Needham Select Board, 12/2/25

Levy, Levy

recording in progress

Good evening and welcome to the Select Board meeting for December 2nd. This meeting is being recorded and broadcast by the Needham Channel, the Needham Local, the Needham Observer, for the Town's YouTube channel and via Zoom. If anyone else in the room or online is recording, now is the time to speak up. Okay, so we'll open our meeting as we always do with public comment. Is there anyone in the room who would like to make a public comment? come on up. You can have a seat here. And we'll ask you to introduce yourself, tell us your address. And you have about three minutes. And generally, we don't talk back. We're just here to listen.

My name is Alex Boney. I live at 13 Nichols Road. It's close to Perry Park, if you're familiar. I'm a lifelong Needham resident, and I'm here to voice my support for the Envision Needham project. I'm going to start with a little anecdote. As you may see, I'm wearing a splint on my left hand. I broke my left hand like two months ago in a biking accident. which wouldn't have happened if there was adequate biking infrastructure where I was. I was in Boston. And this is why I support the original Envision Needham plan, which has safe biking infrastructure. I think it's important that the town supports and provides safety features to people, no matter how they're enjoying our public space, whether that be walking, biking, driving, or any other means of moving around.

Yeah, I mean, obviously, my hand is going to be a problem for a couple more years, probably. It was a pretty bad injury, and so I don't want that to happen to other people. I appreciate you all for listening. I hope that we'll see where that project goes. I support the original plan. Thank you.

Thanks for coming in.

Of course.

Yeah. Is there anyone else in the room who would like to make a public comment? Is there anyone online? OK. Alright, then we're going to move right on to a certificate of recognition for a very special resident and town member.

This is a recognition of Dave Overland of Chromosomic TV who's in the audience with his family. Come on up and have a seat. sit down if you'd like please all right better this sit than stand yeah for an old man so you've been a fixture in town for 45 years in Needham Center yes and recently closed your brick and mortar store on Sunday We want to thank you and recognize your contributions to this town. And so we have a certificate of appreciation. From the Town of Needham Select Board, awarded to Chromosomic TV, in recognition of providing outstanding service in Needham Centre for 45 years, we thank you for your many contributions to the residents and business community of Needham. signed the second day of December 2025.

Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Needham's been good to me. I came here in 1984, opened the store in 1979. That guy behind me with his father was my partner. He's like my second dad. I do miss them. And without that family, I wouldn't have done what I did. Joel sits there. He's like my adopted son. he was the driving force of the company and without them I wouldn't have succeeded. And I thank all of you people for honoring me

my life's work, which I'm gonna miss, but I'm still gonna be around selling on my same phone number and website, which is being constructed, so. That's all I can say. I can't give it up. I love my job. If you can love your job, it's not work. It's not even about money. That's all I can say.

Very lucky, ma'am. And we were lucky to have you.

Thank you to everybody here in the room that supported me and all of Needham. I can't say anything anymore. I had nothing when I came here and I got a roof off of my head.

So you do have one more thing to say because you're entering this brave new world of internet marketing. which is you need to give your URL. Where are people going to find you on the internet?

ChromosonicTV at gmail.com, I suppose, yes.

Okay.

Or clomassonictv.com, I guess.

Right.

I can't even run the Macintosh here. I just bought one and can't even run it.

You're going to need to get some cards to hand out.

Yeah, I do have some here as well.

Excellent. Excellent. Would you consider taking a picture with us, Lefbert?

Absolutely. Why not? As long as I don't break the camera.

I think we'll be okay. We're going to follow.

I would have combed my hair if I knew. I also tell jokes on the side.

Selfies.

You know we all know our strength.

OK, so we're going to move on to our next order of business, the Newman Elementary School polling location with Louise Miller, town clerk. Come on up and tell us about. the potential for relocation.

Yep, which is up to the select board. So I think I've spoken informally with, if not all of you, at least most of you, about Newman as a polling location.

Hang on just one sec. Thanks, Amy. It's just going to be hard for people to hear.

Okay, let's start again. We'll start over. Newman is a polling location. Last year, I had settled into the job and had kind of looked at what the different polling locations are. Secretary of the Commonwealth had a emergency planning training and kind of forced us to look at polling locations from a security and emergency planning perspective. and there are a couple of issues from an emergency and security perspective with respect to Newman. If you're familiar with Newman as a polling location, the gym is a polling location.

and the entrance to the polling location is past an area that's normally gated where the gate is locked during normal school operations and the playground is right there. So during, on election day, all of that has to be opened up. and the kids still go out, they still play in the playground, but there are some security concerns with respect to that. The parking lot is very crowded, so for us, it makes it very difficult because the site is more difficult for access for voters. These are precincts C and D. and Precinct C is a very widespread precinct. No matter where, voters will physically vote they're almost certainly going to have to drive.

Precinct D is more compact, but because of Central Avenue, Most people still probably do have to drive to the polling location. I did receive a number of letters from parents, primarily Newman parents, primarily in Precinct C, who were concerned about safety as well during pickup. and the amount of traffic and the gates being open. I worked with the school principal and assistant principal and they were absolutely fabulous to try to identify certain spots that would be reserved for voters on election day. But again, the parking lot is really tight. and we also have to make sure that we maintain some handicap accessible parking for voters. So all in all, it's just not an ideal location.

There are not a lot of locations in Precinct C and D. But as we look at where the different polling locations are for the different precincts, they're not necessarily in the precinct. Some of them are near the precinct, but they're not, except for E&H, they're not. So what I wanted to float by you is if we want to stay in precinct C or D, Really the only other alternative that I saw was the Jack Cogswell building, which is also on Central Avenue. So Central Avenue is also an issue. in general on Election Day with schools, etc. So it does not get us away from Central Avenue, but it might get us out of the schools. I have not toured that to see what

the parking lot looks like, but that is a public building under your jurisdiction that would potentially be a location that we could move to in precincts C and D. Other than that, the police and fire, the station over here, have a really nice, like, I don't know whether you call it a conference room. It's large. The problem with that is on heavy elections, which like the November presidential elections, I would anticipate this year's state elections where there's heavy turnout. I'm not sure that they can act handle the traffic from two precincts. So one of my thoughts was, do we need to keep C and D together or can we split them up?

We could move one precinct to the police and fire station and I don't think that would be any difficulty. I have spoken with both the fire chief and the police chief they have absolutely no issue with that. And we already have two precincts voting at the town hall. the possibility would be to have a third precinct in the town hall. It is large enough to accommodate another precinct. It does help with emergency planning because now were more consolidated. And these are just things I just wanted to bring this up with you so we can talk about it. And then you can think of what types of questions do you have. and the again the issue downtown that was parking. So I think we would probably have to talk about how to reserve parking on election days. So I just wanted to start a conversation with you now.

The next election is in April, and if we're going to move the polling location, we would need to provide sufficient notice to voters.

So can I just ask you a question? Sure. I know that over recent years, the town has been trying to move all of our voting locations away from schools. Is Newman the last one?

Newman is the only school left, yes.

and I probably should know, but how many voters are there per precinct approximately?

About 3,200, 3,300 registered voters. And C and D are pretty good turnout precincts. They're reasonable. They're reasonable, yeah. They're an average turnout.

OK. And when do we need to make this decision? Are you trying to make this move by the April election?

I don't know that you need to, but I definitely like I'd I'd want us to do this before the September 1 state primary. But I want to start the discussion. If we do it for April, I think we need to have a decision by February 1 so that we have enough time. to inform the voters in precinct C and D of any change in location.

OK. Mary, I'm just wondering if you thought at all about Olin. I'm thinking about that lobby area near the...

That has been brought up. I have not contacted anyone at Olin to find out whether that would be an option.

because I don't, I feel like we need to put together a small group, maybe working with, you know, a couple of your staff or the... And the emergency management. Yeah. To... I don't know how much parking is at Jack Coswell, but my perception is it's not a lot. It's a small amount.

