety improvements to show for it?

Construction workers do not vote on whether they wear a hard hat. We do not leave life-saving decisions to a popularity contest. This board has the authority and the responsibility to choose the safer option when one is available. There will come a day, perhaps on this board, or a future one, when a serious injury or death occurs on this stretch of road, as it did in 2009. When that happens, the people will ask, why did the board choose an unsafe plan when a safer one was on the table? I'm here today as a transportation engineer and a Needham advocate to ask that question before we have to ask it after a tragedy. Thank you all.

Thank you, Aiden. OK. Next up is Ken Buckley.

Good evening. My name is Ken Buckley. I reside at 221 Warren Street. And I came to speak this evening in support of subcommittee appointments that are transparent and inclusive. The proposed policy as outlined in the packet indicates to me that the policy allows for a single board member to negate the appointment of a resident to the committee, to any committee. Further, this veto power would be exercised outside of public view. Town Meeting recently voted in a resolution in support of democracy and against tyranny. Secret vetoes of committee appointments conflicts with that resolution. I believe that every person has inherent worth and deserving of dignity and respect. Town government is meant to be conducted in a non-partisan fashion.

So prior associations are not to be used in evaluating the qualifications of a candidate. At a recent select board meeting, an eminently qualified candidate seemed to be denied appointment based on one board member's opinion and supported by two others based on the view that one board member's opinion is enough to deny that appointment, if I understand what I witnessed. Please, I urge you to adopt a more transparent and democratic process than the proposed policy. The committees in town should be populated with a diverse set of members. so multiple perspectives are represented in town government. Thank you for listening.

And our last, well, at least the last public comment that I'm aware of is Gary Aegemian. So come on up.

Thank you, Madam Chair, select board members. Gary Ajamian, Precinct F. Town Meeting Member and I reside at 47 Meeting House Circle. I appreciate the three minutes here, but as I recall, there's no dialogue, correct? Correct. It's not a conversation.

It's not a conversation. We're just listening.

So I have before me your recommendations for updates to the appointment policy. I'm concerned that this proposal moves Needham in the wrong direction. As a town meeting member, I want to share what many residents are telling me. They're reaching out to me, and I honestly was not aware of this policy in the packet until residents contacted me with concerns. The residents are asking for the appointment process to be transparent from the beginning all the way to the end. Many residents observe that the same individuals are repeatedly appointed to multiple boards and committees year after year. As a result, some residents feel the process is predetermined and don't even bother applying. I'm sad when I hear that.

They believe that they have little chance of being considered. This proposal before us risks reinforcing that perception, which is not what we want here in Needham. It introduces subjective criteria such as demeanor and fit. and allows concerns to be addressed privately. It permits nominations to be withdrawn before a public discussion actually occurs. The question that I'm hearing is how will residents know whether appointments are being made based on qualifications and merit or based on private objections that are never explained publicly? If a qualified resident is passed over, I believe the public deserves to understand why. I ran a company for 40 years and we explained to the candidates that we were interviewing why we didn't accept them.

We had a more qualified candidate. The transparency in this builds trust. I also think it's fair to ask why these changes are being proposed now, especially after the appointment policy was only recently revised at the direction of the Attorney General's Office following a finding that an open meeting law violation had occurred. If our goal is greater participation, which I believe it is, and public trust, again, I believe it is, we should be making the process more transparent, not less. Thank you for my three minutes. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Okay, that's all that I had on my list. Is there anyone else in the room who wants to make a public comment?

thank you very much my name is ross donald um 25 h chambers street and my comments have nothing to do with any of the previous comments it's a whole different set of rules and regulations I'm going to refer to. The message I've provided to you and I'm going to read here part of it. is addressed to the Select Board with copies to other interested parties like the Housing Authority as well as the Office of the Attorney General. who I'm asking for their opinion on my observations and my question that I'm bringing to you. The observation is that the select board may have violated certain rules and regulations that require the Needham Housing Authority to consult with the local tenant organization recognized by the housing authority prior to submitting a request for a waiver to the executive office of HLC.

The waiver can apply to basically obviating any rules and regulations in favor of another option. The waiver is granted by the state during the time period 2020 to 2021 were requested by the select board and the housing authority without the housing authority consulting with the local tenant organization in place at the time. I can say I observed this failure of the housing authority to follow the rules because I was present at at least one of the public meetings between the select board and the housing authority held at the time. I was not allowed to speak because it was not a hearing and I was considered a member of the public, which I am. But the reality here is that at the time, 2020 to 2021, a recognized LTO did exist, was not included, and I was on the LTO board as a member at large.

I need to observe and report that there was no discussion between the LTO and the Housing Authority about waivers. The arrangement made between the Select Board and the Housing Authority did not include the LTO. This is a violation of critical parts of 760 CMR 6.10. I do not expect anybody to right the wrong that was committed five and six years ago, because when mistakes are made, such as a previous, fairly recent violation of the open meeting law regarding the appointment process, for the resident commissioner position was basically acknowledged as being legitimate, but

the practice is is kind of an institutional bias that provides the you know for the wrong to be not corrected and in favor of another kind of logic such as, well, the passage of time, or just the inconvenience of making a correction, about another 30 seconds. and I found it ironic that the process used by the select board to guarantee the participation of residents in public housing through an appointment of a resident commissioner did not include the participation of any of the residents in the process. The question is, if and when the select board makes no mistake

on its own, but nevertheless participates in a process that is flawed by the mistakes of the housing authority in this case, should the select board benefit from a process that has excluded and continues to exclude the participation of the residents as required. The question going forward would be, will the housing authority be required to meet with the LTO in accordance with the rules and regulations?

Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Is there anyone online for public comment? All right. I think we are going to move on to our agenda. OK, so the first thing on our agenda is our Juneteenth proclamation. And our vice chair will read the proclamation.

Certainly. 2026 Juneteenth Proclamation Whereas on July 4th, 1776, the 13 United States of America pronounced in their Declaration of Independence the self-evident truth that all men are created equal, even as those states continued to allow the cruel and inhumane enslavement of African people stolen from their homelands. And whereas, in 1863, during the Civil War, President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation declaring that all persons held as slaves within the states then in a state of rebellion are and henceforth shall be free. And whereas, due to the slow advance of Union troops, enslaved people in Texas did not know of the signing of the proclamation and their subsequent freedom until Union General Gordon Granger issued General Order No. 3 on June 19, 1865,

And whereas, in 1866, formerly enslaved people and their allies began commemorating the anniversary of the issuance of General Order No. 3 on June 19th, calling the date Juneteenth. With celebrations spreading throughout the South and the country over the next century and a half. And whereas, in 2020, Governor Charlie Baker signed into law a bill designating Juneteenth as a legal holiday in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Now therefore be it resolved that June 19, 2026 be declared Juneteenth in the Town of Needham, and that all residents be encouraged to observe Juneteenth as a celebration of the resilience of Black Americans and an opportunity for education about the true history of this country.

Madam Chair, I would move that the Board vote to approve and sign the 2026 Juneteenth Proclamation.

Second. Great. And before we vote, I just want to note that there's a town commemoration of this an observance of Juneteenth on the town common on June 19th at 9 30 a.m and our host will be the vice chair So if there's no discussion, we'll go to a vote. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Motion passes. Excellent. Okay, next up on our list is, we have a number of grants of location. The first is, Joanne is joining us, I see. Thank you, Carol. The first is for 150 Fair Oaks Park. Hi, Joanne. Good evening. How are you? Well, thanks. How are you?

Fantastic. Thank you. So, yes, Eversource is seeking a grant location to install approximately 55 feet of conduit into Fair Oaks Park, and that is to provide underground service to the new home at 150 Fair Oaks Park.

Great. Thank you. Is everything in order?

Everything is in order.

OK. Anybody have any comments? No. All right. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to make a comment in the room or online? Okay. If that's the case, I would welcome a motion.

I would move that the select board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately 55 feet of conduit in Fair Oaks Park. Second.

Okay, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Joanne. The next is 339 Chestnut Street.

Yes, Eversource is seeking a grant location to install approximately 50 feet of conduit into Chestnut Street. And again, that is to provide underground service to the home at 339 Chestnut Street.

okay and everything in order yes excellent anybody have any comments no okay this is a public hearing anyone in the room for this grant of location anyone online all right

Madam Chair, I would move that the select board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately 50 feet of conduit in Chestnut Street.

Second.

Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? The motion carries. Thank you. And our last one, Joanne.

Yes, lastly, Eversource is seeking a grant location to install approximately 17 feet of conduit into High Rock Street. and that is to provide underground service to the home at 373 Hyde Rock.

Okay. Everything is in order. All right. Any comments? No. All right. Anyone in the room want to comment? Anyone online? Okay. Motion?

I move that the select board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately 17 feet of conduit in High Rock Street. Second.

excellent all those in favor say aye aye those opposed the motion carries thank you Joanne thank you have a great evening have a whole bunch of non-problematic ones right in a row. Okay. Next thing is the introduction of our new treasurer and tax collector. So Celia Simchak, come on down.

welcome all right hello um i'm very excited to be here to introduce heath utter our new treasurer tax collector um it's his second week with us he started on june 1st So he's still meeting everyone and meeting too many people who all remember him and he'll have to remember all their names. But a little bit about Heath. He's coming to us. He was the previous business manager and district treasurer for the Franklin Central School District in Franklin, New York. So him and his family just moved up here. um before working for the school district he has a background in banking and has his bachelor's in business economics from SUNY Oneonta um so we're very excited to have him on board especially you know just with the turnover in the treasurer's department with the system ERP that we're going through the implementation process he's going to be a huge help for that and so yeah if you want to say just and no no pressure

No, I'm excited to be here. It's been a while. A few months coming, but we're relocating, as Cecilia said, my family. So excited to take this on, and it's been a great first week and a half, and we continue to move forward.

excellent well welcome welcome to to the town as a as an employee but also welcome to Needham um thank you and i hope you enjoyed here yes we're looking forward to lots of good things same yes

Yes, welcome. Go ahead, Josh. I'm sorry.

Go ahead, Josh.

This is a really important role that we have, and we're really excited that you're here to fill it, so thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Same as I.

yeah I just wanted to say your experience is wonderful and it's great that we have you we can take advantage of that and thank you

Again, no pressure.

Massachusetts has a bit of a reputation as being a quirky municipal administration state.

Completely undeserved.

I get to introduce him to the concept of town meeting, which is going to be fun. Yep. Yep. All of that.

Welcome to Needham. I hope you enjoy it here. Your resume is very interesting. You seem to have spent every day in upstate New York.

Yes.

Yes. So welcome to Massachusetts. Yankees or Mets?

Yankees. I did marry a Boston fan though so you should be. Thank you.

Oh, thank you. Best of luck. Appreciate it.

All right.

Too bad about the Yankees, but... Too bad about the Red Sox.

Well, thank you and welcome.

Thank you. Appreciate it.

Okay, so now we're going to talk about stormwater regulations, and we're going to be joined by Kim Donovan, our management analyst, and Tom Ryder, the town engineer. Perfect entrance, or maybe you were... lurking outside. Come on down, have a seat. Yeah, Jim Sullivan, come on up. Make yourself comfortable. Good to see you all. Okay, so fill us in. How's this going to work?

So I'll just introduce Kim Donovan, Tom Ryder, Jim Sullivan. So we are here to talk about your most favorite topic, I think, so at least two of you. Yeah, so we're going to discuss the regulations tonight. And in the packet that we sent, we included the draft regulations. some threshold scenarios as guidance that we provided that we'll continue to update. The town's website also has a lot of this information already. and as we get more information for guidance purposes, we will be updating those as well. So I'll turn it off to Kim.

Thanks. So first off, he just did the introduction, so we can skip right over that. So why regulations are needed. The Stormwater By-law establishes the Town's authority and overall requirements for managing stormwater impacts associated with land disturbing activities, which we so lovingly passed last October. However, regulations are necessary to provide the detailed standards and procedures required for consistent implementation and administration of those wonderful bylaws. The proposed stormwater regulations establish clear permit thresholds, design requirements, performance standards, review procedures, and operation and maintenance obligations. Together, the bylaw and regulations create a comprehensive framework that supports compliance with federal and state stormwater requirements, protects our water quality, promotes responsible development practices, and aids in the mitigation of localized flooding and drainage concerns throughout the community.

So the process we went through for regulation development was reviewing existing town requirements, federal MS4 permit obligations, Massachusetts Stormwater Standards and regulatory approaches utilized by our neighboring municipalities. The draft regulations were prepared and developed in conjunction with the Stormwater By-law Committee at when we were doing the bylaw rewrite. They took a great interest and input on what the regulation should be to administer the bylaw. making sure that they were practical, enforceable, and consistent with current stormwater management practices. And then we also did some engagement exercises where we held, I believe, three Coffee Hours, open to the public, contractors, developers, or members of the community. We had a great turnout.

We'll slow trickle in at the beginning, but by the end, we had 10 to 15 people, which was great with lots of constructive good questions that actually fed to some edits and changes in our Regulations Draft. So we have incorporated some of the things that were brought up as not a concern, but more of a confusion or was not explained enough for them. So overview of the regulations themselves. So there's a lot of information in the regulations, but to distill it down and make it very quick overview, The stormwater regulations establish the standards, procedures, and technical requirements. establishes what standards need to be met. And it also gives you an idea of how the compliance to those bylaws will be maintained. It is obviously just a high level overview, but that's essentially what the regulations are proposed for.

and when we met with the stakeholders they mentioned that they were interested in more coffee hours as we continue. and even after development of the regs, even after the adoption of the regulations, because they had a lot of questions and comments about more guidance as far as they want to see some standard town details Be placed onto the web so they can utilize that, see what the town actually wants to see for structures. So I think that was very helpful. And as we go ahead, I think we will probably offer those opportunities and perhaps there'll be a little bit more sharing of details that we can you know put online with these with the other builders and engineers.

absolutely they they did appreciate the uh scenario write-ups because they kind of distilled down the entirety of the bylaw and the regulations without having to read the multiple pages word for word to figure out what they're trying to figure trying to accomplish. So the key changes and highlights to the regulations are, number one, there is a separate regulations document. Our previous bylaw was more of a pseudo bylaw regulations document all in one, and it became are readily apparent to the bylaw committee that they needed to be two separate documents because they function separately. So the overall umbrella bylaw, which is what gives us our authority and has the overall overreaching of Stormwater and Needham. But then the regulations is a specific document that gives you the how to or ways you would comply with that bylaw. So it's a little bit more detailed and a lot more detailed and

is a better tool for that, as opposed to having one compounded document. So there are clearer requirements, updated standards, and enhanced accountability. So it gives you a... there's a specific change to how we record the structures that are being put in for stormwater whereas we're requiring them to be noted with a registry of deeds so that future homeowners or future owners of property continue with the maintenance of their stormwater structures assuming that they actually know that they're there because that has been a problem that we've run into for years where it's not required to disclose it so a new homeowner or a new person comes in they don't even know it's there to be maintaining it so they're not maintaining it and it doesn't function the way it should So the example permit threshold scenarios that we have currently available online and I believe are included with your packet are the small-scale earthwork

Activities, Minor Addition and Temporary Structures, Moderate Additions, New Construction, DPW Street Permit Compliance, Projects Within Conservation Jurisdiction, and then the Infiltration System Design Criteria Summary. every exhaustible possible scenario but those were the most frequent ones that we had questions about so we wanted to put those out there and we're happy to create more as more questions if any more questions or other scenarios are desired by the public So for the implementation plan, following the select board acceptance, the stormwater regulations will become the administrative framework for implementing the stormwater bylaw. The Town will update the permit application materials, procedures, guidance documents, and website resources to reflect the new requirements and staff will be trained on the regulations to ensure consistent administration and review of projects,

while ongoing public education outreach will help applicants, property owners and design professionals understand their responsibilities. projects submitted after the effective date will be reviewed in accordance with the new regulations providing a clear and consistent transition to the updated stormwater management

I just want to be clear, too, that this is not a separate permit. This is part of an existing framework of permits.

