Sunday, September 20, 2026
Subscribe Advertise Donate Advertiser Log In
Support free local journalism for all of Wayland. Donate Now
Donate Subscribe
Try: Select Board School Committee Real Estate Town Meeting Budget

January 14, 2026 – Select Board – Video & Transcript

play-sharp-fill

January 14, 2026 - Select Board

 
LanguageEnglish
Good morning, Carol Martin, Chair of the Select Board, calling the meeting of the Select Board of January 14, 2026 to order. This is a remote access only meeting. This meeting may be recorded and if recorded, it will be made available to the public on WACAM as soon as possible after the meeting. The public will be excluded from the executive session, which will be held at the end of this meeting this morning. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, this meeting will be conducted via remote access in accordance with the applicable law. No in-person attendance by members of the public will be permitted, and one may watch the meeting remotely with the meeting link that can be found either on the Select Board agenda or through the Wayland Town calendar. So when required by law or allowed by the chair, persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting may do so at the meeting location, which today is remote only. Public comment should be limited to two minutes per person. Okay, so if we're going to review the agenda, which is obviously a call to order, the announcements in public comment, we are going to spend some time, which is the main purpose of this meeting this morning, is to finalize articles that we will, the board will submit for the 2026 annual town meeting consideration, including transfer cost of living adjustments, green burial, amending the town meeting time, appropriating funds for engineering for a piece of property, property and town planning board appeals, and then we will have a discussion on a previously submitted article concerning acquisition of permanent easements regarding the mass central rail trail. This will be followed by the town manager, a brief discussion about the town manager evaluation, town manager's reports, consent, review correspondence. I'm going to skip over members' reports and concerns, and there are no topics reasonably anticipated. Afterwards, we will enter into executive session where we will review with the intent to approve and hold the minutes of December 1st and December 15th, and then pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 30, Section 21A, we will review and consider for potential release executive session minutes regarding the Firefighter's AFL-CIO Grievance Step 3, and we will be related to litigation concerning Dwayne Galaby vs. the Wayne's Zone Board of Appeals and Michael Henley, and then also regarding the strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with the town manager. And hopefully we will adjourn by 1230 because everyone is working and needs to get back to work. I appreciate everyone coming in this morning. So joining me this morning in the room is Mr. Fay, Mr. Whitney, Ms. Brinsley, and myself. Mr. Levine is unable to join us this morning. We are also joined by the town manager, Michael McCall, our assistant town manager, Kelsey Powers-Burlett, and we are being hosted this morning by the town manager's executive assistant, Abby Warren. So having said that, I think we can move on to, and also because we are remote, all votes will be by roll call. So do we have any announcements from the board? All right. Having none, I'm going to move on to public comment. Do we have any public comments? Does anyone have their hand raised for public comment, Ms. Abby? I see anybody with their hands raised. I don't see any, so I'm going to close public comment. Okay. All righty. So this morning, like I said, the primary reason for this meeting, and I appreciate, again, everyone coming in and making changes to your schedules because the deadline for article submission is tomorrow at 430, and so we need to get these done. There are a number, most of them are in the supplemental packet, but there is one in the main packet, which is CC. So I'm going to suggest that we start with that one, and also, Abby, when Katie Klein comes online, would you just bring her right forward, and we will do her article? Yes. Thank you. All right. So this is one that we talked about a couple times during the year, and then we decided last week to kind of put this through. A difficulty, I think, Kelsey would agree, finding a time meeting time in between all the commitments that so many folks want to use the Fieldhouse. So we thought perhaps, and it seemed both of the last two years, if we could just have town meeting the next week, we wouldn't have had to, you know, be in conflict with anyone who might want to use the Fieldhouse. So we've put this article together, what we talked, we didn't really show up the dates. So I think it said that proposal now is instead of April 1 and May 15, it's March 15 and June 1, and I want to open it to the floor. And anybody wants to speak about this, then we'll go forward. Go ahead, Tom. Yeah, sorry. I'm happy to support the proposed article. It just gives the Select Board a bit more flexibility. It doesn't require the Select Board to schedule a town meeting in mid-March or in late May. It just gives them a bit more flexibility, if you say, depending on dates. I will say this. I don't think a reason to schedule town meeting from one week to another should be driven by the use of the Fieldhouse, because I think there are other factors that the Select Board needs to consider relative to the dates. But other than that, I spoke about it. Okay. Any other comments? I looked at other town meeting schedules just to see if there was anything that, you know, surrounding communities might have come up against, and there wasn't. So I don't, unless there's something that somebody wants to bring up right now that I didn't think about or, you know, is very specific to Wayland, I didn't. I see no reason not to do this. Okay. Okay, Bill, are you all set? I agree. Okay. I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with March 15th. I mean, I have to tell you, if we have a March 15th or a March 25th annual time meeting, we're going to be doing articles in that budget in November. And as it is, there's difficulty feeling comfortable, you know, with the finance team feeling comfortable with numbers by the end of the year, because they're still waiting for a couple numbers. I also know that years ago, there was a concern when we held time meeting in April, you know, mid April, that we were not taking into Tom's point consideration snowbirds. So I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with the March 15th. I'm definitely comfortable with the June 1st. So do we want to just leave it at, you know, the April 1st and the June 1st? I just don't keep it as is. We just don't know what circumstances will occur year to year. And there may be policy decisions that really demand or require an early time meeting. And therefore, I just think it creates flexibility for future, future boards. Okay. Um, Kelsey and Michael, obviously one of you, because the meeting, Kelsey, you were at the meeting and you assisted us very nicely last week. Thank you. And, um, I know we had mentioned April 1st. Is there a reason that the March 15th was put in? Um, just to echo what Tom, uh, what Mr. Fay just said, uh, is just to give greater flexibility. I mean, uh, Massachusetts general law, chapter 39, section nine allows towns to hold, uh, annual, their annual town meetings in February, March, April, May, and June. So I just kind of, I, I still thought maybe the April 1st was a little too restrictive as well. And it does like, like, like Mr. Fay alluded to, it doesn't necessarily mean that we have to have it in March, but you, we really don't know what the future holds and, you know, limiting ourselves to the April 1st deadline. And then, you know, something comes up in five years and then we have to revise the bylaw again. That's, I, I think it's probably a better idea to just have a bit of a more wide, uh, variety of available dates. Um, knowing that the select board would probably lean towards having it end of April, beginning of May, begin late, uh, May. Okay. Thank you. The other things we did not discuss, but it's in this language is, and I think Kelsey and maybe both Michael have mentioned to us at one time or another, that other communities often have their town meeting and then vote. We vote, we go to have annual town election first. This is the same language right here. We did not discuss this on the board. We're only