HomeMy WebLinkAbout1932-02-09 316
SELECTMEN'S MEETING
FEB. 9, 1932.
o-c
A 1egular meeting of the Selectmen was held in
the Selectmen' s Room, Town Office Building, at 7:30 P.M.
Mess±s. Trask, Blake, Custance, Shannon and Gilcreast
were present. The Supt. of Public Works and the Clerk
were also present.
Arthur S. Tyler, of Maple Street was drawn as a juror
Jurors. to take the place of William W. Reed who received exemption
on account of his age.
Harold W. Ashley of Bloomfield Street, was also
drawn as a juror for the criminal session.
Mr. Ezra F. Breed, Chairman of the Committee on the
Celebration of the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of
George Washington, came before the Board to inform them
what the Committee decided for celebrktinn. He stated
that he had been waiting to receive the phamplets from
Washington Sol Blume who has charge of the publicity for the celebration
Committee. and that he had just received them this week. The Committee
pave now decided that they would like to put on a pageant
in the Cary Memorial Hall inasmuch as Washington has set
apart various places as the important places to ho'd
celebrations, naming Lexington as one of them, and
April 19th the important day. Asked whether or not he
felt that the pageant could be held 'on April 19th, he
stated that he would rather not hold it on that day. He
also stated that he was going to endeavor to have the
bion, the BoxrdofrTl'ade, the D. A. R. and the
Churches put on little plays of their own in commemoration
of the Anniversary. He stated that the schools have
already made a start to do something for the celebration.
Mr. Breed asked that an appropriation be made for
this celebration. The Board considered the matter and
decided to request an appropriation of $250.
Mr. Scamman reported receiving the bill of $61.48 for
tepairs to the car owned by Mr. J. A. Meuhling. The repairs
were caused on account of a manhole cover flying up and
Meuhling striking the car. Mr. Scamman recommended that the bill
accident. be paid. It w.3s therefor decided to turn the matter
over to the Town Counsel and request that he obtain a
release.
Letter was received from Samuel Walcott in which he
informed the Board that the sale of the property of
Mrs. Agnes J. Lothrop, 80 Bloomfield Street# did not net
Lothrop her anything. It was therefor decided to continue Old
case. Age Assistance to Mrs. Lothrop who is at the Old People's
Home.
Letter was received from Ruth P. Kimball, 122
North Vista Bonita Ave. , Glendora, California, in which
she asked about the status of the Cary and Farnham , .,_
...
317
wills. She stated that she was an heir and gave her consent to
the modification of the Trust Fund pertaining to the
erection of a Memorial Building in the Town of Lexington.
She understood, however, that some of the heirs did not' Cary give their consent to this modification and she therefor shill.
desired to withdraw her consent if nothing had been done
toward the erection of a municipal building .
It was decided to refer this letter to Mr. Clapp for
his attention.
At 8 P.M. joint hearing of the Board of Selectmen
and Board of Appeals wa$ called on the application of
Innis and McLennan, owners of the A. G. Davis Ice Co.
for permission to erect a public garage at 3 Grant Street.
Mr. Mitchell, Architect for Innis and McLennan, appeared
representing the owners and presented the same plan which was
formerly presented to the Board at the hearing on the
installation of the underground tanks for fuel oil. He Hearing,
stated that it was proposed to build this building on the
line of the land between the Town property and that of the Ice Co.
A. G . Davis Ice Co. He stated that the actual lot line
of the property runs through the middle of Vine Brook.
Both ends of the garage would also be on the line of the
property. It was proposed to tear down the open shed located
there at the present time. He stated that the garage would
be of fieldstone. He was working on the drawings so that
he did not have them to present. He stated that the office
building and the stable will remain until they are able to
carry out the development proposed of stores on Grant Street.
The Board discussed the application of Innis and McLennan
for a public garage as proposed on the sketches presented
by Mr. Mitchell and voted to grant the permit.
Mr. D. F. Collins of Arlington came before the
Board with Mr. Crecenzio Sperandeo, also the Building
Inspector and the Town Counsel.