We had started this conversation because there was a church that had been floated as well, large parking lot, empty generally on Tuesdays. but there were some there were some surrounding logistical issues custodial support and security and so on so maybe sort of a conversation about public and versus private locations as well just so we can you know discuss the odds and ends that come up

I think private locations are fine, but we do start the day at 6 a.m. We have to have buildings open and be ready to go at 6 a.m. It's a long day. It is a very long day. We may need to stay late. If there's hand counting that needs to take place, we could be in a location pretty late. And obviously if it's one of our buildings, the custodial staff stays, police, details, all of that.

I would just add relative to the Cogswell that we're undertaking phase two construction to expand that building so I think that one probably should come off the list and it's a limited Limited Bathrooms Limited. It's a limited building currently. But I defer to the clerk about if it's town-owned building versus not. But obviously, town-owned. We have full control. Right. So I think there's value in that.

And that's my preference as well, if we can use a townhome building. I have a question about proximity. So are the guidelines on how far away or outside of a precinct a polling location?

Well, I mean, there are preferences, but no. We could... decide that we have all our polling locations in one physical space if we have one that is suitable. I don't think we have anything large enough in Needham for all precincts, but no.

I had one other crazy idea, which is, do we think about renting a modular unit for the day? There are things that can come in for a day. provide bathroom facilities and that. But is that another alternative? And you put it at Claxton and take advantage of the Claxton parking. I just am trying to think what other out of the box things do we have that might be possibilities. Sure. I don't know, but yeah.

I'm not opposed to anything that makes sense. We just, again, would need to make sure that it works from an operational perspective for us. and that people have sufficient notice and understanding of where they need to go. But yeah, something like that could work as well.

I think we're generally supportive of moving voting as an activity away from the schools. We'll just need to work to find the right place.

OK. And Marianne, you had a thought that perhaps we need to sit down and through what the issues.

Well, so I wonder if we need a small group to kind of work through it and bring back a recommendation. It feels to me like if we could work with you, with some of the registrars, with maybe the emergency planning manager. but clearly we would need to understand is the parking sufficient? Can we accommodate handicapped folks there? Be sure it's accessible and it meets all the requirements.

Another idea for throwing things out. Does the school department have objections with using Emory Grover as a voting location? Would that be doable?

Again, I don't know if there's enough parking.

Parking is on which location are you thinking?

Well the third floor space.

If they had a first floor, that'd be great.

Yeah. You know, I could see that. Because this even here, sometimes it can be difficult to get up to the top floor in the town hall. Yeah.

Is there any wisdom for your own staff if you're splitting them up? I mean, C and D together, you have staff and machinery together. But if you had to put C in one spot or D in another, is that duplicating efforts?

No, because we really staff each precinct separately. They have their own warden, their own clerk. And I think if they're sufficiently close to us, which Lake Town Hall, and Police and Fire are, it's not really a concern. Right now, both Newman and the golf club are the most difficult for us. on election day because it takes a lot longer to get to those locations if they need anything or we need to troubleshoot an issue with their machines. Those are the toughest ones to get to. The others, we can be there in a matter of like two minutes.

Would Hillside have enough space and be viable?

So I thought about Hillside too. It could be. I'm not sure what is there right now. And I think we'd have to figure out what the accessibility is. Like where is the parking? How do you get into the building? Given its former use, there should be, but it depends how it's configured. I'm not as familiar with that. There probably would be cafeteria space downstairs. Which could work.

Some big room.

That could work as well.

And it's not on Central, it's off of, but it's close-ish. okay great well we'll um well maybe you and the town manager can coordinate some small group to sure work on some alternatives okay great all right that sounds good thank you thanks Louise

We appreciate it. It's been a longstanding need to try to figure out something. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you.

Madam Chair, can I move the consent agenda?

Certainly.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. motion passes and now we are excited to hear an update on the Needham branding and town seal committee from Kevin Keane, the chair of that committee, Amy Halson, and any members of the committee who are here and available and want to come up and join.

Yes.

Let's just have everyone introduce themselves if you don't mind before we get started.

This is Needham's best and brightest here.

We know you're all on a first-name basis after all these months. That's right.

Gloria Grice. Marshall Davis.

Louise Miller.

Excellent. Amy Gailson, Director of Communications. Hi. Tell us.

All right. Let me give you the update on this. If we go first slide, I want to show you the The existing seal. And I'm going to bring it to speed about what we want to do with it. Can we get that up?

Do you have some folks who are online, too, on your committee? Yes, Topher and Cynthia.

Oh, Topher and Cynthia. All right, yes.

Oh, I see Cynthia waving.

OK. Cynthia, say hi. Topher. All right. OK. So I wanted to let you know, this committee's been meeting for how many years now? Two. Two years. And the conversations have been great. It's been, we work well, and I think we've raised a lot of issues as we go along. But let me look at the first, the existing town seal. Let me just walk you through it. It was done in 1891. One of the people on the committee was Emery Grover. and here's some assessments. They might have overshot. I think in 1891 when they're doing this they want to flex the authority and Maturvy of town government. But the calligraphy they use is basically a medieval old style. By 1440, we had movable type. So this always feels a little medieval. and so we thought we'd change that.

The crosses are a bit too crusady. Think Monty Python, the Holy Grail. And as an aside, Puritans would never have crosses. Some people may remember the incident in 1760 when the pine tree flag from Massachusetts had the St. George's Cross. and that was quickly removed and then put back. The point was Puritans hated crosses. They wouldn't have a cross. I think today it also lands differently today. We are not necessarily a religious organization, not at all. So we thought we could move that. Then there's historical inaccuracies in the The Tipi on the left, of course, would not have been used in eastern Algonquin nations.

That's the high rock in the center, which looks like one of the Grand Tetons, which is sort of promoting high rock a lot. The gentleman on the left is William Nehoyden. He is actually one of the more interesting people in Needham's history. He taught under John Eliot, the minister. He was as well educated as a person could be in New England. He was bilingual. He worked as an intermediary with Metacomet or King Phillips. sought to stop that civil war. And then afterwards, he wrote deeds for the towns in the area, explaining how the land is now not native-owned. This illustration is from 1688. That's when this story is. 1688. This is a Denham story. Those two people there are unnamed.

are from Dedham, receiving the land grant from Nehoyden. And so we want to Well, fix the historical stuff. You'll notice the Englishmen were wearing fedoras. somewhat caricatured. So we wanted to make it a bit more realistic, or at least historically accurate. At the end of the day, it didn't work. We were running into issues of Power Dynamics. How many settlers, how many natives? It never quite worked. We tried seated, we tried standing up, shaking hands. a number of poses kept doing it and it just It never got quite right.

And at the end of the day, we're talking about a somewhat sad period in our history where the Native Americans were effectively giving away the land that they had been but they lost. It was taken from them in war and in peace. There's a point where it's just like, we gotta scrap this story. It's not necessarily ours, and it's also probably not something that is our shining moment. So one thought was to look at this and realize that minus the land deal in the foreground, it is a landscape. of Needham elements, the Charles River, the High Rock, and William de Hooyden, of course, is an actual real Needham historical figure. So we decide to...

take away the land deal and just work on the Charles River scene and put Nahoiden in it in a canoe. As the Charles River was the first, as it surrounds Needham, it is, as I said, our first circumferential highway. And so can we get to the next slide? So what we came up with. was using a photograph from Topher Cox. Topher, take a bow. That is actually of the Charles River. And then we got a, Thank you, Gloria. Grace, you got an old postcard showing the High Rock before it was overgrown by trees. So, Gloria, take a bow. And so that is source material of High Rock, the Charles, and a canoe with William de Hoyden in it.

and we sent this into an artist in California who made into an etching of a woodcut, which I'd also like to point out, And many towns are redoing their town seals. And it was important, I think, to the committee that we keep a certain quality of the existing, sort of a much more, like, not folk art but we want to say it's a bit more dignified than some other towns so going from there we have so this is the existing towns what we propose It is, in the first version we had the canoeist paddling down the river, away, and that seemed sad. Coming into the future, it sort of seemed like this is The river moves through our past, present, and into our future.