submitting, uh, well, we could, we could submit, submit submitting today, but did we wanted to have that conversation while we're here or just, uh, adjust the dates. Adjust the dates that other discussion is much more involved and maybe Doug Levine would want to participate. Great. Okay. So having said that, then let's have a motion on this one to submit, please. I'm happy to move to this board. Go to submit and insert article CC and set forth in our packet. Second, please. Second. Thank you. Hello. Any further discussion? Otherwise, hello's in favor? Uh, one question. Sure. Are we, uh, are we inserting articles today or merely? Submitting? Submitting. Submitting. Uh, Tom's, uh, Mr. Faye's motion was to submit and, uh, insert. Wow. I'm happy to revise the motion and provided it gets in the warrant that, um, we're going to be voting to submit article CC as set forth in our packet. Thank you. Uh, second that, uh, revised motion. Thank you. All right. Um, without any further discussion, we'll have, uh, roll call vote. Ann? Yes. Tom. Yeah. Bill. Yes. Carol. Yes. Motion passes for zero. Okay. So the balance of the articles now are in the supplemental packet. So, um, we'll start with those. There's also the revised chart and you will see that other boards and committees are starting to, you know, get their articles in, which is good because they're due, um, tomorrow. Um. All right. So the first, the first one up on the list is going to be the, uh, AA transfer, uh, funds to fund the FY 26 fire payroll budget. So does Michael or Kelsey want to speak to this, please? If I may, um, these have been danced. There's, there's should be two. Now, um, we have to make, uh, adjustments in the event that we get a settlement, um, decision from our arbitrator. We submitted our briefs last week to the three panels. And so the finance director indicated, regardless of the outcome, uh, if, if we don't have a decision in time, we have to move monies, um, from salary reserve. Or if we do have a decision, we have to have an article moving monies around to pay for, uh, any such recommendation from the JLMC. Great. Is there any questions on, on this? All right. Why don't I have a motion? To. I mean, I, I didn't put on the agenda insert, so I think we have to stick with just cement. So go ahead. Sorry. Happy to move this board. Submit. The 26 annual town meeting article, AA, entitled transfer cost of living adjustment funds. Second, please. Second. Thank you. Any further discussion? Okay. Roll call vote. Bill. Yes. Ann. Yes. Tom. Yes. And Carol. Yes. That passes for zero. All right. Ms. Klein is here has joined us. So I think what I'd like to. Direct everybody to the information, um, article why. On the agenda. We've already inserted this. This is in regards to the, um, acquisition of the permanent easements and conveyance of the temporary easements of town center for the mass central rail trail. And there has been, I think some, uh, updates or questions that have risen. So, um, Tom asked to have them reinsert it into the packet and Katie and Tom are going to explain the, the requests and the changes and. And we will then discuss it. So floor is yours. Yeah. By way of background, we've had conversations, continue to have conversations with PCR. They are working closely with the master UT to complete the rail trail between Sudbury and the Wayland Library. That construction probably will not occur until at least 2020. So, however, there's a lot of legwork needs to be completed, including establishing easements for permanent easements and temporary easements. So temporary, primarily for construction and permanent, um, in the area close to the Wayland town center. Um, so, you have been asked recently by PCR for us to do some of the legwork on the easements. I told them that I could not speak for the select board, but I could not recommend it to the select board basically because they wanted us to pay for legal fees, credit fees, certain properties, properties, including, uh, property. Russell's. Uh, nurse. But by way of background, that's kind of where we are. What other issues, Katie, do we need to bring up today? Yes. Um, uh, good morning. Uh, yeah, I'm not the way DCR explained that for some reason, because of their internal policies, it is difficult for them to acquire. It's basically all temporary easements that, um, are associated with this portion of the rail trail. Um, and they've asked the town to, uh, take over that, uh, uh, responsibility. Um, the temporary easements are on both private property. Well, it's all private property, but, um, the temporary easements that we're discussing are on the town center property, the property that was recently acquired by NP Weyland LLC. And on three other private properties, Russell's, excuse me, Russell's, um, Boston Edison and the Weyland Historical Society. Um, and, uh, NP Weyland, um, is, uh, has expressed a preference for the town to acquire the temporary easements on its property because they prefer to deal just with the town on this, um, because the town's acquiring the permanent easement. Um, and so that's sort of separate, um, and I would think in your thinking, um, there wouldn't be substantial additional costs associated with that. In my opinion, um, the other properties are a little more complicated because there's a, um, the town would, uh, have to do an order of taking and there'd be appraisals involved. Um, and, uh, there's a procedure. MassDOT has a specific procedure because of federal highway, uh, policies that the town would need to undergo, uh, undertake. And, um, as Tom has indicated, he has, uh, made a, uh, request of DCR that if the town were to even, uh, consider this, um, that they would, that, uh, they would want DCR, the town would want DCR to, uh, to pay the expenses associated with it. Um, so I think that's, that's sort of the, the background. Um, in any event, the town would acquire the, the easements. Um, but, um, you know, DCR would still be the proponent of the project. And then of course, uh, MassDOT constructs the project itself. Um, so that's, uh, sort of a summary of where DCR is and the request that it has made of the town. Well, one of my concerns, in addition to the cost, even if the DOT said that we've reimbursed us, or DCR said, my concern is that the work we would do, the lawyers we hired or the places we hired, would not be satisfactory for the state. Uh, as we know, the state, um, regulatory authorities are very particular with these things. And I'm concerned it would not be time well spent or money well spent if they came back and said, you know what, we really don't want it that way. We want it done this way. My point is, I think it's, it's past that DOT usually does themselves and they should, they should do this. I don't think it's from the town's interest to take, you take that, take on the responsibility or financial expense. Oh, um, everyone understands this. There's two asks here. And the first one, we start with the first one, Tom's and then parse them out. Um, and the first one is that NP, um, properties would prefer us, prefer to just deal with one person on this. They are obviously, if we've already have a letter in our packet that explains that they are, I believe, uh, willing to, um, to give us the temporary easement for the construction, which we discussed the last time. And then they would prefer to just discuss, um, do both, both of these easements with us. So let's talk about that and see what everyone's thoughts are on that. And Tom, I mean, and Bill. I need to do more research on this. This is new to me. Okay. Um, the, this sounds fairly straightforward. Uh, uh, I think, uh, if NP Wayland is, uh, amenable to conveying, uh, the easements to the town, uh, for little or no consideration. And his attorney Klein has said, uh, there's not significant cost involved. It seems to me something that could be done. Um, but I gather this is for both, uh, temporary easement for construction as well as a permanent easement. Is that right? Well, the, the permanent easement, um, I believe has already come before the select board. Um, I, I, I think the, the intent all along was for the, uh, NP Wayland and the, uh, to convey the permanent easement to the town because DCR explained to us that it could not acquire the permanent easement because it's not contiguous to other DCR property. So I believe that that was considered, you know, a month or six weeks ago by this board. Right. But the temporary easement is new on the NP Wayland property. And, and do we know the limits of, uh, the, uh, the temporary easement? Are they identical to the permanent easement? And do we know