HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-07-20 SB Packet - ReleasedAGENDA
SELECT BOARD MEETING
Monday, July 20, 2026
Select Board Meeting Room 1625 Massachusetts Avenue
6:30 PM
1.Select Board Member Announcements and Liaison Reports
2.Lexington High School Project Update to Board
1.Town Manager Weekly Update
1.Approve: One-Day Liquor License(s) - Lexington-Waltham Lodge of Elks #2204,
959 Waltham Street
Tribute to Fallen Soldiers Torch Ride: Friday, July 24, 2026 through
Saturday, July 25, 2026
2.Approve: One-Day Liquor License - Wilson Farm, 10 Pleasant Street
Dinner in the Fields: Thursday, July 30, 2026
3.Approve: Entertainment License - Follen Community Church, 755 Massachusetts
Avenue
East Village Fair: Saturday, October 3, 2026
4.Approve: Common Victualler License
Dunkin' Donuts/Jimmy Johns: 323 Marrett Road
5.Approve: Limousine License
Sirius Limo Services - 7222 Lexington Ridge Drive, 1 Vehicle
6.Approve: Select Board Meeting Minutes
June 8, 2026 Select Board
June 10, 2026 Finance Summit
June 15, 2026 Select Board
7.Accept: Select Board Committee Resignations
Registrars of Voters: Mark Vitunic
EXECUTIVE SESSION A
Exemption 3: Collective Bargaining - To Discuss Strategy with Respect to Collective Bargaining (Fire
& Patrol)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comments are allowed for up to 10 minutes at the beginning of each meeting. Each speaker is
limited to 2 minutes for comment. Members of the Board will neither comment nor respond, other than
to ask questions of clarification. Speakers are encouraged to notify the Select Board's Office at 781-
698-4580 if they wish to speak during public comment to assist the Chair in managing meeting times.
SELECT BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS
TOWN MANAGER REPORT
CONSENT AGENDA
1
Fund for Lexington: Joe Pato
8.Approve: Select Board Committee Appointment
Fund for Lexington: Jill Hai
9.Approve: Town Manager Committee Appointment
Conservation Commission: Hope Dehmlow Dunne
10.Approve: Willard Circle, Stage Coach Road and Cart Path Lane - Street
Acceptance Order of Takings
11.Vote and Sign September 2026 State Primary Election Warrant
12.Approve: Appointment of Election Officers 2026-2027
1.Discussion: Proposed Local Election Voter Turnout Task Force Charge
7:05pm
2.Update: Lexington Human Rights Committee Recommendation - Awareness of
Immigration Rights & Safety
7:15pm
3.Discussion: Trash Program Options
7:30pm
1.Adjournment
8:15pm
1.Meeting Information
Meeting Packet: https://lexingtonma.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=5
*Members of the public can attend the meeting from their computer or tablet by
clicking on the following link at the time of the meeting:
https://lexingtonma.zoom.us/j/86343561893?pwd=oXKQDdIdatm6cK4k5pbTMMCVODdQYa.1
join.zoom.us
Meeting ID: 863 4356 1893
Passcode: 436053
Please note that the in-person meeting will not be suspended or terminated if
technological problems interrupt the remote connection.
An Act Relative to Extending Certain State of Emergency Accommodations:
https://www.mass.gov/the-open-meeting-law
The next regular meeting of the Select Board will be held on Monday, August 3,
2026 at 6:30pm via hybrid participation.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
ADJOURN
MEETING INFORMATION
2
ITEM
NUMBER:
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION A
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Exemption 3: Collective Bargaining - To Discuss Strategy with Respect to Collective Bargaining (Fire
& Patrol)
SUMMARY:
Move that the Select Board go into Executive Session under Exemption 3 to To discuss strategy with
respect to collective bargaining for Fire and Patrol, and to reconvene in Open Session. Further, as
Chair, I declare that an open meeting discussion may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining and
litigating position of the Town.
3
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
SELECT BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Select Board Member Announcements and Liaison Reports
SUMMARY:
Under this item, Select Board Members can provide verbal updates, make announcements, as well as
comment on any additional points or concerns.
Resources for Immigrant Rights, Travel and Protection
ATTACHMENTS:
Liaison Reports-Joe Pato-2026-07-20.pdf
2026-07-22-Email-Summary.pdf
4
Joe Pato:
• Urban Forest Master Plan Meeting 1
A Community Meeting for the Lexington Urban Forest Master Plan
Lexington's urban forest is made up of all the trees in yards, in parks, and along streets across the
town. Trees improve our lives by making Lexington a cooler, cleaner, more beautiful place to live.
But trees require care from the people and Town of Lexington to stay healthy and strong.
The Town of Lexington is developing an Urban Forest Master Plan to set a vision for the future of its
urban forestry program. We want to hear from you about your priorities and concerns when it
comes to trees. Learn more about the Urban Forest Master Plan and share your input about trees in
Lexington.
Community Meeting, Wednesday, July 29th, 2026
Topic: Lexington Urban Forest Master Plan
Location: Lexington Police Department Community Room - 1575 Massachusetts Ave
Time: 7pm - 9pm
A presentation about the Urban Forest Master Plan will be accompanied with activities and prompts
to provide input, and will be followed by an “Ask an Arborist” Q&A session. The presentation will be
hybrid and interactive, where those in attendance will be able to suggest ideas and provide
feedback about their experiences with trees in Lexington.
Snacks and light refreshments will be provided.
5
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 1 -
Public Email Comments to the Select
Board
Prepared from public comment emails received July 2–July 16, 2026. Message numbers are
assigned in chronological order from oldest to newest. Content generated using Microsoft
CoPilot using the prompts in Section 5.
1. Message Inventory Ordered by Date
Message
No.
Date Subject Issues Covered Town
Committee?
1 July 2,
2026,
11:41
AM
Bicycle Advisory
Committee Letter
to the Select Board
Retention of temporary green
bicycle lanes on
Massachusetts Avenue;
bicycle safety;
implementation of the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan;
multimodal transportation;
abutter and parking impacts.
Yes — Bicycle
Advisory
Committee
2 July 2,
2026,
12:06
PM
250 celebrations Lexington’s 250th
anniversary; global context of
the American Revolution;
historical connections with
events in India; civic
education and
commemoration.
No
3 July 3,
2026,
10:23
AM
Adam/East St
intersection
improvement
comment
Adams/East/Hathaway
intersection design;
pedestrian and school safety;
school-period traƯic queues;
roundabout or “peanutabout”
eƯects; sight lines.
No
6
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 2 -
Message
No.
Date Subject Issues Covered Town
Committee?
4 July 5,
2026,
6:02
PM
Letter for the
Select Board Re:
Intersection at
Adams/East St.
Adams/East intersection
alternatives; impacts on Fiske
Common land, residences,
property values, and mature
trees; traƯic flow; preference
for a mini roundabout, with a
“peanutabout” as an
alternative.
No —
submitted on
behalf of a
private
condominium
board
5 July 5,
2026,
8:09
PM
Re: Road
improvements on
Adams St —
follow-up for Nov.
7, 2023 Select
Board meeting
Pedestrian and bicycle
priority in design; traƯic
calming; school crossings;
raised crossing or pedestrian-
activated signal; request for
explicit Board action.
Includes a forwarded 2023
message on the same issues.
No
6 July 6,
2026,
8:26
AM
Comment — 7/6
Update on Adams
at East Street
Intersection
Improvements
Objection to larger
intersection changes;
preservation of Fiske
Common land, landscape,
and property value;
preference for a smaller
rotary.
No
7 July 6,
2026,
9:58
AM
Adams/Hancock
St. intersection
Support for a roundabout;
crash and near-miss
concerns; noise, pollution,
and delay associated with
stop-controlled alternatives;
feasibility of roundabouts on
slopes.
No
8 July 6,
2026,
10:31
AM
Comment — 7/6
Update on Adams
at East Street
Intersection
Improvements
School and pedestrian safety;
crosswalks and wider
sidewalks/bicycle paths;
traƯic calming; minimizing
encroachment toward school
fields; preference for a mini
roundabout or
“peanutabout.”
No
7
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 3 -
Message
No.
Date Subject Issues Covered Town
Committee?
9 July 8,
2026,
7:58
AM
Support for Ride
Safe Act Bill
Support for Massachusetts
Senate Bill S.3077;
micromobility and e-bike
classification; helmet,
visibility, battery,
identification, insurance,
enforcement, education, data
collection, and infrastructure.
Yes — Bicycle
Advisory
Committee
2. Issue Counts
Counts reflect the number of distinct email messages addressing each issue. A message
may appear in more than one category.
Issue Message
Count
Message
Nos.
Adams Street intersection redesigns and alternatives 6 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8
Pedestrian, bicycle, or school safety near Adams
Street intersections
5 3, 5, 6, 7, 8
Roundabout, mini-roundabout, or “peanutabout”
preferences
5 3, 4, 6, 7, 8
TraƯic flow, calming, queues, noise, pollution, or sight
lines
6 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8
Land, tree, landscape, residence, or property-value
impacts
3 4, 6, 8
Massachusetts Avenue green bicycle lanes 1 1
Micromobility and Ride Safe Act legislation 1 9
250th anniversary and global historical interpretation 1 2
8
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 4 -
3. Summary of Email Collection by Issue
Adams Street Intersection Improvements
Six messages addressed proposed changes at Adams Street intersections. Message 3
requested analysis of pedestrian safety, school-period queues, roundabout eƯects, and
sight-line improvements at Adams/East/Hathaway. Message 4 described potential impacts
on nearby private land, residences, property values, and mature trees, and favored a mini
roundabout. Message 5 asked the Board to direct early consideration of pedestrian and
bicycle impacts, favor pedestrian safety in design tradeoƯs, and evaluate a raised crossing
or pedestrian-activated signal. Message 6 objected to a larger intervention and supported a
smaller rotary to preserve the neighboring landscape. Message 7 supported a roundabout
at Adams/Hancock, citing crashes, near misses, traƯic flow, noise, pollution, and slope
feasibility. Message 8 prioritized student safety, crosswalks, wider walking and bicycling
space, traƯic calming, and limited encroachment near school fields, while favoring a mini
roundabout or “peanutabout.”
Bicycle and Micromobility Policy
Message 1 supported retaining the temporary green bicycle lanes on Massachusetts
Avenue, citing safety, network continuity, multimodal goals, and survey support, while
acknowledging the need to assess abutter and parking eƯects. Message 9 supported the
Ride Safe Act, emphasizing a tiered regulatory framework for e-bikes and other
micromobility devices, safety equipment, enforcement, education, incident data, and
future infrastructure investment.
250th Anniversary and Historical Context
Message 2 encouraged the Town to include a broader global perspective in 250th-
anniversary education and commemoration, particularly the relationship between the
American Revolution and contemporaneous British military and imperial pressures in
India.
9
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 5 -
4. Briefing Memo for the Select Board
To: Select Board
Subject: Public email comments received July 2–8, 2026
Purpose: To summarize nine email messages submitted for the Board’s consideration
without identifying individual senders.
Overview
The collection is concentrated on transportation safety and infrastructure. Six of nine
messages concern proposed Adams Street intersection improvements. Two messages
were submitted by the Town’s Bicycle Advisory Committee: one on temporary green bicycle
lanes along Massachusetts Avenue and one on state micromobility legislation. One
message concerns the 250th anniversary and a global interpretation of Revolutionary-era
history.
Key Considerations
Comments on the Adams Street projects consistently ask the Town to account for
pedestrians, cyclists, schoolchildren, traƯic operations, and visibility. Several messages
support a roundabout-based design, although preferences vary among a mini roundabout,
a “peanutabout,” and other configurations. Three messages raise concerns about land
acquisition, mature-tree removal, residential proximity, landscape character, or property
value. Suggested safety measures include improved crosswalks, wider sidewalks or bicycle
paths, traƯic calming, a raised crossing, and a pedestrian-activated signal.
The Massachusetts Avenue bicycle-lane comment supports retaining the temporary
installation until full corridor redesign and resurfacing, while also recommending outreach
to abutters and review of parking impacts. The Ride Safe Act comment supports a
statewide framework for micromobility classification, equipment, enforcement, education,
incident reporting, and infrastructure.
The anniversary-related comment asks that public education acknowledge the American
Revolution’s wider international setting, including events in India, while preserving the
central place of local and national Revolutionary history.
10
Generated: 7/16/2026 @ 1:54 PM - 6 -
5. Prompts Used to Create This Document
1. Enumerate each email message; create a table of subject, date, issues covered,
message number, and whether the message came from a Town committee; order
the table from oldest to newest; exclude sender identification.
2. Create a table of issues and the number of messages addressing each issue.
3. Summarize the email collection by issue and identify supporting messages by
message number.
4. Rewrite the collection as a neutral briefing memo for the Select Board.
5. Add a section identifying the prompts used to create the document.
11
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Select Board/School Building Committee Member
ITEM
NUMBER:
2
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
SELECT BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Lexington High School Project Update to Board
SUMMARY:
Under this standing item, the Select Board will share general updates on the Lexington High School
Project, including progress reports, key milestones, and upcoming actions. This item is intended to
provide regular updates to the community on the project’s status and next steps.
Public comment will not be taken on this item.
For additional information and live updates, visit the project website: www.lhsproject.lexingtonma.org
12
ITEM
NUMBER:
1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
TOWN MANAGER REPORT
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Town Manager Weekly Update
SUMMARY:
Under this item, the Town Manager can provide verbal updates, make announcements, as well as
comment on any additional points or concerns.
13
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: One-Day Liquor License(s) - Lexington-Waltham Lodge of Elks #2204, 959 Waltham Street
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-making
The Lexington-Waltham Lodge of Elks #2204 requests approval of a One-Day Liquor License to
permit the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages in a designated area of the rear parking lot of
the Lodge, located at 959 Waltham Street, on Friday, July 24, 2026, from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM, and
on Saturday, July 25, 2026, from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM, in conjunction with the Tribute to Fallen
Soldiers Torch Ride.
The Lodge having visitors from the Tribute to Fallen Soldiers Northwest, a 501(c)(3) non-profit
organization whose members are riding cross country to honor America's fallen service members.
The requested one-day license would allow attendees to purchase and consume alcoholic beverages in
the designated outdoor area on both days, separate and distinct from the alcohol served inside under the
Lodge's existing annual liquor license, with no alcohol permitted to move between the two areas. The
Lodge currently holds an annual liquor license for the interior of the building.
Under state law, the Lodge may obtain a separate one-day license for the outdoor area, provided
alcoholic beverages are not transferred between the permanently licensed indoor premises and the
temporarily licensed outdoor premises. The applicant has submitted an plan indicating that the outdoor
service area will be clearly defined and monitored by Lodge personnel to ensure alcoholic beverages
remain within the licensed outdoor area and that service is limited to patrons of legal drinking age.
PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to approve One-Day Liquor License(s) for the Lexington-Waltham Lodge of Elks #2204 to serve
all alcoholic beverages in a designated area of the rear parking lot at 959 Waltham Street on Friday, July
24, 2026 from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM and Saturday, July 25, 2026 from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM, in
conjunction with visit from the Tribute to Fallen Soldiers Torch Ride.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
Elks_Diagram.pdf
14
15
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
2
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: One-Day Liquor License - Wilson Farm, 10 Pleasant Street
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Wilson Farm requests a One-Day Liquor License to serve wine at its 'Dinner in the Fields' event, to be
held immediately outside Greenhouse #7 at 10 Pleasant Street, on Thursday, July 30, 2026, from 5:30
PM to 9:30 PM. A rain date has been requested for Friday, July 31, 2026.
The relevant departments have reviewed this request and have no objections.
PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to approve a One-Day Liquor License for Wilson Farm to serve wine at Dinner in the Fields on
July 30, 2026, from 5:30 PM to 9:30 PM, at 10 Pleasant Street, Lexington, with a requested rain date of
July 31, 2026.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
Dinner in the Fields Diagram.pdf
16
Stairs with a gate to access the field area where dinner in the fields
will be held. Greenhouse is a rain option. Space in circled in red below
17
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
3
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Entertainment License - Follen Community Church, 755 Massachusetts Avenue
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Follen Community Church requests an Entertainment License for live musical performances during the
East Village Fair on Saturday, October 3, 2026. The performances will take place outside Follen
Church, between the Sanctuary and the Community Center at 755 Massachusetts Avenue, from 10:00
AM to 3:00 PM.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve an Entertainment License for Follen Community Church at 755 Massachusetts Avenue for
live musical performances during the East Village Fair on Saturday, October 3, 2026, from 10:00 AM to
3:00 PM.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
Follen Event Map.pdf
18
layout plan - east villlage fair
not to scale 02 October 2021
power use source
bouncy, large
bouncy, small
grill, microwave
grill, crockpots
soup
waldorf, near deck
waldorf, near deck
sanctuary, west
sanctuary, west
sanctuary, se window
power use source
ice cream
cotton candy
hot drinks
furniture tent
sports tent
ext. south loggia
ext. south loggia
ext. south loggia
CC window
CC window
children’s
books
(20 x 30
tent)
(tent 1 or 2)
jewelry
BLM banner
terraceDumpsterBarnes Place19
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
4
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Common Victualler License
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Mission Hill Donuts, LLC, operating under the D/B/A Dunkin'/ Jimmy Johns, is requesting approval of
a Common Victualler License for its location at 323 Marrett Road, Lexington, MA 02421.
The on-site manager will be Geo Barbosa. Proposed hours of operation are Monday through Sunday:
6:00 AM to 8:00 PM. The previous Dunkin's in this location was approved for a 6 am opening. Zoning
confirmed they would allow the new Dunkin/Jimmy Johns to open without a special permit from the
ZBA as it is a grandfathered use.
The applicant is working with the Building, Health, and Fire Departments for their respective required
permits and inspections.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve a Common Victualler License for Dunkin'/ Jimmy Johns, located at 323 Marrett Road,
Lexington, MA 02421, with on-site manager Geo Barbosa, for the hours and days of operation as
Monday through Sunday: 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
Move to approve the consent.
20
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
5
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Limousine License
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Sirius Financial Services, Inc, doing business as Sirius Limo Services, has requested approval of a new
Limousine License for one vehicle. The applicant, Elnur Bairamov, has submitted all required
paperwork. The license covers a 2026 Lincoln, Navigator L garaged at 7222 Lexington Ridge Drive,
and operating within the Metrowest area.
All relevant department reviews have been completed and there are no objections.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve the application and issue one (1) Limousine License to Sirius Limo Services, operated by
Sirius Financial Services, Inc.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
SBLM-26-4.pdf
21
Town of Lexington, MA July 13, 2026
Record No: SBLM-
26-4
Limousine License
Status: Active
Submitted On: 7/10/2026
Primary Location
7222 LEXINGTON RIDGE DR
Lexington, MA 02421
Owner
LEXINGTON RIDGE- AVALON
INC ATTN: TAX DEPARTMENT
4040 WILSON BLVD STE
1000 ARLINGTON, VA 22203
Applicant
Elnur Bairamov
781-
@gmail.com
7222 Lexington Ridge dr
Lexington, MA 02421
License Info
7/13/26, 10:18 AM SBLM-26-4
https://lexingtonma.workflow.opengov.com/#/explore/records/125050/details 1/522
Corporate Name*
Sirius Financial Services Inc
Are you operating under a D/B/A?*
Yes
D/B/A*
Sirius Limo Services
Is the owner different than the applicant?*
No
On-Site Manager Name*
Elnur BAirramov
On-Site Manager Primary Email*
@gmail.com
On-Site Manager Primary Phone Number*Federal Identification No.*
Number of Vehicles*
2
Routes*
Lexington
Information on Each Vehicle
If you have more than one vehicle, click "Add New" to enter the information for
each vehicle.
Make*
Lincoln
Model*
Navigatior L
**-***8473
7/13/26, 10:18 AM SBLM-26-4
https://lexingtonma.workflow.opengov.com/#/explore/records/125050/details 2/523
Year*
2026
Livery License Plate Number*
LVB9504
Vehicle Identification Number*
5LMJJ3RG9TEL03684
Where Vehicle Garaged*
Lexington
Authorized Signature
Applicant's Signature*
Elnur Bairamov
Jul 10, 2026
Workers Compensation Affidavit
Business/Organization Name*
SIrius Financial Services Inc
Address*
7222 Lexington Ridge dr
City*
Lexington
State*
MA
Zip Code*
02421
Telephone*
Business Type*
Other
Explain Other Business Type*
Limousine
7/13/26, 10:18 AM SBLM-26-4
https://lexingtonma.workflow.opengov.com/#/explore/records/125050/details 3/524
Are you an employer? Select the appropriate
option*
I am a sole proprietor or partnership and
have no employees working for me in
any capacity. (No Workers
Compensation Insurance required)
Failure to secure coverage as required under MGL c. 152 25A is a criminal violation
punishable by a fine up to $1,500 and/or one year imprisionment, as well as civil
penalties in the form of a STOP WORK ORDER and a fine of up to $250 a day against
the violator. A copy of this statement may be forwarded to the Office of
Investigations of the DIA for insurance coverage verification.
I do hereby certify under the pains and penalties of
perjury that the information provided is true and
correct.*
Elnur Bairamov
Jul 10, 2026
Attachments
Navigator_Registration.pdf
Uploaded by Elnur Bairamov on Jul 10, 2026 at 9:42 AM
REQUIRED
Navigator_Registration.jpg
Uploaded by Elnur Bairamov on Jul 10, 2026 at 9:38 AM
REQUIRED
Navigator_State_inspection.jpg
Uploaded by Elnur Bairamov on Jul 10, 2026 at 9:39 AM
REQUIRED
Workers Compensation Insurance Declaration Page
Vehicle Registration(s)
Registry of Motor Vehicles Inspection
7/13/26, 10:18 AM SBLM-26-4
https://lexingtonma.workflow.opengov.com/#/explore/records/125050/details 4/525
Navigator_TNC.pdf
Uploaded by Elnur Bairamov on Jul 10, 2026 at 9:39 AM
Navigator_TNC.pdf
7/13/26, 10:18 AM SBLM-26-4
https://lexingtonma.workflow.opengov.com/#/explore/records/125050/details 5/526
ITEM
NUMBER:
6
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Select Board Meeting Minutes
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision Making
The Select Board is being asked to approve the following set of minutes:
June 8, 2026 Select Board
June 10, 2026 Finance Summit
June 15, 2026 Select Board
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve and release the following minutes:
June 8, 2026 Select Board
June 10, 2026 Finance Summit
June 15, 2026 Select Board
Move to approve the agenda
ATTACHMENTS:
DRAFT 06082026 Select Board
DRAFT 06102026-Summit
DRAFT 06152026 Select Board
27
SELECT BOARD MEETING
Monday, June 8, 2026
A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:30p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2026, via a
hybrid meeting platform. Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Pato, Vice Chair; Mr. Lucente, Mr. Sandeen and Ms.
Kumar were present, as well as Town Manager, Mr. Bartha; Deputy Town Manager, Ms. Axtell; and
Executive Assistant, Ms. Katzenback.