Yes. The stormwater is included in our in our permitting process at the moment in the individual permits themselves such as the building permit or street permits however other towns or neighboring towns sometimes have a separate stormwater permit so that has led to some confusion sometimes where people think they have a separate one to do but we include it all in one because we like to be inclusive So the anticipated benefits of a stormwater regulations document is exactly the same as the benefits of the bylaw document being revised to adhere to updated laws and regulations, with the exception of this one also establishes consistent standards that protect our infrastructure, property, and natural resources while supporting Responsible Growth.

And select for discussion and questions if you have any discussion or questions.

thank you for doing this work on top of the work that the committee did I mean I know you were on the committee but um it's fantastic I think it's really gonna have a big impact How many more of these do you plan to do before the draft is finished.

More of the presentations to you? No, the coffee hours. We will do the coffee hours continuously and I think we have one or two more that we are posing for somewhat during the summer. It gets a little dicey because of holidays and things and travel, so people may or may not be available. But we were discussing actually possibly having maybe a semi-annual regular thing that is available for everybody. We don't have a specific number in mind.

Okay. But this is, I mean, the stormwater bylaw is in force. It is.

It is enforced.

This is more about explanation, too.

This is explanation of what types of things are we looking for to document what you're trying to do and what kind of expectations and standards should you be meeting when designing these stormwater systems.

Great.

Madam Chair, could I also just, for the board's context, just process-wise, what we were thinking that tonight would be the presentation to you all on where the regulations, this kind of final draft is. The bylaw requires that the select board do a public hearing before regulations are adopted. You actually did hold a public hearing in the fall, but my recommendation is you hold another one now that the regs have been updated and given the length of time. so a public hearing at your June 23rd meeting and then you could vote at your July meeting so as Kim was noting that the coffee hours could continue as info sessions not as opportunities for adjustments to the language of the regulations, correct?

And I just want to say, too, the regulations are meant to be the standard and what the final would be. having them as a separate document requires the select board's approval as opposed to a whole town meeting to get them approved and changed. So if any major comprehensive changes needed to be made, we would have to bring a new draft along. with that. So the coffee hours are more just to help people understand what we're telling them.

Yeah, they seem to appreciate, of course, they don't want any back and forth. They want to be able to submit one time without any confusion.

And they seem to like the more detail than what the original dialogue.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Kim and Tom. This is amazing. You guys did a lot of work. The committee did a lot of work, but both of you also helped us stay focused. The way I've always thought about is the bylaws are the what and the regulations are the how. Exactly. So some of the things that I think are really important in Section 4.1, applicability, in the bylaw we have a provision that says it applies to removal or addition of earth. So if you're changing the grade here in the regulations, we're specifying how much 100 cubic yards and in our discussions we weren't sure what the right number was. So one example is we had 100 cubic yards here so that if it needs to be adjusted it can more easily be adjusted in the regulations. Correct.

Another thing is that this practice of skirting, I think that's what it's called, raising the earth along the property line so that water goes towards other neighboring properties, that's also regulated here. So this is this is the nuts and bolts.

Thank you for doing all this work. It's a lot. Like any good reading, the fun stuff is the appendixes. And there's a lot in here, so it's great to see. I love to see the block plan and the OMP stuff.

We love a good appendix.

As long as it's as good as the appendix.

I have a general question, not being so steeped in stormwater as some of my colleagues are. And the question is, I've heard that you explained that a lot of this is kind of helping people to comply sort of instructions. To what extent were there also discretionary decisions? I think Josh was mentioning about, you know, 100 cubic yards. particular standards? What kind of mix is it between sort of an actual setting a standard versus just explaining?

Well, the area for the impervious, whether the threshold is 4,000 square feet, At what point do we say that you need to do a study to make sure you're not shedding more water off into your neighboring properties? also the 500 square feet for increasing pervious area like triggers that you review and some mitigation measures. So 500 square feet, 4,000 square feet. Those are two just trying to figure out where the threshold should be. looking at other towns and doing some studies myself on stormwater you know figure the 4,000 is appropriate

yeah with input from the previous building we didn't have the benefit of Jim at the time but the previous building commissioner also gave us his input as far as like things that they frequently see in building and what the most common scenarios are that they come across So that's kind of led us to where it was as well as comparing with neighboring communities to see what they do. Some communities are more suited to a lower threshold and others are

obviously don't have as much open area so they don't have as much available so yeah okay and just one other question were there any things that were either very difficult to decide or difficult to write

All of it's difficult to write only because you don't want to exclude too many people, property, or things, but you also don't want to include everything.

Like we're not trying to... Too long and unwieldy, yeah.

yeah we're not trying to put our thumb on development in town but we're also trying to maintain the development that we do have and keeping it in good working order and not have it degrade to a point where we can't sustain it so

one of the things we did do is the structure mirrors the structure of the bylaw. Correct. So if you go to the bylaw section 7.4 is going to be the same as the regulations section 4. So we didn't add anything to the regulations that was not in the bylaw.

Right. And we kept the regulations similar to what they were before, but we just expanded on them. So there's a lot more to them than what was there before.

So there is a couple notes too on, so the bylaw references that trees should be planted based upon the regulations. So in the regs that we added, if you have more than 4,000 square feet of impervious area to plant three native trees per system that's been installed. So that was clear that was what the bylaw committee wanted.

In lieu of the tree preservation bylaw. Because if the tree preservation bylaw, I can't say that fast, tree preservation bylaw comes into effect, then the stormwater one does not affect it. That one would take precedence.

and the other couple items too is requirement for compensatory storage if your foundation is in the water table and you're requiring a sump pump. So you need to find storage that is the same volume as what you'd be pumping into the town's drainage system. There's also a reserve section two on small die-owner drain connections for a funding source. So there is a section in there. And that was on the previous bylaw.

It was a stormwater fund. There was never anything developed.

Yeah, it was never developed. Adopted.

Yeah.

But it was in there as a reserve.

So if we decide later on that we want that option, it's at least a section still there available. Great. Bill?

I love the copies and guidance and unfortunately I think you're going to have to do them in perpetuity because there's always new people coming and want to learn and I think when you have those, those are very beneficial. Now did you say something about some of these are recorded at the registry or?

Yes. So moving forward now with the new bylaw, the stormwater systems, when you're putting them in, need to be recorded at the registry of deeds before you'll get your certificate of compliance. So that's a part of the permit process now. This allows for I'm in real estate. I'm just saying it's an opportunity to let them know it's there and at least it's recorded and we know where it is. It also is a way to record where things are located in town for us. and we could potentially take credit for the private phosphorus removal on our MS4, which would be very helpful because we have a very large pound phosphorus removal requirement. But we don't have a way to

track or measure that at the moment and because we never required anybody to let anybody else know it was there so there's a lot of properties on town in town where they're digging and they're like what is this big metal thing oh hi

I mean I think it's great that it's at the registry don't get me wrong but it'd be great well I'll have to think about a way or maybe we could think about a way to tell the public you might want to actually look at that I would love if there was a more but I know that's a direct and succinct way to do it.

I'll keep that in my mind. We're going to try to get people involved in OpenGov, the virtual software that we have to look at their property. So they can upload photos of it being installed. They can look at where the system is.

They can see old there. And maybe it's something at some point we could share with the realtors in town so they know to let their people buy, you know.

Absolutely. I'd love to, if anybody's interested.

And to put Jim in the hot seat, what do you think of this?

I think it's great.

You're new to it. To Needham. To Needham. And we just had concluded this.

When it was first developed in my previous position, Anything under 500 square feet was entirely through the building department. So we had cheat sheets. So we sized them. We kind of helped design them because when this first got passed, no one knew anything about them. 15, 18 years ago. So basically that expanded to a whole stormwater division, stormwater officer that it's a full-time position rather than just you know building inspectors doing it okay so now you have conservation involved full storm water you know now it's big business as far as because everyone's got water issues

you had a whole storm audit department you had a whole storm audit department

Great, well we appreciate the time and the effort.

This is going to, we hope, have a big impact. It can't hurt.

Great.

So I guess if you have any comments or any suggestions.

Yeah, if you have any further questions, please let us know.

Email Katie and she'll forward it off.

Yes. Thank you so much. Thank you all. Have a great night.

All right. Our next item on the agenda is a public hearing on water and sewer rates. And so we will welcome up the water and sewer rate structure committee. and whoever from that committee is in the room. Okay, great. And then Dave Davison, our Deputy Town Manager, Director of Finance. Kerris Lustig, Director of Public Works, Celia Simchak. Where she went? There she is. We might need more chairs. And Mike Retsky. Thank you. Hi, everybody. So we have a lot of faces here.

So can we just go on down the line and do some introductions just so everybody on TV knows who you are? Sure.

I'm Cecilia Simchick. I'm the Assistant Director of Finance. Thank you.

Louise Miller. I'm the Water and Sewer Rates Watcher Committee.

Harold Berger, Water and Sewerage Structure Committee.

Excuse me. David Davison, Deputy Town Manager, Director of Finance.

Karis Lustig, Director of Public Works.

Mike Redsky, Water, Soil, Drain Division Superintendent. Peter Cook, Watering and Sewer Raid Structure Committee.

Excellent. Welcome and thank you. The presence in the packet is enormous, so it's clear that there's been a lot of work done here and every year you all come with a very comprehensive rundown on all of our options so looking forward to hearing about this year's

Yeah, sure. We are going to be recommending four different options, two for the sewer system, two for the water system. This is a continuation of the conversation that we had last year where we indicated that Last year's rate increase was going to be followed by subsequent series of additional rate increases as well. And the committee, you know, we debated a lot of different options. It's detailed in the packet. but we wanted to balance obviously rate affordability and the impact on the customers as well as the financial conditions of the enterprise funds, specifically the sewer fund as well. but Dave, I can let you fill in the details if you wanted to talk about that.

Chair, members of the board, the committee met with staff on three occasions as noted starting back in March and we finished up the package. the information to get to a package on June 1st. As the chair of the committee stated, there are four options for the board to consider which was trying to rate a combination of affordability, understanding that we have some structural imbalances, particularly in terms of our fixed costs with our infrastructure. As has been said many times over the years, the most expensive gallon of water to deliver is that first gallon of water, not the last gallon of water. and that's because the whole infrastructure has to be built to get that first gallon to each person's home or a place of business. The other factors, we have some other pressures that are impacting the system.

One is a continuing decline in billable sewer volume. And as a result, although the volume is declining, the costs associated with the treatment and the infrastructure of the system are not declining. And one of the things to note that the only way that you're going to be able to lower the rate of increase associated with that is by having more customers to pass the cost along, particularly when you look at the fixed fee. A couple of items before I do get into the specifics of the four proposals is that the committee also recognizing those issues about the fixed cost going forward.

will be looking at in anticipation of next year's public hearing, perhaps looking if we're recovering the proper amount from units that require larger pipes to deliver water services, particularly many larger commercial buildings or multifamily units. When they're built, they usually have only a single pipe, and they pay the one fee for the connection to the system, although the cost associated to larger pipe and all is much more expensive. So that's something that's going to be explored by the committee in time for next year, as well as re-looking at the consumption steps, the volume steps associated with particularly for sewer. What we found is many of the other communities

have step rates for water, just as Needham does, and just as the law requires. And again, under the step rate system, as one uses more water, the rate per unit has to increase by regulation. That's the complete contrary as one thinks of when they're purchasing in volume for a private activity. The larger you buy, usually the unit price goes down. So again, this is one of the imbalances that when one conserves, the greatest revenue loss happens at the first gallon of water conserved, not the first gallon of water. that's concerned. So that's another pressure that is added on to the water infrastructure that has if too much of the burden is placed on the fewest users or the high-end consumers

that as they have financial incentives to reduce their consumption, that's going to require greater percentage increases on the low end users in order to make up the dollars that are being lost. because again, the cost is having the system in the first place, not delivering that last gallon of water. The first option is looking at the water system, which would increase the step rates at 4% for the domestic meter, or basically the water that one assumes with the indoor usage. Approximately 55% of Needham customers also have a secondary meter which is usually associated with irrigation water. And with that, there's a proposal to increase those step rates by 8%.

The reason for the higher increase in the secondary water use versus the primary water use is usually the secondary water use is first more discretionary than the domestic water use. and the other reason is with the irrigation that tends to require the town to purchase water from the MWRA which is more expensive and hence our assessments which are one of the other primary factors putting an increase in the rates is higher. So it only makes sense that those activities that that require the town to purchase water from the MWRA more often than it would naturally have to, should perhaps pick up a greater share of that assessment cost. And that was the rationale. behind that water rate structure fee.

The other water rate structure fee was looking at increasing the basic service fee that's charged, which is currently $16 per quarter. and increasing that from $16 per quarter to $19, or a $3 increase in the quarterly basic service fee. and then the step rate increases, so the consumption use, those steps would increase by two and seven percent. In the case of the sewer system, which as the chair had mentioned is an area of greater concern because of the The infrastructure needs associated with sewer are much greater and are being addressed, but also the billable volume to recover has been declining. that both options have an increase into the basic service fee.