And then I think the other thing I want to point out is, you'll notice on Massachusetts there is the small s there is of course in 17th, 18th century, the short S and long S, because they'd use Fs as Ss sometimes, and sometimes a short S would be done with a small, S. And so it's a little bit of anachronism grammatically of our English forebears, but they don't exist in the in the image, but they do exist in that little grammatical hiccup. But doubly as a typographical twist, Massachusetts is the name of the Indian tribe of people near the Great Hill. And that's what Massachusetts means. So it's sort of a double nod.

Another thing I wanted to press on you is that everyone on the committee, especially we had a Native American representative from the Native Praying Indians, and they were emphatic, please don't do the land, the existing land deal. But please don't erase us. They want to be present. And we had talked at one point about like the canoe is actually a bit more in the background. as part of the scene and it was sort of not quite maybe clear who it was but We bring the canoeists forward because it's a better composition. But emphatically, we also want to say, this is Nohoitan. This is a Native American. and Native Americans are very clear, don't erase them. They want to be part of the history and the story. I think if you read in the Globe and a number of stories around, there's this sense that maybe we don't represent them at all.

But they're very clear. Please, please do. Not as a caricature, but in a respectful way. And I think that's how we're doing this. And in fact, one of the complaints was to have more detail of a Native American typical dress at the time. You can't see it, but there are two. There's a feather headdress in there. Yeah, you can see it. And so this decision here for you is, this is really the first time we're trotting this out to people to say, we're removing the two Englishmen, the two Dedham citizens. Are you okay with that? and like your feedback. The thought is we will then do this through to town meeting members after we want your initial, your take.

And I will say this is not set in stone, but it is where we think we're going thematically. Thoughts? Questions? Any committee members?

I appreciate the background and how you got to this point. Is this meant to be the same time period as the land swap or what is depicted in the existing?

Yeah, more or less, yes. We actually talked about do we put English houses as suggesting a settlement, something like that. It seemed too storybook, and that was the issue of the power dynamic. you know so we just left it as a Charles River scene right obviously if that's an avoidance sometime within his lifetime as an aside he did grant himself 14 acres? 40. 40 acres, which is now Hemlock Gorge. And he wrote himself a grant. in perpetuity, which lasted about 40 years. And then that was gone. But so yeah, he was then ultimately was like, he was one of our own. Anything else? Marianne? Heidi?

I mean, I like it. I make no pretense to have any kind of artistic expertise, or historical expertise for that matter. But I do like it. I do like that the There are elements of the older seal that make me a little uncomfortable. So I am pleased to see those removed. I'm pleased to see this much more clear. and I know that a lot of discussion and thoughtful collaboration went into I would say, I mean, I'm happy with it, which probably means nothing to anyone, but the idea that the committee, which is full of people who I think are very thoughtful.

If the committee is happy with it, then I am pleased to accept it once more consideration has been done.

I would have said I love this. I think this has come so far. And I know I had seen a couple of the interim things, and they did feel awkward. But this, I like the way that the The font type that goes around echoes of that period. And the nod with the small s, I think, is really well done. And when it first popped up, I went, oh, woodblock. I love woodblocks. Thank you. So I think that's a really appealing sort of art form that is in keeping with this area and shows what you want it to show.

Okay, thank you. I should make a note because someone will pick up on it. The canoe technically should be a machune, which is a Native American word for a dugout canoe. God, we tried.

The log, yes.

For a variety of reasons, it doesn't foreshorten quite well in a three-quarter view. and it kind of looks like a self-assertive stand-up paddle board. It just didn't work. As a nod to just artistic shorthand, we just sort of went with a more classic canoe look, although maybe it's not exactly period accurate. But that's a concession we thought we got to do. Can we do a side-by-side? Yeah.

One of the problems with the existing seal is you can't see it. When it's imprinted, it's not clear exactly.

I do like that the new one is brighter as well.

So I had the opposite concern. If we don't have enough lines, because at one point we had one that was more open, if we don't have enough lines, it actually can't be imprinted. That might just be because our physical seal is old right now. It does need to be replaced. But we're not going to replace it until we know if we're getting a new seal. But yeah. I would like to test that. But I think this has a lot more lines than what we were looking at originally.

But Josh, I see a point. I think on the existing steel, the feet are lost in mud or something, whatever. I can't figure it out. The artists who worked with us, on this was very clear sort of repeatedly clear continually clear that we have to have a very simple layout and he's sort of like you know you can't put A crowd in, you know, you have three elements. You have your high rock, you have your river, you have your canoeist. And they don't go piling on. And he's very clear that this will be shown at about the size of a half dollar. So we keep it simple, but we like.

Yeah. in addition to going to town meeting are we going to the town? I recall we did a survey with our logo

Correct. Yes. So Amy, you want to speak to that? The strategy is we're going to town meeting, to town meeting members to show this to them, get their feedback. You're right, there's a point where you're like, will this go on Facebook? This will go on Facebook, and yes, people, it'll be a lively, town-wide discussion.

King, that's open for discussion whether you'd like to open this up to the community at large to provide feedback on the proposed redesign.

Thoughts? And then, yes, eventually this would be a warrant article in May, assuming you guys all like it.

I like it. I'm happy with it. I do like folk art. I also see that this is better for Needham, more period appropriate, I think. I appreciate that it's actually not in color because I think it makes it look more dignified. I'm happy with that. I can't really say more than that.

No, thank you. That was a consideration, to make it dignified. And you're right, Mary Ann Keaton and the woodcut folk are black and white.

I think what our thought was is we send to town meeting members now what we have basically with the same letter or very similar letter to what you received in your packet. and what the proposal is, which explains what the proposal is. And we're just looking for some kind of feedback. We're not looking for ideas of, oh, no, we think there should be three trees or you know the high rock shouldn't be in it that that's really not the purpose of this it's more to feel you know temperatures is something that you know people appreciate that TAUME members appreciate and are generally viewing favorably and I think that if we open it up to Townwide, I think that's the same idea.

It's not really to get the same kind of feedback of here's a design, here's another design, which one of these do you prefer or do you have other suggestions? It took a really long time to get to this. Yeah, there were a lot of iterations. I think there were a lot of discussions, and I think that we tried to summarize it in the letter. So the thought process, it took a while to gel. what the direction would be. And I do think that it's a good direction. And it's also one that can last.

Yes. I think this will age well.

I think folks tend to underestimate how difficult this kind of decisions and coordinated action can be. It seems like it's just a picture. But I think there's a thousand decisions and and feelings that go into creating something like this so i appreciate the time that you took two years is no joke um and I know I have heard some of those conversations, so I know that there was a lot of very thoughtful consideration.

Thank you.

Anything to add? I'm sorry? Anything to add?

In response to Mr. Levy's comment,

It is appropriate for 1711. This would be an ongoing part of our town, 1711. So it's a little closer to the mark than 1680.

Cynthia.

Thank you, Kevin, for doing such a splendid overview of what we've been through in highlighting important parts. One of the things that for me representing Human Rights Committee is being able to listen to voices of Native Americans and to have a person present from the Massachusetts Navy, bringing Indians who was totally part of all of this was extremely important. And when you said that it was important to the Native American representative to have Nehoyden present. I think that was important to me and to everyone. on the committee that we acknowledge our history and if not just the past, but also the present and into the future, which I think Kevin as nicely highlighted. And let's give the wholeness to us as a community.

I'm very grateful for the committee and for the response of the select board members. Thank you.

All right. Any further comment? All right. Well, thank you very much for the work and the time and for joining us tonight.

