HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-02-BOS-min
71-51
Selectmen’s Meeting
February 6, 2017
A meeting of the Lexington Board of Selectmen was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday,
February 6, 2017 in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room of the Town Office Building. Ms.Barry,
Chair; Mr. Cohen; Mr. Pato; and Ms. Ciccolo were present as well as Mr. Valente, Town
Manager and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary.
Town Manager Report
Mr. Valente reported the Town will sell $47M in bonds and notes, largely related to the middle
school and elementary school projects but also including some Town projects such as 173
Bedford Street. Rating agency Moody’s re-affirmed Lexington’s AAA designation this week, as
did Standard and Poor’s which, at the Town’s request, evaluated Lexington for the first time in
th
12+ years. At the February 13
Selectmen’s meeting, Mr. Valente will announce the results of
the bond issue and ask the Board to make the award.
Ms. Barry thanked and congratulated Mr. Valente and the Town’s finance staff for keeping
Lexington in a strong position.
Grant of Location Petition: Eversource, Maguire Rd.
Ms. Barry opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 p.m.
Maureen Carol, Eversource, spoke on behalf of the company’s petition for the purpose of
obtaining a Grant of Location to install 384+ feet of conduit in Maguire Rd. The reason for this
work is to connect the Town’s proposed solar farm.
The property manager for 4 Maguire Rd. asked for details of the construction timeline and if any
power outages are anticipated. Ms. Carol said once the petition is approved, the Town will
dictate work hours and other stipulations. There should not be any loss of power. Pole #8, which
Eversource will be working on, is in the public way, not on the Maguire Rd property. The
property manager will contact Ms. Carol with the 4 Maguire Rd pole number to verify there will
be no loss of service.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the petition of
Eversource, formerly NSTAR Electric, to construct a line of conduits and manholes with the
necessary wires and cables therein to be located in Maguire Rd., southerly from pole 399/8
thence turning and running southeasterly approximately 471 feet northwest of Hartwell Ave. a
distance of 384+ feet of conduit.
Ms. Barry closed the Public Hearing at 7:07 p.m.
71-52
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Joint Meeting with School Committee—Receive Report of the Subcommittee on Asian
Communities
Mr. Alessandrini, School Committee Chair, called his committee to order at 7:08 and introduced
members: Judy Crocker, Eileen Jay, and Jesse Steigerwald and Dr. Mary Czajkowski,
Superintendent.
Ms. Barry welcomed Susie Lee-Snell, Vision 20/20 Subcommittee on Asian Communities, who
presented findings and recommendations of the study. The goals of the subcommittee were to
examine the role of Town and School officials in responding to the Town’s changing
demographic profile and, building on progress made, to welcome and integrate Asian families
into the community. The subcommittee was formed to identify ways to foster a
community/Town government that reflects a diverse population and to encourage social
integration that makes interactions more seamless.
Ms. Snell noted that she was standing in as presenter due to member Dan Krupka’s skiing
accident over the weekend. Ms. Barry expressed the Board’s wishes for Mr. Krupka’s speedy
recovery.
Ms. Snell said the subcommittee members included representatives from the Chinese-American
Association of Lexington (CAAL), Faith Lin and Bin Zhou; the Indian Americans of Lexington
(IAL), Shoba Reginald and Manasi Singhal; the Korean Organization of Lexington (KOL), Susie
Lee-Snell and Jordan Shin; the PTA/PTO, Becky Barrentine and Tanya Gisolfi; the Vision 20/20
Committee, Margaret Coppe and Dan Krupka; and three Members-at-Large, Nancy Corcoran-
Ronchetti, Pat Costello, and Margaret Heitz.
The full report is available electronically on the Town website or in hard copy form at the
Selectmen’s Office.
Ms. Snell noted that an estimated 25% of Lexington’s residents and 37% of Lexington Public
School students are of Asian ancestry. An underlying question of the subcommittee’s work asked
if Lexington’s civic leaders had a responsibility to plan strategically for the growth of
Lexington’s Asian population and if should they deal with consequences as they occur.
Communities that bore similarities to Lexington were identified in New Jersey (19) and
California (16). That list was narrowed, ultimately, to 12 communities that were studied in
greater depth. Online surveys were conducted with groups in those towns/cities and results were
tabulated in a collaborative effort with Sociology professor Marian Cohen and quantitative
research students from Framingham State. Follow-up dialogues took place with mayors,
PTO/PTA leaders, Town Managers, and community leaders of Asian ancestry in these
communities. The Superintendent of Schools and School Board Chair from Walnut Valley, CA
came to Lexington to share strategies implemented by their district.
71-53
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Report recommendations included:
Establish a Diversity Think Tank with a primary task of funding and selecting diversity
training programs for Schools and Town (Superintendent and Town Manager);
Establish a higher priority for getting personally acquainted with leaders of Lexington’s
Asian community organizations (Town Manager, Board of Selectmen, Superintendent,
School Committee);
Leaders of Chinese American Association, the Indian Americans, and the Korean
Organization should likewise make it a priority to become personal acquainted with the
Town Manager, Selectmen, Superintendent and School Committee. They should also
strengthen programs to integrate newcomers into the community and consider sponsoring
leadership training for potential leaders;
Encourage hiring more Town employees of Asian heritage, explore broadening
Recreation Department programming and develop a pilot Block Party program (Town
Manager);
Continue to host forums fostering participation in school volunteer programs Also,
request a seat on the Diversity Think Tank (PTO/PTA Presidents’ Council);
Increase efforts to hire more principals who reflect the demographics of the student body
and encourage principals to hire more diverse staff. Adopt a practice of annual meetings
with guidance counselors, students, and parents. Consider adopting Walnut Valley
practices such as a wellness center to assist with stress and integration challenges and the
formation of a Student Advisory Council (Superintendent);
Continue to monitor progress towards improved integration of Asian residents and
convene a session in May to assess progress (Vision 20/20);
The report concluded with the statement that all recommendations were created with the Asian
populations in mind but could equally apply to all backgrounds.
Mr. Pato said Lexington’s strength is derived from how the community is brought together. He
thanked the subcommittee for its work and said the community should move forward with
alacrity to implement the recommendations.
Ms. Barry asked about outreach to businesses so that engagement between those businesses and
Asian patrons can be successful and desired goods can be stocked. Ms. Barry also asked if
language barriers present obstacles that translation services could overcome.
Ms. Snell said she would discuss these points with the group. The subcommittee had not
considered either the retail perspective or translation services, although language often holds
residents back.
Subcommittee member Tanya Gisolfi said translation support was strong within the schools. Ms.
Barry encouraged the subcommittee to reach out to the Chamber of Commerce and the Retailers
Association.
71-54
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Mr. Cohen noted that the Library has done a stellar job of welcoming Lexington’s Asian
communities. During recent fundraising efforts, the Chinese community came forward in great
numbers and was very generous.
Ms. Ciccolo echoed Mr. Pato’s sentiments about embracing multi-culturalism and tackling the
issues. She asked the subcommittee for advice about how to envision the proposed Diversity
Think Tank and what the charge for such a group might be.
Ms. Ciccolo said the Citizens Academy has been successful in bringing new people into Town
government and its processes. There has been good participation from the Asian communities.
She asked the Town to gather feedback from graduates to gauge how well the program has
served them.
Ms. Ciccolo added that the Town is potentially going to embark on an update to the
Comprehensive Plan, which presents an opportunity to look holistically at the community,
including some of the issues the subcommittee has raised. Ms. Ciccolo said it is critical to the
success of the Plan to have citizens from all populations participate.
Mr. Alessandrini said the School Committee would discuss the subcommittee’s findings and
recommendations when it reconvenes after leaving the Selectmen’s meeting.
Ms. Crocker suggested that public safety staff have translated materials with them at all times in
order to be able to communicate with non-English speaking residents.
School Committee members expressed gratitude to the subcommittee members and supported
the recommendations. They added their appreciation that the Town Manager and Board of
Selectmen have consistently supported Vision 20/20 efforts over the years.
Elaine Ashton, 32 Cliffe Avenue, offered the advice and facilitation assistance of the East
Lexington Community Association to help develop the block party concept. She does not think
responsibility should be placed solely on elected officials when community groups can assist.
Gretchen Reisig, 9 Victory Garden Way, asked to whom comments or suggestions should be
directed. Ms. Snell said they could be forwarded to her or to Dan Krupka who heads the 20/20
Vision Committee. The email address is: 2020VisionCMTE@ Lexingtonma.gov
The Chairs of CAAL, IAL, and the Human Rights Committee (HRC) offered the support of their
organizations to implement the recommendations of the subcommittee.
Mr. Pato said the think the tank was a topic of discussion at the most recent HRC meeting.
Formation of the group, and the subsequent discourse, should take place before goals are set.
Ms. Jay of the School Committee asked who would take the lead on the next steps. Ms. Barry
said the Town Manager and the Superintendent will determine how to proceed.
71-55
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to receive the report of
the Subcommittee on Asian Communities: Lessons on Integration of Residents of Asian
Ancestry Offered by California and New Jersey Communities with Large Asian Populations—
December 16, 2016.
Update—Purchase of Pelham Property
Ms. Ciccolo recused herself from the discussion due to a conflict of interest.
Mr. Valente said, in the last month, the negotiating parties have at last reached agreement on a
purchase price. The details are not quite ready for disclosure but due diligence steps can now be
discussed that will take place after purchase and sale documents are finalized. Due diligence will
encompass two main areas: an engineering survey and a phase one environmental study. For
these purposes, Mr. Valente asked the Board of Selectmen to authorize a request for a Reserve
Fund transfer of $17,115, which includes a $3,000 contingency.
Under Mass General Law 30B (procurement), the Board must certify that Pelham is a unique
property that is being purchased because of this quality.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 3-0 to authorize the
Chairman to sign a request to the Appropriation Committee for a Reserve Fund transfer of
$17,115 for professional services related to the Town’s due diligence for the purchase of 20
Pelham Road.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 3-0 that it has determined
that advertising under General Laws Chapter 30B for the Town’s acquisition of the following
parcel of real property will not benefit the governmental body’s interest due to the unique
qualities of the property:
Land and the improvements commonly known as 20 Pelham Rd in Lexington and identified
on Lexington’s Assessor’s Map 31 as Lot 65A, consisting of approximately 8.4 acres (the
“Property”)
Specifically, the Property contains a sufficient amount of land in a highly advantageous central
location for which the Town can use the Property for municipal and/or school purposes. Further,
the property abuts existing Town owned land, including the Town community center, and would
serve as an important link for the Town’s municipal and educational purposes.
Mr. Alessandrini thanked the Selectmen and the Town for their efforts and moved the School
Committee into recess, after which it will reconvene at 8:15 p.m. in Cary Hall.
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 10—Community Preservation Committee
Operating Budget and Community Preservation Projects
71-56
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Marilyn Fennollosa, Chair of the Community Preservation Committee presented the details of
Article 10 and gave an overview of the CPC’s financial position.
The available balance is $3.4M which is the total of the amounts in the designated reserves for
the categories of Open Space, Historic Preservation, Affordable Housing plus an undesignated
fund balance. The estimated surcharge of $4,498,110 for FY18 comes from taxes plus the State
match, projected for the coming year as $923,370, or 25% of the taxpayer contribution. Ms.
Fennollosa noted the State match has been steadily declining but help could be on the way. The
170 communities now participating in the CPA are applying pressure and there is legislation
pending to improve the match to a guaranteed 50% annually. Lexington’s representatives have
all co-sponsored the bill.
This year, there are 16 projects that will come before Town Meeting. All have been vetted and
approved by Town Counsel.
a) Interpretive Signage Project - $38,400
b) Parker’s Revenge Interpretive and Public Education Signage & Displays -$41,350
c) Greeley Village Rear Door and Porch Supplemental Request - $56,712
d) Affordable Units Preservation–Pine Grove Village/Judges Road - TBD
e) Willard’s Woods and Wright Farm Meadow Preservation- $40,480
f) Cotton Farm Conservation Area Improvements - $301,300
g) Wright Farm Supplemental Funds - $37,900
h) Stone Building Feasibility Study - $25,000
i) Munroe School Window Restoration - $620,000
j) Center Streetscape Improvements - TBD
k) Community Center Sidewalk - $220,000
l) Park Improvements - Athletic Fields - $125,000
m) Town Pool Renovation - $1,620,000
n) Park and Playground Improvements - $60,000
o) CPA Debt Service–$2,404,259
p) Administrative Budget - $150,000
If all of these projects are approved, the CPC will end Annual Town Meeting 2017 with a
remaining balance of $3M. Ms. Fennollosa noted, however, that the Center Streetscape and
Judges Road do not have price tags at this time. Those will affect the final balance.