The first option is to increase the basic service fee from $13 per quarter to $19 for a $6 increase in that the step rates would increase uniformly at 3%. The second alternative is to not have as great an increase in the basic service fee. That would go from $13 per quarter to $17 or $4 more per quarter. but the step rates would still be the same thing at 3%. Effectively, the first option provides extra revenue as a cushion should the estimates not be sufficient because billable consumption declines during FY27. So it adds a little more hedge. Of the four options as stated, the first option

which is the water rates going up 4% and 8% in this sewer, the basic fee going from $13 to $19, and the step rates going up to 3%. for an average customer using 12,000 cubic feet per year, they would be looking at Bill that would be $86.40 higher than currently paying, or that's a 4.2% increase. option two is also the four and eight percent increases in the step rates and the increase to the sewer would be four dollars rather than still a 3% increase. That would result in a $78.40 increase for that 12,000 cubic feet customer, or a 3.9% increase.

option three introduces the three dollar increase in the water service fee with step rates at two and seven percent two percent for for the primary, 7% for the secondary meter. The sewer step rate would be a 3% increase and the basic service fee would be a $6 increase. in the quarterly fee that would result in an annual increase of $88.68 or 4.4% over the current year. And then the last option is the $3 increase in the basic service fee for water, 2.7% increases in the step rates, and a $4 increase in the sewer basic service fee step rates increased by 3%. That would be an $80.68 increase for 4%.

And with that, Madam Chair, members of the board, I'll pause for questions.

So as in past years, comprehensive and thank you. I'll kick us off with some questions. It is my understanding that we are subsidizing these rates across the board. like all of our what we are charging is below the cost of of the goods that we are providing or the service that we're providing. Is that true?

For a primary, a large percentage of the customers, not all the rates, it's for water, step one and step two pay less than cost. and that's subsidized by the users at step three and step four, hence my earlier comment that a smaller percentage of the population is helping covering the cost for a greater percentage of the population. In the case of the sewer, the same thing. There's an increased Step 1 rate. There are subsidies in Step 2 as well. There are subsidies, but step three and four pay more in order to offset that subsidy.

and all four of these proposals do kind of continue continuing down that that's that subsidy okay in different ways though so is the so I mean across the board I think

We're all very concerned about affordability. Everyone's taxes are going up. The cost of everything is going up. It's hard to raise any costs. um is our goal to get to a place where we are charging at least at cost? Or is our goal to continue to have a varied REIT structure that assists in some cases, like that the steps would be different?

I will first say what I've been presenting to the committee and the committee can speak to their point of view is that we need to reduce the level of the subsidy. and that there are benefits to trying to provide some level of subsidy to the lowest Consumers, and that would strive, but we can't have it have 70% of the customer base being subsidized because inevitably that's going to come back on them as the high-end consumers find ways to conserve which is good or worse move out of town.

We have not discussed anything regarding a complete elimination of the subsidies across the various steps. We have not had that discussion. I don't think that's ever been brought up.

but I would say one of the things that we did discuss was looking at the actual tiering and that could be one of the things that's looked at rather than having you know whatever the percentage that's currently subsidized you reduce the percentage that's being subsidized there are many different ways that this can be looked at and done in the next year and we did talk about looking at the tiering which Dave mentioned.

Right and so I recall from last year that we were talking about looking at years where there were increases each year. And so it just wanted to acknowledge, I guess, that that this is the state of things, because I know that as I say everyone's worried about affordability and and rightly so um just wondering kind of what our trajectory was so I'll open it up to colleagues um Josh

Thank you. I have two questions, and maybe they're related. So on the one hand, how do you think about the user fees, so the basic user fees? In my mind, I've always thought of them as the most regressive of the policy because even if you're using one unit of water, you're paying the same fee as someone who's using 15 units. But then on the other hand, I know that for the sewer enterprise fund in particular, we had insufficient retained earnings for some of our necessary expenditures. So how If they're related, please link them. But I want to make sure that we have enough money to support our infrastructure but also not be regressive in how we charge people.

Yeah, with the sewer fund in particular, that was a little bit of a change in terms of how we were contemplating our options this year. So we had extensive discussions with Dave about the fiscal condition of that specific enterprise fund. It seems that the cash reserves or retainers are getting A little bit thinner than I think David would like it to be. It's an interesting and important question that you raise, especially when you're having a situation where sewer are more or less stagnant. The base charge, you know, I think we modified it twice in the last five years or so. So it's something that we don't look at as a regular option, but we felt in particular, at least with the sewer fund, that it might be the more prudent option and fiscally responsible given the status of that fund. But I know one of the water options, though, is lighter on that fixed space charge.

Thank you. And just to be clear, all four of these options you believe would sustain the infrastructure needs for the town?

Yes, all four rate structures do demonstrate that based upon the revenue that must be raised, that it would meet. The only reason it would not meet is if the consumption were to drop Yeah, below that, which is estimated.

Thank you. We are mindful to one of the things that we consider. I believe it's in your packets are the comparisons of our rates. with the neighboring communities and towns. And I think it's fair to say that our rates are very competitive.

So does raising the fee as opposed to the rate introduce maybe a little less variability?

That's right, yeah. You have a volumetric charge when you have a declining or stagnant usage, you know, the volumetric raise, you know, introduces a little bit more risk. It's a good thing it's fair to say. Where the base charge increase does not.

May I address the fairness? So I think if you look at the requirements, the funding requirements for the enterprise funds as really being in two parts, One is the base infrastructure that you need in order to deliver the water. The water itself would be the second part of that. Equation and for sewer, it's the taking away of the sewer and having it treated. So the base infrastructure, even if people don't use any water, has to be there. and that's why it might be regressive in the sense that that's not what's being done today. But it's not regressive in terms of looking at it from a fairness perspective. and that's why Dave brought up you know maybe looking at the size of the pipes because some particular types of construction might

be drawing more heavily on the infrastructure? And then the second part is what you're actually using, the water and the sewer. And I think there, the rate increases are not as large. It really is the infrastructure. that is primarily being addressed, I think, with what was proposed in sewer. Water, there's a little more leeway because that enterprise fund is...

I mean, historically, when we discuss the race, I'm sorry. Historically, when we discuss the race, we do often talk about regressive concepts and, you know, very and various permutations that we look at. So it is something that we are mindful of. I'm sorry about that.

Just to follow up on this discussion of kind of the user fee versus the rate increase. What would be the difference in consumer behavior? I mean, these seem to be two different philosophical kind of paths to increase the price. Did you think about that? Does that play into it? Like how the consumer will react to these in terms of either conservation or?

Chair, that's one of the regulatory reasons that we're required to have a step-up increase in consumption is by regulation they're trying to encourage by pricing strategy to reduce consumption without the thought about the base cost of getting that first gallon of water there. So that's the disconnect. But certainly there are behavioral changes. However, the pricing still has to be reflective of the cost because if you do not, then by default, You're going to have to raise property taxes, to which there are many uses of water and sewer services that do not pay taxes. So you would be putting even more of the burden on us

yet a smaller subsection to cover the cost for things that are being used by others who would not be participating. So that's why you have to have full recovery for these services.

I'm not actually arguing for or against any of these options i'm just trying to understand sort of what results you get you know they seem philosophically different i'm agnostic on which is the right

One thing that we discussed were the secondary meters specific on the water system, too, and we were discussing it. It sounds like the elasticity in terms of increases is actually quite low, that people just, these are larger properties, generally speaking. uh people continue to irrigate their lawns and that probably that the rate increases do not have as much of an impact so they might hurt a little less is what you're saying

It's actually the mandatory restrictions on outdoor use that has a greater impact in our revenue flow for irrigation water, but as the other members have mentioned, At least for Needham, for irrigation purposes, doesn't seem to be impacted by the price increases that the town has done over the past several years.

May I say one more thing? I know the town has a process for abating water and sewer bills for those who can't, who are financially in need. and to the extent that these rates go up and you can calculate what the rate of increase would be I don't know what the rules are today regarding the abatement but maybe those could also be adjusted so that If you do have customers who that would impact very seriously, their bills could be adjusted. They could receive a higher abatement than they do today.

So I guess you just mentioned about wadding restrictions. I mean, how can you tell? You can't tell what's going to happen, right? So how do you gauge it? Do you just look historically or do you look... at the Old Farmers' Almanac. I mean, what can you do for something like that? The other question I had was, I think you mentioned that sewer is going down. Yes, and any thoughts about why that might be happening?

There are several things. On the first part, this is why we use averages, three or more years for estimating water. particularly in irrigation because as noted in the material that was provided to you, particularly secondary water, there's a significant swing up and down in volume, build volume for secondary water use. Primary water use has been overall declining year after year as well, which sort of explains that you would expect that sewer because Sewers not separately metered, so how we bill sewers based upon whatever your primary water usage is. Some of the reasons for those declines does come from efficiencies that with new construction, for instance, they're more water efficient. So that comes into play.

There may be some behavioral changes that are coming into play. Some large end users of the system have left over the years. Of course, the most notable was Coca-Cola. So all those factors contributed to it. We're also, particularly for the primary water, been in a state of decline because we had seen an increase back during the COVID restrictions when basically everybody was staying home, that use was much higher. and we've been dropping down as more and more people having to return to work or outside of their home more often than they used to be. but I also make note that although water use was higher as people were staying home, they weren't getting up to the top step and it was all the businesses that were closed down that really hurt

and the revenue streams that we needed because they weren't using as much water because there wasn't as much activity actually happening at their physical locations.

The other thing I would just add is that we had the analogy last year of a level one drought. And so we were able to use that data point to inform it's not perfect science. but what the impact of this year's Level 1 drought could have and if there was going to be another one.

Just a reminder that the Level 1 drought is not something that's determined by Needham. It's not something over which we have any say. This is imposed by the EPA. Thank you. So that definitely has an impact, but it's not an impact imposed by Needham.

So just to explain, basically what you're going to do is you're going to see a ceiling on outdoor water usage when you have Drought conditions typically is when Needham has the highest consumption of outdoor water usage. So now that we have to impose a restriction any time the state declares a drought, you're basically going to see that hit a ceiling of when we have Wetter seasons, our outdoor water use is just simply not that high. And now when we have drier seasons, it is likely there'll be a drought declared by the state, which will reduce the amount of water that people can irrigate. So we're just going to have a new ceiling.

and Amir. thank you very much for all this work um i didn't think it was possible to add more levels of nuance but you managed to do it i want to give a shout out to peter cook you're my first appointment and it's good to see you here um you're doing a great job I do want to strike sort of what Josh was saying about regressivity and rising costs and how we're going to strike equity in this in some balance. but to game it out, how about all the snowbirds, people who leave Needham for the winter, come back, they come back, they don't use water all winter. come back and using their irrigation stuff. How does this play? How does this hit them?

well they're paying the basic service fees for each quarter which is also in recognition again even if you're not using it the town has to to supply it, have the ability to get the water there and take the sewage away. And we have to keep those systems operating even when they're not in use. So that's the reason for the basic service fee. But that's also how we make sure that everybody's contributing something towards the cost. In terms of what the amount of the fees are, it's As Ms. Miller mentioned, there is an abatement for hardship cases which is administered by Health and Human Services. knows the individuals that need that assistance.

And we can also see if anything needs to be revised to take into account that individuals that have hardship. but we also need to Ensure that the basic service fees are recovering some percentage of the infrastructure and fixed costs associated in these levels are not overly regressive. in terms of when you look at the overall bill that one has. And if you look at even what one has to pay for the basic service fee associated receiving electricity or natural gas. It's the same thing. Or the basic annual fee that one pays their oil company that delivers the oil, but they also have a fixed fee for tuning the burners and such.

It's all Basic necessities are important to the basic core needs of a civilized society, and we have to make sure they keep running. OK.

Anything else?

I believe it's a public hearing.

Yes, but no other board comments. Okay, well, I don't know where we're going to put you if you're here to talk about sewer rates, but is there anyone in the room who is here to make a comment on sewer rates? maybe it won't be a problem is there anyone online okay well our chair problem is solved at least for the moment thank you very much for all of this work we are not voting tonight we will revisit this at our next meeting

thank you very much thank you thank you Harold it's nice to meet you in person yes

I wouldn't want to miss this one.

oh madam chair I move the consent second all those in favor aye those opposed consent passes thank you Kathy um okay so our next Thang, is the Pollard Middle School Project Updates. And we have a second million presenters. So come on up. Hank Half, Director of Building Design and Construction. Merrill Nistler. I feel like I'm... and MC. Senior Project Manager, Building Design and Construction, Brendan O'Malley. Bond Building Construction, David Billings. That must be you. Thank you. Leroy Hill. Inger Hamre Foley, also from Leroy Hill, and Matt LaRue. He's online. He's online. Fabulous. All right, well, welcome, everybody, and update us.

We'll be passing the torch back and forth between us.

Yes, we'll provide more microphones as you do.

Okay. And Matt, first, give you a quick outline. Matt LaRue will go through some design updates. HMFH has completed several renderings that you'll be seeing this evening. then we'll be going through portions of what we'll be submitting to the MSBA and a broad overview of that. and then ending with the cost estimates, reconciled cost estimates and project budget which was reviewed with the school building committee, PBBC. last evening. So with that, Matt, do you want to take over the... Are we in charge of this?

Yeah. Wow.

Power. Sure. Good evening. Can people hear me? Yes. OK. Thank you for having me. And I'll just try to be quick because I know we have a lot to cover. I'm going to run through some of the latest images that we've shared with the building committee. If you go to the next slide, please. And first I'm going to start off with the site design. You may have seen versions of this. It's been evolving over the course of the schematic design phase. So this represents where we are as we complete this phase. The notable features on the site, we have the building in the middle of the site, which is configured to work around the area available to build on while the existing building is occupied as a school.

with the exception of the very northern wing of the building, which is a classroom wing that will be built as a second phase after the existing building is demolished. On the northern edge end of the site along Harris Avenue, we have kind of parking areas, bookending, a outdoor play field in the middle. That's kind of the foreground to the view of the school. as you're passing it on Harris Avenue. And there's also an entrance onto the site as a loop road where the parent cars will pick up and drop off students close to the front door. The front door is in the area between the two wings.

on the north there's a label number one and a red arrow that's the main entrance and that's the upper part of the site and so you're actually entering the building on the third level Moving around the west side of the site, there's some other parking, there's a loading dock area, and then moving further to the south, That curved driveway is somewhat in the location of the existing driveway along the west, and that will be reserved only for buses to drop off and pick up students. entering into a secondary entrance to the building where the red arrow on the western side is located. On the southern side of the site are the two other academic wings with a outdoor courtyard between them. This is an area that

can be used for education. It can also be used for dining. And there'll be some stormwater, rain gardens in that area. on the ends of the two classroom wings, you'll see kind of green areas. Those are actually low roofs that extend past the Higher roofs of the building and we're planning to have some outdoor classrooms on those low roofs. There's pathways throughout the site for pedestrians and bicyclists. connecting all the way from Harris Ave to the front door of the building and around the west side and even to the tunnel that goes under the commuter rail tracks and we're planning to have a path continuing to the track on the DeFazio side of the site. If you go to the next slide please.

