The maintenance of flags became a significant talking point, following public concerns over their condition. Recently, a torn flag prompted the board to consider a more structured approach to flag upkeep, as volunteers had informally managed this in the past. Discussions centered on creating a regular schedule for changing the flags and ensuring nighttime illumination. A participant, emphasizing conventional practice, remarked, “you’re supposed to light it,” highlighting the importance of lighting flags when displayed at night. The feasibility of using solar-powered lighting was explored, with questions about its reliability, especially in winter months. One participant expressed skepticism about solar technology, noting, “solar doesn’t always isn’t always great,” citing concerns over battery performance and maintenance.

The board also debated the appropriate sizing of flags relative to flagpole heights. Dissatisfaction was expressed regarding smaller flags on taller poles, with one attendee noting, “it looks like hell,” urging attention to flag aesthetics. Responsibilities for flag maintenance were discussed, with a motion passed to assign these to the highway department. Additionally, the town administrator’s office will oversee protocols for flying flags at half-mast in accordance with state requirements. The board agreed on drafting a comprehensive policy to clarify responsibilities and ensure budget provisions for flag purchases.

Waste management was another prominent issue addressed by the board. The focus was on the transfer station’s operations, specifically on managing bulky waste and construction debris. The town pays for bulky waste disposal by weight, and concerns were raised about items like carpeting, which can absorb water and increase costs. There was also a call for clear communication on the schedule for crushing bulky waste and ensuring staff presence to manage these materials.

Pricing changes and regulatory enforcement at the transfer station prompted discussions about potential tensions with residents. The need for effective communication was emphasized to prevent on-site confrontations and disputes. A proposal was made to establish clear guidelines differentiating household waste from construction debris, noting that some contractors have improperly used the transfer station for construction materials disposal.

Recycling practices and community compliance with waste disposal rules were also scrutinized. The board noted ongoing challenges with residents improperly disposing of materials like styrofoam and proposed that styrofoam be sealed in bags before disposal starting January 1, 2025. Concerns about unsealed bags were voiced, with suggestions for stricter enforcement of rules and possible penalties for non-compliance. Additionally, the removal of a stop sign led to suggestions for better signage to ensure driver awareness and safety near the transfer station.

The meeting further touched on financial matters, with approval of accounts payable and payroll warrants. Updates were provided on educational developments, including the potential removal of MCAS testing, requiring districts to set graduation standards, and efforts for budget transparency within the school system. Infrastructure discussions with Eversource about unnotified tree removals highlighted the need for better communication with affected property owners.

New business included a shared streets and spaces grant application to improve pedestrian safety by constructing a sidewalk from Route 116 to South River Meadow. The board also supported a letter for the MVP 2.0 program grant. Appointments to the Deerfield Wild and Scenic River Study Committee and the Cultural Council were made, along with updates on risk management improvements at the transfer station and emergency management exercises.