David Kanter, Capital Expenditures Committee, asked if the subsection under Article 16 for the
Munroe School restoration is the same as subsection I and, if so, would Article 16 be indefinitely
postponed. The Selectmen agreed that it would be.
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 32—Establish Cannabis Committee (Citizen
Article)
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 39—Amend General Bylaws—Right to Farm
(Citizen Article)
71-57
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 46—Amend Zoning Bylaw—Chapter 135 Medical
Marijuana (Citizen Article)
Ms. Barry noted that the citizen bringing forward these three articles is under the weather and
unable to make presentations this evening. These items will be rescheduled for a future date.
Continue Review—FY18 Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommended Budget and Financing
Plan
Mr. Valente asked for the Selectmen’s feedback on Program Improvement Requests (PIRs) so
they can be included in next week’s budget approval vote. He also asked for responses to the
Capital program.
There are also some updates to the budget that Mr. Valente recommends:
The Minuteman Regional High School Assessment has increased. The School Committee
has already voted to approve the revision;
Under benefits, since the School Committee has voted to its recommended budget,
benefit amounts for new hires can now be transferred to Shared Expenses;
In the Public Works Operating Budget, it is recommended the Town extend the current
refuse and recycling contract for another year. JRM has provided a price so the
placeholder can be replaced by the actual amount, now that it is known;
Under Capital, the white book was carrying an amount of money for Bridge School roof
replacement. Since this project is being postponed until it is eligible for MSBA
reimbursement, the project can be put on the deferral list for FY18;
Under Capital, the LHS Security Upgrade project will be amended to include only the
camera system and eliminate the door hardware part of the request, pending on input
from the new Principal on how to proceed;
Under Capital, the Community Center Parking Lot had been intended for bonding; the
Town Manager now recommends this be paid for with Free Cash/Unreserved Fund
Balance instead.
Ms. Barry asked if the $5,000 in Munroe Cemetery project has changed or been eliminated. Mr.
Valente said that originally the funds were slated to come out of the Munroe Cemetery Trust
Fund but those funds have already been committed to another project. It is up to the Board
whether to continue with the Munroe project under these circumstances or defer it.
Mr. Pato asked why the Pavement Markings project is not fully funded this year after deferral
last year. Mr. Valente replied that Engineering determined the original amount to be too high.
The scale of work is the same. Ms. Ciccolo asked if the budgeted amount would allow additional
bike lanes to be created. Mr. Valente said FY18 will be the first of three years that the Town will
expand the number of bike lanes, thereafter focusing on maintenance only.
71-58
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Ms. Ciccolo asked if the PIR for funds for Arts grants is supplemental. Mr. Valente said the State
contributes a modest amount, only, so the Town proposes to supplement.
Ms. Ciccolo asked if the bike share funds would be a one-time or an annual item. Mr. Valente
said it would be an annual item and the funds would come from the remaining $90,000 in the
Center Stabilization Fund. The White Book recommendation is that the bike share program go
forward only if funds from that account are used. Ms. Ciccolo repeated a previous request that
Ms. Tintocalis pursue the same bike share program, Hubway, used by Boston and Cambridge,
even though it is more expensive because it will be more user-friendly for commuters and
visitors.
Feedback regarding the 8 PIRs not recommended for inclusion by the Town Manager:
Ms. Ciccolo asked of any of the Comprehensive Plan (CP) funds might be shared so that at least
part of the Economic Development Department’s request for additional funding might be
satisfied. Mr. Valente said he didn’t believe this would be possible. Ms. Ciccolo said perhaps the
scope could be adapted so that CP funding would serve a dual purpose.
Mr. Cohen asked where Comprehensive Plan funds would come from. Mr. Valente said from the
tax levy, not from borrowing.
Mr. Pato asked if not hiring a Compost Turner heavy machinery operator would negatively affect
the Town’s ability to resume accepting yard waste from Arlington. Mr. Valente said he believes
the Town will eventually need to hire for this position but until the solar farm is in place and the
full space impact is accessed, it is premature to fund the job. Once the job is posted, the salary
will be funded by the facility’s Revolving Fund, not from the tax levy. If during the year the
Town determines it’s appropriate to move forward to hire an operator, it can be done by a vote of
the Board of Selectmen.
The Selectmen reached consensus that Mr. Valente’s PIR recommendations met with their
approval.
Capital projects in abeyance:
Based on the Governor’s proposal for State Aid to municipalities, it appears as though Lexington
will receive more than originally expected, although the State budget is still a work in progress.
If State Aid does come in higher, this could provide the necessary cushion for Capital that would
allow the Town to move ahead without singling out projects for abeyance.
Mr. Pato said he is comfortable with using the higher State Aid as a buffer. If the Town has to
fall back to postponing projects, however, he does not want to forego sidewalks. Mr. Valente
said the Board’s sentiments on sidewalks was noted at the last meeting. In lieu of that, Public
Works has recommended delaying the Grant Street bikeway bridge for a year, if necessary.
Together with an equipment purchase deferral, the abeyance total was reached.
71-59
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
The Board conveyed its agreement with the State Aid approach and abeyance fallback plan list.
Capital Budget:
Mr. Valente said Engineering estimates $1.5M for the Hill Street sidewalk project in FY19.
Funding for FY18 would commit $150,000 for engineering design work. The large price tag has
given staff pause as to whether so much of the yearly allowed within-levy debt should be
committed to this one project. Ms. Barry said she is sympathetic with the concern but sees the
Hill Street sidewalk as an important piece of connectivity on a busy street.
Mr. Pato agreed with the need for the sidewalk and added that the Town has been discussing this
for years with residents. Now that a satisfactory conclusion has been reached about sidewalk
location, he does not want to lose momentum. He asked if the cost has been included in the
within-levy debt modeling. Mr. Valente said this specific project has not been included, only the
full $6M limit of cumulative in-levy debt. The Hill St. project would entail about 25% of one
year’s limit.
David Kanter, Capital Expenditures Committee, asked if it should be clarified that construction
costs are not included for projects that only bear design funding requests for the coming fiscal
year. Mr. Valente said he will discuss with Ms. Kosnoff if article presentations should be
adjusted to make clear future funding implications of approving design requests.
Selectmen Committee Appointment—Human Rights Committee
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to appoint Mary
Anton-Oldenburg to the Human Rights Committee for a term to expire March 31, 2018.
Liquor License—Change of Corporate Name—Yangtze River
The Yangtze River Restaurant has submitted all the paperwork needed to request a change of
corporate name from Ong, Ong, Inc to Yangtze River Restaurant, Inc. The change was registered
with the Secretary of State’s office in 1989 but not registered with the ABCC at that time.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the
application for a change of corporate name and issue an amended 2017 All Alcohol Restaurant
Liquor License to Yangtze River Restaurant, Inc. d/b/a Yangtze River Restaurant, 21-25 Depot
Square.
CONSENT AGENDA
Approve Minutes & Executive Session Minutes—April 2016
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the minutes of
April 4, 2016, April 5, 2016, April 6, 2016, April 11, 2016, April 13, 2016, April 14, 2016, April
25, 2016 (2 sessions), and April 27, 2016
71-60
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 6, 2017
Further, on motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve but
not release the Executive Session minutes of April 4, 2016, April 5, 2016, April 11, 2016, April
13, 2016, April 25, 2016 (2 sessions) and April 27, 2016.
Approve One Day Liquor License—EMACT—Lexington Players
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the
EMACT—Lexington Players’ request for a one-day liquor license to sell beer and wine in the
lobby of Cary Hall on August 26, 2017 from 6:00 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. for the purpose of a
recognition event.
Approve One Day Liquor License
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the request
from St. Brigid Parish, 2001 Mass Ave for a one-day liquor license to sell beer and wine and
other alcohol in Keilty Hall on Saturday, March 18, 2017 from 6:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m. for the
purpose of a St. Patrick’s Day Scholarship Fundraiser.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Maria Hastings PTA
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to approve the Maria
Hastings PTA’s request for a one-day liquor license to sell beer and wine in Cary Hall on
Saturday, March 17, 2017 from 7:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. for the purpose of a Hastings Adult
Social and Fundraiser.
EXECUTIVE SESSION—Update—Belmont Country Club Parcel
On motion duly made and by roll call at 8:50 p.m. the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to enter into
Executive Session under Exemption 6 to consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real
property, Belmont Country Club land, and to reconvene in Open Session only to adjourn.
Further, it was declared that an open meeting might have a detrimental effect on the negotiating
position of the Town.
Adjourn
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to adjourn at
approximately 9:30 p.m.
A true record; Attest:
Kim Siebert
Recording Secretary
71-61
Selectmen’s Meeting
February 13, 2017
A meeting of the Lexington Board of Selectmen was called to back to order at 7:15 p.m. on
Monday, February 13, 2017 in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room of the Town Office Building
following a Joint Session of the Planning Board and the Board of Selectmen that began at 6:02
p.m. in Estabrook Hall in the Cary Memorial Building. Chairman Barry, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Cohen,
Mr. Pato and Ms. Ciccolo were present as well as Mr. Valente, Town Manager and Ms. Siebert,
Recording Secretary.
Selectmen Concerns and Liaison Reports
Mr. Kelley expressed his concern about snow bank height in the town center commercial district.
He suggested the Town should do a one-time removal to ensure traveler’s safety to get in and out
of cars along Massachusetts Avenue.
Ms. Barry provided an update on Vision 20/20’s request to form a Diversity Think Tank group.
Ms. Barry noted the School Committee identified two members who will serve. The Think Tank
will also include Mr. Valente, Town Manager, and Superintendent Dr. Czajkowski. Ms. Barry
stated that two Selectmen are requested to participate. Ms. Barry, Mr. Pato, and Ms. Ciccolo all
expressed interest in representing the Selectmen.
Ms. Barry commended the Department of Public Works (DPW) for the successful undertaking of
clearing the volume of snow from the recent storms.
Town Manager Report
Mr. Valente reported that the DPW also had to deal with water main breaks on East Street and
Harding Road in addition to snow removal during the recent storms.
Mr. Valente also reported that the DPW will address removal of the enormous snow piles from
the Town parking lots. This will be an overnight operation.
Mr. Valente noted removing snow piles from the Center would also be an overnight operation
and also an expensive one. Mr. Valente said the Town would only go in that direction if the
Board feels there hasn’t been sufficient melting. Another option would be to run snowblowers
along the curb edge, achieving curb-to-curb clearance. This would take one night only and
require less traffic diversion and DPW manpower.
Ms. Barry said the Town would revisit the question after the parking lot piles have been cleared
to reassess and deploy snow blowers if necessary.
Award Bond and Note Sale
Ms. Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager for Finance, said the Town put $47M in long term bonds
out for sale last week plus an additional $13M worth of bond anticipation notes. The bonds were
for a variety of projects, mainly middle school additions/remodeling but also waste water and
sewer projects and DPW equipment. Some of the bonds—particularly the School bonds—have a
71-62
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
30-year term. Ms. Kosnoff presented the bond documents and asked the Selectmen to sign the
paperwork associated with the sale and sign the necessary paperwork.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the bond and
notes sale as presented.
FY17 Second Quarter Financial Results
Ms. Kosnoff was joined by Ms. Hewitt, Budget Officer, to present a review of revenue
collections and expenditure through the second quarter of FY17 (through 12/31/2016).
Ms. Hewitt said the analysis is presented in two parts: General Fund and Enterprise Fund. Ms.
Hewitt stated that expenditures and revenues, for the most part, were at or above the 50% level at
the halfway mark through the fiscal year. The following line items were noted:
Motor vehicle excise is only at 15% because bills will not be issued until next week;
An uptick in penalties and interest has caused the Treasurer to look more closely at
delinquent tax bills. Targeted collection efforts have yielded good results;
License and permit revenue from residential and commercial construction activity
continues to be healthy and above projections;
Ms. Hewitt said none of the areas on the Expenditures side have consumed more than 50% of
what was budgeted.
Ms. Hewitt indicated the higher water enterprise revenue projection is due to higher-than-
projected usage during the dry summer. She pointed out that the Sewer enterprise fund revenues,
on the other hand, seem low but it was noted the largest bill was not due until mid-January.
Mr. Cohen asked how back tax collection is faring. Mr. Valente said the Town regularly collects
99% of its annual taxes but the 1% of taxes not collected equals $1.7M. The first step is toward
collecting back taxes is sending a letter to the property owner, stating that proceedings will be
commence unless arrangements are made by a certain deadline. The letter has yielded seven
responses from the top ten delinquent accounts.
