Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-02-29-AC-min 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 1 Minutes Town of Lexington Appropriation Committee (AC) February 29, 2024 Place and Time: Remote participation via a Zoom teleconferencing session that was open to the public; 7:30 p.m.–9:30 p.m. Members Present: Glenn Parker, Chair; Sanjay Padaki, Vice-Chair; Alan Levine, Secretary; John Bartenstein; Anil Ahuja; Eric Michelson; Sean Osborne; Lily Yan; Carolyn Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager, Finance (non-voting, ex officio) Members Absent: none Other Attendees: Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation and Community Programs; Christian Boutwell, Vice Chair, Recreation Committee; David Pinsonneault, Director of Public Works; David Kanter, Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC); Bob Pressman, Community Preservation Commit- tee; Lisah Rhodes, CEC At 7:35 p.m. Mr. Parker called the meeting to order and took attendance by roll call. All votes recorded below were conducted by roll call. Announcements and Liaison Reports Mr. Padaki reported that the Recreation Committee met yesterday. While that committee has not yet determined a course of action for the Old Res Bath House, it doesn’t intend to ask for an additional appropriation. Mr. Bartenstein reported that the preliminary MWRA assessments have been received, with the wa- ter assessment dropping by about 4% while the wastewater assessment is rising by about 4% for a net change of 0%. The assumption in the Town’s proposed operating budget, as published in the Brown Book, was a net increase of 10%. Ms. Kosnoff reported that the Town received preliminary rates from the Group Insurance Commis- sion (GIC) which provides health insurance for Town employees. Based on guidance from the GIC, the proposed operating budget assumed an overall premium rate increase of 9.6% for health insur- ance. The actual rate increases vary, depending on the particular insurance plan, from 7% to 11%, with an average rate increase of 8.5%. The increase in the Town’s cost will be a function of the number and type of plans chosen by employees. Ms. Kosnoff believes the proposed budget appro- priation will be adequate to cover the increases, though the annual surplus from this line item will be lower than in past years. Article 11 Recreation Capital Projects—Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation and Commu- nity Programs; Christian Boutwell, Vice Chair, Recreation Committee Ms. Battite stated that Article 11 will request $110,000 from the Recreation Enterprise Fund to ren- ovate fuel bays and practice bays at the Pine Meadows Golf Course. Article 25 will request $2,575,000 in General Fund debt to renovate the golf course clubhouse, which includes reconfigur- ing the main entrance, bringing the property into compliance with ADA standards, updating to cur- rent electrical building codes, and the possible addition of solar energy panels. The project will not increase the footprint or square footage of the building. 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 2 Mr. Padaki asked why the addition of solar panels was not covered under Article 7 Sustainable Capital Projects. Ms. Kosnoff replied that this project had been in the works since before the sus- tainable capital program had been set up, but that similar projects in the future would be handled as Mr. Padaki suggested. Mr. Levine asked whether the previous drainage issues at the clubhouse were now fully resolved. Ms. Battite replied that new drains and a sump pump in the basement were keeping the basement mostly dry, in spite of recent heavy rains. Mr. Michelson noted that several recent construction projects for the Recreation Department had run over budget due to bids that exceeded their appropriations. He asked if the department had con- fidence that these current requests would be sufficient. Ms. Battite replied that some projects put out to bid during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic were priced unusually high, and that some pro- jects had been delayed by a year, during which time the costs of construction increased. The Recre- ation Department worked with the Department of Public Facilities to develop the cost estimates for these projects, and they believe they reflect the current construction cost environment. Mr. Bartenstein asked what kind of bond would be used to finance the clubhouse renovations. Ms. Kosnoff replied that the Town would probably issue a 10 or 15-year bond, depending on market conditions, and that in the coming years the Town would consider transfers from the Recreation En- terprise Fund to help cover the debt service. Mr. Bartenstein asked Ms. Battite if she would consider raising fees at Pine Meadows to help fund this debt service. Ms. Battite responded that they evaluate their fees annually to stay competitive with other local golf courses. She noted that the golf course currently generates revenue that subsidizes other recreation programs in Lexington. Ms. Battite noted that Recreation Department revenues will be significantly reduced during the an- ticipated shutdown of playing fields during the Lexington High School project. Ms. Kosnoff replied that the uncertainty around future Recreation Department revenue motivated the recommendation to present Article 25 as a General Fund project while allowing the Town to decide in future years whether there is capacity for funding for the project debt service from the Recreation Enterprise Fund. Mr. Padaki asked where solar panels would be installed at the golf course, and how much energy they could be expected to generate. Ms. Battite replied that they would only go on the roof of the clubhouse. Although the maintenance building is larger, it is not structurally sound enough to sup- port solar panels. She had no information on the expected capacity of the solar panels. Mr. Michelson asked Ms. Battite if the Recreation Department was being included in the planning that would affect the future of playing fields in Town. Ms. Battite replied that her department was involved in subgroups working on the high school feasibility study. There is also a separate