Board of Selectmen, September 25, 2014
HOLDEN BOARD OF SELECTMEN
MEETING MINUTES
September 25, 2014
7:00 PM Memorial Hall
Present: Chairman Anthony Renzoni, Jeremy Kurtz, Robert Lavigne, Mark Ferguson
Kenneth O’Brien (7:19PM).
Others Present: Jacquelyn M. Kelly, Town Manager
Elizabeth Fotos, Recording Secretary
Chairman Renzoni called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. The Board stood to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
Ms. Kelly passed certificates out to the Chairman.
Chairman Renzoni passed out an outline to the Budget Goal Workshop that he had compiled from the Selectmen’s notes. He summarized how the meeting would be conducted stating that a Selectman would make a motion and once it was opened up in that manner, the Board could discuss it.
Goal 1: Construct a budget that will require less than a 2.5% increase on the tax base.
The motion was made (Sel. Lavigne) and seconded (Sel. Ferguson). The Chairman opened up the discussion.
Sel. Lavigne stated that three years ago the Board set a goal of 2.25% and last year they challenged Ms. Kelly with a goal of 2%. He stated that he wanted to save as much as possible but not to the detriment of the Town (in particular schools) or the Town Manager’s budget.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he would like to see the goal be 1.5%. He stated that he felt there was a tremendous amount of waste and he thinks that it can be done better. He said he wanted to invest in new growth and that less taxes allows people to expand.
Sel. Kurtz recommended keeping it at 2% as he wanted to see OPEB funded.
Chairman Renzoni asked Ms. Kelly her thoughts on the goal.
Ms. Kelly stated that free cash would be about the same as last year. She agreed with Sel. Lavigne about the money that had been appropriated for the schools. She stated that there were a lot of factors involved but that it was a good goal that she would like to carry on into the future.
Sel. Lavigne asked how much money was available as free cash.
Ms. Kelly responded $2 Million.
Sel. Lavigne asked how much was spent in the last fiscal year.
Ms. Kelly responded $600,000 but that they have also been building a stabilization plan when there was free cash available.
Sel. Lavigne asked if that was part of the $600,000.
Ms. Kelly confirmed it was.
Sel. Lavigne asked why it was beneficial to have that much money available as free cash.
Ms. Kelly responded that it was good to have the reserves in case of emergency. She stated that we have not had a major problem in the recent past but if we do have one, it is good to have those funds in reserves.
Sel. Lavigne asked if it also went towards our good bond ratings.
Ms. Kelly confirmed it did. She also stated that we would have major borrowing in 2016 and that there were lots of reasons to have the surplus. Ms. Kelly stated that the surplus was gained through hard work, not luck.
Sel. Lavigne asked Ms. Kelly if she had had any conversation with the schools.
Ms. Kelly stated that there has been an increase of 1/2 Million in the school assessment. This year (FY 15) we received 90% transportation funding which helped offset the assessment.
Sel. Lavigne stated that they probably wouldn’t see that again (90% transportation). He said it made him nervous to go to 1.5% with the schools being such a large portion of the budget. He said he felt that if they went that low, there was the risk of wiping the reserves and cutting from the budget.
Sel. Ferguson said that he had no fear about making it that low. He said that he would work with 1.75% but with the over 2 million in reserves he is confident that goal could be accomplished.
Chairman Renzoni said he would support 2% but no more, and that if it was possible for the Town Manager to do better, she should. He stated that the Board members present were fiscally conservative and that each year the Board put a lot of weight in this particular goal.
Sel. Lavigne asked if other goals should be discussed first and then worked backwards into the budget.
Sel. Kurtz agreed with Sel. Lavigne.
Chairman Renzoni stated he felt the opposite. He said he felt that the Board would set the tone of the discussion by taking a bold move first.
Sel. Kurtz stated that while there is some room to spend, he agrees with Sel. Ferguson and wanted to focus on saving money for the tax payers.
Sel. O’Brien entered the meeting at 7:19PM.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Ferguson, it was VOTED TO SET A GOAL TO CONSTRUCT A BUDGET THAT WILL REQUIRE NO MORE THAN A 2% INCREASE TO THE TAX BASE BY A VOTE OF 4-1. (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; Renzoni: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ferguson: no).