Vote the FY2018 Recommended Budget and Financing Plan
Mr. Valente stated the feedback the Board provided about the budget during the last few
meetings have resulted in revisions to the budget. Mr. Valente asked the Selectmen to vote on
these revisions this evening so that the Brown Book for Town Meeting can be finalized and sent
to Town Meeting members.
Mr. Valente noted the revised Capital numbers will also require a vote, following the
presentation by the Capital Expenditures Committee.
71-63
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Mr. Valente asked the Selectmen for the authority to revise the debt service numbers based on
the bond sale which have the effect of reducing principal and interest and reduce the amount to
be used from the Capital Stabilization Fund.
Comments by Capital Expenditures Committee
Ms. Hai, Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Chair, referred to the revised Initial Review of
FY2018 Town Manager’s Preliminary Budget & Financing Plan (‘White Book’) for her
discussion. Ms. Hai noted the following questions/concerns from the CEC.
Affordable Units Preservation: Pine Grove/Judges Road still has no dollar amount;
Hill Street New Sidewalk: Design cost (FY18) plus construction cost (FY19 or later) add
up to $1.65M. The Committee recognizes the value of connectivity for that area of town
but has not yet worked through its discomfort with the total cost of the project;
Visitors’ Center: CEC supports deferral and asks the Selectmen to release funds still
available to the Visitors’ Center for a value engineering study that includes program-
specific considerations to reduce projected construction cost;
Hastings School Renovation/Replacement Design & Construction Dollar Amounts: The
Committee asks that the gross amount for the project be listed in the Brown Book as
opposed to the net amount listed in the White Book;
LHS Security Evaluation and Upgrade: CEC voted against this project, 4-1. The original
project has been withdrawn and the Committee supports the revised request of $150,000;
Center Streetscape Improvement: Committee supports the decision to postpone this
project and seeks better definition and clarity, especially with regard to phasing;
Automatic Water Meter Reading: A majority of CEC now supports this request;
Hydrant Replacement Program: with one abstention, the Committee now supports the
request;
Street Acceptance: 4 members for, 1 member against.
Dam Extraordinary Repair: Support with expectation of $150,000 cost saving;
Bikeway Bridge Renovations: Four members supported this with tax-levy capital
funding. One member considers this an expenditure best drawn from the Operating
budget;
Community Center Sidewalk: The Committee has now received design and scope
information and will discuss the project at the next CEC meeting;
Staging for Special Events; 4-1 approve deferral of the project.
Ms. Hai noted that CEC supports removing the roof repair request for the Bridge School based
on assurances from the Facilities Department that it can be maintained until 2021 when the
project will be submitted to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) for
reimbursement.
Mr. Valente said Pine Grove/Judges Road remains in Executive Session discussions but is
anticipated to come before Town Meeting.
71-64
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Mr. Valente stated the gross amount for the Hastings School project will be listed in the Brown
Book.
Mr. Kelley asked why the MSBA reimbursement rate has decreased to 25% from 30%. Mr.
Valente said the change was not one of policy but of how the MSBA formula works. The MSBA
says it will reimburse Lexington 30-32% (based on bonus points for sustainable buildings) but it
caps the reimbursement at $330 per square foot. The cost of building for Lexington is $500/sq.
ft. Mr. Valente said the budget tries to reflect the percentage reimbursement in projected building
costs.
Comments by Appropriation Committee
John Bartenstein, Chair of the Appropriation Committee, noted that Appropriation is on a
slightly different cycle from CEC; CEC works all fall on understanding the Capital projects but
Appropriation see the Capital list for the first time in January in the White Book. Since
Appropriation’s meeting schedule has been hampered by bad weather cancellations, Mr.
Bartenstein did not have official Committee positions to impart but he did have a number of
personal observations and questions the committee has of which he is aware:
The first question was about why the Hastings School reimbursement percentage dropped
and he appreciates the explanation Mr. Valente has just provided;
The Minuteman Tech construction costs have gone up for each remaining member of the
consortium due to the way State Aid is allocated. The Town’s assessment was 5% and is
now 15% which is a matter of concern;
Mr. Bartenstein spoke with Ms. Kosnoff about this concern that was also discussed at the
last Selectmen’s meeting: the estimated State Aid amount is increased, year to year, by
2% but the most recent projections from the State indicate there will be a 16% increase
over last year. The consequence of underestimating State Aid is that revenues then
exceed budget and the overage is then placed in Capital Stabilization Fund. Mr.
Bartenstein does not see an immediate problem but noted that the State Aid formula is
based, in part, on school enrollment which, in Lexington, has increased substantially. For
transparency, Mr. Bartenstein recommended a footnote that explains the Cherry
Sheet/Chapter 70 aid revenues so there is not the appearance of “a big surprise” at fall
Special Town Meeting;
Mr. Valente said he could add such a footnote but said there was already some language to this
affect within the budget assumption language. He said he preferred putting an explanation in the
narrative.
In closing, Mr. Bartenstein introduced two of Appropriation’s newest members—Ms. Jian Yang
and Mr. Sanjay Padaki.
Mr. Valente then took the Selectmen through the changes that have occurred between the White
Book and the Brown Book. Because many of these were discussed at a previous meeting, Mr.
Valente have a high-level overview. He said there were few substantive changes and that most of
the revisions were merely “a truing up” of amounts.
71-65
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Prior to taking a vote on the FY18 Budget and Financing plan, Ms. Ciccolo said that the Board
has discussed these subjects for many months and the lack of questions or comments at this point
reflects thorough vetting of material rather than a lack of due diligence.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the FY18
recommended budget and authorize staff to make non-substantive changes to the debt service
line items and appropriation to the Capital Stabilization Fund to reflect the bond and note sale
approved by the Board on February 13, 2017.
The Brown Book will be published electronically on February 27 and the printed version will
come out the following week.
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 18—Appropriation for Visitors Center (Citizens
Article)
Dawn McKenna (Chair), Margaret Coppe, and Trisha Perez Kennealy from the Tourism
Committee presented information about Article 18 that asks “if the Town will vote to raise and
appropriate a sum of money for planning, constructing, originally equipping, and furnishing a
new Visitors Center” and to determine how project will be funded.
Ms. McKenna included in the presentation data provided by the Massachusetts Office of Travel
and Tourism on Lexington’s tourism profile. According to the data, Lexington ranks third in
tourism spending the Greater Merrimack Valley with 126,000 visitors generating $89,150,501 in
revenue in 2016. Ms. McKenna said tourism creates 744 jobs in Lexington.
Ms. McKenna presented a short history of the current facility that went back to 2011 when the
Visitors Center was added to the Capital plan for the first time. After several steps since that
time, the Tourism now asks if the Town can commit staff time to help develop a financing
strategy for the new Visitors Center so that the project could move forward.
th
It is important to move the project forward, Ms. McKenna said, because of the upcoming 250
anniversary of the Battle of Lexington and Concord. The Federal government is investing in the
celebration and the Town needs to be prepared for the influx of visitors at that time. The siting of
the Visitors Center and landscaping is also an integral part of the Battlegreen Master Plan, Ms.
Kenna said. Also, the State is planning to spend $400M to underwrite the events around the
anniversary of the landing in Plymouth. If the timing of the new Visitors Center is delayed
longer, Lexington may risk missing out on its ability to maximize the economic opportunity
these events represent.
Ms. McKenna said her committee will present this information again before the CEC tomorrow
evening. Ms. McKenna also heard three funding opportunities during tonight’s meeting that
could help with Visitors Center funding: the deferral of the Center Streetscape project which
potentially frees up funds; the Bridge School roofing project now delayed; and the increase in
Chapter 70 State Aid funds.
71-66
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
The members of the Tourism Committee asked the Selectmen for direction on how to proceed.
Ms. McKenna said the group is uncertain whether to ask for design funding or for complete
funding that would expedite the project.
Ms. Ciccolo said she is concerned that travel patterns may shift given what is happening at the
federal and international levels. However, she feels strongly that Lexington should do what it can
to promote tourism. One of the reasons the Visitors Center has been deferred for so long is the
high cost estimate the Town received in 2015 that caused the funding article to be withdrawn
from that year’s Town Meeting warrant. She hopes that the Center can be kept in the Capital plan
while keeping costs under control. She asked the other Selectmen their thinking on releasing
some of the remaining funds in the Visitors Center account to underwrite value engineering for a
more reasonable design.
Ms. McKenna said the Tourism Committee was also dismayed at the cost of the project as
designed in 2015 and the Committee agrees that value engineering should be done. However,
there are not enough remaining funds to pay for value engineering. The Committee’s position
now is to ask Town Meeting for design funds at the very least and perhaps to ask for full
construction costs so that the project can more quickly move ahead.
Mr. Cohen asked how much more money is needed than the sum remaining in the Visitors
Center account. Ms. McKenna said this is one of the reasons the Committee needs the help of
Town staff to figure out costs and the best way to finance the project.
Mr. Kelley said that he has been an advocate for renewing the Visitors Center for a long time.
The original re-design that was rejected for high cost could have been adjusted to better suit the
Town’s needs, according to the consultant at the time, Don Mills. Mr. Kelley said that even more
than a source of economic opportunity, the Visitors Center is “the vestibule or the front door of
this community” and the most important question is how it serves the citizens and their guests.
He believes a new Visitors Center should have public facilities; making these improvements is
“way overdue” and there are ways to get the project done, possibly with creative financing of the
type recently identified to fund a new building at Westview Cemetery.
Mr. Kelley said he is in favor of moving the remaining funds over so that they can be used to re-
hire Mr. Mills to provide adjustments to the original design. He also recommended that Town
staff be authorized to work with the Tourism Committee as the Committee has requested.
Mr. Pato agreed that the Visitors Center is important to Lexington and the accommodating
tourists is an important obligation for the community as steward of the Battle Green. However,
he does not agree that the problem is one of value engineering. The expense of the project as
presented ($3.4M) was significantly higher than what can be afforded, especially considering the
number of School and Municipal Capital projects in the pipeline or on the horizon and the rise of
operating expenses.
Mr. Pato is also not convinced that a new visitor’s center is likely to increase tourism. At the rate
of revenue over expenses quoted by Ms. McKenna, it would take 250 years to pay back the
investment.
71-67
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Ms. Perez Kennealy said the design submitted by the consultant in 2015 was far beyond anything
required—or even desired— and not an effective use of taxpayer dollars. The Committee was
looking for “a purpose-built, simple, functional building that will serve the needs” of tourists and
citizens. In order to get beyond current roadblocks, Ms. Perez Kennealy said the Committee
requires staff assistance and design funding so the Town can ask the architect to come up with a
cost-effective plan.
In reply to Ms. McKenna’s request for guidance from the Board, Ms. Barry said she does not
believe the Visitors Center project is ready to be built. At this point, it would be best to direct
energies toward design, value engineering, and communication. Ms. Barry said she would be
comfortable with rejuvenating the Visitors Center project but not moving toward construction
yet. Looking at the numbers left in the account and deciding how much a design phase would
cost are appropriate steps at this time. Ms. Barry is interested to dig into the grant funding
potential Ms. McKenna identified.
Ms. McKenna said the Board’s willingness to allow the project to move ahead with staff support
is a positive development. The Committee still plans to bring an article of some type to Town
Meeting but perhaps the request would be more modest than full construction funding. After
having a chance to meet with staff and do some research into grant opportunities, the Committee
will have a better idea about the gist of Article 18. She believes that some amount will be
required to move ahead even incrementally.
Appropriation Committee and Precinct 8 Town Meeting member Mr. Padaki, speaking for
himself, said it will be helpful for Town Meeting to know how the previous allocation for the
Visitors Center was spent and how much remains in the account. He asked why the Tourism
Committee did not direct the original design project so that it was not over-designed and what
the guarantee is that new funding will not run similarly afoul of the desired goal.
Elaine Ashton, 32 Cliffe Avenue, said she supports the Tourism Committee’s efforts to bring
more visitors to Lexington. She agrees that tourism is a revenue generator, although the numbers
may not fully support the construction of a new facility.
Ms. Ciccolo indicated she would not support bringing a construction article before Town
Meeting and she is not sure she would support the full design costs until more is known through
a value engineering process. However, she does not think the project should be stopped entirely.
She finds it unacceptable that busloads of international visitors come to Lexington and there are
no bathroom facilities. The bike path also brings people to town who should be accommodated
more hospitably.
She asks that staff update the Board with information about what funding remains in the Visitors
Center account and how much it would require to support a 25% design initiative.