working group that had paused once the MSBA invited the Town to the feasibility study, but it has now re- sumed. So, the department has a voice in the process, but the final outcome remains unclear. They are awaiting detailed information on wetlands that would be relevant to an Article 97 land swap, and they will have to consider if the land that the Town offers in the land swap can function in the same way as the original land. Mr. Boutwell concurred, but he worried that some Recreation De- partment concerns could be overwhelmed by the momentum of larger design decisions. Mr. Michelson noted that over the last ten years, Recreation has been the second largest recipient of CPA funding at 37%. In the near future, CPA funding for affordable housing is expected to grow significantly, which will reduce CPA funds available for other categories. He asked if the Recrea- tion Department had any plans to function with a reduced amount of CPA funding. Ms. Battite noted that the CPA Recreation category covers more than just the Recreation Department and 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 3 Recreation Committee requests. It also includes school playgrounds and other community re- sources. The CPC will have to balance the community’s complete recreation needs against other re- quests. Ms. Battite expressed satisfaction with her department’s program to rebuild all the playgrounds around the Town over the last decade. This program is now nearing completion but will need to be reactivated in 15 to 20 years based on the typical lifespan playground equipment. The department is currently focused on preparing for a heavy load on other recreation fields when some of the Center fields go offline. With the exception of the current golf and bathhouse requests, she feels that most recreation facilities are well-prepared for the next five years. The department is trying to keep up with long-term needs as well as current trends and demands from recreation users. Mr. Boutwell added that it would be important for the public to understand the impacts of an inability of CPA funding to support future recreation needs. Mr. Levine asked if the clubhouse renovations would include a sustainable HVAC system. Ms. Bat- tite replied that this was the intent, but the DPF was still working on the design and engineering. Mr. Levine encouraged Ms. Battite to provide a liaison to the School Building Committee. Article 12 Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment—David Pinsonneault, Director of Public Works Mr. Pinsonneault was assured that the Committee was informed about the newly combined budget program for culverts and stormwater control. Mr. Parker stated that the Town is still waiting to learn how the EPA regulations around stormwater will change. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that phosphorus is the wild card in the delayed updates from the EPA. The Town has proposed doing better leaf col- lection in areas near catch basins and streams, which could help to reduce phosphorus in stormwater runoff. The EPA might credit this towards the Town’s requirements for phosphorus mitigation. Mr. Ahuja asked about Article 12(i) Cemetery Columbarium—Design, and whether the columbar- ium would interfere with the potential addition of a crematorium to the main Westview Cemetery building. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the columbarium would be built into the side of a hill in a separate area that would not affect any additions to the main building. Mr. Padaki asked when the DPW expected to request construction funds for a columbarium. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that they would wait until the 2025 Annual Town Meeting. The current construction cost estimate is $450,000, which includes site work and installation. Mr. Kanter asked what the difference in price would be for interment in a columbarium versus a traditional burial. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the DPW has not developed a pricing model yet, but it would be based largely on the total capacity and cost of the columbarium. Mr. Levine asked how large the columbarium would be. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that it would be a system of linked modules roughly 20 ft high and 40 to 50 ft long, but it would be designed to make maximal use of available space. Each niche is around 2 ft or 3 ft square, so a 20 ft by 40 ft colum- barium could contain up to 200 niches. Mr. Michelson asked how long it would take for the colum- barium to run out of niches. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that he hoped it would last ten to twenty years and noted that columbarium niches boost the overall capacity of the cemetery, which will have to expand to meet future demand. Mr. Parker asked if there were any questions about other items for the municipal capital request. Mr. Pinsonneault noted that the DPW will be repairing parking lots at the library and at Muzzey St (behind Michelson’s Shoes). The DPW has deferred needed work on the Depot lot and the Edison Way lot until the Town determines whether either lot could be repurposed for affordable housing. 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 4 Mr. Bartenstein asked about Article 13 Water System Improvements and Article 14 Wastewater Sys- tem Improvements. Mr. Pinsonneault stated that $50,000 was requested under Article 14 to reassess all pump stations now that some of the replaced equipment is approaching eight years of use. He stated that consultants determined the Town could reuse its existing water tanks after replacing the foundations, so the projected total cost of the water tank rehabilitation project has dropped consider- ably. Ms. Kosnoff stated that the water tank project is not in the FY2025 budget, but it is included in the current 5-year capital plan, with design funds in FY2026 and construction funds in FY2027. Mr. Bartenstein asked about costs related to inflow and infiltration in the wastewater system. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the Town pays for all water that goes through the meter at the Deer Island treatment plant, so the Town is billed for the volumes that come from illegal connections, illicit dis- charges, and even stormwater that enters through cracks in the pipes. Mr. Bartenstein asked if the Town was budgeting for the replacement of sewer lines on a 100-year cycle, the same way it does for water lines. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the sewer lines are subject to more targeted maintenance, replacements or pipe relining, based on inspections in areas with known problems. Mr. Bartenstein asked about repairs needed to Lowell St. near East Lexington. Mr. Pinsonneault re- plied that the Town of Burlington would pay for the repairs in the coming season. Damage to the road resulted from adding water lines to supply MWRA water to Burlington. Mr. Ahuja asked for more details on the water tank rehabilitation project. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that with proper maintenance the tanks should last another 30 to 50 years. The cost to redo the foun- dations, clean and reline the inside of the tanks is estimated at $3.9 million in FY2027. Mr. Osborne asked if the tanks had any significant metal loss, and whether there were any issues with lead while repainting them. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that repairs needed on the tanks were limited to replace- ment of some rivets and bolts, that the tanks had been repainted within the last 10 to 15 years, and that there are no concerns about lead. Mr. Osborne asked how the funding level for street maintenance was determined. Ms. Kosnoff de- scribed the various funding sources, including Chapter 90 and a tax levy earmark based on earlier overrides. Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the Town has a rough plan for street repairs, but the plan will be adapted in response to utility work. The DPW maintains a road condition index database to direct repair work, reducing the need for full road replacements. Mr. Osborne asked if the DPW expected to dig up any recently paved roads in response to new stormwater regulations. Mr. Pinsonneault re- plied that the DPW was trying to include pro-active drainage work in any project where a road is disturbed. Mr. Michelson asked who was paying for water pipe installations on Maple St and down the Min- uteman Bike Path. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the MWRA was paying for it. The project will start in 2024, then it will be suspended during 2025 for the Lex250 celebration, and then be completed in 2026. Mr. Levine asked about MS4 (the EPA permit governing the Town’s discharge of stormwater into the local watersheds). Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the permit was expected to have been issued last fall, but the EPA received strong pushback on some requirements, so they are still considering suggestions for changes. The Town will continue to operate under the existing permit until it is re- placed. 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 5 Mr. Padaki asked if the DPW was replacing any equipment that was off-cycle or unexpected this year. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that there were no unexpected items, and that the leaf vacuum will be a new piece of equipment in their inventory. Mr. Bartenstein asked if the Town had fully funded the copper and lead connection replacement program. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that the program was fully funded and starts with a survey and inventory. They are working on bid specifications for service line replacement contracts. Mr. Kanter asked what the DPW will do with leaves that it collects. Mr. Pinsonneault replied that leaves without too much debris could be sent to the Town composting facility. Otherwise, they must be disposed of off-site. Mr. Parker asked where the town-wide signalization improvements were planned in FY2025. Mr. Pinsonneault responded that this year’s request would fund an updated study of the traffic signals. Warrant Articles for 2024 Annual Town Meeting Ms. Kosnoff stated that the Town Manager was planning to ask for the rescission of a $3 million appropriation from 1999 for the purchase of conservation land, after the Conservation Commission voted in favor of the rescission. This request will probably require removing Article 18 from the consent agenda. Ms. Kosnoff stated that the articles for authorized capital improvements and for unpaid bills would be indefinitely postponed. Ms. Kosnoff is still working on adjustments to the current FY2024 operating budget and noted that the Fire and Police Departments had both exceeded their overtime budgets, and that it was im- portant to properly account for that part of the overtime costs due to contract settlements so they could be taken from the Salary Adjustment Account. The budget for the Town Clerk may also re- quire additional funding due to increased spending on elections. Ms. Kosnoff hopes to provide an updated request in the coming week. Mr. Padaki and Mr. Ahuja updated their votes on Article 12(i) from abstaining to recommending approval. Article 27 Appropriate for Renovation of 173 Bedford Street Ms. Kosnoff stated that the Select Board was moving forward with the renovation of 173 Bedford St. using the original request of $6 million to fund a new all-electric HVAC system rather than the $4.2 million request in the Brown Book. The change will not affect the recommended FY2025 oper- ating budget, but it will increase debt service in the following years. Mr. Padaki changed his vote on Article 27 173 Bedford St to recommend against approval. Mr. Bartenstein asked Ms. Kosnoff if she could provide any insight on the Select Board’s decision to fund a more expensive HVAC system at 173 Bedford St. She replied that it seemed the decision was based on the building being needed for swing space for at least 10 years together with environ- mental concerns. Mr. Levine noted that, depending on the nature of the high school project, the Central Office could occupy 173 Bedford St. for up to 7 years and that would be followed by Cary Library and Town Office Building projects that could extend the use of the facility to 15 years. The differences in indoor air quality between all-electric and gas-fired systems was a second factor in the decision. 