Mr-. Collins stated that he was an Attorney but that
he was not acting as Attorney for Mr. Sperandeo. He simply
came to say a few words to explain the situation. He Sperandeo
explained that Mr. Sperandeo bought the property in 1916 building
and that at that time it was all woods and he built this
building, which is eight feet at the highest point, and
goes down to five feet high and is ten feet wide by 20 feet
long, in 1916. He has five acres of land which he tills.
Mr. Sperandeo explained that he did not use this
building to live in, only on Saturday nights when he was
working there, he stayed to be thee for Sunday morning,
and that he has never lived there.
Mr. Collins felt that if the Board ordered the
building torn down, that it would only be a matter of
his applying for a permit for a similar structure.
He called attention to the fact that about five years
ago he represented 'ir. Stacchi when a permit was given to
him for a building.
He stated that Mr. Sperandeio raises over a hundred
bushels of potatoes on this property, and this place is
a one room affair with a couch in it and he stated that
he did not stay there only on Saturday night. He stated
that if a permit were given to Mr. Sperandeo, he would
318 ogh
agree not to use it for residential purposes.
Mr. Sperandeo was questioned as to where he called
his legal residence, He stated that this past year 464
he called his legal residence Lexington. He stated t
that he would promise to do anything the Board desired
of him. He had taken down all the trees on the property and
he did not have anything stored in the building. There
was a stove there and a couch and he only used it to go
in out of the cold. Mr. Collins st ted for reference
that r. Richard Wiggins of Maple Street could be
communicated with.
Mr. Longbottom stated that when he first investigated
the complaint of Mr. Leslie Wood, Mr. Sperandeo told him
that he had lived in this shack all summer. Re felt also
that Mr. Wood should be at dny hearing that might be
held inasmuch as he felt that Mr. Wood had a real complaint
to make. He has a nice tract of property and this shack
really is a detriment to it.
The Board voted to lay the matter on the table for
further investigation.
The Town Engineer came before the Board and presented
a resume of a study made by him of the sewers and sewer
assessments in the Town, and in which he made several
recommendations for changes.
Sewer The Chairman stated that Mr. Custance made the
Study. suggestkan that this might be printed in the Town Report
this year. The Board felt that it might delay the Town
report and decided to lay the matter over Until a later IIdate when they had had time to study the suggestions made.
License. _The application of Mr. Peter Canessa for a used
car dealers license was referred to Mr. Theodore A. Custance.
The Board decided to write a letter to Metcalf & Eddy
Sewer commenting upon the comprehensive report that they have
Report. rendered of the Sewer Survey of the Twwn of Lexington.
Bill of $289. was received from the Town Counsel for
services in the Ryder Tax_Appeal case. It was decided
Town to request the Town Counsel to give a report of the
Counsel' s status of this case before approving this bill.
bills.
A bill of $25. for services of the Town Counsel in
connection with the damage suit brought by the Town of
Arlington and which was offset by the Town abating the
betterment charges against the Town of Arlington for
sewer, was approved by the Board.
Letter was received from the Building Inspector in
D'Angq.o which he stated that he investigated the complaint of
complaint Vencenzio D*Ab.gelo in regard to the house owned by
Joseph DeFelice on Ward Street and found that two families
lived in the house. He informed the landlord that this
was contrary to the Zoning Law and the landlord informed
hi.a that he had given notice to Mr. D'Angelo to vacate.
319
He stated that he would report later after investigating
whether or not the party had moved from the house.
Application for State Aid was received from Arthur H.
Stone, 721 Green Street, Boston. Mr. Stone received State Aid,
compensation of $25. per mow-h„ he being a Spanish War Stone.
Veteran. He has been out of employment and needs assistance.
It was therefor decided to recomrnena State Aid in
this case.
Application for State Aid was received from Harry L.
Coolidge of 443 Mass. Avenue. He is a Spanish War State Aid,
Veteran and receives $50. per month compensation. Coolidge.
It was decided to recommend State Aid in this case.
Letter was received in regard to Senate Bill #211,
the same being proposed legislation for the protection Senate Bill
of savings bank deposits asking that the Board back, up #211.
this bill.
This matter was referred to Mr. Gilcreast for his
attention.
The application of Marciano Cardillo for Old Age Cardillo, Old
Assistance was referred to Mr. Gilcreast for his Age Assistance.
attention.