PUBLIC COMMENT
John Rossi, 40 Arcola Street, a Town Meeting member and advocate for the disabled, expressed concern
for the process for the June 16, 2026, referendum regarding 2026 Annual Town Meeting Article 31. He
noted that the Commission on Disabilities unanimously voted in opposition to Article 31.
Andrew Erickson, Lexington Fire Department, expressed concern regarding a lack of pay raises and cost
of living adjustments for the firefighters, leading to low morale and financial strain. He stated that the
firefighters do not feel valued.
Mark Simons, Lexington Fire Department, emphasized the low morale among the Lexington Fire
Department Union Staff due to the lack of a new Union contract and rising costs of living.
Laura Houlihan, Lexington Fire Department expressed her frustration and discouragement regarding the
Union contract negotiation process, feeling it is a lack of respect and support from the Town. A fair
contract is not something that should be met with such disdain and frustration. If the Town wants quality
firefighters, support is needed.
Rob Green, President of Lexington Firefighters Local 491, highlighted the value of firefighters and the
lack of respect being shown from the Town. This leads to retention and recruitment issues. The
firefighters ask Town Hall to show the same, not with words and empty promises, but with action.
Janet Kern, 72 Lowell Street and Town Meeting member, stated that she supports the bylaw change on
the June 16, 2026, referendum regarding 2026 Annual Town Meeting Article 31, citing the benefits of
reducing waste and costs.
Stephen Kaye, 6 Abernathy Road, questioned the referendum process and expressed concerns regarding
the Town's communication and its impact on residents.
Olga Guttag, 273 Emerson Road, stated that she feels there is no need to change the bylaw as proposed in
2026 ATM Article 31. She suggested the Town first educate residents on reducing waste before
implementing new policies.
SELECT BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS
1. Select Board Member Announcements and Liaison Reports
Ms. Hai noted that there will be a Financial Policy Summit this Wednesday. Secondly, she gave an update
on the Town’s sister city visit to Antony.
Mr. Lucente stated that he had the privilege of attending and speaking at the LHS graduation on May 31,
2926, where the accomplishments of 603 Lexington High School graduates were celebrated.
28
2. Lexington High School Project Update to Board
Mr. Pato stated that Bill H.4843, an act providing for an exchange of certain park land in the Town of
Lexington, which is an Article 97 process, passed unanimously in both houses of the legislature last week
by roll call vote. The Act has been enacted and is on the Governor's desk for signature.
TOWN MANAGER REPORT
Nothing additional at this time.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approve: One-day Liquor License - Waldorf School of Lexington, 739 Massachusetts Avenue
• 55th Anniversary Celebration: Saturday, June 13, 2026
To approve a One-Day Liquor License for Waldorf School of Lexington to serve beer and wine at 739
Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington, MA 02420 on Saturday, June 13, 2026, from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM.
2. Approve: One-day Liquor License(s) - Craft Food Halls, Visitor Center Lawn
• FIFA Watch Party Beer Garden: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 - Saturday, June 27, 2026
To approve 12 One-Day Liquor Licenses for Craft Food Halls to serve beer on the Visitor Center lawn, 1
Bedford Street, from Tuesday, June 16, 2026, through Saturday, June 27, 2026.
DOCUMENTS: FIFA Event Diagram.pdf
3. Approve: Entertainment License - Indian Americans of Lexington, Hastings Park
• Indian Independence Day: Saturday, August 15, 2026
To approve an Entertainment License for the Indian Americans of Lexington at Hastings Park for Indian
Independence Day on Saturday, August 15, 2026.
DOCUMENTS: IAL Event Diagram.png
4. Approve: Lexington Lions Club Request for 70th Annual Fourth of July Carnival – This item was
held for individual consideration.
5. Approve: Select Board Meeting Minutes
To approve and release the following minutes:
• March 30, 2026, Select Board
• April 6, 2026, Select Board
• April 8 2026, Select Board
• April 13, 2026, Select Board
• April 15, 2026, Select Board
DOCUMENTS: DRAFT 03302026 Select Board Minutes.pdf; DRAFT 04062026 Select Board
Minutes.pdf; DRAFT 04082026 Select Board Minutes.pdf; DRAFT 04132026 Select Board Minutes.pdf;
DRAFT 04152026 Select Board Minutes.pdf
6. Accept: Town Manager Appointment
29
• Conservation Commission - Tom Oliver from Associate to Full Member
To confirm the Town Manager's appointment of Thomas Oliver from an Associate Member to a Full
Member for the Conservation Commission with a term set to expire September 2028.
DOCUMENTS: T. Oliver - Conservation - application_Redacted.pdf
7. Accept: Select Board Committee Resignation
• Housing Partnership Board - Margaret Heitz
To accept the resignation of Margaret Heitz from the Housing Partnership Board, effective immediately.
DOCUMENTS: 2026.05.29 Margaret Heitz - Housing Partnership Board_Redacted.pdf
8. Approve: Request to Lower Battle Green Flag in Memory of Martha C. Wood
To approve the lowering of the Battle Green flag on Saturday, June 13, 2026 in memory of Martha C.
Wood.
9. Approve: Fiscal Year 2027 Cost-Of-Living Adjustment (COLA) for Non-Represented Employees
To approve the Fiscal Year 2027 2.5% Cost-Of-Living Adjustment (COLA) for Non-Represented
Employees, as presented, effective July 1, 2026.
DOCUMENTS: Fiscal Year 2027 COLA
10. Approve: Water and Sewer Deferral
To approve deferral of the FY2026 water and sewer payments for 21 Byron Avenue.
DOCUMENTS: 2026.06.08 C Neurath - Application for Deferral of Water Sewer.pdf
11. Confirmation of Minuteman Regional Vocational Technical School's Operating Transfer Within
the Current FY2026 Budget
To confirm the Minuteman Regional Vocational Technical School's amendment to their FY2026 budget
with an appropriation of $325,000 from certified Excess and Deficiency funds for transfer to the Capital
Stabilization Fund.
DOCUMENTS: Minuteman Regional Vocational Technical School district FY26 Budget
Amendment.pdf
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve the
Consent Agenda, aside from Item #4, as discussed.
4. Approve: Lexington Lions Club Request for 70th Annual Fourth of July Carnival
Mr. Lucente recused himself from this item.
To approve the following requests of the Lexington Lions Club for the 70th Annual Fourth of July
Carnival, outlined in the Lexington Lions Club letter dated May 11, 2026.
30
To approve the request of the Lexington Lions Club to use lighting as necessary until 11:30 PM on
Monday, June 29, 2026 and Tuesday, June 30, 2026 during setup, and until 11:30 PM from Wednesday,
July 1, 2026 through Sunday, July 5, 2026 after the daily closing of the Carnival.
To approve a fireworks display on Thursday, July 2, 2026 at approximately 9:30 PM subject to approval
of the fireworks vendor, Pyrotechnico, and necessary safety precautions as required by the Fire
Department.
DOCUMENTS: 2026 LexLions Request Letter; 2026 Carnival Layout Diagram
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 4-0 to approve
Consent Agenda Item #4, as discussed.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
1. Working Session Discussion: 2026 Annual Town Meeting Article 31 Bylaw Amendment
Ms. Hai explained that this is a discussion on Article 31 from Annual Town Meeting 2026 and as it
relates to the referendum vote on June 16th. The purpose of this item is for the Board to reassert the facts
as they were presented at Town Meeting and what the change to the bylaw is and is not. Also, it is for
individual Board members to share what they would expect to see or to require be included in a final
policy, which would have to be approved by the Board. She noted that the Board has repeatedly indicated
individual commitments to specific requirements, and this discussion is an opportunity to renew those.
Ms. Hai stated that she researched the Town’s immediate neighbors who provide curbside pickup as a
Town service. The closest neighbors who provide this (Bedford, Belmont, Arlington) all provide for
additional bags, which can be purchased for use in overflow weeks. The bags are made available in
multiple easily accessed locations in any given town. The cost seemed relatively consistently to be about
$3 a piece. They come in rolls of varying sizes, depending on the town. There is also an opportunity to
obtain a second cart for an annual fee, which equates roughly to the annualized cost of 1-2 bags/week.
There also seem to be provisions for smaller cart sizes for anyone who would request that. She believes
any policy for Lexington would include similar provisions. Deeper engagement with the community will
yield recommendations from across the community, particularly on needed and appropriate
accommodations for physical, medical, economic or other ability limitation.
Mr. Pato noted that both the Town's curbside collection contract and its disposal contract with the North
Andover waste-to-energy facility are approaching renewal, with significant cost increases anticipated. He
stated that reducing the overall amount of waste generated is the most effective way to control future
costs and believes the framework authorized by Article 31 provides a path toward that goal. He
emphasized that any fees established under the program must comply with state law by recovering only
the cost of providing the service. Based on fee structures in other communities, he estimated that a second
trash cart could cost approximately $100–$200 annually, while occasional excess trash bags could cost
between $2 and $5 each. He stated that the purpose of these fees would be to encourage waste reduction
while avoiding undue hardship for residents. He also clarified that the use of automated trash carts is
separate from Article 31 and that any decision to implement automated collection would depend on the
terms and cost of the Town's future hauling contract.
Ms. Kumar stated that equity should be a guiding principle in developing any future program. She
emphasized that the curbside collection system should be accessible and easy for all residents to use. She
would like to see a program that helps the community ease into the change. She indicated that, from an
31
equity standpoint, a universally provided larger trash cart with the option for residents to request a smaller
cart would be a reasonable approach.
Mr. Sandeen stated that Article 31 provides the Town with additional tools to reduce the volume of trash
requiring disposal and help control rising waste management costs. He noted that, without the bylaw
amendment, the Town would need to either reduce trash collection services, reduce funding for other
municipal services, or seek an operating override to maintain existing service levels. He stated that none
of those alternatives were desirable. He emphasized the importance of program flexibility, noting that
many residents may prefer smaller trash carts. He recommended a default 48-gallon trash cart while
allowing households generating less than 32 gallons of trash per week to opt for a smaller cart. He also
recommended allowing any residents to request a 32-gallon recycling cart, regardless of the default size
selected, and waiving fees for additional trash carts for residents with medical disabilities or demonstrated
financial need. Mr. Sandeen further noted that several communities, including Bedford, Framingham,
Malden, Reading, Beverly, Andover, Maynard, and Wenham, have implemented smart-tag technology
that allows residents to continue using compatible automated collection carts while helping reduce
municipal costs.
Mr. Lucente stated that, regardless of the referendum outcome, the Board should continue discussing
implementation details, including trash cart sizes and the circumstances under which additional fees
would apply. He suggested offering multiple cart size options based on resident preference and
establishing household size thresholds that would automatically qualify a residence for a second cart,
while clearly defining the term "household." He also recommended that the policy address the continued
use of existing trash carts, provide convenient options for residents needing additional trash bags, and
ensure adequate recycling capacity. He cautioned that enforcement measures should avoid creating
incentives for illegal or improper disposal of trash.
Mr. Sandeen noted that the Town's website states there is no limit on the amount of recycling residents
may place at the curb and that additional recycling carts are available upon request.
The Board agreed to continue this discussion at a future date.
DOCUMENTS: 2026 ATM Article 31 Motion
2. Hearing: Liquor License Alteration of Premise Application - Lexington Golf Club Discussion:
Chair Hai opened the public hearing at 7:31.
Ms. Hai noted that the Select Board Office has received all the necessary paperwork from the Lexington
Golf Club for the Alteration of Premise to existing liquor license at 55 Hill Street. The Club recently
completed renovations to the clubhouse, including a reconfiguration of interior spaces on the first floor
(swapping the location of the dining room and locker room areas), improvements to the kitchen, and
modifications to the bar area. The previous open U-shaped bar was redesigned as part of the renovation.
Because these changes affect the licensed areas where alcoholic beverages are served and consumed, an
amendment to the liquor license is required. The hours of license on the liquor license will remain the
same: Clubhouse/Clubhouse porch: 11:00am to 12:00 midnight7 days/week; Adjacent Golf Course:
11:00am - 9:00pm 7 days/week.
There was no public comment and there were no Board comments or questions.
The hearing was closed at 7:32pm.
32
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to Lexington
Golf Club, 55 Hill Street application for the Alteration of Premise on their All-Alcohol Club Liquor
License as per the plans submitted.
DOCUMENTS: Amendment Application LGC
3. Temporary Bike Lanes & Green Paint on Massachusetts Avenue - Between Bow Street & Maple
Street
Ross Morrow, Assistant Town Engineer, explained that the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority
(MWRA), in coordination with the Engineering Division, is requesting the Board's approval to extend the
length of time the temporary bicycle lanes and green pavement markings on Massachusetts Avenue
remain in place following completion of its construction project. This request continues to consider the
bike lanes temporary and does not include requiring DPW to maintain (repaint) the temporary bike lanes
with green paint. DPW anticipates a complete resurfacing of Massachusetts Avenue between Pleasant St.
and Bow Street in approximately 2-4 years.
Mr. Lucente stated that he is a little concerned with the process and scope. In July 2023, the Board
discussed creating a temporary detour. He has heard concerns from several businesses in that area
regarding the temporary nature of this project. There seems to be a likelihood of this being four years
versus two years, and that feels less temporary and more permanent. This does not feel like an extension
of what was already approved. He asked about outreach to people and businesses along Mass Ave. Mr.
Morrow stated that this has only been discussed with Town committees and groups, not individual
outreach to the residents yet.
Ms. Kumar expressed similar concern that extending this makes the change in bike transportation feel
semi-permanent. She asked about the impact on residents and businesses that lost space for this. She
stated that she likes the idea of using this as a pilot for other areas of Town.
Mr. Pato stated that he agrees to keeping the roadway intact as it currently is at this time. The Town
should also be exploring if it wants to expand the use of high visibility bike lanes. He agreed with
engaging the public but would not like to see any short-term remilling of this section of the roadway to
get rid of the paint and then figure out what to do.
Mr. Sandeen stated that he supports the Town engineer/DPW recommendation.
Ms. Hai stated that there was consensus that additional information on potential impact on abutters and
their experiences should be considered.
Dawn McKenna, 9 Hancock Street, stated that this is not a temporary thing if it will continue for another
2-4 years and is longer than it was supposed to be to begin with. Part of the problem with this area is that
the roads are very narrow. The Town is not exempt from the HDC and the request to have green paint as a
bike lane down the middle of the road was never brought to the HDC. Continuing to defer this is basically
sanctioning that this was done without permission or the chance for the public to comment on it.
Mr. Pato noted he does not believe that the HDC has jurisdiction on road safety signage and the Manual
of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Mr. Bartha stated that he would consult Town Counsel.
Mr. Morrow stated that he would continue to work on this and come back before the Board at a future
date.
33
DOCUMENTS: Bike Lane Memo
4. Presentation: Communications Advisory Committee Recommendations for a Renewal of the
LexMedia Contract
Ken Pogran and Rita Vachani, Communications Advisory Committee (CAC), explained that the CAC has
completed its review of the current LexMedia contract and they presented recommendations for
consideration as the Town prepares for contract renewal discussions. The Committee's recommendations
are intended to ensure that LexMedia continues to effectively support public access to local government
meetings, community programming, and multimedia communications while aligning services with the
Town’s evolving communications needs. The CAC is seeking Board feedback in the determination of the
desired level of service to be provided beginning July 1, 2026, confirming the funding sources necessary
to support that service level, and establishing funding for the first two-year term of a proposed six-year
agreement.
Mr. Bartha stated that staff would be comfortable supporting the six-year contract and the commitment
for the first two years.
Jim Shaw, Chairman of the Board of Lex Media, noted that there is a clause in the current contract that
allows the Town to walk away.
There was agreement that there should be further analysis regarding whether the subsequent four years
should be at level service or whether the Town should consider examining a change in service, either for a
fiscal reason or simply for a practical reason.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve a six-
year contract with LexMedia with an FY27 and FY28 first two-year period of the six year contract at the
current level service currently included in the FY27 Town budget at $200,000 and anticipated FY28 at
$225,000 and authorize the Communications Advisory Committee to finish negotiating the contract and
the Town Manager to execute the contract.
DOCUMENTS: Presentation - Overview and Recommendations for LexMedia Grant Agreement
Renewal
5. Hearing: Eversource Grant of Location Petition - Massachusetts Avenue/Meriam Street/Depot
Place
Chair Hai opened the hearing at 8:28pm.
Ms. Hai explained that this is a hearing for the request from NSTAR ELECTRIC COMPANY d/b/a
EVERSOURCE ENERGY to construct, and a location for, such a line of conduits and manholes with the
necessary wires and cables therein, said conduits and manholes to be located, substantially as shown on
the plan made by K. Rice, Dated January 8, 2026, under the following public way or ways of Lexington:
Massachusetts Avenue - Easterly from manhole MH7333, at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue
and Meriam Street, install approximately 40 feet of conduit.
Meriam Street - Easterly from the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Meriam Street, install
approximately190 feet of conduit.
34
Depot Place - Southerly from the intersection of Depot Place and Meriam Street, install approximately 90
feet of conduit and one new manhole, MH32832.
This work is requested to upgrade the service to 1833 Massachusetts Avenue.
Ms. Hai noted that the materials include a reference to three poles, which currently have an existing
double pole and the need to have the existing lines transferred and second pole removed. Verizon is
responsible for removing the double pole once all the wires have been transferred. She asked if
Eversource has transferred their lines. Rick Schifone, Eversource, stated that Eversource has removed its
wires from one of the poles. The poles on Meriam Street still have Eversource wires on them which are
still being scheduled to be removed. Ms Hai asked why if this plan had been in process since January 8,
the work had neither been done nor scheduled. Ms Hai also asked about duration of work to be done and
interruption to scheduled events, in particular on the Depot Square and Visitor Center lawn. There is
likely approximately two weeks of work for this project. Any interruptions will be notified by
construction crews. Ms. Hai asked who Eversource will be coordinating with. Mr. Schifone stated that
DPW will be notified. Ms Hai asked that the Economic Development /Visitor Center staff be notified as
well.
Mr. Pato stated that he appreciates the three poles that were identified, but the Town’s policy is for a 500’
radius from the work for double poles to be examined. There is also double pole at Mass Ave and Muzzey
Street which needs to be addressed according to the policy. Mr. Schifone stated that he missed this one.
Mr. Lucente stated that there are some competing interests such as the double pole situation. The owners
of this building have come forward and noted that they need to upgrade the amperage in the building, in
order to get the tenants needed for the building.
Mr. Sandeen reviewed a number of double poles, and bundles and loose wires that he would like to see a
schedule of removal for from Eversource. He asked that Eversource discuss with Town staff how to
resolve this.
Dawn McKenna, 9 Hancock Street, stated that, to her knowledge, no one was notified when the double
pole was installed in front of the Greek Church. She asked to talk to Eversource outside of this meeting
provide some construction project information planned in the area of the church.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to continue this
hearing to June 22, 2026 when Eversource would need to have scheduled all double pole work discussed.
DOCUMENTS: Grant of Location request for Mass Ave, Meriam St, Depot Pl
6. Hearing: Eversource Grant of Location Petition - 17 Hartwell Avenue
Chair Hai opened the hearing at 8:57pm.
She explained that this is a hearing for the request from NSTAR ELECTRIC COMPANY d/b/a
EVERSOURCE ENERGY to construct, and a location for, such a line of conduits and manholes with the
necessary wires and cables therein, said conduits and manholes to be located, substantially as shown on
the plan made by K. Rice, Dated February 5, 2026, under the following public way or ways of Lexington:
Hartwell Avenue - Northeasterly thence northwesterly from manhole MH25132, approximately 680 feet
southwest of Westview Street, install approximately 275 feet of conduit.
35
Northwesterly from manhole MH25134, approximately 120 feet southwest of Westview Street, install
approximately 78 feet of conduit.
This work is being requested to provide new underground service to the residential building at #17
Hartwell Avenue.
Ms. Hai stated that the information references two poles which need to have existing lines transferred.
She asked if Eversource has transferred their lines, Mr. Schifone stated that it has not for these two poles.
Ms. Hai stated that the Board has the same concerns about this item as it did with the last.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to continue this
hearing to June 22, 2026 when Eversource would need to have scheduled all double pole work discussed.
DOCUMENTS: Grant of Location request
7. Hearing: Eversource Grant of Location Petition - Waltham Street/Worthen Road
Chair Hai opened the hearing at 8:59pm.
She explained that this hearing if for the request from NSTAR ELECTRIC COMPANY d/b/a
EVERSOURCE ENERGY to construct, and a location for, such a line of conduits and manholes with the
necessary wires and cables therein, said conduits and manholes to be located, substantially as shown on
the plan made by K. Rice, Dated April 16, 2026, under the following public way or ways of Lexington:
Waltham Street - Southwesterly from manhole MH4034, approximately 280 feet northeast of Worthen
Road, install approximately 134 feet of conduit. Northeasterly from manhole MH4033, approximately
120 feet south of Worthen Road, install approximately 120 feet of conduit.
Worthen Road - Northerly from the intersection of Waltham Street and Worthen Road, install
approximately 1,615 feet of conduit and five new manholes; MH32875, MH32876, MH32877,
MH32878, MH32879.
This work is being requested to provide service to support the construction for Lexington High School.
Ms. Hai stated that the information references two poles which need to have existing lines transferred.
She asked if Eversource has transferred their lines, Mr. Schifone stated that these are newly set poles. He
asked for a contingent grant of location due to the urgency to start the work based on the project’s
deadline. Ms. Hai stated that she would be willing to make a contingent approval if the schedule is
submitted to the Board this week.
Mr. Sandeen noted that there is one unused loose wire on the sidewalk in this area and asked that this be
addressed.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve a
Grant of Location to NSTAR ELECTRIC COMPANY D/B/A EVERSOURCE ENERGY to construct,
and a location for, such a line of conduits and manholes with the necessary wires and cables therein, said
conduits and manholes to be located, substantially as shown on the plan made by K. Rice, Dated April 16,
2026, under the following public way or ways of Lexington: Waltham Street - Southwesterly from
manhole MH4034, approximately 280 feet northeast of Worthen Road, install approximately 134 feet of
conduit; Waltham Street - Northeasterly from manhole MH4033, approximately 120 feet south of
Worthen Road, install approximately 120 feet of conduit;Worthen Road - Northerly from the intersection
36
of Waltham Street and Worthen Road, install approximately 1,615 feet of conduit and five new manholes;
MH32875, MH32876, MH32877,MH32878, MH32879, to be conditioned on the scheduled work on
removal on the double poles, identified in the request, and the hanging wire be submitted in writing to the
Board this week.
DOCUMENTS: Grant of location request
EXECUTIVE SESSION
1. Exemption 2: To Conduct Strategy Session in Preparation for Contract Renewal Discussions with
Nonunion Personnel - Town Manager
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 at 9:10pm that
the Select Board go into Executive Session under Exemption 2: To Conduct Strategy Session in
Preparation for Contract Negotiations with Nonunion Personnel - Town Manager and not to reconvene in
Open Session. Further, it was declared that an open meeting discussion may have a negotiating position
of the Town.