I want to wish you good luck actually on framing the words that ask for feedback. One more challenge.

Thank you.

Okay, we're going to turn now to our town manager and a discussion of the capital improvement plan recommendations.

and I'm going to ask our two deputy town managers and assistant finance director to join me because there's a lot of work that ends up in just one little small spreadsheet and a lot of it is done by Dave Davidson. Cecilia Simchak, the whole team.

We've all got our special packets.

Special packets. So tonight is our... First, our discussion about recommendations for the capital improvement plan, our five-year plan. Fiscal Year 2027 to 2031. And I'll walk through recommendations for Fiscal Year 27, which are projects that we would truly be funding this year. And I'll ask Dave to walk through the full five years after that. And we are making recommendations. We'll talk through. kind of some direct trade-offs that are inherent in what's being recommended and just all to say that happy to answer any and all questions. We have time to make adjustments as needed. You will vote on this at your next meeting December 16th. So this is the first pass.

So I am first going to walk through this sheet, which I can't tell you what PDF number it is because my computer just locked on me. So it's the fiscal year 2027 only spreadsheet. I don't know.

Capital budget.

Yeah, capital budget.

It might not be in the printout, I think.

Oh, not in the printout. Sorry, just in the packet. It's just in the packet.

Yeah, first page.

Yeah. Great. So first to orient just kind of the columns that we're looking at, we have everything that was requested by departments for fiscal year 2027 for capital. The green column going down the middle of the page is the dollar amount requested. and then the categories cash tier one is recommended to be funded by free cash. Tier one means it is what we're recommending to advance for 27. the next column over is debt and you should consider that also tier one so we're recommending moving forward and this is We can talk through 3% and 10% debt within the levy limit for 3%.

the next two columns cash tier two and debt tier two really are if additional funds become available or on the debt side if if some project falls away or the dollar amounts reduced those sorts of that's where tier two, if funds are available, we would recommend funding, but otherwise they would be deferred. And then there's some notes along the way. If you jump to page three of this spreadsheet, I just want to start a little bit to zoom out before we dive into the details. and just looking midway down the page, it says general fund. I just want to frame kind of in terms of the requests. There's $36 million requested based on identified capital needs and priorities.

Hang on a second. Where are we? Yeah, page two. Sorry, you were on the wrong spreadsheet. Page three of the document in the packet.

Yeah. OK. The FY27 document.

Yes, I see general fund. Looks like it's page 11 in our packet.

Sorry about that. So 36 million requested for general fund capital. So this does not include kind of extraordinary expenses. And recommended for tier one is less than half 50% of what was submitted, so $17.2 million between Tier 1 cash and debt. Then Tier 2 is $15.4 million. Again, only would be funded if additional funds became available, otherwise deferred. and there's another just about two million dollars that are not even recommended for tier two. So those would be kind of deferred for future years. I just want to start there to say you know we have limited resources we have needs and so from the recommendations right kind of off the bat

what we're walking through is to be able to fund about half of what has been requested, just as a starting point to orient everyone. So if we go back to the first page, I'll just walk through. I won't go through every line item, but just generally in the categories. And I'll call out some things that I think might be of note. So the first, I'd say, 10 or 11 lines, brine maker, down to town, facility replacement furniture. is really office equipment and technology that supports core operations. And some of these items are annual. So these are all recommended as tier one for funded by cash. We then transition into more of our building projects and facilities upgrades. And what's recommended here, just to pull out a few highlights, the Center at the Heights

They submitted the construction for their capital improvements in three pieces, but we're really treating this as one project. That's the expansion of the kitchen, the swapping of the game room, the fitness and adding an accessible vestibule from the back of the parking lot into that building. We're recommending this for tier one debt, but if additional free cash came in, we would be considering moving that over to cash and we can talk about kind of why that's one of the trade-offs that we're looking at. the library renovation in the children's area this request is being deferred this is design funds being requested.

So we're finishing up construction of the young adult area in the next phase in the libraries. the children's area and we're recommending at this time to defer that. The other deferral item that I want to call out is the Elliott School Grounds construction. We funded design this past year. it is definitely our common practice to fund design in one year, construction in the next. The construction estimate grew I think by about two million dollars from what was originally anticipated and so given that increase from what we had previously been planning on it's making it more challenging to advance it so we're recommending deferral of that construction

Public Works Infrastructure is maybe one of the only ones that we're kind of splitting into partial funding, so about 3.5 million. We're recommending Tier 1 in cash, but the remaining portion requested by Public Works is Tier 2 if funds are available.

Is this just spread across all of their various projects? Or is this to specifics?

Yeah. Public works infrastructure covers road repair, sidewalks, ADA, RAMPS, but also Brooks and Culverts. So when they get only partial funding in a given year, then we have a discussion about which of those subgroups becomes the priority.

And how much was that line item last year?

Let me see. That we funded? That we funded, just out of curiosity.

Steve, I don't know that I have that right in front of me. I don't know if you do.

I don't. Some years we have been able to fund the total request and others we couldn't. The other thing noted is the requested MOP for 27 is higher than what was being requested for 27 last year at this time. So that's also in the recommended amount is consistent with what we were anticipating 27 to be.

Okay. So that's also helpful to know. Yeah. Thank you.

I think the $2.5 million of that request is George Agate, Brooks and Colvert work. So that is probably why that component was an addition. It's not like one segment of road that we could peel away. It's an entire kind of project.

Last year, it was $5,069,000 total. Total. But that came in at the end. At this time last year, it was lower than that.

OK. So we're able to move some of the tier two into tier one.

Yeah. OK. Thank you.

Yeah. Flipping over to the next page, quiet zone safety upgrades. This is construction for the quiet zone. We have put this into tier one debt. And I'll come back to this to just talk about what those trade-offs mean by doing that. The bulk of the rest of this page is our fleet inventory. And I think what's of note is we recommend a dollar amount that we can I think that we can do under tier one and then really rely on public works expertise to choose which of the vehicles is the priority to then fund. but also of note you can see in the notes column there are some vehicles that have were deferred in 26 that now are again going to be deferred in 27. and anything.

Continuing on to page three, there's a section for extraordinary projects. Of course, this includes the Pollard project what's in this plan is a placeholder so it's the cost estimate that was in the school master plan we've not updated it based on the feasibility study process that we've been engaged in and so when we have get farther along in schematic design on the chosen project, then those costs will be estimated. But just view that as a placeholder. and purchase of open space and improvements to High Rock, also placeholders. And I'd say of note, the public works facilities improvement phase two design, this is being deferred. and on hold until we have a plan on Pollard finalized.

The fourth page is sewer and water enterprise funds. And just to say that we have enough anticipated retained earnings to support the requests. And so those are all in cash tier one.

Can I just ask about the meter reading system?

Yes.

What is it? Can you tell me about the meter reading system?

they are smart meters so that we can get more accurate water reading wirelessly from all across town and more regular reading so we would have very real-time reading for all of the meters, and that would allow the town and end users to understand quickly if there's a leak or a change in usage.

Is this related to all the abatements that we've seen and so on, or is that different?

It's not directly related, but it certainly can have an impact to reduce that. It's where the industry is going in terms of real-time metering. both in in the water industry whether it's a private water company or public have been moving towards this and also in electric electricity and natural gas there are real-time meters that are that the utilities are able to see minute by minute usage. So it's being driven by the trends. as well as the benefits of knowing if there's a leak and notifying the homeowner that they may want to have their system checked.

Does that require physical replacements? at people's houses? Or is this just software in the background?

It's generally software. There is an adapter that they have to do, but I believe that's going to be done on the outside of the house as the meters currently are. The inside meter is only if there's a dispute that the meter outside is registering incorrectly.