Letter was received from James G. Robertson,
President of the State Holding Corp. in which he
requested the Board to insert an article in the warratt
to pay for the water main in Summit Road. Summit Rd. ,
It was decided to ask the Town Counsel to give the Water pi e.
Board advice as to whether or not he -felt that the State
Holding Corp. had established the ownership of this pipe
and whether or not the article should be insetted in the
Warrant.
It was also decided to ask the T ,a Counsel to
advise the Board whether he felt that there was
sufficient proof that Samuel Lippa was the owner of the
water pipe in Fottler Avenue, and if so, whether or Fattier Ave.
not an article should be inserted in the Warrant water pipe.
asking the Town to purchase this water main and ii he
would prepare it.
Letter was received from the Town Counsel in -whidh
he advised the Board that it was possible to assess Betterment
betterments for the extension of water mains. He also Assessments
stated that he felt the assessment of betterments would for water
be a much more effective method of collecting the cost mains.
of water main construction than the present guarantees.
He advised that Article 8 of the By-laws of 1922 would
have to be repealed or amended if the Board decides
that betterment assessments should be used on water
' mains.
The Board decided it would eliminate a great deal
of trouble from water guarantees if assessments could be
made, and requested the Town Counsel to prepare an
article to amend the By-laws so that this may be done.
320
The Chairman called attention to the fact that Mr. tZal
Ourra was employed. on the removal of snow and his extra
men were charged to the Town at the rate of $4. and $5.
Snow per day. Mr. Scamman stated that the men would riot be
Removal. allowed any more pay than the regular employees in the
future.
Applicatinn was received from Louise M. Hannaford
for the extension of a water main in Wachusett Drive
Water Exten- a distance of about 400 feet from the present end of
sion, WachusettOutlook Drive. She requested that the signature of
Drive. her brother, Frank H. Hannaford be accepted as surety,
but the Board decided to advise Miss Hannaford that
they would accept as surety the name of Mr. Richards,
who is the mortgagor.
Copy of letter written by the Town Counsel to
Mr. Mitchell, Chairman of the Appropriation Committee,
relative to Cemetery Funds was before the Board.
Letter from Town Counsel stated that he also sent a copy of the
Town Counsel. letter to the Chairman of the Cemetery Commissioners
and to the Chairman of the Trustees of Public Trusts .
A copy of the letter follows
February 8, 1932.
Lawrence G. Mitchell, l;sq.
11 Parker Street .11
Lexington, Mass .
Dear Lawrence:
Replying to your letter of January 26 on behalf of the
Appropriation Committee, I beg to report as follows on the
Cemetery Trust Funds and return herewith Mr. Nichols letter
of November 18 to you.
1. Westview Cemetery. I find no special act relating to
Westview Cemetery,: It was apparently purchased by the Town
in the ordinary way under the authority of the General Laws.
If bonds Were issued to pay for it they have since been paid
off because I am informed by Mr. Pierce that there are no
outstanding cemetery bonds. Under G. L. Ch. 114 sec. 19 a town
may adopt by-laws with reference to perpetual care deposits in
cemeteries. I have asked the Cemetery Commissioners if there
is any such by-law and they have been unable to refer me to
any. You will note from their pamphlet on Westview Cemetery,
a copy of which I enclose, that on March 17, 1919 the town
accepted a report which apparently included a set of regula-
tions and that the town voted that the regulations be adopted.
This is not equivalent to the adoption of a by-law. Under
G: ' L. Ch. 114 sec. 24 the Cemetery Commissioners may convey
lots "upon such terms and conditions as its regulations pre-
scribe". I am referred by the Commissioners to no regulations
other than those printed in the enclosed pamphlet which
apparently were adopted by the town instead of by the
321
sioners. I have suggested to the Superintendent of the
Commissioners that a set of by-laws be prepared by them and
proposed to the town for adoption. Of course, such regulations
should cover Monroe Cemetery as well as Westview but they are
of less importance there because there are no more lots to
be sold.
G. L. Ch. 114 sec. 25 provides that the proceeds of sales
of lots shall be paid to the Town Treasury and shall be
subject to the order of the Selectmen and the Commissioners.
