Agenda – Plymouth Select Board 7-26-22 Agenda

Official Minutes – Plymouth Select Board Minutes 7-26-22

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

Betty Cavacco:

Welcome to the Plymouth Select Board Tuesday, July 26th, 2022 meeting. Would you please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

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.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. And we call the meeting to order, and the first order of business is Public Comment. Do we have anyone that would like to speak in the public comment? Okay. Please state your name for the record.

Kevin Lynch:

Absolutely! Kevin Lynch, town meeting member, precinct 5, newly elected for a 2-year-term. I don’t know how long I have. Hopefully, I won’t take that long, but I wanted to provide a quick point of information. We all know that the Plymouth Charter Commission is meeting. And recently, I posted a draft chart after a question was raised as to where is the draft chart. And so, I downloaded it, I only downloaded a little bit but I would like to at least enter into the record, I hope, that these are some of the highlights I pointed out as part of being a town meeting veteran.

They have the preamble then they have the mission statement and there’s four parts of that mission statement. I like to just focus on statements 3 and 4. Number 3 is to promote direct and inclusive democracy for all the citizens of Plymouth and to encourage the participation of the citizens in the decision making and governance of the town. That is quite an eye opener and I would love to be able to see how they’re going to actually implement that. Number 4 mission statement is to provide long-range planning to assess the statuses of certain purposes above and then to proactively provide for adaptations to continue to meet those goals.

So, they have a somewhat ambitious mission statement and I hope they will be able to provide more information about that. Also found very intriguing is that is a third non-mandatory town meeting shall be scheduled for January of the calendar year following the Spring Annual meeting provided however etc., etc. So, that’s a third town meeting and by the way, that’s Section 2-1-1. Going to Section 2-13-1, this was asked for a number of years ago and they are finally putting it into the charter. There shall be a town meeting warrant article oversight committee to track the status of articles passed by town meeting, because many times articles have passed and people don’t know what would actually happen to it. So, this provide a nice oversight history of it. There will be five members and the committee of precinct chairs will appoint three of their members to this Article Oversight Committee and the others shall come from Mr. Town Manager or Designee, and the Town Clerk or Designee.

Quickly jumping down to the next Section 2-13-4. This Committee will provide three status reports which I find very, very professional and it’s a long time incoming. The three reports will follow. The first report, 60 days following town meeting so two months later, 180 days- 6 months later- the second report, 300 days, 10 months later. So, the people can really see what is happening. So, I really wanted to throw it out to the camera that I think that the Plymouth Charter Commission is doing a very, very good job providing a little bit more teeth to town meeting and the town governance.

[0:05:07]

Kevin Lynch:

2-15-5, at least twice a year, the Committee and the Select Board shall meet in a joint session to review the most recent Committee Report. I take it that’s the reports that we’re referring to and issue, discuss any issues relating to its implementation. So, I don’t know. I would love to be able to hope that a lot of this is being communicated but I have yet to actually hear about it or see it. So, I’m hoping that you will perhaps indulge me in the future, come up with the second part of the Plymouth Charter Commission. So, I thank you and appreciate it. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there anyone else that would like to speak on the public comment? Anyone online? No. Okay. Another order of business is our Energy Committee. Mr. Farah?

Patrick Farah:

All right. Good evening, everybody. Great. I’m wondering if I can share the screen for you.

Betty Cavacco:

Hold on a second. Can we turn–

Dick Quintal:

Yeah, can we turn Patrick down?

Betty Cavacco:

If that’s Betty then can we turn Betty down?

Dick Quintal:

Yeah. Are we good? Try it again, Patrick, please.

Patrick Farah:

All right. Can everyone hear me?

Dick Quintal:

Yes.

Patrick Farah:

Can you see the screen?

Betty Cavacco:

Yes.

Patrick Farah:

Perfect. All right. So, good evening. For the record, my name is Patrick Farah. I am one of the planning staff members as well as the Energy Officer for the town. Tonight, I’d like to talk with you to give you a quick update on our Plymouth’s Choice Power Supply program. As a few of you may know that we are now in our fifth year, our second contract of purchasing a third-party electric supply for residents and small businesses the past town meeting a few years ago and we’ve been very successful.

So, right now, the rate remains at 9.80 cents per kWh for our standard rate and we have a 100% green option at 9.897 cents per kWh, and these rates are good until the end of the contract, which is actually expiring on October 1st of next year.

I’d like to show you, and I know I’ve come before you before this few months ago, but with the new rates, right now, basic service from Eversource is at 17.81 cents so it has gone up from 15.7 cents the first 6 months of this year. As you can see, Plymouth has these two rates right here: the standard rate as well as the 100% green renewable energy program. And if you take a look, either all the competitive rates from other companies that are providing third-party supply to the town of Plymouth and you could see it starts from 18.7 and it just scrolls down and you could see that we have by far the best rates in the state actually.

So, what does that mean? Well, that means that in the first six months of 2022 and with the basic service rate from Eversource of 15.7 and we’re at 9.8, the program saved residents and small businesses within the community just for the first six months of this year over $5 million. With the new rate at 17.8 cents per kWh, the anticipated savings for the third and fourth quarter of the calendar year will be approaching $8 million, over $7.7 million. So, the anticipated total savings just for this year alone will be creeping up to almost $13 million.

[0:10:08]

Patrick Farah:

Since October 2017 through the end of this year, the community will be saving over $23 million. So, this has been very successful program.

Now, some of you in your heads might be saying, “Well, how can I get on this program?” Well, this plays an automatic opt-in. If you are on Eversource Basic service, you are automatically opt-in. And how would you know? Well, take a look at your electric bill and if you go to page 2, where I have circled in red, look under supplier. So, you have two components of total charges for electricity. You see that supplier that’s highlighted in yellow and delivery. Under Supplier, if you see DYNEGY- Plymouth AGG, that means you’re already on the program and you can tell if you look at the generation service charge and go to the right, you’ll see 0.9807. So, that’s 9.807 cents per kWh.

If you are not on this program, if you have a third-party or you just moved to town, you may be still on basic service, you can call this number. This is DYNEGY at 866-220-5696 to opt-in and/or you can opt-out because there may be some people that have other feelings about this. So, here’s the number if anyone needs it. Here it is. I am available for any questions.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there anybody of the Board Members have questions? I have a couple questions, Patrick. Thank you. That’s a great savings to our residents. Now, is this a program that people can call in and be part of immediately? Actually, someone sent me an email that said that they tried to get into the town program but they weren’t allowed until October. So, that’s a little concerning to me because I don’t think that to be published anywhere that there’s a timeframe or–

Patrick Farah:

There is no timeframe. So, what happens sometimes is if somebody has another third-party and I’d say clear to a source or direct energy or something, what they have to do is they have to call that company and cancel their existing contract then they have to go back on to basic service. You can’t go from third-party to the town’s program directly. What you have to do is if you have a third-party, go to basic service and that usually takes one to two meter reads or one to two months and then you would call up that DYNEGY number and then they will put you on.

I’m not sure who they called but if anyone has any questions, they can call me directly at 508-322-3374. That’s my direct line in my desk.

Betty Cavacco:

Go ahead, Charlie.

Charlie Bletzer:

Yeah. Hi, Patrick, great job on that. I got a question for you. Is there a reason why somebody would not want to be on this? Are there better third-party rates out there?

Patrick Farah:

No. Actually, we have the best rates in the state. However, once in a great while, I do get a phone call from someone who wants to opt-out because they don’t want government controlling their electric bills.

Charlie Bletzer:       

So, they don’t want to save money?

Patrick Farah:

They’re happy to pay more money, yes.

Charlie Bletzer:

Okay, good. All right. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Derek, do you think that we could put like a direct link to this on the town website so we can drive our residents to there so they have all the information they need. And if there’s any way that maybe we could link to DYNEGY that it would be an easier process for them.

Derek Brindisi:

Yeah, I think that’s a great idea. We can work with Patrick and his team and Anthony to put together a PSA with the links connecting them to these resources. That’s a fairly simple request.

Betty Cavacco:

Great. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions?

[0:15:05]

Patrick Farah:

Betty, if I may?

Betty Cavacco:

Sure.

Patrick Farah:

I actually spoke with Anthony. The Energy Committee Chair Hollyce States actually drafted a PSA about a week or two ago and Anthony was kind enough to put it on our town’s webpage. It’s actually on the front page when you first open up the website.

Betty Cavacco:

Great. So, maybe we could post that and put it out there. Great. Thank you, Patrick.

Patrick Farah:

You’re very welcome. Thank you everybody.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Next up is DPW facility upgrade. Mr. Beder.

Jonathan Beder:

Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, Jonathan Beder, for the record, Director of Public Works. I’m very pleased to be here this evening to present to you our feasibility study, which is going to go into some detail about a new and renovated DPW building. But before I even get into that, I just kind of want to do some introductions. We have a little bit of a crowd here this evening.

Couple of months ago, back in really October, November, December time period, we went through a request for qualifications. We selected a owner’s project manager who is CHA associates and with us tonight is Joe Sullivan. Subsequent to that, we went through more of a design of services selection criteria where we selected Weston & Sampson and with us this evening is Tony Wespiser from Weston & Sampson. Together, these two guys have a ton of experience when it comes municipal buildings especially when it comes to DPWs. They’ve done a number of DPWs throughout the state in New England. We’ve been through a lot space that needs planning, phasing and you’ll see that in a second. I’m going to do brief introductions and PowerPoint slides and I’m going to turn it over to Tony. We also have Thomas Fugazzi and Dave Malaguti from the Building Committee and Sheila Sgarzi, Assistant DPW Director to answer any questions and kind of really go into some nuts and bolts of this presentation.

But again, we have completely outgrown our facility. Working with the manager’s office and the Select Board, we wanted to get here this evening just to start talking about what we’re looking at in terms of costs and what are our ideas are to phase this project because it comes down to affordability over the next ten years of how we’re going to make this and we’re really going to do that with three phases. So, with that, I’m going to really just jump in to this presentation and we’ll go from there.

So, the agenda this evening is I’m going to talk about public works responsibilities, existing facility conditions and then Tony is going to talk about Work Completed to Date and then I’ll talk about Benefits of a New Facility and then combined all of us here this evening to answer questions.

What are our public works responsibilities here in Plymouth? DPW touches the lives of all your residents everyday and we maintain our infrastructure that everybody relies on. A lot of these presentations tonight, we know we are pressed for time, we’ll just kind of streamline but you can see everything that we do. Plymouth DPW is one of the largest DPWs in the Commonwealth. Given our size, 106 square miles, 37 miles of coast, 365 ponds, 405 miles of road, there’s a lot that we do and we’re based out of this facility. It’s very difficult to be effective when we’re kind of falling over each other. We don’t have the adequate facilities to work on.

Everyday, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and as everybody knows, the frequency and the intensity of storms, I mean, we’re out every time. We’re planning, we’re responding and we are reacting. Reacting is difficult when your facilities aren’t up to speed. That’s a really big driver when it comes to this discussion and a future request for funding. Snow and ice, hurricanes, flooding, emergency road repairs, and just some of your other public safety departments, this is what we do.

These are just some photos of some recent storms. Trees down all throughout town. Taylor Ave constantly getting washed out, Warren Ave, all of these things that we respond to and we plan on responding and it’s happening more and more throughout the year.

Public Works agencies are considered First Responders and it is our job to respond to any and all events that require us to do as such. And then you can see here since the Fall of 2009, Department of Homeland Security, we have been classified as First Responders. So, we are required to be there.

Why does the Town need a new DPW facility? We have outgrown our existing facilities. Our responsibilities are constantly increasing significantly over the years and the facilities have not.

[0:20:02]

Jonathan Beder:

These facilities just don’t seem to meet our service needs and they don’t meet current codes and our efficiency is being questioned, which negatively impacts our operations. These are just some photos in terms of inadequacies. And again, if everybody recalls, we have two buildings. Our building was acquired where our central offices are. We have DPW administration fleet and highway out of what used to be a rider truck facility. Next door to us, we have Parks, Forestry and Water, which used to be an MVO facility. So, this is where we’re located, two buildings at the end of 159 Camelot Drive.

These are some other photos. These are taking from the rider facility, where we just have highway storage. Again, you could see we’re completely run out of room. This is just some mug sign photos of storage, tires, CONEX boxes, equipment. Some interior photos of just some corrosion. Things are starting to deteriorate. If you remember, we did a lot of significant amount of work at the MVO building back in ‘99, 2000 and now, we’re looking back, that was almost 30 years ago and time goes by real quick.

Interior photos at the rider facility. These are interior photos at the MVO facility where Parks, Forestry and Water is located. This is our general layout looking at the site. If you’re heading east, this is the two circles that would be northeast on a map to those oblong circles are the parking areas for DPW. So, all of our vehicles are stored outside and one of the biggest drivers for a new DPW building is corrosion and cold starks in terms of really impacting the longevity of equipment and that’s a lot of the background. We’re not going to get into the detail this evening, but if you look at a lot of the DPWs, all of their equipment is stored inside to really extend and enhance the longevity of your equipment.

Some more photos. Again, everything we own is outside: sanders, trucks, everything, 365 days of the year. These are some other photos. This is where we keep all of our cones and barrels outside. This canopy has been replaced twice. I don’t think we’re going to do it again. It’s just Plymouth is windy.

Just a summary of our deficiencies:

• The existing facilities are undersized to efficiently and safely support today’s operations.
• Our existing buildings do not comply with today’s building code. We have inadequate egress, they’re not ADA accessible and we do not meet energy code.
• Lockers/showers/toilet facilities are all under par and we do not meet the Plumbing Code.
• The building, in general, does not meet all of the current Mechanical Codes.
• And we have a tremendous amount of operational efficiencies due to the space constraints, storage areas, employee facilities, materials storage areas, undersized maintenance areas and adequate file storage and safety concerns for staff.

So, work completed to date, I’m going to turn it over to Tony but I just want to back up for a second, the inadequacy of the building when it comes to sizes, we don’t have office meeting space, we don’t have proper shower facilities. A lot of times DPW employees are out working a storm or an event for long durations, 20, 30, 40 hours, they don’t have the appropriate breakrooms, they don’t have the appropriate restrooms, they don’t have appropriate places to eat. Those are the main drivers behind this. They need to be comfortable if we expect them to work those types of durations. So, with that, I’m going to turn it over to Tony. Thank you.

Tony Wespiser:

Thank you, JB. Can everybody hear me okay? So, as JB introduced me, my name is Tony Wespiser. I’m with Weston and Sampson and we are the architects for the project. And the work that we’ve completed to date is mainly the feasibility study and I’ll do provide an overview of the work that we’ve done.

The first thing that we do in a feasibility study is try to get our hand along how much space the DPW needs in these facilities. So, we conduct a Space Needs Assessment and that includes field visits where we go out and we observe the actual existing facility. We like to come out and see and we do come out and see the operations working and all the equipment and we also come out and do piece by piece inventory of all the equipment. Another thing that we do that we take some deliberate time on is staff interviews. We meet with every department, with staff from every department and we did meet back in March and JB joined us. And we went through with them, what are your responsibilities? What are the things that you’re doing day-by-day operating out of this facility?

[0:25:10]

Tony Wespiser:

What are the deficiencies in the existing facility that impact your operations? What are your daily workflow, patterns? And we also touch on, what would you like to see? What would be the optimum facility that would allow you to work in the most efficient way possible? So, those are all things that we do early in the Space Needs Assessment.

I mentioned that we do this with every department and these are all of the functional departments with the existing DPW. I won’t read through them all there. I will just highlight at the bottom there. Vehicle maintenance is a very important component of these facilities. To maintain that fleet, it’s large and a lot of maintenance is needed. And one thing that we have incorporated into the feasibility study so far is the consolidation of vehicle maintenance including the fire department and the schools.

So, as far as the programming process goes, what we do is we prepare programming sketches for each space and that’s literally each individual space. Up in the upper left, you see what a typical office might be. Upper right is what a locker room layout might be and we layout every single space within the building and addressed coming out of those interviews, making sure that we’ve got spaces for everyone and space for all the equipment. We literally take that vehicle and equipment inventory and place pieces of equipment on that bottom right figure. We’ll place pieces of equipment all on paper, of course, but virtually using 3D modeling and fit that equipment and vehicles within to make sure we’ve got everything covered.

So, then we roll that all up and end up with total square footages for each individual functional area. And again, you can see those up there. I won’t go through each line but we rolled that all up and right now, we’re seeing that facility needs about 123,000 just shy square feet. Now, bear in mind that we do have an existing building that we do intend to reuse. The town is interested in reusing those and we’ll talk a little bit about that more later. So, that existing space is about 29,800 square feet. So, those two buildings are shown in the picture with the red arrows. JB described them in his comments and that would mean that we’re looking at new construction on the order of 93,000 square feet.

So, now, we move in to Concept Development. Now that we have the square footages, we can start to layout each functional area and layout those individual areas together on the site and see how it all works out. So, the first thing we do is look at the site constraints. We look at which existing structures are desired to remain or need to remain. We look at the zoning setbacks very closely and what the lot coverage requirements are and then obviously wetlands we’ll look at and see how that might be constrain where we’re putting buildings or material storage areas and such.

So, for this project, we did multiple site concepts. We did that internally, wheedled those down to 4 or 5, identifying advantages and disadvantage for each. We did meet with the DPW a number of times and we have meet initially with the Building Committee to review some of those initial comments and coming out of those meetings with the DPW as well as the Building Committee. We took those comments and refined them into a final conceptual plan. I call that final, that’s still pending final review by the Building Committee. So, JB will touch on this later. That’s one thing as far as the next step is to meet with different town boards including the Building Committee.

So, moving on here, this is how we lay it out on the site. So, what’s happening up there on the left-hand side of the screen are the individual functional areas of the proposed new facility, two-scale for square footages and we start to lay them out. And the way we laid them out here is we took the office areas, the admin offices, engineering and then employee facilities: locker, showers, toilets, breakrooms and so forth, and those would be in the front of the side in this current concept and this would also include renovation of a portion of the existing building where admin is now.

The next thing we did is to look at renovating the existing vehicle maintenance areas and that’s not enough. What you just saw fly in there was fire and schools, so that might be how it’s going to be renovated portion of the existing building. But then we need new facilities for vehicle maintenance. So, you see flying in here now new vehicle maintenance as a wash van.

[0:30:12]

Tony Wespiser:

One of the nice things that this does is connects the two buildings. It connects the two existing buildings I should say. And then we wrap it up with bringing in shops into the back building and close it out with bringing in the vehicle and equipment storage on the back of the site. And so, that’s kind of the full building but the next slide here shows the overall site as it would be developed. I kind of went through each of the individual functional areas and I’ll touch on this again in a minute. But in the upper left-hand corner is the fuel island, the salt shed up at the top corner and then we have bulk material storage bins in that left-hand corner.

So, I’m going to try to go through the phasing of the project real quick. We did look at this, JB touched on in order to ease the impact of the cost of this project on the town. We’ve broken it up into three different phases. So, Phase 1 of the project, again, you’ve seen this image a couple of times. This is the existing facility and Phase 1, we would plan to build the office and office support. That would be an added building, an addition, no renovation quite yet. We’d make space in the office to move the existing admin into and then build as I indicated a moment ago, the fuel island and salt shed and bulk material storage. That gives us a platform to start doing some of the next phases. So, Phase 2 includes renovations, building out fleet maintenance, partial vehicle and equipment storage as well as the wash bay I mentioned and then lastly renovate the shops and materials storage. The last phase would be just to build out the remaining of the vehicle and equipment storage and the canopy that goes part and parcel with that. So, those are the three phases we have laid out. Again, this is the completed project. You saw this a moment ago.

So, as far as the schedule goes, this slide is a very high-level slide. What we’ve got there, the bars represent the duration of a project including both design and construction. We have green diamond showing funding request presumably at a Spring Town Meeting with the dark blue at fall. You see Phase 1 there, Phase 2 and Phase 3 extending out from Spring of 2023 all the way out to 2030.

And as far as cost go, this slide has a lot of information on it. Again, our three phases and it’s broken down into construction costs, soft costs and then the total costs for each phase and then a roll up for all three of them. I’m not going to go through any of these in any detail but they’re all up there for you to see and as JB mentioned if there are any questions, JB, Joe and myself would be happy to answer those. This is just an example of the project cost summary. I would just highlight on here that we are building design contingency and incorporating escalation as well as during the construction, we would build in an owner’s contingency as well as construction contingency. So, I’m going to turn it back over to Joe.

Joe Sullivan:

No, that’s fine. I just wanted to give you a little insight. I’m from CHA. We’re a full service, OPM service. We have interior costs made within our firm. Each step of the way, and Tony did a great job outlying actually the summary and trying to be most cost-effective for the Town of Plymouth but what we’re going to do in conjunction with the designers, just do a check and balance each step of the way through conceptual design development and construction documents to make sure that we’re allocating the costs are, what the best interest of trying to consolidate and utilize the space for combined use through each of the departments. And then look at the cost associated with what the market is driving. We’re looking at number of different facilities embedding them, and you can imagine through a pandemic and you’ve seen all of the cost escalations from fuel surcharges and materials. We’re looking at that on a daily basis and trying to allocate what the best usage of material and the best allocation of longevity for this building. I understand that this isn’t a building that you build three or four times. This is the building you’re going to build once, we want to make sure that we build it right. Thank you.

Jonathan Beder:

So, thank you, Tony and Joe. So, just to wrap it up, we have a couple more slides. So, what are the benefits of an improved new DPW and what will it do for the DPW and our community?

[0:35:02]

Jonathan Beder:

So, the three phases of construction will make the project affordable to the town. State-of-the-art facility will be welcoming to both employees and to the public. It be Code/OSHA compliant and a safe work environment for all of our employees. It will protect the towns multi-million-dollar investment in our vehicles and equipment, and far more efficient workspace and response times to better serve the public.

What are our next steps? So, here we listed some of our next steps but I just want to kind of highlight the overall presentation this evening in terms of really looking down the road here. You saw the three phases and the overall schedule and costs. $100 million for the three phases, which includes significant contingency phase, 2030 would be the end of construction but we are trying to wrap up growth, service needs, employee needs, OSHA requirements to have really a state-of-the-art facility. Now, what we want to see is an unbelievable public works for our employees and something that really allows us to provide the service we need to. This process which we’ve been discussing this evening in terms of working with the Building Committee, putting out the request for qualifications for OPM services, designer selection going through your Designer Selection Committee to even get to the Building Committee. All of that is dictated to us through Mass Procurement 149M. That’s a really methodical process and we’ve been kind of following that since last fall. So, we’ve been at this for quite a while now or probably a year. It will a year this August, September. So, we’ve been working pretty hard on this to get to just this point. And there’s a ton of work left. But what our next steps are is to present this project to any and all town boards and committees if we’re going to put this on the Spring one, which would be CIC, Advisory and Finance, Select Board. We would really need that last phase approved by the Building Committee and we do outreach, whatever outreach is necessary to provide an understanding of the basic knowledge of what we’re doing.

I know we provided information to the Select Board the cost estimates. There’s a lot more detail in that packet that was being shown this evening and we can put all that online for everybody to see. But this is just the design construction of Phase 1 and then will be the planning for Phases 2 and 3. So, thank you very much. And again, we’re all here this evening to answer any questions.

Charlie Bletzer:

Tony, the reason for this facility, JB can maybe answer too, is it the longevity of the building? Is the age of the buildings? Is it that we’ve outgrown it? Is it lack or maintenance on the buildings? I know where we place them all our fire stations and we know that there was a serious lack of maintenance on those buildings and we’re working to correct that problem so that it doesn’t happen again. But the DPW, the services they provide to a 106-square-mile town, I mean, it’s enormous. And I realize we need good facilities. So, a couple of things, I just hope if this building is okay through all the boards and committees that it’s a building that is going to last and it’s going to be taken care of. And also, it’s going to be tough with the money we’re spending in fire stations to get this $100 million project. It’s going to be a tough test to get probably through town meeting but it’s going to be over 10 years you’re thinking and so anyways, that was a few questions I just threw in there.

Tony Wespiser:

Yeah, and I’ll do my best to both remember them and answer them and JB, please feel free to chime in. I wouldn’t say there’s a lack of repair. I think the DPW is doing a great job with what they can, but part of the problem is they’ve just outgrown the facility. The town has grown a lot. Another issue is that these buildings were not purpose built for the DPW as JB talked about. For instance, one of them was a rider facility not a DPW operation so it doesn’t have the employee support facilities and those sorts of things. So, JB, I don’t know if you have anything to add to that but you heard the comments.

Jonathan Beder:

Yeah. Charlie, I could speak for probably 7 hours in terms of response but just in terms of generic detail, in terms of why we need to do new DPW facilities, we’ve completely outgrown it in terms of space. If anybody walks to the DPW, you can see that every office is full. We don’t have enough bathrooms; we don’t have wash facilities. I think we touched on that. We don’t have showers. I mean, we do but they’re just completely outdated and not used.

[0:40:07]

Jonathan Beder:

Women’s room, we have two for the whole facility and they share them in our office and then we have a couple over next door. But they are always an issue. Again, no ADA, no elevator, a sign trap is in the second floor and there’s no access. We have to constantly bring equipment down so that’s not safe. Salt shed is undersized. It’s designed wrong with the doors in the front as opposed to the side. So, we have a circulation pattern. All of our plows are outside so we’re working our plows on the elements. Once I mentioned cold starts, that’s a problem. We are on the coast so all of your equipment is corroding and rusting that much faster.

In terms of OSHA, our HVAC systems, our lighting, our storage, as the years go by, we have more and issues with those types of things. But for me, a lot of it is we’re separated in terms of our administration where we don’t work together. I have Parks and Forestry and water in another building. I have my offices under my roof where we are. Our snow and ice room is no longer because of COVID. We switched. We kind of had to move people around, which is a huge issue. The Highway Manager does snow and ice out of his office out of probably a 10X10 area managing, upgrading over 200 pieces of equipment. Our SCADA office is in the second floor. SCADA is the supervisory control system for water, and that’s run out of the water office, which is small, outdated, not lighted, tough working space and that is again, we put out three and half million gallons of water a day, ten wells. So, I mean, it’s a very detailed, sophisticated system undersized, underutilized office space. So, those are number of things combined, Charlie that why we’re here.

I understand we talked about this at COPC last week and I know Derek and Brad are working with Lynne in terms of how do we finance that and speaking with Joe and Tony, Weston and Sampson and the Building Committee, these guys have all done a number of DPWs in Massachusetts. So, a number of big DPWs and when you look at 122,000 square feet, we’re one of the bigger ones and we are. We have almost 130 employees and we have more equipment than most.

During the winter time, all of our equipment is inside: our sweepers, our trommel. We try to keep everything inside to try to keep them dry so they don’t freeze and to cause mechanical problems. So, that’s the issue. But in terms of the financing, that’s why we’re looking into three phases. And speaking with Lynne and Derek, we understand it’s about affordability without doing an over rider of debt explosion and that’s what we’re looking at. So, we can really approach the needs of fire and DPW kind of simultaneously.

Charlie Bletzer:

I like the fact that we have the land, the building so that’s a big plus because we all know how hard that is to find the land to build on, to fund it with our fire stations.

Jonathan Beder:

In Camelot Drive, we have a fantastic site. I mean, zoning, lack of abutters. We’re going to be putting sewer on Camelot Drive so we’ll be able to build the wash bay. We have town water. We have enough room to do what we need to do, which is a huge cost savings plus we’re working with CHA and Weston & Sampson and we realized the benefit to rehab, remodel us, to reconstruct. So, we’re really trying to save as many dollars as we can and make them go further.

Charlie Bletzer:

Thank you.

Jonathan Beder:

You’re welcome.

Dick Quintal:

Thank you, Mrs. Chairman. I like the idea. I don’t like the hundred million and I don’t want to say it like this but it’s going to be show me the money, because there’s going to be a hard first sell, I believe at town meeting. Even though it’s phased, I like that idea. How many vacant acres do we have with the waste water treatment facility that aren’t be in use or aren’t required for that site? I’m just–

Jonathan Beder:

I want to say it’s 33 or 40 acres. We have a substantial amount of acreage.

Dick Quintal:

Okay. Do you ever think you’re going to actually need all that land over there for waste water facility?

Jonathan Beder:

I do. I don’t have the crystal ball in terms of what’s going to happen. I know working with our new vulnerability plan that we’ve already reached out to Organics Company to start collecting organics with our waste water treatment plant to mix with compost and take that on a commercial residential basis. As you know, we’re trying to work with the state to modify our sewer discharge permit and stop using the outfall and use the beds, and who knows what will happen out there? Because we do all of our staging out there, we do all of our materials out there, we do our yard debris, our yard collection. So, that site is very valuable. Fire just put their tower up there. Our new water main for Forges Well runs through there, but we do have land issues. I don’t know how much of it we will need but we do use it consistently often and it is such a great utility.

[0:45:18]

Dick Quintal:

I just was thinking without the cuff, without even going over that, maybe just sell a few acres and take that money and use it to finance your new building so it ain’t on the burden of the taxpayer but the other department needs it so that’s why I asked you the question that I asked you.

Jonathan Beder:

We can look at it.

Dick Quintal:

Not that I don’t think you need it but I do know in the pipeline where we’re repairing the rest of whatever fire station or fire houses we have now, we know on the radar’s sooner or later, very soon, the police station is either going to be expanded or moved. We know Station 1 is a little controversial but I’m going to guess and say that’s going. So, we’re going to be looking to replace that. And then the final fact that looking at the planning of the future is, have we reached out to school department? Do we need an elementary school? How many ambulances we have? If we are, I’d like to base my decision, I’m sure everybody would in town, the town manager, the finance director, let’s get the wish list in front of us and then some kind of audit. I’m not saying one is more important. Well, it was somehow. I mean, we need schools. But this is the only way to make an accurate decision rather than vote something and give my support on something tonight and find out next week that this happened and we need another school. I’ve been hearing two more elementary schools for a while now and that maybe has changed and I haven’t officially heard that. I don’t know. Brad, can you–not to butcher on the spot, but are we in for another elementary school soon or if we’re not, that’s fine too.

Brad Brothers:

Yeah, we met with the superintendent of schools, the facilities director of the schools and the new school, Ms. Manger was there, myself and Lynne two weeks ago now and they said they were going to start preliminary discussions of looking in building a feasibility study to look at specifically the north part of town for elementary school but that will lead into a more conversation about other parts of town and what may be needed. So, it’s definitely on the horizon.

Dick Quintal:

I guess what I’m trying to say long story short is I like to see what the wish list is or what the town actually needs, what the costs are and how we move forward with that. And I think we should do that as a community. But I mean, I like the presentation. I definitely like the idea. I know that the DPW has come a long way, still has a way to go. I know that the guys and the girls that are working there, the women there, I know they didn’t even have a coffee pot but they do now.

Betty Cavacco:

Because you bought it for them.

Dick Quintal:

And that’s okay. It’s just little stuff like that when they are all work in these storms and these big shifts that we should feeding them, we should be giving them coffee and they should have a proper place to shower. So, even if we didn’t have the money to do all this now, I’m all in for it. If we need showers remodeled then I’m sure just to get by until hey, we do have the money but a hundred million dollars, I don’t know. That’s a cost for one of the high schools actually, North High School and South High School I think was 100 million a piece, if I remember it. So, I’m not here to reign in your parade. I like the whole concept. I just would like to find out what the priorities of the town are as a whole meaning the Finance Director needs to be here, the Superintendent and Brad and Derek and get everybody together and find out what we will need to go and what direction. So, I mean, there’s only so much money. I mean, if you’re asking me, am I going to support this for an override? I’m going to tell you right now, no and there’s probably going to be about four more right after that one. I just not going to put it all in the taxpayers. There’s too many unknowns right now. So, that’s my piece of that.

Betty Cavacco:

Any other board members have comments? John?

John Mahoney:

Mr. Beder, I apologize for being late. Trust me this for me was going to be one of the highlights of the evening. So, having said that, Mr. Quintal referenced a couple high schools and I was there at the presentation of the approach. I think it was AI3 with respect to South High School and we were given two options. It was a 115 million to demo and build new over two years or I think it was a 110 million to modernize but disrupt for four years and we went with the complete demo, new construction even though it was a $4 million to $5 million more expensive.

[0:50:10]

John Mahoney:

I think what we did was absolutely the right thing to do. So, I missed the presentation but I look at Phase 2 and you say renovation. So, I guess, my questions are under this presentation, how much of this is modernization or renovation as opposed to new construction? I know you’re trying to keep the initial number down but over the long-term, are you truly saving anything as opposed to over engineering it and building it all new to begin with?

Jonathan Beder:

That makes sense. That makes a ton of sense. I mean, it’s a great point and we did go through that, John. And in your packet, you have a lot of that detailed. We had similar conversations internally as you did with the high school, the AI3 in terms of how do you get the biggest bang to your buck? How do you sequence construction to save money? How do we continue to work out of the DPW 24/7, 365 during construction? All with time and financial constraints in mind, so if you look at the slide here, going through that process, we realized we could get office trailers, we could find temporary space but we thought it’d be best to keep the existing office space, work out of those, build new is Phase 1, build a new salt shed and fuel pumps is Phase 1, but altogether, those three phases, we’d reuse almost 30,000 square feet, which is significantly cheaper than new construction. And Joe can kind of go into those costs for a second, but Phase 1, we’re looking at 20 million. And the reason why Phase 1 is broken up the way it is, is it’s paramount that we rehab our salt shed. We do not keep enough salt for one winter in that salt shed. That’s been an eye sore, a problem of mine since I got here.

We got money from town meeting years ago. It was never enough. We had some issues with that so we released that money but salt shed is important. Fuel pumps, relocating that to that back corner by MBO would be phenomenal in terms of freeing up circulation for us. If anybody drives through REI, you’ll see that. So, that was a big piece.

And then the office space, we thought new construction would be a cost-savings measure for us. But if you look at that detail and I’ll put this out there, that’s all spelled out in terms of our space needs assessment and feasibility and looking at construction dollars. Tony and Joe, I don’t know if I summed that up nicely.

Tony Wespiser:

Absolutely! To your point, you’re hundred percent correct. Every district throughout the Commonwealth struggles financially with all of the implications that happened with any public construction projects. I’ve been involved with schools, DPWs, public safeties and each of them are very equally important. Some would prioritize others higher than others, but there are strategic methods of coming up as a gameplan as to what your overall exposure is going to be. There are some federal programs out there that we’re actually tracking right now to see if there are some federal funds out there that would help First Responding buildings and we’ll work closely with the Town of Plymouth and the Town Manager to identify those. But I can tell you strategically on this, kicking down the can down the road doesn’t help you at all. So, coming up with a game plan and actually putting a strong thought process of how you’re going to manage it is the best approach, and I agree with you a hundred percent.

As far as existing building reuse, your comment was, was it worth doing? That particular part of that building, absolutely! I think we can renovate 29,800 square feet and really bring it up to the code requirements not only energy efficient but mechanical. Everyone says a cup of coffee and a good place to shower and bathe is a good thing, that’s not all they need. They need life safety issues evolve around that. I did a study recently on two towns in the State of Massachusetts where they had outdoor storage on their mechanical equipment, they did an evaluation of the cost implications and what it was to replace that equipment because it was stored outside and they’ve come to realize that it wasn’t hundreds of thousands, it was millions of dollars that they ended up changing that equipment. So, the essentialness of getting it into us as JB indicated is probably paramount to make sure that your longevity and the cost-efficiency with this building and the equipment is held tight.

Jonathan Beder:

Just to add to that, everybody. I think this is such an important piece because remember, we went through a whole space needs planning piece and as I said, all of our equipment is outside. So, when you look at that 122,800 square feet, that’s what we need for all of our office space, that’s what we need to put our equipment, our frontline pieces under roof. That’s also with us taking over schools’ fleet maintenance and fire’s fleet maintenance and all of our existing building space should be renovated.

[0:55:03]

Jonathan Beder:

So, all of your current DPW facility space at the rider truck facility and MBO building would be fully renovated. The new construction at 93,000 square feet is what we need to properly run. So, that’s all new but we would be fully renovating, rehabbing what we have existing as part of this plan.

Joe Sullivan:

And I would just add that the renovation we’re doing is mostly renovating a use of one kind for a similar use. We’re not renovating existing vehicle maintenance for some other brand new use that it’s not necessarily a good fit. It’s mostly for future vehicle maintenance, upgrades and modernization. Likewise, the building outback would be kind of a shop type environment and that’s how it would be renovated is for that same use in the future as well.

John Mahoney:

Thank you. So, just building on what Mr. Quintal had mentioned earlier and I forgot your name in the middle.

Joe Sullivan:

Joe Sullivan.

John Mahoney:

Joe. So, you talked about–I mean, that’s what government does, they kick cans down the road but we’re not kicking a can down the road, we have about 10 to 15 cans to deal with and there’s a bottleneck coming. Actually, it’s here. The bottleneck is here, it’s just going to get bigger. So, you have 8 elementary schools where the youngest two were built in ’77 and you built 4 in the 70s and I’m not an expert but I’m guessing that structurally the 4 built in the 70s are inferior to the 4 that were built in the 50s and 1910 and 1913. I’ll go out in the limb and say that, but the school department has done a better job than the town over the years of maintaining their product. But overall, government can’t think longer than a year at a time and it’s kind of like it’s competition to who gets the town meeting or the Board of Selectmen first or the Select Board, forgive me. So, there should be some sort of working group, Mr. Brindisi, Ms. Cavacco, comprised of school officials, town officials and it’s not difficult to figure out that in the next 15 to 35 years, the town needs billions between schools, fire stations, DPW. They deserve a top rate, first rate. So, we got to think long-term and we got to think outside of the general fund. You can’t just go to them, put it on the ballot and say, “Do you want to raise property taxes X amount of dollars?” I mean, there’s ways of doing that. Not all of it, but some of it outside of the general fund. So, that’s my two cents.

Dick Quintal:

I know you touched on this shed and the need for that and isn’t the Commonwealth and communities now going to calcium? I think it’s called liquid calcium or they treat the roads before and after. So, if that’s the case then why is the big push for a new salt shed? I don’t understand that.

Jonathan Beder:

Yeah. A lot of municipalities go into salt brine, which we have been experimenting with but in terms of Plymouth operations salt brine on 400 miles of road is a little bit different. Our gravel roads, we still do a combination of sand and salt depending on the use. So, I mean, we’re always going to need salt. But yeah, salt brine, we do pre-treat, we are doing all of that even more reason why we need the DPW, because a lot of that equipment needs to be inside because we use gray barrels for that and we’re not equipped like that yet.

Dick Quintal:

I must just add because my equipment are also outside because I can’t afford to put them all inside but I’d love to. But the point I’m bringing up is I think the calcium is doing more damage to the vehicles now than the elements outside. I mean, I see those things are rusting in like three years, it’s like crazy. So, whatever the new system is, it’s definitely tearing up everybody’s vehicles at a faster pace than salt. So, I get that. So, I think a sub-alternative until the vehicles are inside just like we do is we’re washing the end of carriages constantly especially in the winter when you can. But I mean, other than, it’s rust city.

Jonathan Beder:

I mean, we don’t have a wash bay. So, we’re hosing ourself off with firehose.

Dick Quintal:

But even if you just brought them and you didn’t wash them, I think you’re going to have the same effect than if you just left them outside pretty much because the calcium and everything is stuck on the trucks.

Jonathan Beder:

Dickie, when you don’t wash them, they go that much quicker. I mean, the rust is pretty bad because we use the Mag Chloride and that’s what’s doing it.

[1:00:06]

Dick Quintal:

Is it?

Jonathan Beder:

Yeah.

Dick Quintal:

I’ve noticed it, that’s why I asked.

Jonathan Beder:

But in this proposal, there’s a new wash bay, which would be incredible for the DPW.

Dick Quintal:

I’m not saying I don’t like the idea, just I want to know how to pay for it. The only reason I asked you about if there was any extra land, I didn’t mean half of it, just two or three acres industrial land if we were to sell it to somebody then you could take that money and put it towards your building then it’s not a burden on the taxpayer. You get what you need. We scratch if off the list and we go on to the elementary school or the fire station or the police station. But it still all has to be–for me, I think I agree with John and that’s where I was going with this in the first place is to have a roundtable and the town be boarded and see what we’re going to need going forward and we can plan. Nobody is under the pressure because that’s not going to work with me who gets their first. Maybe in the old days will, but it’s priority. You know what I mean? And that’s what it is, so. We know the Finance Director this building is paid off or this is taken care of, like the mortgage was safer, common folk talk and then we could pull out and you know what, then we can refinance over here, borrow some here but without all that information, I can’t give you those answers of support yet.

Tony Wespiser:

I just wanted to clarify; it wasn’t that I was insinuating that you’re kicking anything down the road. My plan was just to strategically come up with a plan in how you’re going to that all. I just want to be clear with that. That’s all. Thank you.

Dick Quintal:

John always says that for years.   

Betty Cavacco:

In the past 12 years. 12 years, right, John?

Dick Quintal:

I’m sure I’ll get a few too, John.

Betty Cavacco:

So, if the Board Members have nothing more to say, I’ve got a little bit more to say. Don’t be looking at your clock now. Well, I know, Mr. Quintal said he didn’t want to reign on the parade and I think I’m going to hurricane all over the parade. So, first of all, I’m actually perplexed that an almost $100 million project has already been vetted by the Building Committee and COPC and we knew nothing about it. So, that’s bothersome to me.

Secondly, this would be the second largest except for the schools. I mean, do we have any long and short-term plans? Do we have those goals with the department? Where are goals are where you think department is going to be in 5 or 10 years? Because one of the things that I want to do is that I know that the fire department is wrapping up their feasibility project and they’re going to have goals. I believe that the police department is embarking on the same thing. I think the Town Manager should work with the DPW director and the consultant and do that same kind of study because there is no way that I’m going to support a $90 million investment until we know what the outlines of the department are and what are projected long-term goals are and short-term goals. But I have to say that out of all of these pretty pictures and everything, I am extremely bothered that we’re like the last to know about it. So, I’m just going to put that out there. But I’m hoping that the Board agrees that we instruct the Town Manager to do that analysis and then we have better information. We know what our goals are and along what John and Dickie said, we can come up with some kind of a plan. Like I said, sorry to hurricane on your parade but I have 90 million reasons to say no today and until I have all that information, I won’t change my position. So, does anybody think that Mr. Brindisi shouldn’t do that exercise?

Derek Brindisi:

I mean, if I could respond, I’m happy to work with DPW Director and go through that analysis. I think you referenced the Fire Department is going through their comprehensive operational study right now. I know Chief Flynn has suggested doing the same.

[1:05:02]

Derek Brindisi:

And their thought process is looking at the current staffing levels, looking at the equipment needs and forecasting out where the department needs to be in the next 10 years. I think that’s what you’re suggesting so I’m happy to work with JB on that.

Betty Cavacco:

Exactly. And if we have to have some kind of consulting services assist in that then please do that because I think it’s difficult for us to sit here and say, “We know we need two schools or at least one.” But in the meantime, when we don’t have these shower facilities and we don’t have a proper breakroom which we haven’t had for quite a while, go rent a trailer. We have trailers that you can have a good decent shower facility for these guys. If the concern truly is to have our employees have the proper shower and breakrooms for all these storms and whatever work that they do then put something in place now instead of saying, “You’re not going to be able to have it for another 10 years,” because if it’s important right now, it’s important right now. So, that’s my two cents.

Charlie Bletzer:

The last thing I want to say is that we’re good at kicking the can down the road. I mean, we kicked the schools down the road until the state stepped in and said, “You need to build the school. We’re going to force you to. We’ll build it and you’re going to have pay for it.” Luckily, they come with the model schools, which we reciprocated I think 68% and it’s too bad they didn’t do that for DPWs and fire stations and everything else. But I would like to keep working on this project but see if we look some kind of grants, federal grants, anything. Maybe we can get the first phase added. I mean, I don’t want to give up on this. Look what happened to fire stations, it costs us a lot more money from when we knew we needed it and it costs us millions more. So, the longer we put this off, the more it’s going to cost us. And we know we need it. We know we need it. So, I just hope we can get some grants to help us but don’t give up on this.

Betty Cavacco:

I believe the first step is to do this analysis that we just asked Derek to do and then we have all the information that we need.

Jonathan Beder:

Can I have a quick comment because there’s been a lot of dialogue? I’ve been here since 2011 and I’ve been here in kicking the can down the road a long time and that’s really the driver why we’re here to talk about this. Betty, Charlie, you all have raised awesome points, all right? We have done this space needs planning and the feasibility. I’ll send that out. In terms of future projections, in terms of employees, what we need to do to service this community based on other DPWs, Weston & Sampson has a tremendous amount of data. I will send you that information. We have the structure and the foundation but typically the way that we work is and working with the Building Committee is once we get money from town meeting, we follow a process. We don’t come to the Board until we’re seeking those funds and we were going to do that if we were going to go to fall town meeting, we were having discussions about coming to present to you guys. We have not presented the COPC anything, CPC anything. We presented to COPC just the building piece of it. We didn’t get into detail about DPW. We went once to the Building Committee because we went through Designer Selection, which is a requirement of 149. We’re just following a process but we will continue to work with the Board and put any and all information out there because DPWs throughout the US are always last.

Schools, police, fire, we get it. They’re always a priority and what I’m here telling you this evening is if you wait until 2030 and there afterwards, we’re going to have problems because we are already not compliant with OSHA. We did a significant amount of upgrades at MBO in 2019, 2020. Now, our main building is starting to see those problems. We are doing doors, generators and lighting to keep up with it but at the end of the day, given the size of your DPW, the size of the town, the town is still growing, you see the development out there. We still have to plow the roads, the storms, we are short that much square footage and we have the back up to support that. So, we’re happy to work with the vantage office, finance director to get you that information and then get the public to understand that. But your DPW currently and we know it’s going to grow unless we stop working altogether, we need that.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, don’t we have the same amount of employees that we had like back in the 70s or something?

Jonathan Beder:

We’ve been growing. If you remember, we’ve been adding, re-added 5 positions in the cemeteries last year. New Facilities Department is growing.

[1:10:03]

Jonathan Beder:

We are finally really full staff in a lot of those DPW divisions. We would like to move engineering under our roof to free up space on the 4th floor. Our mechanics do a phenomenal–actually, all of our employees do a phenomenal job but if you can consolidate some of the schools and fire, you’re saving space and money on that side. So, that’s the creative thinking and that somehow you are suggesting that we’re already doing internally.

Betty Cavacco:

I don’t know what analysis that you guys have and I’m sure Derek will take a look at it, but I want the same thing that police and fire are doing. Despite what you guys are doing, I want that same level of detail because I think that’s where the projections are of what we need and what we have to do and that’s what I’m looking for. And in the meantime, if you need showers, go find a shower trailer and rent it. If you need breakroom space, again, go find a trailer to rent it because you’ve needed it for a long time. So, let’s get something in there for the guys that they have a place to go to eat a meal like Dick said, fed, whatever, take a rest. I mean, we all know that we haven’t been up to OSHA’s standards for as long as I’ve been here so 5 years. You know what I mean? So, kicking the can down the road, we can stop the can from rolling so fast if we put some of these other things in place instead of spending $30 million.

Derek Brindisi:

Again, I’m happy to work with JB on this. It sounds like they have a foundation. What I’m hearing is what about our projected staffing given population growth, the number of road miles and the situation that has grown, the equipment we need to support the operations that were identified I think on Slide 1, but then the deployment plan is really with fire and police is going is how we’re going to deploy those resources? What’s the most efficient way to deploy those resources given the growing community. So, again, I mean, I’m happy to work with JB. I’m happy to identify maybe a consultant that could help us identify that. I can tell you though just in the last week or so, JB, I haven’t talked to you about this because we both have been aware last couple of weeks but folks have brought out to me like going back to the old district plan. Is that something we should reconsider? I know it may cost more money because you’re just trying to centralize operations but is that something that we can consider? I think those are all the questions I imagine you want answered whether or not any of those ideas are actually worthwhile in pursuit. So, again, happy to work on that. But I can tell you right now, $100 million acquisition to fire stations that we’ve already talked about that need to be replaced, schools and I say that plural because we know North Plymouth is one. We’ve talked to the School Department about potential of this.

I think Selectman Mahoney hit the nail on the head. We’re talking over probably billion dollars of work. JB presented at COPC just in the next 3 years, just preventative maintenance alone in that building is $20 million. This is just preventative maintenance. So, we really have to be mindful where we want to be as far as our finances and I would say the next 3 to 5 years, we really have to tighten our belt and think about where our priorities are going to be. And so, I’m not saying this isn’t a priority but there’s just so many ahead of us and we have to really be strategic on where we’re going to spend our money.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, our budget moving forward and we’ve all talked about it and we’ve all heard from our residents, we need to be razor thin because they’re suffering and everybody is suffering. So, I mean, like I said, I need more information and that’s what you’re saying is what I want to say.

Derek Brindisi:

True.

Betty Cavacco:

Harry?

Harry Helm:

Derek, outside of these assessments, it was mentioned a group we put together. Are you going to put together a group? Because I have to tell you, sitting here as a taxpayer, I’m freaking out. I’m freaking out. We have to remember the taxpayers pay for this. This is not in a vacuum. Okay? I’m just learning new schools. Not surprised, because they’re ancient. And John is probably right, the older ones are probably in better shape than the newer ones.

[1:15:03]

Harry Helm:

But I can imagine the residents at home right now watching this and a hundred million here, new Fire Station 1, new born fire station, $11 million per fire station to upgrade them except for the new North one, which already cost us X amount of millions of dollars, on and on and on. And John’s assessment of upwards of a billion dollars when you put in the maintenance, which we have not really truly addressed beyond going maintenance. We throw a few million dollars into the fund every town meeting but we never really have addressed a funding source for that. And I think that a group needs to get together because it just kind of feels like and I understand why it is, because we are expanding. We have been kicking the cans down the road on many fronts. But it’s getting really intense to have all of these requests for millions and millions of dollars almost monthly from another source and on that level, we need to have our act together in terms of making a plan for what is possible and what isn’t possible.

Derek Brindisi:

I totally agree. Again, we’ve already met with the Finance Director just to look at the numbers. We talked about a comprehensive capital improvement plan that’s going to project out the next 10 years and which will include these buildings as well. So, you’ll see black and white exactly what our projected cost is going to be and what our projected revenue is going to be. And I can tell you right now, given everything we just described tonight, there is no municipality in Massachusetts that has the bandwidth or the financial resources to fund that amount of money. There’s none of us. In that sense, I mean, glass being half-full, we just have to be smart about where we layer these projects and I don’t think it so the next 10 years, maybe the next 15 years that we have to lay these projects out.

So, again, you will get that information. Brad has worked with the Finance Director, the Finance Director has already asked the departments to submit to her their 10-year capital improvement plans by September 1st. So, that’s an active conversation that’s happening right now. So, we will have more information for the Board and for the community at large soon as we start pulling those pieces together.

Betty Cavacco:

Did anyone buy any lottery tickets tonight? We could build a school. If anyone wants to pitch in.

Brad Brothers:

I just want to add one thing real quick too that it’s not definitive that there is going to be a new school needed. I don’t want people leaving here saying that that is a 100% going to happen. They’re looking at a feasibility study to determine whether or not there’s a land in a certain area to consolidate two elementary schools, three elementary schools into one. So, that’s a discussion and that’s the money they were talking about putting aside to have that feasibility study done. What I know from my prior experience and just general looking at schools and money spent to build, like John you mentioned before, it comes down to if you invest money into an older building, you actually end up saving money in the long run by building a new, which is a common practice. So, all of that will be weighed out, but I can tell you with MSP reimbursement on some things you wouldn’t get with renovating an older building as well, it makes total sense. We’re going to be at 50% probably at least back on every dollar we spend with an MSPA approved project. So, all stuff that will play itself out but I just don’t want everyone leaving here tonight saying we’re definitively building a new school because that’s not where we are right now, but that will play out down the road of where they want to go.

Betty Cavacco:

JB, you said that you want to move people around and consolidate but what about Cedarville? Isn’t that building empty? There’s like no one down there, is there? That’s a pretty good size building.

Jonathan Beder:

That’s correct. I mean, we just use that as a salt shed right now and storage for our carpenters and we work out there for a shop.

Betty Cavacco:

If you’re looking for a room, maybe there’s a whole other department you can move down there. So, just saying. It’s sad to see an empty building just empty or we could sell it.

Dick Quintal:

Exactly. That’s what I’m about, selling the ones that aren’t full and putting it towards our goals. That’s where I’ve been leaning with this so it’s not on the taxpayer. I mean, have management look at all this. We’re looking at some properties now that we want to put on the market and who know where but think a little out of the box.

[1:20:10]

Dick Quintal:

If it alleviates that problem then we’re back to police and fire and possibility of a school and who knows the unknowns, every year something pops up, something fails somewhere, so.

Betty Cavacco:

John?

John Mahoney:

JB, I’m sorry, what was the price per square foot? New construction, what was used for square foot? Is it 9 or 600?

Jonathan Beder:

I’m going to defer on that. He’s more up to speed with it.

John Mahoney:

I’m just curious.

Tony Wespiser:

So, 700. Joe, 650?

Joe Sullivan:

Yeah, 650 for renovation. 700 for new.

John Mahoney:

Okay. Thank you.

Charlie Bletzer:

Dick, no disrespect but selling the land, I don’t think–I mean, selling the building is not an option. Eventually, we’re going to need land to build a new facility. So, I don’t think that’s an option for this.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, the buildings that we aren’t using.

Charlie Bletzer:

No. What I’m saying though but not this particular–

Betty Cavacco:

We’re not saying we’re selling all just other buildings. Yeah, like Cedarville is basically empty. We could see that piece of property, put it in our real estate account and use that money to offset some of the needs for the $50 million other projects that we have. So, it’s just up to us to prioritize that. But like I said, I honestly expect to see Mr. Beder, a shower trailer and a breakroom trailer for the guys this year during all these storms.

Jonathan Beder:

We have a nice bathroom trailer coming, Betty. We got it right next to office.

Betty Cavacco:          

You can park it right there, if it ever gets there because it’s supposed to be there by now.

Jonathan Beder:

Yeah. My understanding the new delivery date is at least the finish date or completion date is July 29. So, I don’t know when delivery will be after that. Just to wrap it up, I know you guys have other business to do. I want to thank the Board. We’ve gone through a process, which is a process. It’s my job to tell you our overall cost. We can get creative and manipulate things to make it work because that’s what we do and we do understand the drivers and that was our goal tonight is so you understood the drivers of what we want and where we want to be, where we want to go. We should figure out how we’re going to get there and we don’t want it to be a burden on the taxpayer. That’s why when I first came up here, I mentioned debt inclusion override. That’s not where we want to go. I think we have to do some collaboration and figure things out but we’ve been a lot of the DPW over the years to help them out: coffeemakers, food, their breakrooms but it’s still inadequate and aware of that but we’ll keep that going. But then again, that’s why the 2020 town meeting gave us some funding to look at this and to follow a process and that’s what this is. So, we do have a plan now. So, hopefully that came an engagement outside federal dollars or state dollars. We don’t know. But at least we’re at this point to know that that could justify that. So, thank you very much.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. Folks, we’re going to take a five-minute break before we start the Committee Appointments.

[5-Minute Break]

Betty Cavacco:

Okay, we’re back. Thank you for the five-minute break, maybe a little longer. So, we’re going to go with our Save Our Bay Coalition presentation. I know we’re way beyond our time limits so if you could–

Henrietta Cosentino:

Well, we will try to make it brief. Thank you, Madam Chairman and members of the Select Board. We’re very grateful to be here tonight and we don’t want to take a lot of your time but the good news is we’re not asking for money. And the bad news is we are bringing news of impending economic catastrophe, which we are making common cause that we’re not going to let this happen. We are the Save Our Bay. My name is Henrietta Cosentino. I’m on the Save Our Bay Steering Committee and we are a coalition of numerous conservation organizations, industry people, real estate people, people from all walks of like who are horrified at the prospect that Holtec is considering and is intent on dumping radioactive waste water into our bay. I’ve brought two colleagues. I’d like them to introduce themselves.

Leslie Danielson:

Hello, everybody. Thank you so much for having us this evening. My name is Leslie Danielson, and I’m an advisory committee member for Save Our Bay. Like I said, we’re here to just kind of give you an update on what we’re experiencing and where we are.

[1:25:15]

Christine Danielson:

Hello, hi. I’m Christine Danielson. I’m also a member of the advisory committee for Save Our Bay. A little bit about me, I also do climate lobby work and I’m also a part of the Plymouth Water Conservation Committee. So, very near and dear, so.

Henrietta Cosentino:

I wanted to start by saying Betty, thank you so much for making a very powerful statement last night at the NDCAP Meeting. As you probably all know, the Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel meets every two months right here. So, this is our home away from home for the week. And Betty made a very strong statement. I appreciated it. We all appreciated it. Not just for the substance of what you said about Plymouth’s feeling about this horrible idea, but also, you’re pointing out that so much of it has been without your knowledge. I mean, so many developments. We, too, are experiencing that phenomenon. Things are happening on Beacon Hill and we don’t hear about them. Things are happening from Holtec and we feel like we’re all the last to know.

Could we go back to that first slide? That is great. You recognize the Lucas, the site, Historic Plymouth and that is our poster. Not one drop is a meme. You might say that Betty used in her speech back in April and we really mean it. Not one drop more of Holtec contaminated water should go into the bay. League of Women Voters, the Earth Club, Lobstermen’s Association, Mass Seafood Collaborative, Realtors of Southeast in Massachusetts, although I don’t remember the exact name, all of us are in this organization adhoc and very short-lived because this is going to be resolved one way or another by December and probably before that because Holtec has announced that it intends to give us its final decision. By the way, this is the conceit that they have that it’s entirely their decision.

By the end of the third quarter, which is September or early in the fourth quarter, so it may happen at the next NDCAP meeting, and this is rather horrifying. So, going on.

Where is that water? You may wonder, which water are we talking about? There are multiple locations with the site that contain the water but most of it is in the torus, in the dryer/separator pit and most significantly in the spent fuel pool. Altogether, it is more than a million gallons of water. The spent fuel pool water is where the spent fuel rods seep for a long time and therefore we can assume that that water is extremely dirty not just with chemicals but with various kinds of radiation including Tritium, Cesium, radioactive Cobalt, radioactive Magnesium and many other really nasty things. So, it’s much more than the waste that was daily circulated while Plymouth operated and it’s a much greater quantity.

Theoretically, Holtec has four options. Number one, release it into the bay. That’s close and cheap, easy. It’s the path of least resistance. They could also theoretically evaporate the water but having disassembled so much of the plant and so much of the infrastructure, they no longer have the wherewithal to evaporate the water. It’s not there. So, it’s a theoretical option. It’s not a real one.

Transport offsite is the one of four bad options. The one option that we want to see happen because it would be taken to licensed radiation waste sites of which there are quite a few in our country. Maybe five. There’s one in Texas, there’s one in Tennessee, there’s one in Idaho and this is a perfectly legal option. The NRC has endorsed it. We endorse it. We would all like to see that water taken to a licensed site where it would be turned into a sludge and buried far from population centers.

[1:30:26]

Henrietta Cosentino:

The fourth option, and this is a threat which I believe is just a threat, a game of chicken, the fourth option is to keep all the water on site until permanent repository is functioning and we know that there is no permanent repository yet and it doesn’t seem to be anything in the offing.

Now, the problem with number four is that David Noyes, the Compliance Manager and sort of Assistant Manager of Pilgrim says that the only possible place for it to be stored is in the torus, which is that donut-shaped container outside the container, which is used only in emergency situation, but it’s very large. It’s really for overflow. Those uses are no longer relevant because the plant is no longer operating but the problem here is that the base of the torus is cracked. So, it is not a reliable option nor is it an option that Holtec is actually willing to take because they want to get out as fast as they can.

So, the timeline. Since May, you all know what happened in May. You remember that Markey held his hearing and you remember that the NRC then came to town and presented its new rules for decommissioning. That was in May. Now, in June, on June 1st, Save Our Bay sponsored a wonderful webinar with Dr. Barry Potvin, who is our Chair of our Board of Health and who happens to know a great deal about radiation. He worked with radioactive material for several decades and understands very well what it involves. He presented the impact of radionuclides but particularly Tritium, and the impact when it is up taken organically by the small marine creatures. It’s a very different phenomenon from Tritium when you just drink it. It has much more potent effects. Tritium is a radionuclide that cannot be filtered out. There are other radionuclides that can be filtered out and will be filtered out but Tritium can’t. It’s probably already there in the algae, in the tiny marine creatures and so forth, but this would add a huge amount to the load.

Irina Ripyna from Woods Hole facility is an expert on hydrology and she explained with charts and so forth and maps exactly how the circulation in our connected bay system works and she showed how and why the dumped water would not be carried straight out to the Atlantic and diffused. Rather, and particularly in the summer, it would sink into the mud of the bay and the Tritium would get up taken by the marine creatures. Because our bay currents are very particular and very complicated and there really is no straight path out to the Atlantic unfortunately.

First, Dr. Singh’s letter, he wrote a letter in May to Markey and then he wrote a second letter to Markey in early June, and he said that shipping off site would be contrary to their environmental justice policies. We’ll send you the corrected. I didn’t notice that until now. This was very rich, because Singh claimed that shipping the water would be environmentally unjust but somehow dumping them into the bay would be just fine.

[1:35:11]

Henrietta Cosentino:

This is strange logic because they have been shipping low level and mid-level nuclear waste to West Texas for three years and they have every intention of shipping our dry casks all the way to New Mexico, if and when they get permission for their consolidated interim storage facility or–well, never mind what it’s pronounced. It’s the acronym means consolidated interim storage facility and they’re building a huge one in New Mexico where they want to bring all the nuclear wastes from all over the country and they see no problem with environmental injustice in that. But shipping the water? No, because the real truth is it would cost $20 million so this, “suggestion to ship the water to another location for discharge runs counter to our basic tenets of environmental justice, which has led us to discard the idea. Our estimate of the cost to foist Pilgrim’s water is approximately 20 million, 250 truckloads driving approximately 2,000 miles each way over 125,000 gallons of diesel fuel burned and over 1,000 heavily load handling evolutions that will have to be performed by the plant’s crew.         

This all sounds like a sob story and it is. It’s showing us that they really care about that 20 million even though it’s actually trump change compared to the $1.1 billion trust fund that they took over when they came to Pilgrim.

Okay. You recognize this. It makes you love Plymouth. Anyway, June 17th, the EPA sent a letter to Singh and basically it was a smack down. They said, “You have misunderstood the EPA regulations. You have misunderstood the NPDES permit, you have put a spin on it that we didn’t intend. In summary, Holtec Pilgrim is not authorized under the current NPDES Permit to discharge pollutants in spent fuel pool water. If Holtec Pilgrim wishes to seek authorization from EPA for such discharges, Holtec must provide the information necessary for EPA to analyze the request and determine whether such a discharge would be in accordance with the CWA, NPDES regulations, and any other applicable federal law. See details 40 CFR. I hope this letter clarifies your options for ensuring compliance with the Clean Water Act. If you have questions, feel free to contact Damien Houlihan.                           

So, that was EPA’s smackdown. Going forward, it seems that Holtec doesn’t really care about that. We’ll get to that in a minute. On June 14th, we had a celebration of the final votes on The Cape voting 21 towns on the Cape and the vineyard had a non-binding resolution protesting the dumping that was proposed by Holtec. Press was there, people from Markey’s and Warren’s office were there and it was a very nice event.

This is the public advisory, the non binding public advisory resolution passed on The Cape:

WHEREAS, Cape Cod Bay is a federal and state protected area and habitat for the endangered Right Whale; and

WHEREAS, Cape Cod Bay provides a vital livelihood for fishermen and the tourist industry; and WHEREAS, the National Academies of Science has determined there is no safe dose of ionizing radiation,

WHEREAS, One radioactive element in Holtec Pilgrim Water is Tritium, which concentrates up the food chain from sediment to sea grasses to the fish we eat; and

WHEREAS, Holtec Pilgrim can discharge radioactive water anytime without approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and

WHEREAS, The Attorney General of New Mexico has filed a lawsuit against the NRC for unlawful proceedings and illegal activities involving Holtec; and

WHEREAS, The Commonwealth has the authority to stop the dumping.

Therefore, shall the people of the Town of _______ direct the local government to communicate with Governor Charlie Baker, Attorney General Maural Healey, and the State Legislature to employ all means available to ensure that Holtec commits to immediately withdraw any plans to dump any radioactive water into Cape Cod Bay.

[1:40:32]

Henrietta Cosentino:

And that is a resolution that was also very similarly to that passed in Duxbury. We have not passed a resolution in town meeting and I would strongly urge that we get one in October or late September, whenever the town meeting is. I hope it’s not too late to start that initiative. It will just add to the power of all the towns who are on the same page.

Now, June 14th, our Attorney General Maura Healey made one public statement and it’s the only one we’re aware of. Healey said, and this is from the CAI, ‘The company that owns Pilgrim Holtec won’t be allowed to discharge a million gallons of nuclear waste water on her watch either as Attorney General or if she’s elected governor. We’ve come a long way on this issue, and I’ll be damn sure in whatever capacity I serve, that we’re not going to have radioactive waste dumped down here.” She believes the state has the authority to stop the discharge based on a settlement agreement with Holtec, combined with state and federal law. And it is true. When Holtec signed the settlement agreement, they agreed to comply with all the laws of the Commonwealth and with the Marine Sanctuary Act. They made that commitment by signing the contract, and that was the end of preemptive right of the NRC.

However, the bad news is that Holtec has not withdrawn dumping and appears to consider this insignificant. So, now comes the Budget bill. Our wonderful Senator Sue Moran proposed the legislation after the failure of other legislative efforts, by the way. Proposed legislation that would be an amendment to the economic development package. It is Amendment #63 for Senate 3018, and this amendment would put a temporary moratorium on Holtec’s plan to discharge nuclear waste from Pilgrim. It would require a commission study the economic effects that said dumping would have on the local economy, including, but not limited to, the commercial fishing, real estate, and hospitality industries. The amendment would not abrogate, undermine or preempt any federal law or federal agency rules. This economic study is well within the purview of state government.

This was a very clever amendment and I’m happy to report that it was passed through the Senate on Friday. However, it is now with the committee that reconciles House and Senate versions. It is likely that this amendment and the Budget bill will pass. The end of the legislative session is the last day of July but after Charlie Baker has 10 days before he must sign or not sign the budget. That’s a little worrisome because he has 10 days to go line by line through the Budget and if he wanted to cross out that line item, he could. I don’t know why he would want to, but who knows?

So, here unanswered questions and this is really the big one, how will the Commonwealth enforce this amendment? Does Mass DPH have a plan to oversee and sample the water for radionuclides? I’m sorry to say that I asked that question last night, as did Mary Lamber, and the answer was no, they do not have a plan to oversee and sample the water for radionuclides. They have done some split sampling. It’s not clear. Jack Priest told us that last night, but it was very vague and has never been shared and we don’t know. Does MassDEP have a plan to oversee and sample chemicals? No.

[1:45:01]

Henrietta Cosentino:

They are relying on Holtec telling them, sharing their data, which to me feels like the fox watching the hen house. We haven’t seen a lot of reasons to trust what Holtec says.

What the Select Board can do is really communicate Maura Healey any way you can do that. I have to tell you before going through this that we collectively and individually since April have been trying to wring a response out of the Attorney General and we have failed. There has been no response whatsoever in any way, shape or form. We’ve sent emails, we’ve sent letters, we’ve made phone calls – nothing. So, this is very worrisome because we don’t see a path to the enforcement. However, we need to bombard her with communication. She’s busy running for governor and this may explain why she is not attending to this issue right now. But time is very short, and Maura may not understand that they are going to announce their decision very, very soon.

She may think that she has until December to deal with and in one case, she would still be Attorney General and in another case, she would be governor but she may think she has time to deal with it. She doesn’t. That’s the problem. So, if you can write a short letter even the statement that you made, Betty. It does not have to be complicated. You don’t have to invent the wheel. You don’t even have to site statistics that Marian Lambert have done so very thoroughly. But they do need to know that even four years ago, the Blue economy of Massachusetts exceeded half a billion dollars and that is not an economy you want to mess around with. That is not an economic situation that you want to sabotage by allowing this travesty because even the hint that Holtec is doing this has already had a chill effect on for example the real estate community and the shellfish community.

Betty Cavacco:

Brad and Anthony, could you guys draft a letter and check with our special counsel. I’m sorry, Henrietta. We have a big group of people waiting here tonight. So, we kind of have to move.

Henrietta Cosentino:

There is just one last thing that I need to tell you. We couldn’t show the video of it. Well, here’s an excerpt from our letter to the AGO but we can send that to you. What I want you to know is that last night at the meeting, Jim Lampert, and this was 8:40-ish in the evening asked the Holtec representative David Noyes very directly, are you going to respect the EPA letter? And basically, Noyes said, “No.” Again, we can send that to you. I think you really want to hear this. It’s very short. It’s very disturbing. We have to do some pretty radical action to get the Attorney General’s attention because the key is with Maura Healey. That’s all there is to it.

Betty Cavacco:

That’s fine, Henrietta.

[Video Playing]

Henrietta Consentino:

And that’s what we’re dealing with.

Betty Cavacco:

Yeah. I mean, you’re really preaching to the choir here because we’re–

[1:50:01]

Henrietta Cosentino:

I know, but it’s the reality, that when push comes to shove only if we can get Maura Healey on this, will we succeed. Otherwise, they’re dumping.

Betty Cavacco:

The assistant town manager is right here and our admin and I think Mr. Mahoney has something that he wants to say.

Henrietta Cosentino:

I’m sorry, when you’re finished, I just have a couple of concluding remarks for us.

John Mahoney:

Through the chair, the state NDCAP Committee, I guess I have the honor of chairing that committee, okay? I was absent last night. I haven’t followed up with the vice-chairman, Ms. Dubois. I will do that tomorrow, okay? I get back in the town today at about 4 o’clock. So, you’re making it sound like certain things have changed and I’m going to verify that tomorrow. But Holtec has been clear, if you look at the public hearing, I didn’t attend it. I believe the chairman or vice-chair did. That was out in 1820 Court Room, I’d say a month or two ago. So, when Dr. Singh zoomed in, he made it clear that they were going to follow the science on this one.

So, one of the members of NDCAP is Jack Priest and he represents the Department of Massachusetts, Department of Public Health. So, everything that I’ve heard up until less than 24 hours ago was that upon completion, they’re still using this water for certain industrial applications on-site. Upon completion of that, I want to say determine, they no longer have to use that water for any of the decommissioning task, that water will be sampled. That water will go to the Department of Public Health at the state level and it will be tested in state labs. So, that’s where the rubber really meets the road. Okay? So, why that is changed? I’m going to verify this tomorrow. I don’t think it has.

Henrietta Cosentino:

No, it hasn’t really changed.

John Mahoney:

Okay, good. So, that’s the key to the whole thing. And then at that point in time, depending on what that testing says and obviously, it goes without saying that none of one want this to go into the bay. But then the challenge is going to come down, Henrietta, it’s going to come down to Maura Healey and it’s going to come down to three of your federal delegation: two of your senators and Bill Keating. Those are the four individuals that are going to impact this more than anyone else in New England.

Henrietta Cosentino:

Yes, I agree.

John Mahoney:

So, I just want to let you know, you’re probably looking at September or the Thanksgiving when that something is going to happen and that’s the key to the whole thing. You’re going to get past that hurdle. They stop using the water on-site, test a sample that’s taken and sent up to the testing lab.

Henrietta Cosentino:

Therein lies another question, who is taking the sample? Who is overseeing the taking of the sample? Who is choosing the independent sample? Who is paying the independent sampler? Those are important questions and that’s where we–

John Mahoney:

I think some of those questions have been said by the state representatives on the committee.

Henrietta Cosentino:

They have. Not to our satisfaction but that’s another question.

John Mahoney:

Okay. So, at this point in time?

Henrietta Cosentino:

Yeah. What we wanted you to know is about the EPA letter, about Dr. Singh’s letter, about the resolutions that have been taken all over the Cape and in Doxbury, those kinds of things. Those are all development since the May NDCAP.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, thank you. We have to wrap this up.

Christine Danielson:

I’m just going to give you a quick overview. My perspective joining Save Our Bay, I’ve been a Plymouth resident for 5 years. We moved down here from East Woburn. My husband and his family grew up in East Woburn and they were very much a part of a civil action. Those were my husband’s friends who were part of the childhood leukemia. My husband worked with his dad. His dad battled non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. One of the reasons why we left Woburn and moved down to Plymouth was my husband right now is disabled retired. He was disabled retired at the age of 51. Part of his disability is he needs a liver and a kidney transplant. They suspect that the exposure to the contaminants from the particulars with that case are a huge contributing factor to that. You fast forward to that’s all said and done, but here we are and we’re one of the lucky ones.

[1:55:08]

Christine Danielson:

My husband’s dad survived the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and we’re hopeful for my husband’s situation right now. But coming down here and moving into Plymouth and finding out that this is an option that this company is putting on the table. When this is all set and done, Holtec is going to leave and move on to the next situation. But once that happens, you cannot undo that. You cannot unring a bell. At this particular point, you’ve got to understand from the perspective, that hindsight is 20/20 and I am bringing you that hindsight that this is a situation that started back in the 70s in East Woburn and I am personally still dealing with this today. It just cannot happen. And they will dump that water and they will move on, because they do not care but I care.

Betty Cavacco:

I understand completely. I worked there for 30 years so I really know how much they do not care. I know what it’s like to have to go up to the refuel floor and you’re not walking up there in shorts and a tee-shirt. You’re suited up to get up there. So, I know what it’s all about and I can guarantee you that this Board will fight with every ounce of energy that we have to stop it.

Christine Danielson:

Just like we are and we’re also starting to notice a slight uptick in the ingressiveness from Holtec too.

Henrietta Cosentino:

Yeah, that has changed since Singh’s letter to Markey.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, it hasn’t changed for me. It’s the same players just different names. So, same players, different players.

Christine Danielson:

Well, the police were called on us last night, the whole bit. Yeah. So, I don’t know what I’m going to be getting from them. So, with that being said, hindsight is 20/20 , this cannot happen.

Betty Cavacco:

You’re welcome. Thank you.

Henrietta Cosentino:

Yes. So, if you need any information, documents or anything to prove that, it really is very important that every town makes the best case possible. You might site statistics from Plymouth and the truth is those would be gone because economic development is one of Maura Healey’s. Thank you so much.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. And now, we are going to go through our Committee Appointments. I want to put on my glasses so I can see what I’m reading is what I want to do. So, I believe that Mr. Keohan has–yeah, go ahead.

Bill Keohan:

Bill Keohan with the Community Preservation Committee. I initially put my name in to serve on this working group. I’ve seen the list of potential candidates and if it’s okay with the Board, I’d like to withdraw my name as appointment to the working group but what I would replace that with is that I’ll make myself available as a liaison from the Community Preservation Committee because more appropriately, the Community Preservation Committee was the entity that funded the renovations and I have been working closely with all the different groups that have worked with the building over a period of time whether it’s going to RFP or the Building Committee or the volunteer groups. So, I have a detail knowledge of the building and its history in terms of its construction. So, I’ll make myself available if it’s the pleasure of the Board as a liaison from the Community Preservation Committee but I would respectfully withdraw my name as an appointment from this working group.

Betty Cavacco:

Great, excellent. Thank you, Mr. Keohan. And we also have a couple others that withdrew and that was Maggie Glennon and Marlene McGrath. I don’t know if she’s still here. And Joanne Bartlett, okay. All right. So, there are 7 full seats. The town manager will be the Chairman. I’d actually volunteer to be the Selectman Liaison as long as the Board has no issue with that. And we will choose 7 seats. This is going to be a quick process. We’re going to have a turnaround somewhere within 45 to 60 days of what the uses will be for that building. So, Harry?

[2:00:20]

Harry Helm:

Yeah. I just have a question in terms of that timeframe. Why two months turnaround? It’s likely that the findings of this group are most likely going to have some component that is going to run through town meeting to whatever they decide. It’s obviously not going to make the fall town meeting because that warrant closes within 30 days. The next warrant does not open until the end of October for the Spring Town Meeting. So, that’s August, September, October and even into November because I believe that the warrant closes on December the 21st for the Spring 2023 meeting. So, I just was kind of wondering why 60 days?

Betty Cavacco:

Why 60 days? Because we want to make a decision to see what the best use for that building will be. And then when we have to go for funding and everything, that’s a whole different process. We want the input of this Committee to come back and say to the public so we can get our information out there to the public to say this working group worked together and we believe that it’s this, this and this are the best uses for that building and then turn it over to town staff to implement those uses and whatever else goes along with it.

Harry Helm:

Okay. That’s fine and I understand that, but turning it over to town staff to implement it does not mean that town meeting will not need to approve that.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, it also does not mean that town meeting will have anything to approve. We don’t know what the use is going to be.

Harry Helm:

Okay. Say for instance they decide that they’re going to move the library into it. There are costs involved in moving a library. Town meeting has to approve that. I’m not sure I understand why we need 60 days when that gives 60 days before. So, if it’s August, September then you have September, October, 60 days from now is 60 days then 60 days to the warrant opening.

Betty Cavacco:

If we really wanted something for Fall Town Meeting, we could certainly hold a place for Fall Town Meeting working either CPC or as a Selectmen Article. I think the longer we wait, it just drags on everything else and let’s decide what we’re going to do with it and then take it from there. It’s kind of like by not having it in place makes me feel like we’re kind of putting the cart before the horse. So, let’s figure out what it’s going to be first before we move forward because who knows? Maybe the group is going to turn around and say sell it or put out an RFP. I mean, there are so many options.

Harry Helm:

No. I agree with you. I’m just questioning why 60 days. It seems to me there’s 30 more days to put in 90 days and that gives this group 30 more days to make an informed decision because they’re going to have to take a look at the history of this place. They’re going to have to take a look at the original RFP that was produced and examined why the RFP was written the way that it was, why was there a pilot agreement in there. They’re going to have to examine the deliberations of why $4.5 million were approved, which included the statement that the Simes House will never cost the taxpayers in Plymouth anything ever again.

[2:05:01]

Harry Helm:

If they’re going to be revising that, which seems to me that they well could be doing or even recommending selling it. It seems like 60 days when we actually have at least 30 days additional in there before the warrant even opens. I just think the extra 30 days wouldn’t matter. But that’s just me and you guys do what you want to do.

Betty Cavacco:

All those things you just mentioned, I could do it a week and a half.

Harry Helm:

Well, great, Betty. Congratulations! I can’t.

Betty Cavacco:

Go ahead.

Charlie Bletzer:

I can probably call it a compromise and an explanation to why it should be done quickly. I’m not sure it could be done in 60 days but if it could, that would be great. The reason for that is if you didn’t see Brad’s email today, we’re getting request for use of the building and we really at this time, there’s no committee in there and there’s no staff to run the building. The crux of the decision is made to see what they’re going to do, the better. In the meantime, I think we should just spend all activity, which there really isn’t any activity but there’s been a couple of requests. But I think you may have to just say suspend it until further notice. You could say lack of staff, but I think that’s part of the reason to have them wait. It would be great if you can do it six days, but if you can’t, I would think the chairman could say we need a little more time. So, I think that would be good compromise.

Harry Helm:

Okay. Just as long as it’s not written in stone that it’s 60 days.

Charlie Bletzer:

I agree. It shouldn’t be written in stone but hopefully, we can come up with a plan quickly to help everybody, so.

Betty Cavacco:

Mr. Quintal?

Dick Quintal:

How about a compromise? How about not putting any days in there and have the group report back to us in 30 days and if they need more time, they can ask for it then.

Betty Cavacco:

Perfect.

Harry Helm:

Sounds like a good idea.

Betty Cavacco:

All right. So, just to make this a little bit easier for all of us. We have everybody’s letters, we reviewed everything. So, I know Mr. Quintal is going to tally the votes for us.         

Harry Helm:

There were some names in here where the materials that accompanied them gave me no idea who these people were or why they were even applying other than they read the notification and if they are available and waiting to speak, I’m thinking for instance Jonathan Morse.

Jonathan Morse:

I’m Jonathan Morse.

Harry Helm:

There he is, and he’s been sitting here. I think we should run through these and see if any of them–

Betty Cavacco:

Well, you didn’t let me finish.

Harry Helm:

Okay. All right. And if any board members have any questions for these members or if anyone here has something that they want to say then we will allow them. Okay. We’re going to go down the list. Alice Baker. Go ahead.

Anthony Senesi:

One moment. I’m connecting here as a panelist so she will be able to speak. Alice, if you can unmute yourself, you will be able to speak.

Harry Helm:

Alice, unmute yourself.

Anthony Senesi:

You can unmute yourself by pressing the–

Alice Baker:

Okay. Can you hear me?

Dick Quintal:

Yes.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Do you have anything to say, Alice?

Alice Baker:

I do. Thank you, Madam Chair and Board Members for allowing me to speak. My name is Alice Baker. I am the Chairman of Manomet Village Steering Committee. I have been on the Committee for 8 years and chairman 7 years. I am also in the White Horse Beach Parking Committee and I have a vested interest in Manomet. In Plymouth but mostly Manomet. I work very hard ever since on what goes on if I’m chair. The Manomet Steering Committee has invested a lot into the Simes House in the past.

[2:10:14]

Alice Baker:

I would love to be on this taskforce. I would love to work with members to come up with ideas on how to generate revenue and to see what we can do to get the residents the best way to get events going on. I think it’s great. Maybe we could even do a satellite and whatnot. We have to listen to what the other members have to say too. But the Simes House is a very beautiful historic landmark. It is extremely important that we keep the Simes House. We need to get the activity in there.

In the last 5 years, I have not seen anything going on much in there. I know the Manomet Steering Committee has been the only committee that used the meetings for the Manomet Steering Committee in the Simes House up until COVID. So, I could go on and on and on. I don’t want to do that. You folks know who I am. I have a strong interest in working here with Manomet and I truly believe that I would be a good candidate to work with this task force and I’m hoping that you would vote for me tonight. Thank you for allowing me to speak.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you, Mrs. Baker. Anna Fish? Is she here? No. Ellen Cerasuolo?

Anthony Senesi:

She was here but she’s not here right now.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Jeffrey Fiedler? No? Joseph Ventresca? No. Julie Gallant? No. Karen Buechs?

Dick Quintal:

She’s on the screen.

Anthony Senesi:

Karen, if you can unmute yourself.

Karen Buechs:

Here I am. Can you hear me?

Betty Cavacco:

We can. Welcome, Karen.

Karen Buechs:

Hi, everybody! Thank you for considering me for a seat on this committee. I have been involved with Manomet Plymouth for many, many years. Started with the Simes House at its very beginning. As Chair of Precinct 7, I held my caucuses there. I was also on two boards of the Simes House. I’ve seen the progress I would have liked to have seen I did not see. But the thing I want you to know is that I want to work together with this board and the town to bring the best possible solution for that house to Plymouth and it’s long overdue. I want it to be evening considered and I thank you very much. I’ve served on many, many committees. Too many to list right now but this committee would mean a great deal to me and I want to bring this to Plymouth. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you, Mrs. Buechs. Patrica Adelman?

Anthony Senesi:

Patricia, if you can unmute yourself. Thank you.

Patricia Adelman:

Hello. Thank you for hearing me. I think I might have to withdraw because I am not available during the day and when you said the Town Manager was going to lead this working force, I believe that would be during the daytime. So, having that information, I will withdraw. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. Mr. Zupperoli? Sure.

[2:15:06]

Robert Zupperoli:

Good evening. Thank you. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak. You have my letter expressing my interest in the Simes House and I just have a few additional comments to make. I’d be happy to take any questions that you might have after that. I think the Simes House presents a unique opportunity for the Town of Plymouth and specifically Manomet Village. For some time, Manomet Village has needed a building to conserve multiple purposes. And with the acquisition of the Simes House, the town now has a unique opportunity literally on its door step.

The Select Board made the right choice two weeks ago to take over the financial and administration of this building. To date, the Simes House has failed to generate the revenue that two of its previous administrations has attempted to do. And while the reasons for this failure are many, the fact remains that the town now has a building that needs a purpose.

While the property has potential, the management fell short of accomplishing a number of goals that it’s set out for itself. CPC moneys allowed for renovations, but the restoration of the building as a historical structure became not when elevators and contemporary features were installed and other upgrades were made. This is a contemporary structure with a historic shell. $4.5 million has been spent on the house and more will probably be needed. Money is scarce and the town simply cannot absorb the financial burden of the building while relinquishing all administrative control.

I have listened to the reasons as to why this has happened and to me, many fall short. Marketing the building never really happened and while COVID had an impact, other businesses and not for profits have regained some of the losses since 2020. What has happened with the Simes House? This is my question. As a member of the Advisory and Finance Committee, there are several questions that I need to ask. The open space in and around the building needs maintenance. The first and second floor have been vacant. However, the apartments on the third floor are still occupied. Affordable housing has been the only aspect that has lived up to the reasons for the infusion of money into the building. The two groups that have taken over the administration of the building having a word, dropped the ball.

While I do enjoy a good preservation and community project, I think this project needs certain things accomplished. First of all, a complete structural and engineering analysis needs to be done to see what the building needs, what repairs are needed for a building that has sat almost idle for two years. Is the building up to code in all aspects? Are there extermination needs since there have been reports of rodent infestations? And what if anything needs to be done to the grounds to make them more appealing? A thorough cost analysis needs to be completed first answering the question of how much will all of this costs? Is there any potential revenue generating possibilities for the building? And what will the utility and maintenance costs of the building be projected out over the next 5 years? What viable proposals are there for the use of this building, the possibilities include: moving the Manomet Branch of the Plymouth Public library into the first floor. If this is done, engineers need to be engaged to attest to the first floor being able to withstand the weight of the books. This will provide community use of the building, allow for meetings and for village events. There is an open space on which events can be held much in the same way that events are held at the Plymouth Public Library here in town.

Can the second floor be used as a satellite town hall and yet the tenants will still remain? Can the building function as a satellite for the Center for Active Living? There are spaces for community rooms and meeting rooms on the first floor with office space again on the second floor and affordable housing still on the third floor. Our police department, for example, needs a technology center that will allow them a presence in South Plymouth, I also can talk about the need for presence in North Plymouth, but that’s for another time.

These will support great of use visibility for the police department in the community and increase public safety without incurring the costs of building a new precinct. This option would also support a satellite town hall as well and would leave space for other municipal uses. The common denominator in all of these scenarios keeps affordable housing on the third floor. However, these units need a second egress outside the building in the event of an emergency.

[2:20:16]

Robert Zupperoli:

None of these options, I believe, would harm the outward appearance of the building that can be maintained although it does need to be painted. Again, that’s my opinion.

Enough time has passed for this building. If the town is going to keep it, swift and decisive actions need to be taken. I’m sorry, Mr. Helm. I would propose three meetings for this task force. I will compromise to four. A review of the building, designating the cost and structural and engineering reports, three potential uses for the building, writing the report, revising the report, and reporting back to the Board for the Select Board’s decision. To waste anymore time or money on this would simply be frivolous. Thank you and I am happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. Mr. Zupperoli. Does the board have any questions? No? Thank you. Okay. Next, Sarah Jennings? Allen Hemberger? Go ahead and just state your name for the record.

Allen Hemberger:

Thank you, chair and members of the Board. I’m Allen Hemberger. I live at 30 Holmes Road, about 800 feet away from Simes House. My house is like halfway between Simes House and the bay. I want to make sure that someone from the neighborhood was tossing a head on the ring on this. I’m going to withdraw my name for consideration for this thing just because Jeff Feidler and Ellen Cerasuolo have already put their names in and I would hopefully have someone from the neighborhood, those two, take over for this. So, I’m going to defer to those and thank you for your consideration.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. Okay. Jonathan Morse?

Jonathan Morse:

Hello, my name is Jonathan Morse. I’m going to have to withdraw my application because I have to work during the day. I didn’t realize we have a day meeting. I thought it was going to be night type task force, but since it isn’t, I have to withdraw. Thank you very much.

Derek Brindisi:

I know that has been suggested at this mid-day meeting. I think that a lot of the folks that applied would probably prefer but I know that there are some that would prefer evening. So, I mean, in most course of action with newly formed committees, the first thing we do is just try to find the best time of day and what day that we can meet. I guess, I wouldn’t say it’s off the table that we’re not have night meetings but I do think that we would want to try to find time that would work best for everybody. I would say that’s yet to be determined at this time.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Stephen Cole?

Harry Helm:

He’s on vacation.

Betty Cavacco:

Margaret McSharry? Gail Butler?

Gail Butler:

Good evening. My name is Gail Butler, and I am interested in serving on the Simes House task force. A little bit about me. I have served for 4 years on the Advisory and Finance Committee and 2 years on the Capital Improvement Committee here in Plymouth. I worked as a real estate broker for over 30 years in the Western part of the state. And so, doing my biggest job was to anticipate problems and solving them before they became a problem. My second biggest job was finding solutions to problems as they appeared. If you weren’t good at solving problems, you were not going to make any money in real estate because like any sales job, you only get paid when you made a sale.

I love old homes and their stories. I was surprised to just how much history the Simes House has.

[2:25:04]

Gail Butler:

In 1797, title search shows the first owner. In 1855, a gentleman’s farmer conveyed a dwelling, a barn, livestock and carriage at approximately 80 acres extending from the village to the coastline. By 1863, Simes built what appears to be the present home along with several outbuildings, a large barn and a second empire style farm house. What will the new chapter for Simes House be? Can it be just one thing or will it need to have a variety of uses? It’s going to take time thinking outside the box, looking by someone who has time and desire to work on it.

I think a task force can get a list of prospective alternatives and go through them one-by-one and come back to the Board in a month’s time to present their best ideas and see if one or any work. Depending on the outcome, a new direction may be in order. Thank you. I appreciate your consideration.

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you, Ms. Butler. Will Shain?

Will Shain:

I bet a particular set of skills and a certain history with the Simes House and I would underscore that having met the descendants of the Simes Family, I can assure you that it’s pronounced Simes not Simes. They were very adamant about that. Victoria Simes-Pool who passed several years ago was a great granddaughter of Joseph Simes and she chastised my wife and I when we’re sitting in their living room about that pronunciation of the name.

My expertise is I have a private company of my own. I am coach consultant and business advisor to small businesses in Southeastern Massachusetts. I make my own hours. So, working during the day or an evening is inconsequential to me. I’ll simply schedule it. I also currently serve as the trustee and secretary for the Board of Trustees The Cape Cod Community College. I was integral and part of the team that brought the aviation maintenance technology program to Plymouth Airport. I’m currently serving as President of the Taking People Places organization, TPP, which began as group of volunteers. We recently received recognition from the Commonwealth as a non-profit. We’re still waiting for our 501(c)3 to hit but this is the year that we’re going to post 10,000 rides for the disabled and elderly in Greater Plymouth serving individuals that require means to get to work and don’t have dependable transportation to opioid addicted individuals who need to get to and have to get to their treatment facilities. But that is the group that is taking off and I’m very proud that I started to facilitate that meeting and I was elected president in the last year.

I am also Chair of the Board of Directors for the Cape Cod Canal Region Chamber of Commerce where I have an active amount of candidates in that area. I’m also the chair of the Cape Cod Canal Day Festival and Cruise every September. That expertise brings a talent-based that involves in strategic planning but it also involves execution and working with people. I work on numerous committees. I’m an excellent facilitator. And my history with the Simes House is known too many. We didn’t push it across the finish line in the very first endeavor but we did in fact stabilize the house. I know structurally what it looks like. I suspect what it needs now and quite frankly, having been and remaining a member of the Simes House Foundation since we founded it in 2010. I remain active in maintaining St. Catherine’s Chapel Park and White Horse Beach. And if need be, I’ll get out in front of the Simes House and mow it myself just as I cut down trees, clear property every weekend I’m down at the park. While I’m a my son noted a “West Manomet’ person living just two miles outside of town, my wife and I are active members supporting the Manomet community in that park, which I think is a prime example of what volunteers can do when they put their minds to it. So, with that in mind, I would ask for your consideration. I provided the Board as well as Town Manager with my resume and also a cover letter explaining why I think I would like to participate. This is my working retirement. I have a for profit business. I’m active in four non-profits. I very much like to see the Simes House maintained. I will keep an open mind. Thank you very much for your time.

[2:30:26]

Betty Cavacco:

Thank you. Conor Ryan? Tamara Giard? Victoria Costa? No. Monica Mullen? No. Okay. We will now start the voting process. Remember folks, we have 7 votes.

All those in favor of Alice Baker? Unanimous.

All those in favor of Anna Fish? None.

All those in favor of Ellen Cerasuolo? None.

Now, Jeffrey Fiedler and Joseph Ventresca, they’ve withdrawn?

Anthony Senesi:

They did not withdraw.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Jeffrey Fiedler? One.

Joseph Ventresca? None.

Julie Gallant? Four.

Karen Buechs? Four.

Robert Zupperoli? Five.

Sarah Jennings? None.

Allen Hemberger? Oh, withdrew. I’m sorry.

Stephen Cole? Five.

Margaret McSharry? None.

Gail Butler? Two.

Will Shain? Zero.

Conor Ryan? Zero.

Tamara Giard? Zero.

Victoria Costa? Three.

And Monica Mullen? Five.

Dick Quintal:

Alice Baker, Julie Gallant, Karen Buechs, Robert Zupperoli, Stephen Cole, Victoria Costa and Monica Mullen.

Betty Cavacco:

Great. Thank you everyone. Derek, will you be getting in touch with them?

Derek Brindisi:

Yeah. I’ll be reaching out to each one of them.

Betty Cavacco:

Perfect, thank you.

Derek Brindisi:

Probably set up a meeting next week, early next week.

[2:35:00]

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. Now, the Town Manager’s report.

Derek Brindisi:

Sure. So, as you can imagine and if you follow the news, you would have realized we had a very active and busy weekend this past weekend and it started with some really strong preparation by our fire department and our emergency management division who’s working alongside with our Assistant Town Manager last week as we started to experience the heatwave, they pulled together a plan to ensure that our most vulnerable populations were cared for during the heatwave throughout the weekend. So, they pulled together a cooling center plan, which allowed our library to act as a cooling center on Saturday and then we reopened the Center for Active Living on Sunday. Part of that plan, the Chief was able to secure a free transportation for any of the individuals that need a relief during the hot hours of the weekend.

So, I sat there as a bad truck to the preparation that unfolded as we had until last weekend, and that preparation bare witness when on Friday afternoon or Friday evening when the first of two fires took place, two structure fires now is at Thompson Circle. So, that building was fully engulfed. Unfortunately, the family lost their home but I was happy to report that there were no injuries both in the family members within the home but the firefighters as well. Part of the reason why there was no injuries to our fire department was because again the preparation by our fire chief who had already have secured our rehab trailer and have added additional staffing that allowed for a more regular rotation of firefighters to fight these fires. I don’t know if you have the opportunity to notice that there were other fires not in Plymouth but in other communities where some firefighters actually had to be transported to the hospital because of heat exhaustion. Fighting the fire in this extreme heat became difficult.

But again, we didn’t have that experience again because of preparation by Chief Foley and his team. So, we lost unfortunately that home on Thompson Circle and then we lost another one early Sunday morning on Overlook Drive. Again, fortunately, there were no injuries both to the family members and to the fire department itself. So, those fires by the time our fire apparatus had arrived again, the buildings were fully engulfed and they implode a strategy called surround and drown. One of the firefighters just surrounded the building and just dowsed it just to put the fire out to preserve the properties in the surrounding area. So, again, I appreciate the work of the Fire Chief, his department and the firefighters who actually had to bear those difficult conditions. But I also want to just bring out the fact that we’ve had 17 fires in 7 days here in Plymouth, 2 of those were structure fires as I reported. I’ll talk about the third one in a minute but the other ones, the other 14, the thereabouts, they were just local brushfires and the reason why we’re starting to see so many brushfires is because of this extreme dry conditions to the fact that like even mulch is igniting.

Selectman Mahoney and I were talking about one fire that there was a lawn mower hit a rock and sparked, caused a fire in dry grass. So, these are the conditions that we’re experiencing. The fire department is out there through public messaging, working PSAs trying to educate folks on what they need to do to try to prevent future fires.

The last fire just happened yesterday morning, which you may have heard over at the Captain John about two miles out. The Harbormaster received a call that the motor was on fire in Captain John. There were 54 passengers that were going on a fishing excursion that had to be brought back. We had a coastguard already who work with the Harbormaster working on a wheel situation and we’ll talk about that in a minute, they were able to redeploy assets up to two miles out of the harbor. They towed the boat back into the harbor. The fireboat was on scene. The fireboat actually went out as well to assist the Harbormaster at the time. So, again, strong team effort, coastguard was there, fireboat was there, harbormaster was there. They brough the boat back. No injuries. No one had to be transported to the hospital.

[2:40:14]

Derek Brindisi:

So, again, strong work inter-agency response to that fire as well.

And then what gained national attention was what’s going on over at White Horse Beach area. Manomet Point with the whales, I think we have two whales that have been sighted in that area. There’s been a lot of attention on Facebook. I talked about this today because I know a lot of people are excited to see the whales but the general public is worried about the whale safety. And so, the Harbormaster has been meeting on a regular basis with the US coastguard, Noah, Mass Environmental Police and others. So, local non-profits that really want to protect whales and dolphins to try to really educate the public on a couple of different fronts. So, first front is what voters need to be aware of like the distance they need to keep away from the whales to keep the whales safe and we’ve been trying to do that.

Anthony has been working with the Harbormaster’s office on issuing PSAs, working with state officials on issuing those so folks understand what the rules of engagement are on these whales and how to keep them safe. The other piece of this is what are our left and right limits as far as law enforcement. So, I think the general public, they seemed to believe that the Harbormaster and Coastguard can push boaters away from the whales but 90% of these boaters are actually fishing and so they have a right to be there. At the highest point, we had about 200 boats on the water at one point and 90% of those were fishing at the time. So, there’s not much that the coastguard can do unless a boater is harassing the whale so chasing them down and so that’s what they’re out there patrolling. But just trying to educate the voters as to what the distance, the hundred-yard distance they should maintain if the whale goes on and comes up around them to shut the motor off so that they don’t injure the animal. So, we’re really focusing on the education piece at this point. As of this morning, they think it’s working. We are actually handing out pamphlets at the boat ramp as folks prior to getting in the water, we give them information so they knew what the rules of engagement were if they were to come across the whales. So, again, another strong inter-agency collaboration.

And then I just wanted to just bring up to you another item that is gaining national attention over a monkeypox. So, while you probably have heard on the news that there are some CDC experts that are predicting this could potentially be the next pandemic. So, our Board of Health office has weekly meetings with Massachusetts Department of Public Health. So, just some data in Massachusetts, we have 49 cases of monkeypox in Massachusetts. None of them are in Plymouth at this time. And then of those 49 cases, we have no deaths reported. So, we’ll continue to track trends and be mindful of any potential cases here in the community but we’ll be pushing some information as well as to what people can do to try to prevent transmission or contraction of monkeypox.

The last thing I just wanted to remind folks especially those in the community that the warrant is currently open and closes on August 12. So, folks who have Citizen’s petitions, they have until August 12 to submit those. Pending any questions, that’s all I have this evening.

Harry Helm:

Derek, on the whales’ subject. Can you please have the Harbormaster, I’m not sure if they can enforce this, but at least add this. It’s federal law that within ½ mile of a whale and you should assume since there are two to three whales at White Horse Beach that as you’re approaching White Horse Beach, your speed should be maximum 7 knots. I can tell you from my deck this morning at 6:30, boats were coming in much faster than 7 knots. I’m sure it’s because they’re not aware of it but could you have the Harbormaster add that to his advice to people? He’s coming slow.

Derek Brindisi:

Happy to do that.

Harry Helm:

Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

So, one of the things we seemed to have missed on the agenda, Anthony if you could add it from this point forward, we have a section that’s Selectmen comments old/new business.

[2:45:01]

Betty Cavacco:

So, I’m going to add that now as we speak. If there are any selectman comments or old/new business? Charlie?

Charlie Bletzer:

Yes. I’m sure everybody knows that there were some serious issues this weekend at the beaches. I’ve seen the pictures. I’m sure everybody’s gotten them and I’m sure it’s because of the high heat that all crowded the beaches especially Morton Park has some real issues and I know I talked to Barry. I’m sure he talked to you guys. Barry is very concerned about the security especially after that slashing in Carver. That was at the Carver side of it. An employee was slashed not seriously but he’s very concerned. There’s kids at Morton Park, young kids. So, I don’t know if the Chief can do anything about that at least temporarily especially when there’s a high heat like that, you know it’s going to be a big day. White Horse has four police and they took the police off from Morton and put them down there, I think. Is that true?

Betty Cavacco:

No. White Horse doesn’t have 4. They have 2.

Charlie Bletzer:

They have 2 now? Okay. But anyway, he’s concerned and I’m concerned too because the young kids stopping in that road, town people kept complaining it’s kind of dangerous. So, that’s an issue that should be addressed and I’m sure Dan is aware of it. The other issue is at the Fresh Pond and I saw pictures of that too. It was rowdy behavior, loud noise, the trash was unbelievable, how filthy it was. I saw the pictures of it on Monday morning. So, again, I’m hoping it’s just because it’s such a hot weekend and some of the beaches got closed off and they have nowhere else to go. But something I think where we have to keep an eye on that. I know we talked about it in the beaches and ponds meeting. So, those two areas. They tell me White Horse Beach was good. So, those two areas I think we should address as soon as people.

The last thing I have is the crosswalk at Avenue Way. That’s all. That’s the last thing I have.

Derek Brindisi:

If I could respond to all three of your comments, if you don’t mind.

Charlie Bletzer:

Yes, certainly.

Derek Brindisi:

So, crosswalk at Avenue Way, there will be a recommendation that comes to the Board at the next meeting to install crosswalks. So, we just need the Board’s approval for that. The trash and litter at Fresh Pond was a conversation at our staff meeting this morning. Mr. DeBlasio brought it up. We’ve been assured by the DPW Director that they will increase staffing. Again, I would say all of our beaches and ponds were overwhelmed this past weekend, which probably contributed to the high volume of trash. So, we’re going to increase the staffing levels to ensure that we’re cleaning that up as soon as we can and throughout the weekend.

The issue around Morton Park and especially coming off what happened at the Myles Standish State Park, I think we all agree with you, Selectman Bletzer that we need to make sure that our employees are safe, they’re not being harassed and they’re able to do their job appropriately. So, for that reason, we met with Mr. DeBlasio, the Police Chief and his command staff this morning for 90 minutes to discuss this very issue. We’ve come up with a short-term plan to redeploy assets over to Morton Park, police assets so that we can provide a safe and secure environment. This is going to be the short-term plan to get us through the summer. We’ve already committed to working with Mr. Malaguti’s committee around some long-term strategies, work with the residents around Morton Park and Fresh Pond.

Charlie Bletzer:

That’s good. This weekend, if it’s real hot, I’m only right at the street, I might swing by a couple of times just to see it for myself firsthand. In Fresh Pond, I got friends that are down there but I get an email from somebody that is very concerned. So, that’s great, Derek.

Derek Brindisi:

And one thing I would remind, any concessions that call you and complain about loud noise or litter, especially the loud noise and nuisance that’s coming from some of the behavior at some of these ponds, call the police department. The police department will respond 100% of the time.

Charlie Bletzer:

My response was that I’m going to bring it up at the Select Board meeting and I happened to see Barry and we talked about the issues. So, I knew he was going to give you the news.

[2:50:08]

Derek Brindisi:

Yeah, and I know. We’ve educated the Morton Park residents that if you see some inappropriate behavior, just call the police department. They are there. They’re ready to respond and they respond 100% of the time. Thank you.

Betty Cavacco:

Just to kind of go on Charlie’s thing and you and I, Derek have had that discussion this week. The loud radios in the beaches or ponds, I was down there all week, it was unbelievable. I mean, this is their homes whether they’re on a beach, surrounding the pond whatever and I think it’s just gotten to a point that we have to do something to protect our residents and the pleasure that they deserve from their homes. I think it’s time that we have some kind of ban on music because there is somebody on White Horse Beach with a gas generator plugged in to a speaker with the radio. I was like, you can’t have gas like that on the beach but it doesn’t seem like they have any respect for the people that live in that area. And I know Morton Park is a big thing like that and so was Fresh Pond and I know someone who lives right on the pond and I got emails about that as well. I mean, it’s getting to the point where my priority and the town’s priority should be protecting our residents and if that says that we’re going to make some drastic changes for our resident with access to these ponds and beaches then it’s something that we have to address. And I know it’s late in season already but something that we come September, we need to move forward with a plan so we have something in place for next year because me personally, if you have a radio on the beach, you’re missing the point.

Charlie Bletzer:

Ban in music is a little harsh.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, it isn’t harsh when you’re a resident.

Charlie Bletzer:

I mean, if it’s at the right volume.

Derek Brindisi:

I would say loud music is one of the primary complaints at Morton. The park attendants, they go over there, they ask them to turn the music down. Some people will comply but they would say probably at least 50% of them don’t comply.

Charlie Bletzer:

Yeah, unless it’s a police officer. They’re not respecting these kids. As a parent, I wouldn’t want my young kid having responsibility of doing that.

Betty Cavacco:

I’m not saying for police to go up there, but if there’s some kind of policy in place that there’s no radios on the beach or pond that abuts residential property then it’s a rule.

Charlie Bletzer:

If it’s the biggest complaint then yeah, I guess we’ll have to take a look at that but I hope it doesn’t have to come to that.

Betty Cavacco:

Did you have something, Harry?

Harry Helm:

Yeah, I have some new business. Piece of new business, and well, maybe it’s old business. It’s about the racetrack, the thoroughbred horse racetrack. As all of us are probably aware, there was an article WATD and Derek, we received a letter from Loring Tripp, the Director of Planning and Community Development for Boston South. We received this on July 22nd.

On behalf of Boston South, I am pleased to announce that our initial agreement was officially signed on Thursday, July 21st, 2022 marking the official commencement of our first 90-day due diligence period. Following this due diligence period, we will reach out with an update, etc.

In the WATD article concerning this, County Commissioner Jared Valenzuela stated, and I quote, “A thoroughbred horse track is on the table as a potential use.” So, it’s pretty clear that Boston South is at this point ignoring, and they certainly have a right to ignore it during their due diligence phase, they’re ignoring the referendum and they are ignoring the fact that there is a letter on file with the Gaming Commission voicing the disapproval and the not acceptance of this concept for the Town of Plymouth.

[2:55:03]

Harry Helm:

They’re in their due diligence period and I would like to request hard that we begin our due diligence period and I would like to request through the chairman that our Town Manager, Mr. Brindisi call a meeting of our town council and our state legislative delegation including Senator Moran, Representatives Muratore and LiNatra and I will be in attendance. Would you check with our counsel to see if the entire Board can be in attendance? I think there are number of legal questions that have been bandied about with no real answer. If you talk to a different lawyer, you might get a different response. One being can the county build a racetrack on county land? There are many people who think that they cannot. There are many people who actually are lawyers that I’ve talked think that they can. Also, the whole thing about whether town meeting can prevent it if they try to move forward by not voting for zoning change. Clearly, the County of Plymouth does not agree with that. I would like the council to talk to us about that.

The reason for the presence of our legislative delegation is that I know that the State Gaming Commission, particularly the Racing Commission is in the process of changing or suggesting changes to the statute. I’m concerned about some of the changes that they’re proposing and that’s why I would like to discuss that with our legislative delegation.

Charlie Bletzer:

Harry, no disrespect, but if you make a motion, I’m going to vote against that and I tell you why. I said it before, in fact, the Chairman of the county said the same thing. He’s not going to spend that penny talking to lawyers at random and I don’t want the town. I don’t want to waste any more time on this issue, any money. I don’t want to spend a penny. Let that group spend the next couple of years doing their due diligence, spending their millions of dollars and then come back to us with what they can and can’t do and then if we’re against it, we vote against it. But I don’t want to spend another penny on this for supposed horserace proposal. It’s a waste of money. Okay? It’s not going to happen as far as I’m concerned, as long as I’m on this Board, I’ll be against it. And if we don’t okay, they’re not going to get a license. So, I don’t waste another minutes or another penny on the horserace. That’s my feeling about that. So, I’m against the town manager getting involved and specially getting the counsel involve. It costs us money. So, that’s my feeling.

Betty Cavacco:

So, that would be great if they were saying that it is our decision but they’re saying that it isn’t.

Harry Helm:

Charlie, just FYI, the State Gaming Commission, the Racing Division is attempting to change the statutes that we are playing with. If they change the statutes, we could be screwed. So, I don’t think waiting until after because they’re in the process of finalizing their statute changes. I think waiting to discuss that for instance with our state legislative development until after they are at the State House I think is a mistake. And I’m not talking about spending a ton of money. I’m not talking about litigating with the counsel. I’m talking about having the counsel come in and advise us on their opinion about whether or not the county is correct as Betty has pointed out. I would agree with you completely if they weren’t completely ignoring the referendum in our letter. They’re ignoring it because they think they can change it or they can change our minds. The county has already said that they do not agree with either of the two things about county land being used for racetrack as problematic and that town meeting has any say in zoning when it comes to county land. They’re already said that.

So, if we don’t prepare ourselves, we’re going to face this suddenly, literally in many ways out of the blue and we’re going to be behind because we have not done our due diligence.

Charlie Bletzer:

I read the state and had the legal wording on the license and without the local okay from either the counsel or from Select Board that they will not be issued a license.

Harry Helm:

Charlie, that’s the current statute. They’re in the process of examining and revising all of the state statutes around racetracks.

[3:00:22]

Charlie Bletzer:

At that point, we can get an opinion but right now, let them spend their money. The county is doing the same thing. The county is not talking to counsel. The county is letting them spend their money and do their due diligence, that’s their job and then come back. And if it’s a problem, we’re all against it. We’re on the record of being against it.

Harry Helm:

And then oops, we’re too late, Charlie. It’s a wonderful thing to be able to say and I’m sure they were saying it on the Titanic, I knew it would fail. I knew that it would sink. I’m sure there were people saying that as it was going down and I just think we have the opportunity to do some due diligence that it doesn’t cost anything to sit down with our legislative representatives. Not a cent. And it’s not going to cost that much. I’m not talking about bringing in our counsel to start litigation before litigation is necessary. It’s so that we know because there is a divergence of opinion among our residents depending on who they’re listening to that the county can put it on the county land and there’s a whole group of people who are saying, “No, they can’t.”

Charlie Bletzer:

And they are the same people that said we all voted for a racetrack. Okay? It’s the same people. Like I said, do what you want to do, but I’m against getting counsel involve right now.

Harry Helm:

Betty, do we need to make this motion to have this done or I make a motion that Derek set up this meeting and check with counsel to see if the entire Board can attend? So, I make that motion.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there a second? I’ll second for discussion.

Dick Quintal:

Yeah. I’m not going to support this at this time. I agree with Charlie. I can’t set my watch by WATD. That’s how a lot of the turmoil in this community starts. I’m being totally honest about it. Yes, it’s in the RFP to look at every possible thing. This is what I’m being told and racetrack is one of those things. I don’t think they’re going to pursue that but it is in the RFP and they will look at it. I’d say if you’re worried about changing legislation then let our legislators know that if that’s to happen to let us know immediately. Otherwise, we’re wasting time and money.

Betty Cavacco:

I actually disagree. The reason why I disagree is because the Town Manager and I had a meeting with Boston South and they told us that they were going to provide us a letter that said that they would not pursue a racetrack and that was 8 weeks ago. And it’s been complete radio silence since that meeting. So, I think that we should be proactive. I think that we should have all our ducks in a row because if they turn around and they say, “We’re putting a racetrack on there,” then it’s going to be one hell of a fight. So, I don’t think it’s going to hurt anything. I don’t think it’s going to cost a lot of money. I think getting people at the table, you know what, bring the commissioners in. I’d love to chat with them. So, I agree. I think we should do that.

Charlie Bletzer:

They’re against it.

Betty Cavacco:

But we don’t know that. I mean, we don’t know that officially.

Harry Helm:

The County Commissioners are against the racetrack. Is that what you’re saying? The County Commissioners are against it.

Charlie Bletzer:

I’m not speaking for them right now, so. I’m just telling I’m very confident there’s not going to be a racetrack.

Betty Cavacco:

John?

John Mahoney:

So, I think that when Boston South doesn’t come out and sign a document saying they’re going to eliminate that option, it’s kind of similar to Holtec. Holtec is looking at this strictly from a financial perspective.

[3:05:09]

John Mahoney:

They’re not ruling anything out until those lab results come in from the state. Boston South, I think it’s highly unlikely that they come back with a horse track. It’s a small probability. They’re coming back with something. Two to four years from now, they are coming back with something. Now, I would bet against horse track proposal but it’s going to be something.

Having said that, I don’t understand why the question can’t be answered just through a quick phone call from the Town Manager to Boston to town counsel. I just don’t know why it has to get this level of involvement of numerous people. This is not a simple of getting one of our lawyers on the phone up there in Boston and just asking them just over the phone or am I oversimplifying this?

Derek Brindisi:

I would defer to Selectman Helm to answer his intention to have a meeting group think meeting with the state delegation counsel but there’s always different courses of action we can take and we could send them a series of questions via email. But I’ll defer to the Board. We work for the pleasure of the Board. So, you let us know what you want us to do and we’ll do it.

John Mahoney:

And then the other part of that would be could the chair is a novice simplification also for the chair to reach out to Senator Moran or Rep. LiNatra and Muratore to say, “Does the potential exist for this to be changed?” And all of a sudden, this is facilitating what they want to do with respect to a horse track.

Betty Cavacco:

Well, I think at this point, and I don’t have a problem doing that but maybe an official letter to our delegation. I mean, I don’t see anything wrong with meeting with an attorney asking specific questions because I’m going to be honest with you, I’m not trusting anybody right now that has anything to do with this little county horse track because you know what, you and I have been sitting, waiting for that letter for 2 months and they went rogue. So, I really don’t care how they feel about it. I know how I feel about it. I know how the Board feels about it, but I’m not putting my trust in them. I don’t believe they’ll do it because you know what? I believe they were going to send us a letter and that didn’t happen. So, I don’t have a problem whether it’s an executive session, however it has to be that we are able to have these discussions is fine. Like I said, bring on the Commissioners. I got a million questions for them. I’d like to know if that land was surplus before they leased it. How does that happen with county land? Do they have to surplus that land before they were able to lease it? I’d like the answer to that question, because if it was, Plymouth has first right of refusal for that property. I’d like that answered. So, myself, I don’t know. I’m not as nice as you are, Mr. Quintal.

Dick Quintal:

I hear about the state delegation. The state delegation has been at numerous meetings in that table so sending them a letter like, “Hey, wake up!” They know what’s going on. They’ve been at many of the meetings that I’ve been at. So, that’s another reason I won’t.

Charlie Bletzer:

Excuse me, Madam Chairman. I agree with Dickie. They know how we feel and again, I’m against the horserace. I’m sick of talking about it. I saw the ATD article, I saw some comments in Facebook. Here we go again. I know you want to talk about it and I don’t want to spend a dime. Let them spend millions of dollars on their due diligence and find out that they can’t do a racetrack. But I’m against spending any money or any time on it right now.

Betty Cavacco:

What if the statutes change that they’ll be able to do it.

Dick Quintal:

I believe, as Dickie said, the state delegation will tell us if that’s to happen. And then at that point, we can take some action.

Betty Cavacco:

I don’t like to react. But anyway, there’s a motion and a second. All those in favor of having–go ahead. You want to say something? All those in favor? Opposed? Does not pass. So, okay.

[3:10:22]

Betty Cavacco:

Is there any more old/new business? John?

John Mahoney:

Derek, you currently sit in the hotseat and it’s not an easy job. You’re the fourth town manager I’ve served with. Your predecessors time with the community is coming to an end, I believe this Friday. You’re talking about almost a 20-year run. The job is not easy. Somebody told me years ago that this town gives their Town Manager a lot of tennis balls to keep in the air at the same time. It’s not easy. I could never do what you do. So, anyhow, almost two decades, I just wanted to thank her for her service to the community and wish her all the best in all her future endeavors.

Dick Quintal:

I’ll say I agree with you John on that. She did a very good job here. I worked with her for many years. I didn’t write them. I don’t know a lot of years and she did a very good job. So, I wish her the best for their family, her and Bryan and her sister. Wishing them all well and success. There’s no question about whether she carries on something else that should be doing something else and I’d be more than happy to give her a good recommendation if I was called upon to do so.

Charlie Bletzer:

John, thank you for reminding us about that. I forgot. Yeah, Melissa, 17 years of service, she deserves to go out. She’s got hopefully a nice package leaving and she’s happy and I wish her well in the future. She’s still young and if she wants to continue her career and I wish her and Bryan well and I hope she sticks around Plymouth. So, anyway, congratulations, Melissa.

Betty Cavacco:

She’s going to have way more fun retired than she was with us. Anybody? Anything else? Nope All right. We have licenses and administrative notes. Unless there are questions, I’d like to move them as two separate groups.

Charlie Bletzer:

I make the motion.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there a second.

Dick Quintal:

Second.

Betty Cavacco:

Discussion? All those in favor? Okay. In administrative note, is there a motion?

Charlie Bletzer:

Motion.

Betty Cavacco:

Is there a second?

John Mahoney:

Second.

Betty Cavacco:

Discussion?

Dick Quintal:

Mrs. Cavacco, I think this administrative note should be read into the record.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay. The administrative note reads: The board will vote to approve and execute the SEIU Local 888 contract for fiscal year 2022 through fiscal year 2024. All those in favor? Unanimous. Thank you. And now, a motion to adjourn.

Dick Quintal:

Motion.

John Mahoney:

Second.

Betty Cavacco:

Everyone, have a great week. I do not know if we are meeting next week.

Derek Brindisi:

We have two hearings scheduled for next Tuesday.

Betty Cavacco:

I guess we are meeting next week.

Derek Brindisi:

Unless we just did admin notes but we have to do the two hearings.

Betty Cavacco:

Okay, great. Thank you.