what the nature of the construction would be on the temporary easement? Well, we know, I, I'm not sure if you have the plans. The temporary easement would be outside the confines of the permanent easement. And it would be to, uh, um, you know, for the purpose of construction of the rail trail with, you know, within the permanent easement. Right. And it did confirm it's a term of five years. Okay. And, uh, do we understand that NP Wayland is supportive of, uh, the town's acquisition and the, uh, DCR's use of the area, uh, indicated in, for the temporary easement for construction? Yes, they are supportive. Do we, do we think that DCR could use the, uh, NP Wayland construction easement for the entirety of the construction and, uh, thereby avoid the necessity of a temporary easement on, uh, the, uh, the two remaining properties or the three remaining properties? They, they will need the temporary easements on the other three private properties as well. Is, is that your question? Yes. Yes. That's my question. Yes. Um, they would need, um, those additional, you know, easements from the private property owners, from Russell's and Boston Edison and, um, the Historical Society. I, I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything. Um, where is this information? Because I didn't see it in the packet. Um, it is, there is the letter and then there from MP and then there's also a list. I don't know if that's the correct answer here. And there was a list, a chart of the properties that they want the easements on. There are two, looks like there were two and Tom, you can correct me here, please. Two properties in Sudbury. And then there are. Oh, I see. The supplement. Okay. And Whelan. It's in the supplemental packet. I think it's in them. Yeah. Yeah. All right. If it helps. You know what? That's a good point. Could somebody say, my thing doesn't show the pages anymore. Could someone please give the pages? Yep. Thank you. This is perfect. I would say it's pages nine and 10 of the supplement. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Somebody's following along to what we're saying. Okay. I just didn't have much context. So when I read this, I didn't really get it. Okay. All right. There was a set of plans that was distributed to the select board at a previous meeting. Is that, is that right? That's correct. Is it possible for someone to pull those plans up for collective edification? While someone's doing that, I just brought up an aerial of the area that maybe Katie, this is helpful also to explain, although I think the plans are very helpful too. Tom, do you think it would be useful for the purposes of eliciting the cooperation of DCR to agree that we will, that the town will acquire the NP Wayland temporary construction permanent easements and then ask that DCR do their part in acquiring those easements from the other parties? Yes. That's basically what we've asked them to do. And, um, uh, you would agree, Katie, that pretty much what we said, and that's pretty much the subject, I believe of the warrant article that this board has voted to submit already. Yes, that's correct. Um, I, the only, if, if the board decides that it would, uh, acquire the temporary easements on the NP Wayland property. Then the article would need to be changed a little bit. Right. And there are, excuse me, in the packet again, now I think it's probably page eight, because it's another page back up. It shows the, uh, the comments that Katie has made, Miss Klein has made from the, um, article, the acquisition of permanent, and then there's the questions. So, again, it's two, I, to me, it's two asks, to be honest with you, because one's coming from DCR and one is coming really from NP properties. Madam Clerk, I found the plan from the December 19th packet. Okay. Um, it'll be hard. I can try and share it if you want. Thank you. See what I can do here. Yeah. Yeah. Michael. Oh, okay. Um, so the Russell's property is to the south of the entryway where, where, um, route 20 intersects with Andrew Avenue. Yeah. Um, and then my, um, Boston Edison is towards the, uh, Eastern portion. Um, I'm not sure if it shows on this plan or not, because that's the actual, that's the survey plan of that. I think that NP Wayland had done when it acquired the property. So I think the Boston Edison and historical society property would not be on that particular plan. The plan is actually the right of way plans. That is, um, 17 sheets. Um, so it's shown on the ladder, but Russell's is right across from that entry. And Boston Edison is said to the east of this plan. Excuse me, I see something that says Boston Edison on this page. Is that what we're talking about? Closer down. On the right side. On the right side, on the bottom, it says Boston Edison Company easement, exception number 11. I don't know if that's what we're talking about. I think that may be a, a separate. Okay. Sorry. Um, because it's, it's definitely, um, near the, the, uh, old Sudbury road with 27 and Concord road. Um, intersection or fork. Do you need me to move over attorney Klein? If you, if you can, I'm not sure what, um, is shown over there. I don't have. Um, yeah, I think this isn't shown on that particular plan. If you scroll Michael, you might find. Okay. Yeah. Um, I'm going to do that. I think there, we have more below. I'll have to zoom out. Yeah, that's good. Um, Russell's is on page 14. All right. Let me get that. 14. You say. I believe so. That's where Russell's is, but that's, I'm not sure that's the one. The, uh, well depot. Which I think is what? Oh, it's at the depot. I believe. That's part. But isn't, excuse me, if I may hop in here, Tom, for the question. Um, isn't it? Didn't we discuss that last time in the town granted an, uh, a contemporary easement for the construction materials, right? In that area. Yeah, that's part of the. Right. So this is a different easement. This is a different, the, the, the easements, the temporary easements on the town of Wayland property are already addressed in the warrant article. That would be the temporary easements that the town would be paying for the project. These are easements that three private property owner on three private properties. And they're shown on sheets, uh, 14, um, and, uh, 17 of the right of way plans. There's a very, very small temporary easement on historical society. It's, um, 59 square feet. That's on the other side of constituent road. And then there's a, um, temporary easement on the Boston Edison property just to the, uh, south of the rail trail. I'm going to ask a, to me, what seems like an obvious question, but there are three, notwithstanding the conversation that we're probably comfortable with the MP properties town center question. But the other three is Russell's Boston Edison, and the Wayland historical society. Is it society or district? Society. Society. Is that not town land? No, this is a separate, um, historical society. That's not, um, affiliated with the town. Thank you. It's not that question as well. So yeah, is this the right section attorney client? That's exactly. Right. Um, you can see, um, just a little, little tiny rectangle to the right of constituent road. That's labeled, um, Wayland historical society. That says parcel X T E five. Do you see, do you see that? Everybody got it. Yes. Great. And just to the left of that, you can see the end of the Boston Edison company, um, temporary easement, which, um, says 958 square feet. And you're correct. It is to, to the, uh, it is part of that long. Uh, it does run along the, uh, the rail trail, um, which is just the Boston Edison property. It's just south of the rail trail. So I guess one thought on the issue of the repayment then was for our board to vote. Um, uh, uh, either affirmatively or negatively on a motion for the town to pay the legal and appraisal expenses related to the easements of those free costs. Which is something that I do not support, but others may support it. Would that, that be right, Katie, that we would vote on that? Well, I, I think you could conceivably vote to, uh, uh, acquire the easement subject to DCR paying the costs associated with it. That's sort of a, um, you know, uh, compromise, or you could vote not to acquire the easements at all and not be involved. Or you could vote to, um, acquire the easements and pay for it, or you could vote to see what they say about paying for it. Well, time is none of the essence in that issue. Do you agree, Katie? Uh, uh, it would, it is in terms of town meeting. Um, yeah, because you, you have your, uh, your, you know, you wanna finalize your warrant relatively soon. Um, we're not finalizing the