Here we're starting to show what we're thinking about the material character of the building. Primary material for the building will be brick. and that's a good durable, economical and attractive material for the building. We're also mixing in a few other materials. We have some zinc metal, which is used on roof edges and canopies. There's areas of glass or curtain wall. in parts of the building to let in natural light and have views out where those are subject to direct southern light. We're providing some sun screening to help mitigate the effects of that direct southern light. And the lower slide, we're also mixing in another facade material These are concrete panels.

They are kind of a lighter weight, and we are using those where the heavier brick is not as suitable because of conditions over lower roofs and things like that and it helps to provide a contrast to the brick material that's primarily used. Next slide. This is a view from the front of the building as you're entering in off of Harris Ave into that loop road. You're seeing the main entrance. Here the main entrance is nestled in between the library wing on the left and an administrative wing on the right with the taller two-story portion of it being a sixth grade classroom wing adjacent to that. The entrance will have a taller feature so that it's highly visible.

and the doors will be clearly marked and you'll know where you're going as you enter the site. We're also using generous glazing or curtain wall where we can to make connections between the indoors and the outdoors and to bring in the daylight. Next slide, please. This is a view on the western side where that bus drop off is located. You're seeing the secondary entrance, which is slightly at a lower grade. There's some steps in the ramp that go down to that. There's a canopy over that secondary entrance. And then the other volumes that you're seeing here are the corner of the gymnasium, which is the taller part. with the gray concrete panels.

And then in front of that steps down the brick portion houses some of the other athletic features like the weight room and changing rooms. with some classrooms below that. And going to the next slide. is a view from the south looking back at the building as if you were kind of on the train going by on the train tracks. You're seeing the two academic wings with those lower roofs in the foreground. and the green roofs outdoor classrooms on top of those. And then in the middle between the two wings is the center hub of the school. That's where the cafeteria is located. It has plenty of glazing with some sunscreening to let light into that middle part of the building.

and the two classroom wings also have some areas of glazing where there's common areas between the rows of classrooms. You're also seeing the outdoor courtyard between them and the pathway which takes you to the DeFazio side of the site. And lastly, on the last slide is just a quick kind of bird's eye view of the building. It's massing, looking from the Harris Avenue side towards the southeast, southwest, I should say. The two-story sixth grade wing in the foreground, the middle hub of the building between that, and then the three-story classroom wings on the southern side. and that's all I have for my presentation at this point. I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them.

The theater is on the east side, kind of behind the library. So there are two larger masses. One is the theater, which in this view is on the east side of the central core space. and the gymnasium is on the west side of that central core space.

Perfect.

Thank you.

and the cafeteria is on the ground floor, the first floor. And I think you understand that there's a 30 foot grade change between the Harris Ave side and the field side.

I'm not sure, Kevin's question made me think of something. So if the auditorium is kind of in the center of the building, is there a separate entrance or do people have to go through other parts of the wings to get to the auditorium?

When you enter in, you can get there from either the main front entrance or the lower entrance. And when you come in on the upper level, you're at the balcony level of the theater when you're at the first floor you're at the lower stage level sort of the cross aisle in the main seating. And the second floor is into the slope of the lower level of the theater.

But is it directly, the entrances are directly to the theater or do you go through the educational, other parts of the building?

You go through a hub, a central hub, and that's where they're both grand stairs and uh you know fire stairs but the grand stairs within the hub uh would then take you down to those lower levels thank you And there are two elevators, but one of them connects all four floors of the building. because the sixth grade wing starts on the second floor and goes up to the fourth floor.

Madam Chair, can I... The fields in the front, they look like too small. Is it 6 v. 6 fields, really, for soccer? Yeah. Could it... they'd be combined together to go the other way to fit any other sport. And no, it wouldn't fit. I'm thinking maybe a field hockey or something.

I think the line striping could be done that way. They're just about an acre, total acre. So they're primarily going to be for middle school use and most heavily used I would think by the fitness program within the school.

Any other questions before we move off of design?

I would say that the design team has done prior presentations to the school committee focusing largely on the educational program and on the special ed program. and that'll all be part of the submission that goes in all of those documents those presentations are on the the website for the Pollard so if you want to dive into those it's all there along with every other presentation that we've done along the way. Should we jump to the next? In a little background, on this presentation. You may not have the most recent one in your book.

I don't. You don't. I didn't download the second agenda. My notes are in this one, but I can follow along, not to worry.

Don't judge by me. We had a lengthy meeting last evening with the school building committee and had to make some adjustments based upon those decisions that came forth from the committee. but generally the first slide the next slide articulates the savings that are included during the feasibility phase and the team design team and working with Bond who've been great in terms of providing logistical coordination for how the building would be constructed We've tried to take along the process cost reductions in every step of the way. and many of these are listed here I don't need to speak about all of them but

some of the advantages of focusing on the Pollard site versus the DeFazio site is include that we don't have to go through MEPA permitting which would potentially cause a delay and also the MSBA reimbursement for demolition and hazmat removal of the existing building wouldn't have been provided but because we're building on that site and demolishing the building is a requirement they will participate in that the building has been simplified the phasing has been simplified so that sixth grade wing is the primary component of the second phase of construction that puts the majority of the construction in the first phase. that has also enabled an acceleration of the construction schedule which time saves money and

In terms of the geothermal well, we have done a test well down 800 feet. So far the results appear good, but the geothermal well system is the lowest lifecycle cost for heating and cooling the building. and the life cycle cost analysis was done over a 25 year period but obviously the building is going to be a 50 year or more building. and those systems can last that long whereas gas-fired last maybe 10-15 years so there's constant repair and replacement in those systems

and then there has been some tightening of the belt around the building and the envelope to reduce the total square footage although in the next slide you'll see that because of some of the requirements by the MSBA, the total square footage of the building has slightly increased since the PSR stage. But even though the total square footage has increased, when you look at the bottom line the total project cost estimate we've been able to bring that down from the $336 million down to the $325.4 million. and so where we were above a thousand dollars a square foot in terms of the construction costs we're now slightly below a thousand dollars a square foot

and that seems to be roughly where the many of current MSBA projects are coming in as you look at their website.

Could I ask before we move on, what is the revised construction timeline? By when do you think it will be completed?

Is this revised since? last name since last night no it's not the schedule last night the one that you know i mean the timeline just is it has the timeline shortened or is the timeline the same as what we

No, the timeline is shortened over the last month or so, but certainly not since last night. So what we're proposing to do is mobilizing for phase one in the spring of 28, turning over phase one that summer of 30 and then beginning phase two with the building being ready for a went to break 31 to 32 turnover so that students would start the second half of the year in 32 in in the sixth grade wing. And then we're just projecting some landscaping, hardscaping type stuff moving into the spring of 32. So I think the original schedule was turning over summer of 32.

Brendan, you also have the animation, right?

Not tonight.

I recommend it.

It's a great animation. It will definitely be in future community meetings.

and I believe that those are also on the website. The neighborhood meeting we had, most recent one, the videos were presented and it showed the sequence of construction and how there'll be construction access coming from both Harris Ave and then and the use of the Warner Field at DeFazio for temporary parking after phase one is constructed and when you're tearing down the building. and Constructing Phase II. But we don't have enough time to go through all those tonight. I'll just mention on this next slide that the School Building Committee approved all of these value engineering items that are listed here for about 1.14 million.

I don't think we need to get into a lot of detail on these. We did last night. So if you want to listen to the Zoom, you can. and then the ad alternates which we discussed, those will be submitted as part of the submission to the MSBA. They are put in priority. They'll probably be reprioritized and further analyzed as we move through the design process. But eventually if we go out to bid and we list any of these as ad alternates, they would have to be listed in priority and taken in priority. and we still do have quite a bit of discussion about some of these. We know that there was

pushback on parking PV canopies from the neighbors and therefore it has been it's been dropped in the priority list and is a fairly expensive and alternate to include. And there are other complications related to it. The building does have, the proposal is to have solar PV on the rooftop. and that would supply a lot of energy to the building. 700 to 800 kW, which would really help offset both ongoing costs within the building in a fashion I think probably double what we're getting on Sunita Williams' roof.

Sunita Williams's were getting about a quarter to a third of the electric power on an annualized basis. I think with this we'd get 50 to 60 percent of the total power within the building.

Those roof solar power, that's in the base though, that's not now at ultimate?

That's in the base, yeah. It is in the base and it's only the canopy solar on a per watt basis I think is about two to three times as expensive because of the structure of the canopy. So it's much more cost effective to put it on the rooftop compared to the canopies.

Okay. And do we have – I mean, I assume when we go to potentially include it, we have some kind of estimate of how it impacts the long-term cost for maintenance and energy use?

the solar canopies, add-on canopies. We will as we get into DD. there are a number of utility issues that we would need to address. And once we go over one megawatt of power, then there's a threshold that may require further interconnection. We are also exploring the battery storage and grid balancing capability, but fitting the battery on the site is not easy.

Okay, can I just ask one question about the, how is the purple roof different from what I understand the green roof is? And does it, I assume that it probably has a benefit in terms of cooling? or Reducing Heat?

We'll defer to Matt. He's been answering that question. It's a new idea.

I can answer that. A purple roof is a regular vegetated roof that has a slightly deeper profile to it. and some material layers below the soil, which help to act like a sponge and absorb water. and the reason that we're considering it is because space on this site is at a premium and we're having to build structured infiltration under parking lots and things like that, which is pretty expensive. in order to deal with the stormwater and using the area that's occupied by the green roofs and using it to store some of the water allows us to reduce the amount of infiltration chambers under the parking lots. I don't think it's necessarily done for cooling.

I think the soil and the vegetation probably do that on its own without the purple aspect to it.

I won't go through all of these, but we are continuing to investigate additional grant funding perhaps the most important and is the first one which is the MSBA reimbursement rate and we would be going for all of the green green school building for four percentage points addition to the base. Currently we're at 35.42 and we potentially can get over 40% reimbursement. of eligible costs and as we know from prior work that will probably translate into somewhere between 20 to 25 percent of actual total construction costs for the project.

But these are other ways in which we potentially could get further reimbursement. not promising anything on any of these until we get further into the process. You want to jump through schedule?

So June's been busy and we're not even halfway through yet. So we've been working with the designers, with Myra Hill, with Bond, as far as bringing the cost estimates, reconciling them. We receive them at the end of and May and we've just been working to align them with each other's because we had two estimates and now We've been working also in the past week trying to bring the cost down with those VEs that we suggested, the value engineering. so that was our exercise last week to come to the table with the SBC yesterday and now we're going to begin to socialize and pull together the schematic design submission which includes that cost estimate and everything that we've presented so far

so that is going to go into the MSBA June 25th so there's some checks and balances that we need to clear before that get a vote from the SBC on June 22nd just a minute and prior to that the school committee is also going to vote on submitting the SBC that schematic design to the MSBA as well on June 16th. Russell coming in front of the Finance Committee on June 17th. So you know where to find us this month. then pushing forward through to July we're gonna come back in front of you all for the ballot language to go to the MSBA so that's on July 21st I believe

so we'll come back in front of you we'll work with town manager to get the right language the MSBA does have a template actually so it's pretty clear what needs to happen for that we're also going to be having several community meetings the first june 30th we're going to have one in july and one also in august they will all be a hybrid and then we'll also have in person at pollard so we hope that we can start to socialize the project and get the message out about what the project is about and the program and scope and the budget. September, we're back in front of the SBC. October is Special Town Meeting, October 19th. and then it goes to the ballot November 3rd. Any questions about the schedule?

nothing to it right easy and we can get into the details we did send along an updated cost estimate sheet and a project budget sheet that were updated this morning based upon the information from the school building committee last evening and I don't know that we need to go through a lot of detail but we David and Inger have helped a lot in assembling all of these. I will note that there are two estimates and where the architects, which was done by PM&C, was submitted during schematic PSR.

Now we're converting to bonds estimate. because we have the construction manager on board. I guess big picture?

Big picture is we've gone through a lot of detail in order to put these numbers together. There's a lot of drawings, a lot of engineering data that we went through. a good bit of time with the cost estimators and bond reconciling, making sure that we're all looking at the same scope, that we understand what's in the documents, and what those costs will be. Bonds price is higher because they're looking at different units of cost than what an estimator does. That's sort of natural to the marketplace. and we're coming in at below $1,000 a square foot. We're at $978.50 for

a total construction value including the value in engineering at 259 million 862 that's really in line with a lot of the School projects that are out there. I took a quick look at the MSBA. Swansea Middle School is coming in at $1,036 a square foot. Chicopee Elementary is $1,031. North Adderbrook High School is also at 1,031. East Bridgewater is 996. So this is where the market is right now for these types of buildings. I think we've got good value in our estimates. We are understanding what the challenges are and have the contingencies in there. So I think we're very confident on what our construction estimate is.

that sort of leads us to the overall project budget again I'm sure we need to get into all the detail but we've We've really gone through each of the line items that we need to include in the budget. First, we have the feasibility study, which has already been appropriated at $2.75 million. that includes the test well for the geothermal so that's already been paid we've put together a proposal for the and Project Manager costs, really the administrative costs, including bond funds. That comes to about $5.2 million. Architectural fees for base service is 23.5. That's about 9% of construction, which is below the MSBA cap, so I think we're getting really good value there.

other engineering and reimbursement clause for the architect, including traffic studies, wetland surveys, brings the total up to 25.5, which is about 9.6. We're still under the MSBA cap. Construction, I said, is $259.8 million. Then we've got about $875,000 for utility. um fees uh construction material testing and other sort of moving costs uh moving the teachers, things into the new building, getting rid of the existing furniture. That's all kind of a miscellaneous cost. for new furniture and fixtures and equipment. We've got $4.2 million. That's about...

2,300 per student, which is a little higher than the MSBA cap, but I think it's in line with what the design team thinks it's going to cost, then 2.6 million for computers and technology that goes in the classrooms. Then we've got the owner's contingency on top of that. We're looking at a 7% for construction costs or 18.5%. of 25 million. You know, this is a big project. It's going to be a, it's a challenging site. So I think that is a conservative number to carry. and then we've got 2% for soft costs, which is engineering, any additional furniture we want to look at. at 5.2 for a total project budget of $325.4 million.

now we've already funded the 2.75 so the future funding that we need to bond is the 322.6 million.

Madam Chair can I ask a question? Sure. So I've been talking with a lot of residents who are just undecided about how they'll vote on this in the fall, and cost is the biggest contributor. So is there a way to help them decide? Is there a way to break these costs out in a programmatic way to show The biggest things I've heard are geothermal. So what is the net incremental cost of geothermal, the net incremental cost of the auditorium, the net incremental cost of having two phases versus one phase? I think for most people it's easier to comprehend than looking at it in this way. is that possible?

we'll have to work with bondin on looking at it but i'm you know i'm sure we can thank you i think when you talk about cost too especially the geothermal but also some of these add-ons that are discussed here. They're all pretty expensive items. But I think to the extent that you can say this is the upfront cost, but here is the expected I assume back end savings or reduced maintenance cost, that would be really helpful as well. Because I mean, I think geothermal in particular is a much higher well at least residentially it's a much higher upfront cost but then your maintenance and carrying costs into the future are significantly reduced and so so I think just the upfront cost isn't enough I think we need to know kind of what the impact is because I would imagine that you know

a lot of these add-ons solar over the parking lot it might be more expensive but if it helps reduce the carrying costs the same thing with the the increased INI if it helps us to reduce our

What's the barrel of oil cost?

