Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-23 Special Town Meeting Minutes340 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School September 23, 1985 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, Stephen J. O'Leary, at 7:45 P.M., there being a quorum present. The invocation was given by the Rev. James Cann of the Old South United Methodist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ARTICLE 1. The following report, presented by Philip B. Pacino for the Finance Committee, was accepted as a report of progress. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT The saga continues - I cannot help but feel as I approach this microphone that the members of the audience are thinking "Not another doom and gloom report ". After a review of our budget and our possible future financial status I must report to you that the tradition of "doom and gloom" need lives on. "Hell is the truth seen too late ". This quote stated over 300 years ago by John Locke could apply to the future budgetary and financial processes of the Town. Quickly though we must add that this does not necessarily have to be. As implied by the quote if we see the "truth" now then we can possibly avoid a future filled with uncertainty and problems. It is our belief that if this body acts prudently the means are very much available to help offset our upcoming financial problems. Some very crucial decisions will be made at this Special Town Meeting which will affect the future operations of this Town for years to follow. First let us look at the analysis and projections which have brought us to this judgment. Analysis of tax levy FY 87, 88 and and 89 Budget projection FY 87,88 and 89 The projection contains several assumptions. All salary increases for the periods involved would be equal to those given in recent periods. The increases in state aid will be used to offset increases in operating expenses other than salary. Therefore, except for pension and medical expenses, no increases in expenses and no increase in state aid have been put into the projection since it is assumed the two would offset. All amounts from the stabilization fund are excluded from the projection since at the last Annual Town Meeting the stabilization fund became fully exhausted. No amounts were included for major building projects anticipated EG -BPW garage, Town Hall /library and fire station in order to present a clearer financial picture prior to making a decision on them. For the same reason income from sales of landfill and Community Center Dept., etc. were left off the projection. Quite clearly you can see that the Town in the coming three years would, without even considering the effects of any new building projects, have to provide for deficits totaling around $720,000 for FY 87, $990,000 for FY 88 and $1,200,000 for FY 89. moo To cut these amounts from the Town budget would have a severe adverse effect on the Town's services. The magnitude of the cuts would dictate they likely be made from major items such as payrolls, capital equipment, roadway repairs, large ticket maintenance items and other such items which would affect the service of the Town. Simple quick -fix solutions such as freezing salaries might be impractical and ill advised if we want to retain certain levels of employee quality, competence, and the employees themselves. Special Town Meeting September 23, 1985 Imagine if you will, the effect of the above solultion on the quality of education. Imagine the effect on the quantity and quality of public safety. Imagine the effect on attracting and retaining quality people in all departments. Looking further at this analysis it would seem as it seemed in the FinCom report to the Special Town Meeting on February 25, 1985, that we are headed for a future of doom. The Finance Committee then, as now, advises that this need not be the case, if the Town is willing to use the assets it has to offset the budget increases of the future. Reading has land for development in prime locations that it can sell to offset the limitations of Proposition 2'/z for many years to come. Let us look at the potential available sales revenue as it stands at the present time. Sale of real estate exhibit. The Finance Committee sees on the one hand possible adverse effects on our operating budget by possible future budgetary increases and by funding new building projects from the tax levy. On the other hand, the FinCom sees the availability of sale of land revenue. Thus, again as it had previously done the FinCom determined that a financial plan is an absolute need. The financial plan we advise town meeting to support consists of the following: I. That all proceeds of sale of real estate be put in a reserve for appropriation. Such funds to be available to defray operational budget problems of the future and /or special capital projects as determined by Town Meeting. 2. If voted that the DPW garage project be built at a cost of $3,280,000 on the land fill site. The building cost of the project is to be handled over a 10 year period and that the cost of the land is to be paid for out of the reserve for appropriation set up from proceeds of the sale of real estate. 