The Board of Selectmen met this evening with Chairman William Hardin presiding. In attendance were Jeffrey Tufts, Frederick Clark, Patricia Webster, Carla Goodwin, and Town Adm. Kevin Paicos.

At 6:30PM, on Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted unanimously by roll-call, to go into Executive Session for the purpose of Real Estate, to return to Open Session.

At 7:15 the Board reconvened Open Session.

Attorney Lou Cassis, Det. Mike Fox, Chief Stanley Bates, Jim Mitchell, John Hopkins, Jay Lundin in attendance.

At this point in the hearing, Hardin swore in those who would be testifying.

Hardin read the letter sent to Lil Peach (see attached).

At this time, Attorney Cassis called Detective Mike Fox, and questioned how long he (Mike) has been an Officer. Fox noted 18 1/2 years as an Officer, and 4 years as a Detective.

Attorney Cassis reviewed Incident Report I9812765 (on file in the Selectmen’s office), with Detective Fox. Mr. John Hopkins had no questions of Detective Fox.

Attorney Cassis passed out copies of the Two (2) birth certificates of the minors.

Cassis noted that J. Lundin is in attendance at the meeting, but that he didn’t see the need for him to testify in light of Detective Fox’s testimony.

J. Hopkins noted that J. Lundin is a regular customer and that when he first started coming in, he, his wife and Mrs. Richard always carded him because he looked so young. He noted that after a while they stopped carding him because he appeared to have a valid ID. Again Hopkins stated the Lundin was such a regular customer that they didn’t feel the need to keep carding him. Cassis questioned how Hopkins could account for the fact that people had information that Lil Peach would serve to minors. Hopkins noted that because he stopped "ID’ing" Lundin, people in line behind him may have thought that the store didn’t ID people. The other customers may have thought that Lil Peach was selling to minors.

At this point in the meeting Jim Mitchell, Athletic Director for OAHS testified. Cassis questioned why Mitchell believed that minors were being served at Lil Peach.

Mitchell noted as the Athletic Director and Health Coordinator he is forced to punish youngsters that are in penalty with the alcohol policy as athletes. He noted that he and Mike Fox had exchanged information many times on this place. He noted they decided to go out and check on what they had heard about Lil Peach. On the night in question, he stated he had also observed what M. Fox testified to. Mitchell noted that they will probably continue doing this and hopefully won’t be as successful as they were on the night in question for the hearing. Cassis questioned if students had said they could obtain alcohol at Lil Peach. Mitchell stated he heard there were "places" that alcohol could be obtained, but didn’t specifically name Lil Peach.

Hardin commended Mitchell for his concern for the young people, and his help in this particular situation.

Hopkins again stated that Lundin was ID’d several times when he first started coming in. Hopkins noted he has asked Lil Peach to install better lights in the parking lot so he can see what is going on out there. Hopkins noted that at the time of this incident he didn’t know that each and every purchase required an ID. Cassis noted that case law does not allow for a defense of "I carded this person before", and the law prevailed that states that each and every purchase requires an ID. Hardin questioned how long Hopkins has been the Owner/Manager. Hopkins stated since April of 1998. Hardin questioned if Hopkins or his employees attended either an ABCC seminar or Easton Police Dept. (EPD) seminar on checking ID’s. Hopkins stated no. Chief Bates noted that he will be holding another seminar within the next two months, but that he held his last one in April, just prior to Mr. Hopkins becoming licensed at Lil Peach. Clark asked Hopkins "to your knowledge are the events that transpired on 10/24/98, as explained here, true?" Hopkins stated yes. Cassis urged the Board to find Lil Peach guilty on one each of the two counts, noting they are virtually the same violation.

Clark’s motion seconded by Goodwin, to find Lil Peach guilty of one count of 1. Sale to a minor in violation of M.G.L. C.138, Section 34; and one count of 2. Violation of 204, CMR 2.05(2) - Permitting a disorder, disturbance and illegality to occur on the licensed premises, to wit: minor in possession of alcoholic beverages, was voted unanimously.

