all right noting the hour in the presence of Quorum I call this meeting the finance committee to order first up our citizens concerns would anyone in the audience like to voice concerns if you do want to please come up to this Podium and push the button for the microphone seeing no one coming up would like to move on to our first item which is a discussion of the dog park um portion of the CPC funding article please come and hold on good evening my name is Tom gispy I'm the current chairperson of the act and dog park committee and I have a few slides for yeah I'm sorry I'm working on that it's okay I think I need to log out of Zoom um I think you just need to be elevated yeah I'm sorry about this no no worries no worries all right there we go thank you Christie all right um and so there were a few emails around uh going around about one of the CPC items for this year namely the 100K request from the dog park and so I'm here to give you some more numbers answer any questions and uh provide as little or as much information as you need about this project so if you go on to the next slide very quickly the history over the seven years that this project has been going on includes establishment by the select Board number of forums and surveys to gather what the uh requirements were going through a process of selecting available Municipal properties and then through uh recent years securing a design Grant from a foundation that you will hear several times tonight the Stanton Foundation the design Grant which completely covered the design work allowed us to go on and complete a essentially a 90% design and with that came a series of cost estimates which were then required to feed into a Grant application to again the Stanton foundation for a $225 maximum construction Grant uh which has a town match requirement of uh 10% so that 25k the 10 % Town match was secured uh at a previous town meeting in 2021 questions history Etc okay so this is a quick overview of the current design the dog park is on the leand side the triangular piece this is on Route 27 Main Street uh somewhat across and down a bit from the public safety facility building right next door to the Kennedy prop the former Kennedy property and also the site of the act and Housing Authority new project mcmanis Manor which would be off and up to the right you'll see some preliminary uh drawings for a park on the leftand side there's been energy around locating what's called a senior park in that uh portion of the land there there's been some joint activities around making sure that designs were compatible and even uh comprehensive of storm water management plan for both properties but the dog park will be what you see on the left hand side in that black square box featuring both a smaller dog and also an all all dog area a little bit of parking we've researched parking very carefully and feel that the uh approximately 16 spaces there with some handicap spaces will be sufficient for the size dog park and for the population and then a couple of pictures which are harder to see about various uh facets going into that the goal was to produce an attractive Park Landscaping uh a sort of nature trail around the outside boarding around and then connecting up to the senior Park all right so where are we today uh the benefits have been discussed and pretty well uh documented Etc we do feel that there is strong town uh select board and leadership and citizen support that we've clarified and dug into over the previous seven years we do have a final design and the final design that's in place was assuming or is assuming that the town sewer extension project will happen although if that does not happen there are some Alternatives that we've researched already and that would not be we feel a deal breaker at this point and uh I mentioned the integration with the entire Main Street Camp campus various Town committees have taken a look at this have provided some wonderful input and been very helpful as we put this together I'll call it shovel ready we don't have a bid yet but we are virtually ready to go out to a bid but needing to wait for the sewer extension project to sort of finalize um but that's a whole different topic we would be ready and hopefully doing some construction starting this year late summer we'll have to see again how things line up up for that all right next slide starting to get into the numbers so if you take a look at the current funding sources and happy again to answer any questions associated with this I mentioned the design grant that we got from the Stanton Foundation completely covering the design cost and that's been expended and the construction the town construct match for the construction Grant is already set and in place and so the primary source of funding is that 225k coming from the Stanton foundation for construction of the dog park however a couple things to note about that particular Grant it was awarded a few years ago it's a grant that has been in place at that same amount at multiple um neighboring towns and projects for many years and so that's reflective of what was typical amounts for dog parks over the past perhaps decade or so but it has not been updated or um modified in any way and we're at this point having been granted the construction uh monies which is great but we have to have bids in by the end of April next year or Stanton Foundation has indicated that well you just didn't get it done in time and we're going to find someone else to give the money to the Friends of the acting Community dog park has been established for a number of years really working hard organization raising some of the numbers that you've seen already with a balance of uh 10K and then as we get closer to having bids and actually being able to uh put shovels in the ground they feel that they can bring on board another 30k through fund fundraising of various forms and so hopefully you can read all this the final uh funds amount of funds available is around 290k uh to be leveraged for the construction there's also an ongoing maintenance amount of approximately 4K per year coming from the increase in dog licenses that happened uh several Town meetings ago but that's going to be definitely eaten up yearly through maintenance fees um Etc next slide goes over the cost estimates where we are thinking today so we did that estimate of probable costs for the design Grant I'm sorry the construction Grant application back in 21 it was a 90% design it was a comprehensive cost estimate that included prevailing wages and material costs at the time there was no cost estimate included for storm water management simply because we didn't realize that we needed one at that point but we know we do now and so the design really focused on what we were calling a minimum to get a functioning and suitably attractive dog park up and running there's still a number of elements that might be added over the years but this is sort of the the things to get it all going and really the estimate at that time would leverage all of that 250k Stanton Grant and including the town match so that was you know looked to be a pretty doable even level funding between costs and uh sources of income or sources of uh funds at that point and then the private fundraising would bring on additional furnished by other FBO items um such as benches Etc and we'll talk talk a little bit more about that so the next slide brings you to updates onto that 100K um sorry 100K CPA application that we made one of the key drivers of that frankly is just the re recent construction bid costs uh have proven themselves to be higher that's proven in multiple recent Town Projects prevailing wages have gone up material costs have skyrocketed and we're while we don't have any bids in hand we really feel that the original balance between funds available and estimate of costs has really shifted where the funds available have been pretty much staying the same and the costs just keep going up and up and so it was time to um bolster the whole Project's equations by seeking some additional funding that stanson Grant as I mentioned was fixed 225k we had the storm water management costs that were originally not included in that um estimate of costs and then some additional feedback from various Town committees around accessibility and a few other items have led to a number of items that we've added in and I've got some details of that on the next page so if you break down the CPA request the construction estimates that we feel at this point including a 15% contingency is about 332k the items that we've gotten feedback on in terms of accessibility water and benches and these are mostly items that we plan to purchase ourselves not through the contractor to save markups Etc through contractors but still a number of items that are again associated with getting a dog park up and running is about 58k so that brings the total current estimate to around 390 the funds available are about 290 between the things I've already mentioned and that's what left us with 100 100 K Grant going through a CPA application no questions okay um the next slide is a quick breakdown of some of those items that we hope to purchase ourselves came from feedback and was that 58k amount that you saw as part of the component of the overall 100K ask um what happens if we don't get this 100K funding I think at the top on the next slide I think at the top of the list is the fact that we're not going to be able to do a dog park without this funding that level balance is just so far out that um we really do need that additional funding in order to make this an ongoing viable project so if we don't build a dog park there what is the town going to do with those properties um they have a long stored history but there's still um a bit of an isore and uh in a key location in the town sort of nice to have all that's going on with Kelly's corner but then just down the street having these big um slightly isore properties and it's likely that the cost of doing something with that would probably be falling on the town at some point I've mentioned the realities of the construction costs uh we look at it as without the 100K that would be a 25% reduction in the overall Project funding and we just don't see how we're going to close that Gap we'd be compromising a stated goal of the select board to figure out and bring on board an attractive dog park located at that location this has been uh a specific select board goal for a number of previous years and we'd be walking away from that and I do think there would be public dissatisfaction um there's a lot of support again for it the needs come down to people that have uh for various reason animals that are not able to be off leash in the open areas that we do have in act and a lot of people enjoy those open areas and the dogs are able to take advantage of that which is awesome and great but this features a fence in area where dogs can be safely off leash for their owners based upon their temperament Etc and so that brings me to the last Q&A slide thank you who has questions comments sorry you know the the grant just if if I could repeat what I think you said was it it was awarded in 2023 and if it's not used by April 2025 it'll be forfeit correct um okay um I'm just more of a a curiosity but you know when the town approved the the 2,021 um was that just like the application period from 21 to 23 because I have noticed that property's been un unused for quite a while now at this point so I don't think I fully understand the question uh just when the town approved the 25k I mean what was the the lag there just between the town approving the 25k if that is related at all to the Stanton Grant it is related okay Stanton Grant requires that the town Comm match 10% match so we had to work that through and include that in a previous budget go through town meeting to get that 25k set and only then could we go to Stanton with the design and apply for the construction grant for the remainder of the money okay so that's when town meeting 21 the clock started when that approval was given yeah there was still probably another year by the time we got the final design work done prepared the materials Etc and actually made made the application to Stanton one of the things that um affected that time period was the sewer issue where the house Authority was originally planning on using the dog park property as a leech field for the septic system and so we had to sort of continue those discussions and figure out and then the stew extension project came into being and so we adjusted so some of that Gap is just natural figuring out with neighboring things happening sure um and then maybe just on the I think the drainage you said was the new new piece the storm water part of it yes um I'm sorry if I missed it in the material but can you just outline what that what that additional cost is now sure so uh the design costs for that were about 10K and we've done some rough estimates for the increase in the construction costs associated with the storm water management that would need to be put into place into the dog park that also allows for a future senior park with some impervious spaces Etc so we didn't want to just focus completely on the dog park because the select board wanted the two properties to be able to work together a master plan was developed Etc so it was hard to estimate but we think the additional construction cost of the storm water management components uh is probably 30 to 40K above the original estimates and is it just to I apologize for really oversimplifying no that's okay you know going from 2021 to 2024 MH um it sounds like most of this 100,000 incremental is just the inflation really based around the original project plus the the storm water I that's a fair statement yes okay yes um yeah you know just for background I was one of the folks who asked to hold us up because I think I I remember it was it was you in 21 had we had brought this forward to that forward to us and IID asked at the time about the 25,000 saying is this it you know sometimes there's a more money that everybody says this this is sort of a one and done we're done with this and that was my hang up with 100,000 was okay well what's