The meeting began with a critical review of Article Four, which concerns the tennis court project initially planned for Town Hall but later relocated to Littleton High School. Alicia from the Parks and Recreation department provided updates, revealing that the project’s original $1.1 million estimate was deemed too high, leading to its removal from the town meeting agenda. The project was then funded at $734,000 by the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) during a previous town meeting.

However, complications arose when the design firm, Activitas, identified necessary setbacks not included in the initial plans. The required setbacks, essential for proper spacing and safety, altered the design, potentially increasing costs. Alicia explained that the courts needed to be oriented north-south rather than east-west, impacting available space for bus parking at the high school. These oversights led to frustration among committee members, with calls for accountability from the design firm for the miscalculations that delayed the project.

Communication issues between stakeholders, including the school department and the committee, further complicated the situation. Concerns were raised that expectations about bus parking had not aligned with the committee’s understanding. In response, a sports council was formed to address these issues collaboratively.

The committee’s attention then shifted to a substantial $110 million building proposal. Members expressed skepticism about the project’s approval, citing community concerns about the high costs and the need for clear communication regarding tax impacts.

The committee underscored the urgency of presenting a clear rationale for the project to the public and gauging community sentiments. Concerns were raised about the transparency and inclusiveness of the process, with criticism of the previous meeting’s format, which left many feeling uninformed. The necessity of engaging the public and providing detailed information about the project’s financial implications was stressed.

Further complicating the financial landscape, the committee discussed reallocating older warrant articles with remaining balances and the potential for future funding needs. Article 7 identified $16,198.73 for reallocation towards building needs, with a focus on emergency repairs and systematic building maintenance. The need for a building facilities manager was highlighted to address these requirements effectively.

Discussions also covered Article 8, related to Neog Hill Orchard, with a request from the Conservation Commission to transfer care and control of a portion of lot 107. This request aimed to protect land abutting the Neog Reservoir, a critical water source. The committee noted that some parts of the orchard would remain under current lease agreements.

The meeting further delved into various proposed articles, including funding for collective bargaining agreements and the potential amendment of spending limits for the parks and recreation revolving fund. The committee reviewed a draft warrant with approximately 12 articles for the special town meeting, emphasizing the need for collaboration and timely communication among the finance committee, select board, and school committee.

Public comments introduced additional topics, such as a proposal for a stabilization fund for the lakes and the Affordable Housing Trust’s plans to build a house on T to Tan Road. The Clean Lakes initiative was also discussed, highlighting the disparity in financial support for lake maintenance among different homeowner associations.