Clark noted there seems to be confusion on the part of the new Manager, noting he didn’t attend either an ABCC or EPD seminar.

Clark’s motion for a one day suspension for both violations, did not receive a second.

Clark’s motion, for a Warning for both violations, did not receive a second.

Tufts noted he is very upset that liquor is being sold without an ID. Tufts noted this is a serious violation and it was testified to that it occurred several times between April and October of 1998. Tufts noted the need to set a tone with this violation.

Goodwin’s motion to suspend the license until such time as the owner attends the alcohol seminar, and not sooner than 6 months, did not receive a second.

Hardin noted we have a new owner, but the establishment has operated for a long time without problems. Hardin noted that it seems this isn’t a one time thing and that young people seem to know they can buy here.

Hardin’s motion for a two week suspension of the license, did not receive a second.

Webster noted that the Board is having difficulty because while it is a new licenseholder, it is a very serious offense. Webster noted that with the College in Town, the Board is usually concerned with College students that are underage trying to get served, and this is high school students. Webster noted that the location of this store is near all of the schools. Webster noted this situation occurred two times that night within a short time frame, and the young man was not carded either time. Webster noted she wants the owner to start checking ID’s every time and to have himself and his employees attend the alcohol seminars presented by the ABCC and the EPD.

On Webster’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted unanimously for a seven (7) day suspension of the Package Store Malt & Wine License and to require the owner as well as his employees to attend the next EPD seminar, and the Police Chief will notify the Board if the owner and his employees do not attend the next seminar; and that the dates for the suspension will be February 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 18, 1999.

Tufts noted that he would have voted for a higher penalty if it were not for the honesty and forthrightness of the owner at the Hearing tonight.

At this point in the meeting, Hardin asked for a moment of silence in honor of Ken Jackson, Bernie Farrell and David Bulman.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Hardin, the Board voted 3-0-2 to approve General Minutes dated 1/4/99. Tufts, Webster abstained.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted 4-0-1 to approve General Minutes dated 1/11/99, as amended. Goodwin abstained.

At this point in the meeting Tufts noted that Bill Hardin was elected President of the MMA and presented Hardin with a clock in honor of that event. Hardin expressed his appreciation for all the Board members being in attendance at the MMA event.

Robert Mielde - Mielde noted he ran for School Committee unsuccessfully last year. He noted he ran because he has children in the system and wanted to work with the finances in the Schools due to his background. He noted that when the opportunity arose with the Finance Committee he saw this as an opportunity to express his concerns and help the people in Easton.

Goodwin questioned what his perceptions of the Finance Committee are and how he would change or alter their role. Mielde noted he sees them as the gate keeper of the finances and that they give feedback to the Townspeople. He noted he has deffinite ideas, as he has been in private industry his whole career in particular in bringing failing companies back to life. He noted he does understand budgetary requirements.

Webster questioned if he had concern with stepping onto the Committee while the budget process is beginning. Mielde stated no, he is ready to jump in, and anxious to get started. He noted he is ready to step into the fire and he has done so throughout his career.

Clark read the letter submitted by Mielde and reviewed his resume. Clark asked if Mielde felt he had the time to be involved. Mielde noted he works close to Town, right off of Bay Road, and as a partner he can leave when he needs to, he doesn’t punch a time clock.

Hardin noted Mielde looks like he would make an excellent addition to the Finance Committee. Hardin noted that the Committee is charged by the Charter to go over budgets with a fine tooth comb and make recommendations.

Webster questioned when Mielde’s IDFA involvement was. Mielde noted between 1983 and 1990. He noted that it was during the IDFA heyday, and the Authority was very active securing revenue bonds for developers. He noted there were several industrial buildings going up in the Town. Mielde noted there were many meetings during that span of time, the IDFA was quite active.

PATRICK GOODMAN - Goodwin questioned what Goodman perceived the role of Finance Committee member to be, as well as the function of the Committee. Goodman noted to watch the Town’s money and make recommendations. Goodman noted he didn’t know how he could help until he got on the Committee.

