HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-13-CPC-min 1
MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
APRIL 13, 2022
REMOTE ZOOM MEETING
MEETING ID: 830 5363 9755
Committee Members Present by Roll Call: Marilyn Fenollosa (Chair), Charles Hornig (Vice-
Chair), David Horton, Jeanne Krieger, Joe Pato, Robert Pressman, Lisah Rhodes, and Melinda
Walker (arrived at 5:07 pm)
Committee Member(s) Absent: None
Other Attendees: David Kanter (Capital Expenditures Committee liaison)
1. Call to order: Ms. Fenollosa called the meeting to order at 5:04 pm, followed by r eading
the guidelines for a public meeting and for a meeting via Zoom.
2. Vote to Reconsider Article 10(e) (Center Playground Bathrooms and Maintenance
Building Renovation) and (f) (Playground Improvements – Hard Court Surfaces):
A vote by the CPC to reconsider Article 10(e) and (f) was not put forth and voted on, after
a ruling Town Counsel Mina Makarious made at a meeting today attended by Town
Meeting Moderator Deborah Brown, CPC Chair Fenollosa, and Mr. Makarious. Ms.
Fenollosa provided a summary of the procedures he outlined. Her summary had Mr.
Makarious’s approval:
• If there is a motion by Town Meeting to reconsider, the CPC will remain silent on
the matter.
• If reconsideration passes and the article is reopened:
- If asked, we will reaffirm our original recommendation to Town Meeting that
the projects be approved as stated in our Report and the original moti on.
- If any Town Meeting member tries to amend the article, the Moderator will
only permit a reduction in amount, not scope, as per CPA requirement s. If
someone does recommend such a reduction, we will ask for the approval of
the Recreation Committee, i.e., the applicant of the project, to see if they wish
this to happen.
- If the Recreation Committee tells us no, i.e., they do not wish to reduce the
amount, we will do nothing, since we have nothing new to approve.
- If the Recreation Committee tell us yes, giving us a new application, we will
request a recess to enable us (the CPC) to caucus and vote on the new
application. We will then report back to Town Meeting on our position
regarding the revised application/amount.
2
The question was asked at what point, when we actually get to vo te on either the article
or the amended article, can we vote as individuals or do we have to vote the way the
committee voted. Ms.Fenollosa assured us we can always vote however we wish. `
Mr. Hornig asked whether or not Ms. Singh wanted to do anything other than defeat both
10(e) and (f). Mr. Pato reported that he had asked her if she was planning to try to
substitute a motion and she said she had no plans to change the motion. He reported
that Ms. Singh told him that she (and others) just wanted to vote it again and debate it.
Ms. Rhodes reported that the Recreation Committee has reaffirmed its original vote and
is not changing it.
Although the likelihood that we will need to caucus is minimal, should there be a need for
one, call (978) 990-5249 on a telephone and use access code 3201341.
The discussion was concluded with Mr. Kanter saying he had spoken to Ms. Singh earlier
today. She confirmed her action was triggered because Mike Cronin, Director of Public
Facilities, had said that the area being considered for a possible high school location was
all 54 acres. Mr. Kanter pointed out to her that comment was nothing more than an
enumeration of all possibilities, but that he thought it was absolutely irrelevant to
reconsideration because the whole area has been openly discussed for a long time.
3. Committee Business: Since approval of the CPC minutes of April 11 th was not on the
agenda, action on them will be carried over to our next meeting.
4. Motion: To adjourn (moved and seconded by Jeanne Krieger and Melinda Walker,
respectively)
Approved unanimously by roll call vote at 5:18 pm: 8-0
D. Horton, recorder
Approved 6/7/22