Goal 2: Fund the General Government OPEB liability.
The motion was made (Sel. Lavigne) and seconded (Sel. Kurtz). The Chairman opened the motion for discussion.
Sel. Lavigne stated that the committee was set up and that it was important to work with the Finance Committee to fund this for the people.
Sel. Ferguson responded that it there was always going to be money to fund, but the question was where the funds would come from.
Chairman Renzoni replied that we are enjoying a good free budget and that it was the Board’s responsibility to pay down future liabilities when possible.
Sel. Lavigne verified that it was a plan that was being developed over the long term in order to pay the fund, not something that was going to be completed within a year’s time.
Sel. O’Brien indicated that he felt that we were behind on funding OPEB. He stated that he believed that there was a benefit to putting a block of money into OPEB and allowing the fund to gain interest.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Kurtz, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO FUND THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT OPEB LIABILITY.
Goal 3: Produce a proposal/ plan/ timeline for a DPW facility
Chairman Renzoni asked MS. Kelly to give a brief overview of this matter.
Ms. Kelly replied and stated that the first step was going to be to find a site for the new DPW.
Chairman Renzoni left the meeting a 7:24PM.
Chairman Renzoni returned to the meeting at 7:25PM.
Ms. Kelly stated that it would probably be a 15 Million dollar project. The site would need sufficient drainage, a large yard, salt barns, and safety precautions in addition to office space so DPW could be together in one location and storage space for vehicles.
The motion was made (Sel. Kurtz) and seconded (Sel. Lavigne). The Chairman opened the motion for discussion.
Sel. Kurtz stated that the DPW is the last facility that needs to be addressed. He stated that it is not a good working area and that the feasibility study would probably take between 1 – 2 years so it was something that should be addressed sooner than later.
Sel. Lavigne stated he believed it was something that the Board should look at.
Sel. Lavigne stated that the existing DPW building was dilapidated and he wanted more information on the location, time frame, and costs.
Sel. O’Brien felt that there was a large project currently underway in the Town (Mountview) and that while he recognized the need, he didn’t feel it was timely to move forward. He stated he would not be opposed to establishing a committee to start the conversation but that he didn’t feel that two large projects should be running simultaneously.
Chairman Renzoni told Sel. O’Brien that what he outlined was what the motion was addressing; a feasibility study.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he would be voting against it. He felt that it was important to spread the Town’s infrastructure out so that in the future multiple large projects did not come due at the same time.
Chairman Renzoni stated that he wanted to look at it within the capital budget. He stated that the reason the DPW was possible a few years ago was because some debt began to fall off line.
Ms. Kelly confirmed that the pool debt would be returned in the next two years.
Chairman Renzoni stated that the goal of the capital planning was to not go over 5%. He stated that if we stayed within that model it should work as the 5% is what keeps the budget in check.
Ms. Kelly stated that Holden has a history of being very supportive of improving the Town’s infrastructure and she is hopeful that the Town will look at this as the final building that needs this attention.
Sel. Lavigne asked how much money the feasibility study would cost.
Ms. Kelly replied it would probably be around $100,000. There would be the need to hire engineers and architects and to find / acquire a site.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he wanted the Board to be forward-thinking so that the next board was not blindsided by a building that could fall down. He asked if there were any potential sites.
Chairman Renzoni stated that he thought it was a good idea to put some money aside now and look into it. He stated that Mountview from feasibility study to ground breaking was 4 years.
Sel. Lavigne replied that the difference between this and Mountview was that the location was always known for the school.
Ms. Kelly confirmed that the first step would be to identify a parcel that is available and suitable.
Sel. Lavigne asked if that could be done what would then happen to the $100,000.
Ms. Kelly stated that the $100,000 was a rough estimate.
Sel. Kurtz suggested forming a building committee and having the committee report back to the Board so the Board could budget and then move towards a feasibility study and planning process.
Sel. O’Brien stated that in 2009 there was money put into a study.
Ms. Kelly replied she would check to see if any funds remained in the FY 07 appropriation.
Sel. O’Brien asked if we could see if the money was still there and then asked Ms. Kelly to propose a committee to study the problem and make a recommendation.
