2006-11-16-AC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

November 16, 2006 2. STM 1, Article 7 (Joint Facilities Department). This article proposes acceptance of MGL Chapter 71, section 37M to allow the town to merge Municipal and School facilities departments. Acceptance would allow the town to merge these departments, but would not obligate the town to do so. The committee voted 9-0 in favor of this article. 3. STM 2, Article 2 (DPW Facility). This article seeks funding for a new DPW facility. A long discussion was held with Charles Lamb and many questions were put forth regarding such things as utility costs, phasing costs, issues of timing, and the current level of uncertainty in the cost estimates. Charles reported that new estimates were being vetted, and that the cost would likely be less than the current estimate of $30.5M. However no new estimate was officially on the table. Given the lack of answers to the many questions put forth by the Committee and the community, it was felt that a better approach was to finish the design stage first, thus allowing sufficient time for additional information to allow the Committee to make a future recommendation on the entire project. Based on the presentation previously made by representatives of the Permanent Building Committee, this should only introduce a short delay. A motion was made to recommend to the Board of Selectmen that they seek to appropriate at the Special Town Meeting only such additional design and engineering (D&E) money as would be reasonably necessary to complete the design process through construction documents. The motion passed 8-0, with one abstention. It was agreed that Al Levine and Charles Lamb should take a joint message to the Board of Selectmen to inform them of this Committee’s position on reducing the scope of Article 2. 4. STM 1, Article 4 (Community Preservation Fund). This article seeks approval for the use of CPA funding. Part (i) seeks to place funds from a settlement with a builder into the CPA fund for historic preservation. The committee voted 9-0 to support this part of the article. Part (ii) seeks approval to spend CPA funds on a study of the restoration of the Hancock-Clark House. There was considerable discussion of the issue of the propriety of spending public money on non-town-owned property. While there was agreement that in some cases funding such projects was appropriate, there was disagreement on whether or not they should be subject to a higher standard than projects for town-owned property. Regardless, it was felt that this project was sufficiently worthwhile to justify funding under any standard, and the committee voted to support this part of the article by a vote of 9-0. Part (iii) seeks approval to spend CPA funds to install an elevator in the Depot building. Discussion of this proposal as well focused on the question of how requests for CPA funds for non-town owned building should be treated. This - 2 -