And so would this fund that equipment for all?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, as long as we're in the weeds. Sure. PFAS mitigation, we

So what's being requested really is a cost-benefit analysis. So right now, our water is below thresholds in what is allowable for PFAS. this is an evolving thing in terms of both other communities have not had PFAS challenges and then have had PFAS challenges. So I think we want to stay proactive about this. but also the thresholds are being looked at at the state and federal level and they themselves may change. So what is being requested here is for us to start planning for if we need to make decisions about our water supply and really because we have two water sources this is a way for us to think through what are our options if we needed to what would be the cost of constructing a PFAS mitigation system versus what might be the pros or cons of going entirely to MWRA.

We're not making any suggestions. This is just kind of what is the world of options available to us so that If we have to make a decision, we have the information we need to make a better informed one.

I think it's important just to point out that Needham does not have a PFAS problem currently. Correct. We are below the threshold, but the threshold is being lowered in lots of communities, and so It's being lowered everywhere. The real state isn't changing. It's a question of what the threshold is. Yes. But we would still need to comply, and so we're just being planful and proactive.

Okay.

Thank you. Other specific questions before we talk about some of the trade-offs with debt? I'm sorry.

Go ahead, Josh.

I had a specific question about NPDES. I noticed that that wasn't recommended for funding.

I'm going to stay too long. Sure. NPDES would not be funded from the general fund. Within the levy limit, it would be supported by the stormwater fee assessments that folks are paying. This is the first year that we're going to be able to do it. We have $750,000 that will be available for cash, the balance. And this is a project that's all or none. This is to do with the Water Issues by the Broadmeadows School. We would be looking to possibly have the balance funded by and that debt would be supported by the stormwater fees in the future years. So that would come under the 10% rule.

Right. OK. What is the total estimated cost for the project?

$4 billion.

So just to talk through some of the trade-offs and debt, you all know 3% and 10%, but maybe for the people who are watching, the Select Board has debt management policies. They're online under the Select Board policies. and I'm going to focus on the three percent which the policy is the town will allocate or reserve three percent of projected general fund revenue for example that is, property taxes, less debt exclusions, state aid, and local receipts for debt service. And so what is recommended for FY27 that would fall under Debt within the levy limit are the construction of the center at the Heights. It's three lines, but think about it as one project. And the quiet zone. you're aware the quiet zone figure has increased from our original estimate, but we still are only at 10% design.

So that number will move, but I can't tell in what way or to where it will land. and between those two projects these items we could be over the 3% to some amount. And we've discussed what are our options to manage through that. And I think if free cash comes in higher, as I suggested before, we would look at moving the CATH construction project over to cash, away from debt. The quiet zone estimate could come down as we could get further along in design. And we also could use funding from the debt service stabilization fund to ensure that we remain within the 3%.

Kitty, are we back to a realistic place where we think we're going to move forward with the Quiet Zone?

We have... made progress on our two requests in terms of getting information needed to inform the design and getting more clarity on process and how this might work. So I'll be coming to the board with a and some kind of more substantive update on all of those things in the future and regrouping with the Quiet Zone Working Group on that. So I'd say I feel optimistic that we're going to have the tools that maybe a month ago I was less optimistic that we were going to have the tools we need to get to a final design. So I think I'm comfortable continuing on a path assuming that we can get there. at this point.

Can I ask by town meeting in May we're at 10% now where do you expect the design will be by then?

My most recent discussions with our DPW director is that if we get to 30% design, it will give us a very strong estimate to move forward with, and that we could. I think we can get to that before annual town meeting. And I would just say to Dave, please chime in, but for planning purposes, I think you know we plan for the year even if some projects end up getting voted on at the October special town meeting but we would still be planning now within the SIPP assuming that it's for FY27 whether the votes at May or October

And then on the 3%, I'm thinking with Pollard, we will go over the 3%. Am I wrong about that?

Mopala would be a debt exclusion that would be the subject to the 10%.

So I remember in the debt tables that you had in the facility financing plan, it showed that we were over the 3% and the 10%.

But not because of Pollitt, that was because of other projects such as Public Works and hence, as Town Manager mentioned, Phase 2 is on hold.

some because we cannot do phase two and stay within the three percent so what would it maybe let me ask you different what what um what is the number It's an estimate, but what is the estimated number that would keep us at the 3%? How much would we have to trim, for instance?

We'll be fine tuning that in the winter months, January, February, when we update the overall debt outlook. when we also have better numbers or a better sense of where we're going with the Pollitt School and numbers so that will all be updated and we'll be able to work that. We will not be entering town meeting without knowing the impact on the 3%.

because my recollection is that maybe only on one occasion have we ever gone over the 3% and that was deliberate so that we could pay off some debt early.

That's correct. That was a conscious decision made and supported strongly by town meeting.

So I'm hesitant to go over that 3% if we can avoid that.

Marion. I don't think there's a plan to go over the 3% in next year's budget. Is there? At this point, there's not a sense that we're planning to do that. We're planning to manage within our budget, I think is my understanding.

Well, first off, no, it's not going to impact FY27. First off, projects approved at the annual town meeting and that's always our practice are not intended to be financed to impact that upcoming budget year. It's always one year out. there are because the cost estimate for the quiet zone has doubled from what we were looking at last year for it there is a possibility that that if we were to try to do everything that we were planning by funded by debt.

Within the 3% debt.

Within the 3%, that's all I'm discussing here, that we would be in a situation that we could go over. As Town Manager mentioned, we'll have a better number. Secondly, which you'll get a flavor of it in a few minutes, in the out years, there are projects now that are not being recommended as Tier 1. because the consequences of doing the Quiet Zone at $7 million, it impacts our ability to do some of the other projects in the out years. and that's all designed hopefully so that we don't go over the 3%. And again, as the town manager mentioned, if there was a situation that there is that there would be a chance to go over the 3% and that would probably be limited to a year. That is exactly what the Debt Service Stabilization Fund is all about, that there would be a standalone appropriation to do a pay down to avoid the 3%.

So again, I think it's fair, right, Dave? When you're doing planning, the planning work kind of puts everything in it and says, if the town did everything in the time frame that everybody thinks they would like to do all these things, then this is the effect of that, right? and then the bottom line is we take a look at the effect of that and say okay now how are we going to do this in a way that we can actually afford it and therefore we make trade-offs that say this fits and that doesn't fit. So I think there's always a difference between the initial thing that gets laid out and where when we start planning the budget to bring it back into line with our guidelines.

Yeah, with the debt stabilization funds, As we've discussed in recent years, I think I had imagined that it would be used for Pollard, very large projects, rather than for smaller projects, even Quiet Zone.

but it is a tool that's available if necessary. And that's noted to town managers way down the list. We're hoping not to be in that situation in the first place.

I think that's what I had for FY27.

And I guess any other questions or just generally these are recommendations of what we think are priorities but also what my sense of your priorities are. And so if there's something that you think is kind of out of alignment, it would be helpful to hear that. and so we can prepare for the final vote.

I had a general question about the cash capital. So it's budget 8.3 million. Is that realistic? Are we anticipating that we'll have that in free cash?

Yes, that's exactly why the planning at Tier 1, how we got to that number, that's basically what... what I'm assuming for free cash and each of the five years with it growing slightly each year. referred to in the larger of the spreadsheets. And if you refer to page six. At the bottom, you'll see fund through general fund cash. you'll see the recommended amount.

So it's $8.3 million for 27, $8.3 million for 28, slight increase going up to 8.5. 2029, then 8.7 in 2030, and then just under $9 million in 2031. And that's the forecasted free cash amount that would be available for. for cash capital in looking at our over five year planning. And that's why we always have in the year that we're recommending for the capital budget, there's also a tier two that if free cash ends up being greater than those numbers, then what's the prioritization for funding other capital?

Thank you.

Can I ask one other question on the multi-year sheet? And maybe Dave's going to cover this. The HVAC upgrades. We had a large request. We're not funding a big chunk of that. We're funding a little bit. So again, there I would have been curious to go back to how much we sort of did last year. How is this built up and how are we thinking?