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 6 Article 19 Establish, Amend, Dissolve and Appropriate To and From Specified Stabilization Funds Ms. Kosnoff stated that the only action under Article 19 Stabilization Funds would be to appropri- ate $4,036,373 into the Capital Stabilization Fund. The Committee voted 8-0 to recommend ap- proval of Article 19. Article 33 Authorize the Select Board to Seek Affordable Housing Mr. Bartenstein proposed that the Select Board modify their motion on Article 33 to include a time limit on the requested authorization such that it would expire at the end of 2025. A future town meeting could extend the time limit. He further proposed that the motion also include a non-binding resolution that outlines the expectations for any development that results from this authorization. Mr. Bartenstein suggested that the Committee’s report on this article should identify general catego- ries such as school enrollment, police and fire services, and the like. Mr. Bartenstein stated that he is not opposed to the project, but he objects to giving the Select Board “carte blanche”. Mr. Parker noted that Mark Sandeen was at the previous meeting of the Committee where he stated that the Select Board would be modifying their motion to specify an all-affordable development. Mr. Sandeen had hoped to have the Select Board engage in a public discussion on any guidance that should be included in the RFP, but it was unclear when such a discussion would occur. Mr. Osborne stated that he discussed the article with housing advocates and Select Board members, and that his understanding was that any time limit would dissuade developers from responding to the RFP. He believes 40B developers already face major difficulties getting through the permitting process, and they would not respond to a process that requires them to make major financial com- mitments on a deadline. Mr. Osborne noted that the actual costs to the Town had been covered in previous discussions, and that the School Enrollment Working Group established reasonable expectations of at most one new student per housing unit, distributed across multiple grade levels. Mr. Bartenstein disagreed that the Committee has enough information to a detailed evaluation. Mr. Padaki supported Mr. Bartenstein’s view that he would like to see a better definition of the project. Mr. Parker stated that he was having difficulty deciding how to report on this request to town meet- ing. He feels strongly that we do, in fact, have enough information about the kind of development that would result, and the analysis from the School Enrollment Working Group (EWG) derived its results in response to previous failed enrollment predictions from large developments. Mr. Bartenstein disagreed with Mr. Parker’s assertions and noted that the enrollment projections for Avalon Bay had significantly underestimated the enrollment impact. Mr. Parker suggested that the report should cover some of the points raised during the committee’s discussions, but without a formal vote. Mr. Padaki suggested that the report might be limited to a summary of information that the Committee needs before it can make a recommendation. Mr. Parker commented that concerns regarding school enrollment don’t come up when developers build new market-rate units “by right”. Mr. Bartenstein replied that those homeowners would be paying taxes, implying that an all-affordable development would not. Mr. Parker stated that the ex- pectation was that the all-affordable development would make regular property tax payments, or payments in lieu of taxes. Mr. Bartenstein questioned that assumption. Mr. Levine suggested that a negative recommendation would send a message to the Select Board that they need to provide more information to the Committee and to town meeting. He suggested 2/29/2024 AC Minutes 7 that the Town might have to provide additional funding to support the development in the future, either for initial feasibility or for long-term facility renewal. Mr. Parker replied that this assertion was based on assumptions that do not apply to the kind of all-affordable housing developments be- ing considered. Ms. Yan repeated her earlier concerns about the potential negative impacts for traffic on Lowell St. which has two other dense developments with about 100 units very close by the parcel at Lowell and North Sts. Mr. Michelson reminded the Committee that this would be a private development. The Town’s only contribution will be the land and a one-time cash payment, after which the developer will be respon- sible for arranging the remaining funding. The development will be run by a private corporation, without further subsidies from the Town, and will likely involve state and federal subsidies for rent. Up until now, LexHAB has been operating under a very different financial model, but once they transition to nonprofit status they will be able to access rental subsidies, and they don’t expect to be making recurring requests for rental subsidies from the Town. Mr. Bartenstein asked if the Committee supported his proposal to ask the Select Board to include a time limit in their motion for Article 33. A long discussion ensued, raising some questions about the timeline for the process and the likelihood that developers might not respond to an RFP with a time limit. No consensus was reached on this matter. Mr. Bartenstein asked if the Committee supported his proposal for a resolution from town meeting. Two other members indicated their support. Mr. Parker suggested that Mr. Bartenstein should discuss his proposals privately with Select Board members. Future Meeting Schedule Mr. Parker noted that he would be away next week, and that Mr. Padaki would lead the meeting in his stead. The Committee agreed to meet on Monday, March 11, to give final approval to the report. Mr. Par- ker set a goal of publishing the report on March 13. Minutes of Prior Meetings Minutes from the Committee meeting on February 22 were approved by a vote of 8-0. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 10:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Glenn P. Parker Approved: March 11, 2024 Exhibits ● Agenda, posted by Mr. Parker