The board deliberated on the allocation of Community Preservation Funds, addressing several motions. Motion G, which sought $750,000 for the preservation and adaptive reuse of the historic LEA school to create 32 affordable residential units, was a focal point. This project was framed under affordable housing and historic preservation categories. The Community Preservation Committee (CPC) recommended favorable action with a 6-1 vote. A board member acknowledged the extensive research conducted on funding affordable housing, emphasizing the importance of this initiative in light of rising housing costs and potential neighborhood changes. The project aims to provide affordable housing options while preserving historical structures, underscoring its significance to the community.

Another motion was Motion F, requesting $10,000 for the preservation of the 1775 Battle of Bunker Hill Muster Roll. This effort aims to safeguard a vital historical document. The motion received a favorable recommendation from the CPC with an 8-0 vote. A board member expressed strong support for the initiative, emphasizing its alignment with the CPA’s objectives and its historical significance.

The board also discussed Motion E, involving $82,500 for the South Natick Park Improvement Design and permitting project. This funding is intended for design and permitting improvements at parks on Pleasant Street, and the motion received unanimous board approval. The importance of enhancing these parks was highlighted, especially in relation to a previously approved spillway removal.

In addition to funding discussions, the meeting addressed the need for specialized zoning counsel. A speaker emphasized the importance of an independent third party to evaluate zoning bylaws, benefiting both the finance committee and town meeting members. Concerns were raised about the logistics of appointing a special zoning council, with suggestions to align these appointments with those of the town council. The chair acknowledged the need for careful consideration of the timing issue.

The discussion also highlighted past challenges with zoning bylaws, such as errors in marijuana zoning provisions and the historic bylaw, which led to costly legal disputes. These examples emphasized the necessity of a dedicated legal expert to guide the drafting process.

Further discussions involved a proposed moratorium related to turf fields, emphasizing the need for a broader conversation involving stakeholders like medical and environmental experts. The chair suggested letting the town meeting decide the moratorium’s length while clarifying maintenance aspects.

Additionally, a resident named Phil Bigs raised concerns about flooding in his basement following recent road repaving. The town engineer suggested sandbags as a temporary solution, which Bigs found unsatisfactory. He sought guidance from the board for a permanent resolution, emphasizing the inadequacy of the new curb design. The chair requested Bigs email his contact information to facilitate further communication, with assurances that he would be contacted by the appropriate town officials.

The meeting also included discussions on the town meeting warrant articles, with Article 5 concerning stabilization funds being addressed first. This standing article sought to appropriate newly certified growth for operational and capital stabilization funds, with approximately $930,000 anticipated for allocation. Public commentary emphasized the importance of appropriating the extra new growth tax levy to avoid collection issues.

The board also discussed Article 15, proposing changes in committee composition and financing sources. These changes, co-sponsored by the town moderator, aimed to provide clarity and were approved unanimously.