The proposal for no-parking signs sparked debate among residents and board members. During the public hearing, residents expressed strong opposition to the signs, arguing that they would create more problems than they would solve. A resident from North Road criticized the town for not consulting with local residents before proposing the signs, stressing that the homeowners’ association should have a voice in the decision. The sentiment was echoed by others who felt that the signs would inconvenience residents, limiting their ability to park in front of their own homes and potentially decreasing property values.

The board explained that the no-parking signs were intended to manage traffic overflow due to the closure of a nearby public parking lot. However, the residents argued that the real issue was not the parking itself but the behavior of individuals using the area for activities like drinking and partying. They suggested alternative measures, such as installing gates at the parking lots or improving lighting, to address safety concerns without imposing blanket parking restrictions.

The discussion revealed a divide between those advocating for the signs as a public safety measure and those arguing that they would unfairly restrict resident access and enjoyment of their properties. Some residents proposed that the signage be limited to the entrances of streets rather than lining the entire road.

Compounding the issue, residents highlighted concerns about enforcement of the new restrictions. Questions arose about how the police would manage enforcement without clear guidelines, and whether residential parking signs might create ambiguity about who qualifies as a resident. The impact on hunters, who frequent the area primarily in the winter months, was also discussed.

Beyond the parking issue, the meeting addressed other topics. The Select Board held a fiscal year 2025 tax classification hearing, discussing whether to maintain a single tax rate for all property classes. The board noted that nearly 90% of the town’s tax revenue comes from residential properties, and a split tax rate would place an undue burden on small businesses with minimal savings for residents. The board leaned towards maintaining a unified tax rate to foster a business-friendly environment while ensuring adequate funding for residential services.

Additionally, the board discussed the hiring of a town planner and the possibility of appointing a full-time economic development director. There was debate about whether the town’s economic development needs could be met with part-time roles. The conversation highlighted the need to balance economic growth with fiscal responsibility, with some members advocating for the integration of economic development duties into the planner’s role. Others cautioned against increasing costs and emphasized the importance of following the budget cycle before making any hires.

The board also addressed a special town meeting to discuss the Historical Society’s potential extension for acquiring a property on College Highway, as well as the approval of contracted snowplow operators for the upcoming winter season. These discussions were marked by careful consideration of scheduling and resource allocation to ensure effective town operations.

In the midst of these deliberations, the board approved a one-day liquor license for a potluck dinner hosted by a karate group at the recreation center.