changed what's changed and um and to be fair some things Chang but I always like everyone to be aware of that and I think we all need to be aware that sure you know 25,000 as far as I know right now I think that should be it but you know if this goes on right and at that point that the reason I gave that answer was we felt that the con you know the combination of the Stanton funding with the town match plus the fundraising was pretty close to what we felt we needed to bring this thing online to the extent that you have estimated costs Etc that you know the difference was small enough that we could figured out we could make it happen but since that happened a couple years ago the construction cost gone up and we discovered that yes some storm water management will needs to be done and we got a little bit of feedback from other Town committees in terms of well you really need to bring some of these other things online we like we would like the water facilities to be better than just a a spet stuck in the ground sort of thing and all of those things combined brought us to that 100K figure and is there any wiggle room in that I mean I'm not asking like can it be cut but like what happens if this doesn't start getting built till spring of 25 and then we're um yeah I mean with as with any CPA project if we end up not using it all it goes back to the CPA so um and we're going to use the private fundraising up first the Stanton Grant up first and so if we get some really wonderful bids and everything else the amount that we actually need to cover the Gap from the CPA funds would actually be reduced and would just go back into that pot okay thank you Steve yes so um if you were to break the hund thank you sorry beg sorry I was looking down I didn't see her either um so if you were to break the $100,000 down into what changed 30 to 40 was storm water management which was not anticipated um there's another piece that's inflation and there's another piece that is for one of a better term bells and whistles things that you didn't have any original design that you now have yeah I would I would um humbly suggest that a bunch of those were associated with accessibility input so um people that are using it need benches to be able to sit Etc so um but whatever term a fair fair characterization whatever term we want to apply and you can use your own how much of the 100,000 is in inflation and how much is in accessibility things so we would have to look at it to see if the accessibility things were really trimmed back Etc because it it was a it was a set of recommendations they sort of all go together we'd have to look at how we break those apart and prioritize some things Etc um a you know a good port portion of the friends fundraising will be helping towards those things Etc so I I guess I don't have a really crisp answer for you well my concern is that you don't have bids and and um 100,000 may not be enough so I was tring to get a sense of how much you've allowed for inflation because I know if you don't spend it the money goes back to the fund for the CPA but if you go over sure what's the plan so um here's my thinking on that first of all the original um estimate of probable costs did have a 15% contingency built in um so we've kept a contingency in there even though it's tempting to just cut that out right um the guy who put that cost estimate together is our landscape designer Dennis Dale and he is very knowledgeable and has many contacts amongst the industry and so he didn't just you know pick a number and put in there he actually went and talked to a lot of people in terms of those being real prevailing wage conservative costs so I think if you were to apply whatever number you want to based upon recent bids a 10% a 20% factor that probably would still be in the ballpark so we have a I feel like we have a pretty good number from our original estimate and adding what you might typically think is an increase in those cost cost still leaves that as a fairly solid number I think we're I think that with the 100K that equilibrium will again be close enough where we can make this happen thank you anyone else oh sorry Jason you're muted you mentioned briefly that there was a separate topic on uh not just storm water but sewage uh what kind of a uh a potential wild card is at sewage and um um yeah how big a wild card is that are you gonna be back here in a year saying sewers did or didn't happen and therefore you need another 50 Grand no uh that's a great question so um I didn't want to take a lot of time going into that but we started off assuming that the dog park was going to be built on top of a leech field and so our designer did some preliminary designs that accommodated that we went back with the AHA and had them modify a few things because that that's a tricky property there's a lot of slopes involved in that property right and so we had to get those all worked out and it was a you know it was a good exercise a good effort wherein we were still able to accomplish a suitable leech field for the AHA septic system but leaving enough space for still a reasonable size dog park Etc so all of the elements that went into that original design what kind of fence how much fencing what kind of ground cover plantings the walk around the outside the list goes on and on those can just sort of be lifted from the 90% design that we have and sort of plopped back down into the revised uh grade and design when there's going to be a septic field under the dog park so the actual design layout parking lot location all those things are pretty much the same between the two designs the grading is different Etc and that means that the costs are going to be relatively similar so when do you anticipate hearing back from the town on whether or not this is going to happen because you I could also I can also first see a situation where you're waiting for an answer waiting for an answer waiting for an answer and then you either trip the April 2025 deadline or you it's now been long enough period of time that inflation has has bit you again when are you going to when are you going to say we don't what the town does on this we need to move forward with it or what are you going to say when are you going to get a when do you need an absolute firm commitment to make this happen so that you don't get disrupted there are a number of people in the audience that will make sure I get this right um but the last t uh select board meeting meeting where that was discussed indicated there's a tremendous amount of pressure from the Housing Authority project to know because they have a number of they're further along in terms of ready to go out to bid they have some Financial commitments to make Etc bottom line Town manager has indicated that they're pushing hard to get an answer to whether the funding Gap associated with the sewer extension project can be closed and how it's going to be closed by the end of May if it goes by the end of did you say the end of May correct go ahead David hi the um the the the sewer um uh extension was descoped slightly and went out to bid yesterday I believe um and we'll get a we'll know what responses we get in a matter of weeks um not months so um I'm not sure when the deadline is but usually it's three four weeks so uh so uh we we'll know in that in that time frame okay thank you Roland uh do we know if there's any Rock Ledge in there because I know we went to build the schools there's more rock ledge than what they thought was in there and that could absolutely impact construction yeah great question there's considerable Lo Rock Ledge on that property you can see a bunch of it sticking out um but fortunately a dog park doesn't require you dig down it's all really on the surface and so uh our landscape architect really um on top of things like that and he's expressed no concern about the minimal amount of sort of um cutting that has to happen in terms of the soil Etc running into surprises like a big rock ledge Etc Christine um so I mean I'll be honest I wasn't in favor of this dog park to begin with um this property has been the the gift that keeps on taking yeah we bought it yeah with taxpayer money and then sold it to ourselves with other taxpayer money at a loss and now we're meaning more taxpayer money to make the initiatives on the property take place at a time when we're incredibly budget strapped and seeking an override I have a hard time voting in favor of expanded services and expanded maintenance projects that aren't absolutely necessary so this one's a struggle for me anyone else as you can imagine it's uh we are especially looking close at the budget and um because you had said previously very honestly that the expenses were going to be covered it was sure we thought very important to understand why there was a need to come back y yeah I'm a little stuck on uh this myself Steve I could start the ball rolling if you wish Madam chair um I move that we recommend um article 9 section K I believe uh dog park second all right uh discussion um I would simply say in talking to my motion that um I don't want to see us lose $225,000 in a grant and and kill a project forever uh for the lack of 100,000 do we have any idea of what got thrown out at CPC because the CPC is a zero some game do we know what got thrown out to make room for this no lots of head shaking okay oh hold on we might be getting an answer here Dean's coming to join us so the uh as far as this the split on the money um there is no set split I think that uh since this would be considered Recreation most likely if we were going to if the committee was going to not fund the dog park I suspect probably some more money would have gone into the uh 53 River Street project which is also Recreation um and the possibility that a little bit more money would have gone into the uh open space set aside but you know we we didn't really have that conversation it wasn't an either or but uh that's kind of my sense thank you thank you for that um okay I guess it's time to take a votee then yeah you have to turn the microphone all right uh Greg yeah yes uh Christine nay chrisy I I going obain Steve I Dave I Roland I Jason he Adam Hi so the one two three four five six so the motion carries thank you all right next up we're going to go through the remaining town meeting articles I'm sorry to be clear for everyone who's waiting the finance committee has recommended that portion of the um CPC warrant article all right first up is uh the budget transfer we are going to continue deferring that we will meet before the first night of town meeting un unless we know a number do we um so article three which is the uh transfer of free cash in fiscal year 24 for the um uh funding of health insurance is that we are closer obviously is every day and week goes by to the end of the fiscal year um at this point is um the uh Tom manre along with the finance team um is the goal is for a 1% or less turn back but also is that we do need to ensure that um any fundings unforeseen fundings costs that come our way over the next few weeks example a breakdown of a vehicle that we do have the money in 24 so more on the the transfer of free cash for article 3 to come okay so we will plan on meeting immediately before town meeting um I presume a half hour unless something else comes up that we need to have more time to talk about um so that will be continue to be deferred um next up is the town Capital infrastructure design and construction borrowing this is you Christie is it yeah I read your list wrong I thought I was under I thought I had the dog park honestly which made it exciting when it was already taken care of um uh I have the most recent I have the warrant warrant I can read it please do that's right yeah no I've got it on from the website um 19 see if the money will uh town will raise appropriate from available funds or borrow all of the things related to incidental cost to take any action for the DPW facility improvements fueling station replacement of 2.6 million replacement of the 2009 aerial ladder truck for 2.1 million complete streets Prospect intersection Great Road sidewalks 1.2 million and storm water infrastructure improvements Bridges culverts 800,000 the good news is the town manager came to a meeting recently and and had a thorough conversation with us about these initiatives um so uh I don't have anything to add because I read the list wrong um other than that uh I uh move we approve these do we have a second second okay discussion Dave you know I I appreciate the town manager stepped through the fueling station replacement a couple times over the past couple months and you know I think he's given us all the information that he can give us on this I just I don't know where I I really kind of fall with this one um you know I the the article States and he stated that the existing tanks are close to the end of their useful life you know we pushed back a little bit on town going all electric with their vehicle Fleet this article says this will be need this Fuel Depot will be needed for at least the next 20 years and then it says this will accommodate the anticipated location for the new DPW facility um it it to me I know that we would we would discuss that separately but it does seem to you know Grease the skids a little bit on I think that sort of initiative that the capital plan as its laid out now as you know 15 million 15 million a couple years down the road for a new DP PW building I I don't know where I've fallen on this and I know this could just be a standalone thing if the town or finance committee or town meeting decides not to vote for a new DPW building um so I I appreciate that I just I don't necessarily like that it does gray that sort of argument a little bit um and it's more of stepping into that sort of that sort of issue um so my question is really more for the committee I'd like to just get other people's thoughts on this particular issue before voting um so the way I read that is more that this is being done in a way that allows the DPW to happen it's not going to duplicate effort we're not going to move it to this place and then do the DPW and find out that it needs to move no no I I I understand that and I think that's fair and