Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
April28, 2010 <br />Minutes <br />Town of Lexington Appropriation Committee <br />April 28, 2010 <br />Place and time: Room 207, Town Office Building, 6:30 p.m. <br />Members present: Alan Levine (Chair), Glenn Parker (Vice - Chair), John Bartenstein <br />(Vice -Chair and Secretary), Rick Eurich, Susan McLeish, Eric Michelson, Joe Pato <br />Also present: Micah Niemy, Jim Wood, Charles Hornig, Ingrid Klimoff, Dawn <br />McKenna, Betsey Weiss <br />The meeting preceded the ninth session of the annual town meeting. It was called to <br />order at 6:30 p.m. <br />1. Resolution on the Munroe School (Article 36). Jim Wood presented to the <br />Committee the latest version of his proposed motion for a resolution under Article 36 <br />addressing the process to be followed in disposing of the Munroe School building. <br />Several members of the Committee stated that they were sympathetic with the goals of <br />the proposed resolution but did not agree with the language of the draft motion. The <br />Committee voted not to support the resolution in its current form by a vote of 1 -7. <br />2. Town Office Building Renovation (Article 8(1)). Betsey Weiss, Chair of the <br />Community Preservation Committee (CPC), discussed with the Committee the views of a <br />minority of four members of the CPC who had voted not to support the current proposal <br />under Article 8(1) to expend $1,185,000 in CPA funds to partially fund renovations to the <br />Town Office Building. She expressed concerns that the CPC had not been given <br />adequate information about the details of construction project on a timely basis; that the <br />contingency and soft costs were extremely high; that some of the items included in the <br />construction plans were excessively costly; that the use of CPA funds for this project <br />would deplete the funds available for other projects down the road that some members of <br />the CPC felt were of a higher priority; and that the approval of this project could have <br />negative political repercussions. She stated that the CPC would have unanimously <br />supported Article 8(1) if the project were limited to the ramp and bathroom reconstruction <br />components proposed to improve handicapped accessibility. The Committee decided not <br />to reconsider its earlier vote to support this article. <br />The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />John Bartenstein <br />Approved September 22, 2010 <br />-1- <br />