warrant until March because that's when we go to press. We are submitting articles for consideration. Okay. Then look at them starting the next meeting, which is going to be the 20th, right through February and into March. We will be looking at evaluating and taking positions on articles. Um. Okay. He wanted us to have, while we're looking at things, he wanted us to have this conversation. Or, so here we are. I'm sorry, Bill has a question. Sorry. Carol, would it, uh, make sense for the board to consider, um, submitting two articles? One is, uh, with respect to the NP, uh, Wayland and town, uh, temporary and permanent easements. And a second with respect to all of them. And if we submit both articles, uh, that would afford us the, the ability to withdraw one at a later time, once, uh, discussions with DCR proceed on the question of whether it would agree to, uh, accomplish the acquisition of the easements for the three private parcels. That's a good suggestion. Uh, let me, I'm going to turn the question over to Michael and Kelsey because my one thought is, which they'll answer, is if we, if we leave it, go ahead, answer the question, Michael. Does that make sense to do two articles or do we just put it all in one and then amend as we go? If I can interject, I think it might be difficult, this late stage, the 14th of January, to do a new article. But that just means we couldn't revise the current article. Right. To, to go with these thoughts. Am I right, Katie? Yes. Um, you, you, we could do a more comprehensive article if you would like. Um, it was that your question, Tom? Yes. In other words, simply revise the current article, um, which is showing the spirit of the current article, but it reflects the written. Yes. And then the, I mean, there are two ways to approach that. One is if you're not going to acquire, if you've determined not to acquire the three private, uh, property easements prior to town meeting, you could amend the article. You could amend the article on the floor. Maybe you don't like to do that. Or alternatively, you could pass the article and not acquire the private easements because you, you, you don't, you're not obligated to acquire property interests that, um, you're authorized to do. Um, or there are, I guess, a couple scenarios. So, but, um, I'd like to hear from the town manager, please, because I think isn't as simple as we have a motion, we can drop one before we print, but. Yeah. Well, I, I do, uh, turning clients point, you do have different scenarios. You also have the ability to submit something through the clerk tomorrow if you chose, because it might be hard to add a new article right now on your agenda. So if you wanted a separate article, we could fashion one and have the clerk, I think under code can still submit one tomorrow. Um, that might be a way to do that. Um, we do it. We do it. Uh, I'll do whatever the board, you know, my staff, whatever is easiest. Uh, I think because you have one on the agenda, either you amend it or we, we create the second one and we have the clerk submit it tomorrow. So we can't add a third motion to this that says we would pay the easements. We would acquire the temporary easements on the private property. And then as we go through the process, determine we're not going to do that and just drop that motion from the article. See, to me, I think we're doing, you know, there's three or four actions. We're granting easements on our own property. We're acquiring easements, you know, from the town center. And then perhaps the third motion or fourth, maybe would be acquiring the temporary easements on the private property. And then once we hear from the DCR and we don't, maybe we feel we have a cost exposure that we're not comfortable with. Why can't we, and Tom, can you, do you want to chime in here? Why can't we just drop a motion as we go through the process? So you can't really, can't change the scope, but we can, we can limit the scope. Am I close? That's correct. So why don't we just add a motion to this? And maybe what the board, if I'm going to go out here and say this, obviously we're not taking a position on this right now. And then we need to submit, we've already submitted. So we're good. So we're good. But we'd have to take a vote is to add a third motion. And then I would like to suggest that the motion includes that we have Tom with attorney Klein and probably myself, uh, follow up and complete that motion and make sure it gets filed. Does that sound like what we should think about? And then we will be rediscussing this as we go on. Good question. What is the current, what is the motion is presently drafted, uh, uh, envision as far as, uh, acquisition of temporary and permanent easements? The current. The current. Sorry. Excuse me. What page in the packet here? It shows you bill. It's the one that has. Page nine of the supplemental. There you go. Yeah. The current, the current articles, uh, authorizes the select board to acquire the permanent easement for the rail trail on property of NP Wayland and to convey temporary easements on town property. For the purpose of constructing the rail trail. So it is silent on the Boston Edison Wayland historical and Russell's. Correct. And also, also the temporary easement for NP properties that they've asked. Correct. And Tom, your suggestion is perhaps the board could. File a motion or file a, a warrant article or submit a warrant article that would also include the three private parcels, recognizing that we could amend that, uh, reduce the scope, as it were, before the, before the warrant goes to the printer, I suppose. Well, I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong, Katie, but I don't think there's a desire for the town to secure permanent easements on the three private properties. I think the ask from DCR and MassDOT is for us to undertake the expense of title search and appraisal. Yeah. Yeah. Um, it's three temporary easements. Um, they're not permanent. And I think we left it with DCR that you, Tom asked whether or not they would, uh, incur the expense because, um, I think they want the town to acquire them because of, uh, I think their big ask is that they want the town to acquire the, the temporary easements. Because, um, they don't have the ability to do that. Well, to clarify, they have the ability, but they don't have the legal staff. Uh, that, I don't know how accurate what they're saying is, but that's the position they're taking. That it is difficult for them to do it. So could, could this, uh, draft be amended to, uh, authorize acquisition of the three temporary easements provided that DCR agree to, uh, do this and such? Yeah. Give me a birth of time. Sure. You could do that. You could do that. Would you recommend that, Tom? Attorney Klein? I, I, I think the answer is yes, because it, it, it permits us to address it time of time meeting and a lot can happen between now and then. The state may say, no, I'm not going to reimburse you. So then that's, that's established. Then we might just not present that portion of the, of the art. Um, but you'll definitely know sooner rather than later what DCR is willing to do. So you could, I mean, you could just not present that portion of the article at town meeting. If DCR says no. If we know, we can take it, we can take it right out of, we can vote as a board to remove that motion before it gets in the warrant. We're only going to have to worry about amending on the town meeting floors. If we don't hear from them by, I'm going to say March 5th, whatever the date is. But Tom, you said that was not a bad suggestion. Uh, double negatives always give me the heebie-jeebies. What's your recommendation? At least he wasn't giving you commas. I'll, I'll, I'll, I'll just say this. And I'd like Ann and you, Bill, and, and certainly Michael as well. You know, when dealing with state bureaucracy, so many T's have to be crossed, so many I's have to be dotted. And we may do a very thorough job on appraisals, legal work. But there may be certain T's that they don't see crossed or I's dotted. And who knows what they are. But my concern is it's just challenging to deal with state agencies. And Michael, do you think I'm overly cautious on it? I, all I can say is look how long it's taken us to try and get signs and benches. Uh, going back and forth with DCR on that. So I think you're spot on. It's, it's very difficult working with them. I think the question, though, is whether we need two articles or one, whether we can just have one. Add language to it and then understand that we're going to possibly amend that language before it gets to town meeting. Am I right in