___________________________

                                                                                                                                Date Approved

 

 

 

Selectmen’s Meeting Minutes

March 22, 2004

 

The Board of Selectmen met this evening at the Easton Town Offices, Selectmen’s Office with Chairman Gerard Marsan presiding.  Also in attendance were, Jeffrey Tufts, Carla Goodwin, John Haederle, Colleen Corona and Town Administrator Martha White. (7:00pm).

 

Minutes       

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted  4-0-1 to approve general minutes dated 2/2/04.  Tufts abstained.

 

Home Consortium Grant Award

White referred to the attached grant information.  Tufts credited White for her efforts on this program and noted the history of the grant.  Marsan asked about other towns that participate.  White noted twelve other towns plus the two cities.  The board also commended White for her efforts.

 

Appointment to Council on Aging

It was noted that interviews were originally held on 3/8/04.  Tufts referred to the memo from the Council on Aging Director Dolores Kent regarding the Task Force for Senior Center Development.  White noted the history of the Task Force since 2002.  In December of 2002, the board voted to increase the number of citizens to eight.  Kent is now asking for the board to increase this committee membership to nine members with hopes of appointing one of the two candidates to the Task Force. 

The Board voted 3-2 by roll call to appoint Carl Palm to the vacant position on the Council on Aging with a term expiring 6/30/05.

Goodwin – Higgins, Corona – Higgins, Tufts  Palm, Marsan- Palm, Haederle – Palm.

 

On Tufts’ motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously by roll call to appoint Denise Higgins to the Task Force for Senior Center Development, subject to her approval.

Haederle – Higgins, Marsan – Higgins, Corona – Higgins, Goodwin – Higgins, Tufts – Higgins.

White will amend the charge to include the new citizen at large.

 

Public Participation

None

 

 Meeting with Historical Commission re: Demolition Delay Bylaw

Chairman Melanie Deware, Ed Hands and Greg Galer were present.  

Deware spoke of the newly created bylaw, which will be voted at the upcoming Annual Town Meeting (ATM).  Deware gave history of the vote at a previous town meeting and an overview of the bylaw that the commission is proposing.  The proposed bylaw would require the Building Inspector to notify them if they had a permit for demolition.  Hopefully this would give the commission time to review the property and history records to see if they had any information or concerns.  This applies to outside structures only, not inside.  Hands noted only substantial demolition to a building.  The Commission feels that this would be useful to give alternatives to a homeowner who may wish to sell their property.  Hands spoke of the impact and how to minimize any impact.  They would propose to increase the age of the home from 50 to 75 years of age.  This will change the amount of homes that would be affected.  There may be approximately 1100 properties, including public businesses or public buildings like the Town Hall.  Hands spoke of other towns and the fact that 1 in 10 building permits is demolition delay.  Hands referred to the ZBA applicants and how the Commission reviews the applications prior to the ZBA holding their hearing.  Hands referred to the example that over the years, looking at 10 homes, they would only recommend a concern of one of them.  Corona verified that this only applies to demolition.  Deware agreed.  Corona asked for the turn around time.  Hands spoke of 15 business days.  If there is concern and a compromise cannot be gained, they get the building permit after that point.  Haederle asked about the enforcement and what would happen with fines, etc.  Deware explained the proposed process.  Hands noted the most significant difference in the new proposal is the age of the home, from 50 to 75 years.  The commission now has hard evidence on how many homes would qualify.  Hands spoke of outbuildings.  Marsan noted some administrative issues voted on page 2 on procedure, notifying the applicant in writing, etc.  Hands agreed with the need for some clarification and would have it ready for upcoming ATM.  Marsan also noted the authority changing between the commission and the Building Inspector with respect to issuing a permit.  Marsan asked about page 3 and designating authority to the commission or a staff person.  Marsan also asked about adopting fees and requiring engineering studies.  Hands gave an example of a new development and the developer stating that a house may be torn down unnecessarily.  Hands spoke of determination and it would not be the homeowner’s responsibility.  Deware explained the goal of the commission, not to take away authority of the homeowner.  Marsan agreed that we need a bylaw but feels that we need to address some of the issues.  Goodwin asked about the first section and the applicant process.  White referred to the Town of Millis and their support of a bylaw.  Deware spoke of the surrounding towns ( Norton, Stoughton, Mansfield, etc).  Galer spoke of the name of the bylaw and how it gives the wrong impression of delaying.  Galer spoke of the few properties that would be involved and the opportunity to review applications, giving the ZBA as an example and working with the homeowner with options to buy rather than demolishing.  It was suggested that “Demolition Permit Review” might be a better name than what is being proposed now.  Goodwin suggested a change to read  Issuance of Demolition Permits”.  Haederle asked about history over the last 3-5 years how many historic buildings have been demolished.  Hands noted that there has been a sharp increase in demolition in the last few years.  This indicates that we are running out of open space for development.  Hands spoke of preserving neighborhoods.  Hands spoke of working with developers on new construction.  Hands again reiterated that this bylaw would only affect a handful of homes.  Charles King of 41 Kennedy Circle asked if there is an opportunity for the homeowners to meet with historic homes prior to deciding on reconstruction.  Hands spoke of the ability to meet with owners and give them a historic value of their home.   Tufts asked for clarification on delaying individuals who may be in a predicament i.e. elderly going into a nursing home, etc.  Tufts suggested that the delay should be as short as possible.  Tufts asked about a change to the footprint.  Deware noted that it may come under major demolition and clarified that the elderly person wanting to get out from under their home could sell, reiterating that this proposed bylaw only affects demolition.  The board thanked the commission for coming in and speaking on the proposal. 