Mr. Cohen agreed with Ms. Ciccolo and advised the Tourism Committee to defer efforts to
calculate construction costs. He believes if Article 18 attempts to request full construction
funding, the article will be resoundingly defeated for lack of concrete detail. The amount of work
to be done to ready the request for Town Meeting cannot be done in the next two weeks.
71-68
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Mr. Kelley encouraged the Board to revisit the presentation by the architect. Mr. Kelley
remembers that Mr. Mills said he felt confident he could deliver the building the Town wanted at
a price it could support. He believes it is possible to go to Town Meeting and request design
money, coupling it with funds remaining in the account and with possible outside funding
sources.
Mr. Pato said he feels more fiscally cautious because there are so many competing priorities. He
wants to research outside funding to supplement taxpayer support. He recommends careful
definition of the program before asking Town Meeting to approve design funding.
Ms. Barry agreed with her colleagues about using the remaining design money to figure out how
to move forward. She agreed with Mr. Cohen’s point that the project is not at a stage where full
construction funding should be requested.
Ms. McKenna thanked the Board for its feedback and said, at minimum, the Tourism Committee
would like staff support to determine how much funding would be needed beyond what remains
in the account and what financing options exist. Ms. McKenna noted that an exhibit designer was
to be included in the original design but was not so that piece of the project has never been
addressed.
Ms. Barry asked Ms. McKenna is she felt comfortable discussing nest steps with the Town
Manager and two Selectmen sometime after the meeting. Tourism Committee members said this
was agreeable as did the Selectmen.
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 17—Appropriate for Advice and Analysis—
Getting to Net Zero
Mark Sandeen, Chair of Sustainable Lexington, and Lisa Fitzgibbons from Mothers Out Front,
presented details for Article 17 that requests $40,000 in funding for Phase 2 of a three-year
initiative to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions from Lexington’s residential, commercial,
and municipal sectors by transitioning to renewable energy sources.
Phase 2 will be supported by a Task Force of major stakeholder convened during Phase 1 that
will develop a final action plan that includes recommendations, a timeline, and key milestones.
Mr. Sandeen said there are four steps to achieve zero emissions: Report/Assess building
performance; Reduce/Make improvements in energy efficiency; Produce/Maximize onsite
renewable energy; Purchase/Buy renewables.
Mr. Pato said he would normally expect this request to be included in the Operating budget but
because the project spans over several fiscal years, the request is made instead in a warrant
article.
Mr. Kelley asked if last year’s $40,000 has been expended. Mr. Sandeen confirmed that it had.
This request should take the initiative through to the final action plan but it was noted that the
71-69
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
original proposal before Town Meeting named $120,000 as the potential full cost. Mr. Sandeen
said he hopes to conclude during FY18.
Ms. Ciccolo said there are opportunities for Sustainable Lexington to partner even more closely
with the Planning Board during the Comprehensive Plan process. Mr. Sandeen said the Task
Force has presented to the Planning Board and has discussed further collaboration.
Ms. Barry indicated the Board of Selectmen will take positions on Article 17 and all other
articles on March 8, following the Town Elections.
ATM 2017 Article Update—Articles 32,39,46 (Citizen Articles)
Ethan Handwerker, presenter of these articles, was not at the meeting so the presentation was
deferred to a later meeting.
Review and Approve Payment-in-Lieu-of-Parking Policy
Melisa Tintocalis, Economic Development Director, presented revisions to the PILOP policy
following review by the Center Committee. The Center Committee’s primary concern was that
the $10,000 per parking space mitigation fee was not adequate, given supply and demand in the
Center.
The PILOP policy has been developed as a tool to be used when a developer or re-developer
cannot otherwise meet onsite parking requirements as mandated by zoning bylaws.
Changes since the December 2016 draft include that the PILOP applies only to new net square
footage; removal of the “change of use” provision; and a parking factor and use table has been
added.
Highlighting three PILOP triggers, Ms. Tintocalis said an increase of new construction equaling
more than 35% of existing square footage; new construction on vacant lots; and demolition and
construction of a new building that exceeds net sq. footage of the previous building would all fall
under the new policy.
The Center Committee believes the $10,000 mitigation fee creates incentive for developers to
pay rather than to provide parking. The Center Committee also believes the threshold the PILOP
application should be triggered at is 10% expansion of existing square footage rather than 35%.
Town staff justified the mitigation fee saying they believe it to be a meaningful amount that is
not so high that it discourages redevelopment.
Mr. Kelley asked if developer must go back to zero if the 35% threshold is broken. Ms.
Tintocalis stated the calculation must indeed start again, as if no parking had been provided for
the original building.
Mr. Kelley said people often find it hard to interpret the difference between gross and net square
footage. He asked if the policy matches the zoning bylaw on this point. Ms. Tintocalis said the
71-70
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
definition of net square footage is in the current zoning bylaw and there are two ways to
calculate it: square footage that cannot be occupied can be subtracted from the gross or 80% of
the gross can be used as an estimate.
Ms. Tintocalis said a key change was made to the calculation methodology. Going forward, 325
net square feet will be used as the basis to calibrate parking requirements.
Ms. Tintocalis asked the Board to vote on the PILOP policy as it now stands.
Mr. Pato said Ms. Tintocalis described well the Center Committee’s concerns about the
mitigation fee. His personal assessment is that it is time to move forward, even though not
everyone will be happy with every part of the policy.
Mr. Kelley said Selectmen approval of the PILOP sends a message to the ZBA but the ZBA does
not have to heed it. Unless the policy becomes a bylaw, there is no guaranteed effect. Mr. Kelley
believes the 35% threshold is too high and he agrees that the mitigation fee is too low. If the
objective is to bring more parking online or to improve use of current space— as has been done
recently with signage and parking meters— the incentive to create/provide additional parking
should be stronger.
Mr. Cohen said the PILOP has been reviewed a number of times at this point and there are
always going to be those who question the numbers or the methodology. He is ready to adopt the
policy, noting that—as a policy—it can be changed in the future.
Ms. Ciccolo said she still has some concerns but, like her colleagues, she would like to move
ahead with the initiative. She asked if a smaller payment—such as $5,000—should be considered
for projects that do not break the 35% threshold.
David Kanter, Precinct 7 Town Meeting member, stated the Town would be allowing an increase
in parking demand but not assuring an increase in supply. Additionally, the dollar amount for
mitigation is insufficient for the Town to create additional spaces. He agrees that the 35%
increase is too high unless there is no increase in demand caused by the change of use but the
change of use factor has been removed from the policy, although he can see that a Special Permit
might be granted based on a change of use that requires less parking. If the current parking
zoning use table is too aggressive, the table should be reduced to something more reasonable and
eliminate the option for developers to “buy out” their parking requirements.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to adopt the Payment in
Lieu of Parking (PILOP) policy as presented.
Harbell Street Acceptance—Vote to Layout
Town Engineer John Livsey reviewed the Harbell Street Acceptance effort initiated by a resident
petition. The latest version of the petition has the signed agreement of 10 of the 15 residents to
whom a betterment assessment would be applied.
71-71
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
This new petition requests a different formula for assessment and is based on 50% of the
frontage and 50% of the usage or, in other words, the distance from Paul Revere Road to a
residence. Additionally, the petition requests the Town to pay 25-40% of total project cost.
Mr. Cohen met with one of the residents and said he was impressed with the formula that has
been devised. However, he thinks it unwise for the Selectmen to agree to the request for shared
costs and he believes the request would not prevail at Town Meeting.
Mr. Pato confirmed with staff that the formula is legal allowable, then echoed Mr. Cohen’s
thoughts about the shared cost concept.
Mr. Kelley said he, too, agrees that the Town should not set a precedent with sharing the cost.
Ms. Ciccolo agreed that the formula is fine but asked if the residents signed the petition thinking
the Town would contribute part of the expenses. She is reluctant to approve the request without
knowing they will go ahead despite the Town’s position on not sharing costs.
Ms. Barry agreed the formula is inventive but also agreed the Town is not in the position to
contribute to acceptance costs.
David Kanter, Precinct 7, said it is crucial that the Selectmen not commit the Town to sharing the
acceptance costs and important to be sure that the abutters are aware, before Town Meeting, that
the Town is not a participant in the project.
John Taylor, 21 Harbell St, said the residents have discussed the possibility the Town would not
contribute and asked how abutters can communicate their willingness to forge ahead.
Ms. Barry asked what the timeline for Town Meeting is to confirm the acceptance request. Mr.
Livsey said a survey of the land/road is in progress which must be completed and on file 30 days
before the voting date.
Mr. Cohen said the Selectmen should approve the layout request but that does not assure Town
Meeting approval. If the neighbors change their minds about fully funding the project
themselves, they can move for indefinite postponement at Town Meeting.
Dan Hesse, the originator of the petition and resident of 25 Harbell, said it is clear to him the
petition will never get more than 10 signatures. He asked if the Board feels the article is worth
going forward to Town Meeting with that level of support.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to layout Harbell Street
with a betterment assessment determined by: 50% of the cost based on the distance from the
beginning of the street to the center of an abutting parcel’s frontage; and 50% of the cost based
on the frontage of each abutting parcel.
71-72
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Update Options—Woburn Street/Mass Ave Intersection Project
Mike Wasielewski and Ken Ho from the BETA Group presented four design concepts for
roadway configuration and vertical adjustment to control speed at the Woburn
Street/Massachusetts Avenue intersection.
A traffic analysis was conducted, yielding four main design options:
Concept 1: Modify geometry of the intersection, add crosswalks on Massachusetts Avenue, no
signal. BETA suggests a raised intersection and raised crosswalks on all four approaches could
have rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) added although none of the concepts
automatically come with flashers.
Concept 2: Modify geometry, do not add Massachusetts Avenue crosswalks. This is essentially
the same but without crosswalks.
Concept 2A: Modify geometry, do not add crosswalks on Massachusetts Avenue, create two
storage lanes on Woburn Street. This would require a land taking from the Dunkin’ Donuts
property. The availability of the second lane improves queuing on Woburn Street. compared to
the other non-signalized concepts but it does not improve it enough to equal current queue
lengths and wait times.
Concept 3: Similar geometry as existing configuration. The raised intersection is added, the
triangle at the intersection is tightened.
Concept 4: Realigned Woburn Street approach. The approach to Massachusetts Avenue would
be squared up. The Woburn waiting queue would increase with this scenario.
BETA said that differentiated road materials and raised intersections should be used in tandem to
provide drivers with clues to navigate the raised terrain.
Mr. Kelley encouraged the Board to weigh any road changes using safety as the primary
measure. There are simpler ways to improve safety than to resort to mechanical changes and the
Town should experiment with those first. Mr. Kelley recommends lowering the speed limit in the
Center to 20 mph and introducing the concept of sharing the space to change the driving culture
in the center of town. Back-ups at the intersection do not happen with enough frequency to
warrant drastic, expensive reconfigurations to the roadway.
Ms. Ciccolo said none of the concepts capture the ideal solution: when the intersection is
improved for pedestrians and bicycles, those improvements worsen vehicle queuing. She agrees
that the back-up is only for a brief time in the morning and the BETA recommendations may be
examples of over-engineering. If a traffic light is installed, GPS navigation systems will route
even more drivers through the center of town.
Ms. Ciccolo is troubled by the concepts that do not include crosswalks on Massachusetts Avenue
because it does not serve pedestrians, or cyclists well who must cross the wide street. She is
71-73
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
particularly concerned about high schoolers walking to school.However, adding the crosswalks,
according to BETA’s study, increases the Woburn Street vehicle queue. Ms. Ciccolo agrees that
slowing the traffic through town is an important change and she likes the raised intersection idea,
but she wonders if textured road surfaces on the Massachusetts Avenue intersection approaches
would result in wider gaps between cars that create opportunities for pedestrians to cross and for
the Woburn St queue to exit on to the Avenue. She would like this scenario to be modeled.
Of the four concepts, Ms. Ciccolo favors Concept 1 because she believes crosswalks are needed,
if not at this point than further up Massachusetts Avenue. Transit users get off in Lexington and
if the elements of their trip become too arduous, they will abandon use of public transportation.
Mr. Pato said he, too, is looking for the ability to provide safer crossings at the intersection. He
noted that the latest statistics show a substantial increase in the number of bike accidents at the
intersection, a total of 15 crashes in one year.
The reconfiguration of the intersection that creates a more direct approach from Winthrop Road
to Woburn Street would create additional challenges for how to mitigate the traffic moving
through that side of town. Adding a signal could reduce the incentive to cut across the
intersection but absent of light control, Mr. Pato remains concerned it would not represent an
improvement. A raised intersection would slow traffic, as would lowered a speed limit, although
the Town may not have that option since the road is a State numbered route.
