Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-06 SB-min Select Board Meeting February 6, 2023 A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:30p.m. on Monday, February 6, 2023, in the Select Board Meeting Room of the Town Office Building. Hybrid participation was offered as well via the webinar meeting platform. Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Lucente; Vice Chair, Mr. Pato, Ms. Barry, and Mr. Sandeen were present, as well as Mr. Malloy, Town Manager; Ms. Axtell, Deputy Town Manager; and Ms. Katzenback, Executive Clerk. EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. Exemption 3: Discuss Strategy with Respect to Litigation – National Prescription Opiate Litigation Settlement Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 at 6:31 p.m. that the Board go into Executive Session under Exemption 3: Discuss Strategy with Respect to Litigation – National Prescription Opiate Litigation Settlement. Further, Ms. Hai declared that an open meeting discussion on this item may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the Town. Select Board reconvened to open session at 6:47 pm PUBLIC COMMENTS Avon Lewis, President of the Lexington Education Association, expressed concern regarding the Lexington Public School budget. He stated that the Select Board priorities in the White Book are as follows: sustainable vehicles, solar canopies, capital improvement projects, public access television, sidewalk improvements, and fiscal stability. Nowhere on this list is a commitment to provide the citizens of the Town the strong services they deserve. The current budget strategy deliberately underestimates revenue and overestimates cost, minimizing the amount of money available to departments for programs. Instead, this generate millions of dollars in so called free cash, which is being stashed away. The Board is also diverting millions out of the tax levy and into various savings accounts. She stated that this strategy is not good for the citizens of Lexington, especially its most vulnerable community members. The Town has money to pay competitive wages to its firefighters, its custodians, and its school staff, plus save for future projects. She urged Select Board members to reconsider their priorities as elected leaders in this Town. Andre Verner, Lexington High School math teacher, expressed concern regarding the Lexington Public School budget. He stated that he loves teaching at LHHS and cares deeply about this community. He stated that it is his obligation to inform the Board that the schools are facing massive problems. Teachers are burnt out and desperate. Every year teachers in his department are asked to do more and more. Teachers have also been strongly encouraged to place more students into the most advanced classes. For example, 36 sections of honors and AP classes were offered in 2017, whereas the corresponding number this year is 59, an increase of 64%. This success has required an enormous amount of work which has gone largely unacknowledged. Currently, teachers in his department are routinely working 40 % or 50% over their contracted hours. She stated she feels there is simply no way teachers can continue these impossible hours. Laura Sheppard-Brick, Lexington High School math teacher, expressed concern regarding the Lexington Public School budget. She stated that the structure of teacher jobs in Lexington is no longer adequate for the exemplary education expected from Today, good teachers create and revise hands-on and exploratory lessons and incorporate a variety of technology tools. Teachers write novel assessments and offer retakes to students who need longer to form concepts. Teachers provide more challenging problems to students who can do harder mathematics. Teachers post resources, lessons, and homework to Google Classroom and to a website. Teachers work proactively with parents, counselors, resource teachers, and students themselves via email and phone. All of these things are good for students and all of these things take home. Math teachers at the High School have a limit of 125 students at a time and 500 discretionary minutes. She stated that this means she has four minutes per student per week to create assessments and do all of the other things. This is not enough time to be able to meet the needs of students and deliver the education that Lexington parents have come to expect. Teachers need to teach no more than four classes and 100 students. The currently proposed Town budget places money into savings to one day, perhaps build a new high school. However, the students currently in the High School need more support, and they will not benefit from a new high school. She urged the Board to prioritize current students and their needs, and to provide enough money to the school to allow for every high school educator to see 100 students and four classes. Dawn McKenna, Precinct 9 Town Meeting Member, stated that she would like all to remember that Lexington is one Town that has a municipal budget and a school budget. SELECT BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS 1. Announcement: The Town Manager's FY2024 Preliminary Recommended Budget and Financing Plan, reflecting a balanced budget, was published last week. 2. Select Board Member Concerns and Liaison Reports Ms. Hai noted that the groundbreaking for the new Police Station was on January 19, 2023. Mr. Pato stated that a correspondence secretary report was filed with the packet. Since that time, an additional 119 messages were received, 67 of them related to the farm and 46 related to items, such as composting. He stated that he will address these items during the appropriate places in the agenda. DOCUMENTS: Correspondence Secretary Report - February 6, 2023 TOWN MANAGER’S REPORT 1. Town Manager Weekly Update Mr. Malloy noted that James Robinson, Management Fellow, has undertaken a survey of Fire Department EMS fees and has found that Lexington EMS Fees are significantly under market rates. He noted that a group of graduate students from Northeastern University has interest in working with the Town’s Ad Hoc Transportation Committee for a class capstone project. He also noted that the Town received its Moody's rating, and it is Aaa again. This rating also considers the Town’s ESG - Environmental, Social and Governance issues. The Town did very well on all of these ratings. Ms. Barry noted that the Center Streetscape project is essentially complete, and the Town spent over $10M on this project. She stated that she recently walked through the area and noticed an unusual amount of pavement on the sidewalk and also some bricks beginning to heave and twist. Mr. Malloy stated that he would look into this. He noted that some inferior striping in this area will also be redone. DOCUMENTS: 1-27-23, 2-3-23 CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve Select Board Meeting Minutes: December 12, 2022, December 19, 2022 and January 9, 2023 To approve and release the following meeting minutes: December 12, 2022 Select Board, December 19, 2022 Select Board and January 9, 2023 Select Board. DOCUMENTS: DRAFT 12122022 Select Board Minutes, DRAFT 12192022 Select Board Minutes, Draft 01092023 Select Board Minutes 2. Select Board Committee Appointment  Historic Districts Commission - Lee Noel Chase To appoint Lee Noel Chase as a full member of the Historic Districts Commission to fill an unexpired term set to expire on December 31, 2026. DOCUMENTS: 2023 Historic Districts Commission Application - L.N. Chase 3. Select Board Committee Resignation: Semiquincentennial Commission (Lex250) Community Member Representative - Steve Cole, Jr. To accept the resignation of Steve Cole, Jr. from the Semiquincentennial Commission (Lex250) as the Community Member Representative effective immediately. DOCUMENTS: Resignation Letter - S. Cole, Jr. 4. Town Manager Committee Reappointment: Youth Commission - Thomas Romano To reappoint Thomas Romano as the Adult Adviser on the Youth Commission for a term to set to expire on April 30, 2025. VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to approve the Consent Agenda. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1. Review and Approve Food Waste Pilot – The Board tabled this discussion to later in the meeting. 2. Presentation – Draft of Zero Waste Plan Ruth Abbe, Zero Waste Associates, explained that on April 6, 2020, Town Meeting adopted a resolution to move forward with zero waste, with some urgency to creating a Zero Waste Plan. The working group focused on rethink, reduce, and reuse, prior to recycle, compost, and recover materials. The group hosted listening sessions, and interviews with people in the community such members from the Lexington Public Schools, contractors that provide services to the Town, local businesses, and local officials. The working group created a number of measures for the project including asking the Town to lead by example through Town operations, facilities, and schools; to educate everyone to change the culture of wasting; to collaborate with institutions, community organizations, businesses in Town; to invest in clean air and healthy soil; and to look at long term costs and benefits when designing solutions. Finally, to consider environmental justice impacts of decisions, particularly with regard to the fact that a lot of the Town's waste currently goes to a waste-to-energy incinerator, which has an impact on the local community. Lexington’s diversion rate is quite good. 60% of what is discarded in Lexington is diverted through disposal through reuse, recycling, and composting. Only 40% is currently disposed as trash in landfills and incinerators. A Regional Characterization Study from 2019 shows though that most of what is thrown away is still recyclable or compostable. The working group considered opportunities to invest in new Zero Waste initiatives that could bring the Town to over 90% diversion. Some ways to do this include technical insistence and enforcement, local mandatory recycling and composting requirements, making changes to the collection system, outreach and education, the Town leading by example, deconstruction, construction and demolition requirements for new development, and policy programs. Direct actions for these items include expanding compost collection Town-wide. converting to an automated collection system using wheeled carts, evaluating every other week collection, providing reuse collection, expanding environmentally preferable purchasing, and investing in carbon farming. At Hartwell itself, she explained that the group is recommending evaluating food scrap composting at the site, expanding the reuse and recycling drop off facility, developing a glass processing element to the facility, and developing an education center. She noted that constituents in Town have already pursued important product policies and programs, such as reducing single use plastics and banning plastic straws. Expanded product policies could potentially require reusable foodware at businesses that currently provide disposable foodware. Mr. Pato stated that he feels this plan is slightly too long-term and he would prefer actionable short-term steps along the way. Mr. Malloy asked if there are any recommendations based on what the Town as a municipal government can do to affect commercial product change. Ms. Abbe stated that there was information included regarding expanding existing product policies the Town has already implemented around reductions and a pilot program for reusable foodware. Mr. Sandeen noted that commercial property owners make up a large portion of the Town. A Zero Waste Plan needs to consider how to get a handle on the waste occurring from commercial property owners. He agreed with Mr. Pato that he would like to hear some immediate actionable priority items. Ms. Abbe stated that adding a town wide organics collection is a strong recommendation and suggested considering pay as you throw in a comprehensive collection system in Town, moving to a containerized system with new carts, and technical assistance, education and outreach. In response to a question from Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Pinsonneault stated that moving to an automated pickup system, in conjunction with trash metering, will help overall by making it easier to have control over the amount allowed to be picked up, but that automated pickup alone won’t move the needle that much. Mr. Lucente stated that one challenge in implementing new techniques to divert trash, is that this will lead to diverting a lot of trash to commercial dumpsters. The Town needs to determine how to support businesses, and not throw these problems onto them. He noted that this plan should not blanketly, discriminate against groups of people that might create more trash, such as larger families. Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the next step is feedback from the Board. Additional details will then be put into the plan, and a more robust draft will be brought back to the Board for review. The group is planning to host a public meeting in the next month to get feedback from the community. This feedback will also be worked into the draft plan. Ms. Hai stated that she would like to see careful analysis of what would be required and permitted under the existing regulations regarding refuse removal. There will need to be a solid legal opinion and guidance as part of that conversation. DOCUMENTS: Draft Zero waste plan, Zero waste PowerPoint, Zero Waste Presentation Additional Information 1. Review and Approve Food Waste Pilot – The Board retook this item Dave Pinsonneault, Director of Public Works, stated that the Waste Reduction Task Group has been working on solutions to help reduce the impact of waste throughout Town. Currently there are approximately 1,300 residents who have contracted with a vendor to collect food waste at the curb. The resident pays for the service and the Town provides the collection bin free of charge (through a DEP Grant). There are also two food waste drop off stations, funded out of the operating budget, with 376 subscribers. The Task Group would like to run a pilot program to increase curbside collection of food waste. This can be done with a subsidy from the Town to offset the cost to residents. The goal is to increase participation to 2,000 residents. In addition, the recommendation is to expand an additional two drop off locations, at different locations in Town; this can be absorbed through the current operating budget. This pilot program aligns with the Select Board goal of sustainable initiatives. The recommendation is for a $30 subsidy ($60,000) and to request that the FY24 funding come from ARPA funds. Once these 2,000 homes are online, this would be the most cost-effective subsidy level, if the Town were to continue providing subsidies as new residents joined and once ARPA funds are no longer available. In response to a question from Mr. Lucente, Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the additional 700 people included in the program would be first-come, first-served. Mr. Lucente noted that he does not believe the drop off stations are doing enough to fully change the behavior. He stated that he is leaning toward a free pilot program instead, in hopes of enacting behavior changes. Mr. Sandeen agreed with Mr. Lucente’s suggestion of a no-charge program. He noted that one of the Town’s highest priorities regarding Zero Waste is to divert all organics out of the trash cycle. The way organics are currently handled is at no charge to residents. The ultimate intention seems to be for the Town to provide this service, so it should be piloted the same way it is ultimately intended to be implemented. He suggested doing the maximum amount possible at no charge to residents. He agrees with first come first served process. He stated that if we don’t divert, this organic matter will end up in an incinerator. This is an environmental justice issue, if our neighbors are breathing the incinerated ash from our trash. Mr. Pato stated that he agrees with the broadest application of the program as possible. He noted that, if this program is available for no charge to some subset of the population, it should be that way for others as well. He noted that, while the disposal facilities are an important and helpful addition, they are not equivalent to the curbside program. A no charge program is more likely to reach households that would not otherwise feel the motivation to spend money for this service. Mr. Pinsonneault agreed that the overall goal is full curbside pickup. With that, the drop off locations would be eliminated. Ms. Barry agreed with the idea of making this no charge for as many people as possible. Her goal would be for this to someday be included in the automatic trash curb collection. Ms. Hai agreed with broadening the no charge aspect of the proposal to all involved in the program. Cindy Arens, Chair Sustainable Lexington, noted that certain groups in Town are applying for an EPA grants to supplement whatever funding allocated this evening. The chance of getting the EPA grant is greater if the Board shows a commitment to this program. The proposal is for the grant to match any funds allocated by Lexington, and that this increase over the length of the three-year grant. Mr. Pinsonneault noted that he would like the program to move forward, regardless of the EPA grant. The Board discussed possible funding sources for this item. Ms. McKenna, Precinct 9 Town Meeting Member, stated that she has an issue with the proposal to fund this program with ARPA funds. This is a new program, and the Tourism Operations program already exists and is in need of funding. She noted that, if additional free cash is available, the Town should consider giving some of this to the School Department, as there are obvious needs to be addressed. Mr. Malloy noted that this is proposed to be partially funded through free cash as it is a one-time expenditure, not an ongoing operational expense. If free cash was given to the School Department as additional funding, in FY25, the budget will be short that amount. The food waste program would eventually need to be built into the budget. Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the intention would be to fund a one-year pilot program and then evaluate it for the future. Mr. Pato stated that he believes this pilot program should be funded with ARPA funds and then reviewed for future funding. Mr. Lucente stated that he is concerned with setting up a program and not sort of having a long-range view of how to fund it. Interested residents may be dissuaded if there are additional costs to them in the future. Ms. Hai noted that there appears to be uniform support of the Board for this pilot program. She requested that staff take this support and come back with proposed options for funding this program into the future. DOCUMENTS: Food waste collection pilot, Additional Presentation Information 3. LexFarm Request to Extend Current Lease for an Additional Five-Year Term Pamela Tames, Executive Director of LexFarm, explained that the Town leased the land to LexFarm for a term of 10 years, with two 5-year renewal provisions. She stated that, in the past year, the Farm has provided edible plants to more than 500 households, distributed vegetables, herbs, and mushrooms to almost 300 households, engaged 7,000 transactions in the Farm store. The Farm offers farm classes for young children, yoga classes, volunteer opportunities for adults, teens, and children, and many events. The Farm is committed to welcoming people of every age, every stage, and economic level. The Board thanked Ms. Tames and the Farm for everything it has achieved over the years. Mr. Pato stated that the Board received 113 email messages. 67 of them were in support of renewing the Farm lease; none in opposition. Also, 46 were in support of composting; none in opposition. In both groups of email messages, he was struck by the fact these were individually written email messages, carrying personal stories of why these were important things. These are true community values that were reflected in the communication received by the Board. VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to approve a five-year extension to the lease between the Town of Lexington and Lexington Community Farm Coalition, Inc. under the same terms and conditions as the original 2014 lease and further to authorize the Town Manager to execute any documents necessary related to the extension. DOCUMENTS: Presentation - LexFarm: Celebrating Lexington's Farm, LexFarmLeaseRenewalRequest, 2014 Ten-Year Lease, Lex Farm Operational Site Plan The Board took a brief recess. 4. Presentation - Proposed Street Art Pilot Project Mr. Lucente recused himself from this item. Kristen Stelljes stated that the request is for approval to move forward to design a pilot project to address concerns the neighborhood has about traffic. The neighborhood in question consists of approximately 70 homes. A traffic study completed on December 2, 2021, found 539 cars coming southbound and 526 cars going northbound on that day. The residents perceive high speeds from those cars and much of this is pass through traffic. Although there are some traffic lights in the area, current traffic design prioritizes cars over people, and thus does not address the pass-through traffic. As discussed with the Traffic Safety Group, the proposed idea is to create a Neighborway. This includes painting curb extensions on the ground, hopefully in an artistic fashion. The purpose is to suggest that the road is skinnier than it actually is. Neighborways is a nonprofit organization that supports traffic calming and similar projects across the State. There have been multiple neighborhood meetings, some with the Town. To date, 44% of households in the area are in support, including all four direct abutters to the intersection. If approval is granted by the Board, fundraising will be completed to get technical support from Neighborways. Community Preservation Act and Local Cultural Council funding will be sought in the fall. A final design will be shared with the Board in hopes of approval, with the intention of installing the pilot in 2024. Sheila Page, Transportation Safety Group, stated that the group’s initial concerns included installation of the paint throughout the whole intersection, how long the paint will last, and safety of installation of the paint itself. Ms. Page stated that the group eventually agreed on curb extension painting only for this pilot program. The pilot will also be used to see how long the paint will last for. The painting could be done while the road is closed, and neighbors would be notified. The group supports the proposed pilot program. There was consensus on the Board to allow the pilot program to continue forward at this time. DOCUMENTS: Memo1-kendallstreet, CommunityArtPilotprogramsummary, Community Art Pilot Program-presentation 5. 2023 Annual Town Meeting  Procedures for Participation at 2023 Annual Town Meeting Ms. Hai explained that this item will be discussed in further detail at next week’s meeting. Town Meeting Members will likely be asked to bring their individual tablet or laptop to Town Meeting this year.  Presentation - ATM 2023 Article 26: Amend General Bylaws – Municipal Opt-In Specialized Stretch Energy Code Maggie Peard, Sustainability Officer, stated that the purpose of Article 26 is to request to replace the existing stretch code with an opt-in specialized Energy Code, for the purpose of regulating the design and construction of buildings for more effective use of energy, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. 72% of emissions in Lexington come from buildings, with the majority coming from heating and cooling. Buildings that are using fossil fuels have no path to zero emissions. Currently, in Massachusetts, there are three available code pathways. The first is the base code, which comes from the International Energy Conservation Code. Secondly, is the existing stretch code, for which an update automatically went into effect in Lexington in January. Finally, there is the specialized code, which requires a Town Meeting vote to go into effect. The specialized stretch code, while originally conceived of as being a net zero code, does not actually fully restrict fossil fuel installations for new buildings. Instead, it requires that new fossil fuel or mixed fuel buildings be fully wired for electrification, and offset energy use with on-site renewables. The intention is to incentivize construction of healthier buildings with no on-site fossil fuel combustion. This only applies to new construction, not renovations. The adoption of this specialized code is a requirement for participating in the pilot program that DOER has issued for applications that Lexington is looking to pursue.  Presentation - ATM 2023 Article 28: Amend General Bylaws – Tree Bylaw - Increase Protected Tree Look-Back Period Gerry Paul, Chair of the Tree Committee, stated that the proposal is an amendment to the bylaws to change the Look Back period from 12 months to 36 months. This will hopefully reduce the incentive for developers to wait for that period of time and increase the probability that a developer will remove fewer trees on a property. In response to a question from Ms. Barry, Mr. Paul stated that the intention is that the 36 months will make it less economical for developers to purchase a property, pay some taxes on it, incur other costs, and then complete the development. Currently, developers can do this for one year. In response to a question from Mr. Lucente, Mr. Paul stated that it is unclear how many times this type of issue has occurred in the past, as a source for this proposal. Mr. Lucente noted that he does not want this to lead to devaluation of trees on properties. Mr. Paul stated that this will do no harm. This should reduce the probability that homeowners will cut down trees to, “make them more attractive for development.” This will increase the probability that developers remove fewer trees. It was noted that there could be more information as to how it is expected that this change will work, and possibly other towns who have exacted something similar.  Presentation - ATM 2023 Article 29: Amend General Bylaws – Tree Bylaw Changes to Tree Committee Composition Mr. Paul stated that the proposal is to add to associate or non-voting members to the roster of the Tree Committee. There has never been an open slot on the Committee for as long as it takes someone to have their application processed. There was discussion regarding the change in charge of this proposal.  Presentation - ATM 2023 Article 6: Establish Qualifications for Tax Deferrals Vicki Blier, Tax Deferral and Exemption Study Committee, explained that the current tax deferral was achieved through a petition in 2006. At that time State law required an 8% interest on deferrals; there were 16 participants and utilization was very low. The deferral income threshold is set via a periodic review of peer communities. The intention is to see if Town Meeting will accept the concept of attaching this to the cost of living. The State has an income-based tax credit program, the Senior Property Tax Circuit Breaker, which the deferral could be tied to. It has three categories and increases every year, according to the cost-of-living analysis This will ensure that all participants will be able to remain in the program, allowing the deferral to continue to serve the people that the program was intended for.  Select Board Article Presenters, Discussion and Positions Ms. Hai suggested that any Board members with potential recusals send these to Ms. Katzenback. The Board will further review this at its next meeting.  Discuss Potential Select Board Report Ms. Hai suggested that the language for this report continue much in the same way for this year. She suggested that the language contain more of a discussion regarding this year’s budget and the expectation for future budget challenges. She also suggested an additional section regarding project completions. The Board will review a draft report at a future meeting. The Board discussed and agreed that the Library Board of Trustees would submit their own report to Town Meeting separately from the Select Board Report. DOCUMENTS: Art 3 Cary lecture motion, Art 6 tax deferral motion, Article 6 TaxDeferral Presentation, Art 24 easements motion, Art 26 Municipal stretch code motion, Art 26 Municipal stretch code summary, Art 26 Municipal stretch code presentation, Art 28 Tree bylaw-look back motion, Art 28 tree look back slides, Art 29 tree committee composition motion, Art 29 tree committee composition slides, Art 30 humane bylaw correction motion, Art 33 DRAFT motion for SPRD posted on ATM webpage, List of Topics included in 2022ATM Report to Town Meeting and FY2022 Annual Town Report, Select Board Working Document - Positions 2023ATM, Letter to DOER (M Sandeen) 6. Request to Approve License Agreement with Property Owner to Existing Fence Permit on Town Property - 3 Goffe Road Mr. Malloy stated that the Select Board was previously approached by Frank Hsieh, property owner of 3 Goffe Road, with a proposal to sell him a portion of Town-owned land (abutting Bowman Elementary) in which his fence was installed. This would have required School Committee approval as well as Town Meeting. In meeting with Mr. Hsieh, the Town proposed a license that would allow his fence to remain on Town property, which was agreeable to Mr. Hsieh. Town Counsel drafted the attached, which has been reviewed by Mr. Hsieh's attorney and is in a form that the Select Board can approve and authorize the Town Manager to execute. Ms. Barry and Mr. Lucente noted that they would prefer to see the fence moved from Town property. VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 4-0-1 to approve the license agreement between the Town of Lexington and Frank Hsieh for an area of approximately 128 s.f. as shown on the attached license agreement and plan, and further to authorize the Town Manager to execute the license agreement, with the wording regarding the term corrected. DOCUMENTS: License Agreement 7. Discuss FY2024 Town Manager's Preliminary Budget & Financial Planning Ms. Kosnoff stated that she and the Town Manager discussed taking $250,000 of surplus free cash and adding it to the unallocated amount, with the rest going to cash capital, as previously indicated. Ms. Hai noted that the Board will be voting on the White Book at its next meeting. Ms. Barry, as the liaison to the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), asked about where Lexpress stands in the budget. Mr. Malloy stated that the contract has not yet been sought for this, but it should go out for bid within the next couple of days. The budget is level funded to FY23. There are two options, one for the current three routes and one reduced to two routes. Mr. Pato stated that the White Book is a level services budget with a few exceptions, where services were trimmed. Lexpress was never identified as a level funded, rather than level service facility. He stated that he expected that this would be planned for as level service. It concerns him to propose a budget knowing this item is unlikely to be level service. Ms. Hai stated that she was unclear until this evening that one route would be proposed to be eliminated from Lexpress. Ms. Kosnoff stated that one potential funding source would be the Transportation Mitigation Stabilization Fund, in case of a shortfall. Mr. Malloy noted that this bid will be advertised for approximately six weeks, and he does not necessarily expect to see bids back sooner than two months from now. Ms. Hai stated that it is known that transportation is a large issue. The Town has challenges, both in what is provided and how it is funded. She would like the Board to examine how various transportation elements are organized, funded, and coordinated. She stated that she was surprised to hear that funding may be cut to Lexpress right now. Mr. Malloy explained that the Transportation Manager did not send out the RFP in a timely manner. Thus, he did not have a number to plug into the budget. He level funded this item, assuming that once bids are received bids, the Board would have a discussion regarding how to fund it. He has presented a balanced budget. The Board can either agree to move forward with this or unbalance it. There are a number of different vacancies throughout Town government that the Board could choose not to fund in FY24, with the hopes of pursuing other priorities. The Board noted that it would like to hear additional information regarding budget items for Lexpress, the Fire Inspection Lieutenant, Assistant Superintendent for Public Grounds, composting, and trash at the next meeting. DOCUMENTS: White Book 8. Discuss Schedule for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Requests on Future Meeting Agendas The Board agreed that it would take a number of potential items up for discussion out of the regularly scheduled quarterly meetings. It will likely begin to discuss some of these items on February 27, 2023. DOCUMENTS: DRAFT 2023 ATM Warrant ADJOURN VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to adjourn the meeting at 11:08pm. A true record; Attest: Kristan Patenaude Recording Secretary