SELECTMEN’S MEETING MINUTES

JUNE 8, 1998

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.

MINUTES

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted 4-0-1 to approve Executive Session Minutes dated 5/11/98. Webster abstained.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to approve Executive Session Minutes dated 5/18/98.

SPECIAL OLYMPICS RECYCLE FOR GOLD PROGRAM

Clark read the notice for the public’s information. On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to support this effort and to post the notice in the Town Office.

CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION FOR RETIRING SCHOOL PERSONNEL

Hardin read the list of retirees (see attached).

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to approve Certificates of Appreciation for all those on the list. On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to approve a Certificate of Appreciation for Paul O’Leary.

1998 CALENDAR OF HOLIDAYS AND PACKAGE STORE OPENINGS

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted unanimously, that the Board as Local Licensing Authority approves the entire list as proposed by the ABCC, with the exception of the closing time on the day preceding the holiday, on the holiday itself, and Sundays between Thanksgiving and New Years to be 10:00PM.

ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS - NO INTERVIEWS REQUIRED

Hardin read the list of the appointments that didn’t require any interviews.

On Tufts motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to appoint all those on the attached list.

On Webster’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted unanimously to re-appoint the Special Police Officers as proposed on attached list.

FENCE VIEWER POSITION - APPOINTMENT

Hardin noted there were two applicants.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted by roll-call to appoint Robert Hicks and Frank Mennino as Fence Viewers in the Town of Easton.

Goodwin - Hicks, Mennino, Webster - Hicks, Mennino, Hardin - Hicks, Mennino, Clark - Hicks, Mennino, Tufts - Mennino.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously by roll-call, to reaffirm the long-standing appointment of John Keach as Fence Viewer in the Town of Easton

Goodwin - Keach, Webster - Keach, Hardin - Keach, Clark - Keach, Tufts - Keach.

HOUSING AUTHORITY SECTION 8 CONTRACTS

On Webster’s motion, seconded by Clark, the Board voted unanimously to approve the Section 8 Vouchers Contracts.

ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS INTERVIEWS:

PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD

JOHN WEBBY - Webby noted he has been here three or four times trying to get on the Planning Board. Webby noted he feel he would be a great asset on the Planning Board, and asked for the Selectmen’s support for this position. Webster noted that Webby stated last year that he didn’t do work in Easton and questioned if this is still the case. Webby noted he is not doing any development in Easton because he wants to be on the Planning Board. Webby noted he chose not to do any Easton development so he could get on the Planning Board and help plan the Town’s growth. Tufts and Clark both noted their appreciation for Webby’s work on the Flyaway Pond Committee. Hardin noted that the Planning Board is one of the most demanding boards in Town and requires much time and late hours. Webby noted he would be able to meet the commitment and also to continue on with the work of the Flyaway Pond Committee.

COLIN GILLIS - Gillis noted that Winston Churchill stated that in war you only die once, but in politics you die many times. Gillis noted he has been the Chair of the Housing Partnership and gave direction to it, but would like to move into a Board that is more active and meets more often. Gillis noted he did some research through the Annual Town Reports on the Planning Board. Gillis noted that the Planning Board is a regulatory compliance Board and as a lawyer, regulatory compliance is easier to understand. Gillis noted there was an unexpired term available and wanted to see what it is like and if it works out OK, he will ask for re-appointment, but if not he will serve the two year commitment.

Webster questioned what type of law he practiced. Gillis noted Criminal work primarily, with some personal injury, but that he doesn’t represent contractors. Hardin questioned if there was any conflict for Gillis between his practice and this position. Gillis stated no, and if there were any, he wouldn’t have come forward for this position. Clark noted that site visits are required occasionally on Saturday mornings, in rain and snow also. Gillis noted he is a former marine and is used to snow and rain. Tufts, noting that the Planning Board will have a major role RE: growth management, questioned Gillis’ thoughts on the subject. Gillis noted that the growth management study was supposed to be ready in 1997 but stated he is glad that there were rules and regs clearly established by the Planning Board already. Gillis noted that philosophically he doesn’t want the Town to over-grow itself. Gillis noted he wants to see what effects economics will have on the Town. Clark noted the Planning Board’s rules and regs are updated every 5-10 years. Hardin noted that 600’ dead end’s are not permitted in Town mainly because of water distribution issues, and questioned if Gillis could live with this and continue this philosophy RE: water protection. Gillis noted he is cognizant of the need to follow the rules and regulations of all other committees.