Webster questioned why Goodman wanted to be on the Committee. Goodman noted he thought he could help the Town. He noted he put a lot of years on the Recreation Commission and it is time to do something else.

Hardin questioned if Goodman would leave the Recreation Commission. Goodman noted he thought he would, but if He doesn’t have to, he won’t. Hardin noted that Finance Committee will take a lot of time. Goodman noted I got plenty of time.

Paicos noted two memos, one from him and one from the Building Inspector.

Paicos noted the proposed changes in the Building Dept. are dependent on increasing the building fees. Hardin questioned how do the rates stand up against surrounding communities. Paicos noted the building fees at the increased levels will still be at the low side of average. Paicos noted he is not sure with plumbing and gas.

Tufts expressed concern RE: confusion on the gas and plumbing rates/increases/structure.

Paicos suggested postponing the gas and plumbing fee increase until W. Fulcher can be in attendance and answer the Board’s questions. Clark asked for the schedule of neighboring fees and what was used for evaluating the increase. Clark reviewed individual increases on the proposal. Paicos reviewed the increases noted by Clark, and the % of the increases in terms of actual dollars. Clark noted the Building Dept. has always generated enough money to cover their department budget. Clark noted he wants to know what Bridgewater’s fees are, as they are similar to Easton.

Goodwin questioned what the dollar amount is that Paicos is anticipating with the increases. Paicos noted that $42,000 will be the amount increased in the FY’2000 by these fee increases. Paicos noted the need for approximately $40,000 in salaries for the building department.

Goodwin questioned how many three family dwellings there are in Town. Goodwin questioned why in- ground vs above ground pools were not listed as such previously. Paicos noted the difference in the inspection schedule for in-ground vs above ground, and gave a brief explanation.

There was much discussion RE: the need for fee increases to be voted as soon as is possible in order to keep the budget in balance.

Tufts asked for comparative information from surrounding communities also.

Paicos noted he will get sheets from other communities and put them in the Selectmen’s packets.

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted unanimously to table this pending the information being received RE: comparative data from other communities.

JOINT MEETING WITH FINANCE COMMITTEE TO APPOINT NEW MEMBER

Allen Barron, Robert Hicks, Brian Herr, Heidi Churchill, Christopher D’Arpino, John Kent, David Brown in attendance. Gloria Stafford absent.

Allen Barron’s motion as Chair of the Finance Committee, seconded by William Hardin, as Chair of the Board of Selectmen, to vote to fill the vacancy on the Finance Committee, was not voted at this time.

Barron noted that on 1/13/99 the Finance Committee interviewed the two candidates, Patrick Goodman and Robert Mielde and by majority voted to recommend Patrick Goodman to fill the vacancy.

Kent suggested declaring it was a dead heat and suspending any election until the April election. Webster suggested waiting for the missing FinCom member G. Stafford to be in attendance to vote. Hicks expressed concern that the School Budget sub-committee needs to be resolved quickly. Paicos noted that in the event they can’t come to agreement, no one is elected, leaving a "vacancy". Paicos noted there is no majority tonight and to leave this open until another meeting can be scheduled with G. Stafford present. Barron noted Stafford won’t be available for several weeks. Kent noted there is nothing that states we "have" to fill a vacancy. Hicks noted that a previous resignation on the Committee waited to the April election time to be filled.

No action taken.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted that all three bidders be provided an opportunity to submit written documentation to clarify and/or correct any misinterpretation which the proposer feels may have been made during the review process; and further that in so doing, all bidders shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) all documents must be received in the Selectmen’s Office by 4:30PM on Wednesday February 3, 1999; 2) proposers may clarify compliance with Comparative Evaluation Criteria referencing A through F in the proposal evaluation procedure, (see attached), was not voted at this time.

Goodwin noted that this is meant to provide each proposer with an opportunity to provide information making all three proposals on an equal level, and to uphold the integrity of the process. Goodwin noted that all three bidders will be sent a letter with the motion contained and explained.