that because that makes sense to me to have it as one article and we just expand the language right now. And then as things develop or don't develop, we remove portions of it. So I'm going to go back to my original suggestion here is that let's have a motion that we're going to add this language to this article. And then I want to add to it that we, with the understanding that we have, um, Tom work with attorney Klein and then, and I'll review as the chair, I guess. And then to make sure that we get it in by tomorrow's deadline. So to be clear, Katie, um, the motion would basically seek approval from town being authorized, uh, payment of. Legal fees, uh, cradle fees related to securing temporary easements on three, three possible. Okay. Um, we got more packet, uh, uh, concerning. Russell's we lost medicine company and the way I want to circle exciting that that. Well, all the one article needs to do is authorize the tent, the, the select board to acquire the easements. Um, if DCR doesn't pay, then you wouldn't be, um, doing that. You would just change the, the warrant article or, you know, um, move to amend on, on the town meeting floor. We want to, we don't want to be amending on town meeting floors. Okay. Okay. Thanks. So we want to get this done before town meeting, the thing goes to press, trust me. Okay. That's fine. It just creates so much confusion. And we'll end up spending an hour and a half on this one article. And then that will be just not great. Okay. Sorry. Well, I'll, I'll, I'll move that this board, um, to amend article Y. 2026 annual town meeting that we're going to approve the section authorizing the town to acquire temporary easements. Three parcels. XTE two. XTE four. XTE five. Limit. Part of a packet at today's meeting provided. Those. Part of associated with climbing easements. Uh, reimbursed by the state of math. By the column. Okay. We have a second. Do you want to say to submit. That article. We've already submitted. Excuse me. So we've already submitted it. So we're just. Okay. All right. Sorry. Um, excuse me, before you discuss further, I just want to be sure that we address. The temporary easements on the, uh, NP Whalen property, which are XBP one XTE. No, excuse me, not XBP one XTE 10 and XTE 13. Oh, an XTE. I can't read that, but it's either six or eight and XTE nine. Oh, an XTE seven. XTE one. Isn't it Katie? No T that's. No, I don't think. Did I say XTE one. Yeah. Oh, an XTE. That's no, I don't think. Did I say XTE one. Yeah. Oh, an XTE. No, that was, I said, well, anyway, the temporary easements on the property of NP Whalen does well. Okay. That's XTE. Um, it's actually seven, eight, nine, 10 and 11. Fine. So, so, so amended. I have a second, please. Second. Thank you. Now I'm going to throw in a question before I open up, if you don't mind. And that is, there's a possibility that we may drop that motion. However, we've just put the temporary easement for NP Whalen into that motion. Shouldn't we put the temporary easement, uh, for NP Whalen in with the other, uh, easement? I would put it in, um, is it A? We need to go where we're below with NP Whalen needs to all be together is what I'm saying. Yeah, it would be. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion then? Uh oh. Any further discussion? No? All right, then. Um, all those in favor, I'm gonna start with Ann. Yes. Um, wait a minute. The second motion was your bill. Yes. Bill? Yes. And Carol. Yes. Four zero. Okay. So, and the board is in agreement that Tom will work with attorney Klein and then we'll get this into the packet. Uh, we'll get this into the town manager's office before tomorrow morning, tomorrow's deadline. Correct? Okay. Is that okay with you, Katie? Yes. I'll, I'll send, um, a red line version of the warrant article, um, to Tom and Carol. Does that make sense? Sure. And, and Michael. And Michael. I'll work with, uh, Kelsey and Abby to make sure that the appropriate tendencies are provided for the warrants. We can appreciate what we're doing. Terrific. Thank you, attorney, attorney Klein for joining us this morning. Thank you. I'm sorry. There are a lot of easements. So I apologize for it being confusing. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. So right on schedule. My iPad has gone blank. So, but the next article to discuss, it's unbelievable is B green burials. And this is one that we are going to, it's a home rule petition that we're going to ask the state to allow us to select board rather than have to go to town meetings should somebody would like to, um, have a green barrel on the property. Um, I don't know if there's any questions on this, but let me, let me open it to Michael to do a quick, um, question comments. So as you know, last year we had an unfortunate situation where someone wanted to do a green burial and we put it through the board of health and everybody else conservation. No one had an issue with it, but state law said it had to go before the town and town council advised the definition town and town meeting. And because we only do one town meeting a year, uh, it really, uh, was a hardship on that family to postpone all this while we waited because the family member passed late summer, uh, last year, and we had to wait till spring to figure this out. So, uh, speaking with the family, we had discussed that trying to advance something where we could have our own authority. Um, we being the select board provided, however, we need town meeting to grant it to us. And we would go through, uh, the, the legislature because the statute currently says town meeting has to vote. We would be creating special act, which would allow the select board. So in the future, this board was okay with it last when it came up last year, but then we realized we needed to go to a town meeting. So this would just expedite the process if there was another situation like this going forward. So I'm, I'm going to go right to the chase. Can I have a motion, please? So moved. And a second. Second. To submit. Thank you. Is there any just further discussion on this article? So we've already discussed in. Yeah. Do we know if other communities have, uh, been successful in getting, uh, the Commonwealth to approve such a resolution? I'm not exactly sure if this is on point. There have been other communities who've made the mistake of interpreting it and having the select board vote in it. I think it's called into question. Some of that. Um, I just worked on the language with attorney Murray. I didn't ask if any other towns had taken this route. We, we might be the first one. I'm not sure. But I, I think this it's easier in the hands of the select board because as I said, if the, if there's an unfortunate incident, um, you don't have a lot of time to act if that's what the family wants to do. And short of calling a special town meeting, uh, which could cost the town a significant amount of money, this seems to be the best route to do this. So short answer. I don't know what other communities are doing, but I know that the communities have, have used their select boards and then that's called it into question. So I, I, this is the cleanest way that we could come up with. I agree. My question is whether the general court has approved such a honorable petition previously. I'm not aware, but I can certainly follow up. So there any further discussion here? Otherwise I'm going to take a vote. Tom. Yes. Thank you, Bill. Yes. Yeah. Yes. And Carol. Yes. Motion passes for zero. Okay. So CC we did, which is next. The next one on the list is, um, it's called 25 holiday road. This is going to be to appropriate funding for engineering study and appraisal. So this of course is a result of the recommendations that we have gotten from the budget task force, from the finance team, particularly finance director has been in. I think it is showing us these rather grim slides that the town has, uh, very low new growth and new growth. Of course, helps expand our tax base. We have had slides showing where we're getting, you know, some, uh, of course costs are increasing, uh, health costs going up exponentially. And so this is looking at other properties has been recommended for us to see what's available that we could possibly develop. We have looked in the database, uh, the EDC had came, went before the finance committee. And they also came in and spoke to us and concurred that there really are not a lot of large properties available, town owned large properties to develop. And, um, there's a couple, and this is one on the 25 holiday road. And so I think we've talked about this a little bit at a couple of meetings. So today we're just going to submit