3. That all future capital projects EG - Town Hall /library, fire station be funded from the reserve for apropriation set up from the proceeds of sale of real estate. 4. That all new tax revenue resulting from new capital development be used to fund the operation budget of the Town and not be used to fund capital projects. 5. The following action be taken as quickly as possible: (a) The Planning Board proceeded with addressing the zoning of the Community Center in order that the eventual sale brings the higher dollar. (b) That the Selectmen proceed with appraisal of the Bear Hill property and that the Planning Board address the zoning question in order that the eventual sale brings the highest possible dollars. (c) Swift action be taken on portions of the landfill site to do whatever is necessary to sell some at the highest possible dollars. By supporting the financial plan the Town of Reading and its Town meeting will somewhat preserve the services of the Town and allow them to go on reasonably unimpeded. The plan would give Town Meeting breathing room and not force it to make all decisions under the threat of Prop. 2y2. You probably thought your attendance at this Special Town Meeting was for the purpose of funding the DPW move. We believe that this Special Town Meeting goes far beyond that point. The decision you make at this Special Town Meeting will decide the fate of Town government for years to come. It is our belief that by supporting the FinCom plan we began to set in place a financial plan which will serve the Town well. We urge Town meeting to support the plan. d7 Special Town Meeting September 23, 1985 As the FinCom report to the February 25, 1985 Town Meeting stated, "taking dollars you have now and putting with them into an account for future anticipated needs is not "deficit financing" as some have termed it. It is in fact prudent financial planning of the highest caliber. Commiting dollars you do not have and cannot anticipate is deficit spending hopefully to be reserved to that layer of government far removed from this auditorium." In closing, the FinCom feels that it is important to bring to Town Meeting's attention the facts concerning the amount of funds available to be spent during the remainder of the year. Free cash is at a deficit of $210,361, thus there will be no funds available from free cash to be spent. The overlay reserve at present has available around $118,000 which would be available for Town Meeting. Any amounts available from the current year overlay are not known at this time. At this Special Town Meeting, appropriation is being requested for amounts totaling $108,597. Unless additional amounts become available during the remainder of the year Town Meeting could have as little as $10,000 of available funds to cover articles that could come before it during the remainder of the year. ANALYSIS OF TAX LEVY LIMITS FY 86 Tax Levy Limits Allowable FY 85 levy $ 15,064,025 2'/z thereon 376,000 New Construction 253,472 $ 15,693,497 FY 87 Tax Levy Limits Allowable FY 86 levy $ 15,693,497 2%z thereon 392,337 New Construction 350,000 $ 16,435,834 FY 88 Tax Levy Limits Allowable FY 87 levy $ 16,435,834 2Y2 thereon 410,896 New Construction 350,000 $ 17,1961730 FY 89 Tax Levy Limits Allowable FY 88 levy $ 17,196,730 2Y2 thereon 429,918 New Construction 350,000 $ 17,976,648 BUDGET PROJECTION FY 1987 FY 86 budget $26, 792,394 Pension 200,000 Health Insurance 100,000 Debt service decrease (238,000) Salary increase 755,375 27,609,769 Other appropriation 1,850,000 $ 29,459,769 Less receipts and revenues 12,300,00 $ 17,159,769 Special Town Meeting September 23, 1985343 Levy limit $ 16, 435, 834 Above 17,159,769 $ (723,935) BUDGET PROJECTION FY 1988 FY 87 budget $ 27,609,769 Pension and health McManus 300,000 Debt service decrease $ 1,945,000 (65,000) Salary increse Available at present 793,144 Community Center 1,200,000 28,637,913 Other appropriation 1,850,000 $ 30,487,913 Less receipts and revenue 12,300,000 $ 18,187,913 Levy limit $ 17,196,730 Above 18,187,913 $ (991,183) BUDGET PROJECTION FY 89 FY 88 budget $ 28,637,913 Pension and health 200,000 Debt service decrease (74,000) Salary increase 832,801 $ 29,596,714 Other appropriation 1,850,000 $ 31,446,714 Less receipts and revenues 12,300,000 $ 19,146,714 Levy limit $ 17,976,648 Above 19,146,714 $ (1,170,066 SALE OF REAL ESTATE DPW land TASC $ 1,760,000 Depot 125,000 McManus 60,000 $ 1,945,000 Used FY 86 (278,500) Available at present 1,666,500 Community Center 1,200,000 Bear Hill land estimate 2.000.000 $ 4,866,500 Remaining land fill ? ARTICLE 1. Paul C. Dustin, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen reported on the sale of the Community Center. 