HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-20-ATM-min March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting
The 2023 Annual Town Meeting, held in the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building,
1605 Massachusetts Avenue, commenced with the William Diamond Fife and Drum Corps leading the
Lexington Minutemen to post the colors, followed by the playing of the National Anthem. Moderator,
Deborah Brown, called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m. A quorum in excess of 100 members was present
(163).
Town Clerk, Mary de Alderete, read the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting until waived. The Town
Clerk read the Constable's Return of Service.
7:42 p.m. The Moderator called attention to the voting portal and asked members approve use of the
voting system which would be recording votes on a tablet. Ms. Hai, Select Board Chair,
moved that the Town Meeting Members approve the use of the hand-held technology during
the Meetings. The Moderator noted that she would treat this as a voice vote, and asked if
there were any objections to using the tablets. As there were none, the motion carries
unanimously.
7:43 p.m. A video tutorial explaining the use of the tablets and possible issues that might arise was
presented to the Members.
7:49 pm. The Moderator opened to Portal to take attendance and noted that a quorum (160) had been
reached. She then gave a brief overview of parliamentary procedure for throughout the
meeting.
7:57 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
a. Deputy Moderator
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that Tom Diaz be approved as Deputy Moderator.
7:57 p.m. The Moderator noted that unless there were objections, she would consider this a voice vote.
As there were no objections the motion carries unanimously. The Moderator thanked the
Members and Mr. Diaz for agreeing to serve in this capacity. Mr. Diaz was sworn to the
faithful performance of his duties by the Town Clerk.
7:58 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
b. Report of the Committee on Cary Lectures
MOTION: Ms. Goldberg moves that the report of the Committee on Cary Lectures be received and
placed on file and the Committee discharged. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Rita Goldberg, Member of the Committee on Cary Lectures, presented information on upcoming Lectures
and asked the Members to consider attending them in person.
7:59 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 3:
ARTICLE 3 APPOINTMENTS TO CARY LECTURE SERIES
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the Moderator appoint a committee of four to have the charge of the
lectures under the wills of Eliza Cary Farnham and Suzanna E. Cary for the current year.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, noted the unanimous support of the Select Board for the
Article.
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:08 P.M. As there were no questions, the Moderator opened voting on Article 3.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Approve Article 3 - Cary Lecture Series
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
159 2 1
MOTION CARRIES
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
k. Report of the Cary Library Trustees
MOTION: Ms. Barry moves that the report of the Cary Library Trustees be received and placed on
file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Suzanne Barry, Select Board Member, gave a brief overview of the Cary Library Trustees Report which
had information about planned renovations to the children's room of the library which had originally come
to Town Meeting in 2019 under Article 20h.
8:11 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Articles 31 and 32.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Articles 31 and 32. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 31
ARTICLE 31 FAIR TRADE RESTRICTIONS- FUR PRODUCTS (Citizen Petition)
MOTION: That Chapter 9 of the Code of the Town of Lexington be amended by adding the
following Section 9-8:
Section 9-8. Trade in Fur Products.
A. Purpose and Findings.
To protect the health and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Lexington, this ordinance will restrict
trade in fur products in the Town. The Town finds that the fur production process is energy intensive and
has a significant environmental impact, including air and water pollution.
The Town also finds that animals that are slaughtered for their fur endure tremendous suffering. The
Town believes that eliminating the sale of fur products in the Town of Lexington will decrease the
demand for these cruel and environmentally harmful products, and promote community health and
wellbeing, as well as animal welfare, and, in turn, will foster a more humane environment and enhance
the reputation of the Town.
B. Definitions.
The following words as used in this Section shall have the following meanings:
"Fur" means any animal skin or part thereof with hair, fleece, or fur fibers attached thereto, either in its
raw or processed state.
"Fur product"means any article of clothing or covering for any part of the body, or any fashion accessory,
including but not limited to handbags, shoes, slippers, hats, earmuffs, scarves, shawls, gloves, jewelry,
keychains, toys or trinkets, and home accessories and decor, that is made in whole or part of fur. "Fur
product" shall not include any of the following:
a. An animal skin or part thereof that is to be converted into leather, or which in
2
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
processing will have the hair, fleece, or fur fiber completely removed;
b. Cowhide with the hair attached thereto;
c. Deerskin with the hair attached thereto;
d. Lambskin or sheepskin with the fleece attached thereto;or
e. The pelt or skin of any animal that is preserved through taxidermy or for the purpose
of taxidermy.
"Non-profit organization" means any corporation that is created for charitable, religious,
philanthropic, educational, or similar purposes under state or federal law.
"Offer for sale" means to advertise or otherwise proffer a fur product for acceptance by another person or
entity.
"Sell" means to exchange for consideration, barter, auction, trade, lease or otherwise transfer for
consideration.
"Taxidermy"means the practice of preparing and preserving the skin of an animal that is deceased
and stuffing and mounting it in lifelike form.
"Ultimate consumer" means an individual who buys a fur product for their own use, or for the use of
another, but not for resale or trade.
"Used fur product" means a fur product that has been worn or used by an ultimate consumer.
C. Prohibition of Sale of Fur Products.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall sell, offer for sale, display for sale, trade, or
otherwise distribute for monetary or nonmonetary consideration a fur product in the Town of Lexington.
For purposes of this Section, the sale of a fur product shall be deemed to occur in the Town of Lexington
if:
(1) The buyer takes physical possession of the fur product in the Town; or
(2) The seller is located in the Town.
D. Exemptions.
This section shall not apply to the sale, offer for sale, display for sale, trade, or distribution of:
(1) A used fur product by an individual (excluding a retail transaction), non-profit
organization, or second-hand store, including a pawn shop;
(2) A fur product required for use in the practice of a religion;
(3) A fur product used for traditional tribal, cultural, or spiritual purposes by a member of a
federally recognized or state recognized Native American tribe; or
(4) A fur product where the activity is expressly authorized by federal or state law.
E. Enforcement.
(1) Section 9-8 of this Bylaw shall be enforced by the Town Manager or their designee pursuant
3
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
to G.L. c. 40, § 21D, according to the following schedule:
1st Offense: $50 2nd
Offense: $100
3rd & Each Subsequent Offense: $300
Each fur product and every day upon which any such violation shall occur shall constitute a
separate offense.
(2) This Chapter may also be enforced through any other means available in law or equity.
Nothing in this Chapter may be construed to alter or amend any other legal obligations applicable to
the sale of fur, or any other entities, under any other law or regulation.
F. Severability.
The invalidity of any provision of this By-Law shall not invalidate any other section or provision thereof.
G. Effective Date.
This By-Law shall become effective upon satisfaction of the requirements for Attorney General approval
and for posting or publication provided in M.G.L. c.40, § 32, and no earlier than 6 months after passage.
1. That Section 1-6 of the Code of the Town of Lexington be amended by adding under Chapter
1-6 the following:
§9-8:
1st Offense: $50 2nd
Offense: $100
3rd & Each subsequent Offense: $300
8:14 p.m. A presentation on Article 31 took place.
8:19 p.m. Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, noted the unanimous support of the Select Board for
the Article.
8:22 p.m. The Moderator called for a vote on Article 31.
8:24 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, noted that the tablets seemed to not allow signup in any of the question
or debate lines. The Moderator asked that he keep an eye on the process for the next Article
to see if it continued to happen.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Approve Article 31 - Fair Trade Restrictions —Fur Products (Citizen Petition)
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
161 2 2
MOTION CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
4
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:24 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 32.
ARTICLE 32 DUNBACK MEADOW SEWER EASEMENT (Citizen Petition)
MOTION: Mr. Michelson moves that the Town authorize the Select Board, with the approval of the
Conservation Commission, to grant permanent easements over portions of the Dunback Meadow
Conservation Land to the owners of property bordering Bacon Street in order to allow connections to the
Town sewer system, with the exact locations to be determined by the Department of Public Works, the
Conservation Commission, and the applicant at such time as the applicant requests approval of such
connections, and authorize the Select Board to petition the General Court for an act to permit such
easements over conservation land to the extent necessary.
Ms. Hai, Select Board Chair, noted the unanimous support of the Select Board for passage of the Article.
8:29 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, noted that the tablets still would not allow signup in any of the question
or debate lines.
8:29 p.m. The Moderator called a brief recess in order for the issue to be researched.
8:34 p.m. The Moderator explained that an updat had taken place in the system over the weekend, and
was the cause of the glitch. She pointed out which microphones would be used for yes, no, or
questions.
8:35 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting back to Order.
8:36 p.m. Mark Anderson, Pct. 9, asked for the clarification on why the Article had to come before
Town Meeting.
Charles Hornig, owner of the property, said that as this was a permanent easement that
crossed Town-owned property, it was required. He further mentioned that there would be
future approvals needed by the Select Board, as well as Conservation Commission as a part
of the property was protected by Article 97. It also would require an approval of 2/3 in each
house of the State legislature, including sign-off from the Governor's Office, then comes
back to the Select Board and Conservation Commission to grant the easement and was a very
lengthy process.
8:38 Steven Heinrich, Pct., 3, asked for clarification on what had taken place 25 years ago in the
process as it had been mentioned in the Presentation.
Mr. Hornig noted that in 1998 he had brought forward Article 42 and it was discussed and
passed overwhelmingly, but they were unable to pursue the idea as the cesspool needed an
immediate upgrade to a septic system due to a failure and the timing didn't work out at that
time.
8:39 p.m. Amy Weinstock, Pct. 2, asked whether Counsel could weigh in on whether the property (once
approved) would be eligible to participate in the Open Space Redistricting.
Mina Makarious, Town Counsel noted that the Open Space bylaws required a number of
factors and stated that without specific criteria, it was hard to make a determination about
what could be done.
Ms. Weinstock followed up by asking what the implications of it would be and whether it
would be a good idea to move ahead without the Article.
The Moderator asked for clarification from Ms. Weinstock on whether she was asking about
tabling the Article. When Ms. Weinstock stated that she was, the Moderator had Counsel
explain that as there were many different requirements for the OSRD the time to discuss it
would be at an application process and not during attempting an easement, and could not be
5
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
answered in the abstract. The Moderator stated that under those circumstances there would
be no purpose to tabling at this time and suggested moving forward on the merits.
8:43 p.m. Mr. Hornig stated that he did not believe that there was a requirement for a property to be on
public water/sewer in order to participate in OSRD.
8:44 p.m. Tina McBride, Pct. 7, asked why the plan couldn't be changed to connect through private
land.
Mr. Hornig explained that while this was possible, it would be a longer connection and take it
through 200' of wetlands and the floodplain.
Ms. McBride followed up by asking why this possibility had not been shown on the
presentation video.
Mr. Hornig stated that when he had made the video, it hadn't yet been suggested.
8:46 p.m. Leonard Morse-Fortier, Pct. 7, moves the following Amendment to the Article:
That the Town authorize the Select Board, with the approval of the Conservation
Commission, to grant permanent easements over portions of the Dunback Meadow
Conservation Land to the owners of property bordering Bacon Street in order to allow
connections for no more than two dwellings to the Town sewer system, with the exact
locations to be determined by the Department of Public Works, the Conservation
Commission, and the applicant at such time as the applicant requests approval of such
connections, and authorize the Select Board to petition the General Court for an act to permit
such easements over conservation land to the extent necessary.
8:47 p.m. The Town Clerk noted the time in order to start the Amendment time allotted.
Mr. Hornig read a statement from his family stating that he and his family did not support the
last minute amendment and that it was a troubling precedent. He noted that the Board of
Health hoped to make the sewer available to all properties. He further noted that it seemed to
be a personal attack as the sewer had never been limited for any properties.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, noted that they were unanimously against the
Amendment as written.
8:51 p.m. Mr. Morse-Fortier asked for clarification of why they had rejected the idea.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, stated that while he couldn't speak for the whole
Board,they had listened to comments from the proponent of the Article, and this is what they
had voted.
8:54 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, stated that she was rising in opposition of the Amendment.
As there were no further questions or debate,the Moderator called for a vote on the
Amendment
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Amend Article 32
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
19 137 10
MOTION TO AMEND FAILS
8:54 p.m. Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, noted that the Portal queue was now working.
8:56 p.m. The Moderator stated that they were now back to the Main Article.
6
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:58 p.m. Martin Martignetti, Pct. 3, called the question. The Moderator called for two voice votes
regarding terminating debate, but as the results could not be determined, she opened the
Portal to determine the outcome.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Terminate Debate
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
73 81 15
MOTION TO TERMINATE DEBATE FAILS
9:01 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to debate the Article. Mr. Hornig showed a map referring
to the two options going across his property to the sewer line.
9:14 p.m. Marsha Baker, Pct. 7, called the question. Motion to terminate debate approved by majority
voice vote. Mr. Hornig made summary comments thanking the Members for the
consideration.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 32.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Approve Article 32 - Dunback Meadow Sewer Easement (Citizen Petition)
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
141 19 9
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 26. Ms. Hai moved to take up Article 26.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
ARTICLE 26 AMEND THE GENERAL BYLAWS —MUNICIPAL OPT-IN SPECIALIZED
STRETCH ENERGY CODE
MOTION:
Ms. Arens moves that the Town replace Chapter 115 of the Code of the Town of Lexington entitled
"Stretch Energy Code"with the "Specialized Energy Code"pursuant to the entirety of 225 CMR 22 and
23, including Appendices RC and CC, and future editions, amendments or modifications in substantially
the form below:
Chapter 115: SPECIALIZED ENERGY CODE
115-1 Purpose
The purpose of the Specialized Energy Code at 225 CMR 22.00 and 23.00, including Appendices RC and
CC, is to provide a more energy efficient and low greenhouse gas emissions alternative to the Stretch
Energy Code or the baseline Massachusetts Energy Code, applicable to the relevant sections of the
building code for both new construction and existing buildings.
115-2 Definitions
Effective Date—January 1, 2024.
International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) —The International Energy Conservation Code
(IECC), a building energy code created by the International Code Council. The baseline energy
conservation requirements of the MA State Building Code are the IECC with Massachusetts amendments,
as approved by the Board of Building Regulations and Standards and published in state regulations as part
of 780 CMR.
7
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Specialized Energy Code—The energy code codified by the entirety of 225 CMR 22 and 23 including
Appendices RC and CC, including the residential and commercial appendices added to the Massachusetts
Stretch Energy Code, based on amendments to the respective net-zero appendices of the IECC to
incorporate the energy efficiency of the Stretch Energy Code.
Stretch Energy Code—The energy code codified by the combination of 225 CMR 22 and 23 not
including Appendices RC and CC,
115-3 Specialized Energy Code
A. The Specialized Energy Code is herein incorporated by reference and shall apply to residential and
commercial buildings in the Town of Lexington after the Effective Date.
B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Town is accepted into the Department of Energy Resources
Fossil Fuel-Free Demonstration Project, residential and commercial buildings in the Town shall, to
the extent not otherwise exempt under any bylaws of the Town of Lexington, be subject to the
Specialized Energy Code modified as follows:
1. Low-rise Residential Code (225 CMR 22 Appendix RC): Sections RC102 and
RC101 "Zero Energy Pathway" and "Mixed Fuel Pathway" shall not be permitted for use
for new construction, and major renovations shall not install any new combustion
equipment.
2. Commercial and All Other (225 CMR 23 Appendix CC): Sections CC 103 and
CC 105 "Zero Energy Pathway" and "Mixed-Fuel Pathway" shall not be permitted for new
construction, and major renovations shall not install any new combustion equipment.
C. The Specialized Code is enforceable by the Building Commissioner.
Maggie Peard, Sustainability and Resilience Officer for the Town of Lexington, presented information on
the Article.
9:26 p.m. Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that the Board was unanimous in their support of
passage of the Article.
9:28 p.m. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, asked what impact this Article would have on life sciences buildings
that required a generator set for back-up power.
Ms. Peard noted that there were exceptions to allow this type of use.
9:29 p.m. Ricki Pappo, Pct. 2, and Chair of the Lexington Climate Action Network, encouraged
Members to vote in favor of the Article.
Anil Ahuja, Pct. 5, asked about how this might work for some roofs that did not meet solar
qualifications or might be shaded by trees.
Ms. Peard stated that there was a solar defined area and there were exceptions if the roof did
not face the correct direction or would require cutting down too many trees.
9:30 p.m. Tina McBride, Pct. 7, stated that the Article would move Lexington in the right direction in
noticing the climate emergency.
9:31 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, posed a hypothetical question that if she wanted to add homes to her
historic property in the historic district, whether it would have to be all electric. Ms. Peard
said that the stretch code only applied to new construction. Ms. McKenna asked for
clarification if new construction meant a new house and not an addition to an existing home.
Mr. Peard confirmed this information.
9:34 p.m. Cindy Arens, Pct. 3, thanked Ms. Peard for her work on the Article and stated that it provided
good consumer protection and there were well thought out exceptions included.
9:38 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 26.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Amend the General Bylaws —Article 26 -Municipal Opt-In Specialized Stretch Energy
Code
8
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
154 3 4
MOTION CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
9:40 p.m. Rita Goldberg stated that she wasn't able to vote. The Moderator stated that in the future she
could stand or hold up her hand if she were having an issue.
9:41 p.m. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel, noted that Ms. Arens might wish to serve a Notice of
Reconsideration due to the impact of the Article on future Article 27. The Moderator noted
that this would preserve options if they needed them later.
9:42 p.m. Cindy Arens, Pct. 3, served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 26.
9:42 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 28. Ms. Hai moved to take
up Article 28. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
ARTICLE 28 AMEND GENERAL BYLAWS - TREE BYLAW -INCREASE PROTECTED
TREE LOOK-BACK PERIOD
MOTION: Mr. Paul moves that the Town's Tree Bylaw, Chapter 120.8.B.1 of the Code of the Town of
Lexington, be amended as follows, where stndek thfetig exl s to be removed and bolded text is to be
added:
Additionally, if any protected trees were removed during the 4-2-36 months preceding the application for
the building or demolition permit, a tree removal and mitigation proposal regarding the protected trees
already removed shall be submitted to the Building Commissioner.
Mr. Paul presented information regarding the Article.
9:48 p.m. Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that there were 3 Members in favor of the Article
and 2 awaiting Town Meeting discussion.
9:49 p.m. Rita Goldberg, Pct. 2, asked whether the bylaw would have any impact on large subdivisions.
Mr. Paul stated that it would, and showed an example. He noted that when a developer builds
homes, they build them one at a time, so the later houses are built after the trees are cut. For
large subdivisions, after the first house, there was no incentive for builders to minimize the
number of trees cut.
9:54 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, asked how the look back period was decided. Mr. Paul said that it
should be long enough to discourage developers from removing trees first. Mr. Baskin asked
whether this would be a real deterrent to builders. Mr. Paul noted that he didn't know, but if
it turned out to be insufficient, it could always be brought back to a future town meeting to be
made longer.
9:57 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the Article including whether or not
enforcement would be possible. Mr. Paul noted that anyone could report a tree cutting to the
Tree Committee for investigation.
10:17 p.m. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, called the question. Motion to terminate debate approved by majority
voice vote.
10:18 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 28.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Amend the General Bylaws —Article 28 - Tree Bylaw—Increase Protected Tree Look-
Back Period
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
149 10 1
MOTION CARRIES
9
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
10:22 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 22, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by unanimous
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
March 22, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the second session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:31 p.m.
on Wednesday, March 22, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(165).
The Moderator explained seating and parliamentary procedure for the evening. She mentioned that the
plan was to exclusively use the web portal. The Moderator gave notice of quorum at 7:35 p.m. and stated
that she would leave the Portal open while more Members came into the Hall.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
i. Reports of the Superintendent of Minuteman Regional Technical High School
MOTION: Ms. Judy Crocker moves that the reports of the Superintendent of Schools be received and
placed on file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Judy Crocker introduced Dr. Kathleen Dawson, Superintendent Director for the Minuteman Regional
Technical High School.
Dr. Kathleen Dawson, Superintendent of the Minuteman Regional Technical High School presented
information on budget requests and the School's priorities including addressing higher requests for
enrollment. She noted that the shifts in enrollment affected the Member Towns share.
7:50 p.m. The Moderator noted that Dr. Dawson would now be available to answer questions.
7:51 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, welcomed Dr. Dawson to Lexington and asked whether Spring
vacation programming might be coming back. Dr. Dawson said that they would and other
programs would also come back next year.
7:53 p.m. Bob Balaban, Pct. 5, said that the presentation didn't mention State funding. He asked if they
could anticipate receiving any. Dr. Dawson said that there was, and that the governor had
proposed aid from Chapter 70 and 71 for transportation which was more than anticipated, but
they were awaiting final budget. She noted that if there was a difference, it would be
returned to the Member towns. Mr. Balaban asked if they had an estimate on what they were
expecting to receive. Dr. Dawson said that the overall difference was around $750K over
what they had estimated in Chapter 70a but they wouldn't be sharing the actual amount with
member Towns until the budget process was complete.
Jeff Fennelly, Pct. 1, asked if there was an endowment fund for the High School that people
could contribute to voluntarily. Dr. Dawson said that they could receive donations based on
how the donor would like them used, such as a scholarship. Mr. Fennelly asked whether the
School would be open to create an endowment fund. Dr. Dawson said that they had a
Minuteman Foundation so that there were a few ways that supporters and community
members could donate. Mr. Fennelly asked if the High School kept track of how graduates
do after they've moved on. Dr. Dawson noted that they had started tracking and working to
improve data to show success rates after high school. She noted that with the majority of
10
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
students, 2/3 went on to college and 1/3 straight into a career or the military. She said that
there was a strong alumni base that had been proven to be very successful.
Eric Michelson, Pct. 1, wanted to inform the Members where to find information on Dr.
Dawson's presentation and that there was more information about the amounts discussed in
the Appropriation Committee's report.
7:56 p.m. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, asked how students got selected to attend. Dr. Dawson said that per
the regional agreement, priority was given to Member towns, and as of then, there were no
seats for out of district students. She said that the admission process was a blind process, but
there were different priorities assigned for grades, attendance, an interview and
recommendations. She stated that the process has been reviewed to ensure that barriers
weren't created, but rather, opportunities. Dr. Dawson noted that Lexington was slotted with
22 seats and they had received 40 qualified applicants. Overall 35 offers had been made, but
it was understood that not all students would accept. Currently, they had 29 accepted and had
5 on the wait list.
7:58 p.m. Weidong Wang, Pct. 8, noted that it looked as if in 2021 it had been at capacity, but the
presentation showed adding 32 more students. He asked for a projection for the future. Dr.
Dawson noted that currently there were 680 students, and the projection for Fall was for 734
students, but that was before students transfer or decline and those will be backfilled so they
wouldn't fill with more than 720 students. Dr. Dawson noted that they were looking into
renovating another building for more classrooms and taking a look at projections for future
plans.
8:02 p.m. Steve Kaufman, Pct. 5, noted that there was money in the budget for more work on the
athletic fields and asked what that was directed toward. Dr. Dawson said that they had
completed Phase I debt service for lighting and to complete Phase II they were hoping for a
partner that would front the cost and in return and then lease the facilities at a nominal rate
until they saw a return on investment. She noted that there was no new money in the budget
except towards capital stabilization. Mr. Kaufman asked if the Town could have access to
use the fields. Dr. Dawson noted that the first priority would be to the Minuteman students,
then the strategic partner, and then the member Towns.
8:04 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, recalled that Dr. Dawson had spoken about another building that might
be incorporated as classrooms. He asked the proximity of the other buildings and how
students would gain access to it. Dr. Dawson noted that while she did not have an exact
measurement, the area was right before the athletic fields and said that the conversation had
been that because of the way the career tech programs operated, they were on a week on,
week off schedule and children were in there for the full day. Those programs would be
moved to this location for the full day and then arrangements would be made to shuttle the
children to the main campus for lunch, or have lunch there.
8:07 p.m. Mark St. Lewis, Pct. 5 asked what type of strategic partners they were interested in and
whether it would be one or many. Dr. Dawson stated that they were in conversations with
one in particular. She noted that they had put out an RFP to complete the athletic complex
and they were talking through the details to decide whether it would be finalized. She also
noted the possibility of adding a new member town as they had received requests from 4
other towns to join. She said that this was not a quick process, and that the current 9 towns
would have to accept it through a vote and they couldn't move forward without it. She stated
that while more member towns lowered the membership assessment, it could also possibly
mean more students on wait list unless they could find partners to expand their facility. Mr.
St. Lewis asked the if there was a cost estimate for the next phase. Dr. Dawson stated that
Phase II was estimated to be around $13 million.
The Moderator thanked Dr. Dawson for the generosity of her time and welcomed her to Lexington.
8:11 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
11
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
j. Reports of the Planning Board
MOTION: Mr. Peters moves that the reports of the Planning Board be received and placed on file.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Mr. Peters gave a brief presentation regarding recent items the Planning Board had and noted their work
on various sections of the Zoning regulations and overlays, along with goals for the coming year.
8:14 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Articles 36, 37, 38, and 39. Mr.
Lucente moved to take up Articles 36, 37, 38 and 39. Motion approved by unanimous voice.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
j. Reports of the Planning Board
MOTION: Mr. Peters moves that the reports of the Planning Board be received and placed on file.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. (Article 36 Report)
ARTICLE 36 AMEND ZONING BYLAW AND MAP CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
MOTION: Mr. Peters moves that the Zoning Map be amended as follows, and further that non-
substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply with the numbering format of
the Code of the Town of Lexington:
1. Amend the Zoning Map to rezone the following areas into the CB District:
a. Lots 5A, 79, and 80 on assessor's map 49; and
b. All portions of the area bounded by Massachusetts Avenue, Meriam Street,the northern sideline
of the Minuteman Commuter Bikeway, and Grant Street not currently located in the CB District
except lot 11 on assessor's map 49 (Emery Park).
Existing:
�-DRIVE QAY7PEt 1L
OOK
ul
-�
Proposed:
12
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
fff
Charles Horning, Member of the Planning Board,presented information on the Article.
Mr. Hornig noted that the Planning Board unanimously recommended approval of the Article. He also
noted that the work under Articles 36 and 34 were independent of each other and had different benefits for
the Town.
Suzanne Barry, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported passage of
Article 36.
Jerry Michelson, Chair of the Lexington Center Committee, stated the unanimous support of the Lexington
Center Committee.
Bridger McGaw, Vice Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC), said that no
formal vote had been taken by the Committee due to a portion they did not support regarding the inclusion
of Emery Park at the time and therefore took no position on the Article.
8:18 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, noted that she had still not heard a good reason why the Planning
Board change to GC a few years ago, and now they were being asked to take it out of the GC
and put it into different zoning. Mr. Horning stated that when the Town had created the GC
(government civic district) all town owned parcels were put into it without particular plans
for future use, including the Miriam street parking lot. He continued by saying that since that
time there had been many discussions of possible uses of the Miriam Street Parking lot uses
that might include parking, housing, commercial, or institutional elements, so the Planning
Board felt at this time it should recognize this. Ms. McKenna asked why they shouldn't wait
to rezone the area until after the Plan had been better developed. Mr. Hornig noted that they
chose this year to look at the boundaries of the Central Business District and believed it was
appropriate for the zoning on the lot to be consistent with the rest of Lexington Center. Ms.
McKenna mentioned that Mr. Horning had stated that Article 34 was independent, and asked
if Article 34 were approved would that be the "subsequent action"by Town Meeting to
enable by-right development. Mr. Horning stated that moving the parcel in Article 36 into
the Central Business District was for permitted uses of the parcel under the CB District,
which were largely commercial uses, and it would give dimensional controls such as the 25'
height limit. He further noted that Article 34 was completely separate and would permit a
different set of uses with different height limit, opening further possibilities but that they
didn't supersede each other. He said that Article 36 opens the possibility of commercial uses,
included mixed uses with parking, and Article 34 would open the possibility of housing uses.
Ms. McKenna asked whether the Planning Board had a potential idea of a planned use that
they would support. Mr. Horning stated that Planning Board had not had discussions of
future use of the property, but that he had been involved with other committees in the past
13
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
that had discussed it. He noted that at one point it had been considered for a senior center, a
parking garage with affordable housing above it, or ground floor retail with affordable
housing.
8:25 p.m. Pam Hoffman, Pct. 7, asked whether the parcels under Article 36 were already included in
Lexington Center parcel for Article 34. Mr. Horning said that as things stood,the parcels
proposed for the CB District in Article 36 were identical for Article 34. Ms. Hoffman
followed up by asking that if Article was voted down, which parcels would remain in the
Lexington Center District for Article 34. Mr. Horning said that if Article 36 were approved,
it permitted commercial uses with a maximum of 25 feet and if Article 34 were approved it
permitted multi-family uses with a max height of 52 feet. If both were approved, there could
be mixed uses with a maximum height of 52 feet and said that one did not replace the other.
Ms. Hoffman asked if Article 36 were voted down and Article 34 passed, what would be
permitted at 16 Clarke Street and the properties on Main Street. Mr. Hornig said that the
current use could continue as a non-conforming use or could be replaced by multi-family
housing but they could not have mixed uses, so the existing commercial use would need to be
removed from those properties.
8:30 p.m. Steve Kaufman, Pct. 5, read a note from a constituent expressing concern regarding the
parking situation. He noted that the person had mentioned a lot of concern about the loss of
parking, the parking lot being full any day of the week, and that rezoning the property in
order for the town to build seemed ludicrous. Mr. Kaufman noted that while the comments
were not from him, he would like to hear Mr. Hornig's thoughts about the loss of parking.
Mr. Horning said that parking such as currently existed was a permitted use in both the GC
and the proposed CB District. He noted that there was not a reason for the parking to go
away. Mr. Horning stated that the use of the property could not be changed without a vote of
the Select Board and of Town Meeting so any change such as reconfiguration would require
first going to the Select Board and then to Town Meeting for a vote. Mr. Kaufman asked for
clarification that this Article was simply permitting replacement of parking but that there was
no specific plan yet to replace it. Mr. Horning noted that there was a strong understanding of
parking concerns in the Center, but that nothing in the current Article required nor expected
anything to change—but that it permitted them to start talking about it.
8:33 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to debate and discuss the Article.
8:41 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, called the question. Motion to terminate debate approved by majority
voice vote.
8:42 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 36
Motion to Amend Zoning Bylaw and Map Central Business —Article 36
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
144 22 5
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
8:44 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
j. Reports of the Planning Board
MOTION: Mr. Creech moves that the reports of the Planning Board be received and placed on file.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. (Article 37 Report)
14
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 37.
ARTICLE 37 AMEND ZONING BYLAW ACTION DEADLINE FOR MAJOR SITE PLAN
REVIEW
MOTION:
Mr. Creech moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be
amended as follows, where sf..dek thfough text is to be removed and underlined text is to be added, and
further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply with the
numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
1. Amend §135-9.5.4.4 as follows:
4. The Planning Board or its designee shall review and act upon the site plan, requiring such
conditions as necessary to satisfy the Review Standards and the Zoning Regulations, and notify the
applicant of its decision. The decision shall be in writing and shall be rendered within 60 days (for a
minor site plan review) and 150 days (for a major site plan reviews from the date of submission of a
complete application.
Mr. Creech presented information on the Article
Robert Creech, Planning Board Chair, said that on February 15, 2023, after 3 public hearings, the
Planning Board had voted 5-0 to unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
Mr. Pato, Select Board Member stated that the Select Board had voted with 4 members in support and 1
awaiting discussion on the Article.
8:50 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, questioned whether the Bylaw took place immediately upon passage.
Mina Makarious, Town Counsel, stated that it would take effect"effective immediately"but
they would first need to await approval of the Attorney General's office, which could be 90
days after Town Meeting. Mr. Kanter followed up by asking if someone had filed and the
change was now in effect, whether that person would go with the new rule or proceed with
whatever was in effect at the time of filing. Mr. Makarious said that this was an unusual
situation because the application was made after the first notice of public hearing, it would
arguably be subject to the new rule when it took effect, however this was unusual in that it
was a procedural rule, so there could be a case when someone would still be entitled to the
shorter 60 day review, but thought that any such person would have their decision before the
AG's approval.
8:51 p.m. Umesh Shelat, Pct. 7, noted that he fully supported the Article.
8:52 p.m. John Zhao, Pct. 5, asked what the current typical turn around was. Mr. Creech stated that this
was in the FAQs presented by Planning Director McCabe.
Abby McCabe, Planning Director, added that the lab project Mr. Creech had mentioned came
before Town Meeting last spring and a lot of site plan reviews in the past had gone through a
public process including a preliminary review by the Planning Board and through a Town
Meeting. She stated that the reason the Planning Board had brought this forward now was
because with some of the recently zoning changes, the site plan review was becoming the
primary application process with the Planning Board, where it used to be most site plan
reviews would be combined with a Special Permit or a Town Meeting. Ms. McCabe said that
generally, most new construction projects required 3-5 months to go through the Planning
Board and the public hearing process due to time needed for notifications to abutter notices,
etc.
8:55 p.m. Leonard Morse Fortier, Pct. 7, asked for the definitions of minor and major. Mr. Creech
defined minor for an addition up to 2,000 sq. ft. and major was 5,000 sq. ft. or more it was a
major site plan review. He further noted that it also involved parking, if more than 20
parking spaces were being added, it would also be considered major and less than that would
be minor.
15
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:56 p.m. Deepika Sawney, Pct. 6, asked if anything in the Article would affect the High School
project. Charles Hornig, Planning Board Member, noted that when there was a site plan
review for schools, there would be a specific exemption for Lexington Public Schools.
8:57 p.m. A Member from the floor asked for the Moderator to poll the Select Board on the one
Member who had been waiting for a decision after debate. Select Board Member Doug
Lucente noted that he had been the one awaiting conversation and said that he had been
concerned about the length of time changing from 60 to 150 days, although he recognized
longer was necessary, he felt that they had to balance ensuring that those who wanted to build
developments found an acceptable and reasonable timeframe. He noted that after hearing
debate he did appreciate the concerns, but would be voting "no".
Mr. Creech and Ms. McCabe offered summary comments on the Article.
9:00 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 37.
Motion to Amend Zoning Bylaw—Article 37 -Action Deadline for Maior Site Plan Review
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
157 9 3
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
9:02 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
j. Reports of the Planning Board
MOTION: Mr. Schanbacher moves that the reports of the Planning Board be received and placed on
file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. (Article 38 Report)
ARTICLE 38 AMEND ZONING BYLAW MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO APPROVED
PERMITS
Mr. Schanbacher moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be
amended as follows, and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted
to comply with the numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
1) Add a new § 135-9.2.2(5) as follows:
5. To consider and approve minor modifications to an approved special permit, appeal, variance, or
comprehensive permit. Minor modifications shall be limited to changes that do not have a material
impact on the project permitted by the special permit, appeal, variance or comprehensive permit, and
do not grant any zoning relief not originally requested or approved. Minor modifications shall be
consistent with the Zoning Bylaw. Minor modifications may be authorized by a majority vote of the
Board of Appeals. If the Board of Appeals in its review determines that a requested modification
constitutes a major modification, it shall require the submission of an application for amendment
requiring a new public hearing pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40A.