With the exception of the Perpetual Care Fund which I shall
refer to in a moment, I have not yet discovered what becomes
of the proceeds of the sales of lots. If they are paid into
theiTreasury, they must, of course, be paid to the Town
Treasurer and should later be appropriated in the manner
provided by the statute. I 4uestion whethor this procedure
has been followed and suggest that it is worth investigating.
Since the bonds for the purchase of the Cemetery have been
paid I suppose that the proceeds of the sales of lots can be
appropriated for any town purpose. The Statute apparently
does not stipulate that they must be used for Cemetery pur-
poses.
If there is no by-law relating to the Perpetual Care
Funds of the town, the only information to be obtained about
it is contained in the enclosed regulations. As I have stated
above, it does not appear that the regulations have been
properly adopted. These provide that, "All conveyances of
exclusive burial rights shall be made subject to the provision
that of the panchase price an amount equal to fifty cents per
square foot of the area conveyed shall be paid into a perpetual
care fund and all moneys so received and any other deposits
made for the purpose of the perpetual care shall constitute
a fund to be know as the 'Perpetual Care fund' ." There is
nothing in the regulations to show what is to be done with the
Perpetual Care runds. The Statutes do not enlighten us on the
subjedt. In the form of deed used for Westview Cemetery a
sentence includes substantially the same language as the
regulations. The deed also, however, contains a covenant
by the town "that it will keep in suitable condition and
• preservation said lot $ in the said Cemetery, including
the trees, shrubbery and soil thereon, and also to keep such
enclosures, monuments and tablets as may be upon said lot,
costing in the aggregate not more than in suitabib
repair and condition: (but does not include the renewal of
any enclosure, monument or tablet which may become broken or
decayed) ."
In view of the prevalence of Perpetual Care Funds the
income of which only is used for that purpose I think
that until proper by-laws are adopted by the town on the sub-
ject we may assume that the meaning of the deed and the above
regulations is that the income from the fund and the income
only shall be used for care of the lots. In view of the
language of the covenant in the deed I am in some doubt as
to whether this can include care of approaches to the lot.
I think this should be covered by the proposed by-law. The
covenant in the deed Simply binds us to do certain things Finn
does not say what shall be done with the Perpetual Care Fund.
322 bpik
This is obviously a single fund for the entire cemetery and L
not separate funds for epecific lots. I am, therefore,
of the opinion that the town has a legal right to prov dey, �
that the income from this fund shall be used for the
general care of the entire cemetery. In my opinionefrem
the fund should be used fez this purpose and should not
be allowed to accumulate unless the town by specific by-law
so provides. Perpetual Care .funds are commoi and I believe the
universal conception of them is that the income from the
fund is to be used for the care of lots.
2. Monroe Cemetery. The situation here with respect to
perpetual care is somewhat -different. There is na single
l Perpetual Care Fund formal y established as with respect
to Westview Cemetery but there have been numerous gifts for
perpetual care. I understand from the Cemetery Commissioners
as well as from Mr. Nicholls letter that these are kept
by the Trustees as separate accounts. The income apparently
has not been always used for care of the-lots . In my opinion
it should be used for that purpose and should not be allowed
to accumulate. These funds have probably arisen under a
great variety of form in bequests and wills and formal and
informal gifts by living persons. I have asked for information
as to the terminology of these different gifts. The Cemetery
Commissioners apparently have not record of these. I presume
that the Trustees of eublic trusts should have copies of them and
-- that any peculiarities with reference to the use of the income
are being complied with Not copies of them have yet been
submitted to me. I find that in the Acts of 1892, Resolve
#86 the state authorized the payment of $250 for perpetual care
of the burial lot of ex-Governor Eustis in Lexington. the
Cemetery Commissioners are unable to give me any information
about this. They have no record except an old card list which
contains the following. n uov. Eustis, Old Cemetery rear of
Church, *100." It might be interesting to find out where this
' Perpetual Care t'und is. There are evidently no special
conditions with reference to its use. Since these are separate
funds with reference to specific lots, I think the income should
be used for the care of the lots in question. It ,may be
impracticable as a matter of bookkeeping to distinguish this
in detail but I think the town should make some appropriation
for the care of walks and drives in this cemetery.