ADJOURN
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 from
the Executive Session to adjourn both the Executive Session and the Regular Meeting at 9:50pm.
A true record; Attest:
Kristan Patenaude
Recording Secretary
37
Financial Summit
Select Board, School Committee, Appropriation Committee, Capital Expenditures Committee
Wednesday, June 10, 2026
A Financial Summit was called to order by Select Board Chair Jill Hai at 7:00p.m. on Wednesday, June
10, 2026, via Zoom hybrid meeting platform in Estabrook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, 1605
Massachusetts Avenue.
Present for the Select Board (SB): Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Pato; Mr. Lucente; Mr. Sandeen; and Ms. Kumar
as well as Mr. Bartha, Town Manager; Ms. Impink, Budget Director; and Ms. Kosnoff, Deputy Town
Manager for Finance.
Present for the School Committee (SC): Mr. Freeman, Chair; Ms. Carter; Ms. Jay; Ms. Lenihan; and Ms.
Roy; and Dr. Hackett, Superintendent of Schools.
Present for the Appropriation Committee (AC): Mr. Parker, Chair; Mr. Padaki; Mr. Ahuja; Mr. Levine;
Mr. Michelson; Ms. Verma; Mr. Bartenstein; and Ms. Yan
Present for the Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC): Mr. Lamb, Chair; Mr. Boudett; Mr. Rubenstein;
Ms. Rhodes; and Mr. Cole
All boards and committee called their groups to order.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
1. Discussion: Long Term Budget Challenges and Policy Considerations
Ms. Hai (SB) explained that in 2019 the Town adopted financial guidelines which expressly drove the
removal of Free Cash from the operating budget, increased the budget forecasting projections from three
years to five years, emphasized the need to build fiscal reserves, established a new prioritized rating
system for major capital expenditures, outlined the anticipated transfer of pension funding to OPEB
funding (which is still in process), built the capital stabilization funding for the High School, reaffirmed
the use of the allocation model with the new addition of dedicated LHS funding, and recommended
creation of a new debt management policy.
Ms. Hai (SB) reviewed the list of policy topics submitted by members of the summit as those to be
reviewed, including the revenue allocation/the history of the split/and revising it, the continued use of one
time funds for one-time expenses (not operating expenses), the reserve and safety nets and the usage
thereof, the capital stabilization fund post-LHS project, energy rebates and how they are used, pension
liability following full funding date, and the override policy and levy limit decisions. She also noted an
additional list of topics of concern that can be addressed in terms of costs that are outpacing the levy
growth. These include compensation, the capital plan debt service issues after the high school, residential
development and declining commercial development.
The groups discussed other potential policy discussion topics. Mr. Michelson (AC) stated that the
Minuteman budget as a driver should be added to the list. Dr. Hackett (SC) stated that she would like to
see shared expenses on the list. Mr. Levine (AC) stated that he would like to include property assessment,
specifically assessing apartments and the capitalization rate. Mr. Bartenstein (AC) suggested including
potential program trimming as a way to trim the budget. Mr. Michelson (AC) stated that he would like to
include commonalities between the municipal and school sides to potentially combine staffing and
provide services in common. Ms. Jay (SC) stated that she would like the group to consider which services
38
are mandated, which are essential, and which are contractual. Mr. Levine suggested a discussion on new
sustainability initiatives. Mr. Padaki (AC) suggested reviewing the different buckets of reserve funds
across all departments and budget lines.
There was agreement that the revenue allocation should be further discussed.
Mr. Padaki (AC) asked about a maintenance and replacement schedule for vehicles and equipment. Mr.
Lamb (CEC) stated that the Public Safety and DPW Departments have such schedules. He noted that the
Town funded the ladder truck purchase this year with debt of $675,000. This is a clear example of why
the Town should not use free cash for operating. It brings up the question as to how to prioritize public
safety versus other operating items.
There was discussion regarding creating shared target ranges for total compensation and comparable ways
to display the information.
Ms. Yan (AC) suggested a study comparison of neighboring communities and how their tax on rental
properties compare to owner occupied homes.
There was discussion regarding OPEB funding.
The groups discussed what members would like to see occur during the Summit meetings moving
forward. There was discussion regarding the School Department presenting its White Book to the AC,
CEC, etc., if the various groups would find this helpful. Ms. Hai suggested a meeting of the Chairs of the
Summit groups in order to bring topics back to the full groups at a future Summit meeting. Mr. Boudett
(CEC) suggested a closer coordination between the different financial staff.
DOCUMENTS: Summit Presentation; Ref: 2019 Fiscal Guideline Recommendations.pdf; Ref: 2009-07-
10 AdHocFiscalTaskForce-RPT
ADJOURN
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted 5-0 by roll call to adjourn the meeting at
9:04p.m. The Appropriation Committee, Capital Expenditures Committee and School Committee followed
suit.
A true record; Attest:
Kristan Patenaude
Recording Secretary
39
SELECT BOARD MEETING
Monday, June 15, 2026
A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, June 15, 2026, via
a hybrid meeting platform. Ms. Hai, Chair; Mr. Pato, Vice Chair; Mr. Lucente, Mr. Sandeen and Ms.
Kumar were present, as well as Town Manager, Mr. Bartha; Deputy Town Manager, Ms. Axtell; and
Executive Assistant, Ms. Katzenback.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approve: One-Day Liquor License - Wilson Farm, 10 Pleasant Street
• Dinner in the Fields: Thursday, June 25, 2026
To approve a One-Day Liquor License for Wilson Farm to serve wine at 10 Pleasant Street on Thursday,
June 25, 2026, from 5:30 PM to 9:30 PM.
DOCUMENTS: Dinner in the Field Event Map.pdf
2. Approve: Common Victualler License
• Commune All Day Cafe - 7 Depot Square
This item was held for further discussion.
3. Approve: Town Manager Appointment
• Historical Commission - Samantha Richard
To confirm the Town Manager's appointment of Samantha Richard as a member of the Historical
Commission with a term set to expire September 30, 2028.
DOCUMENTS: Historical Commission - Samantha Richard - application_Redacted.pdf
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve the
Consent Agenda Items #1 and #3.
2. Approve: Common Victualler License
• Commune All Day Cafe - 7 Depot Square
Mr. Pato noted that this looks to grant operations starting at 5am in the Center, which follows changes in
the zoning bylaws. He believes it is appropriate to take this outside of the Consent Agenda to note that
other locations in the Center currently have licenses starting at 7am and this one will have operations
starting at 5am. It is important to make sure that other merchants in the area operating cafes are aware that
there has been a change.
Ms. Hai agreed that notifications should be given to business owners that they can apply to adapt their
existing licenses to expand to the new hours.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve a
Common Victualler License for Commune All Day Cafe, located at 7 Depot Square, Lexington, MA
02420, with on-site manager Smiral Patel, for the hours and days of operation as indicated.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
40
1. Update: Status of Union Contracts
Mr. Bartha stated that all the contracts are on a June cycle. In November 2024, the Town was underway
with a comp & class study for all its non-union employees. There were five union contracts set to expire
the following June. As part of the comp & class study, the Select Board supported establishing a target
against benchmark communities of the 75th percentile at total compensation which, in addition to base
salary, includes things such as stipends, education incentives, and health insurance. In the 2026 budget,
market adjustments were made to bring non-union employees to the 75th percentile of their respective
position classes. A key aspect of this approach is distinguishing between cost-of-living adjustments
(COLAs), which should roughly track inflation, and market adjustments, which help keep total
compensation in line with target levels. Of the five contracts that were set to expire on June 30, 2025, four
have been settled: Police Superior Officers, LMEA, LMMA, and Crossing Guards. The Fire contract
remains unsettled but is working its way through the statutory Joint Labor Management Commission
(JLMC) process, as requested by the union. Three contracts are set to expire at the end of this month:
Patrol, Dispatch, and Library. However, an agreement was reached last week with the librarians, and the
Town is actively engaged in negotiations with patrol and dispatch. The five contracts that settled since
November 2024 provided COLAs of 2.5% in FY26 and FY27 and 2% in FY28 and FY29. Most, if not all
of these, included targeted market adjustments, when necessary, in line with the Town’s philosophy.
These COLAs and adjustments are all reflected in the FY27 budget for settled bargaining units and non-
union employees.
2. Discussion & Approval: Riding Through History Art Installations
Jillian Tung, Semiquincentennial Commission Member, presented to the Board regarding the future of
Riding Through History, Lex250's signature public art exhibit featuring seven uniquely decorated
fiberglass horses displayed throughout Lexington Center. Originally approved to remain in place through
mid-summer 2026, the exhibit has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from residents and visitors.
The request is to consider a proposal to extend the installation period for portions of the collection.
Ms. Tung explained that the plan which was endorsed by the Lex 250th Commission calls for keeping or
rehoming four of the seven horses and auctioning the remaining three. The proceeds from the sale of
those three horses could then be used for the maintenance of the ones being kept and/or to consider
establishing a fund for the upkeep of Lexington's monuments and memorials.
The Board thanked Ms. Tung for all her efforts into this project over the years.
Dawn McKenna, 9 Hancock Street, echoed thanks to Ms. Tung. She expressed some disappointment
about the ownership of the horse at the Community Center which may not be seen as well and asked if
there could be a way to make this more visible. Ms. Hai noted that there is something symbiotic about
having a community art installation at the Community Center. She is not discomforted by having the
installation in this location.
Mr. Lucente expressed concern regarding the auction portion of the plan. This can be an intense process,
as the Town is a public entity. Depending on the cost of the auctioneer, this could require a bid process.
The process should not be delayed for too long, especially if the expiration of the HDC approval is in
October. He suggested authorizing the Town Manager to sign off on this process.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to approve the
proposal to extend the installation period for portions of the Riding Through History public art collection
as proposed, including relocation of the lantern/illuminated horse to the Community Center with a strong
41
preference of the first choice location, and to authorize the Town Manager to pursue the auction process
necessary for disposition of the remaining three.
DOCUMENTS: Presentation.pdf; For Reference: Lexington Historical Society Riding Through History
License AgreementLicense; Agreement.pdf
3. Discussion: Cannabis Delivery Opt-Out Option
Ms. Hai explained that, as the Board discussed at its May 22, 2026 meeting, the Massachusetts Cannabis
Control Commission (CCC) has issued guidance to municipalities regarding cannabis delivery provisions
under H.5350, An Act Modernizing the Commonwealth's Cannabis Laws, signed by the Governor and
effective April 19, 2026. Under Section 25 of the Act, limited delivery of marijuana and marijuana
products is now
permitted statewide by default. Municipalities that do not authorize retail Marijuana Establishment
licenses within their borders may request a waiver from the Commission to temporarily prohibit delivery
within their jurisdiction. Upon initial request, the Commission is required to grant the waiver. The waiver
is valid for up to two years and may be extended in two-year increments at the Commission's discretion.
Medical marijuana deliveries to patients and caregivers are not subject to municipal opt-out and may
continue in all municipalities. The Board’s previous discussion indicated an interest in applying for the
waiver now, in order to have time to conduct outreach and determine the best ultimate path. The Town
Manager has spoken with the CCC, and they do not see an issue with a subsequent request to release the
waiver, prior to the two years, should such a request be made.
Mr. Bartha noted that the town of Lincoln submitted a request for a one-year waiver, which was not
contemplated in the regulations, but, after a brief discussion with the CCC, it appears this will be
favorably received.
Mr. Sandeen stated that he does not feel the need for a waiver at all. He stated that he would vote against
a temporary waiver with an unlimited timeframe and asked what a reasonable timeframe would be. Mr.
Lucente stated that he believes a year is enough time to receive feedback on this. Less than this would be
a mistake. Ms. Kumar stated that she would like to take the waiver now and then consider how much time
is needed. This is something that the public needs to be engaged in. Mr. Pato agreed that he is comfortable
with taking the waiver as offered by the Commission at this time and then determining a date to decide
by. He noted that there is easy availability in Lexington, though maybe not through home delivery. Ms.
Hai stated that she is not sure the waiver is particularly necessary as many items can be delivered to the
home that are all legal and have varying degrees of advisability of use. It is worth hearing input from the
community on this topic.
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to request the
Cannabis Control Commission issue a temporary waiver for one year, prohibiting delivery of retail
recreational marijuana within Lexington, and further authorize the Town Manager to submit the letter on
the Board’s behalf.
DOCUMENTS: Bulletin_No._2 An Act Modernizing Commonwealths Cannabis Laws.pdf
4. Work Session - Discussion: Planning for Select Board Retreat
Ms. Hai explained that the Board is looking to hold an organizational retreat this summer. The Board
discussed potential dates for the retreat.
42
Ms. Hai noted that the Town’s sister city of Antony, France needs a headcount for the trip by June 20,
2026. The trip has no impact on the Town budget, as attendees pay their own way.
ADJOURN
VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to adjourn at
7:29pm.
A true record; Attest:
Kristan Patenaude
Recording Secretary
43
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
7
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Accept: Select Board Committee Resignations
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
The Select Board is asked to accept the resignation of Mark Vitunic from the Registrars of Voters,
effective once seat is filled but no later than December 31, 2026. Mark will serve for as long as needed
until December 2026 as he prepares to move out of state.
The Select Board is asked to accept the resignation of Joe Pato from the Fund for Lexington, effective
immediately.
PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to accept the resignation of Mark Vitunic from the Registrars of Voters, effective once seat is
filled but no later than December 31, 2026.
Move to accept the resignation of Joe Pato from the Fund of Lexington, effective immediately.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
2026-07-06 Mark Vitunic - Board of Registrars.pdf
2026-07-08 Joe Pato - Fund for Lexington.pdf
44
45
46
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
8
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Select Board Committee Appointment
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
The Select Board is being asked to appoint Jill Hai to the Fund for Lexington, effective immediately.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To appoint Jill Hai to the Fund for Lexington, effective immediately.
Move to approve the consent.
47
ITEM
NUMBER:
9
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Town Manager Committee Appointment
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Town Manager, Steve Bartha, and Conservation Administrator, Karen Mullins, have interviewed Hope
Dehmlow Dunne for appointment to the Conservation Commission. Ms. Dehmlow Dunne brings a
relevant education and strong technical skills that would be an asset to the Commission. Her term
would be effective immediately and will expire September 30, 2028.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To confirm the Town Manager's appointment of Hope Dehmlow Dunne as a member of the
Conservation Commission with a term set to expire September 30, 2028.
Move to approve the consent.
ATTACHMENTS:
Hope Dehmlow Dunne - Conservation Committee.pdf
48
Submit Date: Jun 05, 2026
First Name Middle
Initial
Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Lexington MA Boards & Committees
Application Form
Profile
Attendance to a regularly scheduled meeting of the board or committee of interest is
strongly encouraged when considering applying for membership. All committee
meetings are open to the public and are posted at least 48 hours in advance of the
meeting in our www.lexingtonma.gov/calendar.
If you are appointed to the board or committee for which you have applied, information
from this application will be used to contact you regarding your appointment from the
appointing authority as well as the Town Clerk’s Office. Please do not offer information
on this application you would prefer we not use.
Applications will be kept on file and considered as vacancies occur for up to six months
unless otherwise noted.
If you have any questions or need more information regarding the completion of the
application, please contact either the Select Board Office at 781-698-4580 or the Town
Manager’s Office at 781-698-4540.
Nickname
Hope
Preferred Title (i.e. Mr., Ms., Mx., Dr., Rev .....)
Mrs.
Alternate Email Address (Optional)
Length of Residence in Lexington (Note: ZBA requirement is a minimum of 8
years)
0 years
What Precinct do you live in?
None Selected
Hope L Dehmlow Dunne
Lexington MA 02421
Home:
Hope L Dehmlow Dunne 49
Employer Job Title
Work Address
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Conservation Commission: Submitted
Interests & Experiences
Please tell us about yourself and why you want to serve.
Special Training and/or Qualifications
I have undergraduate degrees in environmental science and economics from Samford
University and my research focused on urban ecology and habitat fragmentation. I got my
dual masters degree from Indiana University in Environmental Science and Public Affairs. I
was a research assistant at the Bloomington Urban Forestry Research Group and assisted
with tree inventories databases, assisted in creating databases for cities and towns across
Indiana who included Urban Forestry in their Master Plans or had their own Urban Forestry
Management plans, and assisted in research about greenspace allocation in equitable ways.
More broadly, my education gave me a deep understanding for environmental law and policy
across a wide level of governance structures. I have experience in community organizing as
a Project Coordinator for a community health survey as well.
Why are you interested in serving on this board or commission?
My husband and I recently purchased a home in Lexington and I would love to get involved
in the community we have decided to set down roots in. I strongly believe in community
participation and would love to learn about our new home from the people who make it
great. I was deeply attracted to the city because of it's commitment to protecting it's natural
landscapes and was excited to see it was a Tree City USA. I would love to help contribute to
the community by applying the skills I have to assist in it's continued commitment to
environmental protections.
How did you hear about the board or commission for which you are applying?
Link to Lexington email updates.
Have you recently attended any meetings of the board or committee for
which you are applying?
Yes No
Have you confirmed your availability to attend the board or committee's
meetings? (i.e. can attend at the time the committee regularly meets)
Yes No
Hope L Dehmlow Dunne 50
Conflict of Interest Law Training Certificate
Do you currently serve on another board or committee?
Yes No
If yes, please list date of most recent Conflict of Interest Law Training.
Hope L Dehmlow Dunne 51
Hope Dehmlow Dunne
Lexington, MA, 02421
EDUCATION
Master of Public Affairs and Master of Science in Environmental Science, Bloomington, Indiana Concentration: Environmental and Climate Policy Relevant Coursework: Urban Ecology, Natural Resources Management and Policy, Climate Change
Planning for Urban Communities, Domestic Environmental Policy, Law and Public Affairs
Skills: Stata, SAS, Microsoft Office, Environmental Risk Analysis, GIS, Policy Analysis
Samford University, Birmingham, Alabama 2014-2018
Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science and Bachelor of Arts in EconomicsPLQRULQSV\FKRORJ\
WORK EXPERIENCE
Restoring Eden Project Project Organizer 2016-2019
•Developed organizational materials including project’s strategic plan, timeline, maps, and scientific design
•Organized community health census in North Birmingham, Alabama to determine if proximity to coalburning power plants is correlated to negative health effects in economically disadvantaged areas.•Recruited college students to be citizen scientists and assisted in training students to conduct health surveys•Lead efforts in community outreach and awareness of current and historical air pollution
Fall 2018 Hoosier Environmental Council Environmental Justice Intern
•Performed and analyzed community health surveys in areas with groundwater contamination to pinpointawareness of the issues and health indicators in proximity to initial contamination site•Updated and maintained social media presence for Indianapolis Environmental Equity Council
Fall 2017 Gasp Group Solar Intern
•Conducted analysis of states with solar tariffs including determining legal precedence and outlined findingsin detailed case studies to be used by legal team•Assisted Southern Environmental Law Center gathering solar research data in Alabama to help raise publicawareness about affordability of solar power in Southeastern states
Samford Research Experience for Undergraduates Program and ASPIRE Program
Student Researcher 2016-2017
•Designed and conducted thorough scientific research project in the field of urban ecology•Analyzed data and developed cohesive report that was then presented at multiple conferences•Awarded ASPIRE Grant to continue research in summer of 2017
CONFERENCES AND PRESENTATIONS
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 25th Conference of the Parties, Hosted By Chile,
located in Madrid, Spain, December 2nd-13th, 2019. Graduate student research delegate for Indiana University.
Reamer, Hope, Gentry, G., & Mezebish, T. (2017). Impact of Soil Compaction and Soil Moisture on Silphid
Abundance along the Urban-Rural Gradient. First place in the biological sciences poster session presented at the annual Alabama Academy of Science Conference.
Reamer, Hope, Gentry, G., Mezebish, T., Heinkel, I. (2017). Impact of land use and soil characteristics on carrion
beetle abundance along an urban-rural gradient in northern Alabama. Presented at the annual Ecological
Society Meetings and the Southeastern Environmental Conference.
Bloomington Urban Forestry Research Group Research Assistant 2019-2020
•Contributed to the development of a survey assessing urban forestry programs across the state of Indiana
•Collected data on various urban forestry programs in Indiana for a cohesive statewide database
•Collaborated and edited past research related to historical redlining and its impact on urban forestry
Indiana University Debate Team Graduate Assistant Coach
•3URGXFHGLQGHSWKUHVHDUFKRQYDULRXVWRSLFVRILQWHUHVWLQFOXGLQJFOLPDWHSROLF\DQGHFRQRPLFV
LQWHUQDWLRQDOUHODWLRQVlegal analysis, DQGSROLWLFDODIIDLUV
•Coordinated research efforts among the team and synthesized contrasting arguments from differing
stakeholders to write a comprehensive policy argument
2018-2021
Indiana University, O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs 2018-2023
52
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
10
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Willard Circle, Stage Coach Road and Cart Path Lane - Street Acceptance Order of Takings
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision Making
Attached are the proposed Order of Takings for Willard Circle, Cart Path Lane, and Stage Coach Road.
At the 2026 Annual Town Meeting, Town Meeting voted to accept these streets as public ways. This
Order of Taking represents the final formal action required by the Select Board to complete the street
acceptance process.
The Select Board has previously completed all required actions to support the acceptance of Willard
Circle, Cart Path Lane, and Stage Coach Road as public ways.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve the Order of Taking for Willard Circle, Cart Path Lane and Stage Coach Road and to
acquire any fee, easement or other interest in the properties by eminent domain, for the purpose of
accepting Willard Circle, Cart Path Lane and Stage Coach Road as public ways, as laid out on the plans
provided.
Move to approve the consent.
FOLLOW-UP:
Engineering to record order of takings
ATTACHMENTS:
Willard Cir._Order of Taking
Willard Circle St Acceptance Plan
Stage Coach_Order of Taking
Stage Coach Street Acceptance Plan
Cart Path_Order of Taking
Cart Path Street Acceptance Plan
53
ORDER OF TAKING
WHEREAS, the Town of Lexington, acting by and through its Select Board (the
“Town”) hereby certifies that the Town did vote to acquire by purchase or eminent domain,
any fee, easement, or other interest in the land known as Willard Circle in Lexington,
Middlesex County, Massachusetts (the “Property”) as shown on a plan entitled “Willard
Circle, Street Acceptance Plan, Located in Lexington, Mass.” dated November 19, 2025 (the
“Plan”), said Plan being recorded with the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds (the
“Registry”) as Plan _______of 2026.