2) Add new § 135-9.4.7 as follows:
9.4.7 Modifications.
Any modification to an approved special permit requires prior approval from the SPGA. Certain
requests may be considered as a minor modification, authorized by a majority vote of the SPGA.
Minor modifications shall be limited to changes that do not have a material impact on the project
permitted by the special permit, appeal variance or comprehensive permit, and do not grant any
zoning relief not originally requested or approved. Minor modifications shall be consistent with the
Zoning Bylaw. If the SPGA in its review determines that a requested modification constitutes a
16
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
major modification, it shall require the submission of an application for amendment requiring a new
public hearing pursuant to M.G.L. c.40A.
9:04 p.m. Mr. Schanbacher presented information on the Article.
Michael Schanbacher, Planning Board Member, stated that the Planning Board unanimously
recommended approval of the Article
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, noted that the Select Board unanimously supported passage of
Article 38.
9:05 p.m. Laura Swain, Pct. 2, asked if minor modifications would in fact include an easement as she
didn't consider that a minor modification. Mr. Schanbacher said that at times an easement
could be considered a minor modification Mina Makarious, Town Counsel clarified by
saying that an easement is not zoning relief granted by a special permit granting authority if a
town required easement was involved. He noted that easements in this case would be most
likely be among private parties.
9:06 p.m. Jeff Howry, Pct. 2, asked for a summarization of minor vs major. Ms. McCabe stated that
usually when a project was approved by the Planning Board, a formal decision was issued by
the Planning Board and they directed all applicants to understand that whatever was
constructed had to comply with the approved plan and there could be no changes without
prior approval. She also noted that they outline that if there is a modification request, it has
to come back to the Planning Board. She said that they tended to think of minor changes as
something that would have been approved during initial approval but something comes up in
the field during construction. Ms. McCabe gave the example of a recent change that was to a
patio, which had been approved, but with a new configuration. She noted that larger changes
required refiling as formal amendment with public hearing, publish in newspaper, and
notification to abutters.
9:09 p.m. Tina McBride, Pct. 7, asked what changes would be considered when a builder with a site
sensitive permit decided to change siding and windows on a historic house, and whether that
would that be a minor modification. Ms. McCabe noted that the Planning Board, on a single
family house, usually only reviewed road layout, infrastructure, and the lot, but not
necessarily construction of the house and noted that things like siding, windows, or things of
this nature were not necessarily under PB purview. She said that if it were a commercial
building which had been approved, it did not necessarily trigger a review if there was a like
for like material exchange.
9:12 p.m. Kate Colburn, Pct. 4, noted that the bylaw stated that the minor modification would need to
comply with Zoning Bylaw—and asked whether that would mean the zoning bylaw as it
existed at the time when the special permit was granted. Ms. McCabe said that it would and
noted that if an application greatly differed from the Planning Board's approval it would be
considered a new application.
9:15 p.m. Nyles Barnert, Vice-Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, stated that they did not do minor
modifications as the bylaw didn't allow it, so if someone has a minor change, they have to go
through the whole process.
9:18 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 38
Motion to Amend Zoning Bylaw—Article 38 -Minor Modifications to Approved Permits
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
157 5 6
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
17
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:19 P.M. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
j. Reports of the Planning Board
MOTION: Ms. Thompson moves that the reports of the Planning Board be received and placed on file.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. (Article 39 Report)
9:19 P.M. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 39.
ARTICLE 39 AMEND ZONING BYLAW TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS
MOTION:
Ms. Thompson moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be
amended as follows, where sf..dek thfough text is to be removed and underlined text is to be added, and
further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply with the
numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
1. Amend § 135-9.5.5.3 as follows:
3. Open space, natural features, and the landscape, emphasizing the function of natural,
aesthetic, social, and roa al recreational design;
2. Amend § 135-6.7.3.2 as follows:
2. An owner of the property on which the accessory apartment is to be created shall occupy one
or the other of the dwelling units as a primary residence, except for temporary absences as
the fti is the all be efte tnefe ndi ,a
provided herein. �n��e�e�-or-�s3eot�e��e�
who eeftstittAe a family, who hold title difeetly of indifeetly to the dwelling, and fef whem
dwelling is the r itnafy side tee_
9:19 p.m. Ms. Thompson presented information on the Article.
Melanie Thompson, Planning Board Member and Clerk, stated that the Planning Board unanimously
recommended approval of Article 39.
Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, noted the unanimous support of the Select Board for Article 39.
As there were no questions on the floor,the Moderator opened voting on Article 39.
Motion to Amend Zoning Bylaw -Article 39 - Technical Corrections
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
163 1 3
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
9:23 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 29.
Mr. Lucente moved to take up Article 29. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the meeting on Article 29.
18
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
ARTICLE 29 AMEND GENERAL BYLAWS - TREE BYLAW - CHANGES TO TREE
COMMITTEE COMPOSITION
MOTION: Mr. Paul moves that the Town's Tree Bylaw, Chapter 120.6.A of the Code of the Town of
Lexington, be amended as follows as follows, stndek thfo,,g tea is to be removed and bolded text is to be
added:
The Town shall have a Tree Committee that consists of seven members and two non-voting associate
members as appointed by the Select Board. A quorum of the Tree committee shall consist of a majority
of the voting members then in office. For the first appointments of full members, three members will
serve one-year terms; two members will serve two-year terms; and two members shall serve three- year
terms. All members up for renewal and associate members will then-serve three-year terms.
9:24 p.m. Mr. Paul presented information on the Article.
Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported
passage of the Article.
9:25 p.m. As there were no questions from the floor,the Moderator opened voting on Article 29.
Motion to Amend General Bylaws —Article 29 - Tree Bylaw—Changes to Tree Committee
Composition
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
162 0 3
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
9:28 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 25.
Mr. Lucente moved to take up Article 25. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the meeting on Article 25.
ARTICLE 25 AMEND THE GENERAL BYLAWS - DEMOLITION DELAY
MOTION: Mr. Rotberg moves that Section 19-3(3)(F)(3)(Buildings, Demolition of) of the Code of
the Town of Lexington be amended by striking the figure "12" and substituting therefor the figure "21"
; and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted in order that it be in
compliance with the numbering format of the Code of the Town Lexington.
9:30 p.m. Robert Rotberg, Member of the Historical Commission, presented information on the Article,
including noting that the Commission requested an affirmative vote from Town Meeting.
Suzie Barry, Member of the Select Board noted that as of that evening, they had 2 in favor(Pato,
Sandeen), and 3 Members waiting, but as Jill Hai was not able to be present, only 2 were present at that
time.
9:32 p.m. Kathryn Roy, Pct. 4, asked whether Mr. Luker's amendment to have multi-family housing
was excluded from the 21 months. The Moderator asked whether she was considering a
friendly amendment. Ms. Roy confirmed this. Mr. Rotberg stated that the Historical
Commission voted to not favor the amendment for a number of reasons, and one that they
were a preservation commission, not a social engineering commission, and secondly that it
was not germane to what the Historical Commission does, and thirdly it might actually
encourage the kind of development they want to avoid.
9:33 pm. Gerry Paul, Pct. 4, stated that first, he would speak as a Member of the Tree Committee, and
they were unanimously in support of this Article, not only because it would preserve the
character of the Town, but also as it should reduce the number of teardown sites and number
of lots that were clear cut. Mr. Paul said that speaking for himself, there were a couple of
other benefits to Article, one being that it would help maintain housing diversity.
19
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:34 p.m. Peter Shapiro, 11 Wachusett Drive, noted the he was opposed to Article 25, as he felt it
would impede homeowners due to delays, and potential buyers who might wish to do
renovations and said that homes on the historic inventory were at a disadvantage to those not
on it. He felt there were too many on the inventory that did not belong there.
9:37 p.m. Bob Avallone, Pct. 8, asked whether this would apply to just tear downs or major
modifications as well. Mr. Rotberg stated it applied to roofline changes, other minor
modifications, and it was only a major delay if there was teardown request, with teardowns
being fewer than minor modifications (rooflines/facades). Mr. Rotberg said that in the past 5
years, there had been approximately 150 requests - most minor - and of those, roughly 15
were full demo delay requests that were not granted and eventually after a year become
demos. Mr. Avallone asked if someone requested a minor modification, would they still go
through the 21 month delay, or would it likely just be granted. Mr. Rotberg said that it could
be both, but in his experience he had seen that minor modifications were usually approved
without the delay and in his limited experience have all been discussed with the Commission
and sometimes improved and not subject to lengthy delay. Mr. Avallone asked if they waited
to for 21 month delay would there be issues. Mr. Rotberg stated that once delay period
expired, the Commission had no further authority. Mr. Avallone asked if the Article passed,
would any other boards need to approve it. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel stated that there
would not be, but wanted to clarify regarding the last question that demolition delay is
applicable to the Historical Commission and the Historic Districts Commission (HDC), and
in case of HDC there could be further review on the actual changes to be made.
9:41 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, asked why the recommendation was for 2 years but this was presented
as 21 months and why there was a difference. Mr. Rotberg noted that they felt that 21
months was sufficient.
9:43 p.m. Mr. Luker moved the following Amendment to Article 25.
ARTICLE 25
PROPOSED AMENDMENT: That the motion under Article 25 be amended as follows, underlined text to
be inserted:
That Section 19-3(3)(F)(3)(Buildings, Demolition of) of the Code of the Town of Lexington be
amended by striking the figure "12" and substituting therefor "21", and adding the following at the end
of this subsection: "provided that if the requested demolition permit is for a lot which has received site
plan approval, a special permit or a building permit for the creation of Multifamily Housing or
Inclusionary Dwelling Units as defined in Chapter 135-10.1, said period shall be reduced to 12
months."; and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted in order
that it be in compliance with the numbering format of the Code of the Town Lexington.
Mr. Luker presented information on the Amendment.
Mr. Rotberg noted that the Historical Commission had voted 4 opposed and 1 abstention against the
Amendment. He further noted that the Historical Commission had made it clear in its meeting that each
member was totally supportive of Affordable Housing, but not in this way.
Suzanne Barry, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board had reviewed the Amendment at their
meeting with 4 Members present, and all were in support of the Amendment.
9:47 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, asked if the Amendment were adopted and a properly prepared
multi-family housing project was brought forward on a property in their inventory that is not
historically significant whether the Historical Commission would be able to expedite. Mr.
Rotberg stated that this couldn't occur by definition as their inventory only included houses
of historical character. Mr. McGaw asked the process for getting a non-historic home off of
the inventory. Mr. Rotberg stated that it was very easy for the owner to come before the
Commission to discuss getting off inventory list, which allowed the Commission to scrutinize
why it was on the inventory and he was aware that in the time he had been serving, of two
homes that had been taken off of the inventory. Mr. McGaw asked if it was possible, if the
20
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
amendment were adopted, for a multi-family housing project come to replace a teardown
structure, could do an expeditated hearing and not demolition delay. The Moderator asked
for clarification on his statement. Mr. McGaw said that under the current bylaw could they
rule on it being demolished before it gets to 21 months or 12 months. Mr. Rotberg said that if
an applicant comes before the Commission, the procedures were exactly the same because
they would look at historic character of the house, ask if applicant has tried to put on market,
and whether there were plans that would make sense in terms of renovation. He further
stated that if it was an attempt of a developer to tear down a house and the Commission
hadn't been persuaded that the applicant or developer had examined other alternatives, then
the Commission imposes up to 21 months in this future case, but depended on the nature of
the project.
Joseph Pato, Member at Large, stated that the bylaw was the Town's bylaw and not the
Historical Commissions bylaw. He further noted that the Historical Commission had stated
that they were not a social agency and they weren't qualified to judge whether a multi-family
or inclusionary housing project would be appropriate. He noted that rather, the Historical
Commission was entrusted with enforcing the delay, but they did not need to do analysis on
whether on appropriateness. Mr. Pato stated that the building permit request did that. Mr.
Pato stated that the Historical Commission only needed to determine whether there had been
an attempt to preserve, and if they believe no such attempt has been made, that the time
period had expired.
9:54 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the Article.
10:06 p.m. Mr. Luker offered final comments regarding the Amendment.
10:07 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the Amendment.
Motion to Amend Article 25 —Amend the General Bylaws —Demolition Delay
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
98 51 7
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIES
10:09 p.m. The Moderator reminded the Members that they would now return to the Article as
Amended.
10:10 p.m. Mr. Rotberg stated that the Historical Commission was in favor of the Motion as Amended.
The Moderator stated that the Select Board was as well.
10:11 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, called the question. Motion approved by majority voice vote.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 25, as Amended.
Motion to Approve Article 25, as Amended
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
119 36 6
MOTION CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
10:15 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Monday, March 27, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
21
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by unanimous
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
March 27, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the third session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. on
Monday, March 27, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(157).
The Moderator explained seating and parliamentary procedure for the evening as well as a reminders for
members of the public to sign up for opportunities to speak at the public microphone. She welcomed all
visitors. The Moderator asked that those in the public area who were holding signs to turn them around so
they weren't showing, and reminded everyone that the plan was to exclusively use the web portal. The
Moderator asked Members to record their attendance on the device. Quorum announcement at 7:37 p.m.
Andy Freidlich, Pct. 5, offered brief remarks regarding the Black Cat Caf6 finally being open. He thanked
Erin Manz and Dawn McKenna for helping with setting it up.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
c. Report of the Town Manager
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the report of the Town Manager be received and placed on file. Motion
approved by unanimous voice vote.
James Malloy, Town Manager presented information on the Article including all buildings that had been
completed and events that had taken place in Town and projects that had also happened. Mr. Malloy took
the opportunity to introduce staff who had not been present at past Town Meetings since 2019 due to the
COVID pandemic. The Moderator thanked all the staff and expressed the sincere appreciation of all
present.
7:49 p.m. Mr. Malloy then presented information on the FY24 budget and an overview of the Select
Board's budget priorities and principles, including sustainability, solar canopies, maintaining public access
television, pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle safety on Town roads, as well as fiscal stability and capital
improvement planning.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
g. Report of the Select Board
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the report of the Select Board be received and placed on file. Motion
approved by unanimous voice vote.
Ms. Hai noted that in the interest of time, she wouldn't be reading the Report but recommended that Meeting
Members take the time to do so.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
e. Reports of the Appropriation Committee
MOTION: Mr. Parker moves that the reports of the Appropriation Committee be received and placed
on file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
Mr. Parker noted that he had needed extra time to produce the Report and thanked the Moderator for
allowing it.
22
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
d. Report of the Superintendent of Schools
MOTION: Ms. Cuthbertson moves that the report of the Superintendent of Schools be received and
placed on file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
8:11 p.m. Dr. Hackett, Superintendent of Schools presented information on the FY24 Budget.
8:21 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting on the Consent Agenda. She noted that these were
motions that had the unanimous support of the Select Board, Appropriation Committee (as appropriate),
Capital Expenditures Committee (as appropriate), School Committee (as appropriate), Planning Board (as
appropriate) and the Community Preservation Committee (as appropriate). She noted that"as appropriate"
meant under their purview. The Moderator noted that these boards and committees had also unanimously
approved these items' inclusion on a consent agenda that will be passed with a single vote, with no
presentations at Town Meeting and no debate. She further stated, however, that she would allow questions,
and that if 10 or more members wish to remove an item from the Consent agenda for separate
consideration, she would do so.
8:23 p.m. Robert Balaban asked if the School budget was a part of the Consent Agenda. The
Moderator noted that it was not.
The Moderator read the titles of each of the Consent Motions and paused to allow Members time to ask
questions or request pulling it from the Agenda.
Consent Azenda
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the Town hear and act on the report of the Community Preservation
Committee on the FY2024 Community Preservation budget and, pursuant to the recommendations of the
Community Preservation Committee, take the following actions:
That the Town reserve for appropriation the following amounts from estimated FY2024 receipts as
recommended by the Community Preservation Committee:
1. $807,500 for the acquisition, creation and preservation of open space, and the rehabilitation and
restoration of open space acquired or created with CPA funds;
2. $807,500 for the acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources;
3. $807,500 for the acquisition, creation, preservation and support of community housing, and the
rehabilitation and restoration of community housing acquired or created with CPA funds; and
4. $5,652,500 to the Unbudgeted Reserve.
d) That $35,000 be appropriated for Archives and Records Management, and to meet this appropriation
$35,000 be appropriated from the Historic Resources Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund;
h) That $300,000 be appropriated for Whipple Hill Trail Repair, Fire Access, and to meet this
appropriation $250,000 be appropriated from the Open Space Reserve and $50,000 be appropriated
from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund;
j) That$285,000 be appropriated for Park and Playground Improvements-Bridge School, and to meet this
appropriation $285,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community Preservation
Fund;
k) That $155,000 be appropriated for Park and Playground Improvements-Justin Park, and to meet this
appropriation $155,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community
Preservation Fund;
l) That $200,000 be appropriated for Public Grounds Irrigation Improvements, and to meet this
appropriation $80,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community
Preservation Fund and$120,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
23
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
n) That$1,500,000 be appropriated for Affordable Housing Trust Funding, and to meet this appropriation
$1,500,000 be appropriated from the Community Housing Reserve of the Community Preservation
Fund;
p) That $345,125 be appropriated for LexHAB Rehabilitation/Preservation and Installation of Solar
Panels, and to meet this appropriation $345,125 be appropriated from the Community Housing
Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund;
q) That $1,788,900 be appropriated for CPA Debt Service and related costs, and to meet this
appropriation$309,750 be appropriated from the Open Space Reserve, $771,750 be appropriated from
the Historic Resources Reserve and $707,400 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the
Community Preservation Fund;
r) That $150,000 be appropriated for Administrative Expenses and all other necessary andproper
expenses of the Community Preservation Committee for FY2024, and to meet this appropriation
$150,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund.
ARTICLE 11 APPROPRIATE FOR RECREATION CAPITAL PROJECTS
MOTION:
a) That $150,000 be appropriated for Pine Meadows Golf Course improvements, and all incidental
costs related thereto; and that to meet this appropriation $150,000 be appropriated from Recreation
Enterprise Fund Retained Earnings;
b) That $124,000 be appropriated for Pine Meadows Golf Course equipment, and all incidental costs
related thereto; and that to meet this appropriation $124,000 be appropriated from Recreation
Enterprise Fund Retained Earnings;
C) That $35,000 be appropriated for the replacement of the Pool Water Chemistry Automated
Controllers at the Irving H. Mabee Town Pool Complex, and all incidental costs related thereto; and
that to meet this $35,000 be appropriated from the Recreation Enterprise Fund Retained Earnings.
ARTICLE 12 APPROPRIATE FOR MUNICIPAL CAPITAL PROJECTS AND
EQUIPMENT
MOTION: That the following amounts be appropriated for the following municipal capital
improvements and that each amount be appropriated as follows:
C) Transportation Mitigation$87,685 for the Transportation Safety Group for certain traffic, pedestrian
and bike safety improvements, including the design and construction of smaller scale safety related
projects and education programs related to alternative transportation and bike safety, and all
incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $7,685 be appropriated from the
Transportation Network Company Special Revenue Fund and $80,000 be appropriated from the
Traffic Mitigation Stabilization Fund;
e) Townwide Culvert Replacement - $390,000 for the repair and replacement of culverts, and to take
by eminent domain, purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land
necessary therefor; and all incidental costs related thereto; and that to meet this appropriation
$390,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
f) Equipment Replacement- $1,755,000 for the cost of equipment for the Department of Public Works
and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation, $1,755,000 be
appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
g) Sidewalk Improvements- $800,000 for rebuilding and repaving existing sidewalks, and all incidental
costs related thereto, and to take by eminent domain,purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement
or other interest in land necessary therefor; and that to meet this appropriation $800,000 be
appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance; JM Correction on Street in Brown
Book
24
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
h) Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES compliance - $570,000 for constructing and
reconstructing storm drains and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation
$570,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
i) Comprehensive Watershed Stormwater Management - $390,000 to fund watershed storm
management projects and all incidental costs related thereto, and to take by eminent domain,
purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land necessary therefor; and that
to meet this appropriation, $390,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund
balance;
j) Street Improvements - $2,688,312 for road reconstruction, repairs and resurfacing and all incidental
costs related thereto, and to take by eminent domain,purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement
or other interest in land necessary therefor, and that to meet this appropriation $2,688,312 be raised
in the tax levy, and authorize the Town to accept and expend any additional funds provided or to be
provided by The Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation;
k) Hydrant Replacement Program - $150,000 for the replacement of fire hydrants and all incidental
costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $75,000 be appropriated from Water Fund
Retained Earnings and $75,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
n) Network Core Equipment Replacement - $980,000 to replace aging equipment at the core or head
end of the Town network, and that to meet this appropriation $980,000 be appropriated from the
General Fund unreserved fund balance;
o) Network Redundancy and Improvement Plan - $988,094 to build a stand-alone fiber network for
town computing and communications, and all the incidental costs thereto, and to take by eminent
domain,purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land necessary therefor,
and that to meet this appropriation$988,094 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund
balance; and
q) Scanning -Electronic Document Management- $110,000 to scan existing paper documents into the
Town's document management systems, and that to meet this appropriation $110,000 be
appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance.
ARTICLE 14 APPROPRIATE FOR WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
MOTION: That the following be authorized, and that the following amounts be appropriated for the
following capital improvements and that each amount be raised as indicated:
(a) the Select Board be authorized to install sanitary sewer mains and sewerage systems and
replacements thereof, and pay all incidental costs related thereto, in such accepted or unaccepted
streets or other land as the Select Board may determine, subject to the assessment of betterments or
otherwise, in accordance with Chapter 504 of the Acts of 1897, as amended, or otherwise, and to
take by eminent domain, purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land
necessary therefor; to appropriate for such installation and land acquisition the sum of$1,040,404;
and that to meet this appropriation, $400,000 shall be raised through wastewater user fees, and
$640,404 be appropriated from Wastewater Fund Retained Earnings; and
(b) $75,000 be appropriated for an evaluation of the Town's pump stations and for an update of the asset
management plan to provide guidance for future pump station improvements, and all incidental costs
related thereto, and to raise such amount $75,000 be appropriated from Wastewater Fund Retained
Earnings.
ARTICLE 15 APPROPRIATE FOR SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT
MOTION: That$1,465,488 be appropriated for maintaining and upgrading the Lexington Public School
technology systems, including the acquisition of new equipment in connection therewith, and all incidental
costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $1,465,488 be appropriated from the General Fund
unreserved fund balance.
25
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
ARTICLE 16 APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS
MOTION: That the following amounts be appropriated for the following capital improvements to public
facilities and that each amount be raised as follows:
a) Public Facilities Bid Documents - $125,000 for professional services to produce design
development, construction documents, and bid administration services for capital projects and all
incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $125,000 be appropriated from
the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
b) Public Facilities Interior Finishes - $407,200 for interior finishes in municipal and school buildings,
and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $407,200 be appropriated
from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
C) Public Facilities Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Replacements - $849,200 for replacement of
HVAC, plumbing, electrical, and related components and systems that have exceeded their useful
life, and all incidental costs related thereto,that to meet this appropriation $849,200 be appropriated
from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
d) School Paving and Sidewalks - $265,000 for school paving and sidewalk improvement programs,
including traffic safety improvements, and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this
appropriation $265,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
e) Municipal Building Envelopes and Associated Systems - $225,029 for extraordinary repairs and
modifications to municipal buildings and systems, and that to meet this appropriation $225,029 be
raised in the tax levy;
f) School Building Envelopes and Associated Systems - $1,457,684 for extraordinary repairs and
modifications to school buildings and systems, and that to meet this appropriation $1,457,684 be
appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
ARTICLE 18 RESCIND PRIOR BORROWING AUTHORIZATIONS
MOTION: That this article be indefinitely postponed.
ARTICLE 20 APPROPRIATE FOR PRIOR YEARS' UNPAID BILLS
MOTION: That this article be indefinitely postponed.
ARTICLE 22 APPROPRIATE FOR AUTHORIZED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
MOTION: That this article be indefinitely postponed.
ARTICLE 24 SELECT BOARD TO ACCEPT EASEMENTS
MOTION: That, until July 1, 2024, the Select Board be authorized to acquire on behalf of the Town
easements for the following purposes: roads, sidewalks, vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian access or passage,
water, drainage and other utilities, where such easements are acquired at no cost to the Town; and are
required pursuant to a land use permit, site plan review, or memorandum of understanding.
ARTICLE 30 HUMANE PET STORE BYLAW CORRECTION
MOTION: That the Town replace Chapter 9-7(C) of the Code of the Town of Lexington (Human Pet
Store Bylaw) with the following:
C. Enforcement and Severability
26
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
(1) Section 9-7 of this Bylaw shall be enforced by the Town Manager or the Town Manager's designee
pursuant to G.L. c. 40, § 2 1 D according to the following schedule:
I" Offense: $50
2nd Offense: $100
3rd & Each subsequent Offense: $300
b. Each unlawful sale or offer for sale shall constitute a separate violation.
(2) This Chapter may also be enforced through any other means available in law or equity. Nothing in this
Chapter may be construed to alter or amend any other legal obligations applicable to the sale of fur, or any
other entities, under any other law or regulation.
(3) The invalidity of any section or provision of this Chapter shall not invalidate any other section or
provision thereof.
And further that,the Town amend Section 1-6 of the Code of the Town of Lexington by adding under
Chapter 9 the following:
§ 9-7:
I" Offense: $50
2nd Offense: $100
3rd & Each subsequent Offense: $300
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
ARTICLE 35 AMEND ZONING BYLAW SUPPLEMENTAL INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
REQUIREMENTS
MOTION: The Planning Board recommends Town Meeting refer this article to the Planning Board.
Bridget McGaw, Pct. 6 asked what the lifespan of a fire hydrant was. David Pinsonneault,
Director of Public Works stated that they had about a 25-30 year lifespan. He also noted that
they were not only replacing old ones, but also those that get hit or are new. Mr. McGaw said
that since Recreation and the DPW had successfully identified how to use CPA funding against
needs of the Town, could they look at the future for other funding. Mr. Malloy stated that they
could.
Thomas Diaz,Pct. 8,noted that his question was about Article 17 and asked when OPEB would
be fully funded. Mr. Malloy stated between 30-50 years and noted that there was still no
obligation for Town to do so, but they continued to fund, as it was expected to eventually be
required. Mr. Diaz asked that Article 17 be removed from the Consent Agenda to be voted
separately. As nine other Members stood in support,the Moderator stated Article 17 would be
separated out.
Rita Goldberg, Pct. 2, stated that Marrett Road sidewalks were in dreadful condition and
wondered if there was a plan to improve this vital pedestrian bicycle route. John Livesy, Town
Engineer, said that Marrett Road was owned by the Town, but rather by the State so it would
be their responsibility
8:33 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, referred to Article 10d and stated that from what he understood, they
were oversized books, and wanted to know if this preservation served engineering and in what
way. Mary de Alderete, Town Clerk, answered that there were 3 volumes of a larger size and
of historic value to the Town and they had been recommended by the Archivist that all three
27
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
were preserved at once. Mr. Andersen asked the strategy of physical preservation vs digitizing.
The Town Clerk noted that it would be digitized as well as being slated for physical
preservation and said they were a very unique resource for the Town to preserve.
8:36 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the Consent Agenda.
Motion to Approve Consent Agenda (excepting Article 17)
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
167 0 1
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
Note to file - Alice Adler, Pct. 9, voted"yes" but system did not record,therefore the record was updated
to reflect:
Yes No Abstain
168 0 1
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
8:40 p.m. The Moderator opened the meeting on Article 4.
ARTICLE 4 APPROPRIATE FY2024 OPERATING BUDGET
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the following amounts be appropriated for the ensuing fiscal year and
raised in the tax levy or from general revenues of the Town, except where a transfer or other source is
indicated, they shall be provided by such transfer or other source.
Program 1000: Education
Personal Services $ 112,791,507
Expenses $ 21.938.737
Total Line Item 1100, Lexington Public Schools $ 134,730,244
1200 Regional Schools $ 3.501.977
Program 2000: Shared Expenses
2110 Contributory Retirement $ 9,984,800
2130 Employee Benefits (Health/Dental/Life/Medicare) $ 34,937,635
2140 Unemployment $ 200,000
2150 Workers' Comp.(MGL Ch. 40, Sec. 13A&13C, Ch. 41, Sec. 111F)* $ 500,000
2210 Property & Liability Insurance $ 992,000
2220 Uninsured Losses (MGL Ch. 40, Sec. 13)* $ 200,000
2310 Solar Producer Payments $ 390,000
2400 Debt Service
2410 Payment on Funded Debt $ 4,840,333
2420 Interest on Funded Debt $ 1,210,458
2430 Temporary Borrowing $ 803,310
2510 Reserve Fund $ 750,000
2600 Facilities $ 13,975,403
Program 3000: Public Works
28
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
3100-3500 DPW Personal Services $ 5,014,681
3100-3500 DPW Expenses $ 7,702,828
Program 4000: Public Safety
4100 Law Enforcement Personal Services $ 7,868,662
4100 Law Enforcement Expenses $ 1,173,868
4200 Fire Personal Services $ 7,286,211
4200 Fire Expenses $ 815,860
Program 5000: Culture & Recreation
5100 Library Personal Services $ 2,696,650
5100 Library Expenses $ 689,170
Program 6000: Human Services and Health
6100-6200 Human Services Personal Services $ 748,917
6100-6200 Human Services Expenses $ 952,781
6500 Health Personal Services $ 426,513
6500 Health Expenses $ 100,800
Program 7000: Land Ilse_ Housing and Develonment
7100-7400 Land Use, Housing and Development Personal Services $ 2,024,579
7100-7400 Land Use, Housing and Development Expenses $ 374,537
Program 8000: General Government
8110 Select Board Personal Services $ 150,784
8110 Select Board Expenses $ 136,338
8120 Legal $ 375,000
8130 Town Report $ 13,688
8140 PEG $ 658,517
8210-8220 Town Manager Personal Services $ 1,138,391
8210-8220 Town Manager Expenses $ 346,561
8230 Salary Transfer Account(MGL Ch.40, Sec 13D)* $ 725,300
and further that Line 8230 is to be transferred by the Select Board for contractual
settlements within departments upon recommendation of the Town Manager
8310 Financial Committees $ 8,535
8320 Misc. Boards and Committees $ 10,500
8330 Town Celebrations Committee $ 47,173
8400 Finance Personal Services $ 1,623,147
8400 Finance Expenses $ 492,025
8500 Town Clerk Personal Services $ 487,985
8500 Town Clerk Expenses $ 109,375
8600 Innovation & Technology Personal Services $ 808,139
8600 Innovation & Technology Expenses $ 2,110,426
29
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Note: Asterisk denotes a Continuing Balance Account.
and that the Town transfer the following sums to meet, in part, appropriations made at this Town
Meeting:
$ 400,000 from Unreserved Fund Balance/Free Cash for line item 2110;
$ 240,000 from the Health Claims Trust Fund for line item 2130;
$ 586.833 from the PEG Access Special Revenue Fund for line items 2130. 2600 and 8140:
$ 11,500 from the Betterments Fund for line items 2410, 2420 and 2430;
$ 50,408 from the Cemetery Sale of Lots Fund for line items 2410, 2420 and 2430:
$ 50,000 from the Visitors Center Stabilization Fund for line items 2410, 2420 and 2430;
$ 100,000 from the Parking Meter Fund for line items 3100-3500 and 4100;
$ 171,000 from the Transportation Demand Management/Public Transportation Stabilization
Fund for line items 6100-6200 and 7100-7400;
$1,011,340 from the Water Enterprise Fund;
$ 588,040 from the Sewer Enterprise Fund; and
$ 294,687 from the Recreation Enterprise Fund.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimously in support of the Article.
Sara Cuthbertson, Chair of the School Committee, stated that the School Committee was unanimously in
support of the Article.
Alan Levine, Secretary and Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
8:42 p.m. The Moderator stated that she would read program types and pause for questions or debate.
8:42 p.m. Taylor Singh, Pct. 6, requested that line 1100 be taken up separately. The Moderator said
that she would pull out that line item for separate consideration.
8:43 p.m. Robert Balaban, Pct. 5, asked whether it was considered wise to budget and allocate when
there was an outstanding labor contract under negotiation. Dr. Hackett, Superintendent of
Schools, stated that yes it was wise to continue even though the contracts weren't settled as
they were constantly in a state of contract negotiations and to delay wouldn't be prudent. Mr.
Balaban said that he was still wondering how it would work if it was approved and
negotiations reach a consensus and end up costing more. The Moderator suggested that this
would be a better conversation when that portion of the budget was discussed.
8:44 p.m. Scott Burson, Pct. 9, asked if the budget could be passed without 1100 in it. The Moderator
noted that it could be pulled out for separate consideration. Mr. Burson asked if Town
Meeting had authority to do anything with line 1100. The Moderator said they could, but
they couldn't dive into how the whole line item would be spent, but had the ability to suggest
a larger or smaller number
8:45 p.m. Katherine Reynolds, Pct. 1, said that her question was regarding line 1200 and the contract
negotiations and asked whether the teacher negotiations were related to the regional schools
or just Lexington Public Schools. The Moderator stated that it was just Lexington Public
Schools.
8:47 p.m. Sarah Daggett, Pct. 2, noted that the Budget stated in Section I, page 5,that there was an
unallocated $1 million and asked what it was for. Jim Malloy, Town Manager, stated that the
funds were there in case of a reduction of state aide. Ms. Daggett asked if it funds such as
this could be used for the school budget. Mr. Malloy said it could not as it was coming from
free cash. Ms. Daggett followed up by asking what if others such as unanticipated funds
weren't used. Mr. Malloy said that it would go into free cash in a subsequent year.
8:48 pm. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, noted that he had a procedural question. He noted that if line 1100
changed up or down, whether the rest of Article 4 would have to be re-voted. The Moderator
stated that the Finance Committee and Select Board had the ability to reconsider (reopen) an
article without notice if it was to readjust the budget due to reconsideration.
30
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:49 p.m. Alessandro Alessandrini, Pct. 4, noted then when speaking about the Fair Share Act which
had just passed, what the percent of money coming to Lexington was. Mr. Malloy stated that
they had not received a clear indication on what to expect.