 

Homeland Security Grant Award

Mr. Saunders from the Bristol County Commissioners noted that the application for the Homeland Security Grant has been approved in the amount of $125,000.  Chief Stone and Firefighter/Bristol County Representative William Downey were present also.  Saunders explained the excess revenue from the Bristol County Retirement.  The need for Police and Fire has increased since the September 11th event.  Saunders thanked Stone and Downey for their participation in this effort.  A check in the amount of $124,307.82 was presented to the board.  White noted a meeting with both the Police and Fire Chiefs would be held tomorrow.  Finance Committee Member Bob Hicks requested a copy of the terms and conditions of the grant.

 

Olmsted Memorial Cairn Design Contract Amendment

Greg Galer was present and updated the board on the Olmsted Memorial Cairn project. Galer spoke of the Phase I work and the remainder of $85,000 is still available but not enough to complete the project.  The Historical Commission is working with CPA Committee on funding.  Galer spoke of the need for continued construction documents.  Galer distributed maps showing the phases of the project.   Bid packages are being worked on.  The CPA Committee will go to town meeting and ask for modification to $100,000.  CPA also voted to front $10,000 from their administrative funds to help get prepared for the bid documents, etc. The money will be paid back.  The request tonight is for the $10,000 contract with the firm of McKinley Kalsow and Associates, LLP.  Goodwin asked about using more CPA funds to fund the entire project.  Galer noted that $300,000 would be needed just for this piece.  Galer spoke of the grant funding for the project and noted that progress is being made, one piece at a time.   White thanked Galer and noted the complication of this project.  

Tufts’ motioned to approve amendments to the McGinley Kalsow and Associates contract.  Haederle seconded the motion.  White noted that the CPA Committee would be requesting a warrant article.  White noted that the amendment #3 funds are not available until after town meeting.  The Town Accountant will sign off after town meeting for the funding. 

Tufts questioned the height of the area.  Galer noted the installation of the railing for safety.  Tufts asked about underground wiring.  Galer noted that the funding is not available but agrees that this is the correct solution.    The board voted unanimously on the motion.

 

Referral of Zoning Amendments to Planning & Zoning Board

White referred to the Stormwater Management Bylaw Amendment.  See attached memo.