M. Hayden from Baron asked if changes would be permitted to the terms of the RFP. Goodwin noted no, just clarifications will be allowed. M. Hayden questioned if the Board will provide what they want clarification on from each bidder separately, in the letters. Paicos noted that if the proposer currently feels the need for clarification, they need to submit it in writing. M. Hayden questioned if the PFSC’s criteria/ratings still stand. Goodwin noted the process is now at the level of the Board of Selectmen, and the Board will be making decisions and will be evaluating the proposals. Goodwin cautioned the participants to submit any further information succinctly.

Paicos reviewed the reasons for postponing the ATM. Paicos noted also that Ch. 70 requirements formula was not received until February or March and it is hard to know what will be there for other departments aside from the school. Paicos noted that House Bill 1 is the budget bill and hasn’t been approved yet. He noted that the SE Regional School assessment is not known until February or March either. Paicos noted he is forced to forecast very conservatively until all other issues, previously mentioned are known by either February or March. Paicos noted that once the Cherry Sheet is received we have a better idea on what money is required by the Schools, Regional School and what money is expected through local aid. Paicos

noted there will be no proposal for the school building repairs ready for the April ATM. He noted he will not have the debt service schedule on the Library for the April ATM. They may not be ready until May or June. Paicos noted the Single Vendor issue and the $1.8million for landfill capping won’t be ready for the April ATM and he is not sure what if any debt service will be needed.

Paicos recommended that with the peculiarities of this year, that the Board postpone this year’s ATM to May or June. Paicos noted that as we engage other departments for their input on postponing ATM permanently, the Board will have the time for a more thoughtful discussion.

Tufts noted that every year has its own set of peculiarities, and he sees the need for two Town Meetings. Tufts expressed concern RE: postponing the trash issue with the landfill closing in June. He noted the Board may need to put off the capital budget, growth management recommendations, library debt service, for instance, but not everything.

Webster noted that the trash issue can’t be put off and we should be careful of delaying important issues. Webster noted that if we need to put off the operating budget, it could hold to May, but too many other issues are out there that need discussion and decisions.

Paicos noted that as long as the Board knows there will be many changes coming from the State, that will generate budget change memos that impact capital budget and warrant articles. Paicos noted that the budget change memos cause some confusion and the Board has expressed concern over that, and he is trying to avoid repeating the same set of circumstances. Paicos noted that as long as the Board is OK with the likely confusion and changes, and the need for a correcting meeting in the Fall, he will go forward as usual. Webster suggested holding an STM within the ATM in April for everything except the operating budget. Paicos noted the difficulty drafting warrants to include all necessary issues/articles. Clark noting the Town By-Laws stated he wants to see the ATM in April and to extend to another date if necessary. Goodwin noted that the Town Administrator is trying to explain the complexity of the issues in the Town, and the complexity of the money situation. Goodwin noted the TA is trying to explain to the Board a way to help with the "confusion" and to help the ATM process. Goodwin noted she is open to the new way of doing this. Goodwin noted the need to get the public the information they need to understand the issues and the budget dollars better. Paicos noted that the fall STM had at least 10 money articles. Tufts noted that certain issues have to be dealt with at ATM by statute but that once they have been addressed we could table to June to resume the Annual meeting for the issues still needing input. Tufts noted the Board needs to handle issues earlier than they have been to prepare for the ATM, with issues such as zoning, trash, etc. Goodwin suggested two Selectmen work with Paicos sometime within the next week, to develop a format and deadline to accomplish these tasks. Paicos noted that this is already such a busy time. Hardin noted the Cherry sheet lateness is not going away. He noted he likes having as many issues as possible addressed in April such as street repairs etc, and would suggest taking all issues needing further financial clarification from the State and adjourn the ATM to June. Tufts noted agreement with Goodwin’s suggestion.

Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Tufts, to have two (2) Selectmen work with the Town Administrator in looking at clustering Warrant Articles to make the most efficient Town Meeting as possible, was not voted. It was agreed that Tufts and Goodwin will be the sub-committee to meet with Paicos.

