The Environmental Sustainability Committee presented a Municipal Landscape Policy, advocating for the inclusion of native non-cultivar plants in municipal landscaping projects. The proposed policy specifies that new landscaping on municipal land should comprise at least 7% native non-cultivar plants and up to 20% native cultivar plants while aiming to eliminate invasive species. The board engaged in a nuanced discussion regarding the policy’s applicability to various municipal lands, including schools and fire stations. Concerns were raised about the policy’s enforceability, particularly on lands managed by the school committee. The board acknowledged the need for legal clarification to ensure effective policy implementation.

In addition to enforcement concerns, the board debated the potential exclusion of sports fields from the policy, given that these areas typically involve established non-native grass. The complexities of enforcing such a policy on leased properties, like the Benfield land, were also discussed. The board recognized the need for comprehensive education and potential policy adjustments to address these issues effectively. A critical point of discussion was the definition of native plants and cultivars, noting that native plants derive from non-genetically modified seeds, whereas cultivars are altered to enhance specific traits. The policy’s aim to prioritize biodiversity by using non-cultivar native plants was emphasized.

The board also examined the fiscal implications of adopting this policy, with concerns about potential costs associated with procuring native plants. References to previous Board of Health regulations highlighted the importance of avoiding similar financial burdens for municipal projects. The board suggested piloting the policy on smaller projects to assess feasibility and effectiveness before broader implementation.

Moving to fiscal matters, the board reviewed the town’s budget projections and property tax impacts for fiscal year 2026. A levy analysis tool was discussed, revealing that single-family homes primarily influence the average tax bill, though a shift towards non-single-family homes has slightly altered this. The board noted that new houses built in the current year have been valued above average, dispersing the tax burden further. The projected revenue increase for the next fiscal year is 2.85%, lower than in previous years due to the absence of free cash in the model.

The board expressed concern over rising expenses, particularly employee wages and retirement assessments, which are expected to increase significantly. The relationship between revenue and expenses was analyzed, indicating that while revenue is projected to grow, expenses are set to outpace it, potentially depleting excess levy capacity. The conversation touched on the implications of using free cash in the operating budget, with a caution against forming a habit of relying on it for budget balance. The board reflected on past financial challenges and recognized the potential need for cuts if current trends continue.

The meeting also covered the implications of school enrollment projections on budget allocations. With fluctuating student numbers, there was concern over a potential reversal of beneficial trends that have allowed for lower tax increases. The board discussed the financial structure of the school budget, emphasizing the need for clarity in separating operating costs and debt obligations.

In addressing capital expenditures, the board noted that the town’s capital threshold is set at $5,000, allowing for greater control over expenses. The necessity of addressing deferred maintenance on municipal infrastructure, such as the town hall roof and the aging fire truck fleet, was highlighted. The board explored borrowing strategies and the importance of maintaining a good credit rating for future funding opportunities. Discussions included the management of Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds, with suggestions for strategic use to alleviate financial burdens on community projects.