Motion by Sel. Kurtz, seconded by Sel. Lavigne, it was VOTED TO PRODUCE A PLAN/ COMMITTEE TO FORMULATE A PROPOSAL AND TIMELINE FOR A DPW FACILITY BY A VOTE OF 4-1 (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; Renzoni: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ferguson: no).
Goal #4: Continue to fund the water leak remediation program- a) Meter replacement (Sel. Lavigne) b) Goal: 15% UAW by ____ (Sel. Kurtz)
Chairman Renzoni stated that the Board could table this item if they wished as on October 6, 2014 the Board would be receiving an in depth update and briefing on this matter from Mr. John Woodsmall, DPW Director.
Ms. Kelly corrected the language stating it is actually unaccounted for water, not leaking.
Chairman Renzoni suggested a motion to continue to fund UAW program and reiterated that the director would be giving an update on October 6, 2014.
The motion was made (Sel. Lavigne) and seconded (Sel. Ferguson). The Chairman opened the motion for discussion.
Sel. Lavigne stated that UAW was something that was spoken about a lot. He stated that checking leaks was fine, but now that there were funds available, more work should be done and more support should be given to Ms. Kelly regarding this issue.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he felt this was a serious issue. He stated he felt this issue was not a money problem but an attitude problem. He stated that the Board could call it a goal if they wanted but that this matter would have a direct relationship with how he viewed the Town Manager. He stated that as a Selectman he would move to replace people if this was not addressed.
Sel. Renzoni told Mr. Ferguson to address the goal and not threaten repraisals.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he had been looking at the contract with the city of Worcester. In that contract it states that if UAW goes over 15% an independent study should take place and action steps should be set up. Sel. O’Brien stated it was supposed to be done annually.
Sel. Lavigne stated that the Town did not have the money to do it.
Sel. O’Brien asked for confirmation as to whether the study had been done to address the matter.
Ms. Kelly confirmed that a lot of time had been allocated to this matter and that the Town had developed a step by step program to address UAW in 2013.
Chairman Renzoni said that the study took place in January of 2013. He encouraged these questions to be asked on October 6, 2014 when Mr. Woodsmall was present to provide an update on UAW.
Sel. O’Brien replied that he was asking these questions to see if he could support this motion. He felt it was important to hold water/ sewer department accountable and that if the trigger was a 15% threshold then it was something that the Town should ensure is done annually.
Sel. Ferguson asked to speak, he stated that he didn’t believe that the Town was doing everything right regarding unaccounted for water. Sel. Ferguson began to speak about the sewer program.
Sel. Lavigne called a point of order as he didn’t believe the line of conversation to be within the motion.
Sel. Ferguson spoke to the matter of trash and lights and how well the Town accomplished it.
Chairman Renzoni lightly gaveled Sel. Ferguson.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled Sel. Ferguson and stated that the Chairman had the floor.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled Sel. Ferguson.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak, stating “I get to speak.”
Chairman Renzoni gaveled Sel. Ferguson again and stated “It’s insane.”
Sel. Ferguson responded by stating, “Now there is name calling.”
Chairman Renzoni verified what he said, “I did not say you, I said it.”
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled again and stated that every time unaccounted for water gets spoken about, the meeting gets out of control.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled again and took the floor back.
Chairman Renzoni told the Board that all the specific questions could be addressed at the October 6, 2014 meeting when Mr. Woodsmall was present. Chairman Renzoni stated that everyone on the Board felt that UAW was something that needed attention. Chairman Renzoni moved the motion.
Motion made by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Ferguson, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO CONTINUE TO FUND THE UNACCOUNTED FOR WATER REMEDIATION PROGRAM.
Goal 5: Develop comprehensive plan of ECC property- a) Budget $25,000 for ECC Property cleanup (Sel. Ferguson)
The motion was made (Sel. Kurtz) and seconded (Sel. Ferguson). The Chairman opened the floor up for discussion.
Sel. Ferguson began speaking about the property in question.
Chairman Renzoni left the meeting at 7:50PM
Sel. Ferguson continued and stated that he believes the Town should treat this similar to how it would be treated in the private sector. He voiced his concerns about the amount that is owed ($600,000) and stated that he felt the property cleanup was very doable. He stated that he felt eventually the Town would own the property by default so it was better to address the issues now.
