The meeting opened with a review of the proposed scenarios for the DPW building, highlighting option one as the original plan, covering 40,641 square feet at an estimated cost of $34 million. Although this option met all identified needs from a feasibility study, its high cost and the necessity of site evacuation during construction drew criticism. Members noted the functional benefits of this option but ultimately deemed it unaffordable. In contrast, option two, the least expensive at just over $11 million, involved renovating the existing facility. However, it was criticized for failing to address long-standing space issues and inadequacies, including facilities for female workers.

The conversation then moved to option three, which proposed demolishing half of the existing building to construct a larger fleet storage garage. Despite its focus on fleet storage, it was decided against forwarding this scenario due to inadequate improvements in staff areas and mechanical spaces. This led to a discussion of scenario four, which introduced two variations: 4A and 4B. Scenario 4A, while less costly, was criticized for not prioritizing staff needs, whereas scenario 4B aligned more closely with community priorities by proposing a new structure for staff and repurposing the existing building for fleet storage.

The appeal of scenario 4B lay in its phased construction approach, allowing for the continuation of operations without relocating staff, thereby reducing costs and timelines. However, concerns about the adequacy of vehicle storage space remained, particularly for winter operations. Alternative solutions, such as using an unused fire station, were considered, though the impact of outdoor storage on vehicle lifespan was debated.

Further discussions addressed the potential outsourcing of mechanical services as a cost-saving measure. Perspectives varied, with some advocating for evaluating the benefits of outsourcing against maintaining an in-house team, while others emphasized the importance of on-site mechanics for immediate repairs, especially during emergencies. The feasibility of regional collaboration with neighboring towns was also suggested as a means to further reduce costs through shared resources.

The meeting also examined the practicality of leasing or purchasing existing buildings as alternatives to new construction. While the prospect of acquiring a property like the old Saab dealership was discussed, skepticism arose about its long-term viability and potential impact on the town’s tax base.

In addition to the DPW building scenarios, the meeting addressed challenges related to the town’s senior center. The current location was deemed too distant for accessibility, with annual rental costs and the loss of tax revenue from removing the property from the tax rolls highlighted as concerns. The potential use of the Conant building as an interim solution was debated, though issues regarding its condition and compliance with current standards were raised.