WHEREAS, the Town has deemed that public necessity and convenience require that
it should take charge of and take by eminent domain a fee interest in the Property for use as a
public road;
WHEREAS, the taking was authorized by a vote pursuant to Article 22 of the 2026
Annual Town Meeting, a certified copy of which vote is recorded herewith; and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently owned by the owners identified on Exhibit A
hereto, under those certain deeds identified on Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Select Board of the Town of Lexington,
acting herein under the authority conferred on us by Chapters 40 and 79 of the General Laws,
do hereby adopt this Order of Taking to take, on behalf of the Town, a fee simple interest in
all of the Property.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that excepted from the fee interest herein taken are all
easements for wires, pipes, conduits, poles, and other appurtenances for the conveyance of
water, sewer, gas, oil, electricity, and telephone communication now lawfully in or upon the
Property, including, without limitation, the following easements: (i) that certain easement
recorded with the Registry at Book 65869, Page 91 over the land labeled as “Lots F & G” on
a plan entitled “Property Rights Plan of Land Located in Lexington, Massachusetts” dated
November 17, 2014 and recorded with Registry as Plan 513 of 2015 (the “Plan”), (ii) that
certain easement recorded with the Registry at Book 65869, Page 95 over the land labeled as
“Lots B & C” on the Plan, and (iii) that certain easement recorded with the Registry at Book
65869, Page 98, over the land labeled as “Lots D & E” on the Plan.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that included in this taking and without limiting the
54
2
provisions of the foregoing, said taking includes the right of the Town of Lexington to use
and maintain the Property for all purposes for which public roadways are commonly used in
the Town of Lexington including but not limited to: walkways, wires, cables, poles, pipes,
conduits and other appurtenances for the conveyance of gas, water, sewerage, electricity,
cable television, telephone or other electronic communication located in, on, under or upon
the Property as well as storm drainage systems, but not including any improvements or
structures constructed or installed on the Property including but not limited to: sewerage
system, water systems, mail boxes, alarm system panels, decorative street improvements,
entranceway stone walls and signs.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no betterments are to be assessed under this Order
of Taking.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no damages have been sustained by persons to their
property by reason of this taking, and no damages awarded to any person.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that a representative of the Town shall record this Order
of Taking in the Registry within thirty (30) days from its final passage, shall notify the
Treasurer and Collector of Taxes in the Town of Lexington of this taking in accordance with
Chapter 79 of the Massachusetts General Laws, and shall cause notice of the taking to be
given to all persons entitled thereto and do all things necessary for the validity of this Order
of Taking.
[Signatures to appear on next page.]
55
3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, the Select Board, have executed this Order of Taking this
__ day of __________, 2026.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
SELECT BOARD
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX
On this ___ day of ____________, 2026, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared
, proved to me through satisfactory
evidence of identification, which was personal knowledge, to be the persons whose names are
signed on the preceding or attached document and acknowledged to me that they signed it
voluntarily for its stated purpose, as members of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington.
________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
56
4
EXHIBIT A
Lot B
Record Owner: Robert Smith III and Kirsten Smith
Parcel Address: 6 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 70059, Page 337
Lot C
Record Owner: Robert E. Smith, Jr.
Parcel Address: 8 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 69410, Page 81 (Confirmatory Deed correcting prior Deed dated
July 7, 2015 and recorded on July 10, 2025 with the Middlesex South
Registry of Deeds in Book 65703 Page 400)
Lot D
Record Owner: Choong I. Lee and Byung Sook Lee
Parcel Address: 10 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 72918, Page 40
Lot E
Record Owner: Timothy S. Zue and Nicole M. Zue
Parcel Address: 9 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 72890, Page 4
Lot F
Record Owner: Olutade O. Okediji and Ruth L. Okediji
Parcel Address: 7 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 69797, Page 420
Lot G
Record Owner: Scott Foster Burson and Wendy Faith Liebow, as Trustees of the
Wendy Faith Liebow Living Trust, u/d/t dated December 6, 2011
Parcel Address: 5 Willard Circle
Record Title: Book 66598, Page 142
57
5
RECORD OF VOTE OF THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD
____________, 2026
At a duly called public meeting of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington (the “Board”)
on ____________, 2026, the Board voted as follows with respect to the land known as Willard
Circle in Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, as more particularly identified on a plan
entitled “Willard Circle, Street Acceptance Plan, Located in Lexington, Mass.” dated November
19, 2025, being recorded with the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds as Plan _______of 2026
(the “Property”):
To acquire any fee, easement or other interest in the Property by eminent domain, for the
purpose of accepting the Property as a public way, as laid out on the Plan.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
By its Select Board:
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
58
59
ORDER OF TAKING
WHEREAS, the Town of Lexington, acting by and through its Select Board (the
“Town”) hereby certifies that the Town did vote to acquire by purchase or eminent domain,
any fee, easement, or other interest in the land known as Stage Coach Road in Lexington,
Middlesex County, Massachusetts (the “Property”) as shown on a plan entitled “Street
Acceptance Plan Stage Coach Road in Lexington, Mass.,” prepared for Lexington August Realty
Trust, dated December 29, 2025 (the “Plan”), said Plan being recorded with the Middlesex
South Registry of Deeds (the “Registry”) as Plan _______of 2026.
WHEREAS, the Town has deemed that public necessity and convenience require that
it should take charge of and take by eminent domain a fee interest in the Property for use as a
public road;
WHEREAS, the taking was authorized by a vote pursuant to Article 22 of the 2026
Annual Town Meeting, a certified copy of which vote is recorded herewith; and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently owned by the owners identified on Exhibit A
hereto, under those certain deeds identified on Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Select Board of the Town of Lexington,
acting herein under the authority conferred on us by Chapters 40 and 79 of the General Laws,
do hereby adopt this Order of Taking to take, on behalf of the Town, a fee simple interest in
all of the Property.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that excepted from the fee interest herein taken are all
easements for wires, pipes, conduits, poles, and other appurtenances for the conveyance of
water, sewer, gas, oil, electricity, and telephone communication now lawfully in or upon the
Property.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that included in this taking and without limiting the
provisions of the foregoing, said taking includes the right of the Town of Lexington to use
and maintain the Property for all purposes for which public roadways are commonly used in
the Town of Lexington including but not limited to: walkways, wires, cables, poles, pipes,
conduits and other appurtenances for the conveyance of gas, water, sewerage, electricity,
cable television, telephone or other electronic communication located in, on, under or upon
the Property as well as storm drainage systems, but not including any improvements or
60
2
structures constructed or installed on the Property including but not limited to: sewerage
system, water systems, mail boxes, alarm system panels, decorative street improvements,
entranceway stone walls and signs.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no betterments are to be assessed under this Order
of Taking.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no damages have been sustained by persons to their
property by reason of this taking, and no damages awarded to any person.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that a representative of the Town shall record this Order
of Taking in the Registry within thirty (30) days from its final passage, shall notify the
Treasurer and Collector of Taxes in the Town of Lexington of this taking in accordance with
Chapter 79 of the Massachusetts General Laws, and shall cause notice of the taking to be
given to all persons entitled thereto and do all things necessary for the validity of this Order
of Taking.
[Signatures to appear on next page.]
61
3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, the Select Board, have executed this Order of Taking this
__ day of __________, 2026.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
SELECT BOARD
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX
On this ___ day of ____________, 2026, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared
, proved to me through satisfactory
evidence of identification, which was personal knowledge, to be the persons whose names are
signed on the preceding or attached document and acknowledged to me that they signed it
voluntarily for its stated purpose, as members of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington.
________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
62
4
EXHIBIT A
Lot 9
Record Owner: Can Jin & Yuhong Geng
Parcel Address: 3 Stage Coach Road
Record Title: Book 68513, Page 196
Lot 10
Record Owner: Renjian Zhao & Ping Xiong
Parcel Address: 5 Stage Coach Road
Record Title: Book 71238, Page 39
Lot 12
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: 7 Stage Coach Road
Record Title: Book 45088, Page 464
Lot 13
Record Owner: Yash Patel & Priyanka Patel
Parcel Address: 10 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 81979, Page 32
Lot 14
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: 8 Stage Coach Road
Record Title: Book 47515, Page 333
Lot 15
Record Owner: Yabing Jiang & Lanlan Chen
Parcel Address: 12 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 72004, Page 206
Parcel A
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: Stage Coach Road
Record Title: Book 47515, Page 333
63
5
RECORD OF VOTE OF THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD
____________, 2026
At a duly called public meeting of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington (the “Board”)
on ____________, 2026, the Board voted as follows with respect to the land known as Stage Coach
Road in Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, as more particularly identified on a plan
entitled “Street Acceptance Plan Stage Coach Road in Lexington, Mass.,” prepared for Lexington
August Realty Trust, dated December 29, 2025, being recorded with the Middlesex South
Registry of Deeds as Plan _______of 2026 (the “Property”):
To acquire any fee, easement or other interest in the Property by eminent domain, for the
purpose of accepting the Property as a public way, as laid out on the Plan.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
By its Select Board:
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
64
65
ORDER OF TAKING
WHEREAS, the Town of Lexington, acting by and through its Select Board (the
“Town”) hereby certifies that the Town did vote to acquire by purchase or eminent domain,
any fee, easement, or other interest in the land known as Cart Path Lane in Lexington,
Middlesex County, Massachusetts (the “Property”) as shown on a plan entitled “Street
Acceptance Plan Cart Path Lane in Lexington, Mass.,” prepared for Lexington August Realty Trust
dated December 29, 2025 (the “Plan”), said Plan being recorded with the Middlesex South
Registry of Deeds (the “Registry”) as Plan _______of 2026.
WHEREAS, the Town has deemed that public necessity and convenience require that
it should take charge of and take by eminent domain a fee interest in the Property for use as
a public road;
WHEREAS, the taking was authorized by a vote pursuant to Article 22 of the 2026
Annual Town Meeting, a certified copy of which vote is recorded herewith; and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently owned by the owners identified on Exhibit A
hereto, under those certain deeds identified on Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Select Board of the Town of Lexington,
acting herein under the authority conferred on us by Chapters 40 and 79 of the General Laws,
do hereby adopt this Order of Taking to take, on behalf of the Town, a fee simple interest in
all of the Property.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that excepted from the fee interest herein taken are all
easements for wires, pipes, conduits, poles, and other appurtenances for the conveyance of
water, sewer, gas, oil, electricity, and telephone communication now lawfully in or upon the
Property.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that included in this taking and without limiting the
provisions of the foregoing, said taking includes the right of the Town of Lexington to use
and maintain the Property for all purposes for which public roadways are commonly used in
the Town of Lexington including but not limited to: walkways, wires, cables, poles, pipes,
conduits and other appurtenances for the conveyance of gas, water, sewerage, electricity,
cable television, telephone or other electronic communication located in, on, under or upon
the Property as well as storm drainage systems, but not including any improvements or
66
2
structures constructed or installed on the Property including but not limited to: sewerage
system, water systems, mail boxes, alarm system panels, decorative street improvements,
entranceway stone walls and signs.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no betterments are to be assessed under this Order
of Taking.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that no damages have been sustained by persons to their
property by reason of this taking, and no damages awarded to any person.
AND FURTHER ORDERED that a representative of the Town shall record this Order
of Taking in the Registry within thirty (30) days from its final passage, shall notify the
Treasurer and Collector of Taxes in the Town of Lexington of this taking in accordance with
Chapter 79 of the Massachusetts General Laws, and shall cause notice of the taking to be
given to all persons entitled thereto and do all things necessary for the validity of this Order
of Taking.
[Signatures to appear on next page.]
67
3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, the Select Board, have executed this Order of Taking this
__ day of __________, 2026.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
SELECT BOARD
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX
On this ___ day of ____________, 2026, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared
, proved to me through satisfactory
evidence of identification, which was personal knowledge, to be the persons whose names are
signed on the preceding or attached document and acknowledged to me that they signed it
voluntarily for its stated purpose, as members of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington.
________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
68
4
EXHIBIT A
Lot 1
Record Owner: Pankaj Rai Ghai & Priyanka Ghai
Parcel Address: 15 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 75802, Page 360
Lot 2
Record Owner: Zakaria Khondker & Mahbuba Khondker
Parcel Address: 13 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 80553, Page 518
Lot 3
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: 11 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 47515, Page 333
Lot 4
Record Owner: Habib Aminipour & Shahin Aminipour
Parcel Address: 9 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 70456, Page 150
Lot 5
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: 7 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 47515, Page 333
Lot 6
Record Owner: Joseph C. Lerman, Trustee of the Lexington August Realty Trust u/d/t
dated August 9, 2024
Parcel Address: 5 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 47515, Page 333
Lot 7
Record Owner: Han Tae Kim & Ok Soon Kim
Parcel Address: 3 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 63357, Page 243
Lot 8
Record Owner: Michael Blake & Emily Babalas
Parcel Address: 6 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 65739, Page 47
Lot 11
69
5
Record Owner: Srinivas G. Reddy & Aruna G. Reddy
Parcel Address: 8 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 81961, Page 85
Lot 13
Record Owner: Yash Patel & Priyanka Patel
Parcel Address: 10 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 81979, Page 33
Lot 15
Record Owner: Yabing Jiang & Lanlan Chen
Parcel Address: 12 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 72004, Page 207
Lot 16
Record Owner: Drupad M. Panchal & Priti M. Patel
Parcel Address: 14 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 72285, Page 402
Lot 17
Record Owner: Longmei Han
Parcel Address: 16 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 66415, Page 66
Lot 18
Record Owner: Capitasaurus LLC
Parcel Address: 18 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 85213, Page 543
Lot 19
Record Owner: Weiwei Cao & Fan Zhang
Parcel Address: 20 Cart Path Lane
Record Title: Book 80122, Page 529
70
6
RECORD OF VOTE OF THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD
____________, 2026
At a duly called public meeting of the Select Board of the Town of Lexington (the “Board”)
on ____________, 2026, the Board voted as follows with respect to the land known as Cart Path
Lane in Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, as more particularly identified on a plan
entitled “Street Acceptance Plan Cart Path Lane in Lexington, Mass.,” prepared for Lexington
August Realty Trust dated December 29, 2025, being recorded with the Middlesex South
Registry of Deeds as Plan _______of 2026 (the “Property”):
To acquire any fee, easement or other interest in the Property by eminent domain, for the
purpose of accepting the Property as a public way, as laid out on the Plan.
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
By its Select Board:
_____________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair
_____________________________
Jill I. Hai
_____________________________
Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
_____________________________
Vineeta A. Kumar
71
72
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Select Board Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
11
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Vote and Sign September 2026 State Primary Election Warrant
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
The Board is being requested to approve the Tuesday, September 1, 2026 State Primary Election
Warrant, as provided by the Town Clerk.
In addition for public information, the Town Clerk has provided the attached schedule for the early
voting hours being held in the Cary Memorial Building for the September 2026 Primary Election as
established and approved by the Registrar of Voters.
PROPOSED MOTION:
to approve and sign the September 1, 2026 State Primary Election Warrant.
Move to approve the consent
ATTACHMENTS:
2026-09-01 State Primary Election Warrant.pdf
Early Voting Flyer 9-1-2026.pdf
73
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
WILLIAM FRANCIS GALVIN
SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH
WARRANT FOR 2026 STATE PRIMARY
Middlesex, ss.
To the Constables of the Town of Lexington
GREETINGS:
In the name of the Commonwealth, you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of the Town of
Lexington who are qualified to vote in Primaries to vote at:
PRECINCT ONE, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING; PRECINCT TWO, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING;
PRECINCT THREE, LEXINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER; PRECINCT FOUR, CARY MEMORIAL
BUILDING; PRECINCT FIVE, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING; PRECINCT SIX, CARY MEMORIAL
BUILDING; PRECINCT SEVEN, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING; PRECINCT EIGHT, SAMUEL HADLEY
PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING; PRECINCT NINE, LEXINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER,
on TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026, from 7:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. for the following purpose:
To cast their votes in the State Primaries for the candidates of political parties for the following offices:
SENATOR IN CONGRESS ...................................................................... FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
GOVERNOR ............................................................................................. FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR ..................................................................... FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
ATTORNEY GENERAL ............................................................................ FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
SECRETARY OF STATE .......................................................................... FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
TREASURER ............................................................................................. FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
AUDITOR ................................................................................................... FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS ...................................................... FIFTH DISTRICT
COUNCILLOR .......................................................................................... THIRD DISTRICT
SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT (precincts 1,2,4-7 ............................. FOURTH MIDDLESEX DISTRICT
SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT (precincts 3,8,9) ................................ THIRD MIDDLESEX DISTRICT
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT (precincts 1-5,7-9 ............. FIFTEENTH MIDDLESEX DISTRICT
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT (precinct 6) ........................ TWENTY-FIRST MIDDLESEX DISTRICT
DISTRICT ATTORNEY ....................................................................... NORTHERN DISTRICT
REGISTER OF PROBATE ................................................................... MIDDLESEX COUNTY
Hereof fail not and make return of this Warrant with your doings thereon at the time and place of said voting.
Given under our hands this ___________ day of July, 2026.
_____________________________________ _____________________________________
Joseph N. Pato, Chair Douglas M. Lucente
_____________________________________ _____________________________________
Vineeta Kumar Jill I. Hai
_____________________________________
Mark D. Sandeen
Select Board of Lexington
I have served the foregoing warrant by posting a printed copy thereof in the Town Office Building, 7 days at least before the time of said Primary.
_____________________________________ ______________, 2026.
Constable of Lexington
Warrant must be posted by August 25, 2026, (at least seven days prior to the September 1, 2026 State Primary).
74
75
PRESENTER:
Joe Pato, Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
12
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Approve: Appointment of Election Officers 2026-2027
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision-Making
Attached letter and list of recommended Election Officers from the Town Clerk and Board of Registrars
regarding appointment of election officer.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To approve the list of election officers for the period of September 1, 2026 through August 31, 2027 as
recommended by the Town Clerk and Board of Registrars as presented.
Move to approve the consent.
FOLLOW-UP:
Town Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
Request Letter
76
Town of Lexington
Town Clerk’s Office
Board of Registrars
Tel: (781) 862-0500 x4558
Gordon M. Jones III, Chair Fax: (781) 861- 2754
Judith E. Moore
Mark R. Vitunic
Mary de Alderete, Clerk
1625 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE • LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02420
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jill Hai, Chair, Select Board
FROM: Mary de Alderete, Clerk, Board of Registrars
DATE: June 26, 2026
RE: Select Board appointment of 2026-2027 Election Officers
I am pleased to report that there are 197 names to put forth for appointment this year.
The attached list of persons interested in serving as Election Officers for 2026-2027 is provided for
appointment in accordance with MGL c. 54§12-14 governing the annual appointment of Election Officers
by the Select Board.
The Board of Registrars, at its meeting of May 18, 2026, reviewed the names of those registered voters
expressing an interest in serving as Election Officers and unanimously voted to recommend to the Select
Board for appointment the persons listed on the attached report (dated May 13, 2026).
Accordingly, the Board of Registrars requests the Select Board vote to appoint as Election Officers, for
the period beginning September 1, 2026 the persons listed on the attached pages.
Please reach out if I may provide any additional information.
Many thanks for your consideration.
