HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-12-08-TAC-min
Lexington Transportation Advisory Committee
December 8, 2023
Place: Zoom teleconference. The Zoom teleconferencing session was open to the public.
The meeting was held remotely pursuant to provisions in a supplemental bill signed on March
29th, 2023 by Governor Healy extending temporary provisions pertaining to the Open Meeting
Law to March 31, 2025. The temporary provisions were first implemented by Executive Order in
March 2020 and subsequently enacted by Section 20 of Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, An Act
Relative to Amending Certain COVID-19 Measures Adopted During the State of Emergency
(“Section 20”) (as amended several times to extend the expiration of the temporary provisions).
Members Present: Vinita Verma, Pamela Lyons, Kunal Botla, Mark Andersen, Jonathan
Schwarz
Members Absent: Sally Castleman, Nishanth Veeragandham
Liaisons and Town Staff Absent: Susan Barrett, Town Transportation Manager; Melanie
Thompson, Planning Board; Sudhir Jain, Council on Aging; Jill Hai, Selectboard.
Others Present: Andrew Mason, Sebastian Fairbairn, Marvin Jones
Meeting called to order 7:00pm
Discussion of Warrant Articles
Kunal presented four draft articles for possible presentation to town meeting.
Discussion of proposed warrant article I (text below).
Mark - asked about inclusion of safety and the commuter rail in the preamble.
Kunal explained that safety could be included in the final resolution
Pamela - asked that commuter rail be removed from preamble, and noting the Express Bus
(351) failed to stop in Lexington Center.
Kunal agreed to remove commuter rail and look further.
Marvin Jones (guest) made false and offensive statements about minorities, immigrants and the
governor. These statements were irrelevant to the business of the committee, and it was
unclear that this guest has any relation to Lexington or the matter at hand.
Mark moved, Kunal seconded inclusion in warrant of this article:
To see if the Town will vote to endorse a resolution calling for improvements
to service provided to the Town of Lexington by the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority; or take any action related thereto.
4 Yes, 1 Abstain. Passed.
The second proposed warrant article was discussed.
It reads:
To see if the Town will vote to endorse a resolution calling for School and
Town transportation to integrate operations; appropriate a sum of money for
the cost of development of a cohesive transportation plan; or take any action
related thereto.
Based on Joe Pato’s feedback the committee discussed the possibility of a warrant article v.
going directly to the school committee.
Pam expressed sentiment that TAC work with the school committee and Selectboard directly
without the need to go to town meeting.
Kunal moved that the second article have no action.
Unanimously passed. No action taken.
The third proposed warrant article was discussed.
It reads:
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money for the cost of
MBTA Student M7 Passes to be made available to all K-12 aged students in
the Town of Lexington.
Mark shared that it would be $30/month per student to offer a M7 pass and this does not seem
as worthwhile an investment as improving investment within Lexington transportation. Mark
would oppose spending money on this purpose since the subway is not used typically for
Lexington public school students.
Sebastian (guest) asked if the school would purchase a finite number of passes.
Kunal clarified that if the pass were offered it would probably have to be offered to all students,
as providing only some passes would require clear rules differentiating who would be permitted
to have such a pass.
A motion was offered by Kunal to take no action.
Motion passed unanimously. No action will be taken.
The fourth proposed warrant article was discussed.
It reads:
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money for the cost of
technology improvements to Lexpress.
Kunal introduced the article and shared Joe Pato’s feedback that this is late in the cycle for
budget items but could come as an improvement article.
Mark asked for clarification whether this is a one-time expense or recurring expense. It was
judged partly one time and partly recurring by Kunal.
Mark asked for clarification whether the suggested process is to go to the town manager directly
rather than through town meeting. This was affirmed by Kunal.
Mark expressed preference no action for the town warrant article, and then to bring it back to
TAC at the next meeting do discuss with Susan and understand the cost (how much first year,
how much subsequent years). Mark is concerned that this expense be under $10K/year.
Mark moved that this article receive no action for town warrant, and that the next TAC meeting
further discuss the proposed technology upgrade.
Motion passed unanimously. No action for town meeting to be taken. This topic should be
discussed at the next meeting.
The TAC discussed how to get signatures for the warrant article. The goal is to get more than
10 signatures before Monday and turn it in. Kunal has the paperwork.
Mark shared that prior warrant articles either have articles inserted by the Selectboard at the
request of other committees, or proposed by individual voters. At this date, the article would be
too late for the Selectboard packet for the Monday meeting, although that meeting indicates that
warrant articles will be discussed.
Mark made motion that Kunal draft a letter to the Selectboard and Pam and Vinita review it.
Passed unanimously.
The letter will describe the one article which is recommended for inclusion in the town warrant
(the first proposed article).