Some lots of Monroe Cemetery have been abandoned and are
neglected. The Commissioners wish to reclaim and resell scme
of these lots. I find no statutory authority which permits
this and without special legislateon I know of no way in which
the title to the burial rights in a lot can be taken away from
the person who inherits it under the Statute. I think the
proposed by-law should provide that in all future deeds of
lots there should be some conditicn which wouid cause the
lot to revert to the town if no owner could be located after
a proper interval of time.
Yours sincerely,
(Signed) S. R. ' rightington
{
el
323
The Board discussed this letter and decided to await
word from the Appropriation Committee as to what they
arrived at with the Cemetery Commissioners.
The Clerk reported that the Middlesex County
Sanatorium now rendered bills for all the cases sent
from Lexington for care at the County Hospital at the
weekly rate chargeable monthly to the Town. the bills
for the month of January amounted to $283.50. Prior to
the admission of patients to the Middlesex County
Hospital arrangements were made with the County to take
patients at the various sanatoriums and the charge for
their care was made through a County tax sent to th-e Board
of Assessors to be included in their warrant. The
Assessors have for 1932 also received a bill for $5312.77 Bills for
which is for the maintenance and repairs of the Middlesex care at
County Hospital. In addition to this, a monthly bill Cmunty
for the care of each patient at the rate of $12. 25 per Hospital.
week was received. This sum has not been cared for in
the present appropriation for the Board of Health. Therefor,
provision should be made for this. At the present rate
it will be necessary to increase the appropriation $6000.
The question of cleaning the sewers was discussed,
and it was decided to request the Supt. of Public Works to clean
the trunk line sewers.
The Chairman reported that the net proceeds of the Unemployment
show at the Lexington Theater for the unemployment relief Relief.
was $411.50.
Mr. Custance made a report on the expenses of widening
North Street. The statement showed that gravel was taken
from this job and sent to various streets that were being
constructed, such as Smith Avenue, and when the cost of North
the gravel was reduced on this account it showed a net cost Street.
to the Town of $ for the widening of North
Street. After all targes to other jobs there is a credit of
$29.25.
REPORT OF COST OF WORK ON NORTH STREET
February 9, 1932.
Credits to North St.-Gravel to the Charges to North St.
following streets. Account
Smith Ave. $735.00 $2,708.25
Independence Ave. 225.00
Tucker Ave. 450.00
Crescent Hill Ave. — 675.00
$2085.00 2.085.00
623.25
324 ,4=i
No Charges to Anv Account
Allen Street Construction
Jany 4--270 yds Bank Gravel @ $1.25 - $ 337.50
Jan. 5--252 " " " @ 1.25 315.Q0
$652,60
15 yds. Gravel to Audick job c $1.25- 18.75
20 ids. Fill " " " 4.00 - 80.00
24 rr it n Tucker Ave. 4;00 - 96.00
10 " " " Mi s s Stone' s
property 4.00 - 40.00
55 yds. Gravel to Crescent
Hill Ave. 1.25 - 68.75
17 lds. Fill to " " " 4.00 - 68.00
6 " " " Allen Street 4.00 - 24.00
3 " " " Shade Street 4.00 - 12.00
130 yds. Gravel to Hill Street 1.25 - 162.50
$1222.50 `
Mr. Custance returned from Arlington at the meeting
of the Arlington Board- of Selectmen and Public Works Board
where they discussed the by-pass which Will go by the way
of Concord Avenue in Lexington and terminate in Concord.
He stated that Arlington recom ended that the land damage
cost go through at a cost not exceeding fifteen percent
of the total cost of the construction and the damages.
Mr. Custance stated that he did not see why the State could
Concord not take the whole amount of the construction and damages.
Avenue. He endeavored to figure the damages in the Town of Lexington.
He suggested that there might be damages on Cutler's barn
at $7,000., on John Sellar' s garage at $5000. , Pilkington' s
barn at $5000. and there would be not more than 30 acres
of land taken.
The Board voted in favor of the project of Concord
Avenue going through.
The weekly report of the Supt. of Public Works was
received.
The meeting adjourned at 11:15 P. L.
A true record, Attest:
Clerk.
II