02:09:10The proposed bike lane on Chestnut Hill Avenue emerged as a contentious topic. Many residents, including David Eisenberg and Brenda Hefer, expressed their opposition, arguing that the project might address a non-existent problem while introducing new issues for the community. Eisenberg cited safety concerns, particularly due to heavy traffic from buses and trucks. He warned that the proposal could divert funds from more pressing needs and advocated for a reassessment.

02:21:07Brenda Hefer further emphasized the project’s potential impact on parking and access for service providers, noting that many homes rely on curbside parking. She pointed out the existing traffic congestion and argued that the planned changes would worsen the situation. Highlighting the absence of reported bicycle-vehicle collisions, she questioned the necessity of significant alterations when the current system has functioned safely for decades. Dr. Jesse Hefer criticized the lack of proper notification regarding the public hearing, expressing concern about the initial public engagement process’s inadequacy and how the project would impact residents without sufficient input and discussion.

Shar Hefer echoed these sentiments, pointing out issues like obstructed access for emergency vehicles due to the redesign, which could compromise response times. The removal of on-street parking was another concern, as it would burden residents and service providers. The Hefer family, along with nearly 50 residents, signed a petition urging the town to slow the redesign process, involve more citizens, and explore alternative routes. They emphasized the need for a collaborative consensus, stating, “we can do better but together.”

02:07:19Despite these concerns, the Select Board, including Paul Warren, highlighted a scheduled public forum on March 31 to discuss the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP), inviting community members to participate. This forum could provide an opportunity for residents to voice their thoughts on the bike lane and other related initiatives.

02:18:41In addition to the bike lane debate, the meeting addressed budget discussions. Marissa Vote, representing town meeting members, warned of an $8.2 million school budget gap, urging the Select Board to consider cuts to other town departments to close this gap without harming student services. The proposed cuts to the Department of Public Works (DPW) budget, including a potential $1 million reduction, were scrutinized, with concerns about service sustainability and staff retention.

03:17:51Erin Chud, the Commissioner of Public Works, presented the DPW’s proposed operating budget for FY 26, highlighting the department’s mission and goals, such as improving public right-of-ways management and advancing sustainability initiatives. She noted the department’s expansive responsibilities and the challenges faced, including employee vacancies and a potential collapse of the solid waste management program. The total DPW operating budget exceeded $55 million, with discussions emphasizing the need for a comprehensive understanding of the department’s role in supporting both town and school services.

02:35:49The board also considered appointments to various committees. The Center Street Lots study committee was expanded from nine to eleven members to ensure broader representation. The nomination of Robert Rogers to the Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration Committee was approved unanimously, recognizing his prior contributions and background.

04:28:12Financial management and sustainability were other focal points. The finance department’s proposed budget for FY 26 was presented, with a slight reduction of over $133,000. Maintaining the town’s AAA bond rating was emphasized, with plans to appropriate $3.5 million to the stabilization fund in FY 26. A disparity study in collaboration with Somerville was also noted, directly linked to fiscal objectives.

02:24:31The meeting further addressed warrant articles, including Article 24, proposing a real estate transfer fee to fund affordable housing initiatives. The fee, set between 0.5% and 2%, aimed to exempt the first $1 million of transactions, minimizing the financial burden on lower-value property transfers. Despite concerns about market impacts, the proposal was presented as a timely opportunity to address the housing crisis.