this and allow us to have some more conversation because we, we need to, you know, do some outreach, particularly with this, with the school committee to let them know why we're pursuing this article. Um, and, um, Tom has graciously, um, drawn it up. So I'm going to let him have the, the floor now. Sorry. For just to reiterate your earlier point, Carol, you know, commendation to both Michael McCall and Bill Kevin for exploring options for the town, help address effective shortfalls and tax revenue. Many communities that have read, including Maryland, are facing the need for the board. I think it's on us for all practical options. In the end, as with any town budget, with sale of land, decisions like these, how to use town land, are made by town meat, not by the school. But I think it's, um, responsible for us to, I say, explore ideas. So this, uh, this 13 plus acres, it's in the jurisdiction of the school. One might ask, well, why don't you just get jurisdiction first? And then, you know, pursue, you know, engineering review. But I think the response to that would be, well, why are you asking us at town meeting to change jurisdiction? We don't really have an idea of what you want to do. So by asking town meeting to authorize money to do an engineering review, to do things like quality of the land, where utilities are located, what can practically be built for it. Then, in years time, this board may choose to prevent town meeting with more definitive ideas on that property. And then, at that time, the board may bump the building, so, in support, change of jurisdiction. I mean, it's like going to then to develop it in such a way to improve the, you know, tax revenues through the town, and hopefully the, and depth of the camera. Okay, thank you. Um, does anybody want to, um, have any questions or comments here? The only thing that I would voice is that, uh, 200, I think the number is 200,000. Is that right? That seems really high to me just to determine basic, you know, viability of different projects. It's also, um, to me, like, a lot of real concrete engineering would come to anybody who is actually trying to do this. And I suspect we're not going to be the developers on that. So it would be a developer cost. Uh, so I'm okay with this at this moment in time so that it gets in there. But, um, you know, the, the cost to me is very, very high. So, um, oh, sorry. I think your point's well taken in. And, um, I think as we learn more information between now and time meeting, maybe that figure can be modified. I'll tell you that the, um, equivalent cost at the time for Alta Oxco, which is only four acres, was about 147,000, according to the deputy director. So that, and this is 13 acres. So that's kind of where the, where the, uh, number came from. But I think with more discussions, I think you're right. We may be able to reduce this, uh, as long as everybody understands I'm looking at it as a, you know, top. Yeah. I'm with you. I'm with you, Tom. So, um, let me just answer that if I may. Thank you. Sorry. We've had a couple of conversations and it's interesting that you honed in on that. There was been several, uh, numbers bounced around. And, um, I think yesterday we were thinking 150 might be right, but we put 200 in to submit. And as we go through the process, we are going to refine that because the other issue we have is we have to find a funding source for these, uh, uh, for this project. So, but thank you for mentioning that kind of reinforces what Tom and I were discussing. So, um, sorry, Bill. Uh, I would suggest that we, uh, add, uh, appropriate funding for, and insert the words, preliminary design and engineering. Uh, engineering suggests to me, you know, detailed engineered plans. I, I think that what would likely happen is that you would hire someone with a site planning background who would develop a series of alternatives. Um, you know, uh, looking at different configurations of the site, uh, uh, to address the question that Tom rightly points out. If the neighbors said, what would it look like? You would want some preliminary elevations, maybe some perspective views. Um, uh, so, and, you know, do you want to do some soil testing? Do you want to see if this, the site can perk? Uh, that kind of thing. Uh, so, um, I would suggest that we not limit it to engineering and appraisal, but preliminary design. Um, to the point of what it might cost, uh, maybe one approach would be to say not to exceed 200,000. Um, in my experience, you get into a public process, uh, you have a series of meetings, series of forums. Uh, let's revise the design. Let's look at this. Let's look at that. Uh, that could, that could take a while, uh, and therefore cost some money. So, uh, I personally would advocate leaving the number, uh, not to exceed 200,000, uh, for, uh, as, uh, for the purpose of submission and that we can, as others have suggested, refine it as we learn. I think that's what our plan is to leave it at the 200 and refine. So we're all on the same page on that, which is good. Let's talk about this. Um, now, so Bill, you're saying there are edits you would make. Are they going to be in the title or in the, in the text here? The, uh, and that, this is the article text that would go before the, the, the, the, not the, the background. Well, we'll, we'll add to the background here. So where it says right now, studies, planning analysis, relative to a determination of site suitability for potential salary development. Otherwise, does that not cover all those kinds of things? Yeah, I would, I would just change the title. You change the title to say what? To add the words preliminary engineer or preliminary design and engineering. For. Funding for preliminary design. Appropriate design for preliminary design and engineering. All right. Kelsey. Did you. You're taking notes here so I can ask you. Thank you. Got it. Um, I will, before we go off on and make a motion list, I'd like to open the floor here to Michael and, and, um, excuse me, to the town manager and the assistant town manager if they want to opine on this article as well. This one just sort of in the background and bouncing around and we really haven't had full discussions of it. So I'd like to have some, you know, input from them if they would like to opine. Please. Well, I, I applaud the, the, the efforts to look at other ways to utilize what town properties we have to advance our affordable housing stock and generate revenue. So, you know, this, this could be one method. So I do think we need to look at this. We, as everybody knows, you know, even when we talk about what to do with the town hall property. We don't have a lot of areas that we can really develop. Um, maybe down the road, we can do something with the greenway, something down there for town hall or, or, or something along those lines. But, um, I, I think this is a worthwhile endeavor to take a look here to see what could be done with the site. Um, you know, I, I was talking with Brian Kemeny. We'll have to look at funding sources and how it will be able to do this. One thing I did, uh, encounter speaking with some folks is whether or not this is considered, um, when we do a study like this, is it, is this essentially a capital improvement or not? And our new capital improvement committee is supposed to look at these types of things before they're considered by town meaning. So I don't know if that comes into play here, but just something I'm putting out there, but, um, I do think it's something that we, you know, we do have to advance. Um, housing and. Revenue generation in the town. And this is certainly a mechanism or an avenue we should be pursuing. Okay. Kelsey, would you like to feel set? Thanks. Um, yeah, you know, it's interesting. I'm just going to throw this somewhere on this topic is that when folks here that are, you know, are subsidized housing indexes over the 10%, they figure a, you know, check the box. But unfortunately it's a dynamic number. And as you know, development occurs, if somebody adds in a house or they, you know, they take down one house and put in three or four more or developer buys a piece of land. And, and the census increases. So does our level to maintain the 10%. So we do need to always be on the alert. Plus we want to be on the alert and for opportunities to provide some additional affordable housing in town. And we do like to, you know, follow our production plan. And there's not a lot of affordable housing on that particular precinct and area of town. So that would be also in compliance with our production plan. So it's really a good, a good thought. We have good thoughts here. So, um, as for this, um, do we need to go before the capital improvement committee? I am the liaison to them. Do you, why don't I reach out to the chair to see if this needs to go there? Does it think that's a good idea? Tom, sorry. Yeah. Um, in reading the charge for that committee, I, I think it would be appropriate if we were. Thinking of putting school there or may have municipal building, but given that we're, this would be sort of likely private or at least part of private development. Not so much more. Or that we're thinking about a mix, for example, you know, housing and field, something like that, that might be a different story. So, uh, that was just my only comment relative to the role of capital planning. Certainly, I'm going to be revised reviewing that myself before I make the phone call. But I think why don't I do that as the liaison, reach out and tell that. Okay. Bill, if you have any other comments, otherwise I'll take a motion. Cool. Thank you. I have a motion on this. Uh, article DD, please. Yeah. Happy to move with this board. Submit. 