Mr. Cohen agreed that lowering the speed limit would be an important mitigation strategy. He
noted there is an article coming before Town Meeting to accept new provisions passed by the
State that would allow the Town to create a Special Zone with a 20 mph limit.
Ms. Barry favored Concept 1 as well but she is not a fan of adding a crosswalk to this
intersection, noting there is already too much commotion there. She likes the idea of a raised
intersection and of revised geometry, rather than a signal.
As for Concept 2A, Ms. Barry likes the idea but she does not favor land taking. Mr. Ho said that
it would require approximately 6 feet, which is the width of a sidewalk. However, the sidewalk
would not be removed; it would be shifted in by 6 feet. Ms. Barry added it is her impression that
people use navigation apps to discover creative ways of getting through town, which impacts
residential side streets, a situation that should not be worsened by changes made to the
intersection.
David Kanter, Precinct 7, raised the following concerns: The squaring off of the Woburn St.
approach to Massachusetts Avenue is an important safety feature for drivers trying to make a left
at the intersection so he is confused by the acquiescence of leaving the current geometry in place;
People will cross streets where they want and not providing a safe route to get across the
intersection courts danger; There is no mention of costs in the presentation; How do the various
proposals affect the potential for cut-through traffic; Are there signage requirements for changes
to roadway height and if a raised intersection is chosen, what sort of signage would have to be
added to the streetscape?
71-74
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Dawn McKenna, 9 Hancock St, supported the idea of lowering the speed limit to 20 mph. She
also supports the idea of signage to announce entrance into historic Lexington Center.
John Rosenberg, 64 Bloomfield St, said he has followed this issue closely and appreciates the
concepts presented. He is pleased to see flashing crosswalk signals recommended and approves
of reinforcing slower traffic speeds with differentiated road surface textures. Although outside
the immediate target area of the study, he hopes that flashing signals and differentiated texture
will be considered for other crossing areas throughout town.
Ms. Barry said perhaps bus stop locations could be shifted to safer spots. The MBTA is currently
looking at the number of stops on its routes with an eye to eliminating some of them to improve
delivery times. Mr. Livsey said he has met with the MBTA and usage data is being used as
criteria for stop elimination. The Town could suggest that certain stops be targeted.
Ms. Barry followed up on the question of the addition of RRFBs and in which of the concepts
they were recommended. Mr. Wasielewski said decisions on the flashers are separate from the
other elements of the proposed changes. The flashers are compatible with the crossings at the
Police Station, Hunt Road or either/both of the crosswalks at Dunkin’ Donuts and the
Minuteman Bikeway.
Mr. Pato asked if any of the concepts are compatible with the future installation of a traffic signal
at the intersection. Mr. Wasielewski said resetting the curb line would be required for all
concepts.
The Board conveyed their preferences regarding concepts, raised intersection, textured pavement
and RRFB’s as follows:
Concepts: Mr. Pato expressed his preference for Concepts 2A or 4. Mr. Cohen had no
preference. Ms. Ciccolo said she was not sure but perhaps Concept 1 or Concept 4. Ms. Barry is
intrigued by Concept 2A but not comfortable with the land taking requirement. She also likes
Concept 4 with the provision that, if it is chosen, some type of traffic mitigation should be done
for the Winthrop Road neighborhood, such as speed bumps or one-way traffic flow. Mr. Kelly
does not like any of the concepts, preferring his own recommendations to lower the speed limit
and change the driving culture. He would like to look into moving/eliminating the bus stop at the
intersection.
On the issue of raised intersection, Mr. Kelley indicated he was not in favor; all other Selectmen
indicated they are in favor.
On the issue of textured pavement, Mr. Kelley indicated he was not in favor; all other Selectmen
indicated they are in favor.
In regards to RRFBs: Mr. Kelley was not in favor; Ms. Ciccolo said she is unsure and all the
users of the intersection need to be considered. She would like to consider crosswalk design that
features lights in the pavement, which she understands is being used even in snowy climates.
Additionally, constituents have commented that signage at crosswalks can add to the visual
71-75
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
confusion and therefore not improve safety. She believes the bus stop should be moved if a
crosswalk is not provided at the stop location; Ms. Barry was in favor of an RRFB at the bike
path on Woburn Street and possibly at the Police Station; Mr. Cohen was in favor. Mr. Pato was
in favor for an RRFB at the Police Station but he would need to hear more about the other
locations
To Ms. Ciccolo’s comment about in-pavement lighting for crosswalks, Mr. Wasielewski said an
example of this type of crosswalk on the Arlington/Somerville town line did not last more than a
year before it was damaged and rendered useless. Ms. Ciccolo said she would like to research
this in any case to find our whether improper installation was the issue.
Ms. Ciccolo added that slowing cars down in the vicinity of Hunt Road would be best. The
merging area on Mass Ave in front of the Town Offices is another problem area as vehicles
speed up to adjust position. She believes that textured pavement may be a solution but smooth
pavement bike accommodations at the road edge are an important feature to include.
Ms. Ciccolo agreed with Ms. Barry that traffic mitigation should be done for the Winthrop Road
neighborhood if Concept 4 is selected but she would like to see some modeling data to determine
whether Concept 4 would indeed cause additional cut-through traffic.
Mr. Pato agreed with Ms. Barry and Ms. Ciccolo about considering the impact to Winthrop Road
but noted that the raised intersection would be present for any route a driver takes. Ms. Ciccolo
said the effect of the raise platform would ideally discourage vehicles from coming through
town. Mr. Pato said that existing traffic patterns already result in substantial cut-through traffic to
the Winthrop neighborhood.
Mark Connor, 16 Highland Ave, asked if the speed table would influence the Massachusetts
Avenue back-up. He believes it might cause cut-throughs on Bloomfield Street or Percy Road.
Mr. Wasielewski said there should not be a change on Massachusetts Avenue because the speed
is just being lowered but the road is not otherwise obstructed.
Consent Agenda
Water & Sewer Commitments
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve Water &
Sewer Commitments as follows: December cycle 9 for $272,314. 66; November finals for
$181,480.20; December finals for $4001.61
Water & Sewer Adjustments
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve Water &
Sewer Adjustments from WSAB 1/12/17 ($9,374.70).
71-76
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 13, 2017
Sign Eagle Scout Letters—Dimitri Psyhojos
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to sign a letter of
commendation congratulating Dimitri Psyhojos for attaining the highest rank of Eagle in Boy
Scouting.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Lexington Historical Society –Buckman Tavern
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request for the Lexington Historical Society to serve beer at a Tavern Night at
Buckman Tavern, 1 Bedford Street, on Saturday, March 4, 2017 from 7:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Cantata Singers
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request for the Cantata Singers to serve wine at a post-concert reception at Cary
Hall, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue on Sunday, February 26, 2017 from 3:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m.
Executive Session—20 Pelham Road and Scottish Rite Parking Lot Purchase
On motion duly made and by roll call, the Board voted 5-0 to enter Executive Session to consider
the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property at 33 Marrett Road, owned by the Scottish
Rite, and to reconvene in Open Session only to adjourn. Further, it was declared that an open
meeting might have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the Town.
Adjourn
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to adjourn at
approximately 10:30 p.m.
A true record; Attest:
Kim Siebert
Recording Secretary
71-77
Joint Meeting
Board of Selectmen and Planning Board
February 13, 2017
A joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board was held on Monday, February
13, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in Estabrook Hall of the Cary Memorial Building, 1605 Massachusetts
Avenue. Board of Selectmen (BOS) Ms. Barry, Chair; Mr. Kelley; Mr. Cohen; Mr. Pato; and
Ms. Ciccolo were present along with Mr. Valente, Town Manager; Ms. Kowalski, Assistant
Town Manager for Development; and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary.
Also present were Mr. Henry, Planning Director; and Planning Board (PB) members: Mr.
Canale, Chair; Mr. Dunn; Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti; Mr. Hornig; and Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Barry called the Selectmen’s meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and introduced the Board
members. Mr. Canale called the Planning Board meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
Procedure for Meeting Minutes
The Selectmen’s Recording Secretary will take the minutes. Draft copies will be shared with the
Planning Board (PB) for review prior to approval by the Board of Selectmen (BOS).
Discussion—Brookhaven Expansion Project: Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) and Affordable
Housing Mitigation Payment
Mr. Cohen stated that he will recuse himself from the discussion because he has recently been a
Trustee of Brookhaven.
The Town Manager provided background and updates to negotiations with Brookhaven. Last
year, Brookhaven proposed an addition to their facility that would add independent units and
assisted care units, and reduce the number of nursing beds. In response to that proposal, the
Selectmen asked a team, on behalf of the Town, to negotiate a revised Payment in Lieu of Taxes
(PILOT). The team consisted of members from the Board of Selectmen (Ms. Barry and Ms.
Ciccolo), the Planning Board (Mr. Hornig and Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti), and staff (Planning
Director Mr. Henry, Assistant Town Manager for Development Ms. Kowalski and Town
Manager Mr. Valente). Representing Brookhaven on their negotiating team was the CEO, Jim
Freehling, Attorney Bill Dailey, and Chairman of the Brookhaven Board Jeanne Kreiger.
Discussions centered around two main concepts:
By adding 49 independent living units, Brookhaven would adversely affect the Town’s
affordable housing ratio if it did not set aside 10% of the new units as affordable. The
Town therefore requested that Brookhaven provide 5 ½ affordable units on site. For a
variety of reasons, including their business model, Brookhaven’s team declined the onsite
option. Instead, a cash payment was negotiated.
71-78
Joint Meeting – February 13, 2017
The second question the Town discussed was that, given the expansion, how much
should the current PILOT payment increase? Eleven years ago, when the facility
expanded, Brookhaven increased the PILOT based on the number of additional units. In
this round of expansion, the Town is also looking for an increase. The teams discussed
the methodology by which a new PILOT amount would be calculated.
The proposal now before the Selectmen and Planning Board is the result of the negotiations
between the two bargaining teams that concluded only minutes before this meeting began.
Mr. Valente displayed a document showing the Town’s calculations of cost to mitigate the 5 ½
affordable units: $1,536,369. This number was reached by taking the cost of land ($249,738 per
unit), adding construction costs ($214,602) and subtracting the allowance for affordability
($185,000 per unit), arriving at a unit price of $279,340. The unit price was then multiplied by 5
½ to reach a total of $1,536,369.
Brookhaven said paying that amount upfront would be challenging and asked to be allowed to
pay over time. The Town agreed but added interest over the 15 years of term. These interest
payments bring the full cost of mitigation to $1,900,474. Brookhaven’s negotiating team agreed
to the methodology and indicated it is willing to recommend the proposal to their Board of
Trustees.
Mr. Canale (PB) asked why 5 ½ affordable units were used in the calculation rather than another
number previously discussed. Mr. Valente said 5 ½ is based on 49 independent living units. It
does not take expansion of assisted living into consideration because it is unclear that the Census
will count assisted living in the Town’s total housing inventory. If reason arises to change this
supposition, the mitigation agreement will be reopened.
Mr. Kelley (BOS) said the rules and circumstances surrounding affordable housing have changed
over his time as a developer. He asked if the percentage of affordable units is calculated on the
net number of added units rather than on the number of allowable by-right units that could be
constructed.
Mr. Hornig (PB) said the Planning Board’s practice regarding affordable unit calculation has
always been based on the number of units being constructed, not on the number that could be
constructed under another development model.
Mr. Valente addressed the PILOT payment question. The Board of Assessors must reaffirm
yearly that Brookhaven is not subject to property taxes. However, Brookhaven has always paid a
PILOT as specified by the conditions of its Special Permit, although there is no guidance in the
Special Permit for how the PILOT should be calculated. Currently, the payment is close to
$500,000. The Town then looked back at the application Brookhaven submitted—the PSDUP
(Proposed Site Development and Use Plan) and found the developable site area will go from 23.4
acres to 28.16 acres, about a 20% increase. The building coverage is also going up a little over
20%. The average of the two factors is 20.5%; this became the basis for calculating the PILOT
increase.
71-79
Joint Meeting – February 13, 2017
Brookhaven said an increase of this magnitude was not reasonable, based on its financial model.
Instead, the Town proposed phasing in the 20.5% increase over time with incremental increases
at three points over the 15-year period. In year one, the PILOT would increase 6.85% and stay
the same until year five when it would again increase by another 6.85%. In year ten, the final
6.85% would be levied and the PILOT would remain the same until year sixteen when the
affordable housing payment is paid off. At that time the yearly PILOT increase will return to
3%, as is now the arrangement. The basis for the 3% increase is meant to closely mirror 2 ½%
increases in annual residential property taxes.