how it is how it is stated and how it would be designed Etc and it could be its own Standalone independent of whether a new DPW in some form or another moves forward or not I think that's all fair um I I I like I said I'm I'm just being a little bit of Devil's Advocate of of reading this as you know as sort of a stair step into that um maybe I'm being a little extra sensitive because the the dollar price for that building is is going to be much larger down the road and is you just articulated like we're having debates about $100,000 dog parks much less of 40 to 50 to$ 60 million building the whole you know the Public Works equipment so um I don't want to have that discussion now I'm just open to whatever the committee is thinking each individual member hold on see Rand gets to go so on the the tank replacement you know the Fuel Depot they're in the ground now right they come up to the end of their useful life and things that are in the ground obviously the solo gets wet we've had tons of rain in the last couple of years things rot things rust if one of those tanks let go 2.6 million is going to seem like a bargain because that's going to become a super fun site let alone all the fuel that was poured in there it's going to be now on the ground not it's going to be useless to nobody because you can't use it you got to get it rectified you have clean harbit in there for not not for a day they're going to be in there for a long time remediating that and if it gets into ground water from there you get a whole another ball park no whole another ball game that you're going to be dealing with with so my opinion is replace it they're going to go above ground they're going to be a little better to monitor them they're going to be contained they're going to have containment systems around them so if they did leak that would be contained it wouldn't go into the ground it wouldn't have an environmental have a cleanup impact but you're not going to have an environmental catastrophe um and so that's my replacement on that the aerial truck you know as he said three years out we order it now it's three years weight maybe we get a little faster maybe we don't the longer we wait so basically what you're doing is you're locking up today's dollar for something you get in three years down the road see you know and three we know prices are going to be higher than 2.1 you're going to be 2.2 2.3 maybe um so it's something to consider um the other ones sidewalks I think are important I just question sometimes where they build because I do see people walking New Town Road cars are going by at 40 m hour and people in the road um and obviously storm water infrastructure improvements I've seen with all the rain you just see what happened in Dubai recently where they shut the airport down and cars were underwater the whole city was underwater um now they're in a desert I get that which you would think the groundwater would be soaked up we've had a ton of rain lately and if we keep getting more you know you go buy Ice House Pawn you can see it's at it's almost at the road level I mean it's it's High um so I think these are projects that have to be done and I think it's a good uh we should do it no Steve gets to go next I was just gonna um say my my two sens is um no I don't think we're Paving away for a DPW um building necessarily um this has to be done it's reached the end of its life you can say that about the DPW facility as a whole uh but I don't believe we have a choice except moving on this one as soon as possible whereas the other one yeah with inflation we could be up to $60 Million by now and I think uh that one's going to have to wait a while so um no I don't see it I don't see it as Paving the way Adam can we slide yours down just so this will reach thank you no no that's fine yes I just wanted to um comment on the Fuel Depot since um Roland was our liaison to the DPW committee and I went as a surrogate liazon because I was passionate about the project and I think it was Roland and I that suggested that we separate the Fuel Depot from the DPW project so that in the event that the DPW project failed we' get the Fuel Depot done there were two priorities that were identified that needed to be done more importantly than the DPW one was the Fuel Depot and the other one was just um perimeter safety features for the entire facility so um yeah so that's why we're discussing it now and uh yeah by moving it it makes the future DPW project easier in terms of logistics but I don't necessarily feel like it's going to grease the skids as you were um I think that build that building project is just going to have to stand or fail on its own and that's why the Fuel Depot is separated from it yeah um I guess I would also um sort of counter the argument and say that any um crisis point that requires faster action that we solve possibly even moves the DPW down the road right if the Fuel Depot is about to go and they're like well we have to do the whole project but if we solve the Fuel Depot maybe we can you know push things off a little more but I would also extend since you brought up that we're electrifying the fleet that uh the school buses are not going to be electrified anytime soon and that they use the Fuel Depot as well this is in partnership with the schools that's you're all making a very persuasive argument thank you I actually don't have anything to add to this conversation this is this is one where uh the new guy is listening intently because I'm learning all about all of this stuff from you so um I also thank you for your uh for your information anything add Jason just U I agree with everything that's been said I just don't want to hear I do not want to hear in a couple years we've already done this it's already part of the larger project we might as well keep on going uh the statement of it the DBW building has to stand or fail on its own is Paramount and I definitely don't want to hear that uh we've already been standing in this checkout line for a while we might as well stay so we want to make sure that's loud and clear I think it's been said by multiple people okay I think we're ready for a vote then yes six town Capital infrastructure design and construction borrowing all right so let did I turn on my microphone grg I Christine I chrisy hi I'm a yes or I Steve I Dave hi Roland I Jason I Adam I motion carries all right Greg we're up to your um vehicle sales and rental overlay District okay so 10 this article um has developed a long way since when I first uh saw the presentation at the uh board um select board meeting and uh that initial presentation had um two concepts one of which um would have prohibited um uh auto dealerships being added along Route 2A and the second one which um is a much more moderate uh compromise uh is the one before us um I did the due diligence on this and went and talked to some of the auto dealers on 2A they are not concerned about this because basically their grandfather den and one of the uh the general manager at the Acton Chevrolet that I talked to on this issue basically admitted that what they're all looking at is the new development up in neog and how that is likely to impact um their business as well as the town of Acton in the coming years uh he said there is a potential and again you you can't predict the future but there's this is what they're watching out for of uh 2A becoming a mini Auto Mile where um there may be uh efforts to turn 2A into what Norwood is now where you got a lot of auto dealerships up and down the street that people can go shopping by visiting one after the other he said obviously that creates a traffic problem and so interestingly enough even from people who are in the business um the fact that the uh select board would be able to uh deal with these on a um you know a hearing and could add the kind of conditions that got added uh at neog to to make that development um uh less monolithic and um uh more uh INF fitting with u with the community seems like a prudent step so uh with all that in mind uh we discussed this at the economic uh development uh committee um and uh the committee reports it and uh as s Leah is on um I I'll report that to you they've also taken votes for and against a couple other articles that I'll I'll mention at the time but I also personally support this so I urge this uh finance committee to uh support this article would you like to make a motion so moved it has to be a motion to recommend not recommend no action I think is an option or recommendation no recommendation or defer pardon you have to move to rec move to recommend I move to recommend there go do we have a second second you got that Scott cat I'm sorry this is the hardest part oh just go ahead I'm sorry it's time for discussion I just say of course the people who already have the business would love to put in barriers to somebody else to come in that's the whole purpose of being first one through the door that's that's the that's anti anti- capitalist so it's anti- competition uh of course of course they want to block other people from coming in that that that increases their Monopoly or near Monopoly on the area um I don't see how an economic development committee can be for cutting back on the ability of businesses to move into town um I don't I don't understand this than this being nimm so I U I will be voting against this both here and at town meeting cor do you want to fill on that sure um if the only person I had talked to was Acton Chevrolet I guess maybe I left the m impression I talked to many people um but it included the business community and um the the citizens by the way and the survey that was done of over 600 citizens in Acton basically indicated that the public wanted this um um I checked the survey methodology um and it was representative of the entire town not just people in around neog so from that point of view I think it reflects what the community is looking for um and this is the most moderate proposal and without at least some select board ability to uh review a proposal um we could find ourselves um not with economic development yeeha yall come in whatever um but um economic development that would actually uh provide us with the tax base that we're looking for you'll you'll you'll hear that in the next couple of recommendations that we have and this seemed like a uh modest moderate approach to encouraging businesses of many sorts um to uh locate up and down 2A uh in addition to um the auto deal deers and by the by the only thing that the current auto dealers were mostly concerned about was signage was they have no idea what the new uh business is going to do in terms of signs and whether or not their signs will be sufficient and to me that's boy I remember in the old old days 40 some OD years ago we had a signed by law in acted now we don't have that anymore do we we still do oh good we still do okay well guess what you need a permit for it don't you so to me this is just in keeping with what we've been doing in this community for a long time anyone else okay let's take a vote all right this is was a motion to recommend a motion to recommend uh article 10 vehicle sales rental as described uh Greg I Christine I Christie I I say no Steve I Dave Roland I Jason n Adam I motion motion uh carries to approve article 10 thank you next up is article 11 amend zoning bylaw and map for the asit river overlay district and powdermill Zoning District uh Greg this is also you yeah this is a um project that both Acton and the town of mayard have been working on collaboratively uh to make sure that the uh development down near where the current uh Stop and Shop is um uh also U basically is synchronized uh between Acton and mayard uh such that we can protect the the water particularly uh along the aspit river um but also to continue encouraging uh development so it is an overlay District um uh and um the hearings have been held um uh the economic development committee thinks that this is uh good for economic development it also um basically uh protects a a a water source and is coordinated with another community and has been in the works for about two years so I recommend uh we support this uh article could you please remind me how in overlay District Works um interestingly enough there are already regulations in place what an overlay District does is basically say on top of all the existing protections that we have in terms of um oh let's say flood plane um uh in housing um uh zoning things like that uh what we're going to do here is um basically add the same uh protection to auto dealerships that uh we are adding up along TOA so if you if you need to change the purpose of your business you need to get a permit I thought there was something about an overlay that was um not David um that was optional that if you chose to work with the overlay or not so an overlay District you get your choice of the original zoning or the overlay zoning but you have to meet all the requir IR ments of one or the other you can't mix and match so you can meet all the original zoning or all the overlay zoning right so there's two completely separate sets of rules someone who wants to build there gets Choice a or Choice B but you can't mix and match the rules that are in some from column A some from column B so pres this is about in part about limiting vehicle it it adds that uh among other things that's one piece of oh that's okay that's not for the overlay specifically that's just part of the bylaw change um that is actually in the Baseline okay uh to change to the Basel oh that makes more sense I couldn't figure out why one would choose to comply with an overlay if you had the choice of not and have here good thank you very much yep go ahead Tera so it's my understanding that H terara from Mass uh also I uh believe that it would allow multif family housing on top of the stores uh it's my understanding that it's over a thousand units would be allowed in these different districts all told I think I calculated I went parcel by parcel I don't have my numbers with me like 1,200 uh 70 so and it's three stories above the floor uh the commercial commercial on first floor and then three stories of multif family housing so um that effectively would mean it would be 