I can speak to the individual project and so the HVAC for fiscal year 27, the $2.1 million is design and construction of HVAC repairs at the high school. The cost increased because upon further exploration, it's going to need some roof repair to support the HVAC of Public Work on the Roof. there is a need. And so I think what I would say is right now, it's tier two as a project. If we end up needing to defer it, then What looks like that next year is a $50,000 request is then a $2.1 million request in 28, because we will have deferred it. So it kind of dominoes, and Dave continues with his planning and estimates. in the next year.

So is the renovation required for the roof somewhere in here?

That's part of the 2.1. That's part of the 2.1, okay.

Dave, do you want to talk through the ? Sure.

So in the out years tier one recommendations, generally, anything that was in the prior year that's a tier one recommendation is still in this plan as a tier one recommendation. The changes that you would see is that there's a change in the dollar amount. a change that pushed the project out or accelerated a project? and those are generally the differences that you see in the tier one recommendation and in the out years. So the last capital plan from last year, we had recommendations going up to 2030. So the only column that actually is truly new is the new fifth year, which is 2031. And the guidance in terms of determining Tier 1 is basing it on our

Assumption of availability of cash from pre-cash. Generally, in terms of prioritizing, recurring regular equipment is usually always recommended. and other key critical building facility improvements repairs are the next. and then vehicles based upon prioritization. The vehicles generally is public safety, in schools are funded first and then what's ever remaining is then we look at Public Works. Part of the problem is Public Works has More vehicles than all the other departments combined, so it makes it that much more difficult. And as years get tighter,

or win tighter years, DBW is usually the department that has to not get all the funding requests. Last year, I should recall, in FY26, And as noted, there were quite a number of vehicles from Public Works that did not get funded. There was also, because of the year, a fire vehicle that wasn't funded as well. So it's not always exclusively falling on Public Works, but generally it does. The other thing is because of the quiet zone in the estimate that we're now working with, there are some projects that might have been funded by debt that currently are

not being recommended to be funded by debt or not on tier one right now because of the uncertainty of having enough cash or the ability to assume More debt finance projects within the 3%. Of course, just like in every year, like with the 27, when we're in 28, we'll have a clearer picture. We'll know how things... worked out for the 27 appropriations and what actually got funded and what things are actually coming in at that allows us to adjust things in the out years. as noted earlier, Stormwater, the NPDES projects, that is being shown.

on page two from this slide here and it shows in a blue color the The amounts in 28 and 29 are All five years, the funding source will be the stormwater stabilization fund. And based upon revenue that comes in through the stormwater fees, that we know the 28 and 29 are fundable within the revenue stream anticipated. 2030 and certainly 31 are too far out to know whether or not we'll be able to fund those with cash. in those years.

And as noted earlier, for FY27, in order for that project to go forward, it's going to have to be a combination of cash and a debt authorization. and we'll know more by the time we're having to draft up the marked articles and such.

Dave, what kind of projects are in that? And it seems like there's sort of cycles of bigger years and smaller years. And then if these projects just

Well, the specifics are contained looking at the $5 million number. That's page 131 of the individual capital request.

And these are all state mandated?

These are complying with federal and state.

Federal, yeah.

Federal, and State. So the $5 million has to do with the High Rock Field and Linden Chambers stormwater improvements. for $5 million. And the $4 million, that's to deal with the improvements at Broadmeadows School, which would alleviate issues for some of the downed properties from

From there. Okay, thank you.

The lower field. Yes.

And the up and down of the funding request is design and then construction. Design and then construction.

And that's really the highlights of the five-year plan. And as I said, the changes are generally dollar amounts and estimates, but those the increase in some of the recent projects were such significant that we had to scale back some of the out-year tier one recommendations because of it. notably the Elliott Field for instance is right now on hold because that cost went up as well as that was a potential debt financing So first, it's been pushed by the department by the department making the request by a year. And it's not a tier one right now because we don't know our debt situation. until we get by the annual town meeting.

And what's driving the cost increases in the Elliott School?

So that project includes improvements to the playground, the court, and the field. And during design, there was pivot to synthetic because of how much for the turf. because of how much use it gets. It's been very hard to maintain grass. So in the short term, it will cost the project more. And I think over the long term, the hope is it will cost us less than maintaining or having to try to maintain grass, but it just gets such high usage from recess. And then playgrounds, it's all poured in place is often the cost driver on that, the rubbery surface that makes it ADA accessible.

So then if we put in turf there, presumably we would end up upping our contribution to the replacement fund for turf. to include another field there so it has an implication down the road annually.

Yes, and as Ms. Semchick could remind the board, because it's turf, it's not CPA eligible, so that's the other issue for that project.

Okay. Was it originally, I'm forgetting the details, was it originally proposed?

The design was funded through CPA funds, with the understanding that a significant portion of the construction may not be eligible in the same capacity. So it would just complicate the project. There's such a small portion that could be, and then determining how to parse that out gets messy. I believe there's also some drainage work that would not be CPA eligible.

So I'm just curious, do we consider that we have the same issue at other school playgrounds? Or is there something unique about the playground at Elliott?

My understanding has been there's been something unique about the playground at Elliott.

The field at Elliott, sorry. The field, not the playground. And having such a challenge at maintaining that field.

Yeah. OK. Ed Olsen's referred to that.

Yeah.

This is a lot of work.

a lot of people coordinating well I mean I know that it comes up for the departments, and I can see that this year people aren't getting, you know, departments aren't getting what they requested. So I just want to say I recognize the belt tightening and appreciate it.

Can I ask a procedural question? So we'll vote on this next week. As we get more information about, you know, debt financing at full cost for particularly the quiet zone. Do we have an opportunity, I assume we do, before town meeting to make any adjustments then?

I'm kind of assuming it's like a town meeting warrant. You can put it all on at the beginning and take it off, but you can't put it on later?

Yes, thank you. Yes, so under the charter, we have to have the final SIP out in January. But that does not tie you to ultimately what ends up going to town meeting.

OK, thank you.

Thank you for doing this. It is sort of sobering to see half of what's requested is funded. Only half is funded. I think sometimes the view from, like you see at the end, is like, oh, it all works. But it's amazing to see how much is landing on the floor.

yeah I guess I also just want to say you know sometimes we hear that town meeting sort of passes everything that we propose but this is where the real work happens it's like the weeding out of projects and and everything is happening now and has been happening for months already in department requests and then recommended budgets and then seeing what we can actually afford and then whittling it down to bring it to town meeting. This is exactly where that process is happening and so the only thing that goes to town meeting are the things that are really and truly priorities.

Thank you for all this work.

Thank you. So we'll bring you the final list on the 16th and ask for your vote.

Thank you so much for coming.

Okay, so I think we're ready for the next thing, which is the proposed update to an acting pay policy.

Great. So I will walk you through the substantive changes of this acting pay policy. And just to start by saying that this policy has been cringing in place since 1994. and so obviously it is overdue for a review and we update policies you know as as needed but also trying to be very proactive. I'm looking over at our HR director in the corner. She's being very proactive about going back even just things that haven't caught our attention that definitely need a review to still just go back and take a look at these and make sure that we're refreshing them. So to highlight, I can walk through the proposed policy that's in front of you and I'll just call out there's kind of four subsections that I'd say have substantive changes to it and I do want to suggest one

Language Adjustment, based on Board Member Levy's suggestion to me. So first, just throughout it, this addresses outdated references. The Glover Hospital is referenced. The Personnel Board is referenced. So those are addressed. and then substantively if we go down to the procedure section, section 5A, that really is a new section that is Clarifying procedures for staff for how to request acting pay for an employee and more just the mechanics of it. Under 5C, this really is adjusting kind of what is the expected boundaries of pay for an employee who is serving in an acting role. and the changes here right now the policy says from

3.6% above somebody's acting pay or to the first step of the role that they're filling. And oftentimes, they actually may be making more than that in their current role. So it just mechanically has not made sense. The language change that I would suggest is just in the last sentence to have it say rate that exceeds 10% above their current pay. And thank you for catching that rather than of it would say above. And so under this new policy, it's really saying that an employee in an acting position we would be receiving somewhere between four and 10% of their current Pei while they're in that acting role. The next section with changes, and I'm just noticing there's a double D section. Very good. Yep, we'll fix that. Thank you.

