SELECTMEN’S MEETING MINUTES

JULY 27, 1998

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

NO PARKING ZONE REQUEST - RANDALL STREET

Hardin read the request and gave a brief explanation.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted unanimously to approve, as proposed.

APPOINTMENT - HANDICAP ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Hardin read the request, and noted there are several openings.

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted unanimously, by roll-call to appoint Patricia Dahl to the Handicap Advisory Committee for a three year term, to expire 6/30/2001.

Hardin - Dahl, Goodwin - Dahl, Tufts - Dahl, Clark - Dahl.

ADOPT AMENDED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE POLICY

On Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin the Board voted unanimously to table this issue until the 8/24/98 meeting when there will be a full Board.

At this point in the meeting Tufts left to meet with Special Counsel.

APPROVE SPECIAL COUNSEL WORDING RE: GOOD SHEPHERD LAND SALE

Paicos gave a brief explanation. On Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted unanimously, of those present and voting, the attached motion. (see attached). Tufts not present for this vote.

TOWN ADM’S NOTES

Paicos noted that having the Police report streetlights that are out is working well.

Paicos gave a brief update on the Rt. 106 Watermain project, roadway problems.

Paicos noted that the Grant Writer job description was never approved, and that he had given a draft to the Board members who had requested it.

Paicos noted that the law does not allow for a non-binding ballot question on anything but the Annual Election ballot.

SELECTMEN’S NOTES

RE: the letter from AnnMarie Condon, Clark noted he wants the Safety Committee to review the three-way stop sign issue. Paicos noted he will forward the letter to the Safety Committee and bring a report back to the Board.

REVIEW MECHANIC STREET NO PARKING REQUEST

R. Hill, D. Nolan, B. Malloy, J. Ingala, several other residents in attendance.

Paicos noted that the Board had asked that the neighborhood be invited and both residents and business people are in attendance.

Clark questioned 1) is this no parking anytime or with a restriction; 2) what is the rationale behind this request; 3) were residents consulted. Hill noted that the residents were the ones that made the No Parking request. Nolan noted that the petition for no parking is from Andrews Street to Sullivan Avenue, not the entire street. Nolan noted that the business people are concerned with no parking on the entirety of Mechanic Street. Nolan noted that the resident concerns are appropriate with safety issues. Nolan noted that the business people are concerned with the ability to do business. Nolan asked the Board to focus on the original petition which involves the area from Sullivan to Andrews Street. J. Ingala noted that parking space is now very limited with the construction workers and without the ability for people to park on Mechanic Street, he would be out of business. Hardin questioned if the construction workers could park behind NEG. Hill noted he has already asked the workers to do that. Hill noted that the traffic rules and regs. already provide for this no parking area, it is just a matter of putting up the proper signs. T. Goodale noted that when cars park in front of her house, she can’t get in or out of her driveway. Goodale noted the need for "no parking" signs to be placed. Goodale noted that if the Town parking lot was available this would not be a problem. B. Malloy noted the Town just needs to enforce the laws that are already in existence. Paicos noted that if signs are properly placed and enforced, it would resolve the issues/concerns of both residents and business people. Nolan noted that it looks like a gravel pit across from these homes. Nolan noted that if this was an exclusive neighborhood, this wouldn’t be going on. Nolan noted that the gravel pit operation should cease to continue. Hill noted he would go and speak with the construction supervisor. Hill noted that in approximately 1 1/2 weeks all pipes will be installed and the parking lot will be restored. Paicos suggested the possibility of fencing off the area used by the contractor. A Resident noted that it is not possible, because the contractor uses the whole parking lot. Hill noted he will go to the construction workers and contractor again and see if he can provide some relief for the home owners. Nolan suggested using the land at the railroad station for the construction workers. Hardin asked to see if this gravel operation could be done at the DPW property on Center Street. Tufts questioned the status of the project. Hill gave a brief status report. Goodale noted that construction workers are going down the one-way in the wrong direction. Hill noted he would speak with the construction supervisor and will also contact Officer Farrell to research this issue. On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Clark, the Board voted 3-0-1 to 1)enforce the current posing of "No Parking", 2)to facilitate the immediate completion of the project on the parking lot and to return the parking lot to its rightful use, even if it means going to the DPW property with the rock crushing operation until it is completed, 3) to address through the Police Dept., the issue of the construction workers going down the one-way in the wrong direction. Tufts abstained.