75% of the you know depending on if we had an impact study we would know because that's what that's what cities and towns do uh they would know before they change the zoning what the maximum revenue from uh residential versus commercial would be but it's my estimate that' be 75% since it's bottom floor and then three stories so four parts three parts residential uh so please don't forget that when you decide because it's not just about car dealers there's a lot more to this um and you know when we um Talk talked about the costs of storm water lights Paving sidewalks the developer never gives you all that okay you find out later that all these of costs are borne by the town and so I think it's really important to understand what you're getting into when you add a thousand more housing units on those Parcels thank you so much I hope that you do not vote to recommend this at the very least uh have no recommendation and look for the impact studies that I'll personally be producing before then thank you do you want to make a motion Greg I still move that we recommend this do we have a second second all right um discussion okay let's go ahead with our vote you're up first Greg I Christine I Christie I I Steve I Dave abstain Roland I Jason n Adam I the motion for the overlay District passes you could check sorry I was just trying to streamline eventually the situation here um thank you everyone next up is the next article which is one of Adams this is zoning byw and map MBT overlay District can we please talk about 11 and 12 at the same time and then I'd like to bring up 12 First and vote on it and then come back to 11 how does that sound hold on we just did we just did sorry 123 sorry my bad so I think um broadly for both of these um zoning changes uh what's important to note is that the town has spent two plus years multiple Outreach meetings multip whole sort of public forums um to identify positives and negatives in the Zoning for um requiring for the MBTA but also the Zoning for the South Acton Village so let me now jump to the South Acton Village portion so you know the town's done a fantastic job of identifying what are the negatives of that Village um what would the people who live there and travel through there like to see um generally people want more foot traffic people want more opportunities for businesses there whether it be coffee shops for the railroad what have you and so this zoning um District change uh seeks to address those and make it hopefully inviting for potential developers or new buyers there to develop in a way that fits within this infrastructure um it was pulled out separately to keep it away from the MBTA and then the MBTA becomes an overlay on top of it and um I think that what was definitely identified uh with the South South Acton Village is that failing one developer coming in and buying a whole bunch of property and developing a thing a community like what happened in West Acton Village it's going to be very difficult to address all the issues the entire District so um this this bylaw change seeks to try to achieve that even if it has to happen one parcel at a time and hopefully hopefully it will work so obviously the biggest issue down there is parking you can't have businesses without parking so uh but at any rate um let me make a motion to recommend Article 13 the South Acton Village uming by law okay discussion if I may certainly the um Economic Development Committee discussed this article as well and uh recommends uh supporting it um basically they said that the zoning changes are intended to Spur commercial development investment in South Acton Village by incentivizing commercial activity on the ground floor the changes also provide more flexibility with regard to parking requirements and the collective use of parking facilities so in the uh immediate uh shortterm um this is a good step what the economic development committee is also in the process of discussing is somewhere between now and next year um trying to get a longer term economic development plan for the town so that instead of dealing with this sort of uh piece by piece as they come up that we we have uh a cons consistent idea of if we let things happen as they do uh we may continue to be a 90% funded by homeowners and 10% by businesses for the foreseeable future if we want to grow um the percentage of U the tax base that goes to commercial uh it would be great to have a overview of that but since we're not going to get there until maybe a year from now um this is a good step in that direction Christine um I I think that this is a a well investigated and thought out plan it was possibly originally spurred by you know the state's uh requirements um on that note I'm not willing to walk away from our risk walking away from grant funding from State um and um I think that this is as Greg pointed out there's a lot of upsides for development in that area and we need more business availability if we're going to move the tax base uh clarify Adam we're uh talking about South Acton Village this is not required to pass for the MBTA Zone in correct that is correct so this is not I would still I would still say that this is probably spurred by that other article because we are focusing on this area as a whole due to being forced to look at it for the MBTA rezoning so I think they're kind of hand inand i'm but I'm just saying voting this one down does not affect grant funding in any way sure okay yes correct sir yes correct and the reason that the South Acton Village was pulled out as a separate article or separate zoning um change was so again sort of like the depot versus the the DPW facility uh the the South Acton Village zoning seeks to Spur economic development at the same time protect the historical Heritage of that Village um before the MBTA overlay uh gets dropped in this similar area uh I watched a bunch of the planning meetings on this whole area of topics um one thing that I don't know if you know the answer to but there apparently is a requirement that if you convert a house into multif family you need to live in it or some such they're taking away the residency requirement I cannot remember off the top of my head where that discussion landed and yeah I I was actually curious why I I wouldn't surprise me if that is a requirement in the village um because that would spur what the the various outreaches identified was that people wanted more local homeowners living in the village more pedestrian traffic you know more of a village feel okay and um I thought there was something about the parking parking is a big issue there so in order to convert things to commercial as they're hoping especially with some of these it's kind of like you could do first floor commercial on some of the lots and I remember there being some picture where they like took away some of the the sidewalk or some such or they changed I don't know that there would be sidewalk taken away um that was certainly one of the issues that we identified um it's remarkable to me when we did the walkarounds of that district and I live in South Acton um how similar that street layout is to West conquered And yet when you go into West conquered versus South Acton the look and feel is completely different like they're not even similar but they're they're really almost identical in terms of setback and all of that um the biggest issue is that the streets just aren't really wide enough to park and have a driving lane um and you can't pick up the buildings that are there and just force people to to back them up and so I think the hope with having businesses on some of the ground floor Lots there and being able to park under some of the ground floor Lots there would alleviate some of that it's a tough District to to make better but I think these these the work that this committee put into it was about as thorough and thoughtful as you could get in terms of not lifting up buildings and backing them up off the street and there's so much historic you know buildings down there that just they just can't be bulldozed they can't be moved they're they're important so I'm a little stuck this feels kind of like the Kmart lot again where um but we're doing it across a whole District we just don't know what the effect on actual housing will be like a lot of the argument against Kmart was going to be when when they try to get the zoning Chang to mixed use the idea was that you'd have ground FL ground floor commercial and then residential above and and we as a committee had a lot of concerns about um how much additional strain there would be from introducing that much residential into the town this is would be spread out over more time this isn't potentially one development that has a whole bunch of units so there is a benefit from that it could just be a natural part of the Town growth um I don't know where that puts me but I'm much less comfortable with that aspect of it and that that falls over to the MBTA zoning like I said this one doesn't um have any grant funding tied to it so that said there is no Financial benefit to doing this particularly can you sway me well I think the B the only uh Financial benefit would be if we can spur some commercial growth in that area and this doesn't give any incentives it doesn't um go and ask Commerce to come in and put in businesses it just makes sure that the zoning is available for somebody who wants to put in a business if they would so choose um it also but like I said it also protects the village as it stands there was a lot of care taken with um Building height and the building height on the low end of of say like um School Street versus the high side of School Street and how that you know the for View and Zoning or sorry for View and and height uh I'm I'm I'm stumbling over my words here a little bit um but the the takeaway is that it's very thoughtful planning in my opinion having been part of it and I as somebody who lives in that that District um it's as good like I say it's as good as you're going to be able to hopefully spur the right kind of growth without somebody coming in and just bulldozing and starting from scratch to give people what they want to give the community and the right kind of growth is a mix of commercial and residential yeah it would be mixed use because I can tell you when I go through there I have dreams about things you could put in and there's just not the infrastructure correct so even though none of this seems like it's going to fix that the reality is even though this zoning is going to allow for it somebody creative has to come in and actually do it it doesn't it's not going to make it happen so how was this not changing the zoning to increase multif family housing um I'd have to look at the details because it's been a while since I looked at this but um I I know it's been pulled out of the MBTA zoning but it it seems like it's effectively it's giving by right divisions into multifamilies I don't want to speak out of hand and and say the wrong thing but my recollection is that it doesn't really change the existing multif family that's already on on those lots I believe I could be wrong one second uh so it trade is prohibited it says in the summary it would also allow for multif family housing with more than four units in one building by right where a special permit is currently required okay sorry we are looking at po again spread out over time not one development but potentially significant increase in housing units well it's a question of how many Lots does that affect um and so perhaps we should shove this are we meeting again next week no but we are meeting immediately before we can certainly put it off until then if we want to get more information we could um and then identify specifically um which and what the count is I mean we'd be looking at at worst case this gets back to our discussion at the previous meeting about just what are the the metrics and the costs that we think matter for growth um can I gave a sense of the committee on how much this information might actually change your vote no I can't get a sense or Madam chair I refuse to give you a sense I'm sorry was that I I refuse to give you a sense Roland do you think your your opinion is dependent on the uh no I think we need I think we need to find a little bit more information you want more information that's what I ask I I I think more information is better you know making a decision now and then saying oh we were wrong or something like that you know the more information we can have the better we can be informable when making our recommendation okay Adam do you yeah and so that will be my responsibility to come back so let's make a um the specific questions we want to know versus current zoning how many additional units okay and an actual count and can I have you ask another question as well something that's just hanging out over my head I don't I didn't see it in the more maybe I miss it is there any protection is there anything keeping a developer from coming in taking a property building a storefront with three units above it and then going oh GE Shucks I couldn't find anyone to to fill the storefront but I got three PID paying tenants upstairs good question okay Adam the trick is going to be that we're doing this before town meeting so you have to be as concise and informative what else would we like to know are you specifically questioning um Article 13 yes 13 okay and okay um my understanding is Article 13 does not involve open Lots open undeveloped Lots or there are very few of them being very different from the situation with the MBTA zoning where you don't know like there's just there's so much more of a question mark so let's add that to the question marks how many open Lots how many B Lots or empty lots yes a couple months ago one of the things I was hoping one of the things I was hoping for was a a current I think you already mentioned it but a what's a current bedroom count and what's the by right new bedroom count terara very quick yes just the percentage of tax that would come from commercial versus residential because effectively you're buying by giving them the right to to build uh multif family housing on top of the businesses you're buying you're you're subsidizing that