Chairman Renzoni reentered the meeting at 8:00PM
Ms. Kelly replied that we don’t own the property. The remaining members of the Board echoed the sentiment that the Town did not own the property and it would not be in the Town’s best interest to take on the clean-up of a polluted site.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he was trying to speak and that he was not being allowed to.
Sel. Lavigne left the meeting at 8:01PM.
Chairman Renzoni stated that the motion on the floor was the comprehensive plan on ECC property.
Sel. Lavigne reentered the meeting at 8:02PM
Sel. Kurtz stated that he felt that we would not see a return on this property. He stated that he agreed with Sel. Ferguson regarding this matter. He wanted the Town to take the previous report and update it for changes. He said he wanted to have a plan going forward so the Board and the Town knew what the options on the land were. Sel. Kurtz stated he wanted to go to town meeting and ask for the funds to clean it up or to clean it up through state/ federal funding, but that prior to doing that a study needed to be completed.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he thought the residents in that part of town were suffering. He also said that while it would be nice to do something, he thought Ms. Kelly was looking out for the best interest of the Town. He stated we will not become owners of the property and that he felt the cleanup of this site was going to be a hazardous and difficult one. Sel. O’Brien stated that with the hazardous waste materials moving towards the water it abuts it could become a big liability and that the most important thing to do is to protect the interest of the tax payers.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he agreed with Sel. O’Brien. He stated that while he had empathy for the residents, he did not want to acquire the property. Sel. Lavigne also cautioned the Town about working with the state. He stated that while the state could have potential to assist the clean up his main concern would be that somehow the Town would end of responsible for a costly cleanup and not receive any state aid.
Sel. Kurtz replied that he was not recommending acquiring the land, rather coming up with a plan regarding it. He suggested involving the state, obtaining guaranteed funds, and coming up with a plan.
Chairman Renzoni asked what the study would accomplish.
Sel. Kurtz stated that he felt it was important to know the cost of the cleanup so that funds could be recouped and tax revenue could be realized.
Sel. Lavigne replied he didn’t believe the Town would see the $600,000 in funds.
Sel. Kurtz replied that by cleaning it up and doing something with it there was new revenue potential.
Sel. Ferguson stated that there was potential on the property. He sited places like Union Station in Worcester and others to show that there is potential for this cleanup. Sel. Ferguson also suggested getting Congressmen involved to press the issue. He also stated that it had potential for a future DPW site.
Chairman Renzoni moved the motion.
Motion by Sel. Kurtz, seconded by Sel. Ferguson, THE MOTION TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON ECC PROPERTY FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2-3-0. (Sel. Ferguson: yes; Sel. Kurtz: yes; Sel. Lavigne: no; Sel. Renzoni: no; Sel. O’Brien: no).
Goal 6: Fully fund the library with zero reliance on the “Friends of the Gale Free Library”
The motion was made (Sel. Lavigne) and seconded (Sel. O’Brien). The Chairman opened the floor up for discussion.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he felt that a community is judged on their library and that we needed to do better to support the library.
Sel. Ferguson recommended taking the funds from the legal budget to support the library.
Chairman Renzoni told Sel. Ferguson that was not the motion.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled Sel. Ferguson and stated that he was grandstanding.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak. He asked where the “Friends of the Gale Free Library” stand on the matter.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he had spoken to the “Friends” and that any money they raised would go above and beyond to contribute to the library.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO FULLY FUND THE LIBRARY WITH ZERO RELIANCE ON THE “FRIENDS OF GALE FREE LIBRARY”.
Goal 7: Execute a building maintenance plan a) Town Hall parking lot (Sel. Kurtz)
The motion was made (Sel. Lavigne) and seconded (Sel. Kurtz). The Chairman opened it up for discussion.
Sel. Lavigne stated that this was something that he had spoken about before and that there was going to be a plan constructed for painting, roofs, etc. He wanted to revisit a maintenance plan for the Towns buildings.
Sel. Kurtz stated that each building should have a plan established that would help maintain the buildings and keep them in better shape for the long run.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he would like to not spend money on this and asked about the Sheriffs department.
