Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-04-27 SB-min SELECT BOARD MEETING Monday, April 27, 2026 A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:00p.m. on Monday, April 27, 2026, via a hybrid meeting platform. Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Pato, Vice Chair; Mr. Lucente, Ms. Kumar, and Mr. Sandeen were present, as well as Town Manager, Mr. Bartha; Deputy Town Manager, Ms. Axtell; and Executive Assistant, Ms. Katzenback. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1. Discussion: Potential Lease to Wireless Companies Steve Kaufman, Communications Advisory Committee (CAC), explained that the CAC identified that there is poor signal quality in certain locations on major streets around Town, including Lowell Street, Route 2A, and Mass Ave. Wireless services are very important to some in Town. This can impact commerce and public safety. Dorinda Goodman, IT Infrastructure Manager, explained that for public safety, the vehicles all have computers in them. This allows for running plates and connecting to dispatch. There are also cellular- based systems throughout Town, including reading the water meters, the building management and alarm systems, and staff use technology in the field to efficiently do inspections. There is a significant amount of mobile communications use. Staff have attempted to use alternate sources than cellular, such as satellite, but this did not resolve the problem. Emergency services may not always be able to connect as needed. There have been instances where residents or members of public safety have had to walk or drive further out to connect to dispatch or other resources. Instances have also been reported where residents have had significant delays in response because of lack of cell phone reception at home during an emergency. Mr. Kaufman explained that the CAC met with three carriers to further discuss this. Tim Greene, Verizon Representative, explained that Verizon Wireless has expressed interest in leasing sites on Town-owned land for the purpose of constructing new wireless communication towers to address cell service gaps in town which have been identified. A preliminary evaluation of potential locations was done by Verizon, focusing on parcels with adequate space, appropriate setbacks from wetlands, and no conservation restrictions. Based on this review, two Town-owned properties were identified as suitable candidates: William Diamond Middle School and Pine Meadows Golf Club. Both sites appear to meet the necessary criteria for tower development, including sufficient land area and compliance with environmental considerations. The standard design for this would be a monopole. Mr. Lucente asked if there was any public communication about this proposal. Mr. Kaufman stated that there was a preliminary meeting with the Town Manager. Mr. Lucente stated that, given the proposed locations and the potential aesthetics of a monopole structure, it would be helpful to gather feedback from the public prior to going out for a Request for Proposal(RFP). Mr. Bartha noted that the Superintendent’s Office was informed in March regarding these discussions and the Superintendent expressed that it was okay for the school sites to be explored as possibilities. Mr. Sandeen noted that when the Board approved the monopole behind the Police Station, it was told that AT&T would build the monopole at their cost, with a stipulation that there would be enough room on it for other carriers. He asked if Verizon had taken advantage of placing their equipment on that monopole. Mr. Greene stated that AT&T is the only carrier on that pole. Mr. Sandeen mentioned that the Town’s wireless policy requires antennas be placed on existing poles before considering installation on new poles and asked Verizon to consider taking advantage of the existing monopole for at least some of the coverage gaps. He also asked about the financial implications of the proposal, as he did not hear in the presentation that Verizon was offering to build the new monopole at its expense. It is also unclear what the average individual in Town will be getting from this proposal. Finally, he requested that Lexington’s requirement to avoid diesel generators and preference for electric backup power during outages be included as part of the RFP. Mr. Greene explained that Verizon has a site on the other side of Town that already provides coverage for the area of Town that would be covered by the monopole. Mr. Sandeen asked about small antennae around Town on telephone poles, instead of a large monopole. Parth Patel, Verizon Wireless, explained that, in terms of improving service all around Town, small cell options would not be an ideal situation to close the gaps. There was agreement that input should be solicited from the Recreation Committee and the community regarding a potential cellular location for each site identified. This will include information regarding the potential aesthetics and benefits in coverage. The input will be collected and brought back to the Board prior to issuance of an RFP. DOCUMENTS: Overview.pdf; Verizon Lexington Coverage Analysis; Proposed Cell Tower Sites.pdf 2. 