Section 5E, there were really two changes. So in the first line, it says acting pay shall not be authorized for employees in grades 9 that used to say grade 11 we had a different classification system at the time and again it's just more of an outdated reference So grade nine for us now really is the spot where we used to have classification schedules that were different for managers, different for different departments. when we did our last classification and compensation plan in 2017. 21, we implemented it. Everyone got put on one classification schedule, grades 1 through 16. And this was also part of making sure we had pay equity, like pay for like work.

and so grade nine really is right around where managers start but folks in grade nine aren't entirely all managers so that's why the second change in this section is being recommended which is the Director of HR can authorize acting pay for employees grades nine and below. and really the intent is for the HR director to evaluate the situation and make sure that it is appropriate for somebody to be in an acting role because Let me give a concrete example. Grade nine, we have kind of assistant department managers who are grade nine. They very much would be somebody that we may ask to be in an acting role if the department manager is a vacancy. But a grade nine is also, for example, a public health nurse.

And there wouldn't be a scenario under this policy where I would envision an acting pay. situation for a public health nurse. So that level of kind of just taking it case by case under this policy would be under the direction of the HR director. And then the final recommendation is the very last item, Section 5I. This adds a general language. The town manager has the discretion to interpret and make exceptions to this policy in the best interest of the town. this is language that's in a number of our personnel policies and I'd say what I think is most important is just philosophically I think exceptions should be rare. I apply them rarely. But I think we can't predict all circumstances. And so this language, again, if it is in the best interest of the town, allows me to use my discretion

apply it as it makes sense in that circumstance. So those are the recommended changes and happy to answer questions.

Josh, you proposed to review this policy outside of consent, so did you have additional comments to make or questions to ask?

Yeah, so I appreciate the update. It was definitely overdue for an update. The only reservation I had was with that last catch-all exception. I think with regards to pay, it's very important that there's a fairness, and I think we all agree with that. and whenever there are broad exceptions, I think even if there's no unfairness being applied or any bias being applied, it's easy for people to perceive that there could be. And so I want to avoid that. I really think employees' morale is really important and employees don't, shouldn't see an exception like this and be concerned that a peer of theirs were being treated differently than they would in a similar position. So that's the general type of concern that I have with that exception.

Yeah, I understand that. I'd say there could just as equally be scenarios where that exception would let me address an inequity that is an unintended consequence of a policy. So it actually is a tool to combat an inequity that we didn't realize we were creating. So again, it's a hypothetical situation, but it actually could be the solution to the concern that you're raising.

I don't have any problems with the last exception. I mean, I do expect that the town managers are going to use discretion and that the town manager also understands that equitable pay is one of our core values. So, you know, that's what the whole basis for the compensation system that was a classification system. I'm fine with it. Kevin?

Yeah. Section Firsty. Yep. Can you explain that to me? You can't make the request if there isn't. this insufficient appropriation, how does that work? I mean, is that on the employee?

So I would say that frankly this is rare because if a position is vacant, there's salary savings in the department. So I guess I'd say in my tenure, there's not been a scenario where we didn't have sufficient funds already in the budget be able to pay acting. But in 1994, there may have been a situation where that was not possible. So I think it's important to leave it in. we always with all personnel if it's a new position if it's a vacancy when we're filling it we always go through the exercise to reconfirm that there are funds available in the budget to do what we on the personnel policy side are doing so that the policy and our budget are always talking to each other. But in practice, I have not experienced a time where we haven't had the resources within the existing budget.

and then a second D. Can you explain the distribute the responsibilities evenly among several employees? Would that work? I mean what's the scenario where it's like you don't have a manager so you're all gonna jump on.

Oh, Kevin, it's so sweet that you have not worked for a corporation. You do this and you do that and you do that.

You kept falling told I got that, but yes.

So when there's a vacancy, work gets shifted up and down and sideways. That's what happens. But I'll give an example. you know if there's a licensure required a manager may not be able to do the license function but a peer might be able to do a license function like a building inspector I cannot inspect a building even though I oversee that department, but a peer inspector may be able to. So it's so situationally dependent, but I think, again, the core of the policies in section four. And it's really how long is somebody going to be gone? Is the acting person assuming the majority of those responsibilities of the higher level position? So this is not a policy that gets triggered every time we have a vacancy. A lot of times folks just pitch in and cover the work. Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Can I ask one more question? Just about the role of the Human Resources Advisory Committee. So we changed the charter recently, and they previously would review all policy changes, and now only as necessary. what would you consider to be necessary?

So how we've been working with that committee actually is, I think, in the intent of what the change was to advisory, which is our HR director convenes them semi-regularly. says, what are we working on big picture as a town? Classification, compensation, belonging work, employee recruitment, retention. if we have updates at that time of we're also looking at these policies, that's on the agenda. So I think it's very much, Strategic, and are we in line with best practices in the field, brainstorming ideas for challenges that we have, and I think some major policies when we came to you with paid family medical leave change you know that was a new that was a bigger new thing that we chatted with them about. So I guess that's how I look at how we go to them, when we go to them.

And they maintain all of the authority that they had. previously around collective bargaining and weighing in and providing town meeting their approval or disapproval of those contracts. So that remains the same.

Thank you. I appreciate you bringing this. It's important to be ready to spring into action when unexpected events occur and this is certainly one of them. I mean, everyone has Family Emergencies, Sicknesses, whatever. Just changes in their life. The town manager is the CEO of this town and needs I think really the flexibility to manage the day to day. And not only that is bound to fiduciary conduct on behalf of the town by integrity and by contract. So I personally have no concerns. The policy itself states that should be made only in the best interest of the town. And I think that's an appropriate action to take.

Actually, I just want to clarify. My concern is not with the town manager. My concern is just in general, I think. having all discretion in one office is not preferable in my opinion. And it has nothing to do with the town manager personally or professionally. I just would prefer to see it be structured differently so that if there were exceptions, people could see how they were being made publicly. and I'm not going to stand in the way of this policy as it's written, but that's just my preference so that employees can have extra clarity because in these situations, there can be extra sensitivity.

I understand, but I just think that you're making it sound like it's happening behind closed doors instead of in the HR department, which is where I think it's happening. you're going to consult. It's all documented. So I don't see the danger, but I appreciate the clarity. Marion, you look like you have something brewing.

No, I was just trying to think about and understand the concern. And again, I'm seeing this. This is around acting. It is a temporary situation where people are trying to bridge a gap. that would probably be the area that would be the lowest on my list of concerns because certainly I worry about equity the most and permanent. Hires, and how that gets structured. So the acting roles are things that do come up. sporadically and ad hoc and that kind of thing. And I guess that would be where I would expect discretion that's vested in this case in the town manager to be most exercised and appreciate that we have somebody who is accountable for that sitting in that role.

So do we need to vote on this?

Yeah, Madam Chair, I make a motion. The Select Board approve proposed updates to Acting Pay Policy, Benefits Administration No. 502.

Second.

May be as revised.

As revised.

Thanks. All right. Any more discussion? I'm sorry. This is not a public hearing.

We discussed that we're going to change that to above.