Enc: Election Officer Candidates 2023-2024
cc: Board of Registrars
Kim Katzenback, Executive Clerk, Select Board
77
Election Officer Candidates for
Appointment/Reappointment - 2026-2027
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Alyn Susan J.171 Lake St, Waltham UNR
Ament-Bergey Shirley 29 Greenwood St DEM
Aranow Martha 18 Journeys End Ln DEM
Awbrey Brian J 21 Leonard Rd REP
Backlund Guy R.92 Bedford St DEM
Baker Marsha E.46 Burlington St DEM
Bennani Maureen 250 Marrett Rd DEM
Bennet Andrew D 54 Tarbell Ave UNR
Blier Victoria 41 Shade St DEM
Boer Susan Dudnick 56 Robbins Rd DEM
Boucher Robert 252 Lincoln St UNR
Burnell Mary 4 Eaton Rd UNR
Burns Maureen T.83 Bedford St UNR
Burwell Cristina R.6Albemarle Ave DEM
Cameron Ellen Nadine 12 Scotland Rd DEM
Carilli Theresa M.1412 Massachusetts Ave UNR
Carothers Sarah M.4Frost Rd UNR
Carpenter Laurel 94 Pleasant St DEM
Caton Suzanne B.6Fifer Ln DEM
Cavatorta Marcia Frances 12 Forest St REP
Chanoux Anita B.46 Hancock St UNR
Chen Gang 24 Bellflower St UNR
Chua Katherine 147 Woburn St N/A
Chua Kevin S.147 Woburn St UNR
Chung Janice C.7 Hilltop Avenue UNR
Clark Rita P.51 Spring St.REP
Cohen Natalie 65 Baskin Rd UNR
Cohn Ellen S.32 Moon Hill Rd DEM
Collins Christine A.429 Waltham St DEM
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 1 of 7
78
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Comings Richard J.84 Bridge St DEM
Conway L. Susan 29 Woodland Rd UNR
Cooper Constance "No BF 30 Greenwood St DEM
Counts-Klebe Margaret L.8 Hancock Ave DEM
Cutler Brian Todd 6Forest Ct DEM
DesRoches David 12 Idylwilde Rd UNR
Deutsch Brenda O'Connor 17 Phinney Rd DEM
Diamant Lisa 31 Ingleside Rd DEM
Dixon Linda J.70 Fifer Ln UNR
Dondley Irene M.22 Leonard Rd DEM
Doran Elaine Celeste 168 East St UNR
Edmonston Ian R 96 Blake Rd DEM
Edwards Francine C.96 Outlook Dr UNR
Enders Robert H 11 Kimball Rd DEM
England Perullo Susan U.243 Lexington St, Woburn DEM
Eurich Richard R 7 Pitcairn Pl UNR
Fairbairn Sebastian J.11 Utica St UNR
Farris Donnalee A.158 Maple St UNR
Fenollosa Marilyn M.10 Marshall Rd DEM
Fenollosa Michael K.10 Marshall Rd DEM
Fiedler Anne S.54 Chase Ave DEM
Fleming Paul R.84 Winter St DEM
Foley Edward J.40 Brandon St UNR
Forsdick Harry C.46 Burlington St UNR
Fortmann Carla V.5 Harrington Rd UNR
Frankel Sheila 3 Kimball Rd DEM
Freeman Charles M.16 Normandy Rd REP
Freeman Margaret M.16 Normandy Rd UNR
Friedlander Daniel 15 Ponybrook La DEM
Friedlander Elizabeth 15 Ponybrook La DEM
Friedman Michael 12 Loring Rd DEM
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 2 of 7
79
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Frohman Maria 4 Maureen Rd UNR
Fusco Argelia Ines 37 Woburn St UNR
Gall Cheryl W 12 Hancock Ave DEM
Gao Yang 204 Woburn St UNR
Gardner Felice 87 Blossomcrest Rd DEM
Garland Elizabeth (Best
B.21 Preston Rd DEM
Gasbarro Sandra M.4 Seaborn Pl UNR
George Pranav V.27 Christina Ave, Billerica UNR
Ghiloni Elaine M.23 Saint Clements Rd, Med UNR
Goldstein Carole J 18 Kendall Rd DEM
Goldthwait Carol A.251 Mass. Ave. REP
Golovchenko Elizabeth M.1Nowers Rd UNR
Gorospe Rebecca Fagan 42 Carville Ave UNR
Graham Natalie 18 Turning Mill Rd UNR
Grasso Patricia 7 Gould Rd DEM
Greenwald Greig 19 Sutherland Rd DEM
Hagopian Sonya 12 Lantern Ln UNR
Halverson Jane N.2210 Massachusetts Ave UNR
Harter Dodd B.5 Wildwood Rd UNR
Head Kathleen 40 Fair Oaks Dr UNR
Heaton Debra M.80 School St UNR
Himmel Magdalena W.66 Hancock St UNR
Hussong Laura J.13 Lois Lane DEM
Hutton Mary R.S.67 Valley Rd DEM
Inamdar Nidhi 39 Grapevine Ave
Isbitsky Adam Joseph 23 Hancock St UNR
Izbicki Joanne C.25 Frances Rd UNR
Jackan Bruce V.2McKeever Dr UNR
Jao Patricia Ann 98 Potter Pond UNR
Jick Kathleen M.41 Clark St DEM
Johnson Dennis Robert 549 Lowell St UNR
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 3 of 7
80
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Kadlec Anne 19 Paul Revere Rd, Acton UNR
Katzenberg Barbara 37 Moon Hill Rd DEM
Khavandgar Raana 23 Locke Ln REP
King Charmaine L.70 Simonds Rd UNR
Klein Alice H 5Flintlock Rd DEM
Knight Mary
L.56 Emerson Gdns UNR
Latiff Seri 28 Lawrence Lane UNR
Levy Rachel K.31 Fairlawn Ln DEM
Lidman Edward M.63 Grant St UNR
Lucas Caroline K 30 Balfour St DEM
Mahoney Barbara J.6 Curve St DEM
Manes Jonna D 16 Doran Farm Ln UNR
Marcus Joel 31 Ingleside Rd UNR
Marinaro Susan 33 Forest St DEM
Marquis Lorain A.62 Valley Rd UNR
Mason Sheryl T.33 Robinson Rd UNR
Masson Leslie 12 Hayes Ave DEM
McCulloch Catherine H 49 Baker Ave DEM
McDonald Robert 3 Bryant Rd REP
McIntosh Donald K.5Liberty Ave DEM
McIntosh Sean C.5Liberty Ave DEM
McLeish Susan A.665 Lowell St UNR
McPhillips Emily 7 Bushnell Dr DEM
Meadow Cheryl 21 Lois Ln DEM
Millane Cecilia 27 Calvin St UNR
Minardi Lee Raoul 37 Downing Rd DEM
Muckenhoupt Margaret 19 Whipple Rd DEM
Murphy Grace M 6 Colony Rd DEM
Murphy Joyce 1505 Massachusetts Ave DEM
Nolan Louise Mary 9Stevens Rd UNR
Olt Nancy L.7 Gould Rd DEM
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 4 of 7
81
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Ouellette Margaret 23 Tucker Ave DEM
Pandey Rita 102 Maple St DEM
Paquette Guy 24 York St UNR
Parks Katherine J.92 Bow St DEM
Parks Sandra 18 Blossom St UNR
Parrish A. Constance 36 Kendall Rd UNR
Peifer Pamela J 15 Barnes Pl DEM
Perkins Stephen S.14 Baker Ave UNR
Peterson Greta J.3 Winston Rd UNR
Piquet Elisabeth Anne 31 Fifer Lane UNR
Pullin Diana C.23 Normandy Rd DEM
Puopolo Evangeline K.35 Prospect Hill Rd UNR
Purdy Giesela B.1404 Massachusetts Ave UNR
Quezada Sarah Shelley 26 Blossomcrest Rd DEM
Quinn Margaret M.58 Paul Revere Rd DEM
Rabins Erica 14 Bird Hill Rd UNR
Ramsey Barbara S.52 Dexter Rd UNR
Rao Jyoti 3101 Main Campus Dr DEM
Ravi Kavita 11 Rockville Ave DEM
Richer Katelyn 144 Lowell St UNR
Rockwell Susan R.366 Lowell St UNR
Rohrer Richard 17 Trotting Horse Dr UNR
Romero Loyde H.5Frost Rd DEM
Rommelfanger Barbara Potkay 25 Hilltop Ave UNR
Rooney E. Ashley 202 Badger Ter, Bedford UNR
Rynn Maureen F.2 Countryside Village UNR
Samra Virginia M.663 Lowell St. UNR
Saradjian Margaret 259 Bedford Street DEM
Sarathy Arjun 40 Robinson Rd UNR
Sawhey Deepika 6 Porter Ln DEM
Schuler Judith A.646 Marrett Rd UNR
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 5 of 7
82
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Schwartz Donna Pruess 1948 Massachusetts Ave DEM
Setterlund Lorraine A.2Circle Rd UNR
Shedd Dennis 382 Marrett Rd DEM
Sheehan Gregory H.51 Williams Rd DEM
Sheehan Kathleen T 51 Williams Rd UNR
Shiple Thomas
R.18 Phinney Rd UNR
Sibert Julie Claire 30 Ingleside Rd UNR
Siegel Ellan B.3 Diamond Rd UNR
Sillari Debra M.5 Solomon Pierce Rd DEM
Silver Howard J.19 Welch Rd DEM
Simon Kristin M.50 Vaille Ave DEM
Skerry James D.11 Pine Knoll Rd. UNR
Small Joan R.6 Fairbanks Rd UNR
Snell Carol A.66 Fifer Ln UNR
Spence Michael C.33 Forest St. UNR
Sperber Dianne 41 Allen St UNR
Sperber Michael Bruce 41 Allen St UNR
Steigerwald Jessie 143 Cedar St UNR
Steigerwald Schna Julia C.143 Cedar St UNR
Stevens Alison B.1373 Massachusetts Ave UNR
Strimling Phyllis R.1010 Waltham St UNR
Strong Ann R.37 Maple St DEM
Suhl Emmy 57 Forest St. DEM
Tec Leora 5 Rindge Ave DEM
Thomas Ruth 10 Parker St DEM
Thompson Julia H.11 Norton Rd DEM
Thuma Jean H.149 Wood St DEM
Tobin Julie 27 Calvin St UNR
Todd Duncan G.4Frost Rd UNR
Tracy Margaret J.63 Oak St DEM
Trudeau Jane A.1364 Massachusetts Ave DEM
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 6 of 7
83
Last Name First Name MI Str # Street Party
Tsakraklides Vasiliki 85 Oak St UNR
van Oossanen Dennis 32 Tyler Rd UNR
VanDeurse Gary B.42 Percy Rd DEM
Wallace Gloria Mary 1444 Massachusetts Ave UNR
Walsh Matthew J.41 Spring St DEM
Ward Elaine
P.V.20 Marrett Rd UNR
Webster Ann S.16 Brent Rd UNR
Woit Janet Z.30 Edgewood Rd DEM
Worcester Christin L.26 Freemont St DEM
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 Page 7 of 7
84
07/20/2026 7:05pm
PRESENTER:
Jeri Zeder, Vision for Lexington Committee Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Discussion: Proposed Local Election Voter Turnout Task Force Charge
SUMMARY:
Category: Decision Making
As a follow-up to the initial presentation made at the March 16, 2026 Select Board meeting, Jeri Zeder
will present a revised draft charge for the proposed Local Election Voter Turnout Task Force for the
Select Board's review and consideration.
If the Select Board approves the proposed charge, staff will initiate the recruitment process to fill the
Task Force's membership in accordance with the Board's committee appointment procedures.
PROPOSED MOTION:
move to approve the proposed charge for the Local Election Voter Turnout Task Force, as presented,
and to authorize the Select Board Office to initiate the recruitment process to fill the Task Force
membership in accordance with the Board's committee appointment procedures.
FOLLOW-UP:
Select Board Office
DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA:
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed updated - Local Election Voter Turnout Task Force Charge
redlined - LOCAL ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT TASK FORCE charge.pdf
85
LOCAL ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT TASK FORCE
Members: 7 Members
Appointed by: Select Board
Criteria for Membership
• 7 community members, including, if feasible, at least one member from the Vision for
Lexington Subcommittee on Local Election Voter Participation. The Select Board will
appoint from a broad, diverse cross-section of the Lexington community, with open
solicitation to include but not be limited to the League of Women Voters of Lexington
and the Commission on Disability.
• Committee Chair to be elected by Task Force members.
• Members will serve for staggered three-year terms, with a limit of two terms.
• Members are encouraged, but not required, to have some experience serving as
election workers.
Ex-officio/Liaisons (non-voting) , the following are invited to serve as liaisons:
o 1 member of the Select Board
o High School Student to serve a one-year liaison term
Staff Support: The Town Clerk or their designee will act as a liaison to the Task Force. The
Town will provide reasonable administrative and logistical support as needed.
Length of Term: The Task Force will exist for a minimum of six years. The Select Board may
consider extending the term further, or making the Task Force permanent.
Meeting Times: As determined by the Task Force. A minimum of one evening meeting
annually for the purpose of soliciting public comment is required.
Mission: The Task Force exists: (1) to assist the Select Board by providing detailed, practical
guidance on the implementation of the recommendations enumerated in the document
entitled “Our Vote, Our Community: Addressing Low Voter Turnout in Lexington’s Local
Elections,” dated August 22, 2025, by the Vision for Lexington Subcommittee on Local
Election Voter Participation (“the Report”); and (2) to increase voter turnout in Lexington’s
local elections and address barriers to voting by transforming local-election voting into a
central social and cultural value and expectation in our town.
Values:
• The Task Force recognizes that voting in Lexington’s local elections is a singular
activity. It is the only activity that installs into office the individuals who oversee and
86
run our Town government, and the only activity through which additional budget
needs can be funded through tax overrides and debt exclusions.
• The Task Force sees local voting as consequential. Voting gives every eligible person
an equal voice, empowers them to shape the policies and decisions that affect their
lives and community, holds elected officials accountable, and encourages elected
officials to be responsive to their constituents.
• The Task Force respects the validity of Lexington’s local elections and does not
consider low voter turnout as disqualifying of the validity of Lexington’s local
elections.
• Under Massachusetts law, persons are eligible to vote if they are U.S. citizens,
residents of Massachusetts, 18 or older, and not currently incarcerated by reason of
a felony conviction. The Task Force seeks to increase local voter turnout among all
eligible individuals without regard to their party affiliations or perceived motives,
abilities, viewpoints, values, levels of knowledge, or other characteristics not
specifled by law.
• The Task Force will neither recommend nor take any action to increase local election
voter turnout through methods that involve misinformation, disinformation,
propaganda, or other alarmist, dishonest, disreputable, or unlawful means.
• The Task Force will work cooperatively, collaboratively, respectfully, and supportively
with Town staff, and will actively engage community members, groups, and
organizations with openness and welcome.
Deliverables: The Task Force will:
• Year One: Submit to the Select Board report(s) that provide detailed, practical
guidance on how to implement the recommendations described in the Report.
• Year Two: Consult the Report and lessons learned in Year One to develop and
implement goals, strategies, and tactics designed to increase voter turnout in
Lexington’s local elections.
• Years Three, Four, and Five: Regularly evaluate and assess the effectiveness of its
work, and make changes and adjustments as things change, stagnate, or progress.
• Year Six: Submit to the Select Board a report describing whether and how its work
has increased voter turnout in Lexington’s local elections, including
recommendations for further action and an assessment of whether the Select Board
should extend the Task Force’s term.
87
Prior to serving as a member of this committee, appointees are required to:
• Acknowledge receipt of the Summary of the Confiict of Interest Statute. Further, to
continue to serve on the committee, the member must acknowledge annually receipt
of the Summary of the Confiict of Interest Statute. Said summary will be provided by
and acknowledged to the Town Clerk.
• Provide evidence to the Town Clerk that the appointee has completed the on-line
training requirement by the Confiict of Interest statute. Further, to continue to serve
on the committee, the member must acknowledge every two years completion of the
online training requirement.
Ref: Adopted by the Select Board (Date______________)
88
LOCAL ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT TASK FORCE
Members (: 7 Members
Appointed by the : Select Board):
Criteria for Membership
• 5 or 7 community members, including, if possiblefeasible, at least one member
from the Vision for Lexington Subcommittee on Local Election Voter Participation
and a high school student, with the Chair to be designated by the Select Board.. The
Select Board may consider recruitingwill appoint from, among other sources, the a
broad, diverse cross-section of the Lexington community, with open solicitation to
include but not be limited to the League of Women Voters of Lexington, and the
Commission on Disability, and from open solicitation to the Lexington community.
• Committee Chair to be elected by Task Force members.
• Members will serve for staggered three-year terms, with a limit of two terms.
• Members are encouraged, but not required, to have some experience serving as
election workers.
Ex-officio/LiaisonLiaisons (non-voting) , the following are invited to serve as liaisons:
o 1 member of the Select Board
o High School Student to serve a one-year liaison term
Staff Support: The Town Clerk or their designee will act as a liaison to the Task Force. The
Town will provide reasonable administrative and logistical support as needed.
Length of Term: The Task Force will exist for a minimum of six years. The Select Board may
consider extending the term further, or making the Task Force permanent.
Meeting Times: As determined by the Task Force. A minimum of one evening meeting
annually for the purpose of soliciting public comment is required.
Mission: The Select Board empowers the Task Force to implement activities consistent
with this Charge.Mission: The Task Force exists: (1) to assist the Select Board by providing
detailed, practical guidance on the implementation of the recommendations enumerated
in the document entitled “Our Vote, Our Community: Addressing Low Voter Turnout in
Lexington’s Local Elections,” dated August 22, 2025, by the Vision for Lexington
Subcommittee on Local Election Voter Participation (“the Report”); and (2) to increase
89
voter turnout in Lexington’s local elections and address barriers to voting by transforming
local-election voting into a central social and cultural value and expectation in our town.
Values:
• The Task Force recognizes that voting in Lexington’s local elections is a singular
activity. It is the only activity that installs into office the individuals who oversee and
run our Town government, and the only activity through which additional budget
needs can be funded through tax overrides and debt exclusions.
• The Task Force sees local voting as consequential. Voting gives every eligible person
an equal voice, empowers them to shape the policies and decisions that affect their
lives and community, holds elected officials accountable, and encourages elected
officials to be responsive to their constituents.
• The Task Force respects the validity of Lexington’s local elections and does not
consider low voter turnout as disqualifying of the validity of Lexington’s local
elections.
• Under Massachusetts law, persons are eligible to vote if they are U.S. citizens,
residents of Massachusetts, 18 or older, and not currently incarcerated by reason of
a felony conviction. The Task Force seeks to increase local voter turnout among all
eligible individuals without regard to their party affiliations or perceived motives,
abilities, viewpoints, values, levels of knowledge, or other characteristics not
specifled by law.
• The Task Force rejectswill neither recommend nor take any effortsaction to increase
local election voter turnout through methods that involve misinformation,
disinformation, propaganda, or other alarmist, dishonest, disreputable, or unlawful
means.
• The Task Force will work cooperatively, collaboratively, respectfully, and
supportively with Town staff, and will actively engage community members, groups,
and organizations with openness and welcome.
Deliverables: The Task Force will:
• Year One: Submit to the Select Board report(s) that provide detailed, practical
guidance on how to implement the recommendations described in the Report.
90
• Year Two: Consult the Report and lessons learned in Year One to develop and
implement goals, strategies, and tactics designed to increase voter turnout in
Lexington’s local elections.
• Years Three, Four, and Five: Regularly evaluate and assess the effectiveness of its
work, and make changes and adjustments as things change, stagnate, or progress.
• Year Six: Submit to the Select Board a report describing whether and how its work
has increased voter turnout in Lexington’s local elections, including
recommendations for further action and an assessment of whether the Select
Board should extend the Task Force’s term.
Prior to serving as a member of this committee, appointees are required to:
• Acknowledge receipt of the Summary of the Confiict of Interest Statute. Further, to
continue to serve on the committee, the member must acknowledge annually
receipt of the Summary of the Confiict of Interest Statute. Said summary will be
provided by and acknowledged to the Town Clerk.
• Provide evidence to the Town Clerk that the appointee has completed the on-line
training requirement by the Confiict of Interest statute. Further, to continue to serve
on the committee, the member must acknowledge every two years completion of
the online training requirement.
Ref: Adopted by the Select Board (Date______________)
91
07/20/2026 7:15pm
PRESENTER:
Christina Lin, Lexington Human Rights Committee Chair
ITEM
NUMBER:
2
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Update: Lexington Human Rights Committee Recommendation - Awareness of Immigration Rights &
Safety
SUMMARY:
Christina Lin, Lexington Human Rights Committee, will present the Immigration Working Group
recommendations on the topic of Awareness of Immigration Rights & Safety.
DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA:
ATTACHMENTS:
Lexington Human Rights Recommendation Presentation.pdf
92
Recommendations on preparedness in
the rapidly changing landscape of
immigration enforcement
March 2026
Immigration Working Group
93
What is the charge of the Immigration Working Group?
The Immigration Working Group, under the Lexington Human Rights Committee,
is a group of citizens with a concern for the safety of immigrants in Lexington, in
particular given the extreme operations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
under the current federal administration.
The group meets regularly to discuss how we can respond to the current
environment, and strategize actions that can help the community of immigrants in
Lexington feel somewhat safer, and be prepared for any encounter with ICE.
Working Group members: Christina Lin, Rachel Levy, Rev. Reebee Girash, Judith
Glixon, Todd Burger, Bruce Neumann
94
~33% of Lexington residents are foreign-born
https://lexobserver.org/2024/06/06/how-a-decade-of-data-reflects-changes-in-lexington/
Top 5 national origins for
immigrants in Lexington
(2024)
1.China
2.India
3.Korea
4.Hong Kong
5.Canada
https://www.bostonindicators.org/global_boston
12.7%
20.2%
32.9%
95
Immigrants in the workforce 2021
https://www.bostonindicators.org/-/media/indicators/boston-indicators-reports/report-files/bi_immigration_pages_reducedsize_2_13.pdf
96
Lexington Community is welcoming to immigrants
●2018 Resolution for a Welcoming, Safe and Inclusive Community
●Longterm support for Lexington Refugee Assistance program (LexRAP)
●When migrants were moved to shelters in Lexington in 2023, our community
showed widespread support of Lex Sheltered Coalition which provided
assistance programs including English Learning classes, help finding jobs,
and support navigating our systems.
●LICA support of refugee and immigrant communities.
●Our immigrant communities play key roles in caring for and shaping of
Lexington: Indian Americans of Lexington, Chinese Association of Lexington,
Chinese Americans of Lexington, Koreans of Lexington, Japanese of
Lexington, Bengali Americans of Lexington.
97
We are not immune to xenophobia
●Anti-immigrant sentiments have been shared when school overcrowding
issues arise - blaming immigrant students for overcrowding in Lexington
public schools.
●The term “Asian-invasion” has been widely used in Lexington in the past.
●Statements such as “Go back to where you came from,” and “You don’t
belong here” have been voiced against immigrants of color.
98
Concerning ICE enforcement activity
1.A majority of immigrants detained by ICE had no criminal history
2.Operation Patriot I & II in Massachusetts led to ~3000 arrests in Massachusetts in 2025 and
over 400 were conducted at courthouses.
3.Numerous reports of disturbing ICE actions including excessive violence and bypassing due
process.
4.Nationwide, at least 46 people have died while in ICE custody since the beginning of the
2nd term of the Trump administration. 26 people died in total in the prior 4 years. In
addition, two US citizens protesting actions in Minnesota were executed by ICE agents, and
another US citizen was killed in Los Angeles (unrelated to protests).
5.Regular ICE actions are occurring in Framingham and Chelsea
6.Community members have an on-going concern about another surge in Massachusetts.
99
Impact of ICE Actions
1.Though immigrants without documentation are most at-risk, reports of
detentions of those with VISAs, green cards, and even a few naturalized
citizens justify the concerns of MANY in our community.
2.We’ve heard from many immigrants that they feel a general sense of fear in
the current environment.
3.One specific impact we’ve seen is that people are opting out of civic
engagement in order to stay under the radar. Thus we’ve seen a a silencing
effect on free speech.
100
Concerns raised to the IWG
●Sudden changes to immigration status
○H-1B Visa - Untenable fees. Costs rose from <$5K to $100K
○Renewals for Temporary Protective Status for many vulnerable immigrants
●Government surveillance/Data collection - who has information about our residents and
how will/can it be used?
●Proof of citizenship/immigration - Questions like “Do I need to carry my passport?” are a
rising concern.
●Silencing of political views - While our constitution states Freedom of Expression, residents
are no longer confident that they can share their political views on social media without
becoming targeted by ICE.
●International Travel concerns - Can I travel abroad? Can my family come visit me?
●Safety in Massachusetts - Visiting nearby establishments like Burlington Mall which is located
next to an ICE facility is also a rising concern.
101
“In silence people will make up their own stories. So, we
need to be clear in articulating the Town of Lexington’s
practices and values” -S.Bartha (paraphrased)
Now is the time to be proactive in understanding your
rights and safeguarding your family and assets
102
IWG Current efforts: Community Awareness
●Red Card Project
●Website resource updating
●Resource 2-pager for quick information
●4th Amendment Workplace Rights
●Know Your Rights
●Considering outreach at Discovery Day / Farmers Market
We are aware of ongoing mutual aid efforts by other organizations in the region and are staying informed
on those efforts.
103
Red Card Project
Red Cards are wallet-sized cards
Side 1: Quick reference to your Constitutional rights
(in a variety of languages).
Side 2: in English states you are exerting your rights.
“I know my rights.”
Red cards are useful both as a reminder of rights,
and more importantly a way to communicate
“I know that I can remain silent.”
The IWG has gathered Red Cards in English, Spanish,
Portuguese, Haitian Kreyol, Vietnamese, Korean, and Chinese
A number businesses and institutions have agreed to have a display with multiple languages available.
104
Exercising your constitutional rights with Red Cards
from ILRC* available in 56 languages
*ILRC - Immigration Legal Resource Center
SIDE #1 - for card holder SIDE #2 - for federal agent
105
Resources
The IWG maintains a page on the LHRC website with a variety of links for
resources, including rights, family preparedness, how to find a lawyer.
●We will periodically review these to ensure that links are up to date, and valid
information is presented
●We’re also preparing a two-page handout with the most essential information.
This can be available on the web-page, at future events, or by request from
an affected cohort in town.
●We’re considering more Know-your-rights sessions with an immigration
lawyer
●Also considering Displays at Discovery Day and/or Farmer’s market
106
4th Amendment Rights
One aspect of being prepared for ICE activity in Lexington is to ensure that business
owners understand how to establish public and private spaces, and how to train
employees to respond if ICE officers show up.
●Key to this preparedness is identifying the limits of public space, and putting up
signs that say “private” in other spaces.
●The fourth amendment assures that law enforcement may not enter private space
without a judicial warrant
●It’s also important for the business owner to establish a protocol: Who will be the
person to speak to ICE? Who will be taking video of the interaction? Do at-risk
employees know where to go?
The IWG plans to approach businesses in Lexington to provide resources and raise
awareness on ways to protect their businesses.