Mr. Kelley asked if the PILOT was considered in relation to the number of units on the property.
Mr. Valente said the calculation was based on land area and structure size rather than the number
of units.
Mr. Pato asked if Brookhaven’s current financial model is unsustainable. Mr. Valente said that
Brookhaven’s response was, with to the higher calculations, it would not be able to afford the
$1.9M in mitigation.
Mr. Canale (PB) suggested that the 3% PILOT payments could be set aside to create affordable
housing just as easily as the 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year incremental payments could be.
Mr. Hornig (PB) said the agreement was structured to create a dedicated income stream over 15
years, stable enough to fund borrowing for affordable housing.
Ms. Krieger, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Brookhaven, said the expansion was
important primarily because it would allow changes to me made to the current facility that would
keep Brookhaven current with health care practices. The Board of Trustees can accept the
proposal as presented but she noted that it represents “a zero sum”.
Mr. Freehling, CEO of Brookhaven, commented the expansion concept has been delayed for
about a year from going to Town Meeting. There are currently 280 people on the waiting list, a
number that will grow if additional units were built. The demand for senior housing is great and
Brookhaven is one way Lexingtonians can stay in Lexington.
David Kanter, Precinct 7 Town Meeting member, expressed concern about the ability of the
Town to produce affordable housing. With regard to the PILOT, Mr. Kanter stated he is
unhappy with the loss of revenue that temporary discontinuation of the PILOT represents and
uncomfortable that the total revenue under the terms of the agreement is less than it would be if
the 3% PILOT were continued. Finally, Mr. Kanter said the Town should not acquiesce to the
limitations of Brookhaven’s financial model.
David Wells, 33 Forest Street and member of the Brookhaven Board of Trustees, asked if the
only source of money for affordable housing comes from developers. Mr. Valente said 10% of
the Community Preservation Act surcharge is the only other source. Mr. Wells noted that 34% of
the Brookhaven budget is used for health care but the Town contributes nothing towards the
health care of affordable housing residents. He said negotiations had been very difficult for him
71-80
Joint Meeting – February 13, 2017
as a board member and noted that the Trustees are not developers and that the process kept
changing.
Ms. Barry asked if the two Boards could support the agreement in concept based on what was
presented tonight.
Planning Board: Mr. Hornig and Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti voted yes; Mr. Canale voted “not yet”;
Mr. Dunn supported the affordable housing component but is not ready to support the PILOT;
Ms. Johnson was between “not yet” and “yes with conditions” saying this agreement should not
be seen as a precedent for future MOAs.
Board of Selectmen: Ms. Ciccolo and Ms. Barry voted yes; Mr. Pato said he agreed with the
affordable housing agreement but not with the PILOT model; Mr. Kelley voted no.
Adjourn
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-0 to recess at
approximately 7:00 p.m. and reconvene in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room at 7:10 p.m.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Planning Board voted 5-0 to adjourn at 7:00 p.m.
A true record; Attest:
Kim Siebert
Recording Secretary
71-81
Selectmen’s Meeting
February 27, 2017
A meeting of the Lexington Board of Selectmen was called to order at 6:34 on Monday,
February 27, 2017 in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room of the Town Office Building. Chairman
Barry, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Pato and Ms. Ciccolo were present as well as Mr. Valente,
Town Manager and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary.
Also present were Ms. Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development; Mike DiMinico,
Cambridge-based King Street Properties; and Tom Ragno, Cambridge-based King Street
Properties; Jennifer McClain, Mothers Out Front and Amy Smith, National Grid; Mark Sandeen,
Sustainable Lexington;, John Shortsleeve, Baystate Energy; and Paul Gromer, CEO Peregrine
Group; Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation and Community Programs; Mr. Goddard, Director
of Facilities; Fire Chief John Wilson, and Jeff McElravey, Tecton Architects
Public Comments
Elaine Ashton, 32 Cliffe Ave, President of the East Lexington Community Association, thanked
the Town Manager, staff, Board of Selectmen, and Community Center for supporting the
th
Candidates Coffee on February 25. Ms. Ashton praised the new Community Center as a
wonderful facility and Town resource.
Derek White, 4 Baskin Rd, spoke for a group of residents in attendance from Baskin Rd.
regarding concerns with Verizon cell towers being erected near their homes. Mr. White feels
that Baskin Rd residents will be exposed at a level of radiation between 46% and 170% of
maximum, not 1% as Verizon has stated. The neighborhood group asked the Town to have a
more accurate safety analysis done or to have the antennae installed somewhere closer to traffic,
away from homes.
Review and Approve Amended Memorandum of Understanding for 45, 55, 65 Hayden Ave
Mr. DiMinico and Mr. Ragno from Cambridge-based King Street Properties provided the context
for the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and an update on King Street’s activities in
Lexington.
Mr. Ragno said in November, King Street purchased the 400,000 sq. ft., three-building former
Cubist campus on Hayden Avenue. King Street plans to lease to several companies instead of to
a single renter. To attract tenants, a more vibrant corporate environment will be created. Mr.
Ragno said King Street must internally modify existing buildings and add parking. The company
met with Town staff to hear Lexington’s concerns about parking and traffic; it has been able to
address these concerns, navigate the ZBA process, and work toward agreement with
Conservation.
As an outcome of the meetings, King Street will make a payment to the Town of $283,000 in
exchange for the ability to create extra parking spaces and it will develop a parking and
transportation demand management plan. Mr. Ragno said King Street is committed to reducing
single-occupancy vehicles use among its employees. The company will also increase its yearly
71-82
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
contribution to the Lexington Nature Trust to $10,000 to demonstrate support for the Town’s
conservation lands and natural resources.
Ms. Ciccolo asked if the Planning Board, Greenways Corridor Commission, and Transportation
Advisory Committee have received updates on the modifications to the original MOU. Ms.
Kowalski said the Conservation Administrator and the Planning Director were involved in the
revisions but the Greenways Corridor was not.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve and sign the
Memorandum of Understanding between CRP/King Hayden Owner, LLC and the Town of
Lexington, Massachusetts for 45, 55, 65 Hayden Avenue, Lexington February 17, 2017.
Approve and Sign Proclamation and Support Letters—Human Rights Committee
Human Rights Committee (HRC) Chair Mr. Osborne presented a proclamation of human rights
drafted by the HRC. The goal of the proclamation is to maintain a cohesive sense of community,
regardless of where individuals stand politically.
Ms. Barry read the proclamation in its entirety into the record.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve and sign a
Proclamation declaring the Town of Lexington’s commitment to inclusivity.
Dan Fenn, 59 Potter Pond Rd and member of Lexington First Parish Church, said he was
deputized by the congregation to speak in regards to the support letters. First Parish believes it is
critical in the current political climate to reach out to any who have suffered prejudice and
hatred.
Ms. Barry read into the record the letters to the Islamic Center and the Lexington family.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve and sign two
letters of support condemning acts and words of hate and bigotry.
ATM 2017 Warrant Article Update—Article 30-Adjust Retirement COLA Base for Retirees
Ms. Barry recused herself due to a conflict of interest. Ms. Ciccolo assumed the role of Chair.
Mr. Cunha, Chairman of the Retirement Board, presented information about Article 30,
scheduled to come before Town Meeting. The subject of the article is an increase to the cost of
living base from $13,000 to $14,000. Since 1997, the COLA base has been raised just once. Out
of 104 nearby communities, 77 have approved COLA base increases; 24 have increased to
$14,000 and 29 have increased to $15,000. Mr. Cunha stated there are currently 428 retirees and
beneficiaries in Lexington’s retirement system. Most retirees receive less than $20,000 in annual
benefits. Mr. Cunha presented a graph that showed the median annual benefit as $19,800 and the
average annual benefit as $24,233. Most retirees do not receive Social Security benefits because
they worked only in the public sector. Raising the COLA base to $14,000 effective July 1, 2017
71-83
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
increases annual benefit payments by $9,400. Mr. Cunha said the Retirement System will be
fully funded in 2024; it is currently 85.6% funded, the highest percentage of any municipality in
the Commonwealth.
Mr. Pato asked if the Appropriation Committee has analyzed the effects of the COLA increase
on the Operating Budget. He also asked what the rationale is for raising the COLA base only
once in 20 years (in 2015) and then raising it again only two years later.
Mr. Cunha said the Retirement Board takes a conservative approach and waited to see the effects
of the raise before advocating for another one. He is not sure why there were no raises in the 20
years before 2015 but perhaps it was due to efforts to fully fund Other Post-Employment
Benefits (OPEB).
Mr. Pato noted there would be a $1.8M impact to the Operating Budget in FY2024 from the
COLA increase. Before voting on the article, he would like to better understand the effects of
and motivations behind the raise.
Ms. Ciccolo asked Mr. Valente if the matter could be referred to the Appropriation Committee
before taking further action. Mr. Valente said there is time to do this before a vote is needed.
Mr. Cohen said he had no objection to referring the matter to Appropriation but since this is his
last meeting as a Selectmen, he wanted to express admiration for the work of the Retirement
Committee.
Ms. Barry resumed the chair.
Town Manager Report
Mr. Valente said the Selectmen’s recommended FY18 budget and financial plan have been
released. The documents can now be found on the Town website under the “Budget” page. Town
Meeting members and the financial committees have been notified. The printed version of the
so-called “Brown Book” will be ready in about a week. Mr. Valente offered congratulations to
Budget Officer Jennifer Hewitt and Assistant Town Manager for Finance, Carolyn Kosnoff for
completing their first Brown Book within six months of assuming their positions.
Mr. Valente noted Narcan is now available in all Police cruisers as well as on all ambulances and
Police have been trained to administer the opioid overdose antidote.
Mr. Valente announced the appointment of Kelly Axtell to fill the position of Assistant Town
Manager with a start date of March 6, 2017. Ms. Axtell will be responsible for managing all the
internal operations of Town government and coordinating delivery of the Town’s programs and
services. She will also serve as the Americans with Disability Act Coordinator and the Records
Access Officer.
Selectman Concerns
71-84
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Ms. Barry reminded the community that the Town Election will take place next Monday, March
6. Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
On behalf of the Board of Selectmen, Ms. Barry thanked out-going Assistant Town Manager
Linda Vine for 32 years of stalwart, capable, and patient service to the Town in a variety of
capacities.
Ms. Barry noted that this is the last official meeting for retiring Selectman Norman Cohen, who
served in that role for 12 years. Prior to that, Mr. Cohen worked 29 years as Town Counsel and
he is now a candidate for Town Meeting. Members of the Board and Mr. Valente spoke in tribute
of Mr. Cohen and his many contributions, saying it has been a privilege and honor to serve with
him. Mr. Cohen, in turn, praised Town staff and volunteers, saying that local government is
important and admirably non-partisan.
Ms. Barry invited residents to attend a reception for Mr. Cohen to be held in the Cary Memorial
Library living room Thursday, March 2 from 4:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m., co-sponsored by the
Selectmen and the library Trustees.
Ms. Barry amended the order of the agenda to Approve and sign the proclamation for Aurio J.
Pierro
th
Approve and Sign Proclamation—Aurio J. Pierro—100 Birthday
Ms. Barry read the Proclamation in its entirety into the record.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve and sign the
th
Proclamation in honor of the 100 birthday of life-long Lexington resident Aurio J. Pierro.
Ms. Barry returned to the order of the agenda.
BEGIN JOINT MEETING WITH SCHOOL COMMITTEE (Items 5-7), APPROPRIATION
COMMITTEE AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE
Update: Proposed Capital Project for Special Town Meeting, Article 4: 20 Pelham Road Property
Ms. Ciccolo recused herself from the Pelham Road discussion item due to a conflict of interest.
Mr. Alessandrini called the School Committee to order at 7:40 and introduced members Eileen
Jay, Jesse Steigerwald and Judy Crocker and Superintendent of Schools Dr.Mary Czajkowski.
Mr. Goddard, Director of Facilities and Donna DiNisco, DiNisco Architects, presented details to
repurpose 20 Pelham Road. Mr. Goddard said he and Ms. DiNisco met twice with the
Community Center staff to discuss space use for the portion of the building that will not be used
by the Lexington Children’s Place (LCP) integrated pre-school program. The Community Center
can be connected to 20 Pelham by walkways and a shared expanded parking lot currently owned
by the Scottish Rite.
71-85
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Ms. DiNisco said LCP will fit well into the existing facility. The Community Center portion of
the building could also use the gym and cafeteria with some improvements to the kitchen. Most
of the partitions will remain in place, although bathroom enhancements and alterations to some
of the administration spaces may be warranted.
