A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to the discussion of a proposed stormwater utility, which aims to address budgetary shortfalls in the Department of Public Works (DPW) by funding necessary maintenance work. The utility intends to operate similarly to existing water and sewer utilities, charging property owners based on the impermeable area of their properties. Commercial properties, which have a greater impact on the stormwater system, would incur higher fees, while all residents would be charged a nominal fee. The utility is designed to meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements, particularly concerning the regular maintenance of catch basins and street cleaning, as mandated under the MS4 requirements.

The board discussed the necessity of compiling data from the assessors for the stormwater utility, including property owners’ names, addresses, use codes, and assessed values. Although this information is publicly accessible, its compilation into a usable format was emphasized as critical. This effort would require collaboration between the assessors and the stormwater task force, highlighting procedural challenges and the need for efficient data management.

The conversation also addressed the potential billing process for the stormwater fees, considering whether they could be integrated into existing real estate tax bills. A participant raised concerns based on past experiences with sewer and water billing structures. Additionally, the board explored the need for a separate utility to manage stormwater fees, as certain properties would require exemptions.

There were discussions about the synchronization of property data, which is important for finalizing property tax bills by January 1. It was noted that a master spreadsheet or log of all properties exists, and this data needs to be fixed by the first or second week of December to prepare for the upcoming year’s tax bills. This requires careful management due to ongoing changes to property information throughout the year.

The meeting also touched upon the neighborhood review project and the assessment of waterfront properties. A delay in updating the assessment database due to interim adjustments was noted, with a recommendation to postpone certain updates until spring. The possibility of creating a “lake back” designation for properties with lake views was discussed, emphasizing the importance of understanding sales data to support this designation. The board acknowledged the need to maintain momentum in the review process while working within a “sandbox” environment to test changes.

Moreover, the board addressed the hiring of a new principal assessor, Brian Fernandez, who was ratified by the select board and is set to begin on August 18. There was some surprise expressed that he was not present at the meeting.

The meeting also included a discussion on Clause 18 applications, specifically focusing on an individual who needed assistance due to an injury affecting their primary income. The board acknowledged the need to address this application but noted that it could not be reviewed until September. Additionally, the board considered a proposal to increase the veterans’ exemption under Clause 22, prompted by an inquiry from a veteran about why their exemption was lower than those in other communities. The board expressed a desire to show appreciation for veterans but recognized the potential for community pushback against tax increases.

Finally, the board reviewed updates to application forms and upcoming presentations. It was clarified that staff should not assist applicants in completing their applications to avoid conflicts of interest, based on town council advice. The hiring of a new outreach person at the senior center was also mentioned, expected to enhance support for individuals over 50 at the center.