107
Current concerns - what we are keeping an eye on
1.Temporary Protective Status -
a.Haitian TPS - in litigation
b.Cote Verde, Ukrainian TPS ending later in the year
2.Safety concerns
a.Concerns of racial profiling in immigration enforcement
b.Concerns with private data being accessible to ICE
c.Fear of consequences of voicing political views
d.Birthright Citizenship - impact of current court case
3.State Legislation that support immigrant safety
The fundamental concern of the IWG is the safety and security of
immigrants who live and work in Lexington. All our efforts are to ensure
knowledge and a sense of welcome.
108
What’s next?
We recognize that considering the risk of political attention is important when
making decisions to support a safe and welcoming community. It is equally
important that we do not avoid consequences at the expense of other communities
suffering the ire of ICE.
Keeping our community well informed with ample opportunities to access
resource materials is key to keeping our community safe and empowering
everyone to make the best decision for themselves and their family.
109
IWG - recommendations to the Select Board
1.Translated Resolution & Increased Publicity regarding the 2026 Select Board
Proclamation: Affirming Constitutional Rights, Protecting Municipal Facilities, and
Providing Guidance Regarding Civil Immigration Enforcement
2.Immigration resource page more prominent on the Town Website &
Communications
3.Support for IWG’s Red Card Distribution & Fourth Amendment outreach
110
07/20/2026 7:30pm
PRESENTER:
Maggie Peard, Sustainability Officer
ITEM
NUMBER:
3
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING
AGENDA SECTION TITLE:
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Discussion: Trash Program Options
SUMMARY:
After years of discussion, community engagement, information gathering, and passing enabling Town
meeting articles, it is now time to move towards making decisions about the design of Lexington's new
waste collection program. The goal is to design a program to be rolled out in July of 2027 that reduces
waste, mitigates rising costs, and continues to provide Lexington residents with a reliable, convenient,
and accessible waste collection system.
Town staff have put together a detailed memo to the Select Board to guide a discussion that will ideally
result in two program design options that staff can take back to the community to further vet and refine.
The memo contains links to many supporting documents, including feedback summaries, data
summaries, a landscape analysis of programs in surrounding communities, and more. The memo also
outlines the proposed timeline for finalizing a program design, including opportunities for continued
community input.
The memo includes a list of key decisions which should be at the core of the discussion.
Links to several excel spreadsheets containing supporting information:
Trash-Programs_Neighboring-Communities-Summaries
Waste-Survey-Results
Waste-Survey---Raw-Data
No formal vote is needed at this stage, but staff would like to consensus from Board on two program
design options it feels would be appropriate for Lexington given the data and feedback provided.
FOLLOW-UP:
Sustainability Officer
DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA:
ATTACHMENTS:
July 2026 Select Board Memo
Community Outreach and Feedback Summary.pdf
111
Summary of Qualitative Responses from 2026 Survey.pdf
Waste Reduction and Modernization Program Feedback Survey - 3.1 to 6.29 - FINAL.pdf
2025 Waste Bin Audit Results.pdf
Presentation.pdf
112
Designing a Modern, Convenient Waste Program
for Lexington
Prepared by Town Staff for the Select Board
July 2026
The purpose of this document, and the additional supporting documents, is to provide the Select
Board with the information it needs to confirm the details of a program design for a new waste
collection system for Lexington. The goal is to design a program that reduces waste, mitigates
rising costs, and continues to provide Lexington residents with a reliable, convenient waste
collection system.
Contents
1. Key Decisions (pg 2)
2. Proposed Timeline and Opportunities for Community Engagement (pg 2)
3. Supporting Documents (pg 3)
4. Connection to Lexington Plans (pg 4)
5. Data Highlights (pg 6)
6. Overflow Waste Options (pg 6)
7. Trash Program Design Options (pg 10)
8. Recycling & Compost Program Recommendations (pg 12)
9. Accommodations (pg 13)
10. Additional Considerations (pg 14)
Appendix A: MassDEP Grant Details (pg 16)
Appendix B: Weight Assumptions for Cart Sizes (pg 17)
1
113
I. Key Decisions
This document presents many options for various aspects of an updated waste collection
program. It strives to capture relevant considerations for making decisions on the design of the
program. The list below captures the key decisions for the Board to reach consensus on in the
coming months.
● What size trash cart will serve as the default “baseline level of service” that will be picked
up from households for no additional fee?
● Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller cart for their “baseline
level of service”? Would there be a cost associated with choosing a larger size?
● Which fee-based overflow option(s) should the Town offer to households who have trash
beyond their “baseline level of service”? Official overflow bags, leasing an additional cart,
or both?
● What process will be used to set and regularly evaluate fees for overflow trash?
● What size recycling cart will be provided to households?
● Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller or additional recycling
cart?
● Decisions on Key Exceptions
○ What accommodations will be made for residents with mobility challenges?
○ What accommodations will be made for residents with high volumes of waste
associated with a disability or medical condition?
○ Will those with a financial hardship be offered a discount or a waiver on
trash-related fees? What qualifications will be used to determine eligibility?
II. Proposed Timeline and Opportunities for Community
Engagement
The window for community input has not ended. Staff proposes the following timeline for arriving
at a final program design:
● July-August: Select Board deliberates to come up with two draft program designs
based on community input to date and the information presented tonight.
● August-September: Town Staff host a series of public meetings, presenting the two
draft program designs to the public and soliciting input. Proposed dates/times for
community meetings are below and can be adjusted, if needed, before publicizing
widely.
○ Wednesday, August 26th at 6:30 pm (Community Center Dining Room and
Virtual)
○ Wednesday, September 2 at 6:30 pm (Virtual)
○ Friday, September 4 at 9:30 am (Community Center Rm 237) - Women League
of Voters First Friday Event
○ Monday, September 14 at noon (Virtual)
2
114
○ Tuesday, September 15 at 6:30 pm (Police Community Room and Virtual)
● September-October: The Select Board reviews input from the community and uses it to
propose a single, revised program design.
● October-November: Staff negotiate contract with waste haulers using the proposed
final program design.
● November-December: Staff bring back any suggested changes to the program design
to the Select Board based on negotiations with the hauler.
● December: Select Board votes to approve the final program design. Staff initiate
purchase of trash and recycling carts.
● December-July: Staff prepare for implementation, provide multiple notifications to all
residents about the upcoming changes, and host multiple community forums to introduce
the new program.
III. Supporting Documents
The following documents have been prepared to support the Select Board in making decisions
that are informed by data and input from the community:
1. Summary of waste programs in surrounding communities.
This spreadsheet provides an at-a-glance look at the trash and recycling programs of all
communities within a 10-mile radius of Lexington. It provides key program design details
such as cart sizes, overflow trash options and costs, and whether a community has
automated or manual collection, as well as metrics such as number of households and
average pounds of trash per household.
2. Summary of Community Outreach and Feedback
Staff, with support from the Waste Reduction Task Force, has been conducting
community outreach about the “Waste Reduction and Modernization Program” since
November of 2024, and has been discussing the topic internally since the completion of
the Town’s Zero Waste Plan in 2023. Engagement has included hosting in-person and
virtual community forums; presenting to committees and community groups; sharing
information through social media, newsletters, and the Town website; and engaging
residents directly with one-on-one phone calls, emails, and conversations. This
document serves as a summary of the feedback received from the community.
3. Results from the 2026 Waste Cart Size Survey
In an effort to collect data from residents that would inform the design of an updated
waste collection program, the Town put out a Waste Reduction & Modernization Program
Survey. The survey questions were designed in consultation with MassDEP who made
recommendations to ensure the survey data could inform key program design questions
such as appropriate cart size. The survey was first publicized in mid March of 2026 and
has been accepting responses since then. The attached results include the 1,530
responses received through June 29, 2026.
3
115
● Quantitative data summary
● Qualitative data summary
● Raw data from all responses
Questions have been raised about the validity of the survey data because it was
possible to submit more than one response from the same device. Staff performed a
careful analysis of IP addresses to assess the extent to which duplicate responses may
have skewed the results. There were many instances of two responses from the same IP
address with varied responses which were assumed to be members of the same
household filling out the survey on the same network. There were also instances of
larger grouping of responses from the same IP address over many different days with
varied responses which were assumed to be people responding to the survey on the
same shared/public network. There were a more limited number of instances of multiple
responses filled out from the same IP address in close succession with very similar
responses, which were more likely to be the same person filling out the survey multiple
times. Reviewing the full dataset to review such instances resulted in removing 185
responses, which was a conservative culling of the data set. It is possible some valid
responses were removed. Staff compared the response across the full dataset and the
data set with duplicates removed and found that no overall question results were
changed by more than one or two percentage points. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that
the linked summaries remain a helpful tool in gauging public opinion, acknowledging that
it is only one tool of many that should be used. The full data set with duplicates removed
is linked below as an additional resource
● Data with duplicates reviewed and eliminated
4. Results from the 2025 Bin Audit.
These slides show the high level results from a 2025 audit of 1,400 households. The
audit involved recording the number and size of trash and recycling bins, along with
approximate fill level of trash bins in order to approximate volume of trash. Further
analysis of the raw data can be completed upon request.
IV. Connection to Lexington Plans
The proposal to move to an updated waste management program has been carefully
considered over many years, and is supported by several of Lexington’s planning documents.
Zero Waste Resolution
At the 2022 Annual Town Meeting, Lexington adopted a Zero Waste Resolution. The resolution
is a commitment to reduce waste, conserve natural resources, support environmental justice,
and it called on the Town to develop a Zero Waste Plan.
Lexington’s Zero Waste Plan
4
116
The process to develop a Zero Waste Plan began in 2022, shortly after the passage of the Zero
Waste Resolution. The plan was formally adopted by the Select Board of October 2023. One
section of the plan focused on changes to the collection system. The plan recommended the
following actions:
● Expand compost collection town-wide
● Convert to automated collection with wheeled carts
● Evaluate rate structure incentives
● Evaluate every other week trash collection (not currently under consideration)
● Provide reuse collection
Resilient Lexington Climate Action & Resilience Plan
The Town’s Climate Action & Resilience Plan was completed in 2023 after a year-long planning
process with rigorous stakeholder engagement. One of the plan’s five focus areas is Waste. The
following relevant actions were included in the plan:
● Establish a variable rate structure for the Town’s waste collection services based on
quantity of waste to incentive reduction in waste generation for residents.
● Launch a phased zero waste education campaign targeted at residents, businesses, and
Town staff.
● Identify ways to expand material drop-off to additional hard-to-recycle items (e.g. bulky
items, electronics, batteries)
● Secure funding to expand town-wide curbside composting program
● Continue to evaluate current operations at Hartwell Composting Facility to ascertain if
there are additional ways to reduce waste
Lexington Next
In September 2022, the Planning Board adopted the Lexington Next Comprehensive Plan,
which highlights the goal of waste reduction with the following proposed actions:
● Encourage composting and implement curbside pick-up for composting
● Reinstitute “Pay-As-You-Throw” to reduce trash
Additional support for waste reduction initiatives is found in the “Lexington Voices” sections of
the plan that highlights feedback captured from community members.
5
117
V. Data Highlights
The planning team has collected a wide range of data throughout the planning process. The list
below pulls out some of the most relevant data that may inform decision making.
● The average household in Lexington produces 1,391 pounds of trash per year (Capitol
Waste)
● Approximately 11,000 households served by the municipal waste program (excluding
those served by dumpsters)
● The average household in Lexington produces 38 gallons of trash per week. (2025 Bin
Audit). This is a measure of volume, not weight.
○ The average is higher for those who do not compost (41 gallons) and lower for
those who do compost (32 gallons)
● Distribution of gallons of trash per household per week (2025 Bin Audit)
○ 51% use 35 gallons or less
○ 63% use 36 gallons or less
○ 81% use 48 gallons or less
○ 88% use 64 gallons or less
○ 95% use 96 gallons or less
● Weekly self reported trash production (2026 survey)
○ 67% use 1-3 trash bags (fits in a 35 gallon cart)
○ 33% use 4 or more trash bags
● Breakdown of household size in Lexington (US Census Bureau)
○ 1 person: 17.7%
○ 2 people: 31.6%
○ 3 people: 21.8%
○ 4 people: 18.8%
○ 5 people 7.3%
○ 6 or more people 2.8%
For more extensive data summaries, please refer to the 2025 Bin Audit or the 2026 Waste
Reduction and Modernization Survey linked above in the Supporting Documents section.
VI. Overflow Waste Options
Article 31 at the 2026 Town Meeting gave the Select Board the authority to impose reasonable
fees for disposal beyond a baseline level of service. The most common ways to administer fees
for overflow trash is through selling official program overflow bags or leasing an additional cart
for an annual fee. This section explores the details of those options and provides a starting point
for deciding how much each fee should be.
A program could include any combination of the options below.
6
118
Overflow bags
Under an overflow bag model, residents could purchase official program bags at Town buildings
and local retail stores to put out with their trash on any week they have more trash than fits in
their cart. This approach is especially beneficial for households who only produce overflow trash
a few weeks out of the year.
The cost of bags would be set to cover the cost of collection and disposal of that excess trash,
not to generate revenue. An initial proposal of how to price one overflow bag is below. Before
finalizing, these numbers would be validated by our vendors and reviewed by experts at
MassDEP.
FY2030 Cost per ton $114.73
Cost per pound $0.06
Pounds per bag 25
Disposal cost per bag $1.50
Bag cost $0.50
Collection cost $1.00
Program management $0.50
Total cost per bag $3.50
Notes:
● The FY2030 cost per ton rate is used, per recommendation from MassDEP, to avoid
ever operating at a deficit.
● 25 pounds per bag is an estimate used by MassDEP for 33 gallon bags, which is a
typical size for overflow bags. Smaller bags (e.g. 15 gallons, which is a typical kitchen
bag size) could also be supplied at a proportionally lower cost per bag.
● Disposal cost per bag is calculated by multiplying the cost per pound by the pound per
bag.
● Bag cost is based on typical price estimates for overflow bags.
● Collection cost: some automated haulers charge a per bag collection fee to make up for
the inefficiencies caused by having to get out of the truck to pick up an overflow bag.
$1.00 is a conservative estimate, and not a price confirmed by our hauler.
● $0.50 is a typical cost to carry for program administration.
If moving forward with overflow bags, the Town would need to define a process to review the
cost of bags every three years to ensure the cost accurately reflects the true cost of collection
and disposal. This review process should be codified.
Additional Carts
Under an additional cart model, households could elect to pay an annual fee to lease a second
cart. This approach is especially beneficial for households who regularly produce overflow trash,
as it eliminates the need to purchase overflow bags on a regular basis.
7
119
The cost of leasing an additional cart would be set to cover the cost of collection and disposal of
that excess trash, not to generate revenue. An initial proposal of how to price additional carts of
various sizes is below. Before finalizing, these numbers would be validated by our vendors and
reviewed by experts at MassDEP.
These calculations use the EPA Volume-to-Weight Conversion Factors to estimate the annual
weight capacity of each size cart and determine an appropriate cost by multiplying that weight
by the per pound cost of trash disposal. See Appendix B for more information about the weight
assumptions for each cart size.
Calculation Proposed cost
Additional
35-gallon
Disposal: (1802.3 lbs) * ($0.06/lbs) = $108.10
Cart: $10
$120/year
Additional
48-gallon
Disposal: (2,471.0 lbs) * ($0.06/lbs) = $148.26
Cart: $10
$160/year
Additional
65-gallon
Disposal: (3,296.8 lbs) * ($0.06/lbs) = $197.81
Cart: $10
$210/year
Opting up from
35- to 65-gallon
Disposal: [(3,296.8 lbs) - (1,802.3 lbs)] *
($0.06/lbs) = $89.67
$90/year
Note: The cost of the cart itself has been included in the proposed annual cost. A cart,
depending on size, costs somewhere around $40-$60. Adding $10 to the annual cost of leasing
an additional cart would cover the cost of purchasing the extra cost over 4 to 6 years.
Just as with overflow bags, if moving forward with the option to lease additional carts, the Town
would define a process to review the cost to do so every three years to ensure the cost
accurately reflects the true cost of collection and disposal. This review process should be
codified.
Considerations: Overflow Bags vs. Additional Carts
The list below summarizes some considerations that should inform the decision around how to
deal with overflow waste. Having both options available is a common approach in other
communities.
● Public survey results
○ 30% prefer overflow bags
○ 8% prefer leasing an additional cart
○ 22% prefer a mix of both options (overflow bags and leasing additional cart)
○ 16% do not expect to need either option
○ Other responses can be found in the survey results summaries linked in the
Supporting Documents section
8
120
Advantages of Overflow Bags Advantages of Additional Carts
● Bags allow significant flexibility for
households, allowing a true variable
cost option that can size up or size
down based on household need and
seasonality.
● Bag inventory and stocking would be
managed directly by the bag vendor.
WasteZero is the vendor on the state
contract that most municipalities use.
Other communities who have used
this system report very little added
work for staff.
● Bags allow for a more gradual
transition to allow residents to adjust
their trash and consumption behaviors
over time. If a second cart is offered
and accepted, there is little incentive
to not fill it.
● The additional cart option offers a
convenient, low-touch option for
households, such as large families,
that routinely produce more waste
than fits in the first cart.
Drawbacks of Overflow Bags Drawbacks of Additional Carts
● Bags on the curb outside of carts
reduces some of the efficiencies
gained from moving to automated
collection since haulers would have to
get out of the truck to collect loose
bags. This has been workable in other
communities because only a small
percentage of households end up
using overflow bags on a given week.
● The hauler may charge a per bag fee
for the collection of loose bags, which
would need to be included in the price
of a bag.
● The additional cart option requires
additional staff time to maintain an
inventory and manage annual
subscriptions.
9
121
Potential Special Collection Weeks
Some residents have shared that fitting their trash in a single trash cart would only be difficult for
them during specific periods when they are hosting family or hosting large gatherings over the
holidays. One program design addition that could be considered is offering a few free overflow
weeks throughout the year. The Select Board could designate 1-3 weeks out of the year (e.g.
Christmas, Thanksgiving, graduation) during which overflow waste could be collected without
fees. This option would have to be more fully vetted with our hauler, but it is conceivable the
hauler could offer manual collection for those weeks, or residents could request this service
directly from the Town and DPW could manage the collection of the requested overflow pick
ups. Shrewsbury is an example of a community that takes this approach: the Select Board
annually votes to approve free overflow collection the week of Christmas. There would be a cost
associated with this option–either directly to the hauler to conduct manual collection or to pay
overtime for DPW employees. Staff can more thoroughly vet this possibility, if desired by the
Select Board.
VII. Trash Program Design Options
Option 1: 35 gallon baseline
● According to survey data, 67% of households (HH) across all household sizes dispose of
1-3 standard 13-gallon kitchen bags per week; this amount would fit within a 35-gallon
cart and result in no additional costs in a typical week
○ Households with 1-2 people: 87% = no cost
○ Households with 3-4 people: 59% = no cost
○ Households with 5 or more people: 29% = no cost
● If 35-gallon carts were adopted as the default:
○ MassDEP would fund $300,000 of our estimated $550,000 expenditure for trash
carts; and
○ Lexington would be eligible for an additional $7,200 in annual grant funding that
can be used on various waste reduction programs.
● 35-gallon carts is the only size that MassDEP considers a waste reduction strategy for
weekly collection programs. MassDEP has shown communities that have adopted such
a program have reduced solid waste tonnage by 25-50% through a combination of
increased recycling, diversion to reuse, repair, donation, composting, and other methods
of disposal.
○ Reducing our trash tonnage by 25% from our 2025 level would save $205,464 in
FY28, $214,180 in FY29, and $223,207 in FY30 (based on tipping fee savings)
○ Reducing our trash tonnage by 50% from our 2025 level would save $410,928 in
FY28, $428,360 in FY29, and $446,414 in FY30 (based on tipping fee savings)
● A 35-gallon cart would better serve those with limited storage and those with concerns
about moving a larger cart, but would be more challenging for some large families and
others with above average levels of waste
Option 1 could incorporate any of the following features.
10
122
1a: 33 gallon bags for overflow
● At $3.50/bag, one bag per month would cost $42/year
● 51%-67% of HH would pay no fee with zero behavior change (51% from bin audit, 67%
from survey)
● According to survey data, 33% of HHs across all household sizes would occasionally or
routinely need to purchase overflow bags
○ Households with 1-2 people: 13% use more than 3 bags
○ Households with 3-4 people: 51% use more than 3 bags
○ Households with 5 or more people: 71% use more than 3 bags
1b: Option for 65 gallon cart
● According to survey data, 33% of HH across all household sizes dispose of 4 or more
bags per week; this serves as a high end estimate of how many HHs might opt for this
option.
● Adds administrative burden of households self-selecting cart size in advance, or
swapping out carts after program launch
● Opting up could have no cost associated with it, or it could have an annual cost
associated with it based on the extra capacity of the larger bin
○ Proposed cost to opt up: $90 (difference between the annual weight capacity of
35 gallons vs 65 gallons, multiplied by $0.06/lbs)
● If there is no cost to opt up to 65 gallons, MassDEP will not consider our default size as
35-gallons and we would not be eligible for MassDEP funding for trash carts
● A no-cost option to opt up to 65 gallons provides more flexibility for households of
different sizes, but it reduces the incentive for waste reduction
1c: Lease an additional 35 gallon cart
● 33% of HH across all household sizes dispose of 4 or more bags per week, which is
more than what would fit in a 35 gallon cart; therefore, 33% serves as a high estimate of
how many HHs might opt for this option.
● Proposed annual cost for additional 35 gallon cart: $120
Option 2: 48 gallon baseline
● IMPORTANT NOTE: There are currently no cart vendors on the state contract that offer
48-gallon carts as part of their typical inventory. 48-gallon carts represent only 4% of
carts sold nationwide and very few vendors (even beyond the state contract) have them
in their inventory. There is at least one vendor on the state contract who has indicated
they would be willing to manufacture 48-gallon carts for Lexington as a custom order.
Town staff are continuing to look into the feasibility of purchasing 48-gallon carts, but the
Board should be aware of the potentially higher level of risk associated with choosing a
48-gallon cart, as pricing may not be as competitive and future availability is less certain.
● Forgoes $300,000 in MassDEP grant funding for carts
● A 48-gallon baseline would offer the Town an extra $5,400 annually through RDP grant
funding, so long as 50% or more households have a 48-gallon cart
11
123
Option 2 could incorporate any of the following features.
2a: 33 gallon bags for overflow
● At $3.50/bag, one bag per month would cost $42/year
● 81% of HH would pay no fee with zero behavior change (based on bin audit)
2b: Lease an additional 48 gallon cart
● Proposed annual cost for additional 48 gallon cart: $160
● 81% of HH would pay no fee with zero behavior change (based on bin audit)
2c: Opt down to a 35 gallon cart
● Would better serve those with limited storage, and those with concerns about moving a
larger cart
● No cost
Option 3: 65 gallon baseline
● Forgoes $300,000 in MassDEP grant funding for carts
● $0 additional RDP grant funding for 65-gallon cart programs, unless trash is picked up
every other week
Option 3 could incorporate any of the following features.