Floor water obligations for the site. Then it could be really important. So particularly where those add-ons have some pretty, those are some pretty hefty price tags.

Yeah, and there is a full lifecycle cost analysis that was prepared. It is posted on the website. what was demonstrated in this is that the geothermal path one is perhaps the only way that we can get to an energy use intensity or EUI of 22 on the building.

I'm sorry, I don't know what that means.

It's very difficult to understand. It's a scale. that tells you how much total energy, whether it be electrical or natural gas or oil, that's used within the building on a per square foot basis. over a year. So it's a complicated equation.

So what's high and what's low?

What's 22 Guinness? So the existing building has an EUI of around 76. and we are trying to get to an EUI of 22. Okay. We're trying to get down to one third of the total energy use intensity even with a larger building.

Okay.

that gives us, it allows us to participate in that save where we can get additional savings. So it gives us kind of an avenue and a pathway to get additional savings through utilities and different means of getting incentives that we wouldn't otherwise be able to have available to us because we're not getting that EUI.

So if you include that in the net cost, that would be helpful too. What are we gaining? What is the cost for that gain?

What the conclusion was, They looked at ground source heat pumps, a hybrid of ground source and air source heat pumps, all air source heat pumps, and baseline, which would be natural gas. and in looking at the ground source heat pump as I mentioned is the only one that could get us to that EUI of 22. It has the lowest lifecycle cost over a 25-year period. It has the lowest maintenance cost over that same time period. it has the largest utility incentives and IRA tax incentives assuming they're still there it has the

Let's see, net present value.

Sorry, just to be clear, the ground source heat pump is the geothermal? Yes. Okay.

I use those terms interchangeably. Probably geothermal in Iceland means something different that we talk about here. But we're looking at the stable temperature underground to either pull heat from or push excess heat into. um, and so it has the highest capital cost, yes, but it has the highest tax credit potential, has the lowest energy consumption and has the highest potential utility incentives.

Thank you. Can you point us to that document?

I can afford it after the meeting, yes.

So I want to give folks a chance to ask questions. Kathy, we'll just start with you.

I would just say I really appreciate the value engineering stuff that you're doing. I think it's important for the residents and the taxpayers to see that you know we're really looking to squeeze those costs and you know that we're very mindful of that so I appreciate the creativity and the flexibility that you're all showing

Thank you for doing all this work. Bottom line number is?

For the project is 325.4.

This is, I mean, it's been great watching this project come together. I went to Pollard, and it was awful then. And more than you look at Pollard and say, like, this thing, I know, like, the sewer's surcharging. I know it's a mess. this has to be done but I didn't think it'd be done so well and I see this as such an amazing opportunity that's so good for the town that we can have a really good school that we can be very proud of and I knew it would be great to replace Paul. I didn't think we'd be doing it so well, so thank you.

So there are two other questions. Again, you don't have to answer them tonight, but I think it would help people to make a decision. And they're not cost-related. just an explanation for why is a 1300 student school the best educational option and then the other one is kind of related to Mitchell so The stated reason for six to eight is so we can get swing space for Mitchell. But it seems that if the phase two is the only thing that's in the footprint of the existing Pollard. Couldn't the existing Pollard be used as swing space for Mitchell? And then once that's done, finish phase two? Again, you don't have to answer tonight.

I didn't follow it. We can start back.

Gotcha.

Thank you. Thanks.

Bill.

I'm another Pollitt graduate. It wasn't as bad when I was there, but I think I'm a little older than you, Kevin. But it is great, and it looks fantastic, and I love when prices come down, because that doesn't happen very often. And we were at a higher number, now we're at a lower number. We really appreciate it. I think there's a big psychological thing being underneath that $1,000 per square foot. It's a big psychological thing for people that would say $1,000. So now we can say, no, it's under that. And I appreciate, I know you guys are working very hard, and we appreciate all the work you're doing on this.

yeah and I guess I would just say we know that construction in the future always costs more than construction now so getting this done as quickly as possible and really condensing the time frame seems to be like one of the most tangible ways that we can actually reduce the construction costs. So I appreciate the work that you've put into that. and we're looking forward to hearing from you again.

If I could take a stab at your question. Parking.

because there would be too many students on site.

And we would have to modify the zoning that we just modified because you then have a building you have greater use of the building you've increased the FAR you've increased the footprint of the bill almost doubled the footprint of the building

and it would delay our construction as well right so new construction if we're yes changing Pollard better theoretically to change it now versus in the future After Mitchell, right?

No, I'm sorry. Maybe I wasn't clear. So phase one of Pollard is the seventh and eighth. The idea is to do that first anyway, move the seven and eight from the existing Pollard to the new school. and then the existing Pollard building will be vacant.

And it's knocked down.

It's gone. Well, right. So it could be completely demolished. Then you build the phase two sixth grade center and then move the sixth grade from High Rock to Pollard and then move Mitchell, while that's being constructed, to High Rock. So that's the current plan. The alternative, just the answer, why is this not feasible to, before, finish the phase one, before doing phase two, you have a vacant existing Pollard building. Can that be used for Mitchell?

You would need

can I just throw in I think this is a legitimate question but I also think that these guys are construction and I think that the school committee probably also needs to be consulted on that kind of question as well as as well as the the question that you asked earlier, the learning plan, which is really a school committee determined.

I see them in the room.

Yeah. I mean, I'm not saying that we should invite them up now because I think this is the but I but I'm wondering if perhaps you want to we want to if that is still a question in your mind then maybe we consult with them you have to answer it yeah we can detail that for you but parking

The context of all these questions is that I want people to feel confidence in how they vote.

I don't want people to go into the vote being uncertain. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And to Matt online as well. Thank you. Thanks, Matt.

Have a good night. Thank you.

Okay, so at our last meeting we talked a bit about the campus at 128 environmental notification we talked about the concept of the project and what was going to happen we at that meeting determined that the town staff and the town manager were compiling a report or rather a response um to uh to the project and so uh Ms. King will you tell us about it

Great. And I'm going to ask if I could bring up Liz LaRossi, our deputy account manager. And she can run through it because I have gotten some accolades. But this is largely Liz's work for along with the team.

welcome hello um so i'm here to seek the select board's overall support for the draft comment letter that was sent out regarding the proposed campus at 128 project in Dedham and authorization for the town manager to submit the final version to MEPA. Given the short comment period, staff moved quickly to assemble a development review team led by the planning departments and consisting of representatives from multiple town departments. the town also retained Greenman Peterson Inc or GPI to conduct an independent transportation review staff participated in the MEPA public consultation session and reviewed comments received from residents and select board members The version before you tonight reflects the work of multiple departments as well as many of the comments received up through this past Friday.

We are looking to also include comments received since then, such as specific intersections and cut-throughs, bridge and corridor modification evaluations, and evaluation of wetland impacts as applicable to stream crossing standards in the final version to be sent before Thursday. At a high level the letter focuses on four primary areas. First, transportation. The project is expected to generate approximately 14,000 Daily Vehicle Trips, and the Town is requesting a more comprehensive analysis of regional traffic impacts, including impacts to Needham roadways, intersections, potential cut-through traffic, Roadway capacity, transit usage, and any infrastructure improvements that may be necessary to accommodate project-related traffic. Secondly, environmental impacts. The project includes significant new impervious surface, roadway construction, and impacts to wetland resources within the Charles River watershed.

The Town is requesting additional analysis of stormwater, flooding, water quality, water demand, climate resiliency, wetland impacts, and potential impacts to downstream communities. Third, transit and multimodal transportation. The town is seeking a more thorough evaluation of impacts to Hersey Station, Needham Junction, shuttle connections, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and Transportation Demand Management measures intended to reduce vehicle trips. Finally, Public Safety and Municipal Service Impacts. The letter requests additional evaluation of emergency response, EMS capacity, hazardous materials associated with laboratory uses, fire protection requirements, mutual aid implications, and Coordination with Needham Public Safety Departments. The letter also incorporates the findings and recommendations of the Town's Transportation Consultants and requests that those recommendations be considered as part of the scope of the draft Environmental Impact Report.

The purpose of the letter is not to take a position on whether the project should move forward, rather it is to ensure that the environmental review process fully evaluates the potential impacts to Needham. and that those impacts are appropriately addressed through the process. Comments are due to MEPA on Thursday. Following tonight's discussion, staff can incorporate any additional comments or suggestions offered by the select board members of the public and finalized the letter for submission prior to the deadline. Thank you.

Excellent. well yes thank you for this hard work because this was a big project to pull together in a very short amount of time so it's it's very much appreciated and it sounds as though in the GPI report it sounds as though the The environmental impact rate minimized. They seem to be indicating that several boxes should have been checked that were not checked. Yes.

Yeah.

so I so especially given that I just really appreciate you know the town's diligence and getting this together and getting all of these comments in I want to

yeah no I just I just want to thank you I mean clearly there's a lot of concern in Needham about this and you know much if not most of the impact will be felt in Needham and so that is a real concern you know that we're not going to get the benefit of the tax revenue we're going to get the cost so how do we deal with that but this seems very strongly worded and very comprehensive and you know I think that's what most Needham residents are looking for you know to put our Best foot forward in making the case that this stuff needs to be looked at. And, you know, I would like us to be made whole if there's any way to do that at all. And I'm sure others feel the same.

There were public comments or letters about adding South Street and the widening of the Denham Bridge and the MBTA track over on Denham Ave.

Yes, we can incorporate all of that.

and thank you for doing this

Yeah, and I guess I would add Lyon Street, like through the St. Seb corridor. And it seems to me like the entirety of Dedham Ave would be affected. I see that Dedham Ave appears on the list in a number of places, but it just seems like you know we've already had some some traffic issues there we have a lot of critical infrastructure there and it just seems like that would be a huge problem for us

Yeah, I want to thank you also. This is the first step in protecting the town's interests and making sure that our town's interests are represented. There are many more steps to come. And so It is a long road. We don't even know how this project will turn, but this establishes that we are going to be present at every step along the way.

I agree and it's such a quick timeline you did it and to come up with this really great and I also agree that we should look at and I think the town manager does not have a problem with adding the two recommendations that Ms. Herlock had sent in to us.

Yes, those will be added in. And I'll just say the planning department pulled this together very quickly. So thank you to the planning department.

excellent uh does anyone want to make a motion sure madam chair um i move uh to uh vote

to authorize the town manager to submit the attached comment letter and consultant report to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act MEPA office on behalf of the town of Needham. I'll just suggest as amended.

As amended. As amended so we can pop those other comments in there.

As amended. Second.

All right, any more discussion? all those in favor say aye aye those opposed motion passes thank you Okay. Katie, project-based committees.

Yes. So the Select Board from time to time sets up committees to help assist and advise you and add capacity on specific topic areas to dig into some of your goals and advance those projects. We are at a little bit of an inflection point on some of those boards and committees where work has concluded and their charges have been fulfilled. So I'm bringing for you tonight a recommendation to dissolve the Envision Needham Center Working Group, the Needham Branding and Town Seal Committee, and the Tree Preservation Planning Committee. Obviously, the... Redesign and Redevelopment of Great Plain Ave will continue on, as will the discussion around the Tree Bylaw. So the work is not entirely concluded, but kind of the phase of the work that these committees were charged with. have run their course. I would just say that

there are so many volunteers that spend so much time and energy on really important issues and really dig in. I mean, we heard a little bit about it today with the stormwater, the Remnants of the Stormwater By-law Working Group's work. Tree Preservation Committee was before you last meeting. This is really important work and it is what ends up going to town meeting, coming to the select board. it feels a little bit anticlimactic to ask you to dissolve these committees and I think maybe everyone should go on the side and throw a party and kind of Mark the moment because it's a lot of work and really meaningful. But I think it's a great way to advance the work beyond what we have the capacity necessarily for the five of you to be able to do to try to tackle everything we're trying to do in town.

So, Madam Chair, I would move that the board vote to dissolve the Envision Needham Center Working Group, the Needham Branding and Town Sale Committee, and the Tree Preservation Planning Committee.

Second. Excellent. Any more discussion? all those in favor say aye aye those opposed the motion passes all right and now town manager report

I have quite a potpourri today. Here we go. The Rosemary Pool is now open for lap swimming and water walking from 6 to 10 a.m. we start opening for open swim starting this Saturday the 13th the hours do change kind of week to week and depending on what form of swimming you would like so I would recommend that folks visit needhamma.gov and look for the icon for park and rec. So we officially, for me, that's officially the start of the summer when we open the pool. We have been working for quite a while to create a mobile or to get a mobile app option up and running to pay for your meter. We've kind of had a few fits and starts with the project. Parking meters. Parking meters. Sorry. Water meters. Parking meters. and so we appreciate everyone's patience on that we are we've trained our parking enforcement officials on the technology we're working on the back end and just beta testing it and we've been kind of finding some

things that need to get cleaned up before we're ready to go live. So that's happening. And as soon as we feel really confident with a launch date, we will push that out to the community. And you still will be able to use coins. This is just adding an additional option. I wanted to update the board that we have submitted a federal grant application to the Federal Railroad Administration for the Quiet Zone. This is our application would be for all of the construction for the five at-grade crossings that would include the quiet zone. and the entire project cost for what we're estimating at this point of project cost for elimination of crossing at the golf course. This

I would say this is a very competitive application process so I you know we gave it our absolute best shot and I want to thank we got letters of support from all our federal delegation, state delegation from the golf course, from the MBTA to help us kind of make the best case we can that this is a wonderful project to improve the safety at all those six crossings. So I am told that we may not hear from more than a year.