Ms. Kelly responded that the Sheriff’s people have done a good job but were sometimes unable to do some types of tasks. For example, the Sheriff’s people could not paint Town Hall because of the lead paint.
Sel. Kurtz left the meeting at 8:24PM.
Sel. O’Brien asked if there was someone (Gary Kaczmarek) that was currently responsible for building maintenance.
Ms. Kelly stated that there was and that he did currently coordinate maintenance work on the buildings, in conjunction with the DPW Buildings & Grounds Division.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Kurtz, it was VOTED TO EXECUTE A BUILDING MAINTENANCE PLAN BY A VOTE OF 4-0. (Ferguson: yes; Lavigne: yes; Renzoni: yes; O’Brien: yes; Kurtz: not present).
Sel. Kurtz reentered the meeting at 8:26PM.
ADDITIONAL PROPOSED FY16 GOALS:
- Installation of electronic message board:
Motion by Sel. Ferguson, seconded by Sel. Lavigne, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO INSTALL AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD AT THE NEW RECREATION BUILDING.
Sel. Ferguson confirmed that he wanted to ensure this was done in a manner that was appropriate for the neighborhood.
- Review ongoing need for the IIF:
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO REVIEW IIF.
The Board discussed the function of IIF. They also spoke about the potential to meet with IIF and have the Selectmen present for the meeting to discuss the functionality of the group.
- Malden St. Access road to HYS proposed project:
Motion by Sel. Kurtz, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, the Board discussed the Malden Street access road to HYS and Sel. Kurtz moved to withdraw the motion.
Chairman Renzoni left the meeting at 8:39PM.
Chairman Renzoni returned to the meeting at 8:41PM.
- Develop 5-10 Year Vision:
The Board discussed the merit of reestablishing a master planning committee.
- Reduce legal budget:
Motion was made (Sel. Ferguson) and seconded (Sel. O’Brien). The Chairman opened the motion up for discussion.
Sel. Ferguson stated that he did not understand the amount of legal fees that the Town pays. He stated that our first line of defense was the Town Manager, and then the Assistant Town Manager, who was an attorney. Sel. Ferguson encouraged the Board to look around at other firms and explore ways in which to lower the legal budget.
Sel. O’Brien agreed with Sel. Ferguson on the amount of money spent in legal fees. He also felt that Mr. Lukes, the Assistant Town Manager could assist the Town with legal contracts and thus lower the legal budget.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he did not believe it would be appropriate to task Mr. Lukes with these responsibilities as he was not a municipal attorney. He stated that if the Town wanted to explore hiring general counsel and putting them on staff that was a different conversation but to have Mr. Lukes do that would retract from his job as the Assistant Town Manager. He also said that Mirik O’Connell was on retainer with the Town and that he didn’t believe the legal costs would be lowered simply by having Mr. Lukes perform some of these duties.
Ms. Kelly said that the Selectmen do not direct the work of Town staff.
Sel. Kurtz stated he was in favor to reduce the budget where possible, but understood there were a lot of circumstances that required counsel to review them. He asked if there was a way to put a cap on the fee’s and have Ms. Kelly come back to the Board if she needed to exceed the cap.
Sel. O’Brien stated that while he thought Ms. Kelly was prudent with funds, he also wanted to encourage contract negotiations to come from the Town (Town Manager/ Assistant Town Manager) not counsel.
Ms. Kelly verified that she does in fact direct negotiations. She stated that these are not simple proceedings; they are long, expensive, processes. Ms. Kelly verified that next January (2015) there are 4 contracts coming due that will be costly even if Mr. Lukes sits in on them.
Chairman Renzoni stated that he felt Ms. Kelly was handling this correctly and was not wasting money.
Sel. Ferguson stated he believed we should shop for different firms.
Sel. Lavigne stated that capping the budget further would be a bad idea. He felt that it could have the potential of needing to go to Town Meeting in the middle of a lawsuit if more money was needed.