TOWN ADM’S NOTES - CONTINUED

Paicos gave a brief explanation of the quarterly dividend recently received from SEMHG, in the amount of $25,640, noting that these dividends are going to lower a predicted 2 1/2% increase in health insurance costs to 1%.

MEET WITH RECYCLING COMMITTEE, CONSULTANT RE: LANDFILL CLOSURE

R. Hill, M. Graff, E. Jacobson, J. Azevedo, B. Anderson, M. Clark (SEA) in attendance.

Paicos did a brief review of the memo given to the Board dated 7/23/98. Hill noted the Recycling Committee had been working on this for 1 1/2 years and have looked at many options. Hill noted he agrees with mandatory recycling and gave a brief review of him memo to the Board dated 7/20/98. Graff also noted that the recycling programs need to be mandatory, which is a point that some people may have concern with. Paicos noted that we already have a mandatory recycling bylaw in place. Paicos commended the Recycling Committee for all their work. Hardin questioned if the Board of Health was involved in these discussion and decisions. Graff noted that they have been copied on all reports and documents and had a member assigned to the Recycling Committee itself. Tufts noted he wants the Town out of the business and wants the users to pay the costs. Graff noted this program is a hybrid program of the "Pay as you Throw" program. Tufts questioned how the mandatory part of this can be enforced. Graff noted it is up to the Board as to how strictly they want the program to be enforced. Tufts questioned if there would be an appeal process for someone who doesn’t want to participate. Graff noted the need for some level of leniency for people to be able to appeal. Graff noted the need for people to be able to seek exemptions also. Tufts questioned if the tax roll list or census will be used. Paicos noted that it is not up to the Town to police and as long as people aren’t using another vendor they can get rid of trash and recyclables on their own as long as it’s not done illegally. Tufts questioned what would happen to condos. Graff gave a brief explanation of the current situation with the condos and noted that they would be phased into this new program slowly. Hill noted he was concerned originally with the price being higher due to so many landfills being closed, but he found that landfills and SEMASS have an advantage with residential waste and may lock in prices on a long-term basis. Hill recommended waiting on the condos being part of

JULY 27, 1998

this project. Clark noted that several years ago the Town voted against a single vendor program, and he is also concerned with people not being able to have freedom of choice when we go to one vendor. Graff gave a brief explanation of the problems in Norton due to not making their program mandatory. Graff noted the only way to get this program workable and cost effective is with mandatory participation. Paicos noted that at this point he needs a vote to bid this program and to come back with specific actual numbers to make further choices. Paicos noted we won’t know for certain if this proposal is correct until the RFP’s are put out, received, and reviewed. Paicos noted he wanted to have the results by mid-September. E. Jacobson noted that Dedham, Milton, and Brockton all use the one vendor program and it is the cheapest way to go. Goodwin questioned if the Town chose one vendor and the vendor didn’t work out could we get rid of the vendor. Hill noted we would have a performance based contract. Goodwin noted the situation today was totally different from the time of the Town’s last vote on the single vendor issue. Hardin noted that this proposal is to find out the cost, not to implement the program now. Hill noted that solid waste disposal contracts aren’t covered by 30B

On Goodwin’s motion, seconded by Clark, the Board voted unanimously to authorize issuance of an RFP, with the results to be reviewed and presented back to the Board for further discussion and decisions.

Goodwin noted the need to communicate with the townspeople on this issue effectively. Paicos noted the need for the STM in early - mid October.