commercial business so if it's 75% in residential then you're effectively losing money and paying for those shops which might be empty also the uh actum water district will want to know because they wrote a letter of concern about that intersection and about the water infrastructure there so you may want to hear from them before you decide to we I I count I counted I went parcel by parcel the other night and I counted about 800 units so subtract that from what exists but I can show you that analysis if you like I'll show you how to do it yourself if staff won't do it but uh thank you and by the way same thing in powder mill you just voted effectively to subsidize business with all of that housing because you don't know how much the tax would be coming so so the goal laudable goal is to increase the percentage of commercial but you just voted to recommend a proposal that would reduce the percentage of commercial so thank you for listening and thank you for it looks like you're deciding to get more information and i' be happy to work with Adam and Jason knows a lot about stuff like this so hopefully we'll get more information thank you so we've got uh question mark additional units question mark whether a new installed storefront would be able to sit vacant which I'm assuming would be um and then how many empty l affected and then a potential bedroom count current zoning versus changed zoning um any other questions that you'd like me to bring back uh if you could find out more about the water district oh water district it's a tall order for a short period of time thank you Adam yeah thank you yeah no worries um okay so um we can just table that we don't need to make a motion to table it until the next meeting okay so article 12 I think we're talking about MBTA article 12 the MBTA zoning law so again a zoning law whereby the town has really proactively put their best foot forward multi- years of studies and discussions to do what they need to do to bring an article to town meeting that would allow the town to comply with the zoning law so that at least from the town's perspective we're not failing compliance and not not complying we have the opportunity to comply but it really is up to the voters right that's what it's Al ultimately going to come down to um I suspect the only holes you could poke in this zoning article is that we've maybe over complied by a little bit versus what the minimum requirement is there are surrounding issues that aren't specific to this passing or not passing that I think are worthy topics to discuss um I think certainly myself and other people I've spoken to really feel like we're being extorted um we all know that this is the state trying to help the city of Boston move their population density issues out into the rural areas um I've also spoken to people who live down in the Boston area they love this MBT housing law because they would love to alleviate some of the congestion that they have down there so those are sort of the spous topics that um that surround this and then the other topic that surrounds this that concerns me is and I think Jason has brought this up on numerous occasions I think this is just the beginning what are they going to come back with next and personally I just find it difficult that the state is sort of extorting the towns into this by saying do it or else we're going to punish you in my opinion that's the definition of duress um where's the carrot right what are they giving us instead they're they want us to take all of their Urban growth um but they're not giving us anything for it and what's next Once We comply with this what are they going to come in next those are the sort of extra questions that are on my mind with regard to this particular article it's difficult for me to say whether we should recommend it whether we shouldn't recommend it or whether we should make no recommendation it has been um thrown out in public meeting that perhaps we should put it off until closer to the actual deadline which is the end of this year and maybe have a special town meeting in the fall um when we have kicked the can down the road and seen what's going on with the other towns that are fighting it to see whether or not we have a leg to stand on to fight it I'm really on the fence on this one about what to recommend I'm happy to take discussion Greg yeah the um it's it's ironic that this is um being presented as a uh we're being forced by the state to do this the original law was proposed by then Governor um the Republican Governor uh W not not weld no um Charlie Baker it was a bipartisan uh vote um and um the issue as I understand it is to address something that I think uh all of us see in here uh which is housing affordability we have not as a state um provided enough new construction and uh the dir of properties that are available basically in a supply demand curve have have become a situation where the average home is now what $900,000 um um I've talk to um Town employees here in Acton who can't afford to live here now I don't know that this proposal is going to solve all that in one f whooop it probably won't but what I do know is that um there is a long standing concept um of uh the tragedy of the commons if we let every town try to solve a state housing shortage um it's not going to get solved and what the uh previous governor and the legislature came up with was a um an attempt to do that now that's the background there's also then what we're going to call the specifics yeah but what about this particular proposal here in our town um so I understand there are huge forces um back and forth there's a lot of context to this one um uh my guess is we're not going to uh be able to focus on the uh narrow issue of let's look at this article we're going to probably get caught up in into the the broader subjects but um uh I guess I want to try to maintain some balance of the yeah but this is this is somebody's good effort and it seemed to be a bipartisan good effort at the time to tackle a big problem that hasn't been solved in decades Christie I just want to say how much I appreciate Greg's comments because I'm a Negative Nancy and I'm thinking about the negative aspects of this how it uh how I hear from people who talk about the negative aspects of this but there are positive aspects of it too which Greg has pointed out I'm going to step in there and point out that we are supposed to be voting based on the financial impact and our financial guidance to the town not whether not the more not the socio economic all the other things that we are thinking about in our heads but that's for our personal votes not what we're doing here Jason okay a couple of things to address your direct statement about this being Financial um we don't no cost of this that's part of the problem we've got 6 we're going to have 1,600 by right new uh new uh uh residences well we have not done the work to know uh what the what the cost is going to be in police fire water and school children the five the five um the five metrics The Perennial metrics that I mentioned in last week's speech um we've been given one side of the equation we've been given the extortion number it is is absolutely Statewide extortion um so we don't we we do not know extent of the economic U duress that can come that can come from this state Force issue um this is there's no reason to believe we'd be bringing up an article like this under any circumstances were it not for uh for the BTA law um 40b at least was Statewide NBTA is using a gimmick of saying if because you got public transportation you're going to have to share an un un share of the burden of trying to alleviate what is indeed a Statewide problem if if the purpose is to low lower housing costs everywhere that's kind of brutal um if the purpose is to have more housing that's fine it should be shared across across every town in the Commonwealth furthermore there should be some accounting for towns that already have a large popul a large percentage of uh multi-dwelling Condominiums Etc that things were not taken into account um under 40b uh and are not being taken under account under this as well um the unintended consequences of this are currently uncalculated and I I won't say they're calculate a b but they're certainly uncalculated and approving this until we absolutely have to until we are truly forced at the at the end of the legal legal gun which is what we are under we should be putting this off as long as possible and hope that one of the other towns that's got a large enough uh lawyer retainer to be able to fight it can fight it on our behalf um there is there is no other way to slice this other than uh extortion from this state it's not even an unfunded mandate it's because they're actively taking stuff away and while while we have done a good job of identifying just exactly how much that extortion is going to cost us in the in the uh prevailing grants that we've received over the last number of years there's been no uh similar calculation to what the increased population is going to cost um independent of what it does to character of the town just straight up what's it going to cost from water sewer fire police access in the schools um I realize we can't say no but God I hate this and I hate being extorted and I would love for us to push this the last possible moment um and I really wish we weren't bringing you to town meeting at all why can't we so I'll be voting no just because I can't I can't stand being extorted uh why can't we say no you've just explained that if we say no we if we say no then we are then we are going to have to direct we are by definition directing the town manager to fight a legal battle with the state or we say no due to lack of information that has been requested there is as you just very eloquently said there is no concept of cost if this does pass only cost if this doesn't pass I I don't think the and this is me uh conjecturing that's always a dangerous thing I think if we vote this down at town meeting on laudable grounds of we want to know exactly how many uh how many extra beds we think this is going to be before we before we commit and that's a perfectly loable goal um my fear is that the Attorney General is not going to read it that way they're going to say we are not in compliance we have failed to do so and we will immediately be in Jeopardy of all of the punishments that the state is so readily dled out to Milton and accounts um I I appreciate that there's some sentiment that this has been worked on for a long time we do have the option of going to our select board and saying we don't have the information we need to recommend this please provide more and make a fall town meeting personally I would love for the select Court to pull this from the stound meeting and wait until the last minute they 've done the work if we're going to be forced into it I guess we're going to be into it but why first of all why put out 1,600 units when we were only on the hook for 1380 I don't like that either [Music] um yeah I'm voting against it but man hate it's hard to fight Authority isn't it Steve yeah so um I'm I'm move by all your Don kot is uh tilting at windmills um it's the state they do this all right they have unfunded mandates all the time this is a new wrinkle on it uh they're not telling us to do something they're not paying for us they're telling us to do something or they won't pay for something they give us now so for those of you who are afraid of $100,000 for dog park we're talking maybe $2 million a years in Grants in a time when we are strap for cash um the other side of it is do we know what will happen we can conjecture we can look at the worst case scenarios if you want but I'll give you one uh statistic uh what how many units will be required to be built if this passes what will the state require us to do zero zero so it's $2 million worth of zero as we know now I agree I don't know what's coming I don't know what's coming next but something may be but I don't it's not zero well that by law it's not zero but by right it's it's huge what show me your numbers I will well how many are required how many absolutely will be required by passing I'm not I agree with you it's zero it's zero can we all agree it's zero y can we also all agree will not actually be zero in one year two years and five years yeah I I will give you it be greater than zero at some point uh but I don't know what that point is I I don't know what the answer is I know what we'll lose for sure so I'm I'm gonna so wasn't quite finished uh I would be happy to see this booted to a special town meeting in the fall because there's more answers we could get but if we got to vote tonight I'd say vote for it uh so talking 2 million a year in Grants um the water district meeting that I attended back in December I think it was was talking about if we hooked up to the MW that was going to be hundreds of millions of dollars and if I mean I I haven't seen a good indication of the Water District's view on this have have you seen those any last I understood they didn't have numbers to know potential support on this so I am I am concerned at that also I'm sorry also given the EPA just said zero P which could push us in the other direction and that we do have these 0% loans covering our filtration system that I don't know what they're going to do about passing so the water district would have to follow state law uh and calculating the impact and that's 110 G per bedroom to Jason's point of a few weeks ago at a planning board meeting can we get a bedroom count well no you can't get an exact bedroom count because we don't nothing is required to be built but some things will be so we can't get an accurate we could we could do a probab ballistic forecast of how many bedrooms might come out of that you could calculate the water but right now there's not enough data to do that so uh like I said I I'm happy to agree to boot this to a special town meeting but we don't call special Town meetings and we don't sue the state so if we're going to deal with it tonight I'm voting for it Adam I have another thought on the comment of if we have to deal with this tonight which is that we could vote tonight to recommend this it could pass a