Foreseen changes to the building include:
Complete abatement
New roof
New windows
Updated mechanical systems
Fire protection
Plumbing
ADA accessibility
Expansion of lockers and showers for Community Center use
Project cost projections are: $18.3M for the LCP portion, $6.1M for the Community Center
portion for a total renovation project cost equals $24.4M.
Ms. DiNisco said that a 2013 cost evaluation for Community Center expansion, independent of
the Pelham property, yielded a $8M to $9M estimate for facilities similar to those Pelham
provides. She noted that the renovation estimate of $6.1M falls below that estimate. Following
funding approval at Annual Town Meeting, community space renovations could begin in late
spring of 2017; design development for LCP would take another 6 months with construction
starting as early as summer of ’18 for an opening in the fall of ’19.
Ms. Jay (SC) asked if considerations had been made to lower LCP renovation costs, as requested
by the School Committee. Ms. DiNisco said there have not been any further evaluations for cost
containments but now that the program has been determined for the Community Center, costs
can be re-examined holistically. Ms. Jay asked Ms. DiNisco if the whole-building costs—such as
abatement and roofing—were apportioned separately to the two building uses. Ms. DiNisco said
whole building costs are under LCP and not divvied up. Ms. Jay asked if costs will be
apportioned as the project moves forward. Mr. Goddard said if a break out needs to be done, it
can be.
Ms. Steigerwald (SC) said it is important for the public to be able to transparently evaluate the
costs per use. She asked the Selectmen if it would be better to pay for the Community portion of
the project through private funding, as the recent Cary Library initiative was, instead of through
the Capital Budget or a debt exclusion.
Ms. Steigerwald (SC) asked if an itemization would be done and asked if the current estimate is
based on square footage. Mr. Goddard said the broad estimate number was calculated by a
professional estimator and is based on sq. footage. Ms. Steigerwald asked if costs could be
broken down simply into needs versus wants. Mr. Goddard replied that a cost/benefit analysis for
71-86
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
components of the project will be provided.
Ms. Crocker (SC) asked whether Pelham is eligible for MSBA reimbursement for roofing and
windows. Mr. Goddard replied it is not eligible.
Mr. Alessandrini (SC) asked the age of the boiler and the type of fuel it uses. Mr. Goddard said
the boiler was installed in 1961 and uses natural gas. Mr. Goddard noted the plans currently
under consideration anticipate upgrades to the heating and mechanical systems. Mr. Alessandrini
asked if any of the upgrades would have a green component. Mr. Goddard said he will look at
various options for heating and cooling systems and let the policymakers decide which
alternative to use.
Mr. Pato asked if the estimates originally made for LCP were for whole-building systems. Mr.
Goddard said the heating estimate was but air conditioning was not.
Mr. Kelley asked what the cafeteria and gymnasium capacities are. Ms. DiNisco replied that the
gym holds 320 if used as a dining space and 440 as an auditorium space. Cafeteria seating adds
another 192.
Mr. Cohen said he prefers the option of improving the space in phases but even if that cannot be
done he remains a strong supporter of purchasing the property.
Ms. Barry said she is committed to the shared-use concept but $24.4M is too large a price tag.
Ms. Crocker (SC) asked if the skylights on the LCP side would be kept or eliminated. They
provide natural light and improve the space. Ms. DiNisco agreed and said they will be evaluated
when the new roof is addressed and kept if possible.
David Kanter, Precinct 7 Town Meeting and Capital Expenditures Committee member, said he
fully supports the shared-use concept but the cost needs to be put into the context of the Capital
Plan and other major projects on the horizon.
Mr. Kanter asked if there is a need for an emergency exit from the Pelham property and if the
one-way, single entrance/exit traffic flow design takes that into account. Mr. Goddard said the
intent of the one-way concept is not to add any more traffic to the Marrett Road intersection with
Massachusetts Avenue. From a cut-through perspective, the public safety staff recommended
one-way flow. If there is an emergency, Town personnel would direct traffic as appropriate.
Ms. Barry asked if it was premature for the Board to request updated projections for the Capital
financing plan. Mr. Valente said staff is working on that now and it should be ready for the
TMMA information session on March 16.
Jill Hai, Precinct 4 and Chair of Capital Expenditures, asked for a breakdown of what systems
would be done if only LCP used the building. She also asked what the differential would be if
the Town wanted to preserve the possibility of bringing the community portion online later.
71-87
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Helen Yang, Appropriation Committee, asked what it would cost to build a new LCP building
since the cost of acquiring Pelham plus the renovations make the project very expensive. Also,
what is the lifespan of the renovated building be compared to that of a new building?
Ms. DiNisco said the cost estimates were calculated for a 50-year lifespan. The costs of a new
LCP building would be $20M including some site work. Ms. Yang noted that $18M and $20M
are not far apart and that the cost of new construction compares favorably with the cost of
renovation.
Galina Raynus, 15 Pelham Rd, said that Pelham Rd is narrow and already experiences a lot of
traffic from Youville Place. If the plan was only to have LCP at 20 Pelham, there would be less
additional traffic but adding community programs will cause an unacceptable volume of traffic
for the neighborhood. She hopes traffic can be rerouted.
Mr. Kanter, asked if there is a timeline difference between new construction and renovation. Mr.
Goddard said this has not been evaluated at the Pelham site, although it has been at Old
Harrington. If Harrington was used, the occupancy date would be fall 2019. The reservation
about doing new construction at Harrington is that the site is already overcrowded.
Ms. Hai said if the Town is to allocate the cost of the roof and systems between the two uses—
School and Municipal—and come up with prices that reflect that allocation, the project could
foreseeably come before Town Meeting as two separate articles, one of which might not pass. If
that came to pass, the cost of systems upgrades would be borne by the part of the project that did
pass, changing that cost. Future estimates should be calculated with this in mind.
Mr. Cohen recommended the project should not be broken into two separate articles.
Mr. Valente said Special Town Meeting Article 4 is specific to LCP appropriation of funds for
design engineering and architectural services. Expanding the project to include the Community
component cannot be done under STM Article 4, however he believes it can be accomplished
under Annual Town Meeting Article 16, a generic Capital article for design purposes.
Review Draft Policy—Integrated Building Design Guidelines
Ms. Ciccolo returned to the Selectmen’s table.
Mr. Goddard said the Facilities Department has developed integrated design process guidelines
that were reviewed by members of the Permanent Building Committee, Sustainable Lexington,
the Energy Conservation Committee, the financial committees, the Hastings School Principal,
and representatives of the School Committee and the Selectmen. The goal of the policy is to
achieve high performance building standards in the categories of health and indoor environment
quality, cognitive performance, energy demand and emissions, onsite renewables, resilience, and
building operations and management.
Mr. Goddard said Lexington is currently in the MSBA process for the Hastings School and must
set the budget in the schematic design phase. To this end, the DiNisco team asked the Town to
71-88
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
accelerate the design timeline in order to meet the March 1 deadline. The purpose of the
presentation tonight is to obtain direction and approval from the Selectmen for which approach
to take on the Hastings School design, adopting a resilience standard; a heating/cooling
technology; and a CO2 air quality guideline.
Mr. Goddard has told the MSBA that Lexington will design to a LEED Silver building standard,
which requires making choices between various methods of achieving the necessary 50 points or
more. In addition to LEED credits, there are attributes that will not be counted toward
certification that are nonetheless potentially desirable to include in new building design.
The baseline cost for construction is $450/sq. ft. The stakeholders committees provided input as
to which attributes were of greater interest and which did not warrant investment. Some of the
attributes were rejected based on the length of time it would require for the investment to be
recouped. There are trade-offs in how much different technologies—geothermal or VRF—
would cost, either upfront or over time. Mr. Goddard said if the option is chosen to go with an
all-electric design, the geothermal method appears to have favorable life cycle rates of return,
even though costs would be higher upfront than for a Variable Refrigerant Flow system (VRF).
Regarding indoor air quality, the stakeholders were largely in agreement to adopt the goal of
600parts per million of CO2, which matches Mass Department of Health and Harvard School of
Public Health recommendations for school environments. Estabrook School currently measures
between 800 and 900 ppm and Hastings would measure similarly if nothing is done to
intentionally lower CO2 levels. Introducing fresh outdoor air might lower the count to 720 ppm
without significant cost. To introduce enough fresh air to lower CO2 to 600 ppm would require
an additional investment of $500,000 to upsize the systems, Mr. Goddard said, and it would also
represent an $800,000 increase in annual operating costs.
Bringing in cold, dry winter air and then heating it also results in drier indoor conditions.
Increasing the influx of outdoor air by 30% is uncharted territory, Mr. Goddard said. The effects
of increased outdoor air may or may not increase instances of sick building syndrome.
Most stakeholder groups were uncomfortable weighing in on questions of health. Similarly, the
groups did not comment on the resilience category. However, Mr. Goddard reported that the Fire
Chief has said Hastings need not be designed as an emergency facility.
Stakeholders did agree to design the building as all-electric using either geothermal or VRF and
to choose a ventilation/air quality strategy that did not increase building costs. It remains for the
Selectmen to provide definitive direction on these questions.
Ms. Barry noted the updated Policy draft is not in the material before the Board tonight. She
asked whether the Selectmen are being asked to approve the update or if taking a vote on the
three Hastings-related questions will suffice. Mr. Valente said the Hastings questions are time-
sensitive but decisions made about Hastings can also be extended to the policy as a whole for
future construction projects if warranted.
71-89
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Mr. Goddard said that MSBA reimbursement grants subtract funding from other reimbursement
sources such as from the Utilities so, as a result, the cost to the Town would not be lower.
Nonetheless, Mr. Goddard will take advantage of all available funding sources, even though the
net effect is unchanged.
As for solar onsite generation, Mr. Goddard said it would be evaluated in the schematic design
phase how much energy can be produced. There are areas in which solar panels can be installed
other than the traditional roof-mounted approach, although roof-mounted solar capacity would be
maximized. Mr. Goddard said fuel pricing for Hastings was calculated based on the Town’s
current energy contract.
Mr. Pato said he is inclined to vote for an all-electric building, rather than natural gas, to avoid
having fossil fuels onsite. However, he does not know enough about the site to know whether
geothermal wells would be possible and he would like to have a more holistic analysis before
making a choice. Mr. Goddard said a government study has determined that VRF is a
mechanically intense system more appropriate for renovation of older buildings than for new
construction. Very few communities are opting for VRF in new buildings of large dimension.
Mr. Pato asked Mr. Goddard to confirm that the Hastings School would not be needed as
emergency shelter during the foreseen high school renovation. Mr. Goddard indicated Hastings
will not be required in that capacity.
Ms. Ciccolo asked if the general consensus of the stakeholders was to go with geothermal to
achieve all-electric. Mr. Goddard clarified that he supported geothermal but none of the other
stakeholders weighed in specifically on geothermal because they didn’t have the information
before them when their choices were made. They did, however, reach consensus about an all-
electricity powered building.
Mr. Alessandrini (SC) said that the Town’s thinking long term on the design that is chosen for
Hastings should focus on the long term. He noted that energy technology— electric,
geothermal—has advanced over time.
Ms. Steigerwald (SC) said one of her concerns is that it is easier to make a decision for Hastings
on the three aspects of integrated building design rather than necessarily apply these decisions to
the entire integrated building policy. Ms. Steigerwald asked what would happen if geothermal is
chosen but found not to be viable on the chosen building site. Mr. Goddard said the design team
is confident wells can be drilled on the site but exactly where they will go can be decided during
the next phase. Ms. Steigerwald asked if any of the recommendations fall outside what MSBA
will reimburse. Mr. Goddard said MSBA caps what it will pay per square foot which is less than
the currently prevailing construction cost of $450 per square foot.
Ms. Crocker (SC) stated she prefers the all-electric, geothermal option and expressed concern
about air quality.
Dr. Czajkowski asked if there is a current Town policy for building design. Mr. Goddard said the
Town designs to LEED Silver.
71-90
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Ms. Jay (SC) said she is also in favor of the all-electric, geothermal option for reasons of
sustainability, health, and cost.
Sanjay Padaki, Appropriation Committee, said that even without comprehensive data, it is
known that lower CO2 is better for cognitive levels. He recommended using indoor plants as a
mitigation strategy.
Ricki Pappo, Precinct 2 Town Meeting member and representing Lexington GWAC, said the
Town has adopted Net Zero and the integrated building policy should acknowledge that. She
supports the all-electric option for Hastings and added that the ventilation question is something
to watch as research provides more information. She said having more resiliency in Town
buildings is a better option because future climate conditions are uncertain.