2a: 33 gallon bags for overflow
● At $3.50/bag, one bag per month would cost $42/year
● 88% of HH would pay no fee with zero behavior change (based on bin audit)
2b: Lease an additional 65-gallon cart
● Proposed annual cost for additional 65 gallon cart: $210
● 88% of HH would pay no fee with zero behavior change (based on bin audit)
2c: Opt down to a 35-gallon cart
● Would better serve those with limited storage, and those with concerns about moving a
larger cart
● No cost
VIII. Recycling & Compost Program Recommendations
Recycling
● Weekly collection
● Recycling remains free and unlimited
● 65 gallon carts as the default, with the option to opt down to 35 gallons
12
124
● If a household routinely has more recycling than fits in their cart, they can request an
additional 65 gallon cart at no cost
● The Town is exploring additional locations for cardboard drop off dumpsters
Composting
● Weekly collection
● Composting remains free and unlimited
● 13 gallon carts provided to all households that sign up
● If a household routinely has more composting than fits in their bin, they can utilize the
community drop off sites at the Public Service building and the Community Center
● There are currently around 3,800 households subscribed to the Town’s compost
program. It is funded up to 4,000 households in FY27. A trash program that incentivizes
waste reduction will likely increase interest in composting, so expansion of the program
should be considered for the FY28 budget.
● The Town is close to finalizing a contract for the Black Earth Compost pilot at Hartwell
Avenue, which could offer an opportunity to bring down the per household cost of
compost collection. The three year pilot will likely offer around a 5% discount in collection
costs, but a longer term agreement could offer more significant savings.
IX. Accommodations
A common theme heard from the community during outreach was the importance of providing
accommodations for residents with varied abilities and incomes. The Human Services
Department is prepared to take on the administrative work of qualifying residents for any
hardship or accommodation program that is adopted.
Financial hardship
The final program design is likely to include fees. To avoid placing a financial burden on
low-income residents, the Select Board could propose a financial hardship program. Town staff
recommend using existing assistance programs as the qualifier for discounted trash fees. For
example, the Town could offer a discounted fee or fee waiver to residents who qualify for the
Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) as this program verifies income levels. HEAP is the
qualifier the Town uses for water and sewer discount rates. Other state or local programs could
be added to the list that would qualify a household for a fee waiver.
Mobility Accommodations
Members of the community have expressed concerns over the potential challenges posed by
moving a wheeled cart. In most communities, this concern is addressed by providing the option
to opt down to a 35 gallon bin if the standard size is larger than 35 gallons. Town staff had an
initial meeting with representatives from the Council on Aging, who felt this was a reasonable
solution.
If a 35 gallon bin remains an issue for some community members, an option to “opt out of the
cart” and simply place a program-approved plastic bag out on the curb for collection has been
13
125
mentioned. Under this model, households could be given 52 free program-approved bags at no
cost to ensure they still received a free baseline level of service. Initial discussions of this option
with our hauler revealed significant pushback, as it would diminish the efficiencies gained from
moving to automated collection because haulers would have to get out of the truck to pick up
the bags.
Medical Waste Accommodations
The Commission on Disabilities, along with other members of the community, have expressed
concerns over financial burden for those who have disabilities or other medical conditions that
result in a significant volume of additional waste. The Select Board could consider waiving fees
for such instances. A self-attestation form could be used to preserve the privacy and dignity of
the individual. We have not yet found examples of other communities in Massachusetts that
offer well-publicized waivers of this kind. Town staff is seeking further input from the
Commission on Disability for their recommendations for implementation at the Commission’s
July 21 meeting.
X. Additional Considerations
Reusing existing bins
Through Town Meeting comments and other feedback channels, community members have
expressed designing a waste program under which households could choose to continue to use
their existing trash cart if it has a lid and the metal bar used for automated collection.
Staff recognizes and appreciates the desire to reduce waste by not replacing all carts, but there
are a few important reasons why providing standardized carts–and not using existing ones–is
necessary for an effective program.
First, our hauler needs a simple and consistent way to identify what should be collected at no
cost. A standardized cart, marked with the Town seal, makes that clear—if it’s in the cart, it’s
part of the baseline level of service. Without a uniform cart, drivers would need to slow down
and assess each container, which reduces efficiency and increases costs.
Second, while many residents already have carts, they vary widely in size, type, and condition.
There is no practical way to ensure that every existing cart meets the program requirements or
is compatible with automated collection equipment. A mix of different carts would create
confusion for both residents and the hauler and make consistent enforcement difficult.
Third, standardized carts are essential for modern, automated collection. The waste industry
has shifted away from manual pickup toward automated systems, which are safer, faster, and
more cost-effective. Lexington needs to align with this shift to remain competitive when bidding
future collection contracts. A fully standardized cart system positions the Town to attract better
pricing and more reliable service over time.
14
126
Finally, this approach supports long-term sustainability. More efficient collection reduces truck
time on the road, lowers fuel use, and helps the Town adapt to ongoing changes in the waste
industry.
So while it may feel like a big upfront change, the standardized carts are a key part of improving
service, controlling costs, and setting Lexington up for the future.
In order to reduce the waste associated with replacing existing bins, the Town would highly
encourage residents to reuse their existing bins for yard waste, storing overflow trash, storage
for any other items, and more. We would also look to offer a bin recycling program around the
time that new carts are being delivered. All waste carts on the state contract are made with at
least 30% post-consumer recycled plastic.
Additional Grant Funds
Staff are exploring additional grant opportunities, beyond MassDEP grants, that may be
available to support the rollout of a new program. The Recycling Partnership has indicated an
initial willingness to provide some level of grant funding for new recycling carts and for
education. A formal grant agreement has not yet been awarded.
Other Diversion Options
In order for an updated waste collection program to successfully reduce waste, residents must
have easy access to other diversion options and to programs that help reduce waste in the first
place. The continuation–and as appropriate, the expansion–of the following programs will be
essential for the success of any program:
● Curbside composting
● Curbside recycling
● Collection of hard-to-recycle items at Hartwell Ave
● Curbside yard waste collection
● Drop off yard waste collection
● Drop off composting
● Discounted backyard composting containers
● Curbside collection of waste ban items (e.g. mattresses/box springs, white
goods/appliances)
● Textile recycling drop off bins
● Curbside textile collection
● Hazardous waste disposal events
● Medical waste disposal events
● Paper shredding events
● Pumpkin smash event
● Lexington Zero Waste Collaborative’s Halloween costume swap
● Community Center Fix-It Shop
● Cary Library’s Library of Things
● ZeroToGo reusable take out container program
15
127
● Goodwill trailer
● Free/for sale online forums
● CSAs at local farms (reduces packaging)
● LexShareWare (reusable dishes available for local events)
● Town compost bins for local events
The following are ideas that have been discussed to further expand residents’ diversion
opportunities that staff can continue to explore:
● Additional cardboard drop off locations
● Swap shop
Education
Throughout the outreach to the community, we heard a common sense of confusion from
residents about what can and cannot be recycled, and how to easily find information about
waste. Education will be another critical component of a successful waste program.
The Town has just recently launched LexSortSmart, a new tool available to residents to get local
information about waste disposal and collection. LexSortSmart is both a mobile app and a web
app available on the Town website.
The tool allows residents to:
· Get reminders and notifications about their collection schedule
· View upcoming waste disposal events
· Search for how to properly dispose of items
· Schedule collection of special disposal items (coming soon!)
· Access recycling educational resources
The app serves as a one-stop shop for trash, recycling, and composting information in
Lexington. This is one component of an effort to improve education and access to information.
Beyond LexSortSmart, staff will be looking to do a reorganization and refresh of the
Environmental Services web pages.
Staff can also explore programs that would provide direct feedback to residents about recycling
contamination such as using “Oops stickers” or leaving other notices on waste carts to reinforce
proper recycling habits.
XI. Appendix A: MassDEP Grants Details
MassDEP offers two grants that are relevant to consider during this decision making process.
The Recycling Dividends Program (RDP) provides payments to municipalities that have
implemented specific waste reduction, reuse, and recycling programs and policies. Through this
program, awarded points are translated into annual grant awards. The Town of Lexington
16
128
currently receives $1,800/point/year, and received 10 points total in 2025. The Town would be
eligible for 4 additional RDP points if it instituted a “Modified PAYT” program. A modified
program provides each household with a 35-gallon unit of trash or less per week in basic level
service. Trash in excess of 35 gallons must be placed in an official PAYT bag, sticker, tag, or
punch card purchased by residents. This award would be reduced to 3 additional points in
subsequent years if fewer than 50% of households participate in the program as described.
Using a cart larger than 35 gallons would be considered “not participating.”
Points can also be awarded under the Solid Waste Reduction category for the following program
models:
● Full PAYT: A full program requires all trash to be placed in a PAYT bag OR requires the
use of stickers or tags affixed to each bag of trash disposed, OR the use of a punch card
which is punched for each bag of trash disposed at the transfer station. [4-5 points as
eligible]
● Trash Limit: A municipality with trash limits of one 64-gallon trash cart collected every
other week may qualify only if a municipality has biweekly trash collection and overflow
bags are purchased for excess trash. [3 points]
● Trash Limit: Households are limited to one 48-gallon cart of trash capacity each week.
Overflow bags must be purchased for excess trash. [2 points]
● Trash Limit: A municipality with trash limits of one 96-gallon trash cart collected every
other week may qualify only if a municipality has biweekly trash collection and overflow
bags are purchased for excess trash. [2 points]
The PAYT Grant program awards start up funds for new PAYT, or Modified PAYT, programs
and specific program updates. MassDEP grants a per household award, the value of which
depends on the program design. The relevant awards are as follows.
● $10/HH served with a 35-gallon or less bag/barrel provided by the resident
● $30/HH served by a 35-gallon cart provided by the municipality
● $20/HH served by a program with a PAYT unit fee for all bag/barrels (this model allows
for using carts larger than 35 gallons, so long as all trash in the cart is placed in an
official PAYT trash bag)
XII. Appendix B: Weight Assumptions for Cart Sizes
EPA’s Volume-to-Weight Conversion Factors
Weekly Annual
35 gallons 34.7 lbs 1802.3 lbs
48 gallons 47.5 lbs 2,471.0 lbs
64 gallons 63.4 lbs 3,296.8 lbs
17
129
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program
Community Feedback Memo
Introduction
Staff, with support from the Waste Reduction Task Force, has been conducting community
outreach about the “Waste Reduction and Modernization Program” since November of 2024,
and has been discussing the topic internally since the completion of the Town’s Zero Waste Plan
in 2023. Engagement has included hosting in-person and virtual community forums; presenting
to committees and community groups; sharing information through social media, newsletters,
and the Town website; and engaging residents directly with one-on-one phone calls, emails, and
conversations.
Staff have documented all comments received from residents on the topic and have used this
feedback to further refine the proposed program. Feedback has come in the form of verbal
comments during community meetings, comments in the chat during virtual meetings, direct
emails, and direct conversations.
This document serves as a summary of the feedback received between December 2025 and
July 2026. This was a period when the dialogue was focused on designing a program structure,
whereas previous rounds of outreach were more educational in nature about why the Town was
exploring changes. Input recorded in this document was not pulled directly from comments
made on the TMMA listserv or at Town Meeting as those sources are publicly available, and the
points made through those forums closely mirror feedback collected through other sources.
Outreach completed
● In-person/virtual info sessions, community meetings, etc.
○ 5/6/2024: Tufts team presentation about recommendations for waste
collection changes to Select Board
○ 11/1/2024: First Friday League of Women Voters presentation
○ 12/11/2024: Community Meeting at the Police station
○ 2/4/2025: Virtual community meeting
○ 2/11/2025: Community meeting at the Community Center (reaching
primarily seniors)
○ 4/8/2025: Discussion with JPLex Board
○ 4/24/2025: Discussion with leaders of Association of Black Citizens of
Lexington
○ 6/5/2025: Community meeting hosted by JPLex, CALex, and ABCL
○ 6/1/2025: Information sharing at LexFUN playground event
○ 8/18/2025: Select Board Meeting
130
○ 12/17/2025: Hybrid community meeting
○ 1/8/2026: Virtual community meeting
○ 1/20/2026: Discussion with Commission on Disability
○ 2/23/2026: Select Board Meeting
○ 3/19/2026: Senior Lunch and Learn
○ 3/12/2026: TMMA hosted Town Meeting Q&A night
○ 3/23/2026: LexCAN hosted Town Meeting Q&A night
○ 6/18/2026: Discussion with Council on Aging representatives
○ 7/21/2026: Discussion with Commission on Disabilities
○ Information at a Sustainability tent at the Farmers Market (June 2025,
Sept 2025, June 2026)
● Additional requests/offers to attend meetings of 10+ other community
organizations to share information
● Cart displays in Town buildings for 3+ months
● Townwide survey open for 3+ months
● Town meeting warrant mailed to all households
● Town meeting FAQs on Town website
● Extensive information at www.lexingtonma.gov/ZeroWaste, and other pages on
Town website
● Town meeting debates and votes
● Hundreds of 1:1 in person conversations, phone calls, emails with residents
● Dozens of notifications of all of these opportunities to engage through
newsflashes on the Town website, Town social media, Town newsletters, partner
organization outreach channels, etc.
● At least 3 LexObserver articles
● Special election webpage
● Special election notification mailed to all households
Summary of Community Feedback Received
Note: This summary was generated using Microsoft Copilot due to the volume of feedback
received, and to avoid bias. Staff reviewed the summary to verify its accuracy.
Overview
Residents across Lexington expressed strong interest in modernizing waste operations and
generally support the goals of reducing waste, improving diversion, and transitioning to
automated curbside collection. They also articulated substantial concerns about cart sizing,
household fairness, mobility limitations, program logistics, aesthetic impacts, and unintended
consequences based on past experience with PAYT. The feedback reflects a community that is
131
engaged, values flexibility, and wants a system that balances environmental ambition with
practical lived realities.
1. Strong Support for Waste Reduction and Modernization Goals
Across nearly all feedback channels, residents expressed support for:
● Reducing landfill tonnage and improving recycling quality
● Expanding compost access
● Worker safety and efficiency through automated collection
● Better clarity on recycling rules and multilingual education
● More opportunities for reuse, repair, and donation (swap shed, clearer bulky item re‑use
pathways, textile recycling improvements)
Residents generally accept the need for change but want implementation details to reflect
household needs and local conditions.
2. Cart Size: Central Area of Concern
Feedback on bin sizes was the most consistent and widespread.
Themes include:
● Wide variation in actual household needs.
Small households, seniors living alone, and avid composters often produce very little
trash. Large families, multigenerational households, and those with diapers or medical
waste generate more.
● Preference for choice rather than a town‑mandated single size.
Many request an options-based approach (e.g., 35/48/64 gallons) or scaling capacity to
household size.
● Fear of regressive impacts.
Residents worry that small carts paired with overflow fees would disproportionately
burden families with children, multigenerational homes, and lower-income households.
132
● Concerns that restrictive capacity encourages recycling contamination.
Multiple residents noted that too‑small trash carts can lead residents to “over-recycle,”
worsening contamination rates.
● Many support mid-sized carts as a reasonable baseline.
3. Seniors and Residents with Mobility or Access Challenges
A significant portion of feedback came from older adults and residents with physical limitations.
Key points include:
● Difficulty maneuvering large wheeled carts on steep driveways, icy sidewalks,
cobblestone or brick surfaces
● Lack of garages or limited storage space, especially in historic homes
● Desire for continuation of bag-only set-outs for those who generate minimal trash
● Requests for accommodations such as:
○ curbside pickup at the garage (not the street)
○ exemption or alternative container types
○ smaller or lighter carts
○ formal privacy protections for those requesting exemptions
This group expressed worry that the proposed system could undermine their ability to age in
place conveniently.
4. Recycling: Strong Desire for Larger Capacity and Clearer Education
Across demographic groups, residents request:
● Larger recycling carts than trash carts, reflecting actual weekly volumes
● Multilingual recycling guides, clear instructions, and “Oops” tags
● Recycling rules affixed to carts or mailed to all homes
● Better handling of bulky cardboard, which won’t fit in lidded carts
● Assurance that materials placed in recycling are actually recycled
Several residents noted that clearer outreach would reduce contamination and improve trust.
133
5. Composting: Strong Enthusiasm and Desire for Continued Expansion
Residents praise Black Earth Compost and the Town-funded compost program.
Themes include:
● Seasonal fluctuations in compost volume
● Desire to maintain or expand curbside compost access
● Concerns about the heaviness and short handle of compost bins
● Requests for incentives to participate (lotteries, recognition, fee reductions)
● Interest in additional drop-off options for specialty compostables
Overall, composting is widely seen as the most meaningful climate strategy within household
waste reduction.
6. Bulk Item Fees and Reuse Pathways
Residents repeatedly raised questions on bulky item fees:
● Desire for clear definitions (e.g., is each sectional piece a separate fee?)
● Concern about affordability of disposing furniture and appliances
● Strong recommendations to:
○ include links to reuse/donation sites on the payment page
○ provide one or two free bulky item pickups per year
○ ensure fees do not encourage illegal dumping or hoarding
○ Interest in a formal swap shop / reuse shed at Hartwell (many residents offered to
volunteer)
7. PAYT and Overflow Options: Equity, Behavior, and Unintended Outcomes
Residents are divided on volume-based pricing.
Concerns:
● Past Lexington PAYT resulted in illegal dumping, roadside litter, and contamination
● Fear of increasing hoarding or improper recycling
134
● Discomfort with introducing new fees when taxes are already rising, especially during the
high school construction phase
Support:
● Volume-based fees are consistent with other utilities (e.g. water, electricity)
● Households that generate minimal waste do not want to subsidize high-waste
households
● Positive incentives (rebates, discounts) could work better than punitive fees
There is broad agreement that if overflow bags are used, they must be:
● Easy to purchase
● Affordable
● Paired with education to prevent “wishcycling”
8. Storage, Aesthetics, and Cart Design
A large number of residents expressed strong preferences on:
● Cart color (some suggest black, brown, or gray to blend with properties)
● Cart shape and footprint for garage fit
● Ability to keep carts out of sight on historic properties
● Fear of carts blowing into the street or down steep driveways
● Whether multiple smaller bins are preferable to one large bin
9. Operational Questions About Automated Collection
Residents raised operational concerns:
● Ability of trucks to navigate narrow streets, dead ends, or areas with heavy on-street
parking
● Risk of overhead wires being pulled down (based on prior experience)
● Handling of cardboard that doesn’t fit in carts
● Flexibility for occasional surges (holidays, home cleanouts, deliveries)
● Options for households without paved access to the curb
135
● How carts will be placed on crowded sidewalks or at multi-unit homes
● Whether haulers could still send a helper to manage non-standard situations
These concerns reflect mild skepticism about an entirely hands-off automated model without
human support.
10. Desire for Continued Engagement, Transparency, and Timeline Clarity
Residents appreciated the outreach effort but want:
● More mailers and printed materials, not just online information
● Very clear explanations of costs, especially tax vs. fee impacts
● Evidence of flexibility before Town Meeting adopts new bylaws
● Clear articulation of how the program addresses equity across household types
● Transparent data on contamination rates and waste trends
● A phased or pilot-based rollout before major changes go fully townwide
11. Strong Demand for Local Overflow and Specialty Drop-Off Options
Themes include:
● Local overflow sites in multiple neighborhoods
● Hartwell drop-offs for specialty recyclables (TerraCycle streams, plastic film, odd items)
● Better management of textile bin capacity
● More frequent yard waste collection flexibility in the fall
● Improvements to coordination with local retailers for reuse/recycling
12. Yard Waste Practices and Concerns
Residents value current yard waste service and do not want changes.
Concerns include:
● Ability to continue using paper bags or barrels
136
● Whether yard waste will become automated (strong opposition to requiring carts)
● Flexibility during peak leaf season
● Effects of removing or changing free yard waste collection
● Aesthetic impact of storing large yard-waste carts
13. Equity, Fairness, and Program Philosophy
A recurring thread across submissions:
● Larger households worry about being penalized
● Smaller households worry about subsidizing large users
● Seniors and disabled residents worry about access and hardship
● Residents want clarity on how the system aligns with broader cost-of-living issues
● Concern about any shift away from universal tax-funded trash collection
Many asked the town to prioritize fairness and practicality over strict uniformity.
14. Strong Support for Modernization Paired with Flexibility
Across all feedback, the central message is consistent:
Residents support modernization, but they want:
● flexibility in cart sizes
● accommodations for medical/diaper needs
● practical overflow solutions
● fair treatment across household types
● careful consideration of aging-in-place needs
● robust reuse programs
● clear communication
● thoughtful cart design
● significant education before launch
The community wants a system that is environmentally effective and workable for all
households.
137
Summary of Qualitative Responses from 2026 Survey
The Waste Reduction and Modernization Program Survey included several questions that
provided an opportunity for respondents to enter additional comments or provide their own
responses outside of the multiple choice options. The survey summary document provides
visual summaries of the quantitative survey responses; this document provides a more in depth
analysis of the additional input provided from residents through the survey. Please note that
Microsoft Copilot was used to generate the summaries due to the volume of responses and an
effort to reduce bias.
1. What factors would make a 35-gallon trash bin challenging for your household?
Over 500 households say a 35-gallon bin would not be challenging.
However, meaningful clusters of households cite predictable concerns:
a. Seasonal waste spikes (holidays, yard cleanouts, guests)
b. Large household size (often tied to kids, multigenerational homes)
c. Space constraints (storing bins, maneuvering them)
d. Special waste needs (diapers, medical waste)
e. Mobility limitations (lifting or stairs)
The themes strongly suggest that while the bin size works for many, a substantial minority
has predictable structural needs that increase trash volume. Flexibility mechanisms
(overflow bags, occasional extra capacity, accommodations) are a clear necessity.
2. What would make a smaller standard trash bin more workable for your
household?
A majority of respondents say they do not need adjustments to make a smaller bin
workable.
A significant minority, however, emphasize that a smaller trash bin only functions well in
tandem with strong diversion support—especially increased recycling capacity, composting
access, and convenient overflow options.
These households often describe occasional surges (holidays, guests, project cleanouts) or
structural factors (large families, recyclables that pile up quickly). As such, they need flexible
accommodations rather than weekly baseline capacity increases.
3. If your household occasionally has more trash than fits in the standard bin, which
overflow option would you prefer?
138
Overflow-bag users
The single largest group prefers a straightforward, as-needed option.
Flexible-hybrid users
A large cohort wants both overflow bags and the ability to lease an additional bin — signaling
that variability, not magnitude, drives their trash needs.
Low‑volume households
These households say a standard bin is sufficient week-to-week and do not anticipate
needing overflow options.
This distribution strongly reinforces the need for multiple overflow pathways, rather than a
single, rigid system — especially overflow bags, which are strongly preferred overall.
4. What concerns or unintended consequences should the Town consider if it adopts
a smaller standard trash bin as part of a waste-reduction strategy?
Illegal dumping / misuse of public bins
Multiple respondents explicitly raised concerns that people would place excess trash in
public barrels, business dumpsters, woods, parks, or neighbors’ bins.