SPECIAL EMPLOYEE DESIGNATION REQUESTS

Hardin noted that this is recommended by Town Counsel and the Town Administrator. Clark’s motion, seconded by Tufts, to designate as Special Municipal Employee, Gregor McGregor and Paul Lelito, under Section 17 of Chapter 268A, in connection with any work to be done on the MBTA project, subject to receipt of separate requests from each designee, and was voted unanimously.

SEPTIC PROGRAM SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT

Hardin noted that this is being withdrawn by the applicant.

REVIEW LIBRARY ARCHITECT SELECTION COMMITTEE

D. Richman, B. Ames, P. Hunt, G. Stafford, B. McAndrews in attendance.

Hardin read the failed motion from the 6/1/98 meeting.

Tufts noted he had watched the tape of 6/1/98 meeting and sitting back looking it was easy to see the problems being brought up, and he heard the comments from both the Selectmen and the Directors. Tufts noted he felt frustrated. Tufts noted the question is where do we draw the line to get the results done. Tufts noted the motion suggested leaves all protection for both sides. He agrees with the motion but wants to see how we can get through this quicker. Tufts expressed concern as to why the issues haven’t gotten resolved over these 18 months. Tufts noted that P. Hunt did a great job on the 4/24 letter and he doesn’t want this process to drag on any longer. Tufts noted he would support the motion but wants to know where we go from here on after.

Hunt noted she didn’t watch the meeting and questioned if this proposal is for the Designer Selection Comm. as set forth in the Selectmen’s memo, consisting of 1- Endowment Comm. member, 1- Historical

JUNE 8, 1998

Comm. member, 1 Library Director, 1-PFSC member, 1 Town Addition Director member. Hunt noted there has been no agreement on the Town Addition Directors Committee. She noted her thanks for the work done by the Library Directors sub-committee and noted that if there wasn’t so much business to get ready for the Town Meeting, this could have been resolved prior to tonight. Hunt gave a brief history to date of the process and the Mass. Anti-Aid Agreement. Hunt read from a prepared statement. Hunt noted that the proposed Town Addition Committee would mirror the Endowment Committee. Hunt noted that the first problem is that the Addition Directors aren’t set up so there is no group established to choose from as the representative to the Designer Selection Comm. Hunt noted that the memo was written to the Library Directors in April and there has been no response, even though the sub-committee had discussed the various issues in the memo since January. Hunt noted that she hopes that whatever the issues are that they can be resolved. Hunt noted that if the Library Directors don’t want the Town of Easton to have approval over the design process and construction process, that is a problem, and we need to know this now. Hunt questioned what the issues are with the Memo from the Selectmen. She noted she would welcome feedback and that she has no pride of ownership in the document. Hunt noted the Board needs to know what the issues are. Hunt noted that the Library Directors agreed to the Designer Selection Committee but aren’t in favor of the Town Addition Committee, but the Selectmen’s Town Addition Committee proposal pre-supposed the Addition Committee will be in place to appoint from. Hunt noted it is a very important point to be resolved and we need agreement with the Addition Directors Committee. Hunt noted that if the Library Directors want sole approval over design and construction of the addition, it is against the constitution anti-aid amendment.

Clark noted the need for the Addition Director Comm. in place to appoint from and thought Hunt’s memo would have been discussed with a response back to the Board by this time.

Tufts noted that the Board could appoint an extra person in the interim, and even though he doesn’t like taking out one piece of the puzzle, we need to move forward. Tufts suggested amending this so that the Board’s appointment is in the interim until the Addition Director’s Comm. is in place.

Webster noted the Board sent a letter, had decided on a process, and is concerned that there is no response from the Directors. Webster noted she wants feedback from the Directors on the memo first.

Goodwin noted that either we get there straight or in circles, but we need to start someplace. We can’t pre-suppose that other issues won’t be addressed. Goodwin noted she wanted to make the same motion as last week.