Fran Ludwig, Precinct 7 and GWAC member, said she – as a 40-year Science teacher in
Lexington — is heartened to hear the Town is discussing building sustainability.
Mark Sandeen, Chair of Sustainable Lexington, clarified that studies show increased air flow
lowers, not raises, the instance of sick building syndrome, not raises it. When fresh air is
introduced, CO2 is lowered as well as other toxins. He added that increasing the air flow
capacity by 30% does not mean that level of introduction needs to be used all the time.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 not to adopt the 5-day
resilience design,
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to adopt the all-electric
design with geothermal.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 4-1 to adopt the 720-810ppm
CO2 design goal. Mr. Pato’s dissenting vote was based on his preference for the lower 650-
730ppm level.
Discussion: Fall Special Town Meeting and Consideration of Debt Exclusion Question(s)
Mr. Valente provided revised May 2016 debt exclusion totals plus projections for Fall 2017,
saying the bottom line has increased from $93,950,000 to $103,936,000. Mr. Valente asked the
Boards in attendance whether they would like Town staff to update the debt financing model to
reflect the changes that include Hastings, LCP, the Fire Station and related land purchase
projects.
Ms. Barry polled the Selectmen who were unanimous in approving the model update. Mr. Pato,
however, expressed concern about the Community Center portion of the Pelham project.
The School Committee members unanimously approved the revisions as well.
71-91
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Mr. Valente said in order to meet the timing necessary for the Hastings School, the Special Town
Meeting must take place in October, after which a town-wide debt exclusion vote will take place
4-6 weeks later.
Ms. Steigerwald (SC) asked if a whole building cost break down for the 20 Pelham Road Facility
could be made available if the shared use concept moves forward. Mr. Valente said it could be
estimated on a sq. foot basis.
Mr. Kanter, Capital Expenditures, reiterated that it is important to decide whether the LCP
project should be bundled with the Community Center portion costs.
Dawn McKenna, Tourism Committee, said the Visitor Center also needs to be included in the
th
debt exclusion conversation if a new building is to be available for the 400 celebration of
Plymouth in 2020.
Mr. Valente said, in order to be ready, Town leadership needs to start working in earnest toward
the STM and debt exclusion vote dates.
Mr. Valente said even though the debt exclusion total has grown, so has the Capital Stabilization
Fund. Following an ATM vote, there is expected to be $28M in the fund, rather than the current
balance of $21M. Utilizing Capital Stabilization funds, the effect of the two middle school
projects and the elementary school modular classrooms on the average FY18 residential tax bill
is expected to be modest, about $65 -$75.
The joint meeting disbanded, with the School Committee leaving to reconvene at 9:45 p.m. in
Estabrook Hall.
The Board of Selectmen took a brief recess and Ms. Barry called the Board of Selectmen
meeting back to order at 9:55 p.m.
Update: Proposed Capital Project for Special Town Meeting, Article 3: 173 Bedford Street, Fire
Station Swing Space
Mr. Goddard, Fire Chief John Wilson, and Tecton Architects’ partner Jeff McElravy presented
the preliminary concept plans and estimated budget for fire station swing space at 173 Bedford
St. Tecton Architects was chosen by the Permanent Building Committee to work in collaboration
with Pacheco Ross Architects, experts in the field of fire station and public safety design. The
design presented this evening was reviewed by the Permanent Building Committee.
173 Bedford St. is about 16,400 sq. ft. but it does not have space to house fire apparatus. Mr.
McElravy recommended that the Town rent or purchase temporary, lightweight metal frame
shelter for the 12 to 18 month interim while the current fire station is undergoing renovation. The
temporary structure will be sited at an angle to the building at 173 Bedford St. to accommodate
vehicular flow. It will include 4 bays plus auxiliary equipment storage. A temporary walkway
will be constructed between the building and the temporary vehicle shelter.
71-92
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
The building at 173 Bedford St. has 2 floors plus a partial basement. The main floor will house
operations including offices, training rooms, kitchen, dining room and dormitory space. Showers
will be added to the bathroom facilities but costs will be kept to a minimum. The partial
basement will be used primarily as a fitness area. The HVAC system will be slightly expanded
but left largely as it is. The dormitory area must be sprinkler equipped as required by code. The
second floor will not be used.
Mr. McElravy said the estimated cost of the swing space is $2,092,121 which includes $958,525
for the temporary apparatus bays, interior renovations, and site work; traffic equipment
construction for $171,457; and project development and equipment costs of $344,957.
Timeline estimates following design funding approval at ATM 2017 will produce a design
development documents by STM 2017 and firmer construction cost estimates by ATM 2018.
Renovation/construction cost development for the permanent fire station can occur
simultaneously.
Mr. Kanter, Capital Expenditures, asked if the connecting walkway was elevated or ground level.
Mr. McElravy said it was ground level.
Ms. Barry indicated there will be $50,000 in final design funding requested at Special Town
Meeting, Article 3.
Letter of Support—Super-emitter Gas Leaks Pilot Program
Ms. McClain, Mothers Out Front and Ms. Smith, National Grid asked the Board of Selectmen to
support the town’s participation in a gas leak pilot study. The study would collaborate with
National Grid to understand the volume of gas emitted. Ms. McClain said the study is consistent
with the letter Selectmen sent to the Governor and State Legislators seeking support for
addressing gas leaks in a more thorough and productive manner. The Home Energy Efficiency
Team (HEET) is also a partner in the study process.
David Kanter, Capital Expenditures, applauded the effort but asked why the study focused only
on super-emitters. Ms. Smith said National Grid has proposed a plan to eliminate all leaks over
the next ten years. Mr. Kanter stated he feels this study will help prioritize the work.
Dawn McKenna, Chair, Tourism Committee, hoped disruptive roadwork will be conducted after
the tourist season has ended.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted 5-0 to approve and sign a letter of support
to National Grid to participate in a pilot study with National Grid and the Home Energy
Efficiency Team (HEET) to identify high volume gas leaks in Lexington.
Community Choice (Electricity) Aggregation
Mark Sandeen, Sustainable Lexington, John Shortsleeve, Baystate Energy, and Paul Gromer,
CEO Peregrine Group, asked the Board of Selectmen to approve a municipally-sponsored,
71-93
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
residential electric aggregation program. They asked that the Town Manager be granted authority
to execute a supply agreement when prices are most favorable.
Mr. Gromer said the program is one in which the Town chooses an electricity provider in behalf
of the citizens. Lexington’s key objective is to provide 100% green electricity supplier at or
below the Eversource fixed service price. Town Meeting voted to pursue community choice at
Town Meeting 2015.
Ms. Barry asked if the team plans to translate program information into languages other than
English. The presenting group indicated it was possible to do so.
Mr. Kanter, Precinct 7, asked how the community outreach effort was funded. The presenting
group said the Town does not pay a fee for education or support.
Ms. Barry asked how long it will take for the Department of Public Utilities to approve
Lexington’s adoption plan. Mr. Gromer said the DPU process has become slow but he feels
confident it will be in hand by early May.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to authorize the Town
Manager to execute an aggregation supply agreement if the price is below the price of Basic
Service at program launch.
Proposed Programming for Community Space at 20 Pelham Rd. Facility
Ms. Ciccolo was recused due to a conflict of interest.
Ms. Battite presented recommendations for programmatic uses of the municipal side of the 20
Pelham Rd. facility.
Ms. Battite said the additional space would allow the Community Center to expand health and
wellness programs, cultural performance offerings, and increase classroom availability. The
gymnasium will provide as many as 6 partitioned basketball courts, depending upon the age
group being served. She stated current lack of space precludes offering some programs entirely
or limiting participation. General Board discussion ensued.
Mr. Kanter, Precinct 7, asked what the custodial and Community Center staffing needs would be
for Pelham. Ms. Battite said the format at Pelham would be similar to the Community Center
with a welcome desk and membership check-in. Mr. Kanter said the Town should have a sense
of what the impact on the Operating budget.
Ms. Ciccolo returned to the Selectmen’s table.
Update: Conversation on Guns
Mr. Pato said at ATM 2016 Meeting, Article 34 asked to amend the current general bylaw
regarding guns. He stated Town Meeting asked the Selectmen to initiate a community dialog
71-94
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
about assault weapons and gun violence that would lead to fully considered proposals to be
conveyed to the State for strengthening of assault weapon laws. This was adopted last year by a
vote of 105 yes/ 62 No/5 Abstentions. To this end, the Board formed a Task Force last April,
including Selectmen representatives Ms. Ciccolo and Mr. Pato and a wide variety of
stakeholders. The group identified goals including having an inclusive process that did not
predetermine outcomes.
Mr. Pato explained the report of the process to date currently before the Board is intended to
provide an account of what will be reported to Town Meeting this spring. Mr. Pato said the
Task Force made the following recommendation: As a result of the change in interpretation of
state law—which is currently the subject of a court challenge—the working group advises that
the Town should delay action on a community conversation of gun issues. In addition, the Town
is investigating training a cadre of facilitators to enhance the community dialogue process.
Ms. Barry thanked Mr. Pato for the update and asked him to report this back to Town Meeting
during ATM 2017.
Selectmen Committee Appointments and Resignations
Historic Districts Commission—Appointment
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to appoint Thomas Fenn
to a Historic Districts Commission Associates position to fulfill the unexpired term of Jon
Wardell ending 12/31/17.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to appoint Lee Noel
Chase to the Historic Districts Commission Associates for a term ending 12/31/22.
Board of Registrars—Resignation, Appointment
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted 5-0 to accept the resignation of Jean
Barrett from the Board of Registrars.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to appoint Mark Vitunic
to the Board of Registrars for a term ending 3/31/18.
Transportation Advisory Committee—Appointment
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to appoint Su Shen to the
Transportation Advisory Committee for a term to expire 9/30/19
Center Committee—Resignation
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted 5-0 to accept the resignation of Ellen
Basch from the Center Committee.
71-95
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Approve New Limousine License—Bostantrans Car Service
Ms. Barry noted that Bostantrans Car Service has submitted all the necessary documents, passed
the CORI application with no comment, and the Police have provided a favorable inspection
report on the vehicle. This license will expire on April 30, 2017.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the
application and issue one (1) Limousine License to Bostantran Car Services LLC, 137
Massachusetts Avenue.
Consent Agenda
Approve Minutes & Executive Session Minutes
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the minutes of
September 7, September 12, September 21, September 26, 2016 and a joint meeting between the
Board of Selectmen and School Committee on September 13, 2016.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve but not release
the Executive Session minutes of September 12 and September 26, 2016.
Water & Sewer Adjustments
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the Water and
Sewer Adjustments per WSAB meeting 1/12/17 ($24,573.24)
Town Celebrations Committee Request—Approve Sending Sponsorship Letters
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the request of
the Town Celebrations Committee to send out sponsorship letters as proposed.
Approve One Day Liquor License—St. Brigid Church
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license for St. Brigid Parish, 1981 Massachusetts Avenue, to serve beer and wine on
Sunday, March 12, 2017 from 5:00 p.m. until 9:30 p.m. for the purpose of a wedding celebration.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Bowman PTA
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve the request
from the Bowman PTA for a one day liquor license for the purpose of the “All that Glitters…is
Gold” fundraiser to be held at the Scottish Rite Masonic Museum, 33 Marrett Road on March 25
from 7:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m.
71-96
Selectmen’s Meeting – February 27, 2017
Approve One Day Liquor License—Manicures for Melanoma
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a request for
one day liquor license from MiniLuxe, 1718 Mass Ave for the purpose of a fundraiser to benefit
the Melanoma Foundation of New England (MFNE) on Thursday, March 23, 2017 from 4:00
p.m. until 10:00 p.m.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Spectacle Management
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request from Spectacle Management for the Capital Steps performance at Cary
Memorial Hall, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue, March 5, 2017 from 2:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request from Spectacle Management for the Chris Botti performance at Cary
Memorial Hall, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue on March 24, 2017 from 7:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m.
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request from Spectacle Management for the Jordan Smith performance at Cary
Memorial Hall, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue, March 26, 2017 from 6:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
Approve One Day Liquor License—Munroe Center for the Arts
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to approve a one day
liquor license request from Munroe Center for the Arts for the purpose of the Lexington Open
Studios Private Artist Reception at the Munroe Center for the Arts, 1403 Massachusetts Avenue
on Sunday, April 30, 2017 from 5:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m.
Adjourn
On motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to adjourn at 10:45 p.m.
A true record; Attest:
Kim Siebert
Recording Secretary