2016-06-14 Recreation Committee Minutes -Draft

Home Browse Search

Town of Reading Y Meeting Minutes t i v :: +L Til"iN (,,_ PK R F f +. . Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 2111 OCT -2 PN 2: 33 Recreation Committee Date: 2016-06-14 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Conference Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: Monthly Meeting Session: General Session Attendees: Members - Present: Kate Kaminer, Emily Sisson, Frank Driscoll, Dan Foley, Jeanne Borawski, Rich Hand, Lori Russo, Gil Congdon, Adam Chase Members - Not Present: Mike DiPietro, Nancy Swain Others Present: John Feudo, Genevieve Fiorente Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Genevieve Fiorente Topics of Discussion: DRAFT K. Kammer opens the meeting at 7:05pm. John introduces the new members on the committee Gill Congdon and Lori Russo. Gill and Lori both give brief introductions and the rest of the committee does the same. J. Borawski reports back on the field rentals before 12:00pm. She received information from John Doherty that based on his memory there were no school groups renting before 12;00pm. He wasn't sure about outside rentals but plans to do some fact finding. J. Feudb says he is having a meeting to discuss this topic with him and others on Thursday, June 16". J. Borawski points out that we should speak as one voice and remain consistent. F. Driscoll asks about who rents the fields. J. Borawski answers that any rentals on Sunday have to be passed by J. Doherty. J. Feudo moves on to the decision on the lights. He passes around the letter indicating that the light project is suspended to the committee. He says that the Town asked for 1 million at Town Meeting and that the lowest bid would come out at around 1.4 million. He added that this would only manage to do 3 fields. D. Foley asks where the remainder of the money goes? J. Feudo answers that it would be like it was never asked for and the money spent for borings will be owed to debt services on that portion. J. Feudo adds that the results from the borings will not change and will be beneficial in the future. F. Driscoll asks J. Feudo if the prioritizing of the fields that was presented to the Board of Selectmen have made a difference in the outcome of how many fields could be done? J. Feudo says if the original priority of the fields was approved by the Board of Selectman then 4 could have been done instead of 3, however, that still would not have completed the entire project therefore the result would have been the same. Page 1 1