8:50 p.m. Jodia Finnegan, Pct. 6, asked how much of the budget was devoted to DEI. Mr. Malloy said
that in the FY24 budget, approximately $120-125,000, which covered the Chief Equity
Officer for salary and benefits and work that she does, including DEI training town-wide.
8:51 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 4.
Motion to Approve Article 4 except Line1100 (Lexington Public Schools)
Approved by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
166 1 4
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
8:53 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 4, Line 1100 Lexington Public Schools.
8:55 p.m. Robert Balaban, Pct. 5, asked what the mechanism was for resolution if the labor contract
was higher or lower regarding the funds. Mr. Malloy stated that it would depend and that
almost every year the Town comes to Town Meeting without an unresolved labor contract.
They typically take that into consideration within the budget and then fund the contract
during the course of the year and believed that the School Department did the same. He
further noted that if the contract agreed to was above what was available, they would need to
wait to implement the contract until another Town Meeting was called and then funds would
have to be appropriated at that time.
8:56 p.m. Sarah Daggett, Pct. 2, stated that she was in support of the teachers and felt that they were
asking the teachers to do too much with less. She said that she was asking for consideration
to delay this until there was an equitable Agreement.
8:57 p.m. Sarah Higginbotham, Pct. 5, had seen a wide discrepancy in how the Town views the capital
stabilization fund and how teachers view how that money could potentially be supporting the
Schools. She asked for an explanation about the ideological difference and how funds might
be used to stabilize the situation. Mr. Malloy stated that it was not all new growth going into
the capital stabilization fund and that the framework put together was to maintain normal new
growth into the general fund and then only extraordinary new growth(rezoning at Hartwell)
and taking the net new revenue growth from those specific projects only. He said that for the
most part, new growth revenue coming from property taxes was continuing to the general
fund and then through municipal revenue allocation model that was used.
9:01 p.m. Nick Hart, 66 Oak St, stated that he grew up in Lexington and worked as a teacher at Fiske
Elementary. He said that while he was usually considered calm, he was here to sound alarm,
as he has never seen morale this low, and the main reason was money. He said that
obviously teachers want a fair salary, but that was just part of it. He stated that many
teachers were unfairly overworked, and they needed more teachers and to keep teacher
salaries competitive and workloads down.
9:03 p.m. Bob Avallone, Pct. 8, noted that the inflation rate for the past year was about 6%but the
School's budget had only increased 34%. He asked how they would be able to accomplish
that. Dr. Hackett stated that the cost of inflation was definitely a pressure they were
experiencing, and there was certainly a gap between inflation and the increases they were
seeing. She said that one alternative way of thinking of current inflation, without minimizing
the impact, is to think of the number years that the inflation factor was low, and how the
increases exceeded the inflationary factor during those years. She further noted that with step
and percent increases it helped to close the gap and in some cases, exceed the gap. Mr.
Avallone asked how Lexington teacher salaries compared to similar communities in
Massachusetts. Dr. Hackett said that they compared salaries by districts in the contract,
which are comparable districts, through contiguous districts (surrounding area), and also
31
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
through comparables within the Middlesex league, which was a specific number of districts
in the area. She noted that the comparables were difficult as they had to examine actual
number of days worked. She noted that what they had seen with comparable districts and
come up with a color code which showed whether a condition was favorable (green),
something they were worried about(red), or something in between (yellow). Mr. Balaban
checked with the Moderator whether the vote would be 2/3 or was a majority vote. She
replied that it required a simple majority.
9:09 p.m. Scott Burson, Pct. 9, stated that he would not support this as he had no confidence that it
made adequate provisions for the operational needs of the School. He said that the budget
failed to meet the educational needs that were required and the Schools hadn't been given an
adequate number which would work.
9:10 p.m. Kyler Legault, 1 Sunset Ridge, said that he was present to support the teachers. He noted that
when he had first moved to Lexington he had noticed just how historic the Town was and the
rich history it had. He said that Lexington teacher salaries were around $52—77,000, which
was under average. He noted that Lexington housing costs were not average compared to the
rest of America, but rather estimated at 230 percent more than the national average and this
was unacceptable as it meant that it denied LPS teachers the right to live in Lexington. He
urged Lexington Representatives to consider the struggles that the teachers faced and
reevaluate where the money for budgeting went to.
9:13 p.m. Taylor Singh, Pct. 6, moves that the debate on line 1100 be postponed until all financial
articles had been completed. The Moderator noted that this was a debatable motion and
noted she would ask for the input from the relevant boards and committees but invited Ms.
Singh to make some comments beforehand. Ms. Singh stated that it was imperative that
another budget summit be held after all the financial articles had been voted on in order to
sort out what funds were left unallocated in order to make some progress. She noted that it
was critical to work in good faith to find some of funding the teachers deserved. She said
that doing nothing now would equate to more difficulties later and that the Town's values
were being called into question. Ms. Singh stated that the Lexington's municipal government
was letting the Town employees know that they valued construction projects more than
people and asked Members to vote with her to postpone the vote on 1100.
9:17 p.m. The Moderator called a brief recess in order for the different groups to caucus for their
recommendations.
9:32 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting back to order.
9:33 p.m. Ms. Cuthbertson, Chair of the School Committee, stated that the School Committee was
unanimously opposed. She stated that it was challenging to be an educator now and in the
past few years. Through the advocacy of the School Committee and Administration, and in
partnership with the finance committees, the Select Board, and the Town finance staff, they
had moved from a starting point of 3.6% in the first summit to 5.2%throughout the final
budget summit. She noted that a one time "boost"to the budget, as had been suggested, was
not sustainable going forward when the one-time funds dry up. She stated that they had been
unique in not need to lay-off staff or educators and they wanted to continue that and not set
themselves up financially for that to be the case. She stated that since Town votes on one
budget and the funds had been allocated, it would be difficult to separate out the line items
and believed they should proceed with line 1100 as planned.
9:34 SB Ms. Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimously opposed to the
Motion. She stated that the Select Board, along with all of Lexington, highly valued the
educators and the education system and noted that the current allocation model allowed 70
cents of every dollar of revenue to be allocated to the School operations, but they did not
allocate individually for items within that budget. She said that this budget now exceeded the
original budget request by $1.7 million dollars and the Select Board was confident that the
Schools had budgeted appropriately and could cover their necessary expenses. Mr. Malloy
32
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
stated that there were implications of delaying the budget. He noted that as Ms. Cuthbertson
had mentioned, to change the budget at that time would require rewriting and rebalancing of
the entire budget and probably would not be done for several months as it took a lot of time
to put together. Mr. Malloy said that if the budget was not approved by July 1st, the Town
essentially closes down and no services could be provided, whether in the school or
municipality and this would continue until an operating budget was voted and encouraged
Town Meeting Members to listen to the recommendations of the various Committees that had
put in work on the budget.
9:38 pm. Glenn Parker, Appropriations Committee Chair, stated that the Appropriations Committee
was unanimously opposed to the Motion.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee said that the Capital
Expenditures Committee took a position on this as the capital stabilization fund was a portion
of the discussion and that they were unanimously opposed to the Motion.
Bob Balaban, Pct. 5, noted that he had supported the schools over 30 years and that he was
very sad to see that given that the faculty and staff were under great strain and that the budget
doesn't meet their needs and would be voting in favor of the current Motion.
9:39 p.m. Steve Kaufman, Pct. 5, asked if the Town were to postpone and allocate additional funds to
education programs, where they would come from. Mr. Malloy stated that they could be
from several different areas, including the school area as that was one line item, or they could
look at things such as whether they would still have curb sanitation, or provide some of the
other services the Town provided. He noted that if they simply increased other revenues,
then 74% would go to the school, and 26% to municipal departments, or the possibility of an
override contingency. Mr. Kaufman stated that additional funding had been received from
the governor, and asked whether it was allocated in the education budget, and if so, where.
Mr. Malloy stated that they had allocated $1.7 million over what their original request was.
Mr. Kaufman asked for clarification on where it was allocated. The Moderator commented
that the Town had no insight into this and asked Dr. Hackett to clarify. Dr. Hackett stated
that they did not indicate where it was allocated due to the ongoing contract allocations.
9:44 p.m. Janet West, 12 Carriage Drive, noted that she lives and teaches in Lexington and that morale
was low. She said that teachers go above and beyond and that salaries had slipped compared
to peer districts. She asked Town Meeting Members to vote to table the current budget as
proposed.
9:46 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, asked how long the 74/26 split had been in place. Mr. Malloy stated
that it changed slightly every year but had been in place for decades. Mr. Andersen said that
it was his understanding that this was something that was agreed on due to an override in
early 2000's and on the school side the largest costs were driven by school enrollment and
asked how fluctuations affected the budget. Dr. Hackett responded by saying that enrollment
was one of the points that had been raised in the budget process and that compared to 2020
when they lost 356 students, 317 of these were elementary students and they had started
seeing a rebound in numbers, but with an overall review they were down approximately 200
students overall. Mr. Andersen asked about Lexington's current compensation philosophy
for teachers. Dr. Hackett said that the philosophy for compensation for teachers is that it
there should be competitive salaries and that they should be among the top in terms of
compensation. She also mentioned that there was a process they had to honor and that the
3.6% increase was unacceptable, but they were now at 5.2%, which amounted a lot of give
and take on behalf of all the parties involved. She said that she believed there needed to be a
larger community conversation and what the teachers were saying was important as the
schools were very different since pandemic. She also said there was a struggle as education
had changed so significantly and when considering funding a budget with the same dollars as
in the past that it somewhat defied logic, and a discussion would be best had after this as
there were many complex issues and they could be better prepared for the 2025 budget
summit cycle.
33
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:53 p.m. Meeting Members continued to debate and discuss the proposed Motion.
10:01 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
10:01 p.m. In summary, Taylor Singh encouraged Town Meeting Members to support the motion.
The Moderator opened voting on the Motion.
Motion to Postpone to Time Certain Lexington Public Schools Budget
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
59 100 I1
MOTION FAILS
10:05 p.m. The Moderator noted that they were now back to the original budget line (1100).
Yifang Gong, Pct. 1, stated that from his experience at Town Meeting, it seemed that they
always voted for buildings, but not for people.
10:06 p.m. Bronte Abraham, Pct. 3, stated that she had heard that there was enough money to solve the
problem. She noted that she would like to hear why they had not done so and what proactive
steps could be taken. The Moderator noted that this question entered into the area of
confidential labor negotiations as they were ongoing and they could not be compelled to
answer. Ms. Abraham noted that she understood that, but that they were being asked to vote
a budget up or down that included a certain amount that had been reviewed in budget books
and online and if there were enough through the funds from the governor and through the
residual budget what other questions could be asked. The Moderator stated that although she
had given leeway they couldn't cross what could be asked during an active labor negotiation
and they should move forward. Ms. Abraham encouraged Members to visit the School
Committee to look for a format where they could ask this.
10:08 p.m. Laura Atlee, Pct. 4, asked if they approved the budget item, were they effectively being asked
to help the School Committee and Superintendent stop negotiations, and asked how they
could negotiate fairly if they had decided the end number. The Moderator stated that by State
law, Town Meeting Members couldn't have insight or control on how the School spent the
funds.
10:10 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, said that he stood in support of this as there was an ongoing negotiation
and urged Members to approve it.
10:11 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, stated that ordinarily he had the utmost confidence in the Committees,
but noted that this felt different. He said that Dr. Hackett and Mr. Malloy were speaking
about enough money to meet current contractual obligations and the teachers were talking
about stress due to too great a workload. He noted that these were different problems to
solve.
10:13 p.m. Rory Fox, 5 Hillside Terrace, said that she was a senior at LHS and that teachers were not
just paid to teach curriculum but also acted as emotional role models. She said that during
Covid when classes were taught via computer, students had lost essential interpersonal skills,
especially in the younger students. She stated that teachers were burned out and Lexington
needed to do better for them.
10:16 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the Motion.
10:26 p.m. Bob Avallone, Pct. 8, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
Sarah Cuthbertson offered closing remarks and said that she appreciated the collaboration
they had had with various committees and the Select Board and hoped they could continue to
be creative in finding revenue sources.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 4, Line 1100.
34
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 4 Line1100 (Appropriate FY2024 Lexington Public Schools)
Approved by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
124 23 21
MOTION CARRIES
10:29 p.m. Thomas Diaz, Pct. 8, served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 4.
10:30 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 29, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by unanimous
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
March 29, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the fourth session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
on Wednesday 29, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(157).
The Moderator explained seating and parliamentary procedure for the evening as well as guidelines for
speaking at the Meeting, and explained how members of the public could participate. She asked that
Members log in their attendance via the electronic tables. Quorum announcement at 7:36 p.m.
7:35 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
f. Reports of the Capital Expenditures Committee
MOTION: Mr. Lamb moves that the reports of the Initial Report, Errata Sheet, and Corrected Report
of the Capital Expenditures Committee be received and placed on file. Motion approved by unanimous
voice vote.
Mr. Lamb stated that their initial published report incorrectly specified that the project costs
for the Stone Building (Article 10a) were $19 million, however this had been corrected in the
subsequent errata to $10.1 million.
7:37 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 10 for items that were not on
the Consent Agenda.
Ms. Hai moved to take up items in Article 10 not already approved by the Consent Agenda.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
7:37 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 10 and reminded the Members that this
was for items not already approved by the Consent Agenda.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
MOTION: Ms. Fenollosa moves that the Town hear and act on the report of the Community Preservation
Committee on the FY2024 Community Preservation budget and, pursuant to the recommendations of the
Community Preservation Committee, take the following actions:
That the Town reserve for appropriation the following amounts from estimated FY2024 receipts as
recommended by the Community Preservation Committee:
35
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
7:37 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 2.
ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS,
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
h. Report of the Community Preservation Committee
MOTION: Ms. Fenollosa moves that the report of the Community Preservation Committee be received
and placed on file. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
7:38 p.m. Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee presented information
on the Articles supported by the Community Preservation Committee. She noted that all
Articles had been vetted by Town Counsel.
7:55 p.m. The Moderator stated that they would stop showing the presentation at Article l Oo if there
was no objection, as the rest had been on the Consent Agenda. As there was no objection
from Members or Ms. Fenollosa, the Moderator noted that they would now take up the items
that were not approved as part of the Consent Agenda. She stated that for each one, they
would hear or view supporting presentations and would hear from relevant boards and
committees. She proposed that they would take separate votes on 10-i, 10-a, and 10-b, and
then hear 10-e and 10-f together and take one vote on both. Afterwards, they would hear the
remainder (10-c, 10-g, 10-m, and 10-0) and take one vote on the four together. She noted
that if there was someone wanted to vote separate on anything, the Members could do so.
7:56 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 10i.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
i) That $3,391,500 be appropriated for Lincoln Park Field Improvements including Lighting, and to meet
this appropriation $2,475,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community
Preservation Fund and $216,500 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance and
$700,000 be raised in the tax levy;
7:57 p.m. Christopher Boutwell, Vice Chair of the Recreation Committee, presented information on the
Article. He noted that artificial turf was not eligible for CPA funds, and it had been split
between CPA and non-CPA funds. He then explained the costs associated with the
construction of the improvements and stated that the Town was operating in a field deficit
and this plan would help to provide future field use.
8:13 p.m. Mr. Bartenstein, Pct. 1, raised a Point of Order and mentioned that he would like to set
Motion l Oc aside. The Moderator took note of this request.
8:14 p.m. Mr. Boutwell presented further information regarding challenges of grass fields in the context
of core parameters. He noted grass fields would result in at least 30-50%reduction in overall
field availability and explained the difficulty in having natural turf as well as expenses
incurred by the DPW. He stated that the Recreation Committee was unanimously in support
of passage of the Article.
8:18 p.m. Ms. Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, noted the Community
Preservation Committee had recommended the Article by a vote of 7-2.
Mark Sandeen, Member of the Select Board, stated the Select Board had 3 Members in
support and 2 awaiting Town Meeting discussion.
Sara Cuthbertson, Chair of the School Committee, said that the School Committee had 4
Members in favor and 1 awaiting Town Meeting discussion.
Dr. Jillian Tung, Member of the Board of Health, read a statement from the Board of Health
and noted that whenever possible, they preferred organic natural turf, but recognized that the
choices were complex, but if, after due consideration, it was deemed not feasible to use
36
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
natural turf, they recommend prioritizing synthetic products that minimize the presence of
toxic chemicals, since not all synthetic options were equivalent.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, noted that the Capital
Expenditures Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
Sanjay Padaki, Member of the Appropriation Committee, said that the Appropriation
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
8:22 p.m. Laura Swain, Pct. 2, asked why they were spending tax dollars if CPA funding was not
allowed for artificial turf. Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation, said that the artificial turf
was the portion of the project that did not fall under CPA. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel,
further clarified that the CPA Act had restrictions on allowed uses of CPA funds which were
more restrictive than overall use of public funds. Ms. Swain noted that in 2022, Town
Meeting had passed a zero waste resolution and asked how artificial turf was in line with that.
Mr. Boutwell stated that the goal was to reduce waste from the process, but the use of
synthetic materials was required for durability and for the particular site. He noted that the
bid would require reuse of as many materials on site as possible, and the disposition of those
that could not be were documented and not put into a landfill or incinerator. Ms. Swain
asked if the material wouldn't go to a landfill or incinerator, whether they could require that it
be reused or recycled in other playgrounds in Lexington. Mr. Boutwell said that the typical
reuse was for such things was as mini-golf courses, paintball facilities, etc., where
performance requirements were lower than they would be for fields. Ms. Swain asked if they
could require the type of turf to be used in the new fields to be recyclable. Mr. Boutwell
stated that it was his understanding that although efforts were underway to produce synthetic
turf that was fully recyclable, there were currently no facilities in the US, so their hope was
that over the lifespan field that those facilities would be coming online. Ms. Swain asked
given that information, how much of the current surface did they expect to be
recycled/reused. Mr. Boutwell said that there were two components to the system -the carpet
and the infill. None of the carpet could be reused on sight as it had completed its useful
lifespan. He noted that they would know more regarding the infill underneath which would
have to be inspected when the carpet was removed to determine how much would be reused
onsite and how much it had fulfilled its lifespan. He noted that the Working Group would
oversee the judgment of what was to be regarding the infill material.
8:27 p.m. Jonathan Himmel, Pct. 6, noted that since a large portion of the project qualified for CPA
funding was there any reason to not seek it for the High School project. Mr. Makarious said
that CPA funding could be used for other field projects as a recreation use. Mr. Himmel
asked whether the design of a field needed to be separately invoiced by designers or
construction to make it applicable. Mr. Makarious stated that as a legal matter, not
necessarily, and noted that CPA funds could at times be used in conjunction with other funds,
but he would defer to the Town Manager and the finance staff as to whether it was actually
feasible, but that it might not be able to be answered at this time. Mr. Himmel asked if they
could potentially have fields for the High School show up on a CPC list of future projects.
Marilyn Fenollosa, Community Preservation Chair, noted that they would be eligible as a
recreational resource and would be eligible for CPA funding as long as they were not seeking
artificial turf. She noted that they didn't have a long range plan in that they evaluated the
projects before them based on finances (funds and demand) at the time, but if it were on a
type of 5-year plan that they could consider with other items, then they could look at it. Mr.
Himmel asked for clarification that although the artificial turf had been removed from CPA
funding, the rest including lighting and underlayment could be in this category, but it was a
matter of determining what could be. Mr. Makarious stated that this was correct.
8:31 p.m. Steve Kaufman, Pct. 5, said that speaking from personal experience, Lincoln Field was a
phenomenal facility and used constantly. He stated that when he was a Division Director in
soccer, that it was difficult to find time on the fields, so felt that the requested item was
completely reasonable considering the use. He also noted that it was important for physical
37
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
and mental health, and replacing with grass would counter this as it would provide fewer
hours of opportunity. Mr. Kaufman further noted that the Town should seriously look into
use of the Minuteman fields.
8:34 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, said that he had comments that were not in an official capacity
regarding Temple Isaiah, but based on a conversation with the Temple President, Daniel
Ostrower,there was an unintentional breakdown in the process of abutter notifications that
should have allowed Temple Isaiah to make comments. Mr. Baskin noted that during the bus
tour, he had asked Ms. Battite, Recreation Director, whether there had been outreach to the
abutters and whether they had received any comments. He said that she had replied that there
had been outreach, but no comments. As a member of Temple Isaiah, he had called Dan
when he returned home and he learned that he had received an email about Lincoln Park, but
that it was regarding another Lincoln Park project and an opportunity for the Temple to
participate in discussions regarding long range plans for the Park. Mr. Baskin forwarded the
abutter's letter regarding 10i to Mr. Ostrower as the Temple did not have a record of
receiving a letter, and the other notices did not allow the Temple membership structure time
to review it. Mr. Baskin asked that this Article be brought back in the Fall after the Temple
had been given time to review following their established practices. Mr. Baskin read remarks
from Mr. Ostrower stating that, "the Temple was proud to be a part of the Lexington
community and has done, and will continue to do, all that it could to be a good neighbor. The
Temple understands that Lincoln Park is an important and valuable resource to Lexington and
enjoyed being next door to such a vibrant and energetic part of Lexington. The Temple
believes that continued development of and investment in Lexington resources is good for the
Town and the Temple. If afforded the time to consider the lighting appropriation, the Temple
will approach the issue with this perspective in mind. Should the Town not be able to
provide additional time for the Temple to weigh in on the appropriation vote,the Temple
asked to be afforded the opportunity to discuss the lighting operation schedule with the Town
in order to determine a schedule that maximizes Lincoln Field availability, while minimizing
disruption to Temple events."
8:37 p.m. Nina Arnold, 2 Sedge Road, said that she plays on the fields for both field hockey and
lacrosse, and especially during Covid, playing sports was a highlight of her time at School
and having artificial turf was necessary for field hockey as they would be unable to play on
grass due to the nature of the sport, and that being on the fields helped with physical and
mental health.
8:38 p.m. Valerie Overton, Pct. 1, said that she was sympathetic to needing hours for additional field
use but asked for clarification on whether the synthetic surface would be "PFAS free" and
asked what that meant as there were many species that were not tested. Jay Peters, Principal
Consultant of Risk Assessment for Haley & Aldrich, an engineering consultant, noted that
Ms. Overton was correct and that PFAS contained many compounds, but the way they
certified it as PFAS free is that they tested for the compounds that can be tested for and then
they evaluated the results to make sure the limits were below those set by Mass DEP. He
noted that they would continue to work with the Working Group to evaluate what the testing
protocol would be. Ms. Overton followed up by stating that she encouraged better
transparency or clarification of what is meant by PFAS free and whether there was a way to
look at the production of synthetic turf.
8:42 p.m. Tom Shiple, Pct. 9, stated that although he was not an expert in the area health concerns on
artificial turf, he was aware of them and he and his children knowingly used the fields. He
further noted that he had been a soccer coach for many years and that coaches wanted to play
and practice on Lincoln Field because they were virtually assured that that their event
wouldn't be canceled, however the grass fields could be closed for many days if it had rained
or there was bad weather and stated that adding lights was a good investment for the Town.
8:43 p.m. Jeanne Krieger, Pct. 3, moves that, by adding the following: and further, only natural grass
turf will be installed in the Lincoln Field improvements.
38
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Ms. Krieger introduced an Amendment to the Article and noted that she felt there was an alternative to
artificial turf. She then said that, as a chemist, there were possible additives in plastic, possibly untested,
and that they did not degrade over time and noted that toxic plastic could continue to leach into the
environment.
Christian Boutwell, Recreation Committee Vice-Chair, stated that the Recreation Committee had
unanimously voted against the Amendment 6-0.
Mark Sandeen, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board had 2 Members in support and 3
opposed.
Sara Cuthbertson, Chair of the School Committee, said that the School Committee was unanimously
opposed to the Amendment.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, noted that the Capital Expenditures
Committee unanimously recommended disapproval.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Chair of the Appropriation Committee, said that the Appropriation Committee had
voted unanimously 0-7 with 1 awaiting discussion to recommended disapproval of the Article.
The Moderator indicated, after speaking with Dr. Tung, that the Board of Health had not had an
opportunity to weigh in on the Amendment.
8:50 p.m. Leonard Morse-Fortier, Pct. 7, stated that it was his understand that Lincoln Field was placed
over a landfill and asked how much of a role turf plays in protecting people who used it. He
questioned whether there were health concerns with not having this type of cover over it.
Meg Buczynski, Principal Civil Engineer at Activitas, noted that the DEP required different
coverage over the landfill, with synthetic turf usually requiring 1 feet or 3 feet of natural
grass in order to have protection.
8:53 p.m. Sallye Bleiberg, Pct. 3, said that many people had learned about how harmful PFAS is
including artificial turf. She noted that there were 9 bills in the Massachusetts legislature
seeking to protect children from artificial turf and that it couldn't currently be recycled. Ms.
Bleiberg said that PFAS contained forever chemicals that don't break down, and don't go
away.
8:56 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 8, said that he was in opposition to the Amendment. He stated that the
science on the fields was in dispute, and difficult to take up on the Town Meeting floor. Mr.
Anderson noted that hundreds of hours had been invested in the process and there had been
many discussions and evaluations regarding it. He said that while no one wanted children to
be exposed to chemicals, life involved a portion of calculated risk, and while the materials
weren't perfect, this was the best option.
8:59 p.m. Marsha Gens, 16 Dane Road, said that she was appreciative of the importance of sports in
Lexington and its values on athletic participation, but was speaking in favor of grass fields.
She mentioned that when the synthetic fields were put in, it seemed the best option, but they
had learned a lot since then. She noted that after 8-10 years the fields would need to be
replaced at a great expense, and that the possible damage on health is unknown, but
everything they had learned was giving concern. Ms. Gens said that she wanted to emphasize
that they didn't have a way to dispose of the fields after their use of life. She said that, in a
sense, they were creating another dump with toxic leachates with no way to dispose of them.
9:02 p.m. Tim Clackson, 14 Winthrop Road, said that he was speaking on behalf of Lexington United
Soccer Club (LUSO) and they were strongly in support of 10i and against the Amendment.
He noted that during each Fall and Spring season, approximately 1,400 children participated
in their programs, and it was difficult to overstate the value of Lincoln Park to LUSC as it
provided a centrally accessible multi-field venue for the soccer community and where they
tried to play the majority of their practices. He stated that the players and coaches
overwhelmingly preferred playing on turf due to their reliability, playability, and a resilience
39
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
to New England weather, whereas grass fields, despite the efforts of the DPW, were
frequently closed.
9:05 p.m. Laura Atlee, Pct. 4, asked whether the proposed Amendment took into consideration
pesticides. She also asked whether carbon offsets had been considered if Lincoln Park were
closed and there needed to be greater driving distances to find a field. Ms. Krieger said that
she didn't have specific information on pesticides but understood that there were types of
new grass seed that didn't need as much herbicide or pesticides. She stated that with regard
to the carbon emissions, this was a part of the choices they needed to make regarding possible
environmental impacts.
9:09 p.m. Ricki Pappo, Pct. 2, said that she was in support of the Amendment. She noted that the
Board of Health was of particular importance as they had been learning about potential health
effects of synthetic use, and they needed to understand the risks regarding possible exposure
and toxicity, but having grass fields would help mitigate risk.
9:12 p.m. Andrei Radulescu-Banu, Pct. 8, called the question. The Moderator noted that as there were
only 3 minutes left in the debate time, she would keep it open.
9:13 p.m. Ryan Wise, Pct. 6, said that everyone who had children had to let them take risks they didn't
love, and that there needed to be prioritization and balance, but for their mental health and
access to outdoor activities dwarves any possible risk that they didn't yet understand about
outcomes that might happen. He stated that they needed hours playing outside and on fields
that can be used.
9:14 p.m. The Moderator noted that that the time for debating the Amendment had expired.
Ms. Krieger said in her summary comments that they needed to make careful choices regarding whether
they created a hazardous waste problem or worked together to create a natural, healthy, and sustainable
future.
The Moderator opened voting on the Amendment.
Motion to Approve Krieger Amendment-Natural Grass Turf Requirement
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
35 123 13
MOTION FAILS
9:18 p.m. The Moderator noted that they were now back to the original Motion.
9:18 p.m. Sara Bothwell Allen, Pct. 6, said that she was on the Steering Committee of Lexington Living
Landscapes and that they were concerned about the negative effect caused by artificial light
at night, known as light pollution. She noted that the International Dark Sky Association
provided standards for athletic fields, and they had been grateful that the proposed lighting
system had been designed to meet them. She noted that the Association had a certification
program, and asked if the Recreation Department be willing to enroll in the certification
program.
Scott Burson, Pct. 9, raised a Point of Order, asking about the timing. The Moderator noted
that she had used her two minutes of allotted time.
9:20 p.m. Mr. Boutwell said that the lighting plan was designed to meet all Dark Sky guidelines and
they could explore subsequent steps but they would need to build those into the operating
budget for the Department to ensure they could maintain it.
9:21 p.m. Ms. Bothwell Allen stated that she appreciated their interest in exploring the topic and
wanted to acknowledge that the Recreation Department was tasked with field access with a
large demand from the community, and they had designed a lighting system to mitigate some
issues, however that the night light trajectory Lexington was on was not sustainable and
40
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
asked Town Meeting Members and the Select Board to consider balancing an appetite for
resource convenience today versus the future.
9:21 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, rose in support of the Article and feels it was important to recognize
that the Recreation Department has been working on this for more than just this Town
Meeting as it had been in development for years and many had been offered a chance to
participate in the conversation as well as experts in the field and that the planning matters and
that they should be planning many projects in the same way, years ahead.
9:24 p.m. Marsha Baker, Pct. 7, called the question. Motion to terminate debate approved by majority
voice vote.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 10i.
Motion to Approve Article 10i Lincoln Park Field Improvements
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
148 12 11
MOTION CARRIES
9:27 p.m. Tom Diaz, Pct. 8, served Notice of Reconsideration on 10i.
9:27 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 10a.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
a) That $400,000 be appropriated for the Stone Building Design and Unexpected Repairs, and to meet this
appropriation $400,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community Preservation
Fund;
James Malloy, Town Manager, presented information on the Article.
Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, said that the Community
Preservation Committee recommended approval of the Article by a vote of 8-1.
Mark Sandeen, Member of the Select Board stated that the Select Board position on the Article was not an
indication of support for any future projects, but for this initial design work they had voted 3 in support, 1
opposed, and 1 awaiting Town Meeting discussion.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee Report had noted that they had been unanimously against appropriation, but that had changed
and they were now 5-1 against as one member had become convinced that viable tenants existed. Mr.
Lamb stated that the entire committee was concerned about the overall project price, whether the program
was a want or a need, that the project must and will follow integrated building design construction policy,
and that they did not incur more CPA debt funding then necessary, and lack of prioritization.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Chair of the Appropriation Committee, noted that when the Appropriation Committee
published their report they had voted 1-7 against. Mr. Padaki said that the majority of the Committee at
that time had concerns about the timing of the funding request which went against established Town
policy for major capital projects, and objected to the appropriation of design funds prior to identifying a
suitable tenant. Recently, however, they had received information from Lexington Lyceum advocates, and
based on that information, they had voted again, with 4 in favor and 4 against..
9:38 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, said that the presentation had stated that a final use had not been
determined nor was there an identified end user, yet almost all information he had seen
showed it being used as a modern lyceum. He asked for confirmation that a final user had
not been identified. Jim Malloy, Town Manager, confirmed Mr. Baskin's comments. Mr.
41
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Malloy stated that the Town would be required to follow Chapter 30B and put out an RFP for
an end-user and they couldn't do that until the building was in a condition to be leased out.
Mr. Baskin asked what would happen if funding was not approved. Mr. Malloy stated that
the Town would continue to maintain it through facilities budget as it was now. Mr. Baskin
asked if the final use would be up to the end user or whether the Town would determine it
and then find a user. Mr. Malloy said the process was similar to that used with the Munroe
Center, in which the criteria was decided, and then a committee would be set up to review
and then the highest rated bid would be chosen.
9:42 p.m. Mark Manasas, Pct. 2, President of Lexington Lyceum Advocates, gave a brief mention of
the historic names (Robbins/Stone) on rooms in the Hall. Mr. Manasas said that Eli Robbins
was the builder of the Stone Building and was civic minded, and built the Lyceum Hall for
his workers and the Town and his granddaughter, Ellen Stone, donated the building to the
Town. He noted that past generations named the rooms in their honor due to the
contributions they made to the Lexington community and that the Article wasn't about the
building, but what it represented and that there would be more impact taking school children
to Lyceum Hall to discuss issues such as the lyceum movement, abolition, suffrage, or
transcendentalism rather than other places in Lexington.
9:46 p.m. Ricki Pappo, Pct. 2, asked what had happened in 2007 when there was a flood and why had
the Town chosen to not fix it at that time. David Kanter, Pct. 7, stated that the Library had
decided not to continue using it at that time. Koren Stembridge, Library Director, said that
this was correct and the Trustees had voted at that time based on usage and cost to repair and
chose not to reopen. Ms. Pappo asked for confirmation that the amount to fix it then would
have been less. Mr. Malloy agreed that it would have been less in 2007. Ms. Pappo stated
that she understood that this was a big price tag but that it was a treasure.
9:50 p.m. Janel Showalter, 46 Paul Revere Road, asked Members to look at the possible benefits to
Lexington and support the Article as the Stone Building could be a complement to the
historical aspect of the Town and attract new visitors.
9:53 p.m. Jeff Howry, Pct. 2, Chair of the Stone Building Reuse Committee, said that there had been a
detailed report in 2011 and this showed the cost of waiting.
9:55 p.m. Robert Cohen, Pct. 4, noted that he was present when the issue came up a decade ago and
CPC money to stabilize it had debated numerous times, but the bottom line was that the
building was in really poor condition, restricted on what can be used for, does not have a
tenant, and will potentially cost millions of dollars to get ready for a possible future tenant.
9:57 p.m. Members continued to debate and discuss the Article.
10:13 p.m. Eric Michelson, Pct. 1, called the question. Motion to terminate debate approved by majority
voice vote.
10:14 p.m. It was noted that the Select Board Member awaiting conversation was now a yes.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 10a.
Motion to Approve Article 10a Stone Building Design and Unexpected Repairs
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
113 50 8
MOTION CARRIES
10:17 p.m. Tom Diaz, Pct. 8, served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 10a.
10:18 p.m. Jessie Steigerwald, Pct. 8, raised a Point of Personal Privilege to let Members know that
Friday would be the 310th birthday of Lexington and the anniversary of incorporation.
42
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
10:18 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Monday, April 3, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by unanimous
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
April 3, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the fifth session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. on
Monday, April 3, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(155).
The Moderator called for Members to use their devices to take attendance. Quorum announcement at 7:37
p.m.