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously to transmit to the Planning and Zoning Board a proposal to amend the Easton Zoning Bylaw by including a new subsection for Stormwater management under section XI environmental performance standards with the new sub-section to be identified as 11.2 Stormwater Management.

 

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously to transmit to the Planning and Zoning Board a proposal to rezone town-owned land from Residential to Municipal and Open Space Mar R08-402 – 303 By Road (from the cemetery commission)

 

On Corona’s motion, seconded by Haederle, the board voted unanimously to transmit to the Planning and Zoning Board a proposal to rezone certain town-owned land from Residential to Municipal and Open Space as follows:  U-17-172 15 Pond Street; U38-062 288 Depot Street; U09-084 39 Arborway; R08-403 32 Dunbar Drive; R07-223 43 Dunbar Drive.

 

White referred to citizen petition to amend Section X-Signs of the Zoning Bylaw.   See attached memo dated 3/18/04.  

Goodwin motioned to transmit to the Planning and Zoning Board a proposal to amend the Easton Zoning Bylaw generally related to signs and specifically pertaining to electronic message center and changeable copy signs.  Corona seconded the motion.  Tufts suggested that the town must be proactive in this regard but did not agree with all that is listed on this petition.   The board discussed the proposal.  Marsan suggested that the board be notified of all the hearings.  Marsan also suggested having the businesses come in to receive their feedback.  The board voted 4-0-1.  Tufts abstained.

 

White referred to aquifer protection district change zoning change. See memo dated 3/22/04.  

Tufts asked about notifying property owners.   White indicated that it is not necessary. 

On Haederle’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously to transmit to the Planning & Zoning Board a proposal to amend Town of Easton zoning map by amending the boundaries of the Aquifer Protection District. 

 

FY’05 Budget 

White referred to the current 2005 revenue projections.  White reviewed the projections in detail.  See attached spreadsheet.  White noted the upcoming meeting with the financial team, budget subcommittee and department heads (Police & Fire).  White asked about process and if the board would want to meet with each department.   Marsan reflected on last year’s process and meeting with the departments that were going to be impacted by change.  Tufts referred back to previous meetings and suggested that the time be spent where needed, on changes only.    White spoke of a budget informational meeting on April 12th for the board.  White hopes to have the full budget available by April 12th.  Corona spoke in favor of meeting with all department heads, specifically noting the new board members.  The board spoke of a separate budget night for this purpose. 

 

Special Municipal Employee Designations 

White referred to her memo dated 3/16/04.  White noted that the positions are designated, not the individuals.  White referred to the list of special municipal employees.  Corona called five surrounding communities and their processes were all different.  Each town designated the special employee status on an as needed basis.  Only one community had a long list of special municipal employees.  Some of the towns felt that the blanket approval takes away some of the town’s authority.  White referred to the Ethics Commission and the added step of informing the community of the other business they are conducting  with the town.  Corona spoke of only dealing with this if it is a livelihood issue.  Corona called the State Ethics Commission and they indicated that it is most often done on a case-by-case basis.    Tufts acknowledged that the last one done was the Recreation Director.  Tufts spoke of the difference of opinion from former Town Counsel M. Lincoln and current Town Counsel.  Positions vs. individuals were discussed.   All the inspectors were once exempt.  Tufts spoke of the attorneys and their businesses with the town.  Tufts felt that it may be discriminatory if we are looking only at business owners and attorneys.  Corona again noted the problem with blanket issuances.  Goodwin referred to 11/2/03 and the discussion held at that time.  Marsan spoke of attracting good people and serving us well as a board by designating this.  He doesn’t feel it is a livelihood question.  Haederle spoke of years ago and the permitting boards and he was under the impression at the time that they were designated special municipal employees and they had access to Town Counsel because of it.  Marsan noted that the record is unclear and we know that some were designated but we do not know for sure.  Two years ago, the board discussed listing the entire board, not as individuals.   The board discussed whether the status gave any coverage to discard against lawsuits.  White was not aware of the difference.  White noted the opportunity to run afoul on this issue without the status.  White referred to the individuals involved and their protection.  Corona spoke of the current process and again did not see the need to vote the blanket status.  Corona felt that we should take the time to decide which committees should be designated.  Tufts felt that most of the boards and committees have already been voted.  Research will be needed.  Hicks expressed concern with discussing this issue without the boards and committees notified.  Haederle agreed with the issue of the blanket proposal.  Marsan noted that a notice can be given to each chair of every board and ask them to make a designation to each board.  Marsan summarized that over the years a number of boards were designated but we are not sure which ones.  The board discussed polling the boards and committees on information on special municipal status and any history. Corona suggested checking with the Town Clerk for records. 