344 Special Town Meeting September 23, 1985 ARTICLE 1. The following report of the Board of Public Works presented by James R. Boucher, was accepted as a report of progress. REPORT ON THE DUBITZKY PROPERTY On motion of Mr. Philip D. LeBlanc at the Special Town Meeting held June 24, 1985, the Boad of Public Works was instructed to review the so- called Dubitzky property on Salem Street as a potential site for the new public works facility. An analysis of the property was completed by the staff, reviewed and accepted by the Board. This information was sent to Mr. LeBlanc on August 7, 1985, with copies to the Board of Selectmen, Town Moderator, Planning Board, Industrial Development Commission, Conservation Commission and Board of Health. A Summary of the analysis follows: LOCATION AND AREA The subject property is located at the intersection of Salem and Torre Streets, near the Route 128/129 rotary. The property consists of two parcels, neither of which can be used for the public works facililty on its own. When combined, the two parcels contain less than 7 acres of useable land, as discussed below: (a) The larger (6.01) acre parcel is zoned for single- family homes, with more than half of this parcel within the Wetland Zone or its 100 foot buffer zone as defined in the Wetlands Protection Act. There is little chance that waivers can be obtained to fill the wetlands, as the area acts as a large retention pond for a major drainage system. Review of old topological maps and data from excavations for water and sewer systems in the immediate area clearly indicate that this parcel was filled in over peat bogs. Only an extensive site investigation can determine the actual subsurface conditions, but it is reasonable to assume that subsurface ground conditions are of major concern to construction. The approximate cost of such an investigation will be $30,000. (b) The smaller (3.38 acre) parcel is zoned for business, and borders on the Wetland Zone. Although filling of wetlands will not be required, subsurface conditions are suspect for the same reasons given below. EXISTING BUILDINGS The smaller parcel contains structures and parking areas designed for commercial activities, most recently used for a grocery store and a flea market. Though original construction plans are not available for review, there is nothing to suggest that the buildings have structural foundations and floors that will support the loads developed by heavy vehicles. Structural steel, which can be seen, is light and appears to have been designed for simple roof loading. The exterior walls do not lend themselves readily to modification for the installation of multiple openings with overhead doors. Existing heating and cooling systems are clearly designed to serve large open areas and are not easily adaptable to public works facility space requirements. In order to adapt these structures for vehicle storage and repair, the entire structure would have to be rebuilt to conform with the state building codes for that use, and would also have to conform to the requirements for energy efficiency. Costs for demolition of the structure is estimated to be between $50,000 and $75,000 depending on a location for disposal of the materials. There is value in recovery of the structural steeland joists, but the value will not cover the costs of demolition. AVAILABILITY The property is privately owned and effect. If it were to be used for the public taken by eminent domain proceedings. The increased from 12 to 20 percent since then. 1985, asking if the subject property was for July 12, 1985, stating that "The owners of property for use as a garage ". CITIZENS CONCERN there is the possibility of long term leases in works facility, it would have to be purchased or appraised value of land values in Reading have A letter was sent to Mr. Dubitzky on July 2, sale. A reply was received from his attorney on the property are not interested in selling the The Facility Relocation Committee held open meetings concerning various potential sites, and documented the concerns of citizens. The following concerns pertained to the Dubitsky property: (a) Traffic Safety: The property is located on a curve, thereby making access difficult. Construction of a public works facility at this location would add approximately 500 moves per day. This number could be equal to those moves created by a shopping center of this size; however, truck and other vehicle moves would be heaviest during those hours that Salem Street has heavy traffic to serve industrial and commercial facilities in North Reading and Wilmington early morning and late afternoon. JOHN STREET LANDFILL STUDY Reading, MA Minot, DeBlois & Maddison, Inc. September 1985 4 DURPOSE OF THE STUDY : To determine the potential Town benefits associated with the private development of the John Street landfill based on three different scenarios concerning the location of the Town BPW facility. SCENARIOS EXAMINED 1. BPW located on the "front" southwesterly corner of the John Street landfill with private development of the balance of the site. 2. BPW located on the "rear" northeasterly corner of the John Street landfill with private development of the balance of the site. 3. BPW moved from the John Street landfill to an alternate site with private (00� development of the entire John Street site. STUDY QUESTIONS 1. How much and what kind of private development could be attracted to the John Street landfill site ? 14 2. How does the property's former use as a