2026 meeting article DD. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you. Okay. No further discussion then. Tom? Yes. Ann? Yes. Bill? Yes. Carol, yes. That's four zero. Okay. So the good news is, uh, EE is being, um, tabled. And also is GG, which leaves us one last article, which is FF. This is called Planning Board Appeals, but I think there is a better title for this in the pack. It's called Planning Board Appeals. We may have to adjust the title. This is an article that the board really hasn't discussed in all. It surfaced at our meeting last meeting last week, and it had, in relation to, to some frustrations that restaurants have, residents have had or buddies have had in regards to one of the Dover amendment projects being under construction in town. And we said that we would take a look at this particular suggestion to add this piece of code, I guess, to our bylaws. So this has been drafted. I'm going to open it to the floor. I think we're, our goal might be to have a discussion and then maybe insert, excuse me, submit, and then have further discussions and gather more info if we need to before we consider inserting. So who would like to start the discussion? Go ahead, Tom. Thank you. So. I read an interesting article in the Globe the other day about challenges of getting things done in municipalities for various reasons, which I will know. Well, I'm not saying I don't put this article. I want to hear from. I can recall about that general topic and whether you think this article is will increase obstacles to the positive relevant in town, cause undue delay or not. So. I've had some conversations with town council, indirect conversations with at least one or two board members on this. I think this was born out of the frustration of a couple of the projects that are going on here in town, where as, as our rules and regulations and state statute intersect. When there was a site plan approval last spring for one of these larger projects. The only way the site plan to be appealed was they had to wait till the building permit was issued in the building permit didn't happen till almost six months later. But as part of the site plan review, other permits were issued through other boards in town, which allowed for certain work to be performed. And so the residents really didn't have a mechanism to bring this back before the planning board. That's my understanding of the genesis of this town council did say to me when we talked about it. I wasn't there at the last meeting and I know some residents that other towns have some mechanism in town council said that she's aware that other towns that have provided for something similar to this and that this would be the easiest way to allow. And to allow an abutter to appeal in a timely fashion rather than wait and have, you know, work start. But I think if somebody was going to appeal, they're either going to appeal then or when the building permit issues. It's just in at least one of these cases, there was a significant gap in time between when the site plan review was done and when the building permit issued. And so other things happen in the intervening time period. So I don't know that it's going to create more problems. I think if somebody was going to appeal, they were going to appeal. It's just it expedites the appeal. At least all parties would be able to deal that sooner than later. So I think also follow up from our meeting the other day, last week, Michael did speak with Carolyn Murray, our town council, about a couple of things. One was either all the communities that have, you know, implemented this or this particular language into their code. And she wasn't able to let Michael speak for that, but she wasn't able really to give us a definitive number. And then also, Michael, I think she said I think I printed it out here that our code nine one ninety eight dash six or three dot three does want to talk to that as well. Yeah. In that section of our code one ninety eight six or three dash three addresses many of the projects that would otherwise be called Dover projects. And she said we have the appropriate mechanism in there to review these boards and then it would be uncommon upon the boards to, you know, apply a little pressure in the event. We wanted to get more back, you know, traffic improvements or other amenities. But she said we are our bylaw is good. But by adding this into section one ninety eight. That would allow this additional mechanism for people who felt agreed to move forward in an expeditious fashion. So, again, we've not had a lot of time for discussion, but I don't feel an end. Did you want to add anything here before I make my next point? Sorry. The only thing that I'd say is I think it looks actually OK when I did some research on it. My only concern is that how we're using this in this specific situation where somebody could say we put this in place purposely to to get, you know, to essentially sidestep the Dover amendment. So that would be my only legal concern. And I'd be curious as to people's legal opinion on that. This is outside my scope and I've never I've never dealt with this before. It's just is there, you know, a specific time when somebody can say, hey, they they are purposely putting this in place in order to impede our project and therefore that does something. I'm not sure, but I did look it up in the two the two parts of the law are very connected. 17 is used a lot. Section 17. So which is what this is based on. So, you know, legally speaking, that would be my only concern is that is the fact that we're doing this right now an issue. If not, I'm feeling OK, you know. Tom, I think you got a question. You had a question. Sorry, I didn't see you. But and would you agree that this 48 section 17. Well, I'll ask a different question. You'd agree that this proposed one article simply speeds up time for someone to appear as opposed to the right to. Would you agree with that? Yeah, that's why I don't have a problem with it. It would just be if like, you know, we're somehow this really does hold up this project and they say you did this on, you know, and that caused something. I don't think that's the case, but that's happened. Right. And they would lose. It's just is there even a door for them to sue us, you know, and cause an issue. And if the answer is no, then I'm feeling really OK. You'd also agree with me that this one article, either one article is proposed or the statute would eliminate or reduce the Dover amendment status in that case. Yeah, across the board. And that was going to be my point, select board member Faye, that this is a new section 610. So it is a general appeal to the site, any site plan. It doesn't call out any particular applicants. So 603, there was two parts to the question that I was tasked with getting the other day. One was, do we have sufficient mechanisms under our zoning or site plan review for Dover amendment? And that was yes. And I think that's what select board chair Martin was asking me to just comment on. But this is a appeal, a general appeal of a site plan approval, not any particular project brought by any particular applicant. So I have a comment onto this, but go ahead, Bill. I have a number of questions. Presently, if the planning board approves a site plan and and a butter is aggrieved, is there not a 30 day period during which they can seek an appeal or appeal to the zoning board of appeal to review that decision? This is not my strong suit, but my understanding was the the appeal once the building permit is issued. And I think that's part in the law under Chapter 48. I'm going to have to do a little looking on the fly. And also, what is to prevent anyone from filing a lawsuit at any time about anything? Nothing. You can sue anybody for anything that you want. I may sue you, Bill, right now. Thanks, Anne. I was hoping you would represent me. I will do both. That'll be a problem. Very good. Go ahead. No, I'm with you. I understand your basic principle. And it's true that you could sue. You could do it as a private. You could all of a sudden say, oh, this impedes on my property in some way and do it as a civil case. But yeah. Pardon me. So I question whether there is a mechanism presently where if someone is aggrieved, they can appeal sooner rather than later. And secondly, what's to constrain anyone from suing in any event? Also, thinking ahead, let's say hypothetically that a plan comes forward on 212 Cachetuit Road or on the Holiday Road site. Whereas there's a consensus that this is a good idea, but that an abutter then, who is aggrieved, sues sooner rather than later. That may induce someone not to complete their plans, could impose a delay. You know, I appreciate the concern of the abutters about the proponents of these Doberman projects to go forward with, you know, arguably infrastructure that is intended to serve beyond the approved build out and so forth. But I just wonder if in the alternative, this will have the effect of delaying or chilling development of affordable housing or other projects that the town may feel are important. Thank you. There was, I had a conversation with Doug, who's not available, not here today, obviously. And there was another, and Michael, see if you remember this, and you're going to need help here. There was another phrase that Carolyn Murray recommended that some communities use. And on this appeal, I don't, it's certain size projects, or you either do a size or of the project or maybe the percent expansion. There's a trigger that's established. Does this sound familiar, Michael? You can expound on this. Well, I think that was really, that went more with the Dover amendment that if we were, this is separate, Madam Chair, where we wanted to look at putting together a mechanism where we would have a pre-submission review of a project if it encompassed so many square feet. So that, not withstanding it being a Dover project or regular, but if it was going to be a large project that came to town that might have impact on traffic, schools, or other town resources, that they trigger some type of meeting with the select board and other boards prior to the application being submitted. That was something that was something that was talked about with, I think Mr. Levine came forward asking about that in some resonance, but that was part of the discussion about our mechanism under 198.603, which is slightly separate from what we're talking about here. Right. So, of course, I thought Mr. Levine was attending, so I didn't write the phrase down, but so I don't know if that's something that we want to look at as well. Well, I don't know. That was another suggestion, so, Tom. Well, we could always, if we chose to submit this, that would be revised using that word. That would be within scope to add something like that, right? That's what I thought. I don't know what the sense of the board is, but my thought is, why don't we, I think we need more discussion on this, if I'm the only one who thinks that. So, maybe what we do is we, because, again, of this looming deadline tomorrow, do we want to consider submitting, and then we'll have further discussion on this and gather a little more info, and before we decide to insert or support. Does that make sense to everyone? I don't know. Okay, can I have a motion? Go ahead. I'm happy to move to this board, Chair, to submit Article FF, Planning Board of Appeals, that 2016, that time has support in our path. Thank you. Second? Second. Thank you. Any discussion? So, before we pass this, I do want to recommend, as part of our, not motion per se, but of our diligence, is that we ask, Mr. Whitney, as the Planning Board Liaison, to reach out to the Chair and get some input from that Planning Board that will be part of our future discussion. Does everyone think that's a good idea? Great. Thank you. All right. All those in favor? Ann? Yes. Bill? I'm going to abstain. Okay. Tom? Yes. And I'm going to vote yes. So, that's going to be 3-0-1, correct? Right. Perfect. Thank you. So, that concludes the articles. Thank you so much. We will get these votes. Carol, I have to go. Thank you so much for coming, Ann. I really appreciate it. All right. Talk soon, guys. Bye, Ann. All right. Ann has left at 10, 12-23. We're going to move quick now. So, the next item is to look at the town manager's review. I wanted to just get the process going, but I'm going to put this off to 1-20 when all the full board is available so we don't have to repeat stuff next week. So, the town manager's report, unless there's really some significant things. Michael, can we wait until next Tuesday? Yes. I'll just say that my town manager office hours will be on the 26th for anybody who's interested. Thank you very much. So, on the consent calendar, do we have a motion on the consent calendar? Happy to move. Happy to move approval of the consent calendar within today's packet. Do we have a second? I would ask that we pull out the item with respect to the wastewater study or the, you know, I guess it's the stormwater study. Tom, will you advise the motion to support 2-3? Limit it to paragraph 2-3. So, just 2-3, second, please? Yeah.
Bill, can I have a second? Oh, a second. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So, all those, any discussion on the consent items 2 and 3? If not, Tom? Yes. Bill? Yes. Carol, yes. And that's number 3. And go ahead, Bill. I know you had questions about the payment. Yeah, I'll just reiterate my question about the extended drawdown. And does that suggest that this study will occur over a very extended period of time? Or is this, or is the notion that the town basically fronts its expense and then gets reimbursed over time from the Commonwealth? Mr. McCall? Okay. I would have to check on that. I know Mr. Holder came over today with a certain request for reimbursement for the state. So, I don't have an answer right now. I will have to get it for the board for next Tuesday on how we do this, how we get the reimbursement, whether it's all up front or as we go. Or at the end. You might also ask him, Michael, you know, why is it over such a protracted period of time?
You know what, Bill, you asked this question twice. I'm going to put this as an agenda item for next meeting. Thank you. So, it won't be in consent when we just get this done. How does that sound? Great. Okay. So, we're all set on correspondence. All right. Great. Yep. So, I move the Select Board enter into Executive Session. A, pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 30A Section 21A7 to review and approve the Executive Session Minutes of December 1 and December 15 with the intent to hold said minutes. B, pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapters 30A Section 21A3 to review and consider for potential release the Executive Session Minutes related to the Step 3 grievance of February, and that was minutes of February 5 and February 12 of 2024. Again, also, to review and consider for potential release the Executive Session Minutes related to litigation concerning Dwayne E. Galvey versus the Whelan Zoning Board of Appeals and Michael Henley this February 6, 2023, May 20, 2024, and June 3, 2024. And, finally, to review and consider for potential release the following Executive Session Minutes related to Strategy Session in preparation for negotiations with the Town Manager, which is going to be March 4, March 18, March 22, 2024, March 10, and March 24, 2025. Is there a second to the motion to enter into Executive Session? Second. Thank you. The Chair declares that a public discussion of these matters may have a detrimental effect on the litigating, negotiating, or bargaining position of the Town. I'm going to have a roll call vote. Bill? Yes. Tom? Yes. Carol, yes. That's 3-0. The Chair invites attendance by Town Manager Michael McCall, Assistant Town Manager Kelsey Powers-Burlett, Abigail Warren, Executive Assistant to the Town Manager, and I saw Kate Ryan. Is she coming as well? Kate Ryan, Director of Human Resources, if she is available. The Committee will adjourn from the Executive Session. There will be no other public business conducted at this meeting. Thank you, everyone, and I will see you in the Executive Session. Thank you.