Is that what you're referencing? OK, thank you. Yeah, there were a bunch of provisions, actually. Thank you. Okay. Any more discussion? All right. All in favor? Aye. All right. The motion passes. Okay. Moving on to the town manager's report.

really short because we met last week just another friendly reminder that we have the blue tree lighting uh saturday the 6th 5 p.m on the common uh the lights will be also on um in the heights common avery square um and we'll be watching the weather so Fingers crossed.

Do we have special visitors? We do. They're different this year, so come and find out who they are.

Come and find out.

Okay.

All right. Can't wait. So committee reports. We'll just go down the line, but it has only been a week since we met.

Envisionita met. There's going to be an information meeting. We are thinking of mid-January, but that's been moved to February 4 with a snow date maybe of February 11. So be sure to come. More details to come. But it's been moved because we're weighing on a diversion report for the traffic.

Okay, and I just would like to mention that I read in a newsletter, not the Townsend newsletter, incorrectly that it was reported that the Envision Committee was narrowing the choices of the plans and presenting one to the select board. That is incorrect. That is not happening. We've been getting a lot of letters. So I just want to reassure everyone that the Envision Committee is putting together all of the information and public engagement on all of the plans, all of which will be delivered to the Select Board for additional evaluation. just for anyone who read that error. Now you understand.

But I guess I am hoping that they will have a recommendation. I'm hoping that they can come to some recommendation. Well, we'll see. But we did ask them to bring forward All of the plans, yes. Do you have a committee report? I do not. OK. So large house committee also met last evening. They talked through the feedback from the community forum and went through a variety of the recommendations that they had and did sort of a straw poll on each of those to get a sense of the committee. It was not an official vote, but a sense of the committee so that Lee Newman, our planning director, could start to craft the committee expects to vote next week about what they are going to recommend go to the planning board.

And they will go to the planning board on January 6th with a recommendation from Large House. The sense of the committee, while there were advocates on the committee for all three levels of reduction and there was at least one advocate for doing nothing, I would say that the sense was you know probably a little bit more leaning toward the least reduction and then a moderate amount toward the middle reduction and A couple people on the most reduction. So it is spread out, and we will see what happens next week when they actually take a vote. There was a little bit more work that's going on this week by the committee that was laid out. and a developer in town wrote a very thoughtful letter that the committee had some significant discussion of and they will be meeting with that.

and developer over the course of the next week to just clarify some things that they think were misunderstood and be sure they understand the concerns that he was raising as well and determine if that provides some additional feedback. So that's my one committee. I also want to make some comments related to Quiet Zone, which hasn't met. But just to brief this board with where we are, we had a little bit of discussion earlier as part of the budget where a couple questions were asked of Katie. And in fact, there has been some movement within the last week and some additional meeting from MBTA and maybe some support. And we're hoping that this will sort of help us move forward so that we can move this design beyond the 10% level. So I think we're in the cautiously encouraged stage right now, and we'll see if that comes to fruition.

But on Tuesday, November 18, we had a letter, an email, from a resident in town with information pertaining to the golf course private crossing suggesting that the MBTA was willing to do something that they had told the town earlier this fall that they were not willing to do. and so that resulted in some confusion and we sort of said, you know, the town will need to understand what the MBTA's position really is because the town was told something different from what this resident was then forwarding us. I think it's safe to say that we have some clarity based on a meeting that Katie had last week that the MBTA might be willing to do something now, but that do something comes with

the towns being required to sign some legal agreements that completely shift liability and release for anything that may happen on the tracks. and provisioning of some equipment and it would require us actually engaging in a conversation because this is new information than what was discussed in October at the Quiet Zone meeting. So we would have to engage in a discussion with the golf course as well if we were to pursue this for some temporary closure. Meanwhile, what will happen is that we are expecting that we'll be coming to this board because in October it was determined that we were going to go forward with a feasibility study for a culvert under the Gates at the golf course.

We'll bring that to this board and have a discussion about that and then go to the finance committee to make a request for feasibility for the culvert, which is what we actually see as a permanent Long-term, potential part of a solution that can be looked at for the overall quiet zone in town that will cover that private crossing. There is some new information. It's still not completely clear what that information really means in the near term. but we are focused on the long term, as Dave has said and Katie has said, and trying to put it all together for sure.

Can I ask a question? So I guess one of the issues is getting the MBTA to engage in working with us to develop a design in the proper scope. The other thing that I'm thinking about is the infrastructure and how much of their infrastructure we have to pay for. So the MBTA has not acknowledged that their infrastructure is due for repair. and is outdated and sometimes doesn't work, right?

Well, so I think that it's fair to say that the reason that they are now engaging is that they understand that their infrastructure is outdated and they do not have a plan for funding it. And that Needham's plan covered some significant pieces of that so that we could have a quiet zone. If we wait until the MBTA were to have pieces funded, I'm not sure how long we would be waiting. So they were looking to expand what it covered. Maybe you're alluding to that because there was some discussion about that. There was some creep that we heard from them. I don't know exactly where that is now. We look forward to receiving additional information from the MBTA so that we know what they're providing. and we know what we plan to do in a walkthrough with them as of last May, which is when we did the walkthrough with them that set the scope for what our project should be.

Yeah, so in addition to the creep, to the extent that we need to replace their infrastructure, it sounds like we would to some extent. If their infrastructure is already old and out of date and not functioning properly, it does not seem reasonable that we should pay for all of that replacement cost. And that seems like something that we can reasonably negotiate with them.

I don't know that that's correct because it's nowhere in a capital plan for them. So I suppose we could negotiate, and they could say, we'll come back to you in 10 years. But I think the town is looking for us to do something more quickly than that. So I think it's important for us to understand exactly what the pieces are, what we will be replacing, to make happen what the town has asked us to figure out how to do, which is to implement a quiet zone. So then we'll have to look at what that picture is. But right now, we do understand that we are replacing some equipment that is out of date now, like the Quad Gates that we have are all out of date now.

I guess my point is that they currently are responsible for that out-of-date equipment and that they should be responsible for maintaining some and replacing some portion of that cost. and in the negotiations with who's responsible for the maintenance going forward once it's replaced, I also don't want to be in a position where we've replaced the entire costs of this equipment and then we have to wait for them to maintain it up to proper safety standards.

So there are multiple levels of things that are going on. Maintenance is one of the discussions. We are not expecting that the town will be maintaining MBTA infrastructure going forward. That is a piece that is already identified and that was discussed at least last week, was part of the discussion.

So in that case, I think we need some sort of assurance that our investment will be If we're not maintaining the equipment, we need some assurance that they will.

I just say I hear you, and this is part of the ongoing discussions. it is their infrastructure at the end of the day. So we're working with them.

And I do think every community probably has the same issue, but yes.

Okay, well, last night the Tree Committee met, the Tree Preservation and Planning Committee, and discussed the feedback that we received at our public forum on the 19th, which frankly was really, really helpful. People brought up a lot of very interesting ideas, real concerns, and all of those were recorded and are being built into are discussions mostly with the town council. So at our meeting last night, we looked through the portion of the bylaw that we have already worked on. We came to consensus on it with a number, a great number of caveats for... consideration by town council and sent it off so that he could start his vetting process on that.

And we then are putting together a schedule for the committee to look at definitions and the balance of the regulations, including mitigation, fees, and conflicts with potentially with zoning bylaws. So we're making progress and still on track to get to our goal of presenting this to the town at a special town meeting in 26. So October of 26. So, tune in. I will say also that the tree committee has a really nice little updates section on the committee website that kind of gives you three lines of what we did in our last meeting and what we're looking forward to doing the next meeting so it makes it kind of easy to keep track of things so check it out anything else

The next item on our agenda is to retire to executive session for exception number six to discuss the purchase of real property. to consider the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property if the chair declares that an open meeting would be detrimental to the negotiating position of the town, and the chair does so declare, and not to return to open session prior to adjournment.

Second.

This is a roll call vote, which I remembered all by myself. So monumental achievement.

Kevin?

Aye.

Yes. And the chair votes aye.

Good night.