I have let it be known but I will keep you posted of course thank you um yes so so that would be able to be retroactively applied if we don't make the

It would and so it's a cost share where the town would contribute 20% roughly of the total costs and the federal government we've requested 80% for them, which is the maximum available. and they do allow you to apply costs that you've already spent starting from a certain timeframe to go towards your 20%. We had an update from Needham Power Choice, which is our group purchasing. for electricity supply. We launched that program in March of 2025. And so we had a report of what progress we've made from that point until March of 2026 and just some high points we have 9200 accounts of folks that have remained opted in to Needham Power Choice. That's about 1000 business accounts and 8200 residential.

for those accounts over the last year they saved collectively 1.8 million dollars on their electricity costs and this is because our costs were been at a price that ended up being stable while Eversource's rates increased. And that resulted in a cost savings to all those Needham residents and businesses. and our goal for Needham Power Choice is we can't always promise that it will be more affordable. In the last year it has been, so that's wonderful. and but the goal is also to provide a cleaner option for folks to decide how they how green their electricity supply is. So over the last year, Needham Power Trace has helped the town to avoid 72

100 metric tons of CO2 emissions that means nothing to any of us but it's that the equivalent of emissions associated with driving more than 18.5 million miles in an average vehicle so that was just in the last year alone and we look forward to continuing that program for the town. And I'm ending on a banner note, which is that I got a call from Secretary Tepper today. She's the Secretary of the Energy and Environmental Affairs Office. We had already received word in writing, but she called to congratulate the town of Needham for winning a $1 million grant from the Department of Energy Resources. This is because we are part of the community Climate Leaders Program, and that $1 million goes directly to support the installation of solar, EV charging infrastructure, and air source heat pumps at our expansion of the Jack Cogswell Building. which will be housing our fleet maintenance division.

So that is amazing work, particularly by our sustainability manager, Gabby Queenan, and Hank Half, who was just before you, and many others. really a wonderful call to get and we will put that money to good use.

That's tremendous.

Can I ask a question?

Yes.

Does that million dollars go specifically to Jack Cogswell or does it go into the energy revolving fund?

it goes directly to the project.

Thank you.

Amazing. Great work, Gabby. Okay, anything else? Okay, so the next item on our agenda is for discussion and the first item there is the appointment process and I guess I would like to kick this off. In our last meeting we had a discussion about our appointments. And it was clear from that discussion that even though we have recently revised our 10-year-old appointment policy to to comply with the open meeting law. There were a number of concerns that were evident, I think, in the discussion of those changes. And then there were some clear issues with process at our last meeting. And so

The idea here was to have a discussion so that we could all kind of align on how we're moving forward with our revised appointment policy. Part of the discussion that we had at our last meeting was a discussion of past practice and norms, and I thought it was important that we include those things in the discussion of our appointment policy. So in our packet, I included some of my recommendations that were meant to incorporate these norms and potentially incorporate them into the policy, although I will note that other towns have kind of policies that incorporate like a background section or a Ways and Means kind of discussion of those items that are less tangible but that surround a policy.

So these my suggestions and any other suggestions or discussion of the suggestions are up for discussion this evening. The intent is to clarify the process for the members of not only our board, but the boards for which we are appointing members, and for the public. Before we get started, though, I do want to say that I do have a couple of notes that I wanted to make on my own recommendations. But there is one very important one that I just want to say, just before we even get started, because it does make a very big change to the intent. Under disqualifying factors, it should say and I'll give you a second to get there what it says is documentation of delinquency will not create in eligibility. It should say documentation delinquency. It's a very different thing, if you're late on your paperwork, like your ethics.

Very different to be late than to have a documented delinquency of any kind. So just want to say that. But ultimately, our board has obligations to participate in the appointment process and has responsibility to our colleagues, our colleagues on this board, our colleagues on other committees to which they're pointing, the applicants to these volunteer positions and to the town to make sure that these committees work. and so it's important to me and I think to this board that those obligations and the means to address them just are clarified and so that was the intent writing these up and talking about what we have done in the past and what we may want to do in the future. So since they're written down here and everyone can see them, I guess I would just open it up to discussion.

I am the most immediate past vice chair so I've been through the appointment process fairly recently and I would observed that when I began as vice chair that the staff sat me down and explained to me how the process would work which was a lot of those practice and procedures that are not part of the policy you know this was how we were going to do it and um I really didn't deviate from that. I pretty much went plain vanilla of what the traditional practice had been and I believe that what is written down here reflects what I experienced as vice chair following the recommend or not they weren't recommendations following what I understood to be the past practice as explained to me by staff. So I don't believe this is new. It's more of a codification of what the practice, the unwritten practice was.

Right. And I just want to clarify, too, I'm not saying I'm writing this down sort of so that we all have it in front of us and it can be clear. I'm not necessarily saying that we need to write this into the appointment policy either in this form or or as policy as opposed to background. But I do think that it's important that we all understand there are things that do make a difference. When are candidates notified, for example? When does the appointing member provide the information on potential nominees to the board and actually some things that that I didn't write in here but that I think are equally important you know what role you know part of part of what I have recommended is that there is engagement with the

Committee Chair ahead of time to sort of understand what their goals are and what they're looking for, especially if they're looking for particular skills, for example. but I didn't talk about, you know, does that committee chair get a copy of the application form? do they also get notified of who the appointing member intends to appoint? I mean these are all just things that we need to talk about and I don't and I think that there's some some tricky boundaries there because we don't want to have a place where you know a committee chair is essentially deliberating you know outside of outside of the meeting in which the appointments are nominated. But I do think that, and I think anyone here who has chaired a committee

have been part of another committee, and obviously all of us have, you know that the way that those committees work is dependent on their volunteers. And so it just is important, and it needs to be discussed. Sorry, didn't mean to take over. Did you have anything you want to share?

Yeah, I would just say I think we need to take another bite of the apple. When we redid this back in February, I think we knew there was a problem. I mean, there was a problem. We had to address it for the open meeting. but we shouldn't cut out the committee chairs. I wish there was a way to get them back in because I think that was such great outreach to the community. I think committee chairs know what the committees want. and I think it was a cleaner system so I think we need to take another bite at this and I think we cobbled something back together something together in February but it's um

we should do it again we should take we should do this again yeah i i yeah i would just say um madam chair that with that we will need to get town council involved to make sure that whatever Coordination with the committee chairs works with the open meeting law and the guidance.

Right. And I just want to say that one of my main concerns is to balance the participation of committee chairs and the appropriate open meeting law set up with the What I think is a need for privacy on the part of volunteers. Any thoughts you want to share?

Yes, thank you. First and foremost, I just want to respond to the first public comment this evening. I never asked anyone any questions about religion during an interview. The three questions they asked applicants for the Human Rights Committee are, what interests you in serving on the committee? What experience or qualifications do you bring to the committee? and given that they're more interested applicants than seats, what other committees might you be interested in serving on? I did in explaining the committee, I said the committee does involve itself in really high heavy issues. It has made statements about Ukraine, Israel-Gaza, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Anyone who felt uncomfortable for that, I really do apologize because that was not the intent. The second thing I want to respond to is on April 24th, I did also meet with town staff to have my kind of sit down. What I got was different from what you got.

It doesn't mean anything was right or wrong. But what was expressed is that every vice chair does things differently. And so that might be a source of misunderstanding. And then just lastly, I do have some prepared comments that I want to make. So in reviewing the Chair's recommended updates to the appointment policy, I see one overarching theme is clarity. to ensure that the public and all members of the select board have the same set of expectations. I'm generally supportive of such recommendations. One area that would benefit from additional clarity concerns consultation with the chair of committees to which appointments are to be made. and as people have said, following the open meeting law violation, we decided to end that practice. But I'm certainly open to integrating the input of committee chairs and revising that practice in that regard. Clarity can also be provided regarding whether to consider the number of current town volunteer positions held by an applicant when making appointment recommendations.

The past stated practice has been to encourage and in some cases prefer new applicants who have not yet had a chance to serve. The show's recommended updates do include mention of that, though I think we might need to clarify that more in what ways it would be applied and which ways not. Last area needing clarity in regards to interviews for committee members seeking reappointment. My practice, and maybe this is a deviation, I've been interviewing all candidates seeking reappointment in order to understand more about the committee from their perspective and to help inform my conversations with new applicants looking to serve on the committee. this was done in particular to integrate the committee input that was no longer available following the decision to end the practice of establishing screening committees with the committee chairs in all cases I've recommended reappointment of these committee members particularly when boards have a great deal of turnover I think it's important to maintain as much continuity as possible among its members The Chair's recommended updates, I think, are consistent with this preference for continuity, but I do think they go a step further to essentially convert fixed-term appointments into lifetime appointments.

I think there may be some instances where turnover in the membership of the advisory committees may benefit the select board and we should acknowledge that in the policy. The second overarching theme which is kind of in conflict with the theme of clarity is government secrecy. The recommended updates would codify a secret veto. by any one member of the select board over a recommended appointment for any reason. This is inconsistent with state law, which grants authority to the select board to act by a majority of its members, not by any single member. It also is discourteous to applicants who deserve to know the status of their application and have an opportunity to address any concerns that one or more select board members may have. According to the chair's recommended updates, an applicant would never know that a select board member expressed any concerns let alone that the recommended appointment was vetoed in the form of a forced withdrawal. Even in the rare instance of a public vote on an individual appointment as occurred two weeks ago, practice suggests that those concerns would be aired only in the vaguest of terms and the applicant would not be afforded the opportunity to address those concerns.

The criteria by which applicants are selected should also be clear. The proposed criterion of demeanor is subjective and nebulous. How is demeanor to be assessed? Is it only the candidate's demeanor during the interview that's meant to be taken into account, or interactions outside of the interview meant to be taken into account? If it's applied similarly to the criterion of civility that was discussed two weeks ago, we risk an inability or an unwillingness to state the reasons that a person's demeanor is asserted as a disqualifying factor. In such instances, an applicant may justifiably wonder whether demeanor may be cited as a pretext to obscure other unstated reasons. The only thing worse than repeating our conversation in public from two weeks ago about a recommended appointment would be to repeat that conversation in private. In order to attract qualified candidates, the public must have an expectation that their government operates openly and that applicants will be evaluated based on objective criteria. in revising an appointment policy, I think applicants should be informed promptly of the recommendation regarding their appointment.

They should also be provided with a summary of the supporting reasons for the recommendation, including any concerns raised, and they should be provided an opportunity to address those concerns. All of this information can and should be shared with the applicant in a manner that protects their privacy while ensuring that the select board operates openly.

I'd love to hear what Bill has to say and then come back to this.

So I read your recommendation, and I have a concern and a question about this, and then I have a thought overall. in consultation with committee chairs. It's what the committee chairs expected prior to Kennedy. When that word, expected, I don't love because what if we can't get the chair what if something's going on I would maybe we put strongly suggested prior to candidate I don't love that expected word uh then the section where you have um you know select board notification uh members must respond with any concerns or questions in 48 hours receipt of the otm email it doesn't really say in that section who that is to, whether it's to the town staff, whether it's to the vice chair, who that's to. So I think that section needs to be clarified.

I do think that if the committee is running well and we think it's running well that the reappointments if the chair thinks it's well I think we should continue with the reappointments I don't think anybody wants to be in a committee for a lifetime. I've been on a lot of committees and I don't want to be in a committee for a lifetime. So I think there will be natural turnover when that happens. So I think if a chair says, yes, I want this committee member to continue, I think we should respect that and have that committee member continue but I know this all happened because you know there was an open meeting law violation so one of my thoughts was is it possible to go back to the old system where the chair the vice chair i mean and the chair of the committee interviewed the candidate but you just posted that meeting

Then it has to be public.

Right. Then it's a public meeting, but the meeting is posted and it's a public meeting. I don't think we're going to have hundreds of people line up. It'd be great if we saw them come to these public meetings to hear who's applying, but I don't think that would be a terrible thing maybe to go back that way. But actually, it seems like the way to do it correctly is to post that meeting.

I agree with you.

I think that it would be a logistical nightmare, but I think it's something we have to try to figure out. It might slow things down because to get

I have a concern that if candidates all know that it's going to be known that they're applying and it's going to be known that they didn't get it, that that could be it's difficult for people it could really discourage people from applying in the first place so I think that that is my concern with having all the interviews be public. I mean, I think I don't know what town council would say, for example, about a meeting between the vice chair and the committee chair not to speak about individuals because that would be a different thing but to speak in generalities about here's what my committee does here's the type of people you know some committees need really specialized type of people other committees just need somebody who's enthusiastic and is going to show up so like a conversations like that

I guess I would want to know town council's opinion do those need to be posted if so then we would post them the interviews I don't know. I think that's awfully hard to ask a volunteer. I mean, even if for a paid job, if your interview was public, that's really asking a lot. And then everybody knows you interviewed and could watch it and then knows you didn't get it. I don't know. I think that's asking a lot of candidates. And so I think we have to understand exactly how to comply with open meeting law if we want to change. What we have complies. If we want to change, it still has to comply. we need to understand that there may be a way to have you know consultation in general about what the needs of the committee are and maybe that needs to be posted and then we would do it you know what I mean if that's what we need to do but I don't know, the public interviewing and then the public knowing you didn't get it.

That would be a big change that might really discourage people.

Yeah, it might. I mean, I know in the private sector, all interviews are, there's a sense of confidentiality. But we're public. and I think you're eventually going to be on a committee being videotaped and on a Zoom meeting and everything's going to be very public. So I guess you learn.

Madam Chair I do believe there's an option to do screening committees in executive session I would want to confirm with town council on how that's done yeah I mean we can certainly look at it um

we'll have to talk with town council in any case to determine kind of how many paths there are and what what the options are I'm not a fan of these public interviews although you do make a good point many of our volunteers are become unwilling public figures in the course of their committee work so uh you know that's

that's a reality I think if they want to be in a certain committee I don't think it will discourage them because they just want to be in the committee I don't think it will discourage them

Well, I don't wholeheartedly agree, but we can certainly investigate what it would take to make that an option and we can, you know, talk about how that might work I do want to return to the idea of addressing select board concerns because I don't think that your characterization of that is fair. This idea that we're talking about a single person veto. I mean, look, we're all people who work on many, many committees, and we know that you know there are things that we don't necessarily want to say about volunteers in public and it doesn't mean that it's something and so forth. I think it's terrible, but we've all been on committees where people just don't come. We have committee members who just routinely don't show up. If I know that because I have worked on a committee with someone

give you that information? I think that's just as much a breach as me coming to you and saying, I have a concern about this particular person. I think that's information that one should factor in to appointing. I don't know that that means that I'm secretly vetoing. I just think casting it in that way makes it nefarious. What we're doing is based on, I mean, we're all elected officials. We know a lot of people. and we've been in a lot of situations. I don't think that there's anything nefarious in trusted colleagues adding a perspective. I think what happened in our previous conversation is that some of those perspectives were ignored. And that's how we found ourselves moving forward with a nomination that was difficult to talk about in public. I mean, I think it's really important that we don't

I mean and and look I mean maybe it's different if we end up going to a public interview process I don't know how that affects the whole balance of the process, but it feels like under no circumstances would I want to say something negative about someone who's trying to do a good thing and volunteer for the town.

It was not my intention to ignore anyone. I regret that it was perceived that way. I think if people want to share their concerns, we should be free to do that. But it doesn't mean that if someone has a concern, then that's the end of the story.