Trash volume realities (35 gallons too small)
Many comments describe 35 gallons as insufficient for typical weekly household waste —
especially for:
● larger families
● households with diapers or medical waste
● people doing home clean-outs
● holiday / seasonal surges
Some described the bin “far too small” and suggested 48–96 gallon alternatives.
Equity concerns (burden on seniors, large families, low-income households)
Respondents frequently noted:
● mobility challenges carrying/hauling trash
● pressure on seniors who are downsizing
● disproportionate impacts on families with multiple children
● financial strain from paying for overflow disposal
Fear of added fees / reduction in services
A recurring theme: residents worry that shifting to a smaller bin signals future
“pay-as-you-throw” costs or reduced municipal services.
Many commented that Lexington taxes are already high and that trash collection should
139
remain a core included service.
Operational concerns (overflow logistics, limited flexibility)
Concerns included:
● difficulty disposing of bulky items under a rigid bin-size system
● inconvenience obtaining overflow bags
● uncertainty about pickup rules during clean-outs or missed weeks
● fears that strict limits would encourage contamination of recycling or compost bins
Environmental paradox concerns
Several respondents pointed out the irony that replacing existing large bins with mandated
smaller bins could create new plastic waste streams from discarded containers.
Timing and process concerns
A few highlighted that with current town budget constraints or school cuts, this initiative “feels
like the wrong time” or “too sudden,” suggesting more analysis, piloting, or phased adoption.
5. What other diversion options would help you reduce household waste?
Expanded or improved composting options
Multiple respondents requested:
● larger compost bins
● clearer or more convenient composting systems
● better pest‑mitigation support for composting
● concerns that townwide composting must be thoughtfully implemented to avoid
attracting pests
These requests appeared repeatedly across responses.
Enhanced recycling pathways
Residents asked for help with recycling specific materials that currently pose challenges,
including:
● textiles (especially non‑reusable clothing and rugs)
● garden waste
● collapsed cardboard boxes
● construction material recycling
● larger recycling bins to handle cardboard volume
More frequent or more flexible collection options
Some respondents noted that additional or more varied pickup days — particularly for
140
recyclables, yard waste, or special waste streams — would significantly help reduce
household trash.
Drop-off or pickup options for bulky/nonstandard materials
Suggestions included:
● expanded yard waste services (including larger limbs)
● continued or expanded appliance and furniture pickup by appointment
● dedicated drop-off systems for construction material or garden waste
General interest in stronger diversion infrastructure
Several responses conveyed broader themes:
● desire for more robust recycling and composting support
● frustration with consumerism and waste generation
● worry that current diversion systems (especially composting in dense neighborhoods)
need better design to avoid pests
6. Please share any other feedback or questions?
Concerns about job loss from automated trash systems
The most frequently repeated comment (3 responses) expresses worry that switching to
automated collection would eliminate labor-intensive roles currently filled by multiple workers
per truck.
Residents fear that automation would reduce employment and harm current DPW/contractor
staff.
Concerns about composting feasibility due to pests
Multiple respondents (2+) voiced skepticism about whether Lexington’s denser suburban
environment is appropriate for widespread curbside composting.
They worry composting attracts rodents and flies, suggesting it's better suited to rural areas.
Home composting already practiced
A recurring note: some households already compost at home and feel confident in their
system.
These households often question whether additional town programs are needed.
Concerns about recycling capacity and frequency
Several comments describe experiences in other towns where:
141
● automated systems reduced recycling pickup frequency
● recycling bins (even large ones) were not sufficient
● recyclables ended up in trash due to capacity limits
This raises concern that Lexington must maintain or expand recycling support.
Requests to avoid penalizing “outlier” households
One recurring idea: rather than changing the system for everyone, the Town should focus on
the small percentage of households with unusually high waste (e.g., medical waste, large
families with children, diapers).
A few respondents suggested voluntary adoption instead of universal requirements.
Pest challenges even with current systems
A few comments describe issues like black flies even in winter, signaling broader concerns
about pest management regardless of bin size or composting programs.
142
Waste Reduction & Modernization
Program Feedback Survey
Waste Reduction & Modernization
Program Feedback Survey
143
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
How many people live in your household most months out of the
year?
1556 Answers
3 to 4 2 5 or more 1
3 to 444%
686
236%
557
5 or more14%
211
17%102
How many 13-gallon kitchen bags does your household typically
ll with trash each week?
1556 Answers
4 or more 1 2 3
4 or more33%
516
124%
373
223%
363 320%
304
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
How many people live in your household most months out of the
year?
1556 Answers
3 to 4 2 5 or more 1
3 to 444%
686
236%
557
5 or more14%
211
17%102
How many 13-gallon kitchen bags does your household typically
ll with trash each week?
1556 Answers
4 or more 1 2 3
4 or more33%
516
124%
373
223%
363 320%
304
144
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
Which of the following waste reduction programs does your
household currently use? (Select all that apply)
5417 Answers
Curbside recycling28%
1523
Reuse/donation20%
1100
rbside or drop-of)16%
871
Curbside composting16%
844
Drop-o recycling at the Ha9%
484
Other entries11%
595
If your household were provided a 35-gallon trash bin as the
standard service level for weekly collection, how often do you
think it would meet your needs?
1556 Answers
Every week Most weeks Some weeks Not at all Rarely
Not sure
Every week31%
489Most weeks25%
391
Some weeks16%
244
Not at all14%
220
Rarely12%
188
Not sure2%24
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
Which of the following waste reduction programs does your
household currently use? (Select all that apply)
5417 Answers
Curbside recycling28%
1523
Reuse/donation20%
1100
rbside or drop-of)16%
871
Curbside composting16%
844
Drop-o recycling at the Ha9%
484
Other entries11%
595
If your household were provided a 35-gallon trash bin as the
standard service level for weekly collection, how often do you
think it would meet your needs?
1556 Answers
Every week Most weeks Some weeks Not at all Rarely
Not sure
Every week31%
489Most weeks25%
391
Some weeks16%
244
Not at all14%
220
Rarely12%
188
Not sure2%24
145
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
What factors would make a 35-gallon trash bin challenging for
your household? (Select all that apply)
2333 Answers
It would not be challeng24%
571
easonal variability in waste24%
549
Household size22%
514
Storage space constraints10%
225
Physical mobility or lifting limita5%
127
Other entries15%
347
Which of the following would make a smaller standard trash bin
more workable for your household? (Select all that apply)
3179 Answers
Weekly recycling c16%
501
Easy access to over ow bags15%
469
A larger recycling bin15%
468
aste composting14%440
None of the above12%
382
Other entries29%
919
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
What factors would make a 35-gallon trash bin challenging for
your household? (Select all that apply)
2333 Answers
It would not be challeng24%
571
easonal variability in waste24%
549
Household size22%
514
Storage space constraints10%
225
Physical mobility or lifting limita5%
127
Other entries15%
347
Which of the following would make a smaller standard trash bin
more workable for your household? (Select all that apply)
3179 Answers
Weekly recycling c16%
501
Easy access to over ow bags15%
469
A larger recycling bin15%
468
aste composting14%440
None of the above12%
382
Other entries29%
919
146
Waste Reduction &Modernization Program Feedback Survey
Household trash can vary week to week. If your household
occasionally has more trash than ts in the standard bin, which
option would you prefer?
1556 Answers
Purchase over ow bags as needed A mix of both options
I do not expect to exceed the standard bin Lease an additional trash bin
Larger bin Larger trash bin Leave some trash for next week.
Larger bin Other entries
Purchase over ow bags as need30%
466
A mix of both options22%
348
to exceed the standard bin16%
244
Lease an additional trash bin8%
121
Larger bin0%
3
Larger trash bin0%
2
Leave some trash for next week.0%
2
Larger bin0%
2 Other entries24%
368
Would your household need an accommodation or alternative
arrangement under a 35-gallon standard trash bin system?
1556 Answers
No Yes Not sure
No40%
630
Yes32%
496
Not sure28%
430
Waste Reduction &Modernization Program Feedback Survey
Household trash can vary week to week. If your household
occasionally has more trash than ts in the standard bin, which
option would you prefer?
1556 Answers
Purchase over ow bags as needed A mix of both options
I do not expect to exceed the standard bin Lease an additional trash bin
Larger bin Larger trash bin Leave some trash for next week.
Larger bin Other entries
Purchase over ow bags as need30%
466
A mix of both options22%
348
to exceed the standard bin16%
244
Lease an additional trash bin8%
121
Larger bin0%
3
Larger trash bin0%
2
Leave some trash for next week.0%
2
Larger bin0%
2 Other entries24%
368
Would your household need an accommodation or alternative
arrangement under a 35-gallon standard trash bin system?
1556 Answers
No Yes Not sure
No40%
630
Yes32%
496
Not sure28%
430
147
Waste Red ction &Mode ni ation P og am Feedback S e
If the Town moves forward with a waste-reduction–focused
system that includes a smaller standard trash bin, which
statement best re ects your view?
1556 Answers
I would oppose it I would support it I could live with it
I would have signi cant concerns Not sure
I would oppose it36%
554
I would support it25%391
I could live with it20%
314 I would have signi cant co14%
213
Not sure5%84
What concerns or unintended consequences should the Town
consider if it adopts a smaller standard trash bin as part of a
waste-reduction strategy?
60 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
Accommodations for those with medical waste as well as some
way to allot bins per capita as opposed to per house. By
imposing restrictions, the town will have to have some level of
enforcement to ensure people are following rules and not
dumping trash elsewhere or in others’ bins.
2
Our household has nancial constraints.2
over owing bins, critters 1
When placing a home for sale, there is usually an increased
amount of trash. This is an occasion when an exception to the
limitations should be considered. What about old furniture that
needs to be disposed of?
1
Waste Red ction &Mode ni ation P og am Feedback S e
If the Town moves forward with a waste-reduction–focused
system that includes a smaller standard trash bin, which
statement best re ects your view?
1556 Answers
I would oppose it I would support it I could live with it
I would have signi cant concerns Not sure
I would oppose it36%
554
I would support it25%391
I could live with it20%
314 I would have signi cant co14%
213
Not sure5%84
What concerns or unintended consequences should the Town
consider if it adopts a smaller standard trash bin as part of a
waste-reduction strategy?
60 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
Accommodations for those with medical waste as well as some
way to allot bins per capita as opposed to per house. By
imposing restrictions, the town will have to have some level of
enforcement to ensure people are following rules and not
dumping trash elsewhere or in others’ bins.
2
Our household has nancial constraints.2
over owing bins, critters 1
When placing a home for sale, there is usually an increased
amount of trash. This is an occasion when an exception to the
limitations should be considered. What about old furniture that
needs to be disposed of?
1
148
What size recycling bin would meet your needs most weeks out
of the year? Assume weekly collection.
1556 Answers
35 Gallons 64 Gallons 48 Gallons I'm not sure
None of these sizes would meet my needs
35 Gallons33%
517
64 Gallons30%468
48 Gallons22%
347 I'm not sure9%
138
None of these size6%86
What other diversion opportunities would help you reduce
household waste?
25 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
not sure 1
Provide an alternative for disposing of old, unusable furniture
that cannot t into a bin.1
Drop o bins for the hard to recycle items / charm or ridwell
items at Hartwell so that we don't have to maintain 6-8 smaller
collection bags/bins in garage or closet (think electronics,
printer cartridges, batteries, plastic bags, food plastic
packaging (the crinkly type). Sometimes I think it would be
easier to just put it all in one box and then go to Hartwell and
sort it there into the correct streams.
1
centralized cardboard recycling bins in town 1
What size recycling bin would meet your needs most weeks out
of the year? Assume weekly collection.
1556 Answers
35 Gallons 64 Gallons 48 Gallons I'm not sure
None of these sizes would meet my needs
35 Gallons33%
517
64 Gallons30%468
48 Gallons22%
347 I'm not sure9%
138
None of these size6%86
What other diversion opportunities would help you reduce
household waste?
25 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
not sure 1
Provide an alternative for disposing of old, unusable furniture
that cannot t into a bin.1
Drop o bins for the hard to recycle items / charm or ridwell
items at Hartwell so that we don't have to maintain 6-8 smaller
collection bags/bins in garage or closet (think electronics,
printer cartridges, batteries, plastic bags, food plastic
packaging (the crinkly type). Sometimes I think it would be
easier to just put it all in one box and then go to Hartwell and
sort it there into the correct streams.
1
centralized cardboard recycling bins in town 1
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback SurveyWaste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey 149
If you don't compost at home, why not?
1068 Answers
I use a sink disposal I worry about pests I worry about odors
I don't have space for the extra bin
I need more information about how to get started
I didn't know the Town o ers free collection I compost at home.
I use it heavily and would welcome an extra bin for our house.Other entries
I use a sink disposal25%
266
I worry about pests23%
248
I worry about odors19%
204
I don't have space for the extra bin15%
156
I need more information about 5%
58 I didn't know the Town o 3%
35 I compost at home.0%
2
I use it heavily and woul0%
2
Other entries9%
97
Please share any other feedback or questions.
17 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
We currently use a 35 gallon bin. We could t a 48 gallon bin
into our storage space and handle moving it to the street.
Anything larger would be too large.
1
Provide compost bins for all, people don’t do the work to opt
in 1
This survey is not clear. I dont understand how limiting
recycling will allow me to reduce regular waste. I dont
understand why you are proposing 35 gallons for all
households regardless of how many people live in the house. I
dont understand why you say that 35-gallon bins will allow to
reduce waste. You should clarify the proposal. I am supportive
of options that will allow Lexington to reduce waste, but this
seems to be done in a way that will irritate even your
supporters.
1
Please make it easy to pay online and allow for spikes due to
new household items etc 1
There needs to be more public information about the speci cs
of proposals.1
If you don't compost at home, why not?
1068 Answers
I use a sink disposal I worry about pests I worry about odors
I don't have space for the extra bin
I need more information about how to get started
I didn't know the Town o ers free collection I compost at home.
I use it heavily and would welcome an extra bin for our house.Other entries
I use a sink disposal25%
266
I worry about pests23%
248
I worry about odors19%
204
I don't have space for the extra bin15%
156
I need more information about 5%
58 I didn't know the Town o 3%
35 I compost at home.0%
2
I use it heavily and woul0%
2
Other entries9%
97
Please share any other feedback or questions.
17 Answers
Long text chart can display only the latest 100 submissions.
Data Answers
We currently use a 35 gallon bin. We could t a 48 gallon bin
into our storage space and handle moving it to the street.
Anything larger would be too large.
1
Provide compost bins for all, people don’t do the work to opt
in 1
This survey is not clear. I dont understand how limiting
recycling will allow me to reduce regular waste. I dont
understand why you are proposing 35 gallons for all
households regardless of how many people live in the house. I
dont understand why you say that 35-gallon bins will allow to
reduce waste. You should clarify the proposal. I am supportive
of options that will allow Lexington to reduce waste, but this
seems to be done in a way that will irritate even your
supporters.
1
Please make it easy to pay online and allow for spikes due to
new household items etc 1
There needs to be more public information about the speci cs
of proposals.1
150
Thank You!
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
Thank You!
Waste Reduction & Modernization Program Feedback Survey
151
152
153
154
155
156
Waste Bin Survey
Conducted in 2025
157
To further inform the implementation of waste reduction strategies in Lexington, the Waste Reduction Task Force wanted to understand the following:
●How many trash bins do Lexington households put out on trash day?
●How many gallons of trash are households putting out for collection each
week?
●What size are the bins?
●How many recycling bins Lexington households put out on trash day?
●Are any of these answers correlated with whether a household composts?
158
We decided to find out!
●Designed a methodology
●Recruited volunteers to walk trash collection routes
159
Sample
●Surveyed over 1,400 households on their trash day
●12.5% of households served by municipal trash collection
●Sample included:
○A mix of main roads and back roads
○A mix of home sizes
○Households during school vacation week
○All five collection days
●Survey conducted March to May 2025
160
What We Learned
161
●98.6% of households
put 0, 1, or 2 bins
●1.3% of households
put out 3 bins
●0.1% of households
put out 4 bins
Lexington’s current waste regulations set a limit of 6 trash bins per household.
162
●82.7% of bins were
48 gallons or less
●41.8% of bins were
35 gallons
●Only 1.4% of bins
were 96 gallons
MassDEP awards 4 Recycling Dividends Program (RDP) points for hybrid
PAYT programs using 35 gallon bins, and 2 RDP points for hybrid PAYT
programs using 48 gallon bins.163
●56.9% of households
put out 1 recycling
bin
●Only 6.9% put out no
recycling bin
The majority are recycling bins are the Town provided carts, but
wheeled carts of various sizes are also commonly used
164
Using bin size and approximate fill level, we estimated the volume of trash at
each household surveyed.
Gallons of trash per household
Average household in
Lexington produces 38.4
gallons of trash per week.
Note: Volume ≠ Weight.
Weight determines tipping
fees.
165
The red line marks 35
gallons, which is a
standard sized “small”
trash bin.
With 95% confidence, composters produce between 5.3 and 11.3 fewer gallons of
trash per week than non-composters. On average, composters generate 8.3 fewer
gallons, and this difference is statistically significant (with a p-value of >0.001).166
Designing a Modern,
Convenient Waste
Program for Lexington
July 20, 2026
167
168
169
170
171
172
•Available on the web at
lexingtonma.gov/trash (no smartphone or
download required) OR as a mobile app
(Apple and Google)
•Additional mobile app features
•Sign up for collection reminders
•Sign up for notifications from the Town
Download the app
User guide available at
https://www.lexingtonma.gov/2688/LexSortSmart-User-Guide 173
Waste Collection Design Discussion
174
Key Select Board Decisions
•What size trash cart will serve as the default “baseline level of service” that will be picked up from households for no additional fee?
•Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller cart for their “baseline level of service”? Would there be a cost associated with choosing a larger size?
•Which fee-based overflow option(s) should the Town offer to households who have trash beyond their “baseline level of service”? Official overflow bags, leasing an additional cart, or both?
•What process will be used to set and regularly evaluate fees for overflow trash?
•What size recycling cart will be provided to households?
•Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller or additional recycling cart?
•Decisions on Key Exceptions
•What accommodations will be made for residents with mobility challenges?
•What accommodations will be made for residents with high volumes of waste associated with a disability or medical condition?
•Will those with a financial hardship be offered a discount or a waiver on trash-related fees? What qualifications will be used to determine eligibility?
175
Proposed Timeline
•July-August:Select Board deliberates to come up with two draft program designs based on community input to date and the information presented tonight.
•August-September: Town Staff host a series of public meetings, presenting the two draft program designs to
the public and soliciting input. Proposed dates/times for community meetings are below and can be adjusted, if needed, before publicizing widely.
•September-October: The Select Board reviews input from the community and uses it to propose a single, revised program design.
•October-November: Staff negotiate contract with waste haulers using the proposed final program design.
•November-December: Staff bring back any suggested changes to the program design to the Select Board based on negotiations with the hauler.
•December:Select Board votes to approve the final program design. Staff initiate purchase of trash and
recycling carts.
•December-July: Staff prepare for implementation, provide multiple notifications to all residents about the upcoming changes, and host multiple community forums to introduce the new program.
176
Opportunities for Additional Community Input
•Wednesday, August 26 at 6:30 pm (Community Center Dining Room and Virtual)
•Wednesday, September 2 at 6:30 pm (Virtual)
•Friday, September 4 at 9:30 am (Community Center Rm 237) - Women League of
Voters First Friday Event
•Monday, September 14 at noon (Virtual)
•Tuesday, September 15 at 6:30 pm (Police Community Room and Virtual)
All to be publicized widely in the coming weeks. More meetings to be scheduled
at a later date.
177
Information Gathered to Date
•Included in packet
•Summary of waste programs in surrounding communities
•Summary of community outreach and feedback
•Results from 2026 Waste Reduction & Modernization Survey
•Results from the 2025 bin audit
•Incorporated into the memo
•Consultations with MassDEP through a technical assistance grant
•Input from Capitol Waste
•Input from cart vendors
•Informational interviews with staff in other communities
178
Topics Covered in Memo
•Connection to Lexington plans
•Data highlights
•Overflow waste options
•Trash program design options
•Recycling recommendations
•Composting
recommendations
•Accommodations
•Grant funding
•Reuse/recycling of existing
bins
•Other diversion opportunities
•Education
179
Summary of Proposed Options
More detail in the memo
Default bin size 35-gallon 48-gallon 65-gallon
Possible add-on
features (fee $ to
be confirmed)
Overflow bags ($3.50/bag)
Upgrade to 64-gal cart ($90/yr)
2nd 35-gal cart ($120/yr)
Overflow bags ($3.50/bag)
2nd 48-gal cart ($160/yr)
Opt down to 35 gal (no cost)
Overflow bags ($3.50/bag)
2nd 64-gal cart ($210/yr)
Opt down to 35 gal (no cost)
Accomodations Financial hardship program. Medical waste hardship program. Option to opt down to 35-gallon carts. All details to be
confirmed.
Waste reduction
potential
High – 25–50% reduction potential Moderate - 10-15% potential Low
Estimated Cost
savings/year
High
$300k MassDEP grant
$7,200/year additional RDP grant funding
Highest savings from tonnage reduction
Moderate
$5,400/year additional RDP grant
funding
Moderate savings from tonnage
reduction
Low
Lowest savings from tonnage
reduction
Compatibility for
most residents
Works for 51% of households with no
behavoir change
Works for 80% of households with no
behavoir change
Works for 88% of households with
no behavoir change
Ease of execution Easy Moderate (limited trash cart vendor
availability)
Easy
180
Staff Recommendations
•Recycling: Free and unlimited. 65-gallon carts with option to select 35-
gallons. Option for a second cart upon request with no annual fee.
•Composting: Free and unlimited. 13-gallon carts. Drop off locations
available for overflow.
•Trash: 48-gallon carts* with the option to select a 35-gallon cart. First cart
free. Overflow options available for a fee.
•Carts: New trash and recycling carts for all households. Encourage reuse of
existing containers. Provide collection of unwanted containers.
•Accommodations: Opt down to 35-gallons. Financial hardship program. Medical waste fee waiver process to be developed with Commission on Disability (meeting on 7/21).
*48-gallon carts are not as widely available. Would need to confirm availability and pricing competitiveness.181
Key Select Board Decisions
•What size trash cart will serve as the default “baseline level of service” that will be picked up from households for no additional fee?
•Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller cart for their “baseline level of service”? Would there be a cost associated with choosing a larger size?
•Which fee-based overflow option(s) should the Town offer to households who have trash beyond their “baseline level of service”? Official overflow bags, leasing an additional cart, or both?
•What process will be used to set and regularly evaluate fees for overflow trash?
•What size recycling cart will be provided to households?
•Will there be an option for households to opt for a larger or smaller or additional recycling cart?
•Decisions on Key Exceptions
•What accommodations will be made for residents with mobility challenges?
•What accommodations will be made for residents with high volumes of waste associated with a disability or medical condition?
•Will those with a financial hardship be offered a discount or a waiver on trash-related fees? What qualifications will be used to determine eligibility?
182