town meeting towns fighting this could get a foothold and win we could come back next year or we could even hold a special town meeting in the fall with a new article to undo this zoning we could always later on bring up a new article to erase this zoning if we felt we had a foot to stand on um the the key feature is that it's really up to the town's people whether or not they're going to vote on this but you're right our recommendation helps to sway or disway that click point of order Tera yeah just the grandfather once you pass it uh they have seven years so all they have to do is put a plan in on a napkin and they get it so we're talking hundreds of units for one parcel up at do Heights just and I have my other comments I have other answers for you and relative to the court cases too and my recommendation which will keep us out of court I think okay Adam the hard job Falls to you this is tough I I I cannot decide personally what I think is the financial best case scenario other than to make a motion to recommend it oh I pardon if you haven't made that formally yet I have an idea please speak up um is it possible for us to stand up and say we do not understand the financial implications of this there are bad ones and we just don't have the information to know the scope that would be called a no recommendation yeah and we have said that in the past we've made no recommendations because we don't have enough information to understand the financial impact just for reference yeah I don't it feels a little bit of a cop out but I I don't feel like I have enough understanding I I appreciate that from what Steve's saying it might be impossible to have enough information it's difficult because there is a financial impact of it passing versus not passing there is a financial impact of us meeting the deadline versus not meeting the deadline what's and that's negative that's an immediate negative impact what is unknown is the long-term total impact in Net Present Value which is that's a big number to drive a bus through the high and low end of that I mean right off the bat it would take a long time for 1,600 units to change hands um but there is in my opinion and other people's opinion people who were on the committee for this opinion that there is a case where there's a number of lots that will be impacted by this where the owners of those lots the moment that this passes if it passes just won the lottery unfortunately winning the lottery doesn't mean that cash in right or fortunately in some ways did you have a thought I don't know um I think it's fair to make no recommendation simply as an act of um we know our hands Force but that doesn't mean we have to sign off on it um I don't know that I'm totally against the rezoning but I also am worried about the long-term financial implications I'm reading um you know about many many communities that have no idea how they're going to afford the infrastructure that goes along with this um it's a like it's an unfunded mandate it's a it's a it's a multi- multi-million dollar unfunded mandate potentially um to that a little they do not need if there isn't sewer capacity we don't need to up the sewer and water I don't I did not hear that about water um I presume we have to connect people to water or else let them put in Wells which cause other problems yeah you know that's a good valid question which is just because it's zoned by right doesn't mean that you can necessarily get the project finished if there's no water to hook up to but I don't know the ins and outs of how that would work um yeah it's possible our select board member might know yeah David would the zoning does not require us to provide Sewer Service doesn't provide the require the water district to provide water service doesn't require the kcom to you know pass approve of any uh Wetlands boundary uh issues it doesn't require any permitting or anything all that all that is still required um and so that the water district may not I will point out though that in the past decade um uh our our population has gone up by 6% um our water use has gone down by 16% so if we take that we should add another 6% and lose another 16% no obviously that's not the conclusion but it's not obvious that we run out of water all right so then it's just the general infrastructure cost of a town expansion potentially population schools fire police all of that and I'm not terribly worried about that so honestly if that's the case I lean more towards recommend you have 30 seconds so the um first of all the water district has to provide the water if they have it so they can't say no so it could be all used up and then when you want to put an addition on then there's no more water but what I was going to say is that there is a case that's going to be decided in May on whether the state actually has home rule Authority to excuse me is uh is constitutionally allowed to do this so I was going to suggest that you Rec do no recommendation send a memo to the select board ask them to put it off to the fall so we know what that case says in May because once you put the zoning in again they file immediately as soon as the ink is dry there's also a question about this super majority versus majority simple majority and there may be a case against Acton uh relative to it can't be a simple majority so there's a lot of problems with this and I liked your idea of putting it off to the fall um and the millions a year for Grant how many of these Grant dollars have we gotten that actually haven't cost us $2 or $3 per Grant dollar so please be careful about assuming that the grants are just free money thank you mam based on the discussion I would make a motion to make no recommendation at this point on 13 or 12 second 12 all right any further discussion okay we're going to vote on no recommendation Scott please go to Greg I Christine I Christie I I for myself Steve hi Dave hi Roland I Jason I Adam I motion to have motion to make no recommendation to make no recommendation passes okay we've deferred Madam chair May I a may I make a completely different motion certainly uh I move that the chair of the finance committee be directed to send a letter to the select board asking them to delay to pull this from consideration at the annual meeting do we have a second second discussion it's a $20,000 meeting Adam it's a multi-million doll decision this is probably worth a $20,000 meeting and it might be worth waiting till some other towns get through some litigation anyone else okay are you hold on Scott's writing you ready Scott right as I've ever been uh Greg no Christine no Christie I I'm gonna say yes or I Steve I Dave abstain what what did Dave say abstained abstained abstain Rolland I Jason I Adam I vot that motion passes okay so we are asking the select Bo to pull this article article 12 MBTA zoning from the annual town meeting um to be and for them to hold a fall town meeting at which we can discuss it with further information including seeing how the litigation is going and we should have a list of things we'd like to know yes please I realize I just voted I Tobit but I just thought of the question which is whether or not it's worth it to have this as an article for discussion to start to it needs to be voted on yes okay so it would be an up or down vote it wouldn't be educational thank you um Mr who seconded the recommendation Scott that's a very good question I thought that I think it was Roland I voted that's a good reason I we're going with Rand thank you okay um so to back this up this request what questions would we like to have answers to maybe the same questions that we just had uh for the previous one uh what is the current bedroom count um what is the by right maximum knowing that again I stand behind what my speech last week the maximum number is not necessarily a value but we did have it uh would like us to ask uh how many seats we have in the class classrooms and school and in all the schools combined so that we can have some identity of when we're going to hit capacity and potentially have a building problem um let's just let's ask the water district to weigh in um is this is this in a sewer district at all I don't think I think part of it is but not all of it correct so we're going to run out of sewer capacity at 10% of buildout 20% of build out where where's the trip wire where we hit a major postal step function in having to build a new having to build up our infrastructure well if we could ask selectman Market select person um David Martin to come up again I have a question on sewer capacity Mr Martin would you please join us hi so what is our current uncommitted sewer capacity South Acton and how much of this area is covered by the South Acton sewer plant it it depends on whether Powder Mill Place actually gets built right um uh with powder mill place we close to the the the maximum you know uh but if we're without powder place we have actually quite a bit of um headro um Potter Mill Place we've been promised um uh every year now this is the third year that it was you know they were going to come back and build it but it hasn't happened you know late last year it was supposed to happen they were going to come back La last year didn't happen now we're a third of the way into this year it hasn't happened so I you know it's your guess is as good as mine as to whether that would happen so the premise is if power Mill Place went forward then uh we would have very limited ability to accommodate any further development uh in South Acton yes and a number of these Parcels are not on the sewer anyway and so you know any um project would require you know a septic system or um um local you know uh sewage treatment system whatever the Board of Health requires thank you I'm sorry can I ask one more um Tera no more um it is my vague recollection that if a property is in the sewer district and files the things to start being built um that it has by right access to the um the sewer even if there isn't capacity for it am I just making that up in my head so if there really wasn't capacity uh we would probably have to uh Abate their betterments um that's just my guess right um but um an individual like a single family home which is the most mostly the case in the existing sewer district is hundreds of gallons a day it's it's but that's not what we're talking about I'm I'm just imagining with the multi family oh so I to uh if um P place is built um then there's very little room for a multif family I Me Maybe I misunderstood your question there's really not extra capacity for a multif family development unless there still a lot to do it by right yeah but oh no okay I'm sorry now I understand so I if if there was for example let's say four um uh single family houses on four acres um and that gets turned into U um uh a development with 10 units an acre or something um that requires um a privilege fee and the the sewer Comm Commissioners can deny that so um if those if one of those four single family houses they can hook up by right they've already paid their betterment provide and even that's by if that we have capacity right um uh we cannot hold back capacity for somebody else right if if we have capacity we have to give it on a kind of a first first serve basis um but where it wasn't bettered that way um that's a decision for the sewer Commissioners okay so if someone has been paying the betterment but their septic hasn't failed yet the system hits capacity you're saying that they they get their money back effectively on their betterment so I that's a court case and I don't want to predict the court case um but again in that case there is so little for one house it's so little um it's really unlikely that we would be within 300 gallons of the top right so okay thank you yes please Jason can I make a U hopefully it's a friendly amendment to your request um instead of going for the uh maximum number of uh bedrooms um based on what I heard at last week's special town meeting um a probable range is a more reasonable request and my concern here is that one you come up with a number like a maximum uh it gets weaponized and um it then becomes the boogeyman that uh eliminates rational discussion so I I would be more comfortable with a probable range um because that is the reality we're likely to face I agree with I agree with you um as I said last week um calculating the maximum number is a is strictly a a math exercise the probable range is of significantly more um probative value the problem is uh who's going to be the one to be the Arbiter of what a probable range would be um so yeah go for it go for the probable range um I think realistically if we take the five perennial limiters that I me mentioned in the speech last week and find the trip wire on each of those uh each of those um major infrastructure topics uh I think it will become much more Illuminating as to what percentage of Maximum possible becomes um truly prohibitively expensive so we can do it either way you can either uh find the lowest common denominator trip wire of the of the the five most common um infrastructure issues or you can come up with a probable range and then over I almost said overlay sorry uh you can then take that probable range and compare it to uh to the the the current capacity either way any thoughts um could you send me that list of information or write up how you think um what your questions would be on those topics yep I'll send you the last paragraph of the speech and the uh the other questions that I want answered okay thank you so I will send a letter to the select board I believe that we voted and passed that okay meanwhile we have our no recommendation for if they choose to continue with this article in the annual Town Meeting thank you um we are now down to authorizing the long-term lease for 19 and 21 Maple Street so the town manager was kind enough to explain um some of the the Dynamics here um essentially the gist of this is um when the town bought this property a couple years ago um they they weren't allowed to enter into a long-term lease so it was a lease shorter than three years and by passing this warrant article it would allow this property um to be used um for a longer time frame greater than three years and the town has