No, I agree. I mean, there have been situations. I mean, you have availed yourself of this as well. We pulled a nomination to to further talk about and discuss and investigate a situation in which you had a concern. And we were able to do that and an appointment was made and it was all fine. But that's not kind of how I think the ability to express that concern without making it a public affair is exactly what I'm talking about. And I acknowledge that there's a balance there. I mean, it's not a simple thing. It's not without nuance. but you can see where you had a concern, you raised it, it was addressed, and we moved along. That's the process that I'm talking about here.

But I think the process from two weeks ago was a concern was raised. It was heard. And I just didn't agree with it. And I think that's the trickier situation when there's not agreement.

that's right um if if you you well i

Can I just add, I think the term veto is a bit of a strong characterization. No one has really a veto. I think we've used the term and it's not a veto. It kind of becomes a veto because we're trying to put on a consent calendar. and it can't be on consent if someone says I'm against this thing so it can't by its nature it can't be on consent so it appears to be a veto but it really is I think an element of discretion that we try to do on the board that you can talk to each other as colleagues and say I have a concern about this or that. those things are sort of then worked on and it doesn't may not kill a nomination but it may delay something or but it certainly gets off the consent so

yeah and so to that point i mean certainly if the concerns are not addressable i mean you know part of my recommendation was that it would go to a public vote but as I say I don't think whether it comes off the consent agenda and is voted in public I don't think that a discussion or demand for reasoning is appropriate in public on someone who is not you know, for any public volunteer?

What I would propose perhaps is to compromise. That's the intent. basically, if we're still doing it with the vice chair, making recommendations within the 48 hours all board members submit any concerns or sign off whatever comments they have to the town manager and then that determines what the next step is is does that mean that you know those go straight to the consent does it mean that they go to uh you know they get kicked back to candidates for feedback so so i think candidates should should see all of that feedback and they have a chance to respond if it does ever get are going to a public vote. We do all see that information. And it is public. It is what we're basing our opinions on. But you're right. It is unseemly to be criticizing or saying anything about individuals in public. So I wouldn't want to do that either.

But I think from two weeks ago, that was a very unfortunate situation where we didn't have that process in place.

I guess I would just say, though, that if let's take Heidi's example of somebody who never shows up at meetings. And that's just a known fact. what would be the value in transmitting that back to the candidate how could that person resolve the fact that they didn't show up at the meetings well they could respond to it but then it i mean You think that's preferable?

I think people want to know why they are or are not being appointed.

So how are you telling people that they're not your nominee? So if you've decided that they didn't make the cut, what are you telling them?

In this process? Yeah. I think we would...

This should apply to everyone who applies, right? Everyone who you interview. But we're only talking about the nominees. But what about the rest of the folks? If you have a pool of seven, you pick one. Are you going to give specific feedback to all the rest? I mean, I just think it just becomes this feedback loop of negativity, honestly.

No, I mean, I think there's a reality that there are only so many slots. Not everyone can get on every committee they apply to. That's just a reality. I mean, I know we want to give seats to everyone. When I interview people, I do say, if you can't get on this committee, I want you to be able to get on another committee. So that's how I'm framing it. I'm sorry, we can try again for this committee next time or let me know if there's something else you're interested in. That's how I frame it.

Well, I think it is more problematic when there is a legitimate reason. I mean, you know, the candidate, you can reach out to the candidate and say, well, it looks like you didn't show up. I mean, I agree with Kathy. Like, I'm not sure what the point is there, honestly. White.

certainly they do know at that point though there was like okay I understand I didn't show up I understand I'm not getting the point they might not they might they might have thought that it was okay just to be on the committee and not show up well they're already they already know that

Well, I mean, I suppose I'm thinking about the situation of a reappointment versus a new appointment.

Well, then if it's a reappointment, the chairman's probably not going to recommend reappointment if they never show up.

Right. and we will still have to tell them that. Because if they say that they want to be reappointed, we are going to have to tell them.

You didn't show up. Sorry.

you know assuming that's the reason yeah I think in HR world it's we've selected another candidate that more closely meets our needs and that's sort of the answer everyone gets it's like you're not really told that is correct yeah yeah you flubbed this answer you did i guess i just i feel like we're putting the

rather than having the hard discussion between trusted colleagues, we're putting this on the candidate and I don't think that's appropriate.

The reason why I think it's fair and appropriate is because we may not have the correct perception. We have a perception, but it may be different than what the candidate believes is true. And the candidate does have, I think, a right to correct the record in their opinion.

But I guess I'm not sure there's always a case like that. Like, let's say you interviewed five people and and It's for a committee that has no particular skills or anything, you know? And there was a person who was just really enthusiastic. and you wanted to pick that person. Do you say to the other people you weren't enthusiastic? I'm kind of failing to see this. I feel like this is very unpleasant. I feel like it would create a lot of difficult conversations. I feel like it would make people upset. and never want to deal with us again. I don't. I don't see the point so like if somebody if new information if the vice chair interviews someone and they like them but new information comes in that makes them question that I'm not then maybe they just go to a different candidate.

That candidate that might almost have been picked doesn't need to know that they might almost have been picked, but weren't picked. you know what I mean? I'm not sure why, you know, like if you think about it in like a job context, that would happen all the time, you know? So I don't know that I think what Kevin has said makes sense. It's like, you know, or what you were saying, Josh, earlier, you know let's look for something else you know what i mean like love your enthusiasm let's you know keep keep you in mind and when i was vice chair i certainly did that when there were people who weren't picked for something, something else came up, I would contact them and say, hey, you're interested in this other thing. So that stuff happens. But I don't think you need to tell people why they didn't get it.

yeah I guess I would also ask that there be more if a colleague has an objection you know I know that you didn't agree but it didn't seem like the discussion happened between you and the board member who had the concern your discussion happened with candidate and so it seems as though I guess I guess again I'm just trying to bring it back to the board uh I guess I feel like we're making this the candidate's responsibility when the objection is board-based

I recall having a phone conversation and an email conversation with another board member. So I guess I'm just not clear on what your concern is.

Well, I think you've also made two processes. There's a process where someone applies for the role. You hear it through an interview. and then if they're not selected they do it again in front of the whole board where you say like you talk that they should be able to make their case or like previously I've never been lobbied by anyone who was applying for a committee assignment. And I think if we have to explain why you didn't get it, now we're talking they're basically lobbying why why give me this role I want this and I think that's that's a whole nother process that was never existed before

Can we go through this? It seems like there are only a few areas of and other. Disagreement. So what if we go through this as briefly as we possibly can. Just to understand where those areas are and where there's areas of agreement so that we can just focus on those as we talk to town council and talk about how this might really work? The first thing was staff involvement. and I think to your to the to the comment earlier I mean to me not only is staff involvement really frankly very helpful in just making sure that the delivery of details is the same to each interviewee, etc. I mean, that really is very helpful.

But I think it also is to some level protective of both the interviewing member and the candidate, right? This is someone who's essentially proctoring the interview so that so that I think misunderstandings are potentially less likely to happen.

You can do that. I think when we talked about this in February, there was a strong concern that we not overburden staff with their time. So that was the only reason

right so if we if we just work together to book out far enough that we could do you know business hours for the most part i mean it's not always going to work you know candidates have uh obligations as well but the more we can involve them i think that that's really good and if anyone has any major objections no i agree with what you said especially

It protects both parties.

Yeah, I mean, we're interviewing people we don't know.

You can easily offend people without meaning to. And the staff there, they can say, whoa, whoa, whoa, you know.

yeah you yeah third party okay so it sounds like on the first point we more or less agree uh consultation with committee chairs we've all i think agreed that consultation is maybe not expected but highly recommended this was part of our initial conversation on that we knew might be an issue and certainly is an issue so we'll talk with town council about what's really possible here to incorporate?

And Kathy had a great idea about the form. Unfortunately, only one committee chair filled out the form.

Yeah, and it's probably just not fulsome enough anyway to have a forum.

But I think within that conversation, we do need to talk about, are committee chairs receiving the applications? they did under our old system because they were doing the interview with us And so the question is, does that jive with the open meeting law? And do they then, on the other end of the process, do they get to react to the nominations? I think we just have to think through kind of how all that goes, especially if a committee chairs potentially could contact candidates ad hoc outside of the interviews. I mean, they're residents. They may all know each other. I think there are certain elements of this that we can't control, but we need to sort of just think through how it might impact the process. I think whichever way we go about it.

The consultation can happen a bunch of different ways, but I think it's important to decide which form at the very beginning for each committee. yeah so you know if we're if there's going to be an intention to have a screening committee that has to be decided at the beginning you can't jump in at the end and say oh we're going to have a screening committee definitely

I think we would need first the menu of options from town council. Yes. Yeah. From which we can pick.

Yeah. And so, you know, as far as interviews you know I said no matter their fitness perhaps that was not the best choice of words but I think it it goes to your point Kathy where you know we have some candidates who are incredibly skilled and have all kinds of expertise and some who have enthusiasm. And so it doesn't I mean, fitness is like it depends what the role demands right so I think that's entirely subjective but the bottom line is that we want as many volunteers as we can get and we'll find a place for all of them because there is so much work to be done so just you know we want to make sure that they all feel valued within the context of whatever conversation it is whatever committee it is I don't think there's any I can't imagine if anyone disagrees with that I hope

and then I think notification of the proposed nominations I think it's it certainly is past practice to notify the select board before notifying the candidates. Yay or nay, either way. So does anyone have any objection to that?

Which section are you referring to right now? The select board notification?

Select board notification.

But again, members must respond with any questions or concerns to whom. yeah that's fair we need to fill that in yeah absolutely we need to flesh that out that might be something that we want to make sure we do with Town Council so Town Council may say it needs to be staff agreed well so so yeah

that's uh that's fair so typically the notification comes from town staff to the select board and then yeah we can work with town council to determine how things need to be routed to make sure that it's compliant but I think we also need to talk about you know whether the committee is also the committee chair is also being notified and again that's a town council question what so it depends if we're doing a subcommittee that's a no-brainer and if we're not that's it's more complicated

well I think the other question is what does the subcommittee talk about just in general you know what they're looking for or candidates specifically I think it'd be hard to talk about candidates specifically in public

I think we're talking about doing joint interviews.

Well, a joint interview would have to be public then, I think.

Yeah.

Yeah. Well, don't love that idea, as I've said.

I don't love it either. But I mean, maybe Chris will come up with some magic solution. But I agree. I think we're going to have to make a hard choice here about whether we want to do public or not.

Well, I think it can also be, I think Josh was alluding to this, I think it can be committee by committee. It doesn't have to be a blanket. Well, that's fair.

It can be a menu of options that, you know, is picked accordingly.

Okay.

So clearly we're going to have to address select board member concerns. And I think that the same thing applies to the committee. uh the appointing committee as well so if if we end up uh incorporating the chair into the interview or however whatever path that takes you know if we are sharing the potential nominees with the committee chair as well as the select board, then we have to deal with any concerns that might arise.

So it seems like we're going to have to have a decision. Are we going to just consult with the committee chair about what they're looking for, or are we going to consult and say, here are the people?

Yeah.

We're going to have to make that decision.

It's a different level of... Right. So this is the section I have the most concern and issues with. As do I. Is a concern a Does a concern stop the process?

Well, I think it depends.

Depends on the concern.

It depends what's going on. and how many people have concerns and just kind of what the whole situation is. And I think it requires a conversation between the folks who have concerns and the person doing the appointment. Yeah.

And it does say, in a rare instance, may be brought to a public vote.

Yeah. If it can't be worked out, then we can go to a public vote.

but also says it normally in most cases A concern would lead in a withdrawal.

We've been doing appointments in this town for decades. And last night, or last meeting, was the first one that came to us. Well, certainly in my tenure, which is... admittedly short but nonetheless first one that that's happened so it seems as though past practice shows that this can be managed with with effort and trust between colleagues.

I've been on the board for two years and I've never been notified or informed of this provision that a concern would lead to a withdrawal or a veto.

You used this provision.

No, I raised a concern. I never had an understanding that that concern would lead to a withdrawal. Never. No single concern should lead to a withdrawal.

Well, we have different understandings of expectations and that's why I wrote it down so that we could align.

This expectation is not consistent with state law. This is the thing I have the most problems with.

Okay.

Well, that's why we have Time Council, right?

That is why we have Time Council. So, again, and I think we already talked about whether whether it's one or it's many, but especially if it's many, members raise concerns that those can be routed through the town manager to ensure compliance. And we will discuss this with town council.

That's another thing. Town staff can't be used to circumvent the open meeting law. So this, we really need it. Town staff can't be used to circumvent the open meeting law.

so so i just i want town council's opinion on this as well that's what we just talked about like 14 times So candidate notification, I think this has been past practice that staff will notify all candidates of the interview outcome at the same time on the day of the packet's posting. Is that everyone's understanding of what we have done in the past?

Yeah, and that's the only professional way to do it. Yes. No one should be finding out through a grapevine that they didn't get it.

I'm fine with that. This is just not what was communicated to me.

it was certainly what was communicated to me I think that it keeps it very professional and you know the partly it was I did all my interviews with staff present and so it was staff that would explain at the beginning of each interview to the candidate how the process was going to work and would always close the interview with what the next steps were so it was consistent and I think it was professional. People had the proper expectations.

um okay so reappointments um assuming of course that the committee member whose term is expiring is eligible and interested and that the chair of the committee is also willing for them to be reappointed, that that could be done without an interview by the consent agenda. Does anyone have any?

I think the operative word is can be. I want to leave the option open that we can if there are circumstances required because We do want to avoid calcification of committees. If people are there for a long time and there's no turnover, there is benefit to having new people on committees.

Okay. All right, so disqualifying factors. So if the candidate doesn't want to be reappointed, obviously, they shouldn't be reappointed. Yeah, there's a little nap. if they are ineligible it will be because some of the committees have term limits and you know potentially that could be something we consider as well. Goodness, it's like I'm outside or something. Or obviously town residency. But if they're late on their paperwork, I know that this was a thing that was important to you and and I agree that is important but it's managed by a different office and it just uh the town clerk um and often those notifications don't come in uh immediately so folks in advance of an appointment may not even know so

So for people who don't know, I instituted a policy at the very beginning and disseminated it broadly that anyone who wanted to be reappointed would not be reappointed if they were not up to date with their state ethics requirements. And Miles sent an email to every liaison who sent it in turn to every committee member. I, in emails, made it very clear. People have every opportunity. The goal is to get people to comply because in speaking with the town clerk, we do have a several people who are not up to date with their requirements. So this is kind of like the threshold requirement that was mentioned two weeks ago. This is for me a threshold requirement. It is just something that we want committee members to be up to date on their ethics.

I guess, just backing up on this whole thing, these are all board appointments. everybody rotates through as as vice chair and it's a privilege to talk to all the people and do all the interviews and it's it's a lot of fun it's also work but you're doing it on behalf of the board you're doing it as the board's Delegate. So I think introducing new requirements like that is something that should only be done with board agreement. I think like with the reappointments, I think interviewing people when they've always just automatically been reappointed can be jarring for people and is something that I don't see the need for us to do. I would not support that. So I think that again should be a board decision, not the decision for the individual vice chair.