Ms. Kelly stated that she does try to economize on the legal services that are needed. She also stated that the Town went through an RFP process about 5 years ago and subsequently hired Mirick O’Connell. Ms. Kelly finished by stating that she does try to take advance of the fact that Mr. Lukes is an attorney however she felt that Mr. Lukes was hired as the Assistant Town Manager and that is the role he is responsible for.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he understood the benefits of having Mirick O’Connell on retainer but that he would like to spend less. He also asked for more transparency.
Motion by Sel. Ferguson, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, THE MOTION TO REDUCE LEGAL BUDGET FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2-3. (Sel. Ferguson: yes; Sel. O’Brien: yes; Sel. Lavigne: no; Sel. Kurtz: no; Sel. Renzoni: no).
- Reduce Town Manager’s Budget by $6,250.
The motion was made (Sel. Ferguson) and seconded (Sel. O’Brien). The Chairman opened the floor for discussion.
Sel. Ferguson stated that $6,250 was the amount spent to have police presence at the Board of Selectmen meetings. Sel. Ferguson stated it was not a necessity and was a waste of resources. Sel. Ferguson also questioned who initially requested the police presence.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he would not be supporting this motion. He stated he felt the police presence was warranted. Sel. O’Brien also said there was aggressive behavior during the meetings and that he (Sel. O’Brien) was uncomfortable during them.
Chairman Renzoni asked Ms. Kelly to discuss the dispatch of police.
Ms. Kelly confirmed that she had requested police presence. She stated that she had spoken to the Chief of Police and he agreed with her (Ms. Kelly) and since that time there have been peace officers dispatched to the BOS meeting to keep the peace.
Sel. Lavigne said if the Town Manager, the Chief of Police, and even a fellow Selectman (O’Brien) all felt it was a good idea then he did too. He also stated that the funds did not come out of the Town Manager’s Budget but rather the police budget.
Sel. Kurtz stated he did not know what this reduction would accomplish.
Sel. Ferguson responded.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak.
Chairman Renzoni gaveled again and stated that he shut down the floor.
Sel. Ferguson continued to speak and stated he would leave if he couldn’t speak.
Chairman Renzoni stated he had the floor.
Motion by Sel. Ferguson, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, THE MOTION TO REDUCE THE TOWN MANAGER’S BUDGET BY $6,250 FAILED BY A VOTE OF 1-4. (Ferguson: yes; Lavigne: no; Kurtz: no; Renzoni: no; O’Brien: no).
- Develop plan for Jefferson Mill
Sel. Lavigne stated that if there was a plan that was fine and that it could be discussed as an agenda item at a regular Board of Selectmen Meeting.
- Customer Service Program
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Kurtz, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ESTABLISH A CUSTOMER SERVICE TRAINING FOR TOWN EMPLOYEES.
- Convert Holden Pool from LP Gas to Natural Gas
Motion by Sel. Ferguson, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO EXPLORE CONVERTING HOLDEN POOL FROM LP GAS TO NATURAL GAS.
Sel. Ferguson left the meeting at 9:17PM.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS
- Secure $50K in the budget each year to use when a 61A or 61B parcel of interest becomes available. Also the Ag Comm would like the IIF committee to allow some amount of its funds as seed money.
Chairman Renzoni stated that there is some support for this but that he wanted to hold off on discussing this matter presently. He felt as though this request was something that could be addressed within the Master Planning Committee.
- As per FinCom, develop a document that lists salary by position for entire workforce. Ms. Kelly reported that the Fin Com received the information during the last budget review.
Chairman Renzoni recapped the meeting and asked Ms. Kelly to prioritize the goals presented at this meeting.
Sel. Lavigne also asked Ms. Kelly to add in any of her own goals.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Kurtz, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PER MGL c 30a §21(a), no. 2: TO CONDUCT STRATEGY SESSION IN PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH NON-UNION PERSONNEL/ THE TOWN MANAGER AND TO CONDUCT CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH NON-UNION PERSONNEL/THE TOWN MANAGER AND TO RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF ADJOURNMENT. (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; Renzoni: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ferguson: not present).
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Kurtz, it was VOTED TO ADJOURN THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2014 BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AT 9:32PM BY A VOTE OF 4-0. (Lavigne: yes; O’Brien: yes; Kurtz: yes; Renzoni: yes; Ferguson: not present).
APPROVED: __October 20, 2014__________________