7:37 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 8.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Article 8. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
ARTICLE 8 EVALUATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL
(Citizen Petition)
MOTION: Mr. Howry moves that $65,000 be appropriated to conduct a town-wide archaeological
sensitivity survey to determine which areas may have potential for historic and prehistoric archaeological
sites, resources and landscapes including both an overall analysis of the historic (post-contact) and
prehistoric (pre-contact) landscapes located throughout the Town as well as an analysis that will map the
potential resource areas,provide recommendations on the appropriate methods for future investigation and
recommend mitigation methods; and that to meet this appropriation, $65,000 be appropriated from free
cash.
7:38 p.m. Mr. Howry presented information on the Article and the Archaeological Sensitivity Study in
order to discuss future planning and preservation. He pointed out a 350-year old wall between
Cambridge Farms and Watertown as well as possible sites that Members were encouraged to
visit.
7:49 p.m. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, noted the unanimous opposition of the Select Board to the
Article as there was no designated place in the budget and it might be better served by a
grant.
Anil Ahuja, Appropriation Committee Member, noted that the Appropriation Committee was
not in favor of the Article, with a vote of 2 in favor and 6 opposed. He noted that 1 member
who had abstained earlier, changed their vote, and was now in opposition.
7:50 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, asked who would execute this. Mr. Howry said that it would be done
by specialty consultants.
7:50 p.m. Deborah Strod, Pct. 6, asked if they could find a way to put it in the budget, whether it would
go out to bid if it were approved. Jim Malloy, Town Manager stated that they would need to
assign it to a department and it would be put out to bid. Ms. Strod asked if they voted yes,
what the process should look like. Mr. Malloy said that typically, as far as going into the
budget a board/committee would bring it forward through regular budget process, and not as
a Petition. Ms. Strod asked if the Historical Society were the fiscal sponsor whether they
could bring it forward. Mr. Malloy said that it was typically done through a Town
department.
7:52 p.m. Jay Luker, Pct. 1, questioned sites around the Battle Green, and asked if they had done an
archaeological sensitivity survey 10 years ago, whether it might have impacted the decision
to install the roundabout. Mr. Howry said that was not necessarily the case and what was
needed was a mitigation plan.
43
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
7:53 p.m. Michael Boudette, Pct. 4, said that he had a follow-up question, regarding the Historical
Commission mentioned by Mr. Malloy, and asked whether they had done an evaluation and
what was their view. Mr. Malloy said that, to his knowledge, they had not. . Howry said that
he had specifically asked the Historic Commission to sponsor the project and he had heard
that they didn't have the bandwidth to deal with it, he further noted that the President of the
Historical Society, Anne Lee, had sent an email stating that she was supportive of the project.
7:55 p.m. Avram Baskin, pct. 2, asked if it were correct that the Select Board had voted no because
there was no place in budget and not on the merits of the project. Jill Hai, Select Board
Chair, stated that this was true as they were working with a very tight budget.
7:56 p.m. Steve Heinrich, Pct. 3, noted that if the project were implemented it would result in a town
by-law and asked what that would contain. Mr. Howry stated that the project would not
produce a bylaw but rather a sensitivity map for guidance if a bylaw were adopted to consider
areas of moderate to high probability that would be considered if construction were to take
place.
7:58 p.m. Marsha Baker, Pct. 7, said that she was a board member of the Historical Society and said
that Mr. Howry had spoken to the President but they had not taken a vote.
7:58 p.m. Vicki Blier, Pct. 9, asked for a breakdown for funding and whether the Historical Society had
funds for it. Mr. Howry stated that he was requesting funds to come from free cash.
7:59 p.m. Deborah Strod, Pct. 6, asked if the Article were approved whether they would have to reopen
the budget. Mr. Malloy confirmed they would not as it would come from unallocated free
cash.
8:01 p.m. Mr. Howry offered summary comments on the Article.
8:02 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 8.
Motion to Approve Article 8 Evaluation of Archaeological Resource Potential
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
43 99 20
MOTION FAILS
8:04 p.m. The Moderator stated that they would now be returning to the Community Preservation
Committee projects that were not already taken up by the Meeting. She reminded Members that Ms.
Fenollosa had already made the Motion to bring them forward. She also noted that they would
individually take up and vote on 10b, then hear 10e and l Of together, but would take individual votes on
each, then take up l Oc separately before e&f, and finally, hear l Og, l Om, and l Oo and take one vote on
those three together.
8:05 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 10b.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
b) Ms. Fenollosa that $6,635,191 be appropriated for Munroe Center for the Arts, and to meet this
appropriation$1,000,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve and$3,635,191 be appropriated
from the Undesignated Fund Balance of the Community Preservation Fund, and that the Treasurer, with
the approval of the Select Board, is authorized to borrow $2,000,000 under M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section
7, as amended or under M.G.L. Chapter 44B, as amended, or any other enabling authority;
Ms. Christina Burwell, Executive Director for the Munroe Center of the Arts,presented information on the
Article.
Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, said that the Community
Preservation Committee had voted in favor of the Article with a vote of 7-0 with 2 abstentions, one of
whom, a Recreation Committee representative, was waiting for the Committee's approval of changes to
the part at the rear of the building. They had recently been informed that the Recreation Committee had
44
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
voted unanimously in favor and accordingly the CPC Member had changed their vote to now make the
vote 8-0 with 1 abstention.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board was unanimously in support of the
passage of Article 10b.
Victoria Buckley, Chair of the Commission on Disability, noted the unanimous support of the Commission
for the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, said that the Capital Expenditures
Committee had some concerns, as it was the largest building project with the largest appropriation from
CPF funds. He noted that big ticket items were typically done in multiple phases, with one round for
design and one for construction, while this appropriation was for a single phase. He also stated that the
project had not been prioritized against future projects, that the Motion specified partial debt funding, and
that the project had only reached the schematic design phase, which might mean unanticipated expenses in
the future. He noted that countering these concerns were the assurances of the Town Manager and
proponents that the project will follow the Town's integrated building design construction policy which
would give the Town oversight on much of the project. Mr. Lamb stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee had voted the unanimous approval of the article.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Chair of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation Committee had
voted unanimously for approval of 10b, and that ADA compliance was necessary as a Town building,
regardless of the tenant.
8:17 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, asked whether is was anticipated, assuming funding, that at any point
throughout construction the Munroe Center would have to be closed. Ms. Burwell stated that
she did not anticipate that as the majority of their classes happened in the afternoon from 3:00
p.m. and onwards and construction usually took place during the day.
8:18 p.m. Cynthia Arens, Pct. 3, noted that she supported the Motion and that the Munroe Center was
an important resource for the community and the improvements were absolutely necessary
regardless of the tenant.
8:20 p.m. Jamie Magid, 5 Norton Road, said she was a student at the Center and that as a disabled
person, others may not understand the importance of the Arts to be in situations such as hers.
She noted that having access to the Arts was really important as it was something she could
still participate in and the experience there was very good.
8:21 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, noted that earlier during Town Meeting, they had supported the
investment in the Stone Building, and there were some possible reservations among Members
on how these obligations worked, especially with regard to debt on this Article. The
Moderator noted that the Motions and funding sources had been up on website and available
for a while, these points shouldn't be a surprise.
8:22 p.m. Lauren Deems Black, Pct. 8, spoke in support of the Article and mentioned that his daughter
had been participating in adaptive dance classes there for many years and that under DEI,
inclusion involved accessible buildings.
8:23 p.m. Michael Boudett, Pct. 4, asked what the likelihood was that it would need supplemental
appropriation. Michael Cronin, Director of Public Facilities, stated that at this phase in the
completion of design development and they had a recent cost estimate, which had come in
slightly over, but this was not uncommon for this type of project. He said they would go
back and look at the design, make some adjustments, and get back to budget and while there
were no certainties, they would work to maintain scope of project. Mr. Boudett said that he
understands that the CPC reacts to projects before it, and there was the potential for heavy
demand coming in the next years from recreation fields to other projects. He asked how they
saw the next few years playing out in light of taking on this project. Marilyn. Fenollosa,
Community Preservation Chair, stated that the CPC relies on the Asst. Town Manager for
Finance, Appropriation Committee, and the Capital Expenditures Committee to guide them in
45
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
the process, but that they could only evaluate based on projects in front of them and that they
couldn't assume what would come in even if they had heard of projects that might.
8:27 p.m. Valerie Overton, Pct. 1, stated that she was in favor of the Article and that there was positive
creative expression work done at the Munroe Center which helped to promote the well-being
of community members in many ways. She noted that this supported their Resolution for full
inclusion and that the Motion spoke clearly within those parameters.
8:30 p.m. Amy Weinstock, Pct. 2, said that she was in support of the Article, and moved that debate be
closed. The Moderator noted that since she had expressed her opinion, first, the motion was
negated.
8:30 p.m. Jerry Michelson, Pct. 5, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
8:31 p.m. Ms. Burwell, offered summary comments on the Article and thanked the Members for their
attention.
8:32 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 10b.
Motion to Approve Article 10b Munroe Center for the Arts
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
165 3 3
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
8:33 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article loc.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
MOTION:
c) Ms. Fenollosa moves that $118,419 be appropriated for Hancock-Clarke Barn Restoration, and to meet
this appropriation $118,419 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the Community
Preservation Fund;
8:34 p.m. Carol Ward, Executive Director of the Historical Society, presented information on the Article
and said that it was about community and making the barn accessible.
8:40 p.m. Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee said that the Community
Preservation Committee unanimously recommended the Article 9-0.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, said that the Select Board was unanimously in support
of loc.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee stated that the Capital
Expenditures Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice Chair for the Appropriation Committee, said that the Appropriation
Committee had voted 4-3-1 (abstain) with the person abstaining a Board Member of the
Lexington Historical Society. He asked that the Moderator recognize Mr. Bartenstein for the
minority vote. Mr. Bartenstein noted that as the vote was split it made sense to separate the
article out and the minority view was that the historic value of the barn (which has not been
clearly identified) didn't justify the short and long term expense.
8:43 p.m. David Kanter, asked what the likely useable space in the building would be. He was told that it
was roughly 30 x 24 on one level.
8:44 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, noted that the Historical Society took care of the historical assets and
pointed out that the spelling in the Motion was incorrectly missing an "e". The Moderator
asked that the correction to the Motion be made.
46
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:45 p.m. Steve Kaufman, stated that while the Historical Society oversaw many worthy projects, when
walked through the space he felt it was an "old shed". He noted that it wasn't possible to write
a check for everything and he did not feel this project merited it.
8:46 p.m. Edward Nolan, Pct. 3, asked that given the concerns raised by the Appropriation Committee, if
they voted for this what an estimate for the next stages would cost. Ms. Ward said that she
could give estimates based on other projects that they were working on and that they privately
fundraise for similar interpretive work and would guess between $50-100,000.
8:47 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Article including the viability of the structure.
8:55 p.m. Robert Cohen, Pct. 4, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
Ms. Ward offered final comments on the Article.
8:56 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the correctly spelled Motion oflOc.
Motion to Approve Article 10c Hancock-Clarke Barn Restoration
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
128 31 7
MOTION CARRIES
A Member raised a Point of Order indicating that the tablet did not record their vote. The Moderator
suggested that she speak to a member of the IT staff to see if they could fix the issue.
8:58 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Article 10e and 1 O and noted that although each
of the motions were similar, they would be voted separately.
ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE THE FY2024 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS
e) Ms. Fenollosa moves that$12,000 be appropriated for the First Parish Church Clock Restoration; and to
meet this appropriation$12,000 be appropriated from the Historic Resources Reserve of the Community
Preservation Fund;
f) Ms. Fenollosa moves that $9,600 be appropriated for the East Village Clock at Follen Church
Restoration, and to meet this appropriation $9,600 be appropriated from the Historic Resources Reserve
of the Community Preservation Fund;
9:03 p.m. David Pollock, presented information on 10e which would completely overhaul the 1868 E.
Howard clock and noted that First Parish wasn't just a church but a community and gave
examples of activities taking place there. He also said that the issue of separation of church
and state had been looked at closely and there was no religious symbolism or purpose in this
project.
9:08 p.m. Nancy Sofen, presented information on l Of East Village Clock and noted that they had
learned, after some research, that the clock belonged to Church and not to the Town. She
gave an overview of the repairs needed and spoke of the mechanisms for the clock and the
bell.
9:13 p.m. Ms. Sofen presented 2 additional slides after her presentation and said that she would like to
address a comment she had seen on the TMMA that they had applied because "it's easy" and
noted that this was an incomplete response to a question she had been asked. She noted that
Follen originally thought they didn't own the clock, and the church membership had spent a
lot of time to keep things up and when they had received an estimate, it seemed reasonable to
apply to the CPC as something they did not own. By March 101h when they learned that
47
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Follen owned the clock, it was also clear that it was an appropriate source of funding as the
project met the criteria. Ms. Sofen described some of the activities and charity events that
took place in the Follen community.
9:18 p.m. Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee said that the
Community Preservation Committee had unanimously recommend the 10e by a vote of 8-0
with 1 abstention due to membership in the Church, and the Community Preservation
Committee unanimously voted in favor of l Of with a vote of 9-0.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board had 4 in support of I Oe
and 1O and 1 opposed to each(4-1 each vote).
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee stated that the Capital
Expenditures Committee had voted unanimously in favor of 10e and 1Of.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Appropriations Committee Chair stated that the Appropriations
Committee had voted in favor by a vote of 7-1 for both IOe and IOf.
9:19 p.m. Jodia Finnegan, Pct. 6, noted that she had been the person who had asked why the money
hadn't been raised, and stated that when she asked that during the bus tour, she had heard that
someone at the Follen Church had stated that it was easier to apply for the funds, and thinks
that it should be raised. Ms. Sofen stated that she didn't have a response to whether she could
go out to raise funds, but rather, had come to the place felt appropriate to go, as the CPC did
fund items such as this.
9:22 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, stated that she was in support of both projects. She noted that other
Towns had approved similar CPA funds in 6 other communities, and that it was really a
question of whether they wanted to. She suggested supporting them for historic reasons and
that it was the popular to take a picture with it in the background as you stood in front of
Minuteman statue and church.
9:25 p.m. Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the Articles, including whether it crossed
the line of separation between church and state, the architecture of the churches, and the
budget line.
9:50 p.m. Steven Kaufman, Pct. 5, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote
9:51 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on 10e.
Motion to Approve Article 10e First Parish Church Clock Restoration
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
102 54 8
MOTION CARRIES
9:53 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on 1Of.
Motion to Approve Article 10f East Village Clock at Follen Church Restoration
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
97 58 7
MOTION CARRIES
9:55 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting open under Articles 10g, 10m, and 10o and stated that if
there was no objection they would hear them all separately, but then take one vote.
g) Ms. Fenollosa moves that $1,211,675 be appropriated for Willard's Woods Site
Improvements, and to meet this appropriation $1,211,675 be appropriated from the Open
Space Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund;
Phil Hamilton, Chair of the Conservation Commission, presented information Article 10g.
48
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
10:01 p.m. Betsey Weiss, Pct. 2, raised a Point of Order, and stated that she would like to separate out
10m. The Moderator made a note of this.
Ms. Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, said that Community
Preservation Committee, unanimously recommended l Og by a vote of 9-0
Mark Sandeen, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board was unanimously in
support of passage of the Article.
Victoria Buckley, Chair of the Commission on Disability, stated that the Commission on
Disability was very interested in more conservation area becoming accessible and they were
unanimously in support of the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee stated that the Capital
Expenditures Committee had voted unanimously in support of 10g.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Appropriations Committee Chair stated that the Appropriations
Committee had voted unanimously in support of the Article.
10:03 p.m. Marsha Trager, Pct. 5, stated that she was in support of the Article but noted that canine
lovers were afraid to have dogs always on leash or banned and asked if there had been any
discussion that dogs would be restricted from Willard's Woods when the project was
finished. Mr. Hamilton stated that there was no such plan and there might be some
restrictions on dogs for certain parts of the trail but that wasn't certain at the moment. He
also noted that there were many other trails there and that there were no plans to change
allowing dogs on those trails.
10:05 p.m. John Himmel, Pct. 6, asked who had prepared the cost estimate. Mr. Hamilton said that it
had been prepared by a landscape architect firm and it was the same who had prepared the
plans for Parker Meadow. Mr. Himmel asked if Mr. Hamilton could compare the bidding
strategy for this project to the Parker Meadow project. Mr. Himmel stated that it would work
similarly as it was the Town's regular bidding process.
10:09 p.m. Lauren Black, Pct. 8, stated that he was in support of the Article and reminded Members that
the Town had a commitment to inclusion. He further noted that mobility chairs work well for
small children, but not for people who are older.
10:10 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, said that he had a question regarding accessibility for those with
mobility issues and asked if he was correct that those were different needs from the needs of
those who were sight or hearing impaired. Mr. Hamilton said that was correct. Mr. Baskin
asked if this project would meet those needs, as well. Mr. Hamilton said that the primary
focus was on mobility issues but they would try to do that with interpretative stops along the
way, but he was unsure of the technology. Mr. Baskin said that he would have preferred it to
be clear when speaking of accessibility.
10:14 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, stated that the FAQs noted they were preparing alternatives so they
didn't go over the top line of budget. Mr. Hamilton said they were. Mr. McGaw asked if
they had identified what they would be. Mr. Hamilton said that this was being done by the
Conservation Department and he was unsure if they had all been identified. Mr. McGaw
asked to be assured that alternatives will meet the project's goals and they would not go over
budget. Jim Malloy, Town Manager, stated that Karen Mullins, Conservation Director and
Liz Mancini, Purchasing Director were working on that and it had already been determined
by the Conservation Commission that they wished to stay within budget.
10:16 p.m. Victoria Buckley, Pct. 8, Chair of Commission on Disability, stated that the Commission on
Disability covers all types of disabilities and had brought forth the concerns about them when
making suggestions.
10:17 p.m. David Kanter, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 100.
o) Ms. Fenollosa moves that $400,000 be appropriated for LexHAB Property Acquisition
Prefunding, and to meet this appropriation $400,000 be appropriated from the Community
Housing Reserve of the Community Preservation Fund;
49
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Sarah Morrison, Executive Director of LexHAB noted that she did not have an official presentation, but
the overall goal of the funding request was to fund $400,000 for the purchase of property that would
become affordable housing, and most likely used as a down payment on a smaller home.
Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, stated that the Community
Preservation Committee unanimously recommended the Article by a vote of 9-0.
Mark Sandeen, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board was unanimously in support of
the Article.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, noted the unanimous support of the Planning Board for passage of
the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, said that the Capital Expenditures
Committee was unanimously in favor of the Article.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice Chair of the Appropriation Committee, said that the Appropriation Committee was
unanimously in support of the Article.
10:20 p.m. Jay Luker, Pct. 1, asked whether the expenditure would create a unit of affordable housing.
Ms. Morrison stated that it would. Mr. Luker noted that every year the CPC reported back to
the State any money approved at Town Meeting. He asked how the numbers were reported
back as he had heard that someone in the Finance Department handled it as he understand
that there was an organization entitled the Community Preservation Coalition which had a
databank so that there could be a comparison as to what other Towns were doing, but the
numbers seemed off and wondered how to have an accurate metric of affordable housing that
were being created. Carolyn Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager for Finance, said that she
couldn't speak to the accuracy of the Coalition website but that her Department had a CPC
Administrator that filed the reports annually.
10:22 p.m. Members continued discussing the Article.
10:26 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on l Og and 10o and noted that it required a majority vote.
Motion to Approve Article 10 2 and o (Willard's Woods Site Improvements, LexHAB Property
Acquitision Prefunding)
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
152 0 4
MOTION CARRIES
10:26 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting on Article 10m.
m) That $22,000 be appropriated for Transforming Trees into Art: Birds of New England, and to
meet this appropriation $22,000 be appropriated from the Unbudgeted Reserve of the
Community Preservation Fund;
10:29 p.m. Carol Rose, Lexington Council for the Arts, presented information on the Article.
Marilyn Fenollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee, noted that the Community
Preservation Committee had vote 6-3 in favor of the Article.
Mark Sandeen, Select Board Members said that the Select Board, had voted with 3 in support and 2
opposed to the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee had voted 5 -1 in support of the Article.
Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Chair of the Appropriation Committee vote had results in a 4-4 tie vote.
50
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
10:32 p.m. Deborah Strod, Pct. 6, asked how long the art would last. Ms. Rose stated that they should
last 10-20 years and only required oiling for maintenance.
10:33 p.m. Scott Burson, Pct. 4, said that there was something about the proposal he found pleasing and
thought they would be striking and distinctive.
10:34 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, rose in opposition of the Article and said they needed to think about
priorities.
10:37 p.m. Members continued to debate and discuss the Article.
10:44 p.m. Noah Michelson, Pct. 1, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
10:44 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 10m.
Motion to Approve Article 10 m Transforming Trees into Art
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
43 87 10
MOTION FAILS
10:46 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Monday, April 10, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by unanimous
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
April 10, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the sixth session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. on
Monday, April 10, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(155).
The Moderator explained seating and parliamentary procedure for the evening and then asked Meeting
Members to record their attendance. Quorum announcement at 7:35 p.m.
7:35 p.m. Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee noted that there was an updated
Capital Expenditures Committee Report for April 10, 2023.
7:35 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Articles 33 and 34.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Articles 33 and 34. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
7:35 The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 33.
ARTICLE 33 AMEND ZONING BYLAW SPECIAL PERMIT RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENTS
MOTION:
Ms. Hai moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be amended as
follows, and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply
with the numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
51
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
1. Amend § 135-3.4, Table 1, Permitted Uses & Development Standards, by replacing row
A.1.05 with the following:
GC RO RS RT CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM CSX
Special Residential
A.1.05 Development N R R R N N N N N N N N
(SRD)
2. Replace § 135-6.9 with the following:
6.9. SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
6.9.1 Purposes.
This section is intended to:
I. Encourage greater diversity of housing opportunities to meet the needs of a diverse population
with respect to income, ability, accessibility needs,number of persons in a household and stage
of life;
2. Encourage the development of inclusionary housing;
3. Promote development proposals designed with sensitivity to the characteristics of the site;
4. Permit different types of structures and residential uses to be combined in a planned
interrelationship that promotes an improved design relationship between buildings;
5. Preserve historically or architecturally significant buildings or places;
6. Encourage the preservation and minimum disruption of outstanding natural features of open
land and minimize impacts on environmentally sensitive areas;
7. Encourage sustainable development through the use of green building practices and low-impact
development techniques; and
8. Promote the efficient and economical provision of public facilities such as utilities and streets
and facilitate a detailed assessment, by Town officials and the public, of the adequacy of such
facilities and services for the proposed level of development.
6.9.2 Applicability.
A Special Residential Development("SRD") is a project in which one or more lots, tracts, or
parcels of land are to be improved for use as a coordinated site for housing and for which
deviations from the dimensional standards that apply to conventional developments are
allowed in order to achieve a diversity of household types, sizes and affordability. Instead of
determining density by dwelling type, minimum lot area, and frontage requirements, the total
Gross Floor Area(GFA) of market-rate residential development for the tract as a whole is
limited.
No Special Residential Development shall be initiated without site plan review by the
Planning Board in accordance with the provisions of this section and § 9.5 of this Bylaw.
6.9.3 Types of Special Residential Development.
I. Site Sensitive Development (SSD): A Special Residential Development in which the number
of dwellings is limited as set forth below so that existing site features such as natural grades,
mature trees, stone walls, and historic structures may be retained.
2. Compact Neighborhood Development (CND): A Special Residential Development in which
52
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
the size of the dwelling units is limited as set forth below.
6.9.4 Scale of Development.
The amount of development permitted in a Special Residential Development shall be based on a proof plan
showing at least two lots fully complying with the provisions of this bylaw (other than this
§ 6.9 and § 6.12), the Planning Board's Subdivision Regulations, and the criteria set forth
below.
6.9.5 Threshold Criteria for Site Sensitive Development.
An SSD shall be designed to preserve natural features, mature native trees, habitat areas, sloped areas, and
historically or architecturally significant buildings or places. Where possible, an SSD should
be sited to preserve mature native trees and their critical root zone.
6.9.6 Dimensional Standards.
The requirements of§ 4.0 are modified as follows within a Special Residential Development:
1. Lot area. There is no minimum lot area required;provided, however, that the lot area for each
lot shall be sufficient to safely meet the off-street parking requirements of this bylaw and the
installation of any on-site water supply and sewage disposal facilities.
2. Frontage. There is no minimum frontage required; provided, however, that frontage for each
lot shall be sufficient to provide for adequate access to the building site in the judgment of the
Fire Department. Adequate access may be demonstrated by use of shared driveways, parking
lots or other means.
3. Yard Requirements. The Minimum Yards required by § 4.0 shall apply only to the perimeter
of the site but are not required elsewhere within the site.
4. Height Requirements. The height limits in Table 2 shall apply, except that the height limit, as
measured by stories, shall be three stories in all districts.
5. Gross Floor Area. Section 4.4 shall not apply. The total GFA of all dwelling units other than
inclusionary dwelling units shall not exceed 115% of the sum of(1)the total area of all lots in
the proof plan multiplied by 0.16 and (2) 4,550 SF multiplied by the number of lots shown on
the proof plan.
6.9.7 Dwelling Unit Count and Size.
1. Number of Dwellings. In a Site Sensitive Development, the number of dwellings shall not
exceed the total gross floor area of the development divided by the maximum building size
determined under § 6.9.7.4, rounded up. There is no limit on the number of dwellings in a
Compact Neighborhood Development.
2. Number of Dwelling Units. There is no upper limit on the number of dwelling units in a
dwelling. The number of dwelling units shall not be less than the number of lots shown on the
proof plan in accordance with § 6.9.4
3. Dwelling Unit Size. The average GFA for all dwelling units in a Compact Neighborhood
Development shall not exceed 2,250 square feet. The GFA for any single dwelling unit in a
Compact Neighborhood Development shall not exceed 2,800 square feet. There is no limit on
the GFA of a dwelling unit in a Site Sensitive Development.
4. Building Size. The GFA of any building in a Special Residential Development other than an
Historic Building shall not exceed 9,350 square feet in the RO District and 7,030 SF in the RS
and RT Districts.
6.9.8 Inclusionary Housing
L Inclusionary Dwelling Units.
a. At least 15% of the of the sum of(1)the total area of all lots in the proof plan multiplied by
53
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
0.16 and (2) 4,550 SF multiplied by the number of lots shown on the proof plan shall be
incorporated into inclusionary dwelling units, as defined by regulations promulgated by the
Planning Board pursuant to § 6.9.8.5 (the "Inclusionary GFA"). At least two-thirds of the
Inclusionary GFA shall be incorporated into dwelling units eligible for inclusion on the
Town's Subsidized Housing Inventory as determined by the Massachusetts Department of
Housing and Community Development and shall remain affordable in perpetuity.
2. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be substantially similar in size, layout, construction
materials, fixtures, amenities, and interior and exterior finishes to comparable dwelling units
in the same dwelling.
3. A Special Residential Development with more than one inclusionary dwelling unit shall
proportionally disperse those units throughout the development rather than concentrate them
within particular sections of a dwelling or within particular dwellings.
4. Occupants of inclusionary dwelling units shall have the same access to common areas,
facilities, and services as enjoyed by other occupants of the development including but not
limited to outdoor spaces, amenity spaces, storage, parking, bicycle parking facilities, and
resident services.
5. The Planning Board, in consultation with the Select Board,the Housing Partnership Board,
and the Commission on Disability, shall adopt regulations concerning physical
characteristics, location, and access to services of inclusionary dwelling units; defining
limits on the household income of occupants, sale price, and rent of inclusionary dwelling
units; and the form of required legal restrictions for such units.
6. A Special Residential Development with six or fewer market-rate dwelling units shall be
permitted to meet the requirements of this section by making a payment to the Town's
Affordable Housing Trust in an amount equal to the estimated construction cost of 15% of
the GFA permitted under the proof plan submitted pursuant to § 6.9.4, as determined in
accordance with regulations to be promulgated by the Planning Board.
7. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for multi-family housing until an affordable
housing restriction for any inclusionary dwelling units is executed, submitted to the Town,
and, to the extent required, recorded.
6.9.9 Regulations
The Planning Board shall adopt Site Plan Review regulations and standards, consistent with
this Section, regarding Special Residential Developments, including with respect to pedestrian
and vehicular access to, and egress from,the site, landscaping, screening, and buffers, lighting,
stormwater management, architectural style and scale, water and wastewater systems, and
refuse disposal.
The Planning Board shall also adopt Site Plan Review regulations and standards for Site
Sensitive Developments,to protect natural features of the site such as natural grades and slopes,
views, mature trees, stonewalls, natural resources such as agricultural soil, and common open
space.
6.9.10 Common Open Space Standards.
1. Minimum common open space. At least 15% of the developable site area in a Special
Residential Development shall be set aside as common open space.
3. Amend § 135-10, Definitions as follows:
1. Delete the definitions of "BALANCED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT" and "PUBLIC
BENEFIT DEVELOPMENT".
2. Amend definitions as follows:
SITE SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT (SSD)
A type of special residential development as defined in § 6.9.
54
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (SRD)
A residential development regulated by § 6.9, in which a tract of land is divided into one
or more lots for constructing dwellings allowing deviation from the dimensional standards
that apply to conventional developments.
3. Add the following definitions:
COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT (CND)
A type of special residential development as defined in § 6.9.
7:36 p.m. Wendy Manz, Member of the Special Permit Residential Development Zoning Bylaw
Amendment Committee (Ad Hoc),presented information on the Article. She noted that the
Committee had compiled a statement which said "We seek greater diversity in housing to
meet the needs of families and individuals of different circumstances."
7:48 p.m. Ms. Manz offered a few additional remarks regarding the makeup of the Committee and
pointed out that they had many varied backgrounds and named the current members and that
many had been long term residents of Lexington.
7:50 p.m. Ms. Hai, Select Board Chair, noted that the Select Board was unanimously in support of the
Article.
Mr. Hornig, Member of the Planning Board, stated that the Planning Board met on March 1,
2023 and after 3 public hearings had voted 4-0-1 for approval of passage of Article 33.
Betsey Weiss, Vice-Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, said that the Housing
Partnership Board had voted unanimously (9-0) on February 21, 2023 to support both
Articles 33 and 34 and urged Town Meeting to vote in favor of the Articles.
Christina Lin, Clerk of the Lexington Human Rights Committee, stated that the Human
Rights Committee had voted for Articles 33 and 34 on March 8, 2023 with 7-in favor of
passage, 0 against, 0 abstaining on both Articles. She noted that they were in support of the
Planning Board initiatives to address the need for more diverse housing stock.
7:58 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, asked why payment in lieu of something was being included. Ms.
Manz stated that they had discussed this at some length and included it for builders for a
number of reasons but that it only applied to site sensitive developments. She noted that it
was often harder to tuck in an affordable unit within small projects. Payments in lieu, rather
than building the affordable unit, gave a flow of cash into the Housing Trust, and although
seeded with initial money this could assist with further funds into the Trust.
Mr. Kanter asked for an example of the amount of money or percentage. Charles Hornig,
Planning Board Member, stated that the bylaw explicitly allowed the Planning Board to set
the rate through its regulations. He noted that the last time they had done this, they had
looked at recent actual affordable housing development that had been built in order to
estimate the total cost to build and used that as basis for value. If the Article passed, he said
that they would use current numbers to make their calculations.
8:03 p.m. Mike Kennealy, 4 Brent Road, said that he had served in Governor Baker's cabinet as the
Commonwealth's Secretary of Housing and Economic Development. He noted that they
were in a housing crisis, and he liked the proposal as it had the prospect(over time) of adding
more affordable units. He noted that he felt that special permits made it hard to get things
done so recommended the Article remain intact.
8:05 p.m. Leonard Morse-Fortier, Pct. 7, asked a question regarding height restrictions as to what
already existed in the building code. Mr. Hornig explained that there was a slight change in
that the height limit was the same as for all other residential developments except it allowed
permitting of 3 stories rather than 2.5 and height was restricted to 40 feet.
8:06 p.m. Heather Hartshorn, Pct. 4, stated that as a child of a teacher, and non-profit manager, and she
knew that many after school teachers could not afford to live in Town. She stated that she
appreciated the expertise of the group.
8:08 p.m. Nyles Barnert, Pct. 4, said that the proof plan only showed lots and not the houses on them.
And asked if they could assume construction costs would be based on each house on proof
plan being built. Mr. Hornig stated that the language in the motion refers to the proof plan
because that was how they determined the base gross floor area and noted that at least 15
55
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
percent of that must be included as an inclusionary dwelling units, then the Planning Board
would determine a formula based on that that would create the payment in lieu for that
development.
8:12 p.m. Cynthia Arens, Pct. 3, said that she would like to move her Amendment and therefore moves
that:
by striking in its entirety Paragraph 6 of proposed § 135-6.9.8.
0
8:12 p.m. Ms. Arens presented information on the Amendment. The Moderator noted that the
Amendment would strike the entirety of Paragraph 6.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, noted that the Select Board had voted with 3 in favor and 2
opposed. Ms. Hai noted that the Special Residential Development Committee was
unanimously opposed to the Amendment.
Ms. Manz said they had already given some reasons why payment in lieu would be
appropriate and noted that the Special Residential Development Committee agreed that the
formula the Planning Board would eventually propose would be used.
Betsey Weiss, Vice Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, noted that the Housing
Partnership Board had unanimously voted on February 7th to oppose. Ms. Weiss further
noted, speaking for the Special Residential Development Committee, that 15 percent payment
in lieu was an essential needed step and an important source of affordable housing funds that
needed to flow into the Affordable Housing Trust. She noted that there was concern that the
Amendment would end up causing less housing.
8:21 p.m. Charles Hornig, Member of the Planning Board, stated that the Planning Board had voted on
April 101h 5-0 to recommend rejection of the amendment.
Christina Lin, Human Rights Committee, noted that the Human Rights Committee had not
taken a position on the Article.
8:22 p.m. Kathryn Roy, Pct. 4, asked whether Ms. Arens could site a local municipality that had less
than 6 units. Ms. Arens stated that she had not done the research of what might be out there.
She noted that the way that the rest of bylaw was written it included inclusionary housing
amongst multi-family being the same size as the multi-family units and spread out throughout
the units.
8:24 p.m. Ricki Pappo, Pct. 2, spoke in favor of the Amendment and noted that there was nothing
specific in this Article that stated what the payment in lieu might be and she didn't feel she
could support it without specifics about the funding.
8:27 p.m. Janet Kern, Pct. 1, noted that in 2017 Town Meeting had approved Brookhaven expansion
with an affordable housing mitigation equal to the "cost of the Town purchasing land and
constructing approximately 5.5 affordable housing units". She asked if the Town would
consider the cost of purchasing property in addition to construction costs. Charles Hornig,
Planning Board Member, stated that they had not determined the number yet, but understood
that it was very clear by the Special Residential Development Ad Hoc Committee that this
was intended to be inclusive figure, such as used with Brookhaven, but the Planning Board
hadn't yet had a chance to examine costs they were not in a position to discuss "the number".
He noted that at their last meeting they had considered acquisition and building costs. Ms.
Kern asked for clarification of the main motion in that it mentioned "constructions costs" and
nothing about purchasing property. Mr. Hornig said that the main motion said estimated
constructions costs, not to include not only hard construction cost to actually build a housing
development including land acquisition, architecture, site prep, permitting, marketing, etc.
Ms. Kern asked Town Counsel to confirm that"cost of construction" as written in the Motion
would have purchase of the property included. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel, stated that
yes, he would agree to Mr. Hornig's description of what the Planning Board could do under
its regulations.
56
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:30 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, noted that he supports the Amendment and that there were plenty of
builders willing to build in Lexington and that some mistakes were made in Brookhaven.
8:33 p.m. Tina McBride, Pct. 7, asked why the Select Board majority supported the Amendment. Jill
Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the conversation in support was due largely to the
timeliness and noted that those in favor could perhaps give their reasons. Mark Sandeen,
Select Board Member, stated that for him, there was no better or less expensive time to build
affordable housing then when the developer had secured the land and permits and had a team
of contractors ready to start construction. He noted that land was a precious resource in
Lexington and difficult to acquire and it could take 5 or more years to build affordable
housing projects. He further noted that there was a housing crisis and a house unit today was
worth more to someone who needed it than something 5 years from now and in 5 years it
would cost more to build.
8:35 p.m. Ms. Hai noted that the other two members of the Board felt the inclusion at the smaller level
might instead force a developer to choose a conventional subdivision, for which they would
get neither a payment nor a unit. Ms. McBride asked for a comparison on how many
conventional subdivisions vs special permits in the last 15 years. Mr. Hornig noted that he
couldn't come up with 15 years off the top of his head but there had been two fairly recent
ones.
8:37 p.m. Alessandro Alessandrini, Pct. 4, stated that he was in favor of the Amendment and that he
had liked the Article until it had proposed payment in lieu.
8:42 p.m. The Moderator noted that the 30 minutes for debate had now ended. Jeff Howry, Pct. 2,
moved to extend debate by 15 minutes. Motion fails by majority voice vote.
8:43 p.m. Ms. Arens gave closing remarks on the Amendment.
8:44 p.m. Tina McBride, Pct. 7, raised a Point of Order, and asked for a tally vote to be taken
regarding the extension of time for debate. The Moderator asked those who agreed with this
to rise and then noted that there were sufficient numbers to call for a tallied vote.
The Moderator opened voting on extending debate.
Motion to Extend Debate on Amendment
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
84 85 10
MOTION FAILS
8:47 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the Amendment.
Motion to Amend Article 33 (Arens)
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
77 93 5
MOTION TO AMEND FAILS
8:48 p.m. The Moderator noted that they were now back to the main Motion.
Members continued to debate and discuss the main Motion including discussions regarding
trees in the setback.
8:59 p.m. Lin Jensen, Pct. 8, noted that she and Tina McBride, Pct. 7 would like to move to Amend the
Motion.
ARTICLE 33 AMEND ZONING BYLAW SPECIAL PERMIT RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENTS MOTION:
That the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington,be amended as follows, and
further
that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply with the numbering
format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
57
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
1. Amend § 135-3.4, Table 1, Permitted Uses & Development Standards, by replacing row
A.1.05 with the followin2 and addinf! new row A.1.06:
GC RO RS RT C CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM CS X
N
A.1.05 N R R R N N N N N N N N
-Reside-fAial
-Dev,e4epinent
+SR7D-)—_GLornpact
Neighborwd
Development
ACND)
AJ.06 Site Sensitive N SP SP SP N N N N N N N N
Development
ASSD)
2. Replace§ 135-6.9 with the following:
6.9. SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
6.9.1 Purposes.
This section is intended to:
1. Encourage greater diversity of housing opportunities to meet the needs of a diverse population with
respect to income, ability, accessibility needs, number of persons in a household and
stage of life;
2. Encourage the development of inclusionary housing;
3. Promote development proposals designed with sensitivity to the characteristics of the site;
4. Permit different types of structures and residential uses to be combined in a planned
interrelationship that promotes an improved design relationship between buildings;
5. Preserve historically or architecturally significant buildings or places;
6. Encourage the preservation and minimum disruption of outstanding natural features of open land
and minimize impacts on environmentally sensitive areas;
7. Encourage sustainable development through the use of green building practices and low-
impact development techniques; and
8. Promote the efficient and economical provision of public facilities such as utilities and streets and
facilitate a detailed assessment,by Town officials and the public, of the adequacy of such
facilities and services for the proposed level of development.
6.9.2 Applicability.
A Special Residential Development("SRD") is a project in which one or more lots,tracts, or parcels of
land are to be improved for use as a coordinated site for housing and for which deviations
from the dimensional standards that apply to conventional developments are allowed in
order to achieve a diversity of household types, sizes and affordability. Instead of
determining density by dwelling type, minimum lot area, and frontage requirements,the
total Gross Floor Area(GFA) of market-rate residential development for the tract as a whole
58
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
is limited.
No Site Sensitive Development 'SSD) shall be initiated without first obtainin&) a special permit
from the
P of this section Bylaw.
No Speeial Residential Compact Neighborhood Development CNDshallbe initiated
without site plan review by the Planning Board in accordance with the provisions of
this section and § 9.5 of this Bylaw.
6.9.3 Types of Special Residential Development.
1. Site Sensitive Development (SSD): A Special Residential Development in which the number of
dwellings is limited as set forth below so that existing site features such as natural
grades, mature trees, stone walls, and historic structures may be retained.
2. Compact Neighborhood Development (CND): A Special Residential Development in which the
size of the dwelling units is limited as set forth below.
6.9.4 Scale of Development.
The amount of development permitted in a Special Residential Development shall be based on a proof
plan showing at least two lots fully complying with the provisions of this bylaw (other than
this § 6.9 and § 6.12),the Planning Board's Subdivision Regulations, and the criteria set
forth below.
6.9.5 Threshold Criteria for Site Sensitive Development.
An SSD must be designed to preserve natural features, mature native trees, habitat areas, sloped
areas, historically or architecturally significant buildings or places. Where possible, an SSD
should be sited to preserve mature native trees and the critical root zone.
6.9.6 Dimensional Standards.
The requirements of§ 4.0 are modified as follows within a Special Residential Development:
1. Lot area. There is no minimum lot area required;provided, however,that the lot area for each lot
shall be sufficient to safely meet the off-street parking requirements of this bylaw and the
installation of any on-site water supply and sewage disposal facilities.
2. Frontage. There is no minimum frontage required;provided, however,that frontage for each lot shall
be sufficient to provide for adequate access to the building site in the judgment of the Fire
Department. Adequate access may be demonstrated by use of shared driveways,parking lots
or other means.
3. Yard Requirements. The Minimum Yards required by § 4.0 shall apply only to the perimeter of
the site but are not required elsewhere within the site.
4. Height Requirements . The height limits in Table 2 shall apply, except that the height limit,
as measured by stories, shall be three stories in all districts.
5. Gross Floor Area. Section 4.4 shall not apply. The total GFA of all dwelling units other than
inclusionary dwelling units shall not exceed 115% of the sum of(1)the total area of all
lots in the proof plan multiplied by 0.16 and(2) 4,550 SF multiplied by the number of
lots shown on the proof plan.
6.9.7 Dwelling Unit Count and Size.
1. Number of Dwellings. In a Site Sensitive Development,the number of dwellings shall not exceed the
59
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
total gross floor area of the development divided by the maximum building size
determined under §
6.9.7.4, rounded up. There is no limit on the number of dwellings in a Compact Neighborhood
Development.
2. Number of Dwelling Units. There is no upper limit on the number of dwelling units in a dwelling.
The number of dwelling units shall not be less than the number of lots shown on the proof
plan in accordance with § 6.9.4
3. Dwelling Unit Size. The average GFA for all dwelling units in a Compact Neighborhood
Development may not exceed 2,250 square feet. The GFA for any single dwelling unit in a
Compact
Neighborhood Development may not exceed 2,800 square feet. There is no limit on the GFA of a
dwelling unit in a Site Sensitive Development.
4. Building Size. The GFA of any building in a Special Residential Development other than an
Historic Building shall not exceed 9,350 square feet in the RO District and 7,030 SF in
the RS and RT Districts.
6.9.8 Inclusionary Housing
1. Inclusionary Dwelling Units.
a. At least 15% of the of the sum of(1) the total area of all lots in the proof plan multiplied by
0.16 and(2) 4,550 SF multiplied by the number of lots shown on the proof plan shall be (the)
Planning Board pursuant to § 6.9.8.5 (the "Inclusionary GFA"). At least two-thirds of the
Inclusionary GFA shall be incorporated into dwelling units eligible for inclusion on
the Town's Subsidized Housing Inventory as determined by the Massachusetts
Department of Housing and Community Development and shall remain affordable in
perpetuity.
2. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be substantially similar in size, layout, construction materials,
fixtures, amenities, and interior and exterior finishes to comparable dwelling units
in the same dwelling.
3. A Special Residential Development with more than one inclusionary dwelling unit shall
proportionally disperse those units throughout the development rather than concentrate
them within particular sections of a dwelling or within particular dwellings.
4. Occupants of inclusionary dwelling units shall have the same access to common areas, facilities,
and services as enjoyed by other occupants of the development including but not limited
to outdoor spaces, amenity spaces, storage,parking,bicycle parking facilities, and
resident services.
5. The Planning Board, in consultation with the Select Board,the Housing Partnership Board, and the
Commission on Disability, shall adopt regulations concerning physical characteristics,
location, and access to services of inclusionary dwelling units; defining limits on the
household income of occupants, sale price, and rent of inclusionary dwelling units; and
the form of required legal restrictions for such units.
6. A Special Residential Development with six or fewer market-rate dwelling units shall be permitted
to meet the requirements of this section by making a payment to the Town's Affordable
Housing Trust in an amount equal to the estimated construction cost of 15% of the GFA
permitted under the proof plan submitted pursuant to § 6.9.4, as determined in
accordance with regulations to be promulgated by the Planning Board.
7. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for multi-family housing until an affordable housing
restriction for any inclusionary dwelling units is executed, submitted to the Town, and,to
the extent required,recorded.
60
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
6.9.9 Regulations
The Planning Board sh may modify existing Site Plan Review and Special Permit desi)n
regulations and standards (§116-12), consistent with this Section, regarding Special
Residential Developments, including with respect to pedestrian and vehicular access to, and
egress from, the site, landscaping, screening, and buffers, lighting, stormwater management,
architectural style and scale, water and wastewater systems, and refuse disposal.
The Planning Board shall se—adopt additional Site Plan Review and Special Permit design
regulations and standards (17(-12)- for Site Sensitive Developments, to protect natural
features of the site such as natural grades and slopes, views, mature trees, stonewalls, natural
resources such as agricultural soil, and common open space.
6.9.10 Common Open Space
Standards.
1. Minimum common open space. At least 15% of the developable site area in a Special Residential
Development shall be set aside as common open space,
Developments. The Planning Board may grant anpeclal permits that are required for the
Site Sensitive Developments notwlthstandingprovlslons of this bylaw
deli ng ati�g a different special permit crag authority.
6.9.12 Criteria. The SPCensitive Development
makes a
determination that the proposed development is consistent with the standards and criteria set forth
in
9.42 and serves the goals set in 6.9.1.
3. Amend § 135-10, Definitions as follows:
1. Delete the definitions of"BALANCED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT" and"PUBLIC
BENEFIT DEVELOPMENT".
2. Amend definitions as follows:
SITE SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT(SSD)
A type of special residential development as defined in § 6.9.
SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT(SRD)
A residential development regulated by § 6.9, in which a tract of land is divided into one or more
lots for constructing dwellings allowing deviation from the dimensional standards that
apply to conventional developments.
3.Add the following definitions:
COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT(CND)
A type of special residential development as defined in § 6.9.
9:02 p.m. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, requested a quick caucus break. The Moderator recessed the
Meeting.
9:15 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting back to order.
Wendy Manz, Member of the the Special Residential Development Zoning Bylaw
Amendment Committee (SPRD) stated that the SPRD was unanimously in opposition to the
Amendment.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted 3 to 0 with 1 person
awaiting debate against the Amendment.
61
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Betsey Weiss, Vice Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, noted that the Housing
Partnership Board had voted unanimously (8-0) in opposition to the Amendment.
Charles Hornig, Planning Board Member, noted that the Planning Board had met on April
I Oh and voted 4-1 to recommend that Town Meeting reject the Amendment.
9:17 p.m. Sarah Higginbotham, Pct. 5, said that she was trying to understand the differences between
special permitting and major site plan review and asked for an explanation to describe the
differences. Ms. Manz stated that the as Article 33 was structured, they were imposing
burdens on prospective builders as part of the developments. She noted that they would have
a major site plan review which was a substantial process, not really less onerous than a
special permit,just more predictable and efficient. She noted that there was also an
inclusionary housing requirement and 15 percent open space requirement and there would be
regulations which dealt more specifically with protecting a site and its natural features. Ms.
Manz said that a special permit would add one more burden in an already difficult process
and removed the incentive to do the developments. Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager
of Development, said that as defined by the Supreme Judicial Court, a site plan review was a
way to regulate something you want to allow. Special permits were discretionary, and there
was the opportunity to deny it or not allow or prohibit it. She noted that that threat of denial
of a special permit could put a chilling effect on the very development the community wanted
to encourage. She noted that this made major site plan review was more appropriate in the
desire of the community to have more housing.
9:21 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Amendment.
9:33 p.m. Michael Boudett, Pct. 4, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
9:34 p.m. Lin Jensen offered concluding remarks on the Amendment.
9:35 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the Amendment.
Motion to Amend Article 33 (McBride/Jensen)
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
53 121 4
MOTION TO AMEND FAILS
9:37 p.m. The Moderator noted that they would now return to the original Motion for the Article.
9:39 p.m. Steven Kaufman, Pct. 5, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
Ms. Hai declined summary comments.
9:40 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 33 and noted that it needed a simple majority to
pass.
Motion to Approve Article 33
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
146 22 10
MOTION CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
9:41 p.m. The Moderator opened the meeting under Article 34.
ARTICLE 34 AMEND ZONING BYLAW AND MAP MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING FOR MBTA
Mr. Peters moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, and Zoning
Map be amended as follows, and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be
permitted to comply with the numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington:
62
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
1) Add rows to the table in § 135-2.2.5 (Overlay Districts) as follows:
VO Village Overlay
MFO Multi-Family Overlay
VHO Village High-Rise Overlay
2) In § 135-10.0, add a new definition as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (DHCD)
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development.
3) Add a new § 135-7.5 as follows:
7.5 VILLAGE AND MULTI-FAMILY OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
7.5.1 Purpose. The purposes of the Village Overlay (VO, MFO, and VHO) Districts are:
1. To provide family housing and ensure compliance with MGL c. 40A § 3A;
2. To promote multi-family housing near retail sales and services, office, civic, and personal
service uses;
3. To reduce dependency on automobiles by providing opportunities for upper-story and
multi-family housing near public transportation such as bus stops, the Minuteman
Commuter Bikeway, and major transportation routes;
4. To ensure pedestrian-friendly development by permitting higher density housing in areas
that are walkable to public transportation, shopping, and local services;
5. To respond to the local and regional need for affordable housing by permitting a variety of
housing types with inclusionary housing requirements;
6. To encourage economic investment in the redevelopment of properties;
7. To encourage residential and commercial uses to provide a customer base for local
businesses; and
8. To meet the goals of the housing element of the 2022 Lexington NEXT Comprehensive
Plan.
7.5.2 Overlay District. Village and Multi-Family Overlay Districts shall not replace existing
zoning districts but shall be superimposed over them. The provisions of this section apply
only to developments on a lot located entirely within Village and Multi-Family Overlay
Districts where the property owner has elected to comply with the requirements of the
Village Overlay District, rather than complying with those of the underlying zoning district.
7.5.3 Procedures and Regulations. Development under this section requires Site Plan Review by
the Planning Board under § 9.5. The Planning Board shall adopt regulations to facilitate site
layout, building design, and outdoor amenity spaces. All site plan review standards
applicable to developments under this section shall be consistent with the purposes of this
section and DHCD's current Compliance Guidelines for Multi family Zoning Districts
Under Section 3A of the Zoning Act as amended.
7.5.4 Permitted Uses.
1. All developments under this section shall include multi-family housing. All residential uses
under this section shall be multi-family housing.
2. Developments may also include nonresidential uses permitted in an underlying zoning
district.
3. Where the underlying zoning district is the CB District, at least 30% of the net floor area of
the street floor shall be occupied by uses permitted on the street floor in the CB District. No
more than the greater of 20% or 20 feet of the frontage on a public way may be dedicated to
residential uses.
4. Developments in the VO district may contain nonresidential uses on the street floor and
basement to the extent permitted in either the CRS or CB zoning district, except that:
a. The following uses are not permitted:
i. Medical clinic for outpatient services
ii. Motor vehicle sales or rental
iii. Sale of fuel, motor oil, or other motor vehicle parts or accessories
iv. Cleaning, maintenance, and repair of motor vehicles
v. Private postal service
63
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
b. Nonresidential uses that require a special permit in the CRS or CB District shall
require a special permit.
c. The development standards for office uses in Table 1 (Permitted Uses and
Development Standards), section G.2.0 shall not apply.
5. Accessory uses for residential uses are permitted to the same extent they would be
permitted in the RO District.
7.5.5 Dimensional controls. The dimensional controls of§ 4.0 are modified as follows for
developments under this section:
1. § 4.1.4 (One Dwelling Per Lot) does not apply.
2. § 4.2.2 (Lot Regularity), § 4.2.3 (Lot Area), and § 4.2.4 (Lot Frontage) do not apply to lots
with existing buildings.
3. § 4.3.5 (Height of Dwellings Near Lot Lines) does not apply.
4. § 4.4 (Residential Gross Floor Area) does not apply.
5. Nonresidential FAR is not restricted.
6. The minimum required front yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying
zoning district or 15 feet, except that where 50% or more of the facade facing the public
way is occupied by nonresidential principal uses, no front yard is required. Minimum
required front yard areas shall be used as amenity space available for occupants and semi-
public uses such as landscaping, benches, tables, chairs, play areas, public art, or similar
features. Parking spaces are not permitted in the minimum required front yard.
7. The minimum required side yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying
zoning district and that shown below:
If Actual Lot Frontage Is Side Yard Must Be At Least
More than 100 feet 15 feet
More than 75 feet but not more than 100 feet 12 feet
More than 50 feet but not more than 75 feet 10 feet
More than 0 feet but not more than 50 feet 7.5 feet
8. The minimum required rear yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying
zoning district and 15 feet.
9. The site coverage is not restricted.
10. Except as noted below, the maximum height in feet of buildings is:
District MFO VO VHO
Height in feet 52 40* 70*
a. *In the VO District, where at least 30% of the total net floor area of the street floor
of the development is occupied by nonresidential principal uses, the maximum
height is 60 feet if the nonresidential uses are permitted in the underlying district or
52 feet if the nonresidential uses are not permitted in the underlying district.
b. *In the VHO District where at least 50% of the total net floor area on the lot is
occupied by nonresidential principal uses permitted in the underlying district, the
maximum height is 115 feet.
11. The number of stories is not restricted.
7.5.6 Off-Street Parking and Loading. The provisions of§ 5.1 (Off Street Parking and Loading)
are modified as follows:
1. The parking factor for dwelling and rooming units is 1 per unit.
2. The parking factor for other uses shall be the same as in § 5.1.4 (Table of Parking
Requirements) for the CB District.
3. Developments under this section may provide fewer parking spaces where, in the
determination of the Planning Board,proposed parking is found to be sufficient to meet the
needs of the development. In making such a determination the Planning Board may
develop regulations to evaluate any parking reduction requests to consider complementary
uses, proximity to public transportation, proximity to municipal and street parking,
64
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
transportation demand management(TDM) measures, and shared parking arrangements at
the Board's discretion.
7.5.7 § 5.5 (Traffic Standards) does not apply.
7.5.8 § 7.4.4 (Sustainable Design) does not apply.
7.5.9 The provisions of§ 5.3 (Landscaping, Transition and Screening) and § 5.3.5 (Required
Depth or Width(in feet) of a transition area are modified as follows:
1. Transition areas, as specified under § 5.3.4 (Transition Areas), are required only along the
boundary of the Village Overlay Districts (VO, MFO, & VHO) and shall have a depth of
five (5) feet.
7.5.10 The provisions of§ 7.3 (Planned Development Districts) are modified as follows:
1. Notwithstanding § 7.3.2.3 (Compliance Required) and § 7.3.3 (Existing RD and CD
Districts), development under this section, development of related accessory structures and
improvements, and removal of existing structures and improvements need not conform to a
preliminary site development and use plan.
7.5.11 Nonconforming Off-Street Parking and Loading. The provisions of§ 8.7 are modified as
follows:
1. § 8.7.1.2 (Increase in Floor Area) does not apply.
2. § 8.7.2 (Reconstruction or Replacement of a Building) does not apply.
7.5.12 Inclusionary Housing.
1. In any development containing eight(8) or more dwelling units, at least 15% of the
dwelling units shall be Inclusionary Dwelling Units with household income limited to 80%
of the Area Median Income and eligible for inclusion on the DHCD's Subsidized Housing
Inventory. Where a fraction of a dwelling unit is required for this calculation, the amount
of required dwelling units shall be rounded down. If DHCD determines in writing that the
Town has not shown this 15% requirement to be feasible, at least 10% of the dwelling units
in any development containing ten (10) or more units shall be Inclusionary Dwelling Units
with household income limited to 80% of the Area Median Income and eligible for
inclusion on the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
2. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be substantially similar in size, layout, parking,
construction materials, fixtures, amenities, and interior and exterior finishes to the other
dwelling units in the same dwelling.
3. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be proportionally dispersed throughout the development
and not concentrated within particular sections of a dwelling or within particular dwellings.
4. Occupants of inclusionary dwelling units shall have the same access to common areas,
facilities, and services as enjoyed by other occupants of the development including, but not
limited, to outdoor spaces, amenity spaces, storage, parking, bicycle parking facilities, and
resident services.
5. The Planning Board, in consultation with the Select Board, the Housing Partnership Board,
and the Commission on Disability, may adopt regulations consistent with DHCD's
Compliance Guidelines and this section to facilitate equitable size, physical characteristics,
location, and access to services for the inclusionary units and the form of required legal
restrictions.
6. Certificate of occupancy. No certificate of occupancy for a dwelling unit in a development
permitted under this section shall be issued until the regulatory agreements for any
inclusionary dwelling units are recorded.
7.5.13 Playground and Recreation Areas. Any development containing forty (40) or more dwelling
units shall provide an outdoor play area or common space appropriate for use by families
with children which may include features such as swings,jungle-gyms, slides, tables,
chairs, benches, and similar features. Areas shall incorporate universal design standards.
7.5.14 Conditions. The Planning Board may impose reasonable terms and conditions, consistent
with the parameters established by DHCD's Compliance Guidelines, to promote these
objectives and serve the purposes of this section. Approval may reasonably regulate matters
65
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
such as vehicular access and circulation on site, architectural design of a building, site
design, and screening for adjacent properties. The Board may require a performance
guarantee to ensure compliance with these conditions.
4) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to
the VO District:
a. East Lexington
b. Bedford Street/Worthen Road
c. Bedford Street/Reed Street
d. Bedford Street/Bike Path
e. Marrett Road/Waltham Street
f. Marrett Road/Spring Street
g. Concord Avenue/Waltham Street
5) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to
the MFO District:
h. Lexington Center
i. Bedford Street North
7) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to
the VHO District:
j. Hartwell Avenue/Westview Street
k. Maguire Road
1. Hartwell Avenue/Wood Street
Village & Multi-IF'emilly Overlay districts
Legend
Bedford P rfington J MUF'J
✓fir' w" % - �, —
Woburn VIHO
Winchester N
va j (T IMIfl'rA F3us',5ttaps
-„� d"'” r,, .1 , y•. ,�--._ ,�.,�, NIB TA Bus lHautes
� � M
*, UUMIVIVrINinuE'ernan Commuiker Bllkeway
i
Streets
PIbm arcels
,oundarty .. .,. ... .
Arlliinigton
„a
� I Mk
4
' P
%
�
Belmont
Lincoln
List edit M I h 24,. 02 �— --- - „v Waltham
IIAAlm�1�",�'.�IAAlIAAlIAAlIAAl11l
Miles
66
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Draft 2023 Zoniing Map, of the Town of Lexington
sunfll,glonl /
r Legend
Bedford A1101—
Wobuvnl /
/ %/ /oiq ✓ Winchester
- !//j !r
HOIAr
/ ✓� ,w���g
d¢ ,F ! �". � �o� �� �n �✓/G6� aw,�u ez i umi -1r
CUMr Rc,zi NDUSTR—DdSINCTS
��i IIIIIIIIIIII
µ Xtra, Arlliington
x 1
INlu41" ; rsa ai yN� 06 G / k/
// � PLNWIrAEfll mEVEWHNICiYT f]N57RNd]9%'
00,
r
Lilncmlln r 9ellrmort
rya, 41 RESIDEMIlLL gIYNfCY9
�Aqvt F11, Y
Lest edited March 27,2023 Waltham
0 04.25 0.5 1 1!5 2
67
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
EXfMI11EsM ALL PARCELS PROPOSED IN ZONING iMAP ARTICLE 34
MM PO Vim. vo
ma N Lau Site Addrets.; Cuiremi Zone ormeddig IDhfikI
- 2.3 i5'1RWALLI5 CT Cz MMMIMiCo
- 2MI 5WALLIS 17 Cz MM IFU
43 2:5 3',WALL4517 Cs MM IMI
- 2.2; 2-4L'WALLIS 17 CE MwMIMiL
, 25 1,'1,P ALL1517 Cz MMMIMi
- 20 15220 MASSACHUSETTS AVE Cz MMMIMiCo
- 343 11.VIIII7IE BROOK 19E4 Cz MM IFU
48 2,1, Yi5:2;$ fiS"?ACHUSEl4 AVE, x:115 Mw IFU
- 27 9.i5a'!0 MM ES ACHUSETTS AVE, CTAS MwMlfl iL
, 2;� 11554 KARMACHUSETTS AVE C115 MMMIMU
- 317 52A-5211" "ALTIIHAMd SSM` C'LM UFO
- 30A LVA M 5 AC-KUSETTS AVE CE MMMIMU
48 311. 11561-1692 MNMA5 V.CHIUi5ETT.5A°al,`E'. 0115 Mp IFU
- 3%5 20RPr ALT1 M5mM ST CE MwMlfl iL
43 UA '50 WALTMMW4MaMM 57 C.EW 12 MM IMI
- 313- 17216 M SSSACHUSET75 AVE! C's UFO
- 34L 13r34L KAAMACKUSETTSAVE', CE MMMIMU
- 10.1, 17'Q91 MMM755.SACHUSETTS AVE Cz MMMIMiCo
- 100 1729,M SSACKUSETTS AVE,, CI15 M IF
43 192, 1707 M5,5ACHUSETT5 AVE Cs MM IMI
- 104L 4L.C��R&NTS'T Cs UFO
- 99 1733 MA55ACHUSETTS AVE', CE MMMIMi
48 193, E ISLZYM!'r WY Cz MpMIMU
- 96A 17151 MASSACHUSETTS AVE CE MwMlfliL
43 97W4 1.775 M5,5ACHUSETT5 AVE, Cs MM IMI
- 96 DEPiDT a13 FLIS UFO
49' 30 73-RMWWSLTKAMSuM 57 CE MMMIMU
49'. 311 '55'RP ALT6G7kMiM ST 0115 MpMIMU
4.9 113; 20 MIMLa2IE'Y S'T Cz M IF
419 3.2: 41 WALTMMWLMaMM 57 Cs MM IMI
4.9, 42; 1451 UZZE Y T Cs UFO
49' US 311,WALTMEMkMS+M 57 C115 MMMIMU
49 1154, 21,MLa22EYMST 0115 MMMIMiCo
4.9 311. 27 RN ALT11M1kM5+M 5T Cz MM IFU
419 51 S RKTIMWUND ST IRS MM IMI
49' 35L5 2.5 WALTHM 5T C45 MwMIMiL
4.3' 40 7 RXTI kM1OND 5T Cz MMMIMU
4.9,.. 40A 14Wk.IMaMUZZE.1,Y'ST 0115 MMMIMiCo
11.9 1157 13 MMMLa2IEY45T CE MMMIMi
49'.. 35A 1,752 MA55ACHUSEM AVE Cz MpMIMU
4.9, $5' IS M,SLaeM Y4 ST CE MwMIMiL
4.3' 1453 "WIWALTMMAMnM 5T Cz MMMIMU
49' % 1770M 55SACHUSETT5AVE! C'15 Mw1IF
149' 3.3 10 MMMLa2IEY45T CE MMMIMU
68
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
49 371B 1740 MA55ACHUISETTS AVE, CB MIFO
49 fi+q� Tl MLIZZEY ST CB mirfo
49 70A 7 MUZZEY ST CB MIFO
49 37A ITUMMSACH U115EM AVE- CB MIFO
49 71,91 15.1E CUMIE ST IRIS Mr IFO
49 3115 ITS2,MA55ACHUISEM AVE, CB Mr IFO
49 71 MASWIHOSITTS AVE, CE MiFfo
419 MA 13;7.2,MA55ACUISEM AVE- CB MIFO
49 74 2,934 MMW.HU5TTT5 AVE CB MIFO
49 11 MASWHU9,TTS AVIE Gr MIFO
49 2,2A 1.777 MA557aCFVU5EM AVE, CB mIFfQ
49 75 181A MWACHUSETTS AVE- CE MiFfo
419 10 13,DEPG7 SQ, CB MIFO
49 9 15 IYEPO-r SC4, CB mirfo
49 EIA I3;33 MASSACHUSETTS AVE- CB Ma IFO
49 6 9-21 MERAMST CB mIFfQ
49 'SA MERIAM ST Gr MiFfo
�4, IC 459,BE,,EFQIFUD ST GfC Mr IFO
�4 $15A 475 BE"IFORD,ST IRO mirfo
84 fig 47,5 BE DFORID ST C m VHO
84 BOA 17 HAIR TWEIL LAVE Cm VRO
70A 482 BE DFORID ST C m VHD
84 81, 7 HAR TWE LI AVE ETCH VRO
HS 17A 1,MAGUIRE IRD Cm VHD
H5 11, WESTVIE I W 57 C m 71.0
515 16 .3 MAGUIRE IRD Cm VRO
85 1280 WIESTVIEW ST Cm VHD
85 15, 10 MAGUITRIE IRD Cm VRO
HS 3 95WIESTVIEWST F10 VHO
H5 2 97 WIESTVIEWST IIFID 7 1.0
515 1 DWIESPOEWIST IIFID VRO
H5 51 75,WIESTVIEW 5T RO VHO
85 'A 91"i ISTME"itik"5T IIR)D VRO
74 I)o 125,HAJR7WEILIL AVE Cm VHO
74 6A 1:11.HARTWELL AVE ETCH VRO
110 U 956f WA�LTHAM VT go vo
'1110( 2104Hh, "I WALTHAM$7 RO vo
IQ ITS $41i WALTHAM$7 go vo
JJQ '20 $W,:WAH LTH AM%T, RO VIO
1101 62 3�12:OONOORDAVE RO vo
'110 U 927 WALITHAM$T ROVIO
1101 25 31SONCORDA1+E RO vo
24 34ONCORDAVE IRO VO
'JJQ 23IVICONORDAVE ROH vo
1101 '1156 154tOWORDAVE RO VIO
i�( IIIIAI III WAMMAM ST IRO&,CD,4
"IQ 115 915,7,4 ALTMH r d3$7 ON vo
69
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
q 1A 041 CONCORDAVE ROa 1
101 �18 VU ONCORD AVE IRO vo
IOj �04A SO WA�LTHAM$7 CN 190 vv
BOJ 'I'm 011 RDAVE, no vo
10( av: CONCONDAVE so vo
1 1$1 A4WU$E , E ON VO
1.3 1 16rl f* MV,5E1 E ON v
13 113
IIMASS", V$ETTS,AVE ON vv
13 11 3S-40IN NNIS W $AVE ON v
IIA OfVrAOAro ON v
23 3$ $2!MASMC"U$EMAVE ON VIO
13 40 50-100 A 111 AVE, INT svo
13 003 1 1 HV%TT$ VE IAT v
10 12OMk%A�HV$fTTS-AVE IT vo
13 91.14,130 Nh�9!�SS HUUMAVE, PT , v
SO 1141:IU&%,A�HVSETT$AVE JR IT VIO
15S-,1,6Q(MA$SACJIIAETTS AVE, KIT
23 16$MOSACHWETTFSAVE IRIT 1%,IR$ vv
13 00 17 MAZACHOETTS AVE 0 VIO
4126 11 %ACM V E, VIO
13 IWAL 1 CHARLES$T, VIO
4"2!55 271MMS HW&TTSAVE M, VIN
13 32170 Mky$,lf Rl$
13 412119 N HU$f N S AVE on$
13 1,10 7NKER$T 1N5 VIO
13 41A 551MAZA HW$E VE v
411 " 7"eUSETTS«VE, 0% v
13 275 1151 H1N , E RS vo
13 181 121 I AZHV AVE Os r + v
13 3217A 1$Io $BEH$r R$ vo
13 411 '31 IROW ST O v
13 1112S IS CLEUAND RD Rs vo
13 17,01 214A$$ HV%T AVE
13 3210 3DOWKER$7 R$ VIO
13 131MASS HUI%Tlf'S AVE, M o
23 1,77 120 MOWH VI SEM AVE R$ vo
13 3R$A, 13% �ACHVSUT$ VE OR$, VIO
13 zs 14 jU$BETH 51 RS VIO
13
3,41 17 CLEUAND RD R'3 Nv o
13 1,21 10@,$8FTH 57 RS VIO
13 3211 150 MA4ZACHOSEMAVE 'IO
13 331 0AI Ut"ETH T $ v
13 32121 262 Mk%,AEHV,$LTTSAVE JR.$ vp
13 1,11A 219,CLEULMD fRD RS vo
13 3213 2,00 IMOOCH UTSAVE 0 v
70
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
113 124 281 lMk
%ACHUSEMAVE, R$ Vol
1 $77A, 11$5, HV VE M, Vol
13 1134 12 LELLANDRD wl Vol
13 2'04 lMWACHU mS AVE "Offlall mea 1portivo,
113 1,30 2 w 12S' HOE TT AVE MIT Vol
11 134 SI$CLEUAND dD R$ V01
175 2-17I + S HVSET%AVE C VC)_
13 174 21OHMASWHOEMAVE ORS, Vol
1 111130 U4JMM$ACHU$ T$,AVE, AT Vol
15 1401,20 MASSACHVSETTSAVE RIR Vol
1I !2AI M&%, HU$EM AVE, OR$ Vol -
1411 146 MA$$ACHUSfTT$AVE, U,i*airpofWn hif'VO,
1 171 + IS1 IMAZACHUSETY1CSAVE, CAS Vol
15 142 ISO IP k% HkJ$E If'S AVE RT,weN�rpaitom Cm f V
150, U7 MWACHUS TYTS AVE Vol
11 143 15160% A$$AOf%ETT$AVE. U, pjJpnYrm,
15
US OTrfLEIm E
140 ; '�tE1 DRD wl VOI
15 145 If)$IMA%ACH r T$dmVE EST„rearppal In Imt W °
10 2'7"51 HV VE m V101
11 14 S gIWmum H4 ET INT, por" �WImf VO,
1 ~LST M&%ACH UISE7 'SAVE Vol
15
350, 400l HU ,AWE AT VOI
113 351 ! 420 ACHVSETYTS,AVE RT Vol
a52 41SAIO r ILAE err$AVE RT wad
15 515 410IMk%ACh1VSETTIS mWE AT Vol
1 501A$S r SET1 aAVE ( o_
15 354 440 MA%ArHVSETrm ,MWE RIT Vol
I% j4,j 1 HU$ TrT$,AVE off, Vol
1,55 471 HV, ,AWE (m$ vol
113 415A L MA$$Ar-HUSETT"S VE C
13 417 711 A$SAVSETTS f m9 Vol
21 11 4231pa k%ArFELr$Elfl AVE Vol
2 1ALN +, 01"d7WAL7HAM ST JR$ Vol
v 14 402 WALTEfAM$T m' Vol
I'll 43; 410WALTHAMO' R$
3112 42 400 WALTHAM$T 00 IVol
;2 115 124 I ARRETT RYES
71
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
I'll 57 1,1 1,UARRETT RMwoo
32 55 10'4 WALTHAM$T ON vo
;2 56 511i MOMAETT RM, CH vo
54 11 ORAPEVIINE AVE, WS vo
$042 116 WALTHAM$T Vt$
713 1 '$PRIN T E E1
7214 15 MPRNr Rs
313 14 11 aPRIN $7 R$ vo
76 7$Pffi1Nrj
X 77 5$PRKNO$T Ra 'IO
31 728 '$FR11M0$T Rf$l vo
3 14, 424 M^ARKETT 41MC$ VIO
$1 416,IIMAR 1Ef 1 RM, CSX VIO
442:IMORET7 RM Ox vo
1!3 450 MARRETTRM, 91$ vo
1 $4 41,jl VETT RM, R$1 vo
34 104A, 4,31dMARRETTRM, ON vo
3%
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
7 12111 BEDFORD$T 0S V0
5117 710 60 BEDFORD$T M vo
57 12.3 0$1 BEDFORD ST R$ 1R
57 W '80 BEDFORD ST RIS V0
57 145 145 LW LN Rai V0
7 1191 + 01BEDFORD$if ID'S % V
17 12AU 571BEDIFORDST M V10
16 1! 7 101 BOT R$ V10
164 Of BEDFORD ST FIS "10
16 BEDFORD ST IRS Y
16A 1516 1 CAROL LN IR'$ i vo
16 171 i L LN R'S V0
16 102 1111IfiE 0R $T IRR 10
164, 154 IREVEREST RIS V0
64 651 KEED$T R V10
$4 1% U118EDF,0ffi0,$T cm V10
164 $4 14 REID ST Rl$ V10
164, 77 1150-101 BEDFORD$T PIS V0
164, Of10�1RE10r ! i V10
16 167 ITZBEI)FORDST on' Y
104, 74A, 21$18E'DF0RD,$T V0
164 71A f1$58Et9F0 $T
16 72 1B7111EXF,0 $T CH V
16A '11,01 175-:1101 WDIF R D Com'
164, 7$f 1:17,11 BEDFORD ST 01.0 Y10
10 71 'T04.105 BEDIFORD C! ! V0
641 751 17 1111E>r1EOI T h112
16A 70 1107 NEDF09D,$T ON V10
$$A 1.1 ILAR04MONT LNJ IRS 'Yo
14 1211 BIEDFORD,ST ON V0
1 $ 41BEDFORD, if ON V
M, 1,11A, 215 BEDFORD$T ON V0
�113, 421 0IS5OW IRS V0
113 1 11(HENRY R R$ 10
13 10, 111ALLMIDEAVE, IR$ + V10
1 '102 ' O CHERRY ST ]R$, Y
IQ 50A 5plipf'RIRD RO V0
101 loll 34.E 1RR[1R110 kyr0OR`C0R I RO V
,$I j$1 $16CAMRRIDQV�OONORD RO V0
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, presented information on the Article.
9:52 p.m. Mr. Peters offered some additional comments after the presentation and stated that on March
1, 2023, after three public hearings and nine public work sessions, the Planning Board had
voted unanimously 5-0 to recommend that Town Meeting approve the Motion.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, noted that complying with the MBTA requirement was imposed
by the State, and stated that the Select Board had voted 4 members in support and 1 awaiting
discussion.
Betsey Weiss, Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, stated that the Housing Partnership
Board had voted unanimously to support the Article.
Bridger McGaw, Vice Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee, said that
the Economic Development Advisory Committee had voted with 5 in support of the main
Motion and 2 against.
The Moderator noted that the Lexington Human Rights Committee had already given their
support.
Gerry Michaelson, Chair of the Lexington Center Committee, said that the Lexington Center
Committee had voted unanimously to support the Article.
10:00 p.m. Gang Chen, Pct. 8, said that he was confused about the limit to the square footage allowed.
Mr. Peters stated that there wasn't a limit to the square footage. Mr. Chen said that this could
mean that a developer could build a hotel-like structural building in the Center possibly with
multiple units but it might not be what the Town would prefer, and asked if there were
restrictions to avoid this. Charles Hornig, Planning Board Member, stated that the building
code had restrictions of sizes of dwelling units and noted that while zoning was not providing
73
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
a minimum size for a dwelling unit, the building department did and that parking was a
requirement.
10:03 p.m. Courtney Apgar, Pct. 3, said that Lexington was rapidly becoming a Town that was only
accessible to the ultra-wealthy and that Center businesses were struggling. She said that she
considered the Article a thoughtful way of addressing many of those issues.
10:04 p.m. Leonard Morse-Fortier, Pct. 7, said that he had heard from many people in the precinct to
vote no, with the biggest reason that the height restrictions were not severe enough and
concern for a 52' height allowance.
10:06 p.m. Mike Kennealy, Pct. 6, said that he enthusiastically asked Town Meeting to vote in favor, and
that over time it could result in more housing and a revitalizing of the downtown area.
10:08 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, made a Motion for the following Amendment.
Amendment Submitted by Dawn E. McKenna
Co-sponsors: Kate Colburn, Pam Hoffman, Lin Jensen, Barbara Katzenberg, Steve Kaufman,
Alan Levine, Jay Luker, Tina McBride, Bridger McGaw, Tom Shiple, Deborah Strod and
Ruth Thomas.
Barbara Katzenburg presented information on the proposed Amendment and stated that the
two main changes were firstly, lowering the number of districts from 12 to 7 with 5 of those
using by-right permitting and 2 using special permitting while removing the Center as they
had heard many different opinions about the right way to move forward. The second change
was that in order to mitigate a too large building next to a person's home, the amendment
proposed that within 100 feet of a residential property line, the maximum allowable height for
buildings would be 52'.
ARTICLE 34 AMEND ZONING BYLAW AND MAP MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING FOR MBTA
That the main Motion under Article 34 be amended by substituting the following wording in its
place:
MOTION:
Ms. McKenna moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of
Lexington, and Zoning Map be amended as follows, and further that non-substantive changes
to the numbering of this bylaw be permitted to comply with the numbering format of the
Code of the Town of Lexington:
2) Add rows to the table in § 135-2.2.5 (Overlay Districts) as follows:
VO Village Overlay
MFO Multi-Family Overlay
VHO Village High-Rise Overlay
2) In § 135-10.0, add a new definition as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (DHCD)
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development.
3) Add a new § 135-7.5 as follows:
7.5 VILLAGE AND MULTI-FAMILY OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
7.5.1 Purpose. The purposes of the Village and Multi-Family Overlay (VO, MFO, and VHO)
Districts are:
9. To provide family housing and ensure compliance with MGL c. 40A § 3A;
10. To promote multi-family housing near retail sales and services, office, civic, and personal
service uses;
11. To reduce dependency on automobiles by providing opportunities for upper-story and multi-
family housing near public transportation such as bus stops, the Minuteman Commuter
Bikeway, and major transportation routes;
12. To ensure pedestrian-friendly development by permitting higher density housing in areas that
are walkable to public transportation, shopping, and local services;
13. To respond to the local and regional need for affordable housing by permitting a variety of
housing types with inclusionary housing requirements;
14. To encourage economic investment in the redevelopment of properties;
74
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
15. To encourage residential and commercial uses to provide a customer base for local
businesses; and
16. To meet the goals of the housing element of the 2022 Lexington NEXT Comprehensive Plan.
7.5.2 Overlay District. Village and Multi-Family Overlay Districts shall not replace existing
zoning districts but shall be superimposed over them. The provisions of this section apply
only to developments on a lot located entirely within Village and Multi-Family Overlay
Districts where the property owner has elected to comply with the requirements of the
Village and Multi-Family Overlay District, rather than complying with those of the
underlying zoning district.
7.5.3 Procedures and Regulations. Development under this section requires Site Plan Review by
the Planning Board under § 9.5 except that in the Bedford Street/Reed Street and East
Lexington sub-districts approval of a Special Permit shall be required from the Planning
Board in accordance with the provisions of this section and § 9.4. The Planning Board shall
adopt regulations to facilitate site layout, building design, and outdoor amenity spaces. All
site plan review standards applicable to developments under this section shall be consistent
with the purposes of this section and DHCD's current Compliance Guidelines for Multi-
family Zoning Districts Under Section 3A of the Zoning Act as amended.
7.5.4 Permitted Uses.
6. All developments under this section shall include multi-family housing. All residential uses
under this section shall be multi-family housing.
7. Developments may also include nonresidential uses permitted in an underlying zoning
district.
8. Reserved.
9. Developments in the VO district may contain nonresidential uses on the street floor and
basement to the extent permitted in either the CRS or CB zoning district, except that:
a. The following uses are not permitted:
i. Medical clinic for outpatient services
ii. Motor vehicle sales or rental
iii. Sale of fuel, motor oil, or other motor vehicle parts or accessories
iv. Cleaning, maintenance, and repair of motor vehicles
V. Private postal service
b. Nonresidential uses that require a special permit in the CRS or CB District shall require a
special permit.
C. The development standards for office uses in Table 1 (Permitted Uses and Development
Standards), section G.2.0 shall not apply.
10. Accessory uses for residential uses are permitted to the same extent they would be permitted
in the RO District.
7.5.5 Dimensional controls. The dimensional controls of§ 4.0 are modified as follows for
developments under this section:
12. § 4.1.4 (One Dwelling Per Lot) does not apply.
13. § 4.2.2 (Lot Regularity), § 4.2.3 (Lot Area), and § 4.2.4 (Lot Frontage) do not apply to lots
with existing buildings.
14. § 4.3.5 (Height of Dwellings Near Lot Lines) does not apply.
15. § 4.4 (Residential Gross Floor Area) does not apply.
16. Nonresidential FAR is not restricted.
17. The minimum required front yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying
zoning district or 15 feet, except that where 50% or more of the fa4ade facing the public way
is occupied by nonresidential principal uses, no front yard is required. Minimum required
front yard areas shall be used as amenity space available for occupants and semi-public uses
such as landscaping, benches, tables, chairs, play areas, public art, or similar features.
Parking spaces are not permitted in the minimum required front yard.
75
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
18. The minimum required side yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying zoning
district and that shown below:
If Actual Lot Frontage Is Side Yard Must Be At Least
More than 100 feet 15 feet
More than 75 feet but not more than 100 feet 12 feet
More than 50 feet but not more than 75 feet 10 feet
More than 0 feet but not more than 50 feet 7.5 feet
19. The minimum required rear yard in feet is the lesser of that required in the underlying zoning
district and 15 feet.
20. Site coverage is not restricted.
21. Except as noted below, the maximum height in feet of buildings is:
District MFO VO VHO
Height in feet 52 40* 70*
a. *In the VO District, where at least 30% of the total net floor area of the street floor of the
development is occupied by nonresidential principal uses,
i. If the nonresidential uses are permitted in the underlying district, then
1. The maximum height is 52 feet for all parts of a building within 100 feet from a lot within a RO, RS or
RT district. The Planning Board may grant a waiver from this requirement if, in its
determination, such waiver will pose no substantial detriment or adverse effects to any adjacent
property or proximate neighborhood.
2. Otherwise,the maximum height is 60 feet.
ii. If the nonresidential uses are not permitted in the underlying district,then the maximum height is 52 feet.
b. *In the VHO District where at least 50% of the total net floor area on the lot is occupied by
nonresidential principal uses permitted in the underlying district, the maximum height is 115
feet.
22. The number of stories is not restricted.
7.5.6 Off-Street Parking and Loading. The provisions of§ 5.1 (Off Street Parking and Loading) are
modified as follows:
4. The parking factor for dwelling and rooming units is 1 per unit.
5. The parking factor for other uses shall be the same as in § 5.1.4 (Table of Parking
Requirements) for the CB District.
6. Developments under this section may provide fewer parking spaces where, in the
determination of the Planning Board,proposed parking is found to be sufficient to meet the
needs of the development. In making such a determination the Planning Board may develop
regulations to evaluate any parking reduction requests to consider complementary uses,
proximity to public transportation, proximity to municipal and street parking, transportation
demand management(TDM) measures, and shared parking arrangements at the Board's
discretion.
7.5.7 § 5.5 (Traffic Standards) does not apply.
7.5.8 § 7.4.4 (Sustainable Design) does not apply.
7.5.9 The provisions of§ 5.3 (Landscaping, Transition and Screening) and § 5.3.5 (Required Depth
or Width(in feet) of a transition area are modified as follows:
2. Transition areas, as specified under § 5.3.4 (Transition Areas), are required only along the
boundary of the Village and Multi-Family Overlay Districts (VO, MFO, & VHO) and shall
have a depth of five (5) feet.
7.5.10 The provisions of§ 7.3 (Planned Development Districts) are modified as follows:
2. Notwithstanding § 7.3.2.3 (Compliance Required) and § 7.3.3 (Existing RD and CD
Districts), development under this section, development of related accessory structures and
improvements, and removal of existing structures and improvements need not conform to a
preliminary site development and use plan.
7.5.11 Nonconforming Off-Street Parking and Loading. The provisions of§ 8.7 are modified as
follows:
3. § 8.7.1.2 (Increase in Floor Area) does not apply.
76
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
4. § 8.7.2 (Reconstruction or Replacement of a Building) does not apply.
7.5.12 Inclusionary Housing.
7. In any development containing eight(8) or more dwelling units, at least 15% of the dwelling
units shall be Inclusionary Dwelling Units with household income limited to 80% of the Area
Median Income and eligible for inclusion on the DHCD's Subsidized Housing Inventory.
Where a fraction of a dwelling unit is required for this calculation, the amount of required
dwelling units shall be rounded down. If DHCD determines in writing that the Town has not
shown this 15% requirement to be feasible, at least 10% of the dwelling units in any
development containing ten (10) or more units shall be Inclusionary Dwelling Units with
household income limited to 80% of the Area Median Income and eligible for inclusion on
the Subsidized Housing Inventory.
8. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be substantially similar in size, layout, parking, construction
materials, fixtures, amenities, and interior and exterior finishes to the other dwelling units in
the same dwelling.
9. Inclusionary dwelling units shall be proportionally dispersed throughout the development and
not concentrated within particular sections of a dwelling or within particular dwellings.
10. Occupants of inclusionary dwelling units shall have the same access to common areas,
facilities, and services as enjoyed by other occupants of the development including, but not
limited, to outdoor spaces, amenity spaces, storage, parking, bicycle parking facilities, and
resident services.
11. The Planning Board, in consultation with the Select Board, the Housing Partnership Board,
and the Commission on Disability, may adopt regulations consistent with DHCD's
Compliance Guidelines and this section to facilitate equitable size, physical characteristics,
location, and access to services for the inclusionary units and the form of required legal
restrictions.
12. Certificate of occupancy. No certificate of occupancy for a dwelling unit in a development
permitted under this section shall be issued until the regulatory agreements for any
inclusionary dwelling units are recorded.
7.5.13 Playground and Recreation Areas. Any development containing forty (40) or more dwelling
units shall provide an outdoor play area or common space appropriate for use by families
with children which may include features such as swings,jungle-gyms, slides, tables, chairs,
benches, and similar features. Areas shall incorporate universal design standards.
7.5.14 Conditions. The Planning Board may impose reasonable terms and conditions, consistent
with the parameters established by DHCD's Compliance Guidelines, to promote these
objectives and serve the purposes of this section. Approval may reasonably regulate matters
such as vehicular access and circulation on site, architectural design of a building, site design,
and screening for adjacent properties. The Board may require a performance guarantee to
ensure compliance with these conditions.
4) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to the
VO District:
a. East Lexington (subject to special permit)
b. Bedford Street/Reed Street(subject to special permit)
C. Concord Avenue/Waltham Street
5) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to the
MFO District:
a. Bedford Street North
6) Amend the Zoning Map to add the following areas shown on maps on file with the Town Clerk to the
VHO District:
a. Hartwell Avenue/Westview Street
b. Maguire Road
C. Hartwell Avenue/Wood Street
(04/06/2023 REVISED 8:00 PM)
77
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Village & Multi-Family Overlay Districts
. �. 'Burlington Legend
Bedford /� ,/
/MF
a A / Wtll]llrn VH6
Winchester 2, MBTAB swops,
r META Bus Re,F
ONOW
Mi nuteman Cammuter BI&eway
P
Parcels
Ngo-""'",^ rrrrl',Mrr�irV„ ✓ Town Boundary
S
C
J uJ
1 Arlington
rl
yap s,,ri* t y �,,,� Belmont
Lincoln ,n.M 1
Last edited March 24,2023 Waltham
Draft 2023 Zoning Map, of the Town of Lexington
Legend
Bedford � i... "'k.
Burlington IX,
Woburn
tIg
// %
a �
+ 1 / Winchester
0/0/�
/
" j
,ea iMa
If
a..-. /
y / yti /ll
�� / ✓�Y
'7111"c
/ / � .
'" P a era cis
eq
Arlington
/
" �' �I ��
AM
0
�� / E E E ..4 STIt14T4
N
% �/ �r ��/
r% a,
Belmont
Lincoln ai/�
a
14� ,n
Last edited March 27,2023 Waltham
10:12 p.m. Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that on April 4, 2023,the Planning Board had
originally voted 3-1-1 to recommend that Town Meeting disapprove as it did not demonstrate
its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusionary zoning. He further noted that he was
the one who abstained at this meeting, but upon reflection he was now convinced that the
original plan was the better version.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimously opposed to the
Amendment.
Betsey Weiss, Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, said that the Housing Partnership
Board was unanimously opposed to the Amendment.
Bridger McGaw, Vice Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee, stated that
the Economic Development Advisory Committee had met earlier that day, and that they had
voted with 2 to approve the Amendment and 5 against.
Gerry Michelson, Chair of the Lexington Center Committee, said that the Lexington Center
Committee had a strong feeling that the Center should be included in any plan. He noted that
the Lexington Center Committee urged no on the Amendment and yes on the original
Motion.
78
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
10:18 p.m. Lauren Black, Pct. 8, stated that he was curious why Bedford-Reed vs Bedford-Worthen, was
chosen. Pam Hoffman, said that this was an intentional compromise, and noted that she was
personally against Bedford-Worthen in order to protect 1st floor shops that were there as first
floor retail was important.
10:20 p.m. Tom Shiple, Pct. 9, said that this Amendment made a"significant down payment" on the
original Motion and created conditions to see what works and what doesn't, namely Special
Permit vs Site Plan Review.
10:22 p.m. Noah Michelson, Pct. 1, said that the Amendment removes areas closest to business and
forces multi-family near the outskirts of the Town and sends a message that those who want
smaller homes need to live near the outskirts of the Town.
10:24 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Amendment.
10:39 p.m. The Moderator noted that the time to end debate had come. Jessie Steigerwald motioned to
extend debate. The motion to extend debate failed by majority voice vote.
Dawn McKenna offered summary remarks on the Amendment.
Motion to Approve Amendment (McKenna)
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
80 85 7
MOTION FAILS
10:42 p.m. Dawn McKenna Motioned to Lay Article 34 on the Table. Motion to lay on the table
approved by voice vote. Dawn McKenna asked if she should service Notice of
Reconsideration at this time. The Moderator indicated that there wasn't a need to serve
notice at that time as the Article was not yet complete and would be taken up again at the next
session.
10:43 p.m. Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30
p.m. on Wednesday, April 12, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin
Hall, Cary Memorial Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that
Motion was adopted by unanimous voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
April 12, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
The Moderator called the seventh session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. on
Wednesday, April 12, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue. A quorum in excess of 100 members was present(154).
The Moderator explained parliamentary procedures for the evening as well as reminders that members of
the public who wished to participate in the meeting should take balcony seating. The Moderator asked
Meeting Members to record their attendance. Quorum announcement at 7:42 p.m.
The Moderator explained that Article 40 as well as Article 16i would be taken up on Monday the 24th
rather than at this session.
7:40 p.m. The Moderator called for a brief recess so that she could turn the floor over to Bridger
McGaw, Town Meeting Members Association, in order for him to honor two Town Meeting
individuals for their service. Mr. McGaw noted that these individuals had had quite a
challenge over the last two years to keep Members informed and engaged. Betty Gau was
recognized first, for being the "second"to the Chair who was always making sure that the
business got done with honor and integrity. Mr. McGaw then recognized Chair Vineeta
Kumar and noted that she was steadfast in her leadership and creative in how she had kept
them engaged. Ms. Kumar was presented with a plaque and flowers.
7:42 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting back to order, and noted that there were four items from
Article 16 that were not part of the Consent Agenda that had not already been taken up. She
79
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
asked for a procedural motion to take up 16g, 16h, 16j. She stated that she would like the
Members to hear presentations and recommendations on each and debate each, but then take
one vote at the end, with the exception of 16i, which they would take up on April 24h. The
Moderator mentioned that she would like to have presentations and recommendations for
each Article separately, but voted together.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Article those items not on the consent agenda— 16g, 16h, 16j.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under 16g, 16h, and 16j
ARTICLE 16 APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS
MOTION: Mr. Lucente moves that the following amounts be appropriated for the following capital
improvements to public facilities and that each amount be raised as follows:
g) Pine Meadows Clubhouse Renovation - Design- $120,000 for design and engineering costs for
renovating the clubhouse at the Pine Meadows Golf Course, and that to meet this appropriation,
$120,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
h) 173 Bedford Street Renovation Design - $100,000 for design and engineering for renovations and
interior upgrades at 173 Bedford St., and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this
appropriation $100,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
j) East Lexington Fire Station Feasibility Study - $50,000 for a feasibility study to determine an
appropriate site for the East Lexington Fire Station, including an evaluation of the current site at
1006 Massachusetts Avenue, and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this
appropriation $50,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance.
Renen Bassik, Recreation Committee Member, presented information on Article 16g and noted that the
Recreation Committee unanimously supported approval of 16g
Doug Lucente, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board was unanimous in support of
Article 16g.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee unanimously recommended approval of Articles 16g, h, and j.
Alan Levine, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation Committee
unanimously recommended approval of Articles 16g, h, and j.
Victoria Buckley, Chair of the Commission on Disability, said that the Commission on Disability was
thrilled that this was finally coming forward.
7:47 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, asked if they knew the number of Lexington residents who played one
or more rounds of golf on the Course. Melissa Battite, Recreation Director, stated that the
golf course held 43,000 round of golf and about 26% of that was residents, but that it didn't
show individual counts as that wasn't how the tee time system worked.
7:49. p.m. Mike Cronin, Director of Public Facilities, presented information on Article 16h.
Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, noted that the Select Board had voted with 4 in favor and 1
opposed to 16h.
Sara Cuthbertson, School Committee Chair, stated that the School Committee was unanimously in support
of 16h.
The Moderator noted that both the Appropriations Committee and Capital Expense Committee had already
logged their support during the previous Article.
80
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
7:53 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, noted that there were no program uses listed yet. He asked if they
had identified how long that rotation might be for using the building for swing space. Jim
Malloy, Town Manager, said that the Police Department would be using the building until
2024 and that Town Meeting had funded a capital plan for all buildings across 20 years and
what worked needed to be done, and gave examples of possible projects and how the building
could be used until 2023 and the possibility of acquiring the parcel behind it. Mr. McGaw
asked if Article 34 passed whether the site would be rezoned for mixed use site for housing.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that if Article 34 passed in its current form, that
would be correct and the property would be included in the Bedford Reed Street overlay
district. Mr. McGaw asked if it could be redeveloped for housing, multi-family mixed or
commercial, or government use. Mr. Peters said that was correct and asked that Mr. Hornig
be recognized. Charles Hornig, Planning Board Member, said that change in use of the
property would require a change by a Town action, including, most likely, action of Town
Meeting, but it was legally possible. Mr. McGaw asked for clarification that a zoning change
was a legal change. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel said that yes, it was an action of Town
Meeting to change the zoning.
7:59 p.m. Fred Johnson, Pct. 6, looked at this site as a prospective opportunity to generate some capital,
but also because it would be in this new potential zone, which was an ideal sizable site.
8:00 p.m. Alan Levin, Pct. 8, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that one of the reasons
this was being moved now was that the potential High School project had MSBA support and
was moving into the feasibility study phase. When that was under construction, the
construction company might use those fields as a lay down area, so there might be 5-6
recreation fields taken out of service at that time.
8:04 p.m. Kate Colburn, Pct. 4, asked if the purpose of the initial renovations was to provide space for
the Central Office so that they could turn the space into fields. Mr. Malloy stated that the
Article was for design work only, but also to turn the building into useable office space no
matter what they might use it for in the future. Ms. Colburn asked if the Select Board was
advocating giving up a school site to build recreation field space. Jill Hai, Select Board
Chair, stated that they hadn't made a final decision and would be taking up the conversation
in an upcoming summit and would be discussing it with the Finance and School Committees.
Ms. Colburn asked if the School Committee could give more reasoning to why they're
supporting the Article. Sara Cuthbertson, School Committee Chair, stated that it's important
to the Town to have swing space for whatever they'd be using it for. Ms. Colburn asked if
the three subsections would be voted all together. The Moderator answered affirmatively.
Ms. Colburn asked that they separate this Article out for a separate vote. The Moderator
noted this.
8:07 p.m. Steve Heinrich, Pct. 3, asked what the space in the current school building was in square feet
vs the potential in current building on Bedford St. Mr. Cronin said that the ratio of square
feet was about 2-1. He noted that 183 Bedford Street was approximately 16,800 sq. ft. and
the Central Administration building was more than double that, noting that the difference
included a gym.
8:11 p.m. Valerie Overton, Pct. 8, raised a point of order, and noted that she couldn't hear Mr. Cronin.
She asked that he repeat his last comment and asked everyone to speak directly into the
microphones. Mr. Cronin repeated his prior comments and noted that inefficiency of space
was due to the fact that it had been designed as a school, and not office space, so the net
space was actually less. He said that the space study had shown they needed approximately
17,000 sq. ft., which was almost the size of 173 Bedford St.
8:13 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Article.
8:27 p.m. Michael Martignetti, Pct. 3, called the question. The Moderator noted that there was only
one more person in line with a question and requested that they take it. Mr. Martignetti
81
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
agreed. Umesh Shelat, Pct. 7, requested that they separate out 16g. The Moderator stated
they would separate out each Article for a vote.
j) East Lexington Fire Station Feasibility Study - $50,000 for a feasibility study to determine an
appropriate site for the East Lexington Fire Station, including an evaluation of the current site at
1006 Massachusetts Avenue, and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this
appropriation $50,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance.
8:30 p.m. Mike Cronin, Director of Public Facilities, presented information on the Article.
8:33 p.m. Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimous in their
support of the Article.
The Moderator noted that both the Appropriations Committee and Capital Expense Committee had already
logged their support during the previous Article.
8:33 p.m. Bob Avallone, Pct. 8, asked whether the amount shown during the presentation on Article
16g, was the amount of revenue net or gross figure. Melissa Battite, said that in a typical
year their estimate was 300-400K for profit but with past 2 years, golf play had gone up to
$1.1 million in revenue and a profit of approximately $620K which they could use for capital
projects.
8:34 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, noted that he saw on the presentation 3 requirements were about the
health and well-being of fire fighters living in the site, although none addressed that and
asked if they were included. Mr. Cronin apologized for the oversight and said that the
building had an antiquated HVAC system and no fresh air supply, and noted that HVAC
systems were critical components and were part of the evaluation.
8:37 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Article, including the concern of addressing the
needs of the station for the next 10-20 years and whether a new station would fit on the
property, and if not, where else it could be sited.
8:43 p.m. Jerold Michelson Pct. 5, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote.
Mr. Lucente said that all of the above items were to move their capital plans forward and
hoped that Members would vote to pass them.
8:45 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on 16g.
Motion to Approve Article 162 - Pine Meadows Clubhouse Renovation-Design
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
161 4 9
MOTION CARRIES
8:46 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on 16h.
Motion to Approve Article 16h - 173 Bedford Street Renovation Design
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
119 43 10
MOTION CARRIES
82
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:47 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on 16j.
Motion to Approve Article 16i - East Lexington Fire Station—Feasibility Study
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
165 5 5
MOTION CARRIES
8:50 p.m. The Moderator asked Ms. Hai for a procedural motion to take Article 34 from the table.
Ms. Hai moves that Article 34 be taken from the table. Motion approved by majority voice vote.
The Moderator noted that the Meeting was once again open on Article 34, and that they would return to
debate and questions on the original main motion.
8:51 p.m. Joshua Apgar, Pct. 3, President of South Lexington Civic Association, but noted he was
speaking for himself. Mr. Apgar said that many of the voices of those who they were planning
for weren't represented at the Meeting, and that it left the impression that the efforts were
merely for those coming,but to think instead that diversity helped the Town now, as it enriched
everyone.
8:53 p.m. The Moderator noted that the Lexington Center Committee and the Housing Partnership
Board were caucusing in the other room to discuss the upcoming Berger Amendment.
8:54 p.m. Rita Goldberg, Pct. 2, raised a Point of Order and said that she had been out of the room
when the Article was opened and had been third in line last time. She questioned whether the
Amendment had been brought forward. The Moderator noted that the Amendment hadn't yet
been offered.
8:54 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, raised a Point of Order. Said that she had heard the Moderator's
statement that some people were out of room and that she would prefer those people be in the
room as the Meeting progressed.
8:55 p.m. The Moderator agreed with Ms. McKenna and called a brief recess of the Meeting.
9:09 p.m. The Moderator called the Meeting back to order.
9:10 p.m. Carol Marine, 18 Oakmount Circle, Pct. 6, noted that most recently she had served on the
Affordable Housing Trust Study Committee, which had unanimously advocated for the
creation of the Affordable Housing Trust and said that she was in support of Article 34. She
stated that she felt that it was the best opportunity for the types of homes the Town said that
the needed and wanted and would create more equitable housing.
9:13 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, stated that she wanted to be clear that she has long been a supporter
of racial equity in Lexington and that her concerns were not about that, but rather that the
public process matters, and felt that they had gotten away from understanding what public
engagement was all about. She noted that while she commended the Planning Board for their
work to date, people who weren't politically active and didn't know how to check the Town
website or were perhaps uncomfortable with technology didn't always get the information.
She recommended bringing the Article back in the Fall.
9:15 p.m. Salvador Jaramillo, Pct. 5, rose in support of Article 34. He noted that his family lived in
multi-family housing. He said that the Article was a step towards achieving equal
opportunity. He noted that some people say they didn't want multi-family due to the look of
the buildings and asked if the entry to Town should be a million dollar home in order to join
the community. He further stated that the perfect equation for the exact number of units and
homes or number of expected students didn't exist. Mr. Jaramillo said that voting would set
an important precedent for communities across Massachusetts to follow.
83
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:19 p.m. Alessandro Alessandrini, Pct. 4, asked how this Article was considered a multi-family article.
He asked regarding the Article was written currently, with the zones available for multi-
family, what type of building would actually be built there. Robert Peters, Planning Board
Chair, said that with the overlays they could either build to the underlying or overlay zoning,
so they would have a choice. He further noted that the design of the plan that the Planning
Board had brought forward was to encourage potential developers to build under the overlay
zoning in order to build multi-family. Mr. Alessandrini said that the way it was written it was
possible to get no multi-family or affordable housing. Charles Hornig, Planning Board
Member, said that to be clear zoning never made anyone build something, it created an
additional choice and that was always true for all zoning.
9:24 p.m. Todd Burger, Pct. 9, moved the following Amendment:
7.5 VILLAGE AND MULTI-FAMILY OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
7.5.3 Procedures and Regulations. Development under this section,for the F0 and FHG districts and the
North Bedford Street portion of the MTO district, requires Major^ Site Plan Review by the Planning Board
under § 9.5. The Planning Board shall adopt regulations to facilitate site layout, building design, and
outdoor amenity spaces. All site plan review standards applicable to developments under this section shall
be consistent with the purposes of this section and
DHCD's current Compliance Guidelines for Multi family Zoning Districts Under Section 3A of the
Zoning Act as amended.
Development under this section br the Lexington ('enter portion of the MTO district shall be subject to
special pertnit approval fipom the Planning Board in accordance with the provisions of.
x'9.4.
7.5.5 Dimensional controls.
10. Except as noted below,the maximum height in feet of buildings is: District
MFO VO VHO Height in feet 52 40* 70*
a. *In the VO District, where at least 30% of the total net floor area of the street floor of
the development is occupied by nonresidential principal uses, the maximum height is
60 feet if the nonresidential uses are permitted in the underlying district or 52 feet if the
nonresidential uses are not permitted in the underlying district.
b. *In the VHO District where at least 50%of the total net floor area on the lot is occupied
by nonresidential principal uses permitted in the underlying district, the maximum
height is 115 feet.
C. *In the Lexington ("enter portion of the MTO district, any floor above the third floor on
the northerly face of the building inust be,set back at least 6'fipom thefib(ade fiponting on
Massachusetts Avenue of lower floors to ininitnize shadowing on public spaces and
nearby commercial and residential properties.
Mr. Burger offered brief comments regarding the Amendment and said that he believed that
the Center would be better if it had more residents traversing it and noted how the Amendment
changes would help with this.
9:28 p.m. Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, said that the Planning Board voted on April 4, 2023,
5-0 to disapprove the Amendment.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted 3-2 in support of the
Amendment.
Betsey Weiss, Chair of the Housing Partnership Board, said that the Housing Partnership
Board had voted unanimously in opposition to the Amendment.
9:30 p.m. Gerry Michelson, Lexington Center Committee Chair, said that the Lexington Center
Committee had voted with 6 in favor and 0 opposed, with 5 not in attendance that evening.
84
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:33 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Vice-Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee, said that
the Economic Development Advisory Committee had voted with 5 in favor of passage and 1
against.
9:34 p.m. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, asked Mr. Burger to clarify what he meant by the statement that if
Article 34 didn't pass they got"nothing". Mr. Burger said that he had made the comment
because he believed that by addressing the elements he brought out in the Amendment it
would makes it more acceptable to Town Meeting. Mr. Padaki asked that Counsel weigh in
on what would happen if Article 34 was not passed, what the Town could expect as they were
required to comply with State law. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel stated that the Town still
had some time to comply until the end of 2024 and it could presumably come up in some
revised form either during the next town meeting or a special town meeting. Mr. Padaki
asked if it would have to change in its form or could it come back essentially the same before
the December 31, 2024 deadline. Mr. Makarious said that there was a bar on bringing back
zoning amendments that had failed for a two year period, but stated that if the Planning Board
recommended it, that bar was lifted.
9:36 p.m. Andrew Friedlich, Pct. 5, said that he felt he must vote for the Amendment as he was
concerned about height of buildings on the south side of the Center, and the Amendment
partially satisfies that concern. He noted that he wished the original Motion would be
referred back to the Planning Board, as there were two small changes that needed to be made,
one height of the Center on the south side, and the other is to have setback or height
restrictions in certain zones.
9:38 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, said that he believed Mr. Burger mentioned that one of the things he
and his wife liked when they moved here 32 years ago was the type of Town Center they had
then, but that things change and the Center was not the same as back then. He noted that he
appreciated the efforts to protect the Center, but in his opinion is that the changes in the
Amendment defeat the purpose of the original Article.
9:39 p.m. Mike Kennealy, 4 Brent Road, said that he recommends not approving the Amendment. He
said that historically, a Special Permit is a tool for excluding multi-family housing and would
be perceived as such.
9:42 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, asked who was responsible for setting the conditions of a Special
Permit. Abby McCabe, Planning Director, said the Zoning Bylaw set the specific approval
criteria for Special Permits. She noted that this was one of the concerns the Board had with
the Amendment as there was no specific criteria spelled out. Mr. McGaw followed by asking
who, specifically, was responsible for changing the way in which a Special Permit is made
more effective and then noted that using a Special Permit was either super difficult or
exclusionary/challenging and he would like to know who had responsibility for making it
better. Ms. McCabe said that when project applications came into the Planning Board they
would hear the application and then vote on the Special Permit application and that would
require a supermajority vote, which was 4 members, whereas a Site Plan Review was 3 for
approval (5 members total). Mina Makarious, Town Counsel, stated that the Special Permit
criteria mentioned by Ms. McCabe in Section 9.4 of the Zoning Bylaw was set by Town
Meeting and there was no proposal to change it, so generally applicable criteria that were
really intended at a time when a special permit was used to restrict uses that would not be
preferred would now be applied to uses the Town might prefer. He also noted that Special
Permits were creatures of State law, not just governed by the Town and said that with Special
Permits and Site Plan Reviews the key distinction lied within the burden of proof. Mr.
Makarious said that with Special Permits the applicants had to prove they met certain criteria,
while a Site Plan Review would have the Board setting conditions on a project allowed by
right. He said that the reason this mattered to an applicant was that a Special Permit was then
much easier to challenge, even if granted, because the criteria could be challenged, and
especially when the criteria were not a perfect fit for the kind of projects at issue.
85
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:47 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, said he wished to bring attention back to not this amendment, but the
prior one and noted that it had been almost a tie on the vote, and said that when he looked at
complication that properly goes to the Planning Board, he stated that he found in functionally
and philosophically unsuitable when approximately �/z the voters were against it. He stated
that the Article requires further insight and discussion and should have perhaps been a 2/3
vote and should possibly be brought back in the Fall with more clarification.
9:49 p.m. Gerald Paul, Pct. 4, said that he wanted to vote for Article 34 and increased density in the
Center was important. He said that as the vote was incredibly close he didn't think they
should go with this Article when half of the people were against it. He stated that Lexington
Place was a Special Permit and they were happy with it.
9:51 p.m. Jerry Michelson, Pct. 5, raised a Point of Order, and stated that Lexington Place was a
Planned Development and not a Site Plan Review situation. The Moderator asked for
confirmation of this from the Planning Board. Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated
that this information was correct—that it had been a Planned Development, and had come
before Town Meeting.
9:51 p.m. Kathleen Lenihan, Pct. 4, asked for clarification of which Select Board Members were either
in support or against the Amendment so that she could have the majority and minority report.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that Ms. Barry, Mr. Sandeen, and Mr. Lucente were in
favor, and that she and Joseph Pato were opposed. She said that speaking for herself, she
found that the combination of major Site Plan Review and Historic Districts Commission
control more than adequate as a review process for the Town to have a real say in the design
and implementation of any development that would go in, and uncomfortable with a specific
design requirement being enshrined in Zoning instead of a regulation as times and designs
changed. She further stated that she was persuaded by the Lexington Center Committee's
comments about the distance between the sides of Mass. Ave and the two hours, for three
months of the year, that there might be shadowing. Joseph Pato, Select Board Member,
stated that he would continue speaking on the minority position. He said that he also was
convinced by the Center Committee's previous arguments when all 11 of them had met and
they had discussed why they didn't feel a Special Permit was appropriate, or that the
setbacks, when it was a may vs a must why that design element should not be compelled. He
stated that changing it from "may"to "must" made it even more difficult and he felt it was an
unnecessary addition that HDC reviews were sufficient to protect the Center. Mark Sandeen
said that speaking for himself, revitalizing the Center was one of the Select Board's and
community's highest goals. He said that the Burger Amendment addressed some issues of
maintaining the look and feel of the Center as well as shading issues and that it was
incredibly important to have the Center in the project. Ms. Lenihan asked if Michelle
Ciccolo would offer her opinion on the Amendment Michelle Ciccolo, Member at Large,
stated that she was opposed to the Amendment and agreed with the comments presented by
Ms. Hai.
9:57 p.m. The Moderator noted that the time for debate had ended. Mr. Burger offered closing remarks
on the Amendment and stated that he had done computer modeling regarding the shadowing
concerns.
9:57 p.m. Sanjay Padaki, Pct. 8, raised a Point of Order and asked for clarification that if the vote was
yes on the Amendment, whether there would be another vote as Amended. The Moderator
said that was correct and that if voted "yes"there would be a new, amended Main Motion.
9:58 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on the Amendment.
86
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Amendment (Burger)
Fails by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
56 107 11
MOTION FAILS
10:00 p.m. The Moderator noted that they were now back to the original Main Motion as provided by the
Planning Board. A Town Meeting Member stated that they would like division to separate
5h—Lexington Center—out of the Article. The Moderator stated that what was being
proposed was that there would be two votes, one for the Main Motion for everything as
written, except for 5h, which was the inclusion of Lexington Center, and then a second vote
on 5h separately. The Moderator noted that 24 other people needed to rise to support the
request.
Moderator said that they had enough people and had reached division. A separate request
was made to have a vote on 5i. The Moderator asked if there were 25 people who wished to
vote separately on Bedford Street North. The Moderator noted that there did not seem to be
enough people to meet the 25 person requirement.
10:02 p.m. Frank Smith, Pct. 3, raised a Point of Order and asked how this was not an Amendment to
the Main Motion. The Moderator stated that it was just a division of the question making it
two votes. She said that if they were to debate it separately and debate "deleting Lexington
Center"that would be an Amendment, but this had been suggested early in the process. Mr.
Smith asked if they voted down that section, would the Motion stand without that section.
The Moderator said that if they voted in favor of everything and then the second vote, 5h
would either be included or not depending upon that vote.
10:02 p.m. Andrei Radulescu-Banu, Pct. 8, raised a Point of Order, and asked for further clarification
on how it would work. The Moderator stated that it was simply two votes and that the way
the Motion was written, 5h could be taken out for a separate vote, but if it needed a
complicated Amendment, then they couldn't do it that way, but as 25 people had requested it,
she was compelled to allow it. Mr. Radulescu-Banu asked for clarification regarding
referendums. Mina Makarious, Town Counsel, said that Section 8 of the Town Meeting Act
would be regarding a vote at Town Meeting passed that amended an existing bylaw and that
would depend on whether the people challenging it decided to challenge one or both votes.
He further noted that if something passed with"everything but h passes", there wouldn't be
anything to have a referendum on as they couldn't have a referendum on a denied vote.
David Kanter, Pct. 7, raised a Point of Order, and stated that while it was legally permissive,
that the question might be whether this type of division was a good idea on something that
had worked its way through amendments, and would now be presented segmented. He said
that in his opinion it didn't seem to be in the best interest of Town Meeting. The Moderator
agreed.
Michael Boudett, Pct. 4, raised a Point of Order, and noted that he didn't completely follow
the last exchange and asked whether Town Counsel could be consulted as to whether or not
the vote could be separable in this nature. He noted that the Motion was a holistic proposal
and didn't know how he would vote without that. The Moderator noted that division was
strictly about how the Motion was written and said that she agreed with David Kanter that it
wasn't a great way to handle this. Mr. Makarious stated that it was the Moderator's call, but
he believed she was right, and the only standard was if it was capable of division, which it
was. He further noted that if it passed with a yes vote to approve both, the referendum
question would come under Section 8 by petition and it would be up to those seeking the
petition to decide which of the two votes they were challenging, so they could be left a
referendum on only a portion.
Mr. Boudett asked for clarification on whether it was the Moderator's call regardless if 25
people requested it, and if so, should her discretion govern. The Moderator stated that the
way the bylaw was written, the moderator may exercise discretion to grant the request, or if
25 people ask for it. She said that she had always interpreted that she could choose to
separate without asking or if 25 people asked for it. Mr. Makarious noted that this correct,
87
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
and read the pertinent bylaw to the Meeting and said he agreed with her interpretation. Mr.
Makarious further said that the only time is if were not divisible at all, meaning (example)
you couldn't do a without b. He said he understood the possible policy argument for this, but
as legal matter it could theoretically be done. The Moderator said that they could interpret
the fact that she asked 25 people to stand that it wasn't something she would have used her
discretion alone to do, but her hands were tied as it was in the bylaw. Mr. Makarious agreed
with these statements.
10:08 p.m. Marilyn Fenollosa, Pct. 5, raised a Point of Order to ask which part would be taken up first.
The Moderator said that she would take the bigger portion and then h afterwards.
10:09 p.m. Deborah Strod, Pct. 6, raised a Point of Order to ask whether a question could be undivided.
Mr. Makarious said that the only way that could happen was that after all points of order
were completed and having explained the process, asking the 25 Members, having now heard
these processes if they still would like to keep it divided, and if so, the Moderator's hands
were tied as she had indicated before.
10:10 p.m. Sarah Bothwell, Pct. 6, raised a Point of Order and said that she had a similar question and
that 25 people had stood up for the vote to be divided, and asked whether there could be a
vote of Town Meeting to see if they should proceed that way.
10:10 p.m. The Moderator noted that this was why moderators didn't like to add specifics to the bylaw
about parliamentary procedure and the moderator's discretion, but this was very clearly
described in the bylaw. She then said that she would do as suggested by Town Counsel and
check once more on her count whether there were 25 people who wished to separate the
question. The Moderator noted that she had counted 22.
10:11 pm. A Member asked the legal basis for previous vote. Mr. Makarious said that the Moderator
controls issues of procedures of the meeting, and it was clear that there was a
misunderstanding amongst some, at least, of how the process worked, including numerous
questions about it. He noted that the Moderator sought to double check her count and her
decision and judgment to do so is basically unchallengeable. The Member stated that was not
what he observed and felt that the standing vote made it final and this was going around it.
10:12 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, noted that because of how difficult it was to see as they were all
spread out, she requested that they found out a way to know how many people there were.
The Moderator noted that she was clear. Ms. McKenna stated that they couldn't see who
stood and in the past clerks had counted. The Moderator stated that it would not be for this as
it was a standing in place, and not a vote, and she had ruled on it.
10:13 p.m. Meeting Members continued to debate and discuss the Article.
10:30 p.m. Michael Martignetti, Pct. 3, called the question. As the voice vote was unclear, the
Moderator called for a vote on closing debate using the tablets.
Motion to Close Debate
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
90 72 10
MOTION CARRIES
Mr. Peters offered final comments on the Article.
The Moderator opened voting on Article 34.
10:34 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, raised a Point of Order and asked if h and i, together, could be
divisible from the rest of the Article. The Moderator noted that she was already moving
forward with the vote and nothing would be divided.
88
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 34
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
107 63 1
MOTION CARRIES
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
10:37 p.m. Jessie Steigerwald, Pct. 8, said that her vote didn't show and that she had voted no and just
wanted the Moderator to be aware of the issue.
10:37 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6,Served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 34.
10:38 p.m. Andy Friedlich, Pct. 5 raised a Point of Order to ask whether or not there was a part of the
Article that still needed a vote. The Moderator stated that they did not break it out.
10:30 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Monday, April 24, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by majority
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
April 24, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the eighth session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
on Monday, April 24, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(148).
The Moderator explained where seating for the public was located as well as parliamentary procedures and
asked that Members log in their attendance via the electronic tablets. She noted that the plan was to take
up Article 16i on Wednesday in case anyone was in attendance for that Article. Quorum announcement at
7:36 p.m. The Moderator called a brief recess to allow for the Planning Board to caucus. The Moderator
called the Meeting back to order at 7:40 p.m.
7:40 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 40 and thereafter Article 12.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Articles 40 and 12. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 40.
Article 40: Amend Section 135-4.4 of the Zoning Bylaw -Reduce Residential Gross Floor (Citizen
Petition).
MOTION:
Mr. Daggett moves that the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington,be
amended as follows, where sf..dek thr-ough text is to be removed and underlined text is to be added, except
where otherwise stated below, and further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of this bylaw be
permitted to comply with the numbering format of the Code of the Town of Lexington.
1. Amend: §135-4.4 as follows:
4.4.2 Maximum Allowable Residential Gross Floor Area Tables. The total gross floor area of all buildings
on a lot containing a one-family or two-family dwelling may not exceed the amount listed in the
belewTable 4.4.2.2 based on lot area., except that: -
(a) buildings for which a building permit application has been submitted before January
1, 2024 may be extended, altered,reconstructed or structurally changed so long as the total gross floor
89
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
does not exceed that in Table 4.4.2.1 below based on lot area. For the purposes of this §135-4.4.2,
extension, alteration, reconstruction, and structural change shall not include any construction which
involves demolition of more than 50% of the primary building's shell exclusive of demolition of a single
story attached garage. For purposes of calculating the percentages of any demolition under this
subsection, all demolition shall be taken into account which commenced,
or could have commenced,pursuant to an issued permit within two years prior to the date of any request
for any permit to construct,re-construct, alter, add, extend or otherwise structurally change any structure.
(b) For the purposes of§135-6.12.3.7(a),Table 4.4.2.1 shall be used to determine the gross floor area
permitted based on a proof plan.
Table 4.4.2.1:
Lot Area (in square feet) Maximum Gross Floor Area (in square feet)
0 to 5,000 0.8 * Lot Area
5,000 to 7,500 4,000 + 0.55 * (Lot Area- 5,000)
7,500 to 10,000 5,375 + 0.23 * (Lot Area- 7,500)
10,000 to 15,000 5,950 + 0.2 * (Lot Area- 10,000)
15,000 to 30,000 6,950 + 0.16 * (Lot Area- 15,000)
More than 30,000 9,350 + 0.16 * (Lot Area- 30,000)
Table 4.4.2.2:
Lot Area (in square feet Maximum Gross Floor Area (in square feet)
0 to 5,000 0.76 * Lot Area
5,000 to 7,500 3,800 + 0.42 * (Lot Area- 5,000)
7,500 to 10,000 4,850 + 0.12 * (Lot Area- 7,500)
10,000 to 15,000 5,150 + 0.11 * (Lot Area- 10,000)
15,000 to 30,000 5,700 + 0.1 * (Lot Area- 15,000)
More than 30,000 7,200 + 0.1 * (Lot Area- 30,000)
2. The amendments to §135-4.4 under this Motion shall take effect on January 1, 2024.
Mr. Daggett presented information on the Article. He noted that there was a trend for larger homes
throughout the years and this plan called for mitigation.
8:01 p.m. Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that after caucusing before the Meeting, they had
voted 4 - 0, with one member absent, to recommend disapproval of Article 40 and said there
were some concerns that a motion to refer would not be in order under the rules of the Town
Meeting. He said that further, the Planning Board had agreed that the Board would put the
intent of Article 40 on its work plan and bring an Article to the Annual Town Meeting in
2024 that would be more comprehensive in its review.
8:02 p.m. Suzanne Barry, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board did not support the Article
with a vote of 2 in favor and 3 opposed but did support with a vote of 3-2 to refer the article
for further review to the Planning Board.
8:03 p.m. Wendy Manz, for the Special Permit Residential Development(SPRD) Zoning Bylaw
Amendment Ad Hoc Committee, said that on March 1, 2023, the SPRD had voted
unanimously to recommend against passage of Article 40. She noted that the Article
represented a significant change to zoning, which was made without consultation respecting
90
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
other provisions of the bylaw or pending revisions thereof, it was not presented to the SPRD
committee and was materially amended by the proponent after its presentation to the Select
Board on February 13 and the Planning Board on February 15, which were the only public
presentations to date. She further noted that they were unable to complete an analysis on the
implications of the proposal.
8:04 p.m. Steven Heinrich, Pct. 3, asked what the primary purposes behind the zoning Articles Town
Meeting passed regulating GFA several year ago were. Sheila Page, Assistant Planning
Director, asked Mr. Heinrich if he were referring to 2016. He replied that he was. Ms. Page
said that while she was not part of the staff at that time, it was her understanding that was to
help regulate the size of the homes. Mr. Heinrich followed by asking if any of those
regulations resulted in reduced home size in Lexington. Robert Peters, Planning Board
Chair, said that the Board and staff did not believe so. Mr. Heinrich asked if the current
zoning articles passed in 2015-2016 had been successful in reducing homes beings
constructed at all. Mr. Peters said that it would not appear so. Mr. Heinrich asked if the GFA
changes recommended in Article 40, if adopted, would reduce the size of homes being
constructed after January 1, 2024. Mr. Peters said that it was not clear what the impact would
be at this point. Mr. Heinrich asked if there was any reason the Article could not be brought
back to Town Meeting. Mr. Peters said that the Planning Board could absolutely do that, but
it was a question of timing.
8:09 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, said that he thought that this was a rational path that had already been
passed, in different degrees, and that the implementation would make a start along the path
for functional change in their concern for large buildings. He further noted that the fact that
it could come back if found lacking by the Planning Board, would make it perfectly
reasonable to bring back, but they would be on track to do something.
8:10 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, said that it was very difficult to be in the no line, but felt that a while
he still supported the intent of the Article, he agreed with the position of the Planning Board
that the Article be voted down so they could put it on their work schedule, and trusted them
to bring back a good Article.
8:12 p.m. Judy Moore, 258 Bedford Street, said that she grew up in Lexington and had been a realtor
for over 35 years and that she didn't believe the Article was a viable solution for their
situation. She mentioned that housing trends naturally change over time, and people were
looking for more interior spaces as homes became sanctuaries to the buyers which were
environmentally responsible with a smaller carbon footprint. Ms. Moore said that
multigenerational housing space needs had been increasing over the past 50 years and that the
recent approval of Articles 33 and 34 provided more opportunity while Article 40 was not the
answer.
8:15 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the Article, including possible
impacts and feasibility of certain types of building projects, enforcement, fines, and purchase
price vs. new construction.
8:50 p.m. Marsha Baker, Pct. 7, called the question. Debate was closed by majority voice vote.
Mr. Daggett offered summary comments on the Article.
8:52 p.m. Hemaben Bhatt, Pct. 9, raised a Point of Order, and asked what type of majority was
required. The Moderator stated that a 2/3 majority was required for passage.
8:52 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 40.
91
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 40
by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
114 48 1
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
8:54 p.m. Two Members were unable to use the electronic voting. The Moderator took their votes by
voice and noted that they should be reflected in an updated tally.
Michael Boudette, Pct. 4, voice vote no. Katie Cutler, Pct. 4, voice vote yes.
The Moderator noted that the vote should reflect voice votes as below:
Motion to Approve Article 40 with voice votes
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
115 49 1
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
(Approved by the Attorney General's Office August 2, 2023,posted August 7, 2023)
8:55 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 2, and noted that Charles Lamb, Chair of
the Capital Expenditures Committee, moved to accept the second update to the Report of the
Capital Expenditures Committee to the 2023 Town Meeting. Motion approved by
unanimous voice vote.
8:56 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 12 and noted that they had 5 items from
Article 12 that were not part of the Consent Agenda which would now be taken up, and they were 12(a),
12(b), 12(d), 12(1), and 12(m).
Ms. Hai moved to take up 12(a), 12(b), 12(d), 12(1), and 12(m).
The Moderator noted that she would like the Members to hear presentations and recommendations on each
and debate each, but then take one vote at the end. She stated that she would entertain requests to take
items out for separate vote if deemed necessary.
ARTICLE 12 APPROPRIATE FOR MUNICIPAL CAPITAL PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the following amounts be appropriated for the following municipal
capital improvements and that each amount be appropriated as follows:
a) All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) - Forestry - $65,000 to purchase a new All-Terrain Vehicle for the Fire
Department, and all incidental costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation $65,000 be
appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance;
Fire Chief Derek Sencabaugh presented information on the Article.
8:59 p.m. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted unanimously in favor of
passage of the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, said that the Capital Expenditures
Committee had voted unanimously to recommend passage of 12(a), 12(b), 12(d), 12(1), and 12(m).
Sean Osborne, Appropriation Committee Member, stated that the Appropriation Committee had voted
unanimously to recommend passage of 12(a), 12(b), 12(d), 12(1), and 12(m).
92
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:01 P.M. Todd Burger, Pct. 9, asked whether the vehicle was electric or internal combustion. Chief
Sencabaugh said that it was gas powered ATV for its off-road capabilities. Mr. Burger
asked if there had been a quote for an electric vehicle. Chief Sencabaugh stated that they
had looked into it different vendors, but the recommendation was to go this route due to the
lack of ability to recharge rapidly in an emergency event.
9:02 p.m. Avram Baskin, Pct. 2, asked why the current vehicle was 23-years old and not on a
replacement schedule. Chief Sencabaugh said that he had been Chief since 2019 and had
been going through the inventory, but until then they had been able to maintain it but it was
now too old for parts or maintenance. Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures
Committee, also noted that the Chief had presented a very well-tuned capital replacement
schedule every year, and the items that Mr. Baskin had referred to, such as ambulances and
fire trucks had a well-defined lifetime which was shorter due to wear and tear.
b) TMOD Implementation - Permitting and Progress Tracking - $42,000 to develop a permit tracking
system that will track development progress on transportation demand efforts within the
Transportation Management Overlay District, and that to meet this appropriation $42,000 be
appropriated from the Transportation Management Overlay District(TMOD) Stabilization Fund;
Sheila Page, Assistant Planning Director,presented information on the Article.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted unanimously in favor of passage of the
Article.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Planning Board was unanimously in support of 12b.
The Moderator reminded the Meeting that both Finance Committees had already stated their unanimous
support of the Article.
d) Bedford St. and Hartwell Ave. Long-Range Transportation Improvements - $1,750,000 for design,
engineering and architectural services to complete the 25% design Plans, Specifications and
Estimates (PS&E) for the Route 4/225 Bedford St-Hartwell Avenue-Wood Street Transportation
improvement plan; and that to meet this appropriation, $655,272 be appropriated from the General
Fund unreserved fund balance; $70,000 be appropriated from the premiums received and reserved
from the issuance of Bond Anticipation Notes (BANS); and the Treasurer, with the approval of the
Select Board, is authorized to borrow $1,024,728 under M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 7(1), or any
other enabling authority;
Ross Morrow, Assistant Town Engineer, presented information on the Article.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted unanimously in favor of passage of the
Article.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Planning Board was unanimously in support of 12d.
The Moderator reminded the Meeting that both Finance Committees had already stated their unanimous
support of the Article.
9:15 p.m. Gloria Bloom, Pct. 4, asked if the plan took into account the large number of housing units
permitted by article 34 on Hartwell and Bedford Streets, which could increase the number
of passenger cars. Mr. Morrow said that at that time, nothing had yet been permitted, but
the design did take into account some amount of mixed use.
9:16 p.m. Bridger McGaw, Pct. 6, said that he wished to follow up on Mr. Burger's question to the
Chief earlier and they had fleet electrification policy in place, and asked what type of
support vehicles would fall into this category. The Moderator asked for clarification of the
question. Mr. McGaw withdrew the question. Mr. McGaw asked if they were considering
other ramps off of 128 in the design. Mr. Morrow stated that they had presented at a Select
93
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Board meeting and ask if that worth taking another look, and the Select Board had said yes,
if it seemed feasible, but they were still reviewing internally for options.
9:19 P.M. Leonard Morse-Fortier, Pct. 7, asked if there was a way for the lane on 128 just south of the
Bedford Street interchange to connect to a pass way to the compost facility and add another
small lane as an alternate. Mr. Morrow, said that they were looking into it, and there were
still a lot of internal discussions whether it was a viable option.
9:21 p.m. Jay Luker, Pct. 1, asked how someone would know what the 25% design looked like as it
wasn't on the engineering page of the website. Mr. Morrow, said that they were working
on concept designs but they were not at a point to present to the public, and had only
presented information to the Select Board on items that were regarding traffic issues
discovered during the traffic evaluation. Mr. Morrow noted that the design team was
currently still reviewing this information and that of the interchange, which had not been
part of the study previously.
9:23 p.m.
1) Municipal Parking Lot Improvements - $575,000 for the construction and reconstruction of the
Town's municipal parking lots and all incidental costs related thereto, and to take by eminent
domain, purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land necessary
therefor, and that to meet this appropriation $575,000 be appropriated from the General Fund
unreserved fund balance;
John Livsey, Town Engineer, presented information on the Article.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted unanimously in favor of passage of the
Article.
The Moderator reminded the Meeting that both Finance Committees had already stated their unanimous
support of the Article.
9:24 p.m. Ricki Pappo, Pct. 2, said that she understood that they were not considering solar at the
present time, but could it be considered in future and asked whether the way it was planned
to be built would make it possible to add it in order to make it less expensive. James
Malloy, Town Manager, said that they were not looking at solar on that section on parking
lot, only in the section adjacent to Fletcher Park, which would be coming up in Article 16i.
He noted that they were looking at putting impervious and pervious pavement through the
parking lot so that the areas where cars parked would be pervious and driving areas would
be impervious, which helped meet stormwater regulations. Ms. Pappo asked if there would
be anything that would make it difficult to add solar or make it more expensive down the
line. Mr. Malloy said there would not.
9:26 p.m. Tom Shiple, Pct. 9, noted that there was currently a steep grade that connected the bikeway
and the parking lot and asked if there were plans to put in a connection between the two.
Mr. Malloy stated that as part of the police station renovation, that part of the parking lot
would be raised up and allow them to build a safe pathway between the police station and
the Cary Memorial Building that would allow them to connect to the bikeway.
9:27 p.m. Laura Swain, Pct. 2, asked if the funding included electric charging stations. Mr. Malloy
stated that they already had 4 behind the building and the infrastructure to add more. He
noted that the police station would have level 3 chargers installed in the parking garage.
Ms. Swain asked for clarification on whether the funding included charging stations. Mr.
Malloy stated that it did not as they already existed.
94
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:28 p.m.
m) New Sidewalk Installations - $1,620,000 for the design and construction of new sidewalks on
Cedar Street, and all incidental costs related thereto, and to take by eminent domain, purchase or
otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land necessary therefor, and that to meet
this appropriation the Treasurer, with the approval of the Select Board, is authorized to borrow
$1,620,000 under M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 7(1), or any other enabling authority;
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board had voted unanimously in favor of passage of the Article.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Planning Board was unanimously in support of 12m.
The Moderator reminded the Meeting that both Finance Committees had already stated their unanimous
support of the Article.
9:29 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Articles 12a, 12b, 12d, 121 and 12m and noted that it
required a 2/3 quantum of vote.
Todd Burger, Pct. 9, raised a Point of Order, and stated that he would like to remove Article 12a for
separate vote. As there were not 24 additional Members in support,the Motion did not pass.
Motion to Approve Article 12(a), 12(b), 12(d), 12(1), and 12(m).
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
151 1 3
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
9:31 p.m. The Moderator asked for a procedural motion to take up Article 27.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Article 27. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 27 and noted that she would have the red-lined versions
shown to Town Meeting Members as it had been recently updated.
ARTICLE 27 Amend Fossil Fuel Bylaw - Compliance with Department of Energy Resources
(DOER) Regulations and Guidance
MOTION: Mr. Pato moves that Town Meeting amend the bylaw previously approved by Town Meeting
under Article 29 of the 2021 Annual Town Meeting on March 22, 2021 and amended as Article 13 of the
2022-3 Special Town Meeting on November 1, by replacing it with the below for participation in the
Department of Energy Resources' municipal fossil fuel-free demonstration project as established in
Section 84 of Chapter 179 of the Acts of 2022:
Chapter 106: REGULATING FOSSIL FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE IN BUILDINGS
106- 1 Purpose
This Bylaw is adopted by the Town of Lexington to protect health, safety, and the natural environment and
reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, which causes climate change, thereby threatening the
Town and its inhabitants.
106- 2 Definitions
"Combustion Equipment" means as defined in 225 CMR 23.
"Effective Date" shall mean 90 days following the date by which the Town is authorized by the
Department of Energy Resources to regulate fossil fuel infrastructure.
95
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
"New Building" shall mean a new building or new accessory building, as defined in the Lexington Zoning
Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, associated with a building permit application
filed on or after the Effective Date.
"On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure" shall mean piping for coal, natural gas or other fuel hydrocarbons,
including synthetic equivalents, or other fossil fuels that is in a building, in connection with a building, or
otherwise within the property lines of a premises, extending from a supply tank or from the point of
delivery behind a gas meter or the customer-side of a gas meter.
"Major Renovation" shall mean a project associated with a valid building permit application filed on or
after the Effective Date of this article that meets the definition of Level 3 Alteration as defined in 225
CMR 22 and 23.
106- 3 Applicability
This Chapter shall apply to all building permit applications for New Buildings and Major Renovations
proposed to be located in whole or in part within the Town, except that this Chapter shall not apply to:
A. Research laboratories for scientific or medical research,
B. Hospitals regulated by the department of public health as a health care facility,
C. Medical offices regulated by the department of public health as a health care facility,
D. Buildings heated with Clean Biomass Heating Systems as defined in 225 CMR 23 as the only
combustion equipment,
E. Multi-family buildings over 12,000 square feet with permit application filed prior to January 1,
2027 that utilize gas or propane for domestic water heating as the only combustion equipment,
F. Utility service piping connecting the grid to a meter, or to a gas meter itself,
G. The extension or modification of heating systems via HVAC system modification, or
modification of radiator, steam, or hot water piping, provided new fossil fuel piping is not
installed;
H. Repairs of any existing portions of a fuel piping system deemed unsafe or dangerous by the
Plumbing and Gas Fitting Inspector, or
L Piping required to fuel backup electrical generators, indoor or outdoor cooking appliances,
indoor or outdoor fireplaces or fire features, or appliances for outdoor heating.
106- 4 Enforcement
1. On or after the Effective Date, no building permit shall be issued by the Town for the construction
of New Buildings and Major Renovations that include the installation of new On-Site Fossil Fuel
Infrastructure subject to this Chapter except in accordance with this Chapter and Chapter 115.
2. The Town Manager, or their designee, shall publish and present an annual report to the Select
Board quantifying the number and location of building permit applications for new and major
renovation projects exceeding 50% of the original gross floor area of the principal dwelling; the
number of new and major renovation projects requesting a waiver from this Chapter, the
disposition of those waivers, the reasons for granting or denying those waivers and the square
footage of each project for which a waiver is granted.
3. The Select Board may adopt additional requirements, exemption, and regulations to implement or
enforce said new fossil fuel infrastructure restrictions in major construction, consistent with this
Chapter.
106- 5 Waivers
96
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
A. The Building Commissioner may grant a waiver from the requirements of this Chapter in the event
that compliance with the provisions of this Chapter makes a project financially infeasible or
impractical to implement. Compliance with this Chapter may be considered infeasible if, without
limitation:
a. as a result of factors beyond the control of the proponent, the additional cost of the project
over the long term, including any available subsidies, would make the project commercially
unviable; or
b. technological or other factors would make the project unsuitable for its intended purpose.
B. Waivers from compliance with this Chapter may be subject to reasonable conditions. Where
possible, waivers shall be issued for specific portions of a project that are financially infeasible or
impractical to implement under the requirements of this Chapter, rather than entire projects.
C. Waiver requests shall be supported by a detailed cost comparison, including available rebates and
credits. A waiver request may be made at any time and may be based upon submission of
conceptual plans.
D. In considering a request for a waiver, the Building Commissioner may consider as a factor the
requesting party's status as a non-profit or government-sponsored affordable housing entity.
E. The Building Commissioner's decision with respect to the granting of a waiver, the scope thereof,
and any conditions imposed by a waiver, shall be appealable to the Select Board, or its designee,
within thirty (30) days in accordance with policies established by the Select Board.
F. The Select Board shall, prior to the Effective Date issue, and may thereafter amend, guidance
regarding the process for requesting and granting waivers, and describing reasonable conditions
that may be placed on a waiver.
106- 6 Appeals
The Select Board, or its designee, shall hear appeals from decisions of the Building Commissioner under
this Chapter.
106- 7. Reporting
The Select Board, or its designee, shall provide data and other information on the impacts of this Bylaw on
emissions, building costs, operating costs, the number of building permits issued, and other information as
required or requested by the Department of Energy Resources and the Secretary of Housing and Economic
Development.
Maggie Peard, Sustainability and Resilience Officer, presented information on the Article.
9:37 p.m. Joseph Pato, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board had voted
unanimously in favor of passage of the Article.
9:38 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, said that he understood they were using a draft for the Legislature and
asked how confident they were in what would be the final version in the Legislature. Mina
Makarious, Town Counsel, said that at this point the Legislature was done in that they had
authorized Department of Energy Resources to do this. The Department of Energy
Resources (DOER) had put out a model rule that didn't quite match the bylaw format most
towns used, but they had reviewed its substances, and that had been put in the comments
and that Ms. Arens had held a conversation with their staff, so they were confident as they
could be. He further stated that the good news was that they had also spoken to the
Attorney General's Office and they had made it clear that there would be room to adjust as
necessary. Cynthia Arens, Member of the Sustainable Lexington Committee, noted that the
feedback they had received from DOER was that their regulations were final but they had
not been distributed to the public.
97
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
9:40 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 27.
Motion to Approve Article 27 Amend Fossil Fuel Bylaw—Compliance with Department of Energy
Resources (DOER) Regulations and Guidance
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
147 1 3
MOTION CARRIES
The Moderator asked for a motion to take up Articles 7 and 19.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Articles 7 and 19. Motion approved by voice vote.
9:42 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 7.
ARTICLE 7 APPROPRIATE TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 55C, the Town dedicate
payments from Symmes Lifecare, Inc. d/b/a Brookhaven at Lexington beginning on July 1, 2023, for the
purpose of creating affordable housing, to the Lexington Affordable Housing Trust fund, without further
appropriation.
Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development, gave a presentation on the Article.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimous in their support of the Article and
wanted to clarify that this Article was to make future payments into the Affordable Housing Trust on July
1 st, and Article 19, which they would take up next, would talk about existing payments into stabilization
fund.
Carol Kowalski, Member of the Affordable Housing Trust, stated that the Affordable Housing Trust had
met on March 15, 2023, and voted unanimously, with one member absent, in support of the Article.
Robert Peters, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Planning Board was unanimously in favor of passage
the Article.
Eric Michaelson, Member of the Appropriations Committee, stated that the Appropriations Committee
unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
9:45 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 7.
Motion to Approve Article 7
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
146 0 3
MOTION CARRIES
98
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 19.
ARTICLE 19 ESTABLISH, DISSOLVE AND APPROPRIATE TO AND FROM SPECIFIED
STABILIZATION FUNDS
MOTION: Mr. Lucente moves,
a) That $500,000 be appropriated from the Capital Stabilization Fund for projects excluded from the
limits of Proposition 21/2;
b) That $1,733,137 be appropriated into the Capital Stabilization Fund, and to meet this
appropriation, $1,733,137 be appropriated from the tax levy;
c) That $246,063.75 be appropriated into the Transportation Management Overlay District
Stabilization Fund, and to meet this appropriation, $246,063.75 be appropriated from the
Transportation Management Overlay District Special Revenue Fund;
d) That $210,000 be appropriated into the Traffic Mitigation Stabilization Fund, and to meet this
appropriation, $210,000 be appropriated from the Traffic Mitigation Special Revenue Fund;
e) That $205,000 be appropriated into the Transportation Demand Management/Public Transportation
Stabilization Fund, and to meet this appropriation, $205,000 be appropriated from the
Transportation Demand Management/Public Transportation Special Revenue Fund;
f) That $439,402.27 be appropriated from the Affordable Housing Capital Stabilization Fund to the
Lexington Affordable Housing Trust fund; and
g) That in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section 5B paragraph four, that the dedication of
payments from Symmes Lifecare, Inc. d/b/a Brookhaven at Lexington directly into the Affordable
Housing Capital Stabilization Fund, as approved under Article 19 of the 2020 Annual Town
Meeting, be terminated as of June 30, 2023, and
h) That $500,000 be appropriated into the Special Education Stabilization Fund, and to meet this
appropriation, $500,000 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance.
9:46 p.m. Mr. Lucente offered to answer questions rather than read his report and noted that the Select
Board was unanimous in their support of the Article.
Sara Cuthbertson, School Committee Chair, noted that the School Committee was unanimous in support of
Article 19d.
Carol Kowalski, Member of the Affordable Housing Trust, stated that the Affordable Housing Trust had
met on March 15, 2023, and voted unanimously, with one member absent, in support of Articles 19f and g.
Eric Michaelson, Member of the Appropriations Committee, stated that the Appropriations Committee had
voted unanimously 8-0 to recommended approval of the Article 19g, which would dissolve the Affordable
Housing Capital Stabilization Fund, and therefore all the revenue under Article 7 would be go to the Trust.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditures Committee, stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee unanimously 6-0 recommended approval of the Article as related to the stabilization funds.
9:45 p.m. Moderator opened voting on Article 19 and noted that it required a 2/3 vote.
99
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 19
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
146 0 2
MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY AND BY MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
The Moderator asked for a motion to take up Article 9.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Article 9. Motion approved by unanimous voice vote.
9:51 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 9.
ARTICLE 9 ESTABLISH AND CONTINUE DEPARTMENTAL REVOLVING FUNDS
MOTION:
a) Mr. Pato moves that the Town establish a Refuse and Recycling Collection revolving
fund, and that Section 110-1 of the Code of Lexington be amended by inserting the
following row to the table in that section:
Authorized
Representative or
Revolving Fund Board to Spend Departmental Receipts Use of Fund
Fees for collection and Expense for collection
disposal of mattresses, and disposal of
Refuse and Recycling Director of Public white goods and bulky mattresses,white goods
Collection Works items and bulky items
b) that the Town redesignate the Tourism/Liberty Ride revolving fund as the Tourism fund,
and that Section 110-1 of the Code of Lexington be amended by amending following row to
the table in that section:
Authorized
Representative or
Revolving Fund Board to Spend Departmental Receipts Use of Fund
Receipts,including
ticket sales, charter
sales, sale ofgoods,
Town Manager and program fees, Personnel,benefits,
Economic advertising revenue, program expenses and
Tourism A' Development Director I donations andits capital
100
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
c) authorize the following revolving fund limits pursuant to the provisions of
M.G.L.Chapter 44, Section 53E 1/2 , and Chapter 110 of the Code of the Town of Lexington,
for Fiscal Year 2024 beginning July 1, 2023, as follows:
FUNDS REQUESTED:
Program or Purpose for Revolving Funds FY2024
Authorization
School Bus Transportation $1,150,000
Building Rental Revolving Fund $603,000
Lexington Tree Fund $90,000
DPW Burial Containers $60,000
DPW Compost Operations $854,000
Minuteman Household Hazardous Waste Program $300,000
Senior Services Program $75,000
Residential Engineering Review $57,600
Health Programs $90,000
Lab Animal Permit Applications/Inspections $40,000
Tourism $490,000
Refuse and Recycling Collection $230,000
Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board was unanimous in their support of the
Article.
Sara Cuthbertson, School Committee Chair, noted that the School Committee was unanimous in support of
the Article.
Sean Osborne, Appropriation Committee Member, stated that the Appropriation Committee had voted 7-1
to support the Article.
9:53 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 6, stated that she was concerned about funds for white goods and
asked how the process would work and how the public would be involved. James Malloy,
Town Manager, stated that it would occur during Select Board meetings and possibly other
regulations as well. Ms. McKenna asked the Select Board for a commitment to do a very
public engagement process around this before the fees were assessed. Mr. Pato noted that
the Select Board had not caucused and so could not provide an answer regarding it. Ms.
McKenna asked the Moderator to allow a minute to discuss. The Moderator allowed the
Select Board to hold a brief discussion during the meeting. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair,
said that the Board, when they last discussed the issue, did both desire and expect a robust
public process with the caveat that it is built into budget, anticipating a July 1 fiscal year
start. Ms. McKenna asked if the two items could be divided. The Moderator asked
whether she was looking to just separate out"a". Ms. McKenna agreed. As there were not
24 additional Members standing, the Motion failed. Mr. Malloy noted that the items being
considered could no longer be put into a landfill or be considered "trash".
9:59 p.m. Ed. Dolan, Pct. 3, asked for the reason of the dissenting vote in the Appropriations
Committee. Eric Michelson, Appropriations Committee Member, stated that his dissention
followed the same lines as those of Ms. McKenna.
10:01 P.M. Members continued to debate and discuss the Article including possible costs and
procedures.
10:10 P.M. Lauren Black, Pct. 8, called the question. Debate closed by majority voice vote. Mr. Pato
waived final comments.
10:10 P.M. The Moderator opened voting on Article 9
101
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 9
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
122 14 10
MOTION CARRIES
10:12 p.m. Dawn McKenna, served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 9
The Moderator asked for a motion to take up Article 23.
Ms. Hai moved to take up Article 23. Motion approved by voice vote.
10:15 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 23.
ARTICLE 23 ESTABLISH SPECIAL EDUCATION RESERVE FUND
MOTION:
a) Ms. Hai moves to see if the Town will vote to accept the provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section
13E to establish a Reserve Fund for special education, out-of-district tuition or transportation, or take
any other action in relation thereto; and
b) That$750,000 be appropriated to the Special Education Reserve Fund established pursuant to M.G.L
Chapter 40, Section 13E, and that to meet this appropriation,$75 0,000 be appropriated from the
General Fund unreserved fund balance.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimous in their support of the Article.
Sara Cuthbertson, School Committee Chair, noted that the School Committee was unanimous in support of
the Article.
Mr. Levine, Appropriation Committee Member, stated that the Appropriation Committee was unanimous
in support the Article.
10:16 p.m. Steven Kaufman, Pct. 5, said that there had been a vote for 500K and asked how these
funds related to the prior amount. Carolyn Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager, said that this
was in addition to the amount voted into stabilization, which had required a 2/3 vote of
Town Meeting to take money out. She noted that essentially, when utilizing a stabilization
fund, it needed to be planned as part of the budget, and that given rising costs, this was a
more flexible option and allowed by the Municipal Modernization Act, although they had
not used it before.
10:21 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the merits of the Article and how and when the
funds might be used.
10:30 p.m. Tanya Gisolfi-McCready, Chair of the Human Rights Committee, stated that the
Committee had held a robust discussion and had voted unanimously with 8 in favor of
supporting the Article with 1 member absent.
10:31 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 23.
Motion to Approve Article 23
Adopted by a vote of:
102
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Yes No Abstain
139 0 3
MOTION CARRIES
Harry Forsdick, Pct. 7, was unable to use the tablet system. His vote was taken via voice vote. After
voting the tally was amended to:
Yes No Abstain
140 0 3
MOTION CARRIES
10:33 p.m. The Moderator asked for a Motion to Adjourn.
Ms. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, Motioned to Adjourn the Annual Town Meeting to 7:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, April 26, 2023, such meeting to be held at the Margery Milne Battin Hall, Cary Memorial
Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue. The Moderator declared that Motion was adopted by majority
voice vote and the Meeting adjourned.
April 26, 2023 Adiourned Session of the 2023 Annual Town Meeting
Moderator Deborah Brown called the ninth session of 2023 Annual Town Meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. on
Monday, April 26, 2023, at the Margery Milne Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue, a quorum in excess of 100 members was present(136).
The Moderator explained parliamentary procedure for the evening as well as guidelines for speaking at the
Meeting, and asked Members to log in their attendance. Quorum announcement at 7:36 p.m.
7:36 p.m. The Moderator stated that there would be an observance of three memorials
William P Kennedy, known as `Bill"passed away on December 11, 2022, after a short illness.
Bill was born in South Boston and grew up in Dorchester, in St. William's Parish. After graduating BC
High, Bill studied Civil Engineering at Northeastern University, earning a Master's Degree. He then served
two years of Active Duty in the Army Corp of Engineers while stationed in Germany before settling in
Lexington with his wife Janice. Bill continued his military career with 28 years of service in the Army
Reserves and the Massachusetts National Guard. He also had a successful engineering career with
Polaroid, retiring in 2004.
In addition to service to the country, Bill was committed to service in Lexington. He coached soccer and
t-ball when his children were young, served on the St. Brigid's Parish Council, and sang in the church
choir. Bill volunteered assisting fellow veterans, and served as Town Selectman from 2002—2005, and
possibly most notably, was a founding board member of LexHAB in 1983 and actively worked right up
until the time he passed to expand affordable housing solutions in Lexington. In 2017,the Lion's Club
recognized Bill's countless contributions to the community with the White Tricorne Hat award.
Those who were lucky enough to know and interact Bill, remembered him as a kind and thoughtful person
very generous with his time and energies. His family and friends agreed and said that he was loving and
supportive, as well as a great listener devoted to family and friends. The Moderator extended deepest
condolences to his wife Janice and his children Kathleen, Bill, and Michael as well as his siblings, his
nieces and nephews, and 10 grandchildren.
103
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Arthur Katz, passed away in January at the age of 97. At the time of his birth he was born into one of the
only two Jewish families in Glastonbury, Connecticut, where they lived along the family store. Arthur
worked in the store from a young age, which gave him a life-long ethos of hard work as well as
compassion as they kept the store running and helped neighbors throughout the Great Depression. Arthur
attended boarding school, Mt. Herman, and Trinity College in Hartford and then Yale. While at Yale, he
fell in love with a Smith College student, Gladys, who he married after graduation. Soon after he enlisted
in the Army and served in the Occupation force in Japan, as a member of the military police. After the
Army, Arthur began a long career in retail and manufacturing culminating in leading the marketing
department at Velcro, mostly in medical products and devices, but most brilliantly, he brought Velcro to
on disposable diapers. In addition, Arthur was dedicated to service to Lexington and the Five Fields
neighborhood that he and Gladys settled in from 1952. He served on Town Meeting for more than 20
years, served on various town committees, and worked for multiple Lexington non-profits, a guide on the
Lexington Green and wrote for the Lexington Minuteman newspaper. He received the Minuteman Cane
Award in 2007 given annually to the Lexington citizens over the age of 80 who has made substantial
contributions to the Town. Remarkably, he found time to pursue many other activities with zest and
passion. The Moderator stated that it was no exaggeration to consider him a Renaissance Man, as an avid
tennis player, sailor, skier, rider, singer, and lover of prose and poetry, and later caretaker, when Gladys
became ill with cancer in 1998 and Arthur cared for her until she passed in 2001. Arthur was fortunate to
find love and companionship again with a neighbor, Carol Miller, with whom he shared a number of
active years before his health declined due to Covid early in the pandemic, followed by a cancer diagnosis.
Deepest condolences were offered to Carol, and to Arthur's children, Jamie Katz and his wife, Cynthia
Piltch, Mara-Gai Katz, Jo Hannah and Harry Katz; his 7 grandchildren and 1 great-grandchild, along with
his brother, Richard Katz.
Michael Edward Schroeder, Precinct 9 Member, passed away in his home on February 7, 2023,just two
weeks shy of his 71st birthday. It was well known that he was living with a mental illness, but to his
neighbors in Precinct 9, he was the quiet and courteous neighbor who kept mostly to himself, but would
stop to make a purchase from the neighborhood kids with the lemonade stand, and who didn't have a car,
but walked everywhere. Neighbors offered him rides, but he always politely refused. It was known that
he had served in Town Meeting many years ago but still regularly attended those meetings, sitting in the
balcony. He attended Planning Board meetings, sitting in the back, taking notes, but never speaking. He
was familiar to Town staff, who would help him locate documents that he was interested in. He ran for
Town Meeting again in 2020 obtaining the necessary signatures and then winning the election. Then
Covid arrived, and turned all Town Meeting plans upside down as they moved to a remote format using
Zoom, and web based technology, and Michael was a person without a phone or a computer and with the
challenges of his illness, and at first it seemed that his participation would be another casualty of the
pandemic. But he wanted to participate and he kept showing up at the Town Office Building asking when
they would be meeting in person again. The Town Clerk and her staff, Kelly Axtell, Assistant Town
Manager, and the IT staff, all rallied together to come up with a solution that would allow Michael to
participate. A computer was setup in the first floor Town Office Building hallway so he could follow the
proceedings on Zoom, and a cellphone was placed next to the computer, and a member of the IT staff was
assigned to call Michael during each vote to receive and report his voice vote. The Moderator stated that
up until about 2 �/z hours beforehand, this was where his remembrance would have ended, with some
thoughts on what it meant to be engaged in civic life in the face of great personal challenges and how
104
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Michael was met with great compassion and professionalism from members of the staff who saw that they
could assist him and took pleasure in garnering one of Michael's rare smiles, but she had a postscript.
The Moderator noted that she had been alerted that a next of kin had been identified, and she was able to
reach out and speak with Michael's sister, who let her know that Michael was born February 23, 1952 in
Minneapolis. He moved with his parents and siblings to California, San Mateo and Claremont, attending
Damian Catholic High School, and graduating as valedictorian in 1969. He attended California Technical
Institute and in Pasadena, graduating with a physics degree in 1973 and entered the US Airforce. He
served in the Airforce at Rome Air Development Center in Rome New York as an optical science working
with laser devices. Upon completion of the Air Force, he moved to Lexington to work at MIT Lincoln
Labs as a scientist and optical engineer on high energy and free space communication laser projects.
Michael greatly valued and defended his privacy throughout his life and was a life-long bachelor. The
Moderator noted that Michael's sister Mary Jane had asked her to convey a message to Town Meeting
members that Michael felt comfortable living in Lexington. Five years ago, he had surprised all the
siblings by travelling to attend a family wedding, although they hadn't seen him in years. Michael's
brother, John, had offered that Michael could come live with them in Michigan, but Michael politely
declined and said that he wanted to return to his home in Lexington, the home he had bought in 1977 and
had lived in all this time. Mary Jane asked that if anyone had any memories of his life in Lexington, the
siblings would love to hear them as they know very little. The Moderator said that she would be happy to
hear them and pass them along to her. Condolences were offered to Michael's siblings, Mary Jane, Susan,
and John.
The Moderator asked for an observance of a Moment of Silence to honor the three past Members.
7:45 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 5.
ARTICLE 5 APPROPRIATE FY2024 ENTERPRISE FUNDS BUDGETS
MOTION: a) Ms. Barry moves that the Town appropriate the following sums of money to operate the
Water Division of the Department of Public Works during fiscal year 2024 under the
provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 53F�/z:
Personal Services $892,639
Expenses $577,500
Debt Service $2,393,902
MWRA Assessment $9,342,814
Total $13,206,855
Said sums to be funded from water receipts, except that $500,000 shall be funded from
water enterprise retained earnings.
b) That the Town appropriate the following sums of money to operate the Wastewater
(Sewer) Division of the Department of Public Works during fiscal year 2024 under the
provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 53F�/z:
Personal Services $421,922
Expenses $517,400
Debt Service $1,492,248
MWRA Assessment $9,349,530
Total $11,781,100
Said sums to be funded from wastewater receipts.
105
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
c) That the Town appropriate the following sums of money to operate the Recreation and
Community Programs Department during fiscal year 2024 under the provisions of
M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 53F�/z:
Personal Services $1,682,935
Expenses $1,588,814
Total $3,271,749
Said sums to be funded from recreation receipts, except that$375,000 shall be funded
from recreation retained earnings, and $256,675 shall be raised in the tax levy.
Suzanne Barry, Member of the Select Board, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported the
passage of Article 5.
John Bartenstein, Member of the Appropriation Committee stated that the Appropriation Committee had
voted 6-0 to recommend the Article.
7:48 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 5.
Motion to Approve Article 5
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
142 0 1
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY
7:49 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 6.
ARTICLE 6 ESTABLISH QUALIFICATIONS FOR TAX DEFERRALS
MOTION: a) Ms. Blier moves that the maximum qualifying gross receipts amount for property tax
deferrals under Clause 41A of Section 5 of Chapter 59 of the Massachusetts General Laws
and Chapter 190 of the Acts of 2008 be raised to $96,000, beginning in fiscal year 2024;
b) That beginning in fiscal year 2025 the maximum qualifying gross receipts amount for
property tax deferrals under Clause 41A of Section 5 of Chapter 59 of the Massachusetts
General Laws and Chapter 190 of the Acts of 2008, shall be equal to the qualifying income
limit in effect for the Massachusetts Senior Circuit Breaker Tax Credit, for married couples
filing a joint tax return, for the most recent income tax year.
Vicki Blier, Co-Chair of the Select Board's Tax Deferral and Exemption Study Committee, presented
information on the Article.
7:53 Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, thanked the Committee for their many years of
work and stated that the Select Board unanimously supported the passage of Article 6.
John Bartenstein, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation Committee
unanimously supported passage of the Article.
7:54 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 6.
106
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Motion to Approve Article 6
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
143 0 2
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY
7:55 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 13
ARTICLE 13 APPROPRIATE FOR WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
MOTION: Ms. Hai moves that the Select Board be authorized to make water distribution system
improvements, including those identified under the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Lead
and Copper Rule, including the development of an inventory of existing lead service water lines,
conducting engineering studies, and the purchase and installation of equipment to replace lead service
water lines and connections, and pay all incidental costs related thereto, in such accepted or unaccepted
streets or other land as the Select Board may determine, subject to the assessment of betterments or
otherwise, and to take by eminent domain, purchase or otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other
interest in land necessary therefor; and to appropriate $4,209,580 for such distribution systems
improvements; and that to meet this appropriation, the Treasurer, with the approval of the Select Board, is
authorized to borrow $4,209,580 under M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 8(4) or any other enabling authority;
and further that the Treasurer, with the approval of the Select Board, is authorized to borrow all or a
portion of such amount from the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority and in connection therewith to
enter into a loan agreement and/or security agreement.
David Pavlik, Water/Sewer Superintendent, presented information on the Article.
Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported passage of Article 13.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditure Committee, stated that the Capital Expenditures
Committee was unanimously in support of the Article. He also noted that the update 42 of their report
specifies what was mentioned in the presentation, that it would be completely funded with a no interest
loan from the MWRA.
John Bartenstein, Member of the Appropriation Committee for the Appropriation Committee stated that
the Appropriation Committee had voted 6-0 to recommend the Article.
8:04 p.m. Bob Avallone, Pct. 8, stated that he was glad they were doing it, but had concern with the 5
years it would take and asked if they could be sure drinking water was safe in meantime.
Mr. Pavlik stated testing was required annually for lead and copper on areas that they knew
and they would continue to do so. He also noted that there would be workshops to alert
homeowners.
8:06 p.m. Tom Diaz, Pct. 8, asked what materials were used to replace lead pipes. Mr. Pavlik stated
that they used copper to do so.
8:07 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 13 and noted that it required a 2/3 vote to pass.
Motion to Approve Article 13
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
148 0 1
MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY AND WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
107
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:09 P.M. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 16Ii.
ARTICLE 16 APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS
MOTION: Mr. Lucente moves that the following amounts be appropriated for the following capital
improvements to public facilities and that each amount be raised as follows:
i) Solar Canopy and System - $3,400,000 for design, purchase and installation of solar canopies and
energy storage batteries to be located at the site of the new Police Station at 1575 Massachusetts
Avenue, including the adjacent park and parking lots, and to take by eminent domain, purchase or
otherwise acquire any fee, easement or other interest in land necessary therefor, and all incidental
costs related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation the Treasurer,with the approval of the Select
Board, is authorized to borrow $3,400,000 under M.G.L. Chapter 44, Section 7(1), or any other
enabling authority;
Architect Jeff McElravy, Principal for Tecton Architects, presented information on the Article.
8:16 p.m. Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, stated that the Select Board was unanimously in
support of funding Article 16i.
Charles Lamb, Chair of the Capital Expenditure Committee, stated that the Capital
Expenditures Committee was unanimously in support of the appropriation.
Mr. Levine, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation
Committee had voted 8-0 to recommend the Article
Cynthia Arens, Member of Sustainable Lexington Committee, stated that the canopy would
maximize revenue generated by the system and reduce carbon emissions and had the
potential to deliver positive cash flow to the Town of between 2.5-3 million dollars over first
20 years back to Town. Ms. Arens said that the Sustainable Lexington Committee strongly
and unanimously recommended the Article.
8:21 p.m. Steve Kaufman, Pct. 5, asked about power generation of the system. Michael Cronin,
Director of Public Facilities, stated that it would generate approximately 330,OOOKwh and
briefly described how the batteries would work.
8:24 p.m. Brian P. Kelley, Pct. 6, said that he wished to read a statement from David Williams of 1505
Massachusetts Avenue, which stated that it should not be placed on or behind Fletcher Park.
8:26 p.m. Ted Page, 6 Fletcher Avenue, said that he was a direct abutter to the solar project, and that
while there may have been an issue with lack of notice to the abutters who were closest, the
Town had worked especially in regard to Mr. Cronin, in outreach and possible collaboration.
He stated the he believed that they should approve the funding.
8:28 p.m. Ken Shine, Pct. 2, asked for a point of clarification as to whether the amount was the total
required for completion. Mr. Cronin stated that it was.
8:32 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Article.
8:55 p.m. Philip Hamilton, Pct. 7, called the question. Motion approved by majority voice vote.
8:55 p.m. Mr. Lucente declined summary comments. The Moderator opened voting on Article 16i and
noted it required a 2/3 vote to pass.
8:56 p.m. Katie Cutler, Pct. 4 stated that she needed to cast a verbal vote of"yes". The Moderator
asked for the vote to include this.
Motion to Approve Article 16i
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
144 5 3
MOTION CARRIES WITH MORE THAN NECESSARY 2/3RDS
108
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
8:57 p.m. The Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 17.
ARTICLE 17 APPROPRIATE TO POST EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE LIABILITY FUND
MOTION: Mr. Pato moves that$1,985,486 be appropriated to the town of Lexington Post Employment
Insurance Liability Fund established pursuant to Chapter 317 of the Acts of 2002, and that to
meet this appropriation, $2,761 be appropriated from Water Fund receipts, $3,004 be
appropriated from Wastewater Fund receipts, $240,000 be raised in the tax levy, and
$1,739,721 be appropriated from the General Fund unreserved fund balance.
Suzanne Barry, Select Board Member, noted that she would be recused from the Article.
Mr. Himmel raised a Point of Order regarding something said in the prior Article. The Moderator stated
that a Point of Order could not be used for that.
Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported passage of the
article by a vote of 4 to 0 with Ms. Barry recusing herself as her husband was an employee of the Town.
Mr. Levine, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation Committee had voted
unanimously to recommend the Article.
9:03 p.m. Tom Diaz, Pct. 8, said that he saw that in Appendix F of the Appropriation Committee Report
that the fund was laid out in detail, and stated that the "fund was always available as
reserve....". Mr. Diaz asked whether funding health care insurance premiums was an
exclusive example or whether they would be permitted in some future time to withdraw funds
from the special reserve for other purposes. Christina Marshall, Town Counsel, stated that as
it said "for example" it would not be for the exclusive purpose, but any other purpose would
likely need to be similar in nature to the example.
9:06 p.m. Members continued to discuss and debate the Article including current policies, actuary
information, and bond ratings.
9:19 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, called the question. Motion approved by majority voice vote.
9:19 p.m. As Mr. Pato declined summary comments, the Moderator opened voting on Article 17.
Motion to Approve Article 17
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
144 1 5
MOTION CARRIES
9:21 p.m. the Moderator opened the Meeting under Article 21.
ARTICLE 21 AMEND FY2023 OPERATING, ENTERPRISE AND CPA BUDGETS
MOTION:
a) Mr. Lucente moves that the following adjustments be made to the following line items for the
FY2023 budget as approved under Article 4 of the 2022 Annual Town Meeting:
Line Item Program From To
2210 Property & Liability Insurance $ 895,000 $ 920,085
4100 Law Enforcement Personal Services $ 7,169,307 $ 7,299,307
109
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
and further, that to meet this appropriation $155,085 be appropriated from the General Fund
unreserved fund balance.
b) That the following adjustments be made to the estimated receipts reserved for FY2023 as
recommended by the Community Preservation Committee, and approved under Article 10
of the 2022 Annual Town Meeting:
Estimated Recei is Reserved: From To
For the acquisition, creation and preservation of open space $ 813,600 $ 863,600
For the acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation and
restoration of historic resources $ 813,600 $ 863,600
For the acquisition, creation, preservation and support of
community housin $ 813,600 $ 863,600
Doug Lucente, Select Board Vice-Chair, stated that the Select Board unanimously supported passage of
Article 21 and as a member of the Community Preservation Committee was unavailable, noted that the
Community Preservation Committee had recommended reserving $50K to the each of the primary
"buckets"with the remaining reverting to undesignated funding balance.
Charles Lamb, Chair for the Capital Expenditures Committee, stated that Capital Expenditures Committee
commented on part b only as it relates to the fund, and they unanimously recommended approval of that
portion.
Alan Levine, Member of the Appropriation Committee, stated that the Appropriation Committee
unanimously recommended approval of the Article.
9:25 p.m. The Moderator opened voting on Article 21.
Motion to Approve Article 21
Adopted by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
147 0 2
MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY
9:27 P.M. The Moderator said that she would now explain the aspects of Reconsideration and that it
was a parliamentary procedure that allowed the Meeting to revisit something if there was
some new information that had come up that was so significant that it could cause a change
in the vote, and it would have to be new information that wasn't available beforehand. She
noted that the Meeting would hear a Motion of Reconsideration of Article 9 which would
include a presentation on what the new information was, and they would decide if it was
significant new information that could cause someone to vote differently. She further noted
that if that Motion prevailed, then the original Motion for Article would be before the
Meeting to completely re-open and start over.
9:29 p.m. A Member raised a Point of Order and stated that it was his understanding that reading the
bylaw, that it was creature of bylaw statue not parliamentary procedure. The Moderator
stated that the bylaws were not a parliamentary manual and so there were parliamentary
rules and there were also some things for process, such as only allowing 30 minutes for
debate of Reconsideration were described in the bylaw, and some processes to allow the
Select Board or Finance Committees to reopen the budget, so they did not just use bylaws
alone. The Member stated that the bylaw that applied was a comprehensive work of the
Select Board that governed the topic of Reconsideration, and was broken into 3 areas and
stated the 3 types of categories that provided a foundation of what could be moved for
110
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
Reconsideration, how the debate would be carried out and for how long, and what the vote
would be. The Member stated that there was nothing in the bylaw about"new material"
and that had the Select Board wanted to include that as a limitation, they certainly could
have but had not done so. The Member stated that as a matter of statutory construction, he
felt it was illegal and wrongful limitation. The Moderator respectfully disagreed. She
asked if the Member would like Counsel to weigh in. Christina Marshall, Town Counsel,
stated that the Member was correct in that there was no explicit provision in the Lexington
bylaw that provided that a motion to Reconsideration needed to be based on new
information, but that it was contained in traditional parliamentary procedure and had been a
long standing practice of Lexington Town Meeting and it was Counsel's opinion that it was
appropriate for the Moderator to direct the reconsideration debate in the manner in which
she had done. She also stated that the Moderator had a great deal of discretion in Town
Meeting matters, and this was one of those and gave some references of statutory
regulations from Massachusetts General Law.
9:34 p.m. Dawn McKenna, Pct. 9,Motioned to Reopen Article 9, in order to have the Article
Reconsidered.
9:35 p.m. The Moderator noted that the 30 minutes for debate would begin and that there would be 3
minutes allowed for each speaker.
Ms. McKenna stated that they often lost sight of the best means to provide services to
residents, and while they could debate cost and ultimately the item in the budget it really
was small, but meant a lot. She noted that there were a lot of people who didn't have
information and some didn't have new information, such as a copy of the court decision, or
they didn't have background with what had happened in the past nor that there was a bylaw
that required it, that there had been costly litigation around it and that a judge had made it
very clear that the Town could not impose fines for trash. Ms. McKenna noted that if they
reopened the Article, she would address a comment from Town Counsel regarding the
definitions of refuse and rubbish and whether or not that that would be considered
differently at this time. She stated that these were the main issues in terms of new
information. Ms. McKenna said that people were very confused about what it would mean
to reopen it, but noted that if Reconsideration should prevail, she intended to move to
Amend the Article in order to delete section "a", which was the authorization revolving
fund for fees, and also part "c"that talked about those lines. Then Appropriations
Committee would have the authority to open Article 4 for balancing the budget. She noted
that the Town had $1 Million in free cash available that was specifically for FY24 for any
possible issues that could come up. She also said that reopening the Article would allow a
vote with more knowledge and spoke about the lack of process with residents and the only
notice that residents had were through the warrant, and many may not have understood it,
how to read, it and how to be engaged.
Joseph Pato, Select Board Member, stated that the Select Board did not take position because
Town Meeting should make the decision.
9:40 p.m. Frank Smith, Pct. 3, asked whether the Select Board was constrained to match fees to meet
expected costs. Mr. Pato stated that if Reconsideration failed, then the existing vote creating
the fund would be sustained. He also noted that the Select Board would have to look at how
to set fees and was looking at having a public hearing in May and would be considering when
and how to set fees to cover those costs. He noted that the anticipated deliberation of the
Select Board would be in June for FY24.
9:42 p.m. David Kanter, Pct. 7, stated that information provided by Town Counsel, the Town Manager,
and others speaking on behalf of the Article indicated what they needed to hear at the time
and what he heard was not a substantial change.
9:42 p.m. Town Meeting Members continued to discuss and debate the possibility of Reconsidering the
Article.
10:06 p.m. Deborah Strod, moves to extend debate by 15 minutes. Motion fails by majority voice vote.
The Moderator noted that debate was now closed.
10:07 p.m. Ms. McKenna offered summary comments on the Motion.
111
March 20, 2023 Annual Town Meeting, continued
10:09 p.m. The Moderator opened the portal for voting on Reconsideration.
10:09 p.m. Mark Andersen, Pct. 9, raised a Point of Order and asked that the Moderator clarify what a
yes vote meant. Moderator said that a yes vote would reopen the Article, and a no vote
meant that a final action had already been taken.
Following remote electronic vote tallying, the Moderator declared that:
Motion to Reconsider Article 9
10:09 p.m. by a vote of:
Yes No Abstain
54 78 13
MOTION FAILS
10:11 P.M. Jill Hai, Select Board Chair, moved to dissolve Annual Town Meeting 2023.
Motion Adopted by majority voice vote.
A true copy.
Att st:
y de Alderete, Town Clerk
112