I think you know yes there can be some different flavors of this but since since the vice chair is acting on behalf of the board I think you know some of these things are would I think that would constitute quite major changes that I think would require a board vote to do. Like saying you can't be reappointed if you forgot to do your ethics or you have to be re-interviewed. if you want to continue you know you want to use the word may but that would mean it's up to the vice chair's discretion certain people would get re-interviewed and you know why why are those people you know if the chair is happy and they want to continue why should they have to be re-interviewed it might I don't know feel off-putting and and um I it's not something I would support so I think something like that should should be a board policy and not just to the discretion of the vice chair.

I mean, I think we want some degree of continuity here of our process that we're not Zieging and Zagging from one year to another in terms of very different ways of going about things.

Okay. as long as we're changing the process, is that something we want to include?

I'm not sure we're hugely changing the process. I guess most of this I don't think is a change. I think the one thing that we're really, really looking at is how do we deal with this open meeting law issue with the committee chairs? And that I think is... you know we tried something and we're not happy with it and that's kind of an open item i think most of these other things actually are not changed they're just continuity it's just writing down a practice which fair enough it wasn't written down Causes confusion, causes lack of continuity. I think writing it down is good. But this is kind of like the status quo. anything different would be a change which we can certainly contemplate but I think the board should agree on a major change if there's going to be one I would rather keep things standard than

like I would rather it be reappointments who are willing and that the chair is willing can go on consent, period, or all have to be re-interviewed. But I would feel weird about it being like, well, this one we're going to re-interview, and that one we're not.

Yeah, the re-interviewing, too, it's time. I mean, when you rightly... speak about protecting staff time. That's a lot of staff time. That is a whole lot of positions that would suddenly need to be re-interviewed. It's just a lot of time. I'm not sure that for those people, if everything's going well and the committee chairs, everything's going well, all of a sudden, you know, to put that uncertainty in there, I just don't, I wouldn't support it.

Can I just ask a bigger question? Did staff review this? Is this consistent with staff's understanding of the process?

So Katie looked at my recommendations and my recommendations are based on my experience as the vice chair working with staff. staff was going to sort of write up the process but because I decided to put this in as my recommendations I felt like it was not necessarily efficient to help them spend their time doing that. So it's something that we can we can add but they haven't been asked to do it yet right because i'm just observing that like

what has been observed as past practice among this board is at most four years. That's not a long time. We should decide what we want as a board collectively. I think that's what we're doing right now and right and so I've been on the board for two years and none of this like like not that I was doing the appointing but but none of this was familiar as past practice

That's right, but I think that's sort of what we, that was part of our discussion in talking about the appointment when we were last changing the appointment. what we were saying is this has been our experience. This is going to change things. I think it was most apparent with the committee chairs. But for all of it. I mean we at the time there were four of us who had done the appointments and we were saying this is going to be a change this is going to be a change and so this is the change this is this is where we are it's changed and it's and it's uncomfortable so this is meant these recommendations are meant to share past practice and allow us as a board as currently constituted to discuss them and go through what we think is appropriate that's exactly what we're doing

um so uh new appointments um you know we're looking for folks who fit the the call for the volunteer and i think this again is like is the committee chair involved and what are their stated goals um so clearly experience interest availability. I understand your concern about demeanor, but I think it's still an important one.

How would you assess demeanor?

Yeah, I mean, every job interview I've done, you can tell demeanor. I mean, it's a factor. Does this person work well with others? That's my own question. It's like there's technical expertise there's ability to do the job and there's also demeanor. You can judge on all of them, and we do every day when we meet people.

Is it assessed visually, based on experience? How do you do it?

I guess it's case by case. Sometimes if you know the person, it's what you're learning right in front of you as you're interviewing them. I think that's very good. There are times you can look at the resume. I mean, you can figure out things. In education, how many jobs do they do? I don't know. You contact your references. I mean, that's what references are. Reference contacts are all about that. Everyone does this.

So it's reputation? Is that what you mean?

What was she? Your reputation is your shadow. You know, but it is, yeah, people measure you. And you are measured. But you do have contacts. People do in business and hiring all the time. You always contact people.

So I just want to be clear, that's what you mean by demeanor.

There's a number of factors. It can be on a reference call. It can be, does this person show up? Are they late? Do you need them to do work after lunch? I mean, that's a good question sometimes. So there are a lot of questions and a lot of things you can figure from people. So that's what we judge.

No, thank you. I'm not judging people based on something I can't measure or assess.

Well, that's the point. That's why you do contacts. You check contacts or references. People do it.

I think, Josh, we're talking about, or at least I would say that I have done interviews for appointments. in which people have been rude or dismissive of questions or unable to answer questions, but also not interested in answering questions. I mean, I think there is some intangible. and I don't think that it is just you know kind of random and like do I like this person like is not in the mix I you don't you don't we're not picking uh someone to hang out with we're picking someone to do a job with and the question is are they attentive are they um interested or do they do they respond to you with respect. and the same respect that you give to that candidate.

And I think these are the qualities that we are all looking for in colleagues. So if someone were late, and then arrived without saying, hey, I'm sorry I was late, you would notice. These are not, I don't think that we're, when I say demeanor, not looking for reasons not to like someone and looking for someone who's gonna do their their best for the town on behalf of the town and and uh be a good colleague for the other people on the board that they're being appointed to to work with that's

that's what we're talking about at least that's what I'm talking about it says criteria for points many include many factors including but it doesn't say that it's the definite factor it has to be I mean that's more like the words you're using may include these factors so I mean, I would think Tamina's probably, but it might not be.

Right. We're not interviewing to find someone to hang out with. We're interviewing to get a job done and to fill a need on a committee and to make sure that the committee is going to work well together. and I think that to pretend that demeanor doesn't exist or isn't a factor is just not realistic. But it's not the only factor.

I think it has to be defined more clearly because it's still very nebulous to me. And if it's nebulous, it's just a recipe for disaster and disagreement and misunderstanding and confusion.

I don't think in past years we've had disaster, disagreement, debacle. It's gone fairly smoothly with the ancient processes that we had. So I think that again this is these are not hiring decisions but they're sort of analogous you know there are intangibles they're not all quantifiable. This is a human business. There's people involved.

it's it's not widgets it's not all quantifiable yeah yeah but it's not the only factor and and it does talk about you know consider each candidate holistically, including all of the relevant factors, and most importantly, in light of this committee's stated goals and needs in the charge and composition. well that and the the committee chair i mean if you talk to a committee chair in consultation prior to this interview and they say you know people on my committee just don't get along. They're all trying to talk over each other. I mean, look, it happens, right? It's difficult. It's a difficult committee. that is something that you should hear and take into consideration. Are these members going to work well together? I mean, we're trying to create a place where people can get work done, right, and not have personalities.

it's not always possible and you know you don't know all the other people on the committees this is a this is a A little bit of matchmaking. It's a little bit of magic. But it is something that should be taken into account, I think.

Availability is, I think, the most important. Because they might not. That's what I get asked when I get on a board. Can you meet? It's Wednesday night.

Yeah.

No, I play basketball every Wednesday night. I didn't know it was Wednesday night. Okay, go. Hope you score a lot of baskets.

Yeah, and to that point, actually, you know, we do have a lot of We have appointed a lot of new committee members in the past few years, which is fantastic, but we do still have many um committee members who serve on multiple committees and either that's you know in many cases that's because their appointing committee sends them as a representative to a secondary committee or because they have skills and lots of interests and committees want these people. we do not have a policy currently that restricts service on multiple committees unless as Bill says they're not available and they can't do it and that I mean that has been that can be an issue that I think we can ask about, do you have the time for this? There's a lot of commitments. Are you comfortable with this commitment that you're making? But I don't think that we can restrict service on multiple committees because we're, you know,

many times we're not even the appointing body for the other commitments that that candidate might have so I don't know if anyone has anything to say about that I think we you know we want globally there's a lot of talent in this town

and you know we want that on our committees you know in whatever way that that works out we certainly want to encourage new people to join and then we want to make use of the more experienced people who are willing to serve on multiple committees. I think both can be accommodated and both should be accommodated.

and then appointments by other committees. I mean, this is kind of like as I just said we we don't appoint all of the committees or the appointees in town they're appointed there are many appointing bodies and we should just not interfere with other bodies appointments I think that's that's all i have and you know again i think the first stop needs to be uh town council to find out what our decision tree here is in terms of committee chair involvements and so on. and so and then we'll get town council's input on how concerns should be addressed could be addressed and we will have to kind of reconvene on this but I think it's it's important to

lay it all out there make sure that we're all operating from the same manual and from the same expectations and then whether it's in a background or a you know some addition to our policy or actually incorporating a lot of this into our policy I think it's just best that everyone have the the same expectations so we will we will work with town council in the interim and then come back with something else to consider.

in terms of immediate next steps, all the appointments are already paused. It seems like they should continue to be paused until this gets sorted out. I think that does pose some problems for committees who may be short on people. So I think that's just something to be aware of.

Yeah. So committee members whose terms are expiring can continue to and others participate in the committee beyond the expiration date of their term. So hopefully some of them will do that in order to assist their committee. Those who don't want reappointment, those who were hoping for reappointment anyway, it's there will be a formality at that point um but surely yeah there will be there will be committees who operate with maybe maybe even without a quorum for some understand. So they will have to pause their operations, you know, or figure that out. But I think moving forward without hammering this out is not a not really an option. So we'll do the work as quickly as we can and then move on from there so we can restart.

Anyone have anything else before we move along? So then next thing is committee reports. So, Phil, you want to address that? Oh, sorry.

Madam Chair, can I go first because my iPad is about to run out of battery and I have a very long update? Yes, go ahead.

I'm about to run out of battery now.

Go ahead. Uncharacteristically long. But well, I'll start with the short thing that was really, really fun this morning. I went to the eighth grade civics showcase at Pollard. and that was really wonderful um i think there are some others still to go because the whole eighth grade is doing it and i just loved their engagement and just all the different topics they had and they were just adorable so It's just a great uplift if people want to go. I think it's happening this week. Really loved seeing it. But my long update. Sorry, Bill, it's all about TCHOC. We have quarterly updates on the different projects. And so we had the quarterly update last night. and I'll just go through all of the projects. Charles River Center, they did not get the funding this past year. That was not a real surprise. I've shared that with you guys before because they really weren't ready.

they're applying this fall with the state they'll hear in about a year from now um and they have just recently registered with mass save for passive house but they've gone really far with their budget and their plans and everything so they're they're moving along um Needham Housing Authority, Seabeds um they are getting there um they have the money now to purchase the solar you know that town meeting we voted the money to enable them to have the Solar. They actually have enough money to purchase it themselves. They've selected their construction manager. HUD is, I think due to staffing reasons, having some delays. So it looks like their target construction they had hoped would be like this month is going to move back till August. They did discuss their relocation plan. they're going to have maybe 10 to 12 residents at a time that need relocation for like a four month period so they think you know they can handle it between

vacancies elsewhere in seabeds or elsewhere in their federal portfolio, which means Cook or High Rock, they actually can't put people in their state portfolio. The big news is on NHA, Needham Housing Authority, Linden Street. Now this is kind of a good news, bad news story. I'm going to choose to take the good news side of it. they are still awaiting their decision by the state which will be at the end of the summer, August or September. But the big thing is that the federal government, HUD, has terminated the program called Restore Rebuild, formerly Faircloth Authority, that the NHA was using to take those extra units that they had and basically make the state units they had into federal. HUD has terminated that. However, because they have really been so creative, NHA, they are grandfathered in.

This is a piece of amazing luck. Not Luck. They worked hard to get that, so it's not Luck. But the two key things is that agreement they have with the Taunton Housing Authority, because Needham's Faircloth units are not available in time, so they're doing this switch with Taunton. So the fact that they've already had that agreement, that enables them to be grandfathered in. And then the second thing is that they are in discussions with the state on their LIHTC. subsidies. So the fact that they are that far along means that they are still grandfathered into this program, which is ending. So the difficulty, but it's also an opportunity, the difficulty is this is their one shot, this funding cycle, because after this, it is over. Well, I mean, they could try to find something else, but this program is over. But the good news with that is that they can really say that to the state. Like, look, you've got to fund us now. These are the people that could be funded later. They can wait. They've done so much work.

And they've said many times that the strong support from the town is really speaking volumes to the state. with any luck that urgency will help get them state funding the other thing is and i don't mean to be Unkind to other competitors for this, but there are five competitors for two slots with the state. It is possible that some of those other competitors are no longer in the game because they were trying to use this program that's over. were grandfathered. We don't know. No one knows. But it might mean that the pool is smaller. I don't you know again that seems unkind but um still we want to win so that is sorry sorry bill that was my long update and my thing has gone to zero but I needed my notes very good all right well um

Some of us went to the Civic Speed here for the juniors, which I thought was fantastic. It was great to actually see they're doing a lot. I think there was three groups I went to about tree preservation I said we just had this you know and they had the football fields and things we just seen so it was great to see them involved in some of the same things we involved and yesterday of course at graduation even though it was a little warm it was my first graduation that I was down on the field for a little years a few years you know so but I thought that was great as well you and I attended the picnic on Saturday

I mean this is the first time we did it and I think like I've been wanting to this for two years and I think other people for longer maybe so this is a great community yeah

Yeah, Kevin attended as well. And I just would love to say a special thank you to Park and Rec and the Office of the Town Manager who did so much to make this happen. We talked about this three years ago as a like to get this going and the common got renovated and then last year we had Rain, Dowd, and it's such a bummer, but we finally made it happen, and I thought the crowd was really good. I also want to say thank you to the Teardowns, who really tore it up. and they were great. I am lucky enough to have them play on my street sometimes and they're fantastic. I'll also say I attended the MAPC business meeting in Melrose on June 2nd and sort of as a

potential audition to be the alternate representative to MAPC and that was really interesting and so I appreciated being taken along by Mo Handel our are representative to that body. Kevin?

Same thing. Graduation was great. Speakers were good. Allegra Franco and Marco Barbosa spoke. The picnic was great. The other thing is, tomorrow I have office hours, but if you go, you're going to notice I look a lot like Heidi Frail. She's covering for me.

It's a last minute swap out. Sorry, everybody.

I owe you so much. And then the other thing is Wednesday, the 27th of May, we went to Johnny Buchanan's funeral. And it was very sad. DPW did great. They did sort of an honor guard. They had all the trucks. He had a lot of friends at DPW, and I think he was a bit of an institution himself there, despite the fact they all said he was really shy. But I don't believe it because... They loved him. He was very sad. So that's all I got.

All right.

Move to adjourn.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye.