Agenda – Plymouth Select Board 5-17-22 Agenda

Official Minutes – Plymouth Select Board 5-17-22 Minutes

Please note this transcription is unofficial. If you find an error, use the contact page to notify Plymouth On The Record.

Dick Quintal:

Select Board’s meeting of Tuesday, May 17th, 2022. Please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

All:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Dick Quintal:

Mrs. Cavacco, the governor’s letter, please.

Betty Cavacco:

In accordance with Section 2475, and pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021, this meeting will be conducted via remote means and in-person. Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting may do so in the following manner: tune into PACTV government cable access channels Comcast channel 15 or Verizon channel 47 and watch the meeting as it is aired live or watch the meeting live on the PACTV website at PACTV.org. Members of the public who wish to participate in the meeting may do so in the following manner:

In-person attendance: Plymouth Town Hall, 26 Court Street, Great Hall.

Remote participation: Please go to the Town Website under the Select Board page and click on the Zoom Webinar Registration box.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Mr. Flaherty?

Patrick Flaherty:

Thank you. I just want to say a quick thing. It’s my last meeting as a Member of the Select Board, and it’s gone by pretty fast. Also, really, really, really slow at times during the pandemic, but I’m just so grateful and appreciative for all the community support and encouragement over those years and just thank you sincerely to everyone along the way. And also, thank you just to the hundreds of staff and volunteers that it takes to run the town. You get a front row seat on this board to really see the scope and the size of what has to get done every day, and it just gives me a great appreciation for all the efforts it takes to keep the town running smoothly. But then a really big thank you to my partner Lindsey, over there, you’ve just been so understanding for the amount of time it takes to do this job the right way on top of the day job, so really without your support, it would have all been different. It’s been an honor to serve this board and the town. And I wish the new board a lot of success, and the Town Manager a lot of success, because if they’re successful, the town and our community will be successful. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Is Mr. Triffletti joining us by Zoom or? Good evening, Mr. Moderator, can you hear us?

Steve Triffletti:

Yes, I can. Good evening.

Dick Quintal:

Good evening.

Steve Triffletti:

Thank you for having me. Can I begin?

Dick Quintal:

Sure. Go right ahead, Steve.

Steve Triffletti:

And first of all, I’d like to again congratulate Patrick Flaherty and his wife for the service for the past three years on the Select Board. And I’ve enjoyed working with Patrick, and wish him great success going forward in his endeavors. I’m here before you this evening, I’ve sent a letter dated May 11th and I would tell you that I have been planning for the Special Town Meeting that is scheduled in about a month. And I have spoken with the police chief, the fire chief, Barry DeBlasio, the Plymouth Disabilities Commission. I’ve also met with the Board of Health regarding the conduct of the Special Town Meeting. And last week, when I attended the Board of Health, there was a difference in feedback from the members and also there was one motion and that was a motion to conduct a special town meeting in-person. That motion was not seconded and therefore the other four members in attendance did not support a motion for an in-person town meeting.

[0:05:11]

Steve Triffletti

And so, based on my discussion with the Board of Health, based on my own understanding of the current stats of the pandemic. Both in Plymouth, I received the most recent report of the Plymouth average daily cases and also, being aware of what is going on nationally and internationally. I received an update earlier today that cases are up 57% nationally. And so, with the ongoing concern of being mindful of that fact, we have many town meeting members who are seniors, who are more at risk as well as we have people who are immunocompromised. And finally, because we’ve had today five successful town meetings by remote participation, I am proposing that next month’s special town meeting again be one for remote participation. I would note that a majority of town meeting members do support the hybrid model, which would certainly help us with those people who were seniors who do not want to be in-person or immunocompromised. Unfortunately, as your board knows, we are unable at this time to conduct our town meeting by hybrid. However, I can tell you and report to you that Representative Matthew Muratore has presented a legislation at the state level and it is a joint committee. I sent a letter of support for the hybrid legislation that’s pending. And in fact, today I received a response from Senator Feingold who received my letters when he was one of the two co-chairs of the joint committee between the house and the senate. But in addition, of course, as you have set the warrant, we also have our hopeful petition for the hybrid model if the legislation filed by Matt Muratore is not acted upon favorably with the legislature. So, because we don’t have the hybrid model because of the other factors that I’ve cited at this time, I am proposing that the special town meeting be conducted using what we’ve done in the past with Zoom, webinar and OTI virtual reporting platforms. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Any questions or comments from the Board? Seeing none. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak to this? Please make sure the green light is on and identify yourself for the record. Thank you.

Alan Costello:

Yes, good evening. Thank you, Chairman and Members of Select Board. My name is Alan Costello, and I am a town meeting member from Precinct 10, and I’m here this evening in hopes of asking you to discard at this time what Mr. Triffletti has asked you to vote on this evening. I think it’s premature to call for a virtual town meeting for this special town meeting June 21st. The data per the Board of Health, which I attended that meeting last Wednesday, is inconclusive by the Chairman’s own words. It’s being difficult to track and not even being reported any longer at the town level.

Our children are in the school, employees are back in the Town Hall. Most all town boards and committees are meeting in-person. There’s no mask mandates in the school to my knowledge, and that facility at Plymouth North is accommodating musicals and recitals, award shows. There’s no reason at this time that 200 plus town meeting members and associated staff cannot meet one month from now on a Tuesday evening for a couple of hours to do the business of the town. You know more than I do, how important this town meeting, the special town meeting will be. And talking about initially a lot of money for a parcel of land, but that’s really only the beginning of it. If that is passed, the next warrant article in a future town meeting will be for 30, 40, 50 million dollars for a joint public safety building.

[0:10:12]

Alan Costello:

So, it has huge ramifications. And I think you’re putting the legislative branch at a huge disadvantage if you sequester all of us in our different kitchens and dining rooms and home offices. Something of this magnitude for the town, I really think you have to think long and hard, make the tough decision and put us all in the same room. Let us talk about it, debate it and vote on it. I think it’s the very least in this form of government that the legislative branch should be given that ability to exercise our part of this type of government. So, I’d like you to take into consideration. We can certainly monitor the numbers as we lead up to the 21st, but to just indiscriminately call for a virtual town meeting would be a disservice to the resident and the taxpayer. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Anyone else wishing to speak?

Dave Golden:

Good evening, folks. Thank you, Chair Quintal. And my name is Dave Golden, I’m a resident of Plymouth and a member of the Board of Health. I’d start–I did not intend to speak as a member of the Board of Health tonight, but I do want to point out that I believe what Mr. Triffletti had said about the proceedings at last week’s Board of Health meeting was intentionally misleading in that, although there was a single motion that was not seconded and therefore there was not a great support for an in-person town meeting. There was also no motion to have a virtual town meeting. So, there was zero support at that point for at least on the record in way of a motion or a vote for a virtual town meeting. So, I just wanted to clarify that.

I’m here tonight to express my disagreement with the Town Moderator’s request to have yet another town meeting held virtually. Mr. Triffletti is consistently referred to the ages of town meeting members when he seeks support for a virtual platform. In fact, when he came before you folks last time on this matter, he estimated that in consultation with the Town Clerk’s Office that about 65% of town meeting members are over the age of 65. What he leaves out though is that about 96% of the town’s population who are in that demographic are fully vaccinated. I think that’s an important thing for us to recognize. The vaccines are our best weapon against COVID-19. And so, we should be really trusting the science behind those vaccines when we make these decisions. If nothing changes as a result of the upcoming election, I think it’s safe for us to assume that about 96% of the folks who are in that demographic and who are town meeting members are fully vaccinated. But the reality is that the town meeting members are going to change when the town goes to the ballot box this weekend. And we shouldn’t be using the same playbook to make decisions for a legislative body that doesn’t even exist yet.

Virtually every public body as Mr. Costello said has returned to either hybrid or fully in-person format. And to my knowledge, the town has not received any reports of COVID-19 outbreaks resulting from these meetings. In fact, barely more than a week ago, the entire Select Board and all of the full members of the Board of Health attended a meeting held by Senator Markey in this very building. There were more easily more than 100 people in attendance at that hearing, and we were not at all socially distanced. If in-person meetings are good enough for a United States Senator, I think they’re good enough for our legislative body as well. I want to acknowledge the difficulty that you folks have in making this decision. The moderator will almost certainly continue the meeting if you decide not to support his request for a virtual format and that will jeopardize the most critical question that’s going to go before the town meeting members and that’s the purchase of the former Holtec training site. I want to post it tonight that it’s dangerous for us to allow the will of a single politician, whatever authority he may be afforded by statute to be able to delay the business of our town. I think to do so would render our legislative body absolutely irrelevant. So, honestly, at this point, I don’t know what data, metrics, scientific evidence or community sentiment will convince Mr. Triffletti that an in-person town meeting is both safe and desirable, but perhaps instead of arguing over those issues, he should be looking to instead of dividing towns people and members of the town meeting, he should be looking for ways that he can unite a cross-section of the community.

[0:15:16]

Dave Golden:

I humbly request that this body reject Mr. Triffletti’s request for support of a virtual town meeting. Instead, I urge the Select Board, the Town Manager, the Public Health Department and other staff to work with Mr. Triffletti to host a safe in-person town meeting using an open-air format. In an outdoor setting with members socially distanced, I’m certain that we can make this session safe for all who wish to gather. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak, and best of luck in making this critical decision.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Bringing it back to the Board.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you, David and Mr. Costello. One of the issues that I have is that as we all know that Mr. Triffletti has the ability to postpone town meeting and not only is this an important vote that town meeting will take, but another important vote is that we will not, if he extends this, we will not be able to use free cash for this purchase and that’s problematic because I think there’s over $2 million that we had planned on using. I’m all for open format. I mean, kids are graduating. They’re all outside, but I’m hesitant to support something that could potentially end up costing our taxpayers more money, because we can’t use free cash, and it’s an important article, and it’s an important piece of property that this town. I know the Select Board feels that’s very important to what we need to do for our town. So, I’m a little–I hear you, but I don’t want to really take the chance of having it extended and us losing out on–I don’t know what it was, 2.3 million, Brad or something like that, because we can’t use it when he extends it.

Dick Quintal:

One more time, excuse me.

Betty Cavacco:

Say that one more time?

Brad Brothers:

$2,271,409.

Betty Cavacco:

And Mr. Triffletti, for you, if–would an outdoor venue be something that you would consider?

Steve Triffletti:

Certainly, I would consider anything. But at this point, Chapter 22 of the Acts of 2022, which allows for the conduct of groups meets or requires that I determine whether it’s impossible to safely assemble the town meeting members, interested members of the public in a common location. And at this point, I’ve investigated whether or not a common location outside of Plymouth North High School, Center for Performing Arts is available, and it would work and would meet all of the requirements.

In response to one of the earlier comments, it is not premature to be planning now. In fact, it’s late in the planning stage but because this special town meeting came on us quickly, I’ve had to act quickly. So, I do have a responsibility to lead in this community and our legislature and based on the information that I have not only from the Board of Health, but from elsewhere, I agree that the information is not accurate because there’s much more testing that’s going on that is not necessarily being tracked, but we’ve demonstrated that five times they were able to do the business of the town successfully, and that’s the reason for my request.

Dick Quintal:

Mrs. Covacco?

Betty Cavacco:

Is there a potential that you could get that information within a week? And we could put this back on the agenda for next week or unless the Board is ready to vote or something. But I think that–I mean, I hate to tell you, I won’t support not going virtual and jeopardize $2.3 million, I’m sorry.

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Flaherty.

[0:20:02]

Patrick Flaherty:

I also am going to support the virtual. And there’s another thing to consider is that we’ll have a number of new town meeting members and the quantity is going to go up significantly. So, we would have to make sure that we’d have a quorum as well. All these new folks coming on may or may not have that date available. And heaven forbid, we don’t have a quorum because it’s the summertime in an unexpected time. I think that in addition to all the reasons that were brought forward, I’m supporting the virtual.

Dick Quintal:

Anyone up? Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

Mr. Trifletti, Mr. Flaherty just brought up an interesting point that I was thinking about. You’re talking from May 21st to June 21st, one month to train many new members who have never used the Vvoter system or the Zoom meeting platform. Will you be able to complete that so that the meeting runs as smoothly as it has after five times?

Steve Triffletti:

The answer is yes. I’ve spoken with PACTV and OTI, and I’ve already planned for a town meeting orientation preview and presentation night for Monday, June 13th at 6:00 pm. And in addition to that, both PACTV and the Assistant Moderator Nicole Manfredi have videos now in place, so that town meeting members as soon as they are elected can begin to watch the video and begin to be trained. And then in our last town meeting, for example, for the new members and there weren’t as many as they would be. This time, it was very successfully handled with those videos and also with the Assistant Moderator making training available upon request. So, we don’t anticipate a problem and I would just further observe Mr. Flaherty’s comments with me, which is that I am concerned about a quorum if you don’t have the virtual given the number of town meeting members who have previously addressed this Board about their concerns about appearing in-person. And because we know there are some people that will not appear in-person, and we do have higher court requirements now, a higher number of people will need to be present since we are going from 135 to 162 town meeting members.

Dick Quintal:

Any other questions or comments? Pleasure of the Board.

Patrick Flaherty:

Well, I’ll make the motion to take the recommendation of the Moderator for a virtual town meeting.

Betty Cavacco:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? Was your hand up?

Betty Cavacco:

Yeah.

Dick Quintal:

Okay.  

Betty Cavacco:

Well, like I said before, I’m not willing to jeopardize the free cash amount of money that we would be able to use for the purchase that you’ll see that we’ll be discussing. I know how badly people want to be in-person and Mr. Golden is right and Mr. Costello that we were here with Senator Markey, we’ve all met in-person for quite some time now, and I’m hoping that this hybrid legislation or the home rule petition moves forward. And if Steve, if you hear anything regarding that, I know they’re on recess real soon, so if you would please let us know.

Steve Triffletti:

Yes.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Any other discussion? All those in favor? 3 in favor, 2 in opposition–oh, 4 in favor, 1 in opposition. Mr. Helm’s in opposition. Correct, Harry?

Harry Helm:

Correct.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you, Mr. Triffletti. Facilities Update.

Nicholas Hill:

Good evening, Select Board. Thank you for having me out here tonight. So, tonight, I’m just going to go over a nice little 10,000-foot view of what we’re going to be expecting within the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years.

[0:25:01]

Nicholas Hill:

I know it’s going to be a lot to kind of take in at once, but I’ll do my best to explain and get it over to you guys as easy as possible.

Dick Quintal:

Nick, could you identify yourself? I know you’re new, but I know who you are but people watching may not.

Nicholas Hill:

My name is Nicholas Hill. I’m the Facilities Manager for the Town of Plymouth.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you.

Nicholas Hill:

All right. So, let’s start this again. So, yeah. This is our presentation on our 20-year capital outlook. Before we get into that, I just kind of want to go over a little bit of where we’ve been, where we are and kind of where we’re going in terms of facilities maintenance. Our current staffing, future staffing requests. So, right now, under our division, we have custodians and craftsmen. I have an excellent team of custodians and craftsmen. They keep these buildings beautiful. We’re just getting a new team of craftsmen on. I’m sure as you guys may know, our craftsmen, they’ve been a little–we’ve fluctuated a little in our numbers. So, we’re currently funded for three full-time craftsmen and a craftsman apprentice. I just brought on one craftsman two weeks ago and then another one yesterday. They both seemed like really good guys, and we’re currently looking at filling the final craftsman apprentice position. So, with this team, we’re able to do a lot of work throughout the town in-house whether it’s painting at Memorial Hall, working on interior trim that’s coming off the boards and Town Hall, even down the street on Main Street with the bump outs, it was my craftsman working on that with a lot of help, a lot of additional assistance from DPW, Highway and Parks. Even cemetery was able to donate a guy when we’re kind of low. So, we’re able to do a lot in-house with the staffing we currently have.

Now, we do also have four unfunded positions that Facilities has gone for. So, those positions are there. It’s for an in-house electrician, general foreman, HVAC tech and an additional craftsman, and I’ll kind of go over that a little more in the next few upcoming slides as you’ll see. But a few of the projects we’ve gone over recently, all the Fire Station 2, roof replacement, 5 roof replacement. We’re currently finishing up the Police Department roof replacement, the final louvers are going in this week. They’re going to be starting that final push. We’ve been able to do a lot of work in-house, which is great just keeping up with the town aesthetics, replacing all the DPW doors, DPW kitchen remodel. The extensive work we’ve done at Memorial Hall, both interior and exterior. If you’ve gone by Memorial Hall recently, this was a project we finished up I’d say early fall of this past year. We were able to get all the exterior trim painted, repaired, and I’ll go into a little bit more of capital funding towards the end of this presentation for Memorial Hall. So, we’re not even close to done yet.

And as you can see, the list goes on. This list doesn’t even scratch the surface of what we’ve been able to accomplish both in-house and through the use of our outside contractors. We currently have HVAC electrical plumbing, elevator, HVAC controls, all under outside contracts that we have the availability to use, and it’s huge help with getting all these projects done. As I tell my guys every single day, there’s never a shortage of projects in this town. Between just the day-to-day, the overtime, just keeping up with the maintenance and aesthetics of this town, we’ll be busy for quite some time.

So, I know most of you may know what Dude Solutions is. It’s a software that we use for our capital outlook to track maintenance, schedules and to track general projects whether it’s the timeline of a roof, the timeline of a carpet, it’s all outlined within that Dude Solution Software, which we’ve recently found they’ve switched to Brightly. So, it’s the same company under a different ownership. And then in each one of these line items for Dude Solutions now Brightly, we included an expected inflation rate just because over the course of time, the cost of a 2X4 is definitely not going to be the same today as it is 5 years, 10 years, 20 years down the line. So, it takes all that into account.

[0:30:08]

Nicholas Hill:

So, just looking back to show where we’ve been. FY ’21, we were able to get a lot of work done. This is our entire operating budget expenditure that we had in FY ’21. I was able to kind of break it down, so it’s easy to see between custodial Supplies, roofing, carpentry, plumbing, electrical, HVAC and then all those miscellaneous little projects. I know that’s a big number. It was a lot easier to put it in one category. This includes our custodial cleaning contracts, this includes the smaller projects throughout the parks. The Dude Solution software itself. So, in FY ’21, we spent roughly $800,000 just in operating budget alone. And just with the way we’re ramping up and using this Brightly software, we’re able to track new projects, things we should be hitting that might be getting swept under the rug if we didn’t have it, and you’ll be– It’s directly correlated to what we’ve spent. With a 49% increase from the previous year and pretty much all across the board: electrical, plumbing, HVAC, everything has gone up and this will bring us back to those 4 unfunded positions that we have: the electrician, the HVAC tech, the general foreman, the craftsman position. We’ll be tracking those positions in the next few upcoming years to see when it’ll be financially feasible to maybe hold off on.

Betty Cavacco:

I’m sorry, Nick. Non-funded positions, they actually were funded by town meeting, those four positions, a couple–Mr. Costello was the one that made the amendment on town meeting floor as a matter of fact. So, they were funded. So, I’m not really understanding why we still don’t have them.

Nicholas Hill:

Okay. And I could definitely get that answer for you.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you.

Nicholas Hill:

So, we will be taking a deeper look into when it makes financial sense to have those employees on, because I would love to bring on as many employees as I can just so we can keep everything in-house.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, they were budgeted.

Nicholas Hill:

Yup.

Betty Cavacco:

They raised the budget to $180,000 for those positions. See, I don’t forget everything.

Nicholas Hill:

Quick on that, I like it.

Betty Cavacco:

So, I’d like to see those positions move forward so we kind of, you know, our facilities need more than three carpenters.

Nicholas Hill:

Definitely. And I agree. And like I said, there’s definitely not a shortage of projects. So, as you can see, just in the past year with a 49% increase and I know a lot of that is due to unforeseen projects. As most of you may know, the Fire Station Headquarters Project, it was a little bit of a mess over there, but we were able to–Neil knows for sure. We were able to get a hold of that. We had a company come in for a complete remediation. Yes?

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Brindisi?

Derek Brindisi:

I did some research on those positions and from what I was told, those positions were funded. I think the budget cycle as we head into COVID and then there were a series of budget cuts and part of those budget cuts were to remove those positions that were just mentioned in Nick’s presentation: the HVAC technician, the electrician. And from what I understand, those positions have not been refunded since the original budget cuts due to COVID. So, we certainly can look into that a little bit more. I wasn’t–I don’t remember that conversation during the FY ‘23 Congress Budget Discussion. But again, we can look into that.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Harry and then Betty.

Harry Helm:

Mr. Brindisi, I know you weren’t in place at the time, but do you happen to know, was town meeting informed that these positions were part of the budget cuts since they had approved these positions?

Derek Brindisi:

Yeah, that’s a great question. As you pointed out, I was not working for the town during the budget cut discussions. That’s something that I can certainly look into, but as we all do know, there were a bunch of cuts. In fact, the town had to lay off a number of employees. It would be my suspicion that those positions were made public during those budget cuts. But again, I can look into what transpired during the COVID layoffs and budget cuts.

[0:35:10]

Betty Cavacco:

I don’t think they were. I don’t think we had that discussion, but my request, Derek would to be to get these positions refunded and not refunded but refunded.

Derek Brindisi:

I think to your point that these positions are instrumental to what Nick and his team are trying to accomplish and actually what this Board had taken a position on years ago when they identified the lack of maintenance throughout our facility. So, I would agree that we need to revisit this conversation. We need to work with the Finance Department, Director Barrett and her team to identify a source of funds so that we can move this forward. I would imagine though that this conversation will have to take place at the Fall Town Meeting in order to refund these positions.

Betty Cavacco:

Right. Thank you.

Nicholas Hill:

All right. So, just diving back in where I left off. So, this past year, like as I said, we did have a huge project over at Fire Station Headquarters, which was something that we couldn’t necessarily plan for is one of those things we worked very close with Chief Foley on. We’re able to go through remediation, complete restoration, pipe sealing. It’s a very in-depth project and that did take up a very large portion of our budget. So, we’ve been kind of working around that. And as I said, with 32 buildings being as old as they are, you can never fully plan for any disaster that’s going to happen. We tried to the best we can, and with this Brightly Software, it definitely helps us refine our edge when we’re putting in for those numbers.

So, moving forward, I’ve been able to kind of break out our expectancy. This is similar to the five-year capital plan I gave last April 0-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20. So, I know these numbers, they look kind of large and intimidating, which is broken out even further in this slide but what I wanted to do was show you these numbers and then show you exactly where I’m getting these from. It’s not just coming out of thin air. There’s a lot of work that goes into these programs. So, if you bear with me.

We’re generating these reports. It brings it out very detailed, so we can see in each trade, each section: we have plumbing, parking lot, electrical, HVAC. We can break that price out into every year, further down into the down dirty raw data. With this program and the report it generates, I’m able to go to–say I want to iron out a specific building and see exactly in 20 years, what are we going to be spending on this building? Let’s just say we’re looking at the Police Station. So, when we filter out just the Police Station alone, we can see from now to 20 years from now, every single line item that was outlined in this Brightly Software, what’s going to have to be done? Whether it’s replacing the ductless split system in an office, whether it’s replacing a water heater, fire alarm control panel. It’s a very specific program and it gives us an extraordinary amount of data that helps me build these 5, 10, 20, 15-year outlooks on how much we’re going to be spending.

[0:40:00]

Nicholas Hill:

So, it is fairly accurate. And we’re able to see exactly what the money is being spent on whether it’s electrical branch upgrades, plumbing upgrades, interior construction. It’s harder to see this data on this type of graph just because 32 buildings over 20 years. It is going to be a lot of information, thousands of lines of data in Excel that we have to go through and pick out every single year and what projects we update, what projects we have coming up. So, I’m going to go back to the presentation.

Like I said, this is our 1 to 20-year outlook. This is what we’re going to be generally spending every single year. And I just want you to know that this isn’t a roadmap on–better? There we go. Now, this isn’t a roadmap of what we’re going to be spending rather than a guideline to help us figure out where we should be spending our focus on, where should we be putting our budget towards.

Which brings me up to what we’re going to be doing moving forward. Moving forward, we’re going to continue to use the Brightly Capital Planning Software, continue to use it to like I said iron out what we’re going to be going for every single year moving forward. So, it’s not going to be as much of a surprise when we’re going for $5 million dollars or $10 million whatever is specifically lined up for that year. Considering if it does need to. And it will also be affected by unforeseen capital projects.

So, over this upcoming capital season, we’re going to be going for a lot of Memorial Hall project upgrades. I’ve been working with Weston & Sampson on Memorial Hall for replacement windows, HVAC system, boilers, an adequate generator to power the building, so we can possibly use it as a shelter. As we found out the hard way this past year that the generator wasn’t sized correctly to handle our HVAC system. So, it’s all those little projects, all those unforeseen projects that we have to try and account for that will affect the capital outlook, but we’ll try to manage those as best we can.

And finally, it’ll affect our general operating budget requests year-to-year. As our future growing needs grow, we’re going to need more capital to fund these projects to take care of these buildings and just maintain the day-to-day aspects of the town. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you for having me out here today.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you, Nick. Mrs. Cavacco?

Betty Cavacco:

So, this is probably more for Derek than it is for you, Nick, but I appreciate your presentation. Derek, we have a significant amount of money that we have to lay out here. So, one of the things I know myself, Harry, Chairman, we’ve all kind of discussed the meals tax and when it’s Sunsets. And is there a couple of things, are we at the max for the meals tax? And another thing is that we get a certain amount of meals tax every year, and it pays the mortgage, which I think is 1.8 million. So, what do we do? Can we airmark the excess above that mortgage payment that we have to pay? Because not only are these town buildings, they’re already talking about the necessity to build a new elementary school in North Plymouth. So, I’m just trying to think of ways that maybe we can offset some of those costs. I don’t think anybody wants an override. I don’t think anyone wants to do any of that, but we’ve got millions and millions and millions of dollars here that–I mean, that’s a lot of money to burden our taxpayers with.

Derek Brindisi:

That’s a great question. From what I understand, we’re really at the margins as far as our meals tax and having to make that debt payment annually.

[0:45:02]

Derek Brindisi:

I don’t think there’s much remaining from what we’re collecting from meals tax right now. It’s something that I could certainly look into, but even if there was a small balance, I do think it’s small. It probably wouldn’t have much of an impact on what we’re talking about here tonight. But that’s something that we can look for and we can look into and get back to the Board on. But let’s just pretend that there was a large sum of money, we could follow the same pathway that was created years ago when they created the payment stabilization account. Well, the stabilization account for the pavement management. So, when they use the excess from excise tax to put into a stabilization account for pavement management. So, I mean that’s certainly an option. There are different ways, creative ways to do that, but we have to look at exactly how much money is available and after we make that payment.

Betty Cavacco:

And is there something that we can possibly do ahead of schedule and deal with the Sunset of the meals tax.

Derek Brindisi:

Yeah. So, I do believe that’s something that we should explore a little bit more. I believe if we were to lift the Sunset, we could potentially change the special act and put some of that money towards buildings rather than just fund it directly for a Town Hall. So, yeah, that’s something we could explore, but that would take some legislative action.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay.

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

I’m not exactly sure about what happens with the Sunset, but I believe that it will take an action of Town Meeting to authorize the change at the state level. And Derek, I recommend we begin looking at that now rather than wait. And the first question would be, and perhaps this could be an agenda item in an upcoming meeting. First question would be, when exactly does it Sunset? When is this facility paid off? Because that’s the Sunset of that tax. And we should have our–in my mind, we should have our state delegation ready and town meeting ready to do that so that it stays in place and can be used for facilities maintenance. So, a question that I have for you, you mentioned the stabilization fund that I know was started at maybe a couple town meetings ago, and we kind of put a random amount of money or a determined amount of money into it at the Fall Town Meeting as part of the budget. The pavement stabilization fund has a defined income, an area the income comes from. It comes from the excise tax overage, based on the overage in the budget, what Lynne had budgeted because she’s a conservative budgeter, and we always had an overflow. And that goes into the pavement stabilization. I’ve always been concerned. I thought it was great that we started a maintenance stabilization, but I’ve been concerned that I’m not sure we’ve developed a concept of a stable income flow for that other than just appropriating a certain amount of money at every Fall Town Meeting, which I kind of thing that the pavement stabilization fund was very artfully and creatively devised. And could you advise us also at some point the future of the Board of what is being looked at in order to create a stable income stream for that?

Derek Brindisi:

So, yeah. We’re happy to have this conversation more in detail. We can prepare some more information. We can talk about the Sunset, we can talk about the special act that created such, and then we can talk about different models that have been successful in the past as far as what you and I both just referenced as far as pavement management. That was a very creative way. That was developed for pavement management. I was actually here when those conversations began. Most communities, anything additional over above Chapter 90 for roads, they usually just raise and appropriate and kind of try to maintain some level amount of money to fund a program like that.

[0:50:12]

Derek Brindisi:

But yeah. So, I think this is something that we should look at. We don’t have a–as you all pointed out, we don’t have an account that’s focused on facilities’ management. And so, we need to have those conversations and figure out another creative mechanism to develop that account so that we can maintain our buildings of the future. Like they say, let’s not be a pennywise pound foolish by not putting money into prevention and this is, I think really what we’re kind of driving at here this evening.

Brad Brothers:

So, one of the prime reasons why I actually came over from the school side was because the town drastically needs a long-term capital plan and that is something I am actually extremely excited about even though the numbers aren’t going to be great. As we know, both the town and school need significant capital improvements and this is a first step in that but it’s a long-term process. But as Mr. Helm, you mentioned there are a lot of areas and avenues we can use to fill that, but until we map out all of our exact liabilities, that’s when we’ll start putting the resources behind it and kind of creatively thinking how we can best allocate. So, that is on my radar. HR is–a new person is starting on the 30th, I believe, so that will no longer be on my plate and I fully intend to dive right into this because this is obviously a top priority.

Betty Cavacco:

Can we consolidate too while we’re at it?

Dick Quintal:

Can we just–can I say something? You don’t mind, do you? That’s right where I was going to go next. And the problem with the presentation–not a problem, but where I see the disconnect and Betty is correct. Even if it’s not consolidation because we kind of see where that went. But that being said, we need to have the school and the town together in a 20-year build-out. So, town meet members know what to expect and what these buildings are going to–that’s the way I’d like to see it done. So, since you have all that background previously, and now you’re working for the town maybe combine and meet with Derek and staff and come back with some options the different things we can do. I mean, even if it’s–I don’t know what the Finance Director is going to say but 1% right off the top of the budget or 2%, whatever it is and maintain our buildings. But that’s just my own thought and I see somebody has their hand up. Please identify yourself for the record.

Steve Lydon:

Steve Lydon. I appreciate your presentation tonight. And Sheila, you too. I’m on the Capital Outlay Committee and every year they come in and give a detailed explanation, and they really go into it. So, I have some kind of more knowledge than I guess the average person would, but my question is we have 32 buildings. Why do we have 32 buildings? We have three–I mean, these buildings aren’t taxed, they bring in no income. They cost a hell of a lot of money to fix to keep. Do we need all these 32 buildings? I mean, you just talked about Memorial Hall with all the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it’s going to take to fix it. We just allocated I think $300,000 for a sound system. Do we really need to keep this building? I mean, is it such an asset that we need to keep it or should we think about selling some of this property? I don’t know, but I just think it’s something that needs to be looked at.

Charlie Bletzer:

Can I respond to that? Hey, Steve, can I respond to you on that Memorial Hall? I agree with you with a lot of things but Memorial Hall, I can tell you is a huge asset to the Town of Plymouth. We need arts. We need the arts and the Memorial Hall. That’s the home for the Philharmonic and there are musical events there. It’s a great tourist attraction, and the veterans are in there. They have a great museum in there. So, Memorial Hall is a big asset to the Town. So, all right.

Everett Malaguti:

Everett Malaguti, Precinct 1. These numbers are humbling at best. As a Town Meeting member, I cringe at all those numbers, but a lot of them are necessary based upon if we want to have everything functioning properly and not have anything falling apart around us. I do want to say that we do, as was noted by Selectmen Cavacco and Helm about the building maintenance fund that was created a couple of years ago during Town Meeting, which has I believe about 4, 4.5 million roughly in it.

[0:55:14]

Everett Malaguti:

Now, we have not determined an actual funding mechanism to prolong into the future. As of right now, we could look at the meals tax later on, but I think the Sunsets around 2040-2042 in that time range for the Sunset clause. And if that happens, I think that would be a great avenue to put into it once we finalize the final cent on this building because we don’t want to shortchange and then have to raise it appropriate on the building again. I do think that there could be a look for other funding in the meantime before that Sunset clause and we can divert the money that way that we should probably look at other accounts that the town has that are from our revenue raising that other departments use as well. If this department they say, and I don’t want to put them on the spot, but say Recreation has certain buildings or Marine Environmental has certain buildings that they get revenue from and all that, could there be a portion of those funds dedicated toward facility maintenance that either goes into this fund or can be pulled by Mr. Hill during budget time for town meeting that could then be used as an offset for instead of just looking at it as one comprehensive fund, but it’s many avenues that are sharing in the pot combined. I believe that is probably going to be a better opportunity for us so that everyone has skin in the game for this and that it’s not just one looking for the other to do everything. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the Board? Okay. So, in the future, when you can, doesn’t have to be next week, see if we can get some numbers together or lay out something for us that we know which way you’d like to move forward with it because I think the Town as a whole has to put all the buildings up. And we spoke of this just a few hours ago, a list of the abandoned buildings, if you will that the Town has. We could get that and maybe a look at the leases. We don’t need to have every page of every lease, but for instance so-and-so brings in this total amount a year. If we can have all the town buildings looked at that way also, I’d appreciate that. I think it’d be interesting to look at. Any other comments from the Board or for Nick? Okay. Thank you very much.

46 Sandwich Road – Purchase and Sales Agreement. Mr. Brindisi?

Derek Brindisi:

Good evening. So, as the Board knows, we have had many conversations with Mr. Rick Vayo, the developer who’s in the process of acquiring 46 Sandwich Road from Holtec–from the Holtec Company. Through many discussions with Mr. Vayo and under the direction of the Board, I would say probably almost six weeks ago now, we have been able to come to a purchase price of $3,750,000. Our attorney worked with the opposing counsel and drafted a purchase and sale agreement that was discussed at an executive session earlier this evening. So, that is what’s before you today. As you all know, you voted in support of the Purchase and Sale Agreement subject to any minor modifications between Town Counsel and Opposing Counsel. So, the question what’s before you right now is whether or not the board wants to go ahead and ratify that Purchase and Sale Agreement.

Dick Quintal:

Questions or comments?

Betty Cavacco:

Well, it’s a pretty significant facility and I think it’s important for our infrastructure. Police and fire chiefs have both weighed in on the options of the property, and they are both in full agreement that this is an important piece of property for the Town to acquire. So, with that, I’ll make a motion, even for discussion to accept the purchase and sale and move forward for Town Meeting.

[1:00:09]

Harry Helm:

I’ll second the motion for discussion.

Dick Quintal:

Second. Discussion? Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

Mr. Brindisi, I believe you mentioned in Executive Session that there was an appraisal.

Derek Brindisi:

Yes, there is an appraisal we just received today. Give me one second, I just want to give you an exact number. We actually just received the appraisal today. Mr. Bill Keohan was working with one of the appraisal companies he typically works with. They moved quickly and got us the appraisal in time for this evening’s meeting at a total appraised value of $4,350,000.

Dick Quintal:

All right. Any other questions from the Board? Patrick?

Patrick Flaherty:

Yeah, I just appreciate the time both chiefs took to write up their memos and both expressed their full support as Betty said for this parcel of land. And we do know that of course this has to go through Town Meeting. There’s going to be some questions that aren’t yet answered, but it’s just really, really clear that no matter which direction this goes in terms of the timing, that this is a really important piece of land that’s very strategic for the town. So, I support this as well. I voted for this. And if for some reason, we can’t find anything to do with this land, we can always sell it to someone else, but I have a feeling we’re going to find plenty to do here. So, I support this purchase wholeheartedly.

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Bletzer?

Charlie Bletzer:

Just real quick, by purchasing this land, we now control the land. If Town Meeting buys it, the town will control the land, and we control what gets developed there. So, I think it’s very important.

Dick Quintal:

That’s right. It was a unanimous vote in executive Session to purchase it. It has endless possibilities. Like you say public safety, complexes, training center, cemetery, we got one of those on the burner nobody’s thinking about, and I’m not suggesting it, but I’m just saying. And more than anything, I think it leads 20, 25, 30 years down the road when the town says, “You know what? We need a piece of land.” And we just went through this in the Cemetery Committee and I just left the meeting earlier. The Commission of Housing for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Mr. Connolly and his wife are here tonight, and we were talking and Lee brought up that all the parcels that we could even maybe use for a cemetery have conservation restrictions on them. So, we have to go purchase land for that, and that’s a state law. We have to bury our townspeople. I don’t know the mass general number, but I know it’s a state law because I’ve read it. So, that being said, I’m just putting it out there. And I know we were thinking about with the CPC and that’s yet to be determined, but if it’s a short amount of money maybe we better not to, maybe we don’t put the restrictions on it, so we can have a vision in 25 years down the road, if it’s that or maybe the town does have a need for it right away. But I think we need to leave it as a valued piece of property for the Town of Plymouth with no restrictions, and then we’re all going to be sitting in this room. So, it’s going to be a different set of eyes, and they’re going to be looking to do something, and we’ll have a piece of property we can actually use. We can go back and forth about appraisals and there’s been a few mistakes. The one on Nelson Street on the corner, I think the town wanted to buy for 750 instead of a million. How nice would that have been to have right now? Just for parking and maybe you could have put your Marine unit in there. I mean, it’s just saying. I think it’s really valid. There’s a lot of questions. I’ve asked Mr. Vayo and I talked with Catherine Holmes over the weekend, I think it was, and we’re going to try to have it open for two days, two different times so Town Meeting members or Planning Board Members or whoever might want to go see can go through it and hopefully the chiefs can make it, but I don’t make their schedules or they could send somebody in case there’s questions. And we’re going to try to give you as much information, Town Meetings members as we can. We already got the purchase and sale, we got the appraisal. So, by the time you go to town meeting, you’ll have a lot of those answers.

[1:05:05]

Dick Quintal:

We’ve got memos from both chiefs. They’ll do their own presentations, and that’s really it. Any other questions or comments? Oh, I’m sorry. Mr. Bulletin? I ruined it for you, but you still can identify yourself.

Steve Bolotin:

Good evening, Mr. Chair, Members of the Select Board, I’m Steve Bolotin, currently a Precinct 15 Town Meeting Member. I want to echo what you just said as probably the single most important thing for town meeting, information. We all know in town that information seems to get disseminated in dribs and drabs, accurate and inaccurate, speculation and fact all combined. It will be an unusual circumstance coming this Saturday, when we have now 162 town meeting members, 20% of whom did not run for Town Meeting. They will be elected by write-in ballot or appointment. So, 20% of our town meeting members didn’t run for town meeting. Those are not going to be people who are currently today ready to pay attention to such an important issue. And you are correct, this is a very important piece of property. Whether we use it for public safety, other reasons or simply to make sure that we have control of the property. And control is a huge issue in this town when it comes to land use, because as we’ve all learned, if we don’t control it, somebody else controls our destiny. So, I just implore the Select Board to do whatever it can as soon as possible to email information, make sure that everybody who’s elected to town meeting gets a notice that says Town Meeting, Special Town Meeting, the 21st. Here’s the warrant articles, here’s the information, make sure that they get it repeatedly. If you don’t beat them over the head with it, some people are just not going to be paying attention, and this is far too important for people to walk in last minute trying to learn what needs to go on.

I applaud the fact that you’re opening the building up. It’s an interesting facility to say the least. I truly applaud the fact that you’re going to have our public safety officials participate. I look forward to seeing those reports. I’ve heard about them. I actually haven’t even seen them yet myself. I think these are the essential facts that our town meeting members need in order to make an informed decision. Thank you very much.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. I’m sorry, Mr. Serkey.

Rich Serkey:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, Rich Serkey, Precinct 2. I have two questions. The first is, are you aware of how much Mr. Vayo is purchasing the land for? And if so, can you disclose it tonight? That’s the first question, I’ll ask the second afterwards. Okay?

Dick Quintal:

Harry did you want to say something?

Harry Helm:

No, I was just saying Derek should be the one to answer that.

Dick Quintal:

Right, exactly. Well, I didn’t know how many questions. You want to do them one at a time or–

Rich Serkey:

Yeah, okay. The second one is are you able to share the purchase and sale agreement with the public that you voted to sign tonight?

Dick Quintal:

Derek will answer that. Mr. Brindisi, can you answer Mr. Serkey’s questions?

Derek Brindisi:

I can answer all these questions.

Dick Quintal:

Okay.

Derek Brindisi:

So, as we discussed, and I think Mr. Vayo was in the room the last time this subject came up, from what we understand Mr. Vayo was acquiring the property at 46 Sandwich Road from Holtech for $2.3 million. That was stated to us verbally. We’ve never seen their purchase and sale agreement. That’s between two private parties, but we haven’t seen it. And then your second question was I think was relative to the town’s purchase and sale agreement with Mr. Vayo. And yeah, that’s a public record, public document. Once finalized, we certainly can provide that through public records requests.

Rich Serkey:

And when do you expect it to be finalized?

Derek Brindisi:

I would expect that we could have, you know–again, I assume the Board is going to come in and give a wet signature to this. So, based upon their schedule, I would hope by the end of the week.

[1:10:01]

Rich Serkey:

Thank you very much.

Dick Quintal:

Anyone else wishing to speak or ask questions? Seeing none. All those in favor? Unanimous. Article two. Mr. Brindisi.

Derek Brindisi:

Are you waiting for me?

Dick Quintal:

Yes. I’m sorry, I thought you were looking something up, Derek.

Derek Brindisi:

No, no, no. I just–I guess I was taken off track. I didn’t realize that you just voted on Article One. I thought you were discussing the purchase and sale agreement. Okay. So, as far as Article Two goes, as you know, it was previously pointed out by our Town Moderator that this special legislation has been drafted for the Town to file for a Hybrid Town Meeting Model. This is what article–how it reads that we use the same language as that was previously drafted for our original filing through Rep. Muratore. So, this is simple. We’ve talked–I talked to OTI. They say that the technology is available to conduct a hybrid model. I’ve talked to PACTV, they say they can support a hybrid model. So, assuming the Board, and Advisory and Finance and Town Meeting supports this, we’ll go ahead and file it, in hopes that we get favorable action with our state legislature.

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

Just for clarification. Mr. Brindisi, what exactly are we filing? Since we have some legislation already that Matt, Mr. Muratore has filed, what are we filing just so that the people watching will know?

Derek Brindisi:

Right. The difference is Rep. Muratore filed legislation for hybrid town meeting. Now, because it wasn’t at the time, it was done kind of in a quick action, nothing was done this past March, that wasn’t specifically for the Town of Plymouth, that legislation that he filed would allow–if there was a favorable action, would allow for all municipalities in Massachusetts to offer a hybrid town meeting model. What we’re talking about this evening is specifically for the Town of Plymouth. So, this is a home rule petition that if it were to pass would be specifically just for the town and would allow us to conduct our town meetings in the future in a hybrid model. It would not allow other communities to do such.

Dick Quintal:

Any other questions on the Board? Any motion?

Betty Cavacco:

Motion to approve Article 2 – Special Town Meeting.

Harry Helm:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous. Article 3. Chief Foley? You’re up, Chief Foley.

Chief Neil Foley:

Are we talking about the town?

Dick Quintal:

Yes.

Chief Neil Foley:

Sorry for keeping you waiting. So, on this article, what we’re requesting is we were actually looking to go out to an RFP. We’ve identified some space on the new radio tower that we have built over in Camelot Park. Its 180-foot communications tower. We started construction last year. There was some delay in the projects. A lot of that had to do with a lot of the challenges that we’ve faced as a nation, as a community as well. But now that we’re at the end of that construction phase, we spoke with our communication consultants, and they have identified two locations on that communications tower that is leasable to telecommunication companies.

[1:15:15]

Chief Neil Foley:

Each of those locations range from a possibility of being able to bring in annual revenue of anywhere between I think $34,000 to $64,000, don’t quote me exactly on those numbers, but in that ballpark. Obviously, that would be determined through the RFP process. But we’re bringing this to Town Meeting through this article strictly because our town council has made us aware that for us to accept any of the proposals through the RFP that it would have to be first voted on, that the town would wish to lease that particular location on the tower. So, we’re looking for approval of that.

Dick Quintal:

Any questions for the Chief? Awaiting a motion.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion.

Dick Quintal:

I’m sorry, one second. Mr. Malaguti from Precinct 2.

Everett Malaguti:

Thank you for introducing me. Everett Malaguti, Precinct 1 currently to Precinct 2 within a matter of days. So, my only question for this is, I support this, but the funds once they are acquired through whoever is the lessee. We do have a current agreement with Water Department that there’s a partial amount that’s given to the Water Department from the solar array that’s on water property and since this is on sewer property, would we engage in the same aspect as some of the funding from the lease on that would go into the sewer fund and then the rest go into the general fund as just an equal balance since it’s sort of leasing public land in there so we do get access from it. I just want to make sure that we do actually get some funding from that into the sewer fund since the sewer payers did and still currently operate and fund the maintenance and grounds of that. So, I think that there should be some teeth that allow them to get up. It’s not going to do really anything to lower rates or anything like that, but I think that there should be equal standing on any platform when there are other departments or other enterprise accounts that have similar operations. It should be part of that as well. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? On that, bring it back to the Board.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion to approve.

Charlie Bletzer:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Second by Mr. Bletzer. Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous.

Chief Neil Foley:

Thank you for the support.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you, Chief. Article 4 – Citizen’s Petition.

Randy Parker:

Good evening.

Dick Quintal:

Hello, Mr. Parker. How are you?

Randy Parker:

I’m well at Vicky, how are you?

Dick Quintal:

I’m good. Thank you.

Randy Parker:

May I proceed, sir?

Dick Quintal:

Absolutely.

Randy Parker:

Thank you. For the record, my name is Randy Parker. A group of us gathered signatures over a long weekend. The text of the petitions, the narrative provided to you have been well distributed. I don’t feel any need to read the petition or the narratives into the record. I’d rather, if you have any questions, comments, debate that we address intent and interpretation. Article 4 is to have Town Meeting approve or ratified regulations of the Plymouth Conservation Commission. It’s an amendment to the Wetland Bylaw and such approval or ratification will be required before those regulations can be effective or engaged.

Article 5 is the grandfathering of lots. When it comes to wetlands in a parallel and is the case–as is the case with zoning.

[1:20:02]

Randy Parker:

So that little bit being said, I would turn it back to you, Mr. Quintal. I have my narratives. I have everything I need to answer any questions that you all might have. Thank you for your time.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Parker on article 4? Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

Mr. Parker, Randy, can you explain to us why this is required? I mean, I’ll give you what I think you’re trying to address. Are you trying to address rules and regulations that will be or are or have been approved by the Conservation Commission writing into the actual bylaws that these rules and regulations which are not bylaws but have been passed and govern what goes on, you know wherever these rules and regulations impact even though they’re not bylaws? Are you trying to create a statement that would basically require that these rules and regulations actually be approved by town meeting, which they are not currently? Is that what you’re up to?

Randy Parker:

Harry Helm, that is certainly the case with Article 4. Article 5, let’s see.

Harry Helm:

Let’s just talk about Article 4 now.

Randy Parker:

All right. Now, let’s make sure we have our articles straight. These rules, regulations, design specifications and policy guidelines or amendments adopted by the Commission must be approved by town meeting. So, it is absolutely the case that we are looking to town meeting to approve any future regulations that come along. There’s not much we can do about existing regulations at this time, except to continue changing the rules that they used to make the rules. So, we’ll have to see what happens comes the Spring Town Meeting. I’m sorry, Mr. Helm, the Fall Town Meeting. But it’s my opinion that we really need to do something to balance the seesaw on these regulations and stop these pendulums from swinging into such a position that the Conservation Commission has more control over land than those living on water and there’s a whole lot of us living along close to the water within 100 feet, and a lot of resentment for what’s going on these days.

Harry Helm:

Thank you.

Randy Parker:

So, that’s Article 4. In the future, the Town Meeting is going to be reviewing anything that comes out of the Commission, we hope. And also, in the future come to Fall or whenever, we will look at hopefully backtracking some of these regulations that they voted. As I understand it, I think it was April the 26th, Mr. Helm, it just blew me away because I don’t know if it was a conversation with you guys, the last meeting we had here together or if it happened at a Conservation Commission Meeting or some collage of both, but I have had it in my head for what it’s worth that they were to do a third-party review, vote the regulations in an effective date in June. So, here we are on I guess it’s April 26th, I didn’t watch it, Mr. Bjorklund did. And he said, “Randy, they made the regulations effective the same night that they voted them.” Now, that wasn’t my understanding, and it certainly puts a couple of projects that I have under some additional contention. That’s not the issue here. This is not project specific. This is global to Plymouth, and I’m looking–we’re looking, a group of concerned professionals and those around us at bringing some reason and some legitimacy back to how we view and handle wetlands because it’s way out of hand in my humble opinion. Next question.

[1:25:14]

Harry Helm:

Yeah, follow-up, Randy, you are not contesting that the Conservation Commission has statutory rights to create these rules, regulations, design specifications and policy guidelines, correct?

Randy Parker:

We are not.

Harry Helm:

Okay. So, what you are asking for is the Town Meeting be able to approve or disapprove of them before they go into effect?

Randy Parker:

Absolutely, Mr. Helm. That’s the gist of it, yes.

Harry Helm:

Has Town Council reviewed this proposed article?

Randy Parker:

I can’t say that they proposed specifically the Article 4 and 5 that we’re looking at, but they have seen this all before as has Town Meetings, so I have to think that this stuff is secure and operative.

Harry Helm:

Okay. Yeah, no. I recall this on several occasions from my time on Finance Committee. I’m all set. Thank you, Randy.

Randy Parker:

You’re welcome, Harry. Other questions, please?

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Flaherty?

Patrick Flaherty:

It’s more of a statement. So, we met with the Conservation Commission as a board. I think it was last summer when it was going through this because there were certain regulations and rules that were proposed that at the same time would require a homeowner to change their plan for their Title 5 and also at the same time, not allow them to do it. So, when I saw that, that’s when I know a lot of people came forward and had concerns because of their property and the ability to sell it is compromised if you can’t pass your Title 5. So, that was the one item that I was really adamant about. And then sometime between then and now, that was reworded, then it was out, then it’s back in again. So, it seems like this is sort of bounced around. And something that significant of a rule or regulation, I do think should get a look from Town Meeting. And I know this was brought forward a few years ago at Town Meeting and it went through that whole process and the vetting. And I guess my one question for Randy is that this language as proposed here, was this the same language if you recall from a few years ago when it was voted down at Town Meeting?

Randy Parker:

Exactly.

Patrick Flaherty:

Perfect.

Randy Parker:

It’s exactly the same language.

Patrick Flaherty:

Although the work of the Conservation Commission is critical for our town for a number of reasons, there are certain things that rise to a level that affect homeowners that really need to make sure that they have an ability to have a second look at and this is one of them, and that’s my example for that.

Randy Parker:

Thank you so much.

Dick Quintal:

Any other questions? Pleasure of the Board.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion to approve Article 4.

Dick Quintal:

Excuse me. Okay. Sure.

Sharl Heller:

Thank you. Is that better? Well, thank you for letting me speak. With increased pollution of our ponds and numerous wetland protection violations, I believe Plymouth should be strengthening our Wetlands’ Protection Bylaws, and Mr. Parker’s two articles here are clearly an attempt to weaken them.

Article 4, the language rules and regulations design specifications and policy guidelines, I’m not reading it really. I’m reading what the regulations said in 2007 before Town Meeting voted to strike this line, “These rules, regulations, design specifications and policy guidelines of amendments adopted by the Commission must be approved by a vote of Town Meeting.” So, in 2007, Town Meeting voted to amend this bylaw by striking those lines.

[1:30:13]

Sharl Heller:

And why did they do that at that time, it’s my understanding that the majority felt that the Conservation has a better perspective of what should be included in rules and regulations. Town Meeting members, it was said don’t have the time or inclination to focus on the minutia of these regulations, and they felt it was more appropriate for the Commission to set their own rules and regulations. As Mr. Parker mentioned just last month, the Commission adopted, updated Plymouth’s Wetlands Protection Rules and Regulations. This was a process that happened over many years to update these, and I believe the Commission held multiple public meetings to invite comments, they discussed those comments, and they incorporated the comments offered by the public. In fact, it’s my understanding that the Select Board asked the Conservation Commission for a third-party review. I think that’s what you were talking about, Patrick, and this review did happen by the Town’s legal counsel as well as consultants from an environmental firm and an environmental law firm before they adopted those regulations.

They were very open in this process and my experience of just a few of the Conservation Commission meetings I’ve attended that when homeowners including some of Randy’s clients come to the Conservation Commission, they’re pretty generous with how they bend the current regulations to meet those homeowners needs. That’s what I have to say about Article 4. It seems to be working well since 2007, and I would ask that you, as was mentioned here, get the advice of town council on this and at least hear from the Conservation Commission before you vote to accept or approve this article. I’d also like to talk about article 5, but I’ll wait if you want to vote on Article 4.

Dick Quintal:

Anyone else wishing to speak on this article? So, we had the first and the second.

Betty Cavacco:

We did.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? Mr. Helm.

Harry Helm:

Yeah, 2007 was 15 years ago. Given that the Conservation Commission is open and does listen to the residents when they are creating these rules, regulations, etc. I see no reason why the Conservation Commission should be concerned if town meeting has to agree to adopt them into the–you know, agree to adopt them. And I understand that in 2007, the decision was made to strike almost this exact language from the bylaws and what Randy, Mr. Parker is doing here is to put them back in. I think it’s worth the discussion at town meeting to see what the residents of Plymouth after 15 years of working within the guidelines where the rules regulations do not need to be adopted by town meeting to see what the residents think and see how they will speak through their town meeting members. So, I’m actually going to vote in favor of this, and we’ll see what happens.

Dick Quintal:

Mrs. Cavacco?

Betty Cavacco:

I echo what Harry said, our Selectman Helm. I mean, if the Conservation Commission is so open then the discussion that town meeting has shouldn’t really alter their decision. I know that they were–we did request a third-party. I haven’t heard, unless I was not here, I haven’t heard them come back to us with that third-party finding or have any discussion, and they just implemented these rules before that process happened. So, I mean, Town Meeting is the one that makes all the decisions. So, I have no issue supporting this moving forward.

[1:35:14]

Dick Quintal:

Any other questions from the Board or comments? Calling for a vote. All those in favor? Unanimous. Article 5?

Randy Parker:

That would be me again. For the record, I’m still Randy Parker. I think this time, I’ll read the text of the petitioned article Chapter 196 Section 196-6: The Wetland Bylaw exceptions is to add to 196-6 paragraph B, a sentence that says, a permit and application shall not be required for residential lots or structures existing prior to March 27th, 1973. And you have the text of the narrative. The most common question that I get on this is where did you come up with that date, March 27th, 1973? If you look at our Zoning Bylaw, that is the date that what we know to be our Modern Zoning Bylaw where the R40, R25, R20, all of our districts, all of our setbacks, all of our areas came from.

So, by using that date, we’re able to tell really pretty much at a glance and by virtue of determination by the Zoning Department whether a lot is small enough and old enough to be considered for this particular exception. And the problem we’re running into, we were already running into before they revise their regulations to include what I ask them not to do. A 50-to-100-foot discretionary buffer, wherein no building can occur unless there is no practicable alternative, at the mercy of the Conservation Commission. I have no idea how many thousands of lots there are around 39% of the water comprising the Town of Plymouth, how many of these lots there are along the coast, but we are driving these people crazy with regulations that say, “Don’t beg forgiveness, seek approval.” You can go in, and you can ask the question, my daughter wanted to put up a pergola for her hammock. I sent a request, this is what we’re going to do. No response. So, we did it anyway. It’s out of hand, I’m sorry, I mean to be respectful but after 10 years of dealing with this, I’m a little frustrated myself. So, I appreciate your tolerance. We need the stakeholder’s review by town meeting that you voted for on article 4, and we have got to have some sort of protection from these little lots. You cannot tell somebody living on a coastal bank with a seawall, they can’t move a paver because it’s within 35 feet of the top of their bluff. I’ve had enough. I should shut up. Thank you for your time. I’ll take any questions you have.

Dick Quintal:

Questions from the Board? Did you want to speak to this?

Sharl Heller:

Yes. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Okay.

Sharl Heller:

You can see that that Randy is frustrated, but I don’t think that this article was written in a way that people can actually understand what it means including me, even though I’ve spent like all day trying to figure out exactly what this means. So, this bylaw amendment at the very least needs work. And he is talking about in 1973, the Commonwealth created legislation to strengthen the protection of wetlands, but it’s unclear how this exemption would affect permitting. Clearly, the town can’t diminish state bylaws, so I think we need clarification from town council before the Select Board votes to support this article. The way it’s written, you can’t tell if he means to take those homeowners that would now come under those new state regulations, how they would be permitted, how would the Conservation Commission deal with those.

[1:40:10]

Sharl Heller:

So, at least ask town council about this one if you haven’t already. And number two, I’m concerned that this amendment would cause people who have owned their properties before 1973 to push the envelope to do more development that could be detrimental to wetlands and into our coastal waters. I also believe that this would result in an unequal application of our bylaws, because one neighbor would see his neighborhood lived longer in the same area, have permits to do things that the other neighbors couldn’t do. So, again, it’s confusing and I think it would cause a lot of conflict.

Lastly, I’ll just say, the Conservation Commission tonight could not be here because they’re involved in hearings. And I again, ask you to refrain from voting until you can either get clarification on what this bylaw means and how it would affect permits in the future and until you’ve heard the Conservation Commission’s response to these two articles, especially the fifth since you’ve already voted on the fourth.

Randy Parker:

If I may, please, Mr. Quintal?

Dick Quintal:

Absolutely.

Randy Parker:

Thank you. I count Sharl and Frank and most everybody I know of course amongst my friends, but you have to look at this language, “A permit and application should not be required,” as it affects Chapter 91 196-6, it’s only applicable to our local wetland regulations. It does not do anything less restrictive than the state’s regulations 310 cm, R10. So, it means exactly what it says. If you own a lot, and it predates March 27th, 1973 and it’s smaller than the buffers, they’re encouraging its exempt. So, it’s at no more risk than the rest of the state for this land, and we get to be treated like people again. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Any other questions or comments? I’m sorry. Go ahead, Patrick.

Patrick Flaherty:

Thank you both for your comments. I mean, I saw Article 4 as being able to take a second look at changes to rules and regulations, which we know don’t happen very often. And I don’t think town meeting should be involved in the approvals or down to the granular level of any particular project, but I think it is a good check for when changes are made. This is making an exception to those rules and regulations, Article 5. And I don’t support this one because one for the reasons that Sharl brought up but also, we have the rule book to go by, and there’s an equal playing field for anyone to use those rules and regulations. And I don’t feel that creating an exception is in the spirit of what the rules and regulations are meant to do.

Dick Quintal:

Mr. Helm?

Harry Helm:

I agree with Ms. Heller and Mr. Flaherty, but I’m also going to particularly agree with something that Ms. Heller said and that was because I’m in the same boat with her. I really don’t understand what the implications, not on surface that it’s an exception, but I don’t understand what the implications could possibly be by creating this exception. And my tendency is to never vote in favor of something that I don’t understand. I’m not sure if you know, do we want to consider maybe at next week’s meeting taking this one back up with additional information and some other people to explain what these exceptions would be or not, but if we don’t, then I’m going to be voting no on it.

Betty Cavacco:

I’m wondering if we should send this over to council and ask them to give us the explanation of what Mr. Helm is looking for, and postpone it until next week.

[1:45:12]

Dick Quintal:

Fine with me. I mean, they all go to town council anyway, but you want to see what they say before.

Betty Cavacco:

More detail, yeah.

Harry Helm:

Yeah, I would just like to–I would like to know, you know, not the statement. Randy was quite clear that this is an exception, but I would like to be able to understand as best as anybody can, given that you never know the true implications, but what are the potential ramifications of this exception?

Betty Cavacco:

Okay.

Dick Quintal:

Okay.

Harry Helm:

Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Mr. Chairman, I believe that when we were discussing 46 Sandwich Road, we made a motion for the Purchase and Sale Agreement, but I don’t believe that we moved Article 1 forward. So, I’d like to make a motion to move Article One.

Brad Brothers:

That’s correct. Yeah, I think–yeah, you guys lumped them kind of together. So, it’d be best to vote them separately.

Dick Quintal:

Separate?

Brad Brothers:

Yeah.

Dick Quintal:

Okay. Motion?

Betty Cavacco:

Motion to move Article 1 forward to Town Meeting.

Dick Quintal:

Second?

Patrick Flaherty:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Second by Mr. Flaherty. Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous again. Town Manager’s Report, Mr. Brindisi.

Derek Brindisi:

I’m going to defer to the Assistant Town Manager for this evening. Thank you.

Brad Brothers:

So, just a couple quick notes. Update on the Smokestack, the crane was delivered in parts today. It’s being assembled. That’s scheduled to be assembled by the end of the day tomorrow. With demolition expected to start on Thursday morning. And again, this is assuming assembly and weather conditions cooperate. So, that should be cleared up and good to go by hopefully in the day Friday.

Second note is the weather looks extremely warm this weekend. However, this is a reminder that our beaches are not actually staffed until Memorial Day Weekend at the earliest depending on the specific beach. So, Plymouth, Morton and Long Beach open on Memorial Weekend. So, what this means is there will be no access to bathrooms except for White Horse Beach, which will have access to Port-A-John’s and also Plymouth Beach, if Sandy’s Restaurant is open, and that’s the general note I have. You guys probably know the background on that but go ahead.

Harry Helm:

Just a comment.

Brad Brothers:

Sure.

Harry Helm:

I’d like to point out that, I believe if it is not the actual anniversary, last weekend was the actual anniversary of a similar incredibly hot Pre-Memorial Day Weekend, and it was the infamous fight club day on the beach down at White Horse Beach, and I would just like to make the police aware.

Brad Brothers:

We actually noted that today in our meeting today.

Harry Helm:

Thank you. That’s great.

Betty Cavacco:

So, I understand that there aren’t going to be facilities or staff at Plymouth Beach, but if it’s going to be a hot weekend, is that access going to be open for Long Beach? Because if it isn’t, I’d like it to be.

Brad Brothers:

That I don’t know the answer to right now.

Betty Cavacco:

I mean, people don’t need someone to say, “Oh, go ahead and go out to the beach.” I think they can do that at their own risk.

Brad Brothers:

So, my understanding is the beaches are open. They’re just not staffed with our normal staff.

Betty Cavacco:

So, someone can drive out to Long Beach this weekend?

Brad Brothers:

I can find out for you. With that also just to note that I shouldn’t have to say this, but we have to, please remember to take out what you carry in. That’s the last thing we want is things floating around on the beach and the beach areas. Third note is, as a reminder, some precinct voting locations have changed. We have posted this information on our Town Website and the Facebook page. So, please check that out if you’re unsure where your voting location is.

The fourth note is, I’d like to thank Mr. Flaherty for his three years of service on the Board. Mr. Brindisi and I have only been on here kind of for a short-term time, we’ve enjoyed working with you and wish you and your family the best. I mean, we hope to see you active again on future boards whatever it may be. So, thank you.

Patrick Flaherty:

Thank you.

Brad Brothers:

And the last note is just good luck to all the candidates running for open positions this week, this weekend. And then Mrs. Cavacco, I will get back to you.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Anyone wishing to speak on a public comment?

[1:50:17]

Stephen Bullock:

Sorry about that. Stephen Bullock, I live in Plymouth, I live on Darby Station. So, as you guys know, you guys have the town well out there. I’m sure you do not know this will go well with facilities, that for the past seven years, the generator does not work. So, I’m sure you also don’t know that for the last three days, you had no power to the well. Did anybody on this Board know that? Okay. So, I’ll go further. So, three or four months ago, we had a storm, we had power out. Eversource comes down, they tell us private poles, we’re not responsible, we’re not fixing the power. You have to find a private company. Well, you guys found out on Saturday afternoon, about 3 o’clock, tree came down, well goes out. Last night, at about 9:30, they got the well up and running. There’s more to it. I’ve gone to engineering and told them about the poles, because Eversource told me where the town’s the last power hookup that they should be the one that should take priority and get the poles taken over out of private poles to Eversource poles. Nothing’s been done. I never got a phone call back. But once again, people not doing their jobs and carrying through when a resident gives them information, very important information. You guys always talk about the town wells. Well, guess what? You didn’t have power to the town well for three days. We lose power down there, which is fine, live in the woods, understand, probably 10-12 times a year. In those 10 or 12 times a year, we don’t have power for probably 3 or 4 days. So, that means the Town doesn’t have power to the well for 3 or 4 days. And I’m sure nobody is aware of this. Okay?

So, we can go back further as well, when the Town bought the bogs out there. The Town has an easement from the five people on the road for the well. We were never notified that the Town was buying the bogs in making those walking trails. In my eyes, the town really doesn’t have rights to bring people on my property without coming to us and changing the easement to allow people on our property, which we all own that we give the Town an easement for the well. And I think that’s pretty bad that the Town couldn’t come to us, as owners of the road, which we give the town an easement for the well, which now are advertised as walking trails, which bring people down the road. Because I’m sure myself and the neighbors would have been here to complain about them being walking trails, which I did some research and the reason why they had to be advertised as walking trails is so that you guys can get the financing. And a lot of times, you don’t want to give the public the knowledge because they’re going to push back on what you want or what the town people want, and we would have pushed back on having them as walking trails on a dirt road that’s wide enough for one vehicle. It’s already done. It’s over, but the town needs to know what’s going on. I went to Engineering, nothing’s been done. I really think that people are not talking in the Town, whether supervisors or whoever it may be, and it starts at the top, and people are not held accountable. If you’re the top dog, and you’re not doing your job, let’s find somebody else, because it’s time.

So, another note, it’s summer time, boating, harbor. Once again, no tie-ups for 15-minute tie-ups. The Harbor Master gets brand-new boats, brand-new facility, we get less and less every year.

[1:55:02]

Stephen Bullock:

When are we going to get our 15-minute tie-ups back? We’re in another season. Last year, my wife was seven months pregnant, I go to the boat ramp, “You can’t come in, sir. You don’t have a trailer.” So, I keep on driving because you know what? There’s nowhere else to drop off somebody that’s seven months pregnant that’s going to go out for dinner on the boat, but there’s no other place to go. Well, something needs to be done. Four years ago, they dredged, right? Three and a half, four years ago, we haven’t got them back. The Harbor Master just got brand-new docks, brand-new piles, brand-new boat, brand-new facility. Who are the ones that are paying for all this? The mooring holders and what do we get? Nothing. When is something going to change? Hasn’t, and this isn’t the first time this has been brought up. It’s been brought up at Harbor Committee Meetings, it’s been brought up in this room, and nothing’s been done. Am I wrong? So, when is it going to change or when are people’s jobs going to be taken away because they’re not doing their job? I mean, what’s the next step? If they’re not doing their job, and they’re being told to do it then maybe they have to be threatened that their jobs are going to go away.

The Town Well is a very important piece of infrastructure for the Town. Never mind the fact that town water runs down the road. I was told that I couldn’t tie into town water. Just this winter, I had enough with the well water and I went down, and finally he’s like the new director, “Yeah. No problem, you can tie in the water.” There are five houses. I’ve been there five years. What’s that? $1200, $1500 a year times 5. It’s free money for the town. There’s water running down the street. No, you can’t tie into it. These are the people that work for the town that are not bringing in revenue. It’s time. It’s time to make people accountable. They want to get paid top dollar to be in charge? Well, let’s hold them accountable. It’s a lot of that that goes with it. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Mr. Bullock, I’d just like to address a couple of things that you may not be aware of. First of all, for your water situation.

Stephen Bullock:

It’s not my water situation, I have a well. It’s the townspeople.

Betty Cavacco:

I understand that, but for the water situation, in any situation that you get into, you can contact anybody on the Board.

Stephen Bullock:

It doesn’t matter if you contact, once it leaves an email, nothing gets done.

Betty Cavacco:

I have to disagree with you, because I respond to every single email.

Stephen Bullock:

I’m not saying you. I’m saying after somebody sends an email to somebody on the Board, and it goes through a department, it never gets followed through. We still don’t have 15-minute tie-ups those three years ago.

Betty Cavacco

But we do, because that’s the other thing I was going to tell you. So, the new dredge is now it’s a charter boat. It’s going to be called charter boat row and there are the front facing that’s facing towards the south, those are tie-ups, those are 15-minute tie-ups. So, I know I’ve seen you at the Harbor Committee, and we’ve made a lot of progress in the past especially the few months, but I can’t say what happened in the past, whatever issues that you have, I know that we’re moving forward. I know that the new town manager is very receptive, and he responds to everybody. He responds to us immediately. So, I mean, if there’s a problem, you don’t have to reach out to me, reach out to anyone or reach out to him directly.

Stephen Bullock:

I would hope that the issue with the well, I hope that goes further than this room tonight. I really think that there should be no reason why a generator has been broken for five to seven years.

Betty Cavacco:

Derek, can you address that, please? Look into it for Mr. Bullock.

Stephen Bullock:

Not for me.

Derek Brindisi:

I’ll look into it for Mr. Bullock, so that I can learn more about what’s going on down there. As soon as I know more information, I can follow up with the appropriate department. And as you pointed out, Selectman Cavacco, we respond to all of our complaints. Can’t always give them the answer they’re looking for, but we certainly circle back and give them the information that we have at the time.

[2:00:15]

Betty Cavacco:

I mean, just for an example, I’ve been on the Board for five years. I’ve gotten more information back to me in the past month and a half that the new town manager’s been here than I’ve had in the entire five years.

Stephen Bullock:

That’s great. But I think that the well is something very important that the Town really needs to look into. Honestly, ten is probably not the number. Like I said, Saturday was a beautiful day, a tree came down and took our power for three days for the Town. And like I said nobody, I’m sure nobody really knew about it. And the Town had to pay for a private contractor to come out, put a new pole in in and set all the gear. So, what did that cost the town? Nobody on this board knows about or nobody in the town knows about of how many hundreds of thousands of dollars from a conversation that I had four months ago could have been avoided, that nobody did their job on. So, have a good evening.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on the public comment? Anybody in the waiting room, Chris?

Brad Brothers:

Can we circle back to the Long Beach? So, the crossover will not be opened but residents can park along right away and utilize day parking at the day parking area.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there a reason why the crossover won’t be open?

Brad Brothers:

It’s part of the management plan, due to the management plan.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. I think we need to change the management plan.

Dick Quintal:

Yeah, but if it’s mandated, we can’t. If it’s the poll, I don’t want to get going on that, but–

Betty Cavacco:

Don’t stop the polls.

Dick Quintal:

I’m not, but I’m just saying it. If it is, you can’t change that. Not that I know.

Betty Cavacco:

Is it the poll, Everett?

Dick Quintal:

Everett, yeah, please, thank you.

Everett Malaguti:

It’s partly state mandated. We had to go through the State Environment Department and for the actual changes to the management plan also even when parts of the management plan over the past few years are being contested, and we also opened up the Habitat Conservation where we allowed escorted vehicles onto the beach during pull over season to allow more time for past owners to actually reach the crossover. So, there are times that we do have to start looking at the plan over again, but we just want to make sure that if we do start looking at it that the Town is willing if needed to provide funding if necessary for any court battles or any mediation that may be needed through the state and the town. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Thanks.

Dick Quintal:

Okay. We’re going to move on to Licenses. Plymouth Pride Incorporated is requesting a One Day Wine and Malt license for 6/26/22 from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. at Nelson Park.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion.

Harry Helm:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous.

Amplified Music Permit, Plymouth Pride Incorporated is requesting an Amplified Music Permit for a Band DJ for 6/26 from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. also at Nelson Park.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion.

Harry Helm:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous. Mamma Mia’s Pinehills is requesting Temporary Outdoor Dining on the Village Green across from their existing outdoor patio area, 40 seats, area will be cordoned off and staffed.

Betty Cavacco:

Motion.

Harry Helm:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Discussion? All those in favor? Harry, you in favor?

Harry Helm:

Oh, yeah.

Dick Quintal:

Okay. Unanimous. Thank you. The administrative notes number five has been pulled. So, it’s one through four, any questions?

Betty Cavacco:

I like to move them as a group.

Patrick Flaherty:

Second.

[2:05:00]

Dick Quintal:

Second by Mr. Flaherty. Discussion? All those in favor? Unanimous.

Committee liaison updates? Designee updates? Old business? Letters? New business? Motion to adjourn?

Betty Cavacco:

Motion.

Harry Helm:

Second.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you for watching. We’ll see you next week. Keep the people of Ukraine in your thoughts and prayers. Thank you.