2026 Annual Town Meeting Select Board Article Discussion and Positions Ms. Hai explained that the goal of the upcoming Summit is to have a conversation regarding the floor amendment that was made on March 30th to the FY27 proposed budget, and a potential proposed compromise amendment, put forth by the Chair and Vice Chair of the School Committee. Ms. Hai explained that the floor amendment on March 30th was for $1.25M which, per a memo from the Superintendent, would be used to restore 13 positions for a year (four for literacy coaches, five for math coaches, four for digital learning coaches) amounting to $700,000. Also, $250,000 would be used to supplement the literacy curriculum, which the Town is already expending $700,000 from Free Cash to purchase. This would instead allow for the purchase of a five-year support and materials program, which would be a budgetary savings because five individual years would cost $450,000. This would save $200,000 overall. Finally, $250,000 would be used for early retirement incentives. The Board members present during that meeting voted unanimously against the amendment on the floor. Ms. Hai explained that last week, the School Committee Chair and Vice Chair offered a compromise proposal, requesting $625,000 of Free Cash, including $250,000 for the literacy curriculum materials, and $375,000 to retain five positions for a year. The exact positions were not specified. Also, the creation of a Policy Analysis Group, proposed to include two of each of the four Summit boards. She noted that, throughout the budget process, the Board has stated that it would recommend starting the Summit cycle this year after Spring Town Meeting, by convening policy summit conversations. Also, the Board’s stated and published goals for 2026/2027 include convening conversations on long-term financial challenges and policy guidance. Mr. Pato stated that the primary amendment on the table was essentially a randomly chosen number without justification, and the justification was then backfilled. The compromise amendment appears to come forward with specific items and a justification for them. Funding the literacy program makes sense because it will be an overall cost savings and is a one-time expense. The staffing item is a bit more difficult because one-time funds should not generally be used for staffing but there could be further discussion. The conversation around retirement benefits causes him concern as this could create a more difficult financial situation moving forward. Mr. Lucente agreed that he would be open to the curriculum extension program. He is leaning against the use of funds for staffing, and it is not clear if a justification has been made for the retirement incentive proposal. He is uncomfortable having Town Meeting vote on the policy group proposal. He would like all the groups to determine how best to work through the current disfunction in the process. The policy analysis group may not be the answer to this. Ms. Kumar stated that the process has shown that there is a gross depletion of trust in the community. She would like to work in the interest of rebuilding that trust and goodwill in the community while working towards a solution and a compromise. However, this should not occur while departing from the best practices in place. The proposal for an analysis group is a positive offer, but it may not actually address anything, as there would be no audit capability, no investigative capability, etc. Mr. Sandeen stated that the issue seems to be that the groups fundamentally do not agree on where the Town currently is. A bridge of trust needs to be built. He agreed that creation of a new committee through Town Meeting feels uncomfortable. There is a precedent that the existing committees in place would be capable of the work being proposed for the policy group. He explained that, while he supports the proposed use of funds for the literacy curriculum, he would caution against considering this a one-time expense. This is a five-year upfront payment for a curriculum that expires after five years, essentially leading to a recurring cost. Ms. Hai stated that she believes the cost is for five years of materials to create a lasting curriculum. Mr. Sandeen stated that he would change his position, if this was the case. Ms. Hai stated that she believes the proponents are amenable to the idea that this will not be a policy group formed by Town Meeting and instead that the first policy summit should include discussion regarding the creation of a finance group that would be based around the core of what the Appropriations Committee traditionally did. The School Committee expressed a concern that they would not want only Finance Committee members involved and would also want a School Committee member involved. She agreed that this would be helpful. In terms of the retirement consideration, she noted that reducing people at a high step to bring them in at a lower step could rapidly narrow any gap that was available in the potential salary savings. The curriculum material item request seems to make sense. She is willing to consider the funding to retain positions, if it can get all groups to a more positive place. DOCUMENTS: Working Document - 2026 ATM Positions Chart; Article 4 McKenna Amendment Article 4 McKenna Amendment; Proposed_Compromise_Agreement-1_School_Committee_.pdf ADJOURN VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 7:12p.m. A true record; Attest: Kristan Patenaude Recording Secretary