been soliciting uh looking for tenants um with these rfps and as you can see in the latest revision they had three parties that were interested in the 21 and 19 Maple Street and um they reviewed those and would like to proceed forward with the act and food pantry as a tenant on this property um a little really brief history is this lot is immediately adjacent to the train station in South Acton and was initially purchased for $1.1 million to provide parking optionality um for um commuters using the lot um pre pandemic the lot um and all the surrounding satellite Lots were at capacity and additional parking was in great demand and that Dynamic has changed pretty dramatically I mentioned a couple weeks ago that the lot um is is about half the revenue it was sort of pre pandemic and so I think you can think that you know capacity is is probably close to to half it was half of what it was pre pandemic um I think on the surface this is you know something that is obviously good to put this property to use and get a tenant in here um but you know a little bit of background is that $1.1 million to purchase this property um was borrowed um through the bond market um at a rate that was like 4 and a qu% but the actual payment over the 20 years is um75 to $85,000 a year over the next 20 years to pay down that debt that was borrowed um this debt service is currently supported by the commuter rail law um which is more than adequate to support um the servicing of this debt um but by bringing a tenant longer term onto this property um that those payments those lease payments would not go to Ser um to to service the debt now I think it's a little bit of a philosophical point but the issue is the town manager commented that the tenant that they're considering wouldn't have the ability to even make the the Le the the debt payments as it was so in another way the lease would be below $80,000 a year or some amount of money um on an annual basis and so in any case the the parking lot would continue to uh subsidize the uh the debt Debt Service long story short um uh if you read the article I think the wording is very traditional for any of these sort of lease articles and the the terminology is on such terms and conditions as the select board May determine you know for all intents and purposes the lot could be leased for free um just from a technical perspective I don't think we would have any way to oversee that or supervise that is the warrant article would let the town manager and the select board to um not to to under any terms it doesn't say the best economic terms it doesn't say what's in the best interest of the town it's just as to what the select board May determine um so that's my background on it um I don't want to make a motion just yet I I just would like to get the committee sense of the idea that we now the town has debt outstanding of $1.1 million which is paid by The commu Rail lot fund again more than adequate I generally like the idea of The communter Rail lot supporting anything needed to the station or just building up for any additional enhancements to the station this is independent of that so I want to be clear that I'm not not picking on the you know anybody food pantry or any other the potential tenants but they would obviously be independent completely of any sort of funds flowing there so if this lease was approved um technically a tenant could pay nothing and live live rent free while the communter lot subsidizes that that debt payment um so would love to hear um feedback from the committee um uh as I said it's a little bit more of a philosophical issue um I I was part of the South act and train station committee and recall a lot of the issues and challenges with parking there over the years certainly appreciate the Dynamics have changed we don't have a crystal ball to look into the future so um for all intents and purposes the the the fund this the commuter ra lot fees are just growing and there's excess cash there that's to to be used by the as a town Seas fit Etc so any yeah this is another one of the articles that the economic development committee supports um by the way they do oppose one so I don't want you to get the feeling that it was all yes yes yes um but we haven't gotten to that one yet um and they uh basically think that the space has potential to become a Vibrant Community Asset spur positive development in the area in order to realize the potential any lassi will will need to make a substantial Financial investment no meaningful improvements will likely be made if there is only an option for a three-year lease therefore the economic development committee urges a positive vote to enable um this to go forward um anyone else uh Dave do we any idea of whether putting the food pantry in or any other business will lose parking spaces no um I I'm not privy to the rfps or any part of that um if you're familiar with the the the layout um you're asking in in in an indirect way probably an important question which is what sort of improvements would be done to the property or capital investment requir to get the property up and running for them to utilize it um I think John mentioned the town manager mentioned that the back of the U property is now used for an ambulance storage um for a service that's in the area um so to answer your question no I don't know what changes would be required or proposed or more importantly who would pay for them um I don't think I think any approval to spend money on the property would be coming to us um I was actually trying to ask whether whether this was going to cost us money by removing spaces that are available for Community my understanding is these were least spaces these were Special Reserve spaces I think that's that was to be correct I'm wondering if we're going to be losing Revenue oh yeah so they they're unutilized now I think people I mean there there's a number of spaces in like the fire station and uh next to across from exchange Hall which are in the church there that are pretty wide open oh um but these are specifically premium spaces presumably some spaces will be needed for the food pantry so are we giving up the revenue of the premium spaces in order to provide parking for the food pantry I guess simplistically if that demanded return would return yeah for sure has it hopefully within 10 years that this being a longer term lease yeah so and that that's our fair point and I you know what what the crystal ball is is like could we regret this five years from now for sure that that that could happen I don't know I can tell you about working from home and commuter habits and Steve yeah I was just wondering what are we getting now for are the spaces being used is is this would this lease be incremental revenue or uh would it be a loss I I don't know I mean the as I said it's a terms that they they could determine presumably it would be greater than zero so there's some benefit um to allowing this to you know I don't want to complicate it but I mean bring up the South Acton um you know Village and you know to development of South Acton I don't know if this is appropriate to consider in the context of that it's beyond the scope of this article for sure R so from my working perspective is a lot of companies are still stay in hybrid and that's their intentional goal for the for the future mine eventually is going to be going back two weeks a month that's it said that's where they stop once Co hit you know everybody's commuting then all of a sudden that just dried up overnight right there's nobody want into the office anymore and they talk about that in downtown Boston with tons of vacant office space and companies are like my buddy's company they disclosed his office you're all you're fully remote that's it and a lot of companies are doing that because they find it cheaper to not have the employees go into the office because they don't have to pay for office space my wife's companies have their office space so that's changed yeah they were premium spots that you had pay for but there's also if you're looking at that property from Maple Street you're looking at the train station that property is in front of you there's also a lot to the right I went by the other day dropped off my wife on Friday there was one car in there and there's probably 20 spots wide open train station was wide open School Street there wasn't any cars in it so I think that's more typical than not these days and if we we go into a long-term lease you know getting some kind of revenue for that instead of building not being you know being vacant right now albe the ambulance is a smaller building it's a garage but the building next to it it's not there's nothing in there we're not we're we have another asset that's not generating any income or being used for anything for the town so I'm in favor of this article and going forward with it you know it it's for something like the food pantry they need long-term stability for their service that they provide to the community especially for those lowincome families uh my concern is still then what's the limit on the number of spots if the lease says that they get the whole lot then it makes no sense for the commuter to keep paying for it and we're losing money on the system this for me is partially down to we don't we don't have the language and I appreciate they negotiating lease but I would love to have some understanding or limit to how much of this can be handed over you may want to ask all David any data for us so my my guess is it's somewhere in between but again we haven't negotiated yet and that's why you know there are a lot of things to consider here so right now these spaces are really underutilized they're basically not used um part of that I think is this model now is no longer appropriate because even for people that are going into to Boston they typically don't go in 5 days a week and why pay for a space when you're you know for 5 days a week when you don't go in 5 days a week so we we're going to have to look at that right going forward to see how we can get maximum U utilization the the the main lot is approaching full on on some weekdays and so we may get not start to get spill over and then we need we'll need to figure that out so the uh the food pantry or any tenant that we would get there would need some spots how many what percentage you know we don't know yet it's also the possibility that we would have more than one tenant right the the ambulance service is currently a full-paying tenant and we don't know whether they would stay in addition to the food pantry or whether the food pantry would displace them so there's a lot of lot of work to do here um since it's a long-term lease and things are changing you're saying specifically the lots are picking up I know my husband's company now has people having to come in um it it's a shift from fully back to at least part-time in the office there there are some changes um I presume the lease will involve a certain number of spots being available to them and um not comfortable personally with out having like just recommending something that has no guidelines on it well it's a chicken and egg thing right so we can't right now we can't negotiate a long-term lease right and so we're asking town meeting for the permission to do that if town meeting says no we can only negoti appreciate a short-term lease right so um on the flip side of it my recollection is that um Mr mandera told us that the lease was so low because anyone who goes in there will need to improve the property and that the renter will be paying for those improvements I think that that's right okay this sounds a little along the lines of the tax increment financing effectively it's a l increment renting financing except we're pres you know we're presuming that this all works out with the nonprofit and if it does it's a nonprofit right so um it's also Town property and we're not selling it and so no one will pay taxes on it in 10 years if this all gets approved um is it simply back to the select board again to negotiate the next lease okay thank you did you want to say Maran uh yes thank you madam chair so to Mr Martin's Point is that in your question of the premium spaces so we have the flexibility of re reserved spaces in relation to daily space spaces and at a recent select board meeting knowing that the reserved spaces are the least used to Mr wellinghoff point is that we are doing a pilot program where we have transferred five of the reserved spaces to daily spaces um anticipation to be able to bring in more revenue on a daily basis so that I think helps solidify that point about about your question about taking away from reserved premium so if indeed it does come back we have that flexibility to put it back the other way my concern is that when this lot was bought and when we made the recommendation to buy it it was because it was going to pay for itself specifically the parking there and I don't want it to get to the point where the parking everywhere else is paying for this lot which is entirely parking for something unrelated to commuter rail so that's for the select word that would be my main concern um did you want to make a motion no so we are currently [Laughter] deferred um yeah I mean it it there's there's there a couple challenging and I think you're you're you're you're spot on with just sort of the optionality of three to five years from now where are we with this demand for the commuter a lot I mean it was I'll just punch that button again it was like the location was perfect it's right there um and so it's on it's also on the inbound side as opposed to everything else which is on the outbound side so if you have a reserved spot like you would pay to come in in a hurry and boom you're right there um but on the other hand it's doing nothing now um so and then you know the debt the debt is another sort of sticking point to me um for me um I don't know this is this is Big Time Madam chair as a representative of the finance committee and duly appointed to cover article 14 to authorize long-term lease 1921 Maple Street I make a motion that the finance committee recommend this article second thank you raay all right any more discussion okay Scott could you please take