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted 4-1 to table the issue, pending a review of individual boards on institutional knowledge and to further check with the Town Clerk to see if there is any designation of the special municipal status for review on a future agenda.   Tufts opposed. 

 

Town Administrator Performance Evaluation 

Marsan noted that he and Haederle are the subcommittee for the Town Administrator Evaluation Instrument.  Marsan noted the timing of the first evaluation.  Marsan and Haederle suggested a proposal to the board that the evaluation instrument also involve a scoring process.  Haederle further explained the proposed scoring process;   Haederle suggested a #1 – #5 scoring mechanism, #1 being the lowest.  Using this method can compare an average.  Haederle further suggested using the category line i.e. #1. Service and Support to the

Board of Selectmen.  Goodwin suggested including comments so that the Town Administrator understands the reason for the scoring.  Goodwin felt that in general, the evaluation instrument is a good learning tool.  After review, the five evaluations will be turned over to the Town Administrator.  Tufts suggested that we do not have enough evidence to move forward on some of the items listed on the tool.  Haederle agreed that this could be a problem and that we need to keep in mind that it has not been a full annual cycle, some things may not apply.  After much discussion, the board agreed that the would submit information to Marsan by April 8th for discussion at the April 12th  agenda. 

 

Right of First Refusal Consideration (61A) – Bay RoadLot#4

White referred to the memo and the notice of intent from Attorney John Keach.  White noted that she has not heard back from all the boards and committees but hopes to have all the information by the next meeting on 4/12.  Tufts noted the major issue with the changes in the cranberry bogs and suggested that we look at the whole picture and not the individual people.    It was noted that the 61A is for lot 4 only; lot 3 will come back to the board with another filing.  White noted Ed & Lynn White submitted a letter to the board.  White will call the White’s prior to it coming back to the board at the next meeting.  Tufts spoke of growth and the tool of the 61 Option and its efforts to preserve open space.  Marsan noted the statutory time frame.  Haederle spoke of the possible impact on septic systems if the lots are developed. 

 

SERSG Assignment of Contract for Purchases of Liquid Calcium Chloride – Innovative Municipal Products, Inc

The board noted the change due to the purchase of Road Solutions by Innovative Municipal Products.

On Tufts’ motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously to allow the change in contract with Road Solutions to Innovative Municipal Products.  

 

Charter Change Update

White updated the board on the charter change bylaw question.  White spoke of the mailing to all households.  This mailing must be done two weeks prior to the election.  White noted that the printing company would be doing the mailing and the postage.  $2,502 is the approximate cost for the printing and may need to request a reserve fund transfer for this expense. 

 

Ambulance Abatement Request

On Haederle’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously to approve the ambulance abatement as requested in the amount of $1,931.13.

Haederle suggested that we check into a system to better deal with ambulance abatements, possibly quarterly.

 

Town Administrator’s Notes

None

 

Press Notes

None

 

Selectmen’s Notes

None

 

On Haederle’s motion, seconded by Corona, the board voted unanimously by roll call to go into Executive Session, not to return to Open Session, for purposes of real estate negotiations, real estate litigation and labor negotiations.   9:55pm.

Tufts yes, Haederle yes, Marsan yes, Corona yes, Goodwin yes.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Mary McCarthy

 

                                                                                                                ___________________________________

                                                                                                                Approved

 

 

                                                                                                                ___________________________________

                                                                                                                Date