Paicos noted this is the low bidder for site grading at the Landfill, and he also recommends Southworth Milton Co. Clark noted that the bid is very confusing with no information on time limits. Clark questioned will there be 6 operators of machines; do we have people qualified to run all of these machines; will they be rented weekly or monthly. Paicos noted that we do have the people qualified to operate the machinery, and we will rent as needed, not all machines at the same time. Clark questioned what is the total cap on the costs. Paicos noted this was bid as an open bid because no one knows how long it will take to grade for capping the landfill. Clark noted he wants more information before he could support the bid. Paicos noted there will be many bids coming i.e., engineering, materials, etc., but it is up to the DPW Director and the SEA Consultant to manage this closure. Paicos noted that people who put this bid out understand economies of weekly vs monthly renting, etc. Clark noted that it may be cheaper to purchase this equipment and sell it at the end of the use vs renting long term. Paicos noted he assumes the DPW Director

being a PE in several states would know the best way to do this. Paicos noted that prices for sale on this equipment would be large, and selling after 6-9 months of use, the depreciation would cost the Town an enormous amount of money. Paicos noted that SEA is being paid to do these kinds of bids and if the Board wants more detailed information, they need the Consultant and DPW Director to be brought in to meet with the Board for several hours again. Clark noted that Consultants came back on the issue of the Town Hall addition and hadn’t considered what is now being discussed by the Board, to use both buildings in conjunction, as an example. Clark noted this is heavy money here and I need more information and more professional information.

Tufts’ motion, seconded by Goodwin, to approve the bid to Southworth Milton Co., was not voted at this time.

Tufts noted it would be helpful to have a description of the process of site preparation in layman’s terms to understand this functionally. Tufts noted that in the past we decided, based on a Department Head’s recommendations, to purchase a compactor vs renting and he trusts that the same evaluations have been done in this case. Webster noted she wants to see a memo with a schedule and the process and order of the bids that will be coming forward. Webster noted that this bid was confusing and if it had a memo explaining the rationale and process it would have helped.

It was agreed to have the DPW Director send a memo on the process being followed in layman’s terms; a schedule that will be followed for site work; further bids that will be coming forward.

RE: Article on Ch. 90 money being diverted to the Big Dig, reported in the papers, Paicos noted this is absolutely true. Paicos noted that local projects all over are disappearing, maybe even the Depot St. project. Paicos noted that for the public’s information these stories are true and encouraged the public to let the Governor’s office know and insist that money was voted for local projects and not intended for the Big Dig. Paicos asked the Board to send a letter to the Governor also. Hardin asked for the Town Administrator to draft this letter for the Board.

Paicos read a letter received RE: the Highway Departments job done during the recent storm.

Paicos noted that the Growth Management Study meeting is scheduled for 1/28/99, at 6:45PM in the new school and encouraged the public to attend.

Tufts noted that he attended the first meeting RE: Growth Study Committee, and encouraged all to attend and give their input.

Clark noted that page 5 on the General Minutes dated 1/11/99, state that Clark asked for agenda time on the Merit pay issue. Clark noted that now with the full Board present, he polled for a decision on this. Webster stated OK. Goodwin noted that if Clark is not requesting the information for determining the criteria the merit is based , it is OK. Clark OK. By majority vote this will be on an agenda.

Hardin noted that this information is in the budget book from one year to the next, and already available to Clark. Hardin noting the majority vote stated this will be on the agenda within 30 days.

Goodwin noted that Secretary Shelly Meehan was a panelist at the recent MMA Annual meeting on licensing issues.

Goodwin noted she met with Senator Sprague and was asked if she (Sprague) could come before the Board to discuss concerns in the Town, and ways she can be helpful. Goodwin asked for agenda time for Senator Sprague to be invited to the Board’s meeting.

Webster questioned Paicos for an update on the Fire Service Management Committee. Paicos noted he will be meeting with Chief Blye within the next week to decide who will be on the Committee.

Webster questioned Paicos for an update on the Senior Tax Voucher program. Paicos noted he will research this and report back.

At 10:35PM, on Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted 4-1 by roll-call, to go into Executive Session for the purpose of Executive Session Minutes and Negotiations with Non-Union Personnel, not to return to Open Session.

APPROVED_________________________________

DATED_________________________________