us through the V Greg I Christine I Christie n nay I'm sorry I didn't think I said the first one in the microphone I put you down for two uh Steve hi I skipped myself I can come back to myself Dave I Roland I Jason I Adam I I for myself I guess I'll go with the group sorry the motion passes to recommend this article 14 is I'm not going to repeat everything Dave said uh next up is the um citizens petition gas powered leaf blower phase out I would like to point out that we have in the past been very comfortable making no recommendation on citizens petitions and I would argue that from my reading on this it has an unclear at best economic impact Financial impact Adam I would disagree with that statement say this has a very specific and very high Financial cost to the town Dave i' agree okay the economic development committee recommends that we vote no on this and if you want I can give you the reasons if I can hold on for one second I apologize to Christine this is her article if she wouldd like to lead the discussion you don't have to no that's okay I would like to hear what the committee has has to say um so this is something that is being done in many surrounding communities it is a phase out it is specific to the um you know the worst of the worst as far as the impact of the uh gas powered leaf blowers um environmentally noise all of that jazz um I think that one of the financial impacts and I don't know where Adam is going with his statement and I look forward to it is is is the impact on you know the environment um can't be discounted um as a owner of a very quiet very odor free electric leaf blower on a property that's granted half an acre or less they're very effective and work fantastic and they are not annoying uh and they don't shovel greenhouse gases into the environment but all that being said that's not a monetary reason so I'm very interested in the economic development committee and I'm very interested in what Adam has to say and I want to hear what the committee says Adam I love the spirit of this article I do um the timing is way too short um for homeowners that own their own equipment like myself that have literally invested thousands of dollars in very recent years in this kind of equipment um the timing is way too short I will get nothing when I need to sell that that's a direct Financial impact there is not an alternative electric product in the market for what I need for my lot which is 097 Acres which means I don't even get to use any equipment because I'm you know a couple tents under that one acre um if and when the large enough power battery pack leaf blower becomes available on the market it's going to cost me a freaking Fortune because everybody's going to be out buying them at the same time the thing about this article that kills me for the taxpayer is that this has to be enforced don't make rules that you're not willing to enforce and it says right in the article that the police will enforce this how many FTE is that going to cost us because you can't hire police just for the time of year when you want to stop this from happening so we're going to have to add I would guess at least one if not two to three FTE to the police department for all the people that are going to be calling on all the people that are going to be breaking this regulation um I think this has a financial impact on the taxpayers in the minimum of $100,000 a year to our bottom line Greg yeah the um Economic Development Committee didn't look at the environmental issues because that's not part of their uh Charter but what they did do was look at the economic development issues and they came up with two points uh one uh the town's current budget crisis requires a sharp focus on essential town and School Department Services rather than adding more regulation that will require time attention and monetary resources to implement so that's that's your point um so they agree with with that the second one uh he said trying to scroll down quickly and it's not working there we go is an an interesting uh observation which is the market is already moving towards the increased manufacturer and sales of battery powered lawn equipment um lawn Moors as well as leaf blowers and this article only deals with the leaf blower but uh the Market's moving that way Home Depot has said that they expect about 85% of all the lawn equipment sales that they will make in 2028 to be uh batterypowered but uh they also uh indicate that it's going to take them that long uh to deal with the battery issue uh to get enough batteries available that uh people can purchase in addition to talking to um the economic development committee I spoke with some quote landscapers who are singled out and uh they get uh phased in a year before uh residents do virtually all of them are small businesses uh virtually all of them are not prepared to make um the same kind of trade-off you have to do as an individual homeowner which is I've got to I've got to get rid of this stuff within the next year and make an investment in a whole set of new things um and the concern is you need enough batteries because again the infrastructure is not fully developed yet that you can basically drive in and use somebody's uh home to to uh Power what you're doing and um a concern about theft of of the um lithium batteries apparently they are a hot item right now so ironically we're probably going to get there anyway and so why require it it seems to be a burden that falls on small business people um who are not in a position um to take that on that doesn't seem to be a particularly good Economic Development policy on top of the fact that yeah we would have to pay to police it so they're against it and so am I Roland so kind of also to Greg's point is you know then what's going to come next we're going to do snow blowers and lawn MOS and everything else I have riding a laot more luck if a friend gave me his old one um but I look to have replace mine with electric about $6,000 not going to happen um so Battery Technology is still not there I have an electric leaf blower but mine plugs in it's not quiet I'm not going to get rid of it the police can come and yell at me what whatever and thinking a little bit further out what about the town town has Leaf flowers that they use in the in the crews um you know how's this going to impact the town we we have to go and buy all new leaf blowers for the ceter and all these other ones is we keep making things more and more stringent and they're not necessarily green because you get a manufactur is battering you got to use lithium lithium has to be mined so there is still an economic impact to the to the world really and unless you're and then you get to charge these things unless you have a solar aray on your house you know buying 100% acting green they're burning fossil fuels so I'm not in favor of this article at all I know somebody just said to me goes mean I just want to spend about $1,000 buying a Lea battery you know backpack for his property he's like now I got to get rid of it you know so I think you telling you say hey well yeah great let's just do this we'll put this law in effect and there's an economic impact at everybody in town too so something you get to consider so I'm not in favor of this Scott haven't said much but this one this one's really close to home for me um I have electric lawnmowers and I have gas powered leaf blower um and good friend of mine owns a hardware store and when I was buying equipment he said you can do the electric mower but the electric leaf blower versus the commercial gas powered one they are not the same and I would happily take my gas powered Lea L to anybody's house and compare it to electric powered one and see which one Bo to leav more the issue with the Electric Lawnmower works for me but I go through five batteries to B my LA and I can't imagine running a business and using batteries to you know they they would have that mobile charging which generat generates to which would be run by gas right um like I I literally burn through five batteries and I I argue with my wife because if I don't cut the grass when it's um low enough I can't finish the lawn in a day I have to charge the batteries and I have to finish in the next day so I think the battery charging is and I have like the steel like the same thing that these guys are going to be using um batteries and they I they probably might use bigger ones which would take Lear to charge I just think it's it would take I think it's I think it would put a lot of expense on the small business and I think the assumption that that electric and gas is equal across the board is I don't think that is accurate yes um the select board was moving on this and it was not moving fast enough was my understanding which is why it came forward as a citizen's petition I personally I'm comfortable with the select board thinking through it further Steve well I was just going to add the point that you know you talk about individuals having to buy new equipment or small businesses having to buy new equipment well the small business side of it just passes on that to the um customers I live in a condominium that has 60 Acres and 277 units we have a landscaping contract um it takes them probably 10 or 15 guys several days with blowers to do the fall um cleanup um that's going to have to be passed through to the residents and condo fees so it's not without its economic it may not be taxation uh but it's not without its economic consequences for the residents Adam wanted to put a point on that which is that we're not talking about like a 20% increase in the cost of Commercial Landscaping we're probably talking a four-fold increase in the cost of landscaping for people who pay landscapers I was looking at um we have a riding lawn mower I was looking at what it would switch cost to switch and it was on sale for $5,000 the one they had um so it's I don't I don't think the market is there yet it's again a little chicken egg an egg though that you need it I I just think the the phase in time is too short it's too short that's the issue I love the spirit of the article it needs to be a 10year plan not a next year Jason anything to add just that I'm happy that I actually get to agree with the EDC for the change yeah you you'll get to like them okay would someone like to make a motion article sure but I'm happy to have somebody else recommend I recommend do you recommend the article yeah oh no I recommend defend Greg's fired I re I rookie mistake rookie mistake I I get at least one rookie mistake okay I I move we oppose move to not recommend move to not recommend whatever it is can we have a second second okay uh Greg uh now wait if this is a move to oppose then I move I to oppose oh man okay I yes I'll up stain Christie I I am I Steve I Dave I Roland I Jason hi Adam I uh motion to not recommend passes all right Steve we're up to you this is the um bargaining agreements um thank you madam chair as of five o'clock tonight uh I was informed there is no agreement in place um and um can't rule out there might be one on the eve of town meeting but um at at this time there's no reason to change our position which is deferred all right thank you that is for both yes um because it is not a change I believe we do not need a motion is that correct that's correct all right uh debrief on special town meeting a de grief on the special town meeting anyone want anything Adam Adam needs a special town meeting debrief a debrief yes um I believe that can be done another time if no one yeah I'd actually like to share other new information but not it's not on the special time meeting okay um we're going to go through the agenda and then hopefully part of the leison report you can find a put it into uh regarding public education which is the next agenda item I will be presenting our point of view to the select board on at their April not August 29th meeting I keep trying to make yes same topic there's a coffee at KJ's Cafe on Saturday uh coffee with um a select board member and I'm going to try and show up as soon as I soon as I wake up after getting home from Oklahoma um so that's another Outreach opportunity uh to let the public ask ask questions any leaz on reports nope oh please go ahead so I would like to get this board's guidance because the economic development committee which I am your Le on to has asked me to do some presenting at town meeting and the question is I boy I haven't been active in town politics for a long time and I wasn't sure if that's normal weird um proforma you know whatever um no in the past we've had a couple of members who are not only members of the EDC but chairs of the EDC so no there's no conflict in in the roles I I would suggest you you dress a little better if you're going to talk Tom me oh well since since since we're talking about jackets and guys what you're you're going to make me go out and make a purchase I I may have to go buy an electric tie Jason would L your bow tie if that's your taste uh I just thought it would be nice to remind people that there's a town election I guess coming up on April 30th um you know vote early vote often and May 6th I heard there's a something at like 7 7:30 yes um we will be meeting at 6 p.m. I'll get the room out to you unless we think we need more time than that for our discussions that's before the um town meeting that starts at 7 both nights no six just I I hope just the first night okay um the first night will be 6 p.m thank you yes if you'll permit me to remind you that you need an agenda yes I that's why I made that mistake I just that is why I am confirming the time I plan on submitting it as soon as possible um okay that is our next meeting um is the 6 PM meeting on May 6th do we have any other committee business no okay Greg would you please make a motion for us I move we adjourn second call roll a sec even though it's non debatable Greg I Christine I Christie I I Steve I Dave Gone Gone Gone absent Roland I Jason something I'm going to hi Adam Hi say say it real fast go ahead okay I brief correction um we are actually currently scheduled to have a tentative meeting [Music] on uh Thursday May 2nd we will have a meeting at 7:30 p.m. if the override fails on the 30th in this room 7:30 e