MEETING WITH PLANNING BOARD RE: SITE PLAN APPROVAL

C. Kone, D. Boch, K. Percy in attendance.

Paicos gave a brief explanation and reviewed his memo on this issue dated 7/23/98. Hardin noted he doesn’t want this for grandfathered businesses, but for new businesses. Boch questioned how it would be known if a business is acting safely just because they are grandfathered. Boch noted being grandfathered is no guarantee for safety issues. Boch noted that for future planning and safety, the Town needs even grandfathered sites to submit to this review. Clark noted he always promoted site plan approval for each business, and also the need for periodic site inspections, but questioned who will do them and who is the enforcing agent. Clark noted the Board should check with the Chamber of Commerce RE: this issue. Kone noted he wants site plan review for all businesses, and there shouldn’t be a group who don’t have site plan review required. Kone noted/reviewed the objectives established for site plans and they should be for every site. Kone noted that he, along with the Planning Board, want to set this in motion but they realize this can’t be done overnight. Boch noted he wants to set up a rotating basis for licensed premises to be reviewed by the Planning Board. Kone noted that the Planning Board would work with the Selectmen to resolve all answers to the issues. Clark noted the need for a legal opinion on businesses that are grandfathered RE: site plan approval. Tufts noted his upset that this discussion is on the agenda without the business people being invited. Tufts noted that we should have business people let us know what they feel and how they think the site plan review/approval process can be improved. Tufts noted that the Board claims to be pro-business and yet a decision and discussion that affects businesses is on the agenda and they aren’t invited to participate in the discussion. Tufts noted the need to be open with the business people and he feels we could work out something agreeable. Boch noted that on the annual renewal request for information form, the Planning Board lists concerns with businesses that don’t have site plan approval and the Selectmen don’t use the information. Boch stated why bother ask our opinion and not use it. Paicos noted the Selectmen have been inconsistent with votes on requiring site plan approval. Tufts noted the need to be friendly to businesses with our process. Hardin noted his agreement that the Chamber of Commerce should have been present for discussion. Goodwin asked what would be sample site plan problems. Boch noted issues such as 1) insufficient parking, 2)no lighting at night, 3)entrance to roadway deteriorated to the point it is not clear, 4) having openings on premises so large people could fall, 5)entrances not clearly delineated, 6)parking spaces not clearly delineated, 7) no pavement at all, 8)any safety issues for both vehicles and people, etc.

Boch questioned if the Selectmen want the Planning Board to review site plans to determine the need for site plan approval, or to require site plan for all businesses prior to approval of licenses. Kone noted that the Planning Board tries very hard during the site plan process to work with each individual business.

JULY 27, 1998

Paicos noted the next step could be the Town Adm. going to the Chamber meeting along with representatives of the Planning Board and to return to the Selectmen with whatever dialogue comes out of it. Clark noted he would rather have the Chamber and the Planning Board meet with the Selectmen. Kone noted he doesn’t want the Chamber of Commerce to perceive the Planning Board is at odds with the businesses. K. Percy questioned approximately how many businesses are without approved site plans currently. Paicos noted approximately 20-30. Paicos suggested that he and the Planning Board meet with the Chamber first and then come to the Board with the discussion.

TOWN ADM’S NOTES - CONTINUED

Paicos noted that the Town Clerk has abandoned the idea of using the new school for a polling place due to the parking issues.

At 9:50PM, on Clark’s motion, seconded by Goodwin, the Board voted unanimously by roll-call, to go into Executive Session for the purpose of Litigation and Real Property, not to return to Open Session.

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

APPROVED_________________________________

DATED__________________________________

JULY 27, 1998

PAGE

SummaryInformation

Microsoft Word 6.0

ð㤀3㨀¶㨀Ã㨀Å㨀Æ㨀Ì㨀Í㨀Î㨀Ð㨀Ñ㨀×㨀Ø㨀Ù㨀Ú㨀Û㨀Þ㨀ß㨀æ㨀üúøøúøøøúøøúøøøúúúøøøúúøøøúøúøøøøò

üúøøúøøøúøøúøøøúúúøøøúúøøøúøúøøøøð

Normal

Default Paragraph Font

Line Number

Footer

Page Number

MS-Office=\\SERVER7\SMEEHAN\SMEEHAN\SELECT\SMEEHAN\99SELECT\MIN7-27.DOC MS-Office

A:\MIN7-27.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