Hunt noted it is unfair to characterize the Board as going in circles, and that many hours have been spent on this issue and there is still no response from the Directors to the memo. Hunt questioned what happens to the memo’s proposal if this motion passes. Hardin read the motion from 6/1/98. Hunt noted that this motion allows for only four people, no Addition Director will be present. C. Boyle noted that Hunt’s memo dated 4/24/98 and D. Richman’s document dated 5/1 crossed in the mail. Boyle noted that this document didn’t get in front of the entire Board of Directors until the third week of May. Boyle noted that the issues from the memo that were discussed, were discussed by the sub-committee in Executive Session. Boyle noted that Richman’s memo lists the committee that the Directors agreed to. 1-Hist. Comm., 1- Endow. Comm., 1- Corp. Dir., and 1- Board of Selectmen appointee. Boyle noted there are 5 Town appointed Directors that the Board could choose from. Boyle noted the Directors haven’t discussed the Addition Director as a whole group yet. The "Concept" with an Addition Director would involve a change of by-laws with the Library Directors. Richman noted that 9 years ago to change the library by-laws, the Board of Selectmen added that they wanted to appoint Town Trustees vs elected appointees. Richman noted this is unusual in the Commonwealth as most are elected. Richman noted that the Public Library Trustees take their responsibility very seriously. Hunt noted that other communities have transferred ownership and control to Towns, but the Endowment Comm. wants the Richardson Building to stay in the control of the private corp. Hunt noted that Town appointees are on a private board. Stafford noted that she has always considered herself a public official, and that creating more directors is redundant and so typical of bureaucracy. McAndrews asked if the State can give grant money to a private library. Hardin stated yes, it is similar to the Boston Public Library situation. Libraries are special as far as State money is concerned.

JUNE 8, 1998

Clark noting the Fanny Holt Ames Endowment, questioned what the amount was, and where it is earmarked. Hardin noted there are a number of different trusts, some have strings, some don’t. Clark noted that the Library could use their own money to do this addition.

Tufts motion, seconded by Goodwin, to form an Architect Selection Committee to begin the process to hire an architect to work in tandem to work out the issues in the Memorandum of Agreement, primarily the ownership issue, and that if there is no signed Memorandum of Agreement the Board will not sign a contract for an architect, was not voted at this time.

B. Ames noted that the Corp. has $17M in several funds, $15M of which have strings to be used with the children’s wing. Tufts amendment to the motion, that the Selectmen’s appointee to the Architect Selection Committee is in lieu of the Addition Committee member until it is formed, did not receive a second.

Richman noted that during discussions of the Selectmen’s appointee, it was assumed that it would be someone already in existence. Goodwin noted that one member appointed by the Selectmen could be from the PFSC. Hunt noted the reason for the PFSC was to bring in an industry person with experience, not someone already involved with the Library. Hunt gave a brief explanation of the 5 persons as proposed by the Selectmen to be on this committee. At this point there was much discussion RE: the composition of the Designer Selection Comm. Hunt noted the process needs to be inclusive, not exclusive and that she recommends people outside of the already established Directors. Richman noted that the Directors are here as a courtesy but the role of the Library Directors is to handle the architect process. She again noted they are trying to include everyone in the process. Webster noted that it is the Selectmen’s role to protect the $3M but she also want this to be an open process.

The motion, amended by Tufts, seconded by Goodwin, to include as the Designer Selection Committee makeup 1 member PFSC, 1 member of Hist. Comm., 1 member of Endowment Comm., 1 member of Addition Directors Comm., and a Corp. Library Director, was not voted at this time.

Churchill noted that the 4/24 memo has not been agreed to by the Library Directors and that there are issues of control on both sides. Churchill suggested the 5th member be agreed to by both.

Vote on the motion was 3-2. Webster, Clark opposed.

LIBRARY DIRECTORS INTERVIEWS

HAZEL VARELLA - Hardin noted that H. Varella was out of Town, but is very interested in continuing on the Library Board of Directors. Hardin noted that Varella is a certified school librarian and a valuable addition to the Board of Directors.

KATHLEEN BOYLE - Boyle noted she was appointed by the Board for 2 three year terms, and is interested in being re-appointed to stay involved with the building project. Boyle noted she is a teacher at OAHS and the mother of two sons who used the library over the years. Boyle noted she wants to be re-appointed and promises to uphold the trust placed in her. Boyle noted her hope that the meeting in three years from now will take place in the new addition meeting room.

KATHLEEN GRIFFIN - Noted she grew up in Town and has been an enthusiastic user of the Library. She noted she had moved to Newton when first married and is now back to Town and was excited to hear of the addition project. Griffin noted she worked in business until last fall and is now a full-time mother. She hopes to offer new blood and ideas to the Library. Goodwin asked if Griffin is not appointed would she be interested in working on the Addition Comm. Griffin stated yes. Clark questioned what her opinion on the library issue to date is. Griffin noted she has seen people flying in circles and wants to see things go straight and to bring additional library services to the Town.

By roll-call vote, Hazel Varella and Kathleen Boyle were appointed.

Tufts - Varella, Boyle, Clark - Varella, Griffin, Hardin - Varella, Boyle, Webster - Varella, Griffin, Goodwin - Varella, Boyle.

Hardin noted that the Board will designate their person to represent the Addition Committee on the Designer Selection Committee prior to the Library meeting of 6/18/98.

JUNE 8, 1998

PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD INTERVIEWS - CONTINUED

DAVID BOCH - Boch noted he has served 2 1/2 years and would be pleased to serve another 5 year term. Tufts noted he worked with Boch on the growth management study committee and he is an excellent applicant.

By roll-call vote Colin Gillis and David Boch were appointed to the Planning Board. Boch for a 5 year term, and Gillis to fulfill the unexpired term of P. Yochim.

FIRST VOTE

Clark - Webby, Gillis; Hardin - Gillis, Boch; Webster - Gillis, Webby; Goodwin - Boch, Webby; Tufts - Boch, Gillis.

SECOND VOTE

Hardin - Boch, Webster - Webby, Goodwin - Boch, Tufts - Boch, Clark - Webby.

MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF NEW POND RESPITE INC. RE: LAND PURCHASE REQUEST

Attorney David Marsan, Paul Saulnier, Kathleen Garneau, M. Sites in attendance.

Marsan noting that Saulnier is a civil engineer, gave a brief explanation of the services provided by him.

Marsan noted that he submitted a brief to the Board today.

Saulnier gave a brief explanation of the proposed design for the new septic system. Marsan noted they went to ConCom to try to reach a compromise for a piece of land. Marsan noted this acquired land will be for parking so that the newly proposed septic system can be placed in front. Marsan noted his client is looking for support of the purchase of this piece of land from the Town. Tufts questioned if it is possible to have an easement to Town parking lot for the hospice parking. Sites noted this is not possible due to Self Help funds being used to buy the Town land. Tufts noted he is in favor of whatever it takes to transfer property at a fair market value. Clark questioned if it is necessary to advertise this land per 30B. Paicos stated no because the tax title disposal process is much easier than the 30B process and this land is eligible for that. Webster noting the need to satisfy the public purpose, and that it is to prevent contaminating the pond and to continue this valuable service to the Town. Webster noted her support of this and stated she is grateful that a compromise in the amount of land necessary, was made. Hardin noted this is dividing a Form A lot that is valuable to the Town and is effectively ruining the Form A lot. Saulnier noted the perc test didn’t perc on that lot. Webster noted that currently the Respite is licensed for 6-7 patients and the addition is to enlarge the family rooms and gathering rooms, not to add extra patients. Tufts noted he wants the Planning Board to approve this prior to the Selectmen.

Saulnier noted this is a total replacement for a failed system.

Paicos expressed concern that if this is a buildable Form A lot he didn’t know that until now. Paicos noted if this is in fact a Form A lot on a main street in Easton it is worth a considerable amount of money. Paicos noted that if carving this piece out destroys the Form A, he can’t recommend this to the Board. Paicos noted it would not be financially responsible to give this up for any less than fair market value through the 30B process. Paicos noted he would want Town departments to review this with this new information as a potential affordable housing lot which the Board of Selectmen is in favor of exploring. Tufts noted this is a policy decision involving everything, public purpose and protecting the pond, as well as financial protection for the Town. Tufts noted this is not just a clear cut financial decision. Clark read the letter from the Board of Health stating that this is not a viable lot in Easton, it is too small and there is not enough frontage. Paicos noted that based on what Clark read, he is comfortable that this is not a Form A, and is probably not buildable. Paicos noted that in light of the new information he will return to his original recommendation to sell a piece of this land to the New Pond Respite with the caveat that no more intensive use of the property be permitted and that current intensity of use be the highest intensity of use. Sites noted the ConCom is in agreement that if the compromise could be reached they will be in favor of this agreement. Sites noted this gives ConCom better entrance with less potential to danger of the pond being polluted. Sites asked that the parking area not be paved with impervious materials, and that he wants a buffer area between the ConCom land and the Respite land. Sites noted he is also in favor of no new or more intensive use of the land. Sites noted that the ConCom would oppose the land being put on the open market.

JUNE 8, 1998

Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster to go ahead with either 30B or tax title process to provide an approximate 10,000 sq. ft. parcel with the applicant doing the engineering review and preparing a plan with a deed restriction of use not being anymore intensive than already existing and a price to be at fair market value, based on Town Counsel’s recommendation, and to authorize an RFP to be prepared for the Selectmen to review to dispose of the land, and was voted unanimously.

POLICE CRUISER CONTRACT

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to approve a contract for three marked cruisers.

DPW BID AWARD

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Tufts, the Board voted unanimously to approve the DPW Bid for Ice Stop to Solutions, Inc.

TOWN ADM’S NOTES

RE: landscaping of town buildings, Paicos noted that the DPW Director will put together an analysis for comprehensive efforts.

Paicos noted the receipt of $3,024.00 in dividends from MIIA for this quarter. Paicos noted that for this year to date, there has been over $6,000.00 received due to the loss control efforts.

Paicos reminded the Board of the New Bedford meeting on 6/10/98.

RE: a question from a Board member on why Selectmen receive Planning & Zoning plans, Paicos noted that the Boards comments and questions are submitted back to the Planning Board.

Paicos noted that the savings for Easton through the SERSG DPW bids is $58,797.

SELECTMEN’S NOTES

Clark questioned if there were answers to his questions on the LSIS roof work. Paicos noted that R. Hill will be sending a written response to the Board.

Clark noting receipt of merit information for ‘94, ‘95, ‘96, asked for the merit information for FY’97. Paicos noted that he would need the Board to direct him to create this record, and again noted he is opposed to creating this document. Clark asked for this issue to be on the next available agenda.

Goodwin noted that she and Webster will be attending the New Bedford meeting on 6/10/98, and will provide a written report to the rest of the Board.

Webster questioned if the money will be encumbered for the Senior Citizen program. Paicos noted he will either get the program going or will encumber the money.

At 10:10PM, on Clark’s motion, seconded by Webster, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn to Executive Session for the purpose of Litigation and Collective Bargaining, not to return to Open Session.

Hardin in favor, Webster in favor, Goodwin in favor, Tufts in favor, Clark in favor.

APPROVED___________________________________

DATED____________________________________

JUNE 8, 1998

PAGE

SummaryInformation

Microsoft Word 6.0

Ï䌀üúøøøøøúøøúøøøøøúøøúøøøøúøøøøøøúøøúúøøøúúøøøøøøøø

üúøøøøøúøøúøøøøøúøøúøøøøúøøøøøøúøøúúøøøúúøøøøøøøø

üþþüþþüüþþþþ

þþüþþüüþþþþö

Normal

Default Paragraph Font

Line Number

Footer

Page Number

MS-Office<\\SERVER7\SMEEHAN\SMEEHAN\SELECT\SMEEHAN\98SELECT\MIN6-8.DOC MS-Office

A:\MIN6-8.DOCÿ@HP LaserJet 4 Plus/4M Plus

HPPCL5E

HP LaserJet 4 Plus/4M Plus

Times New Roman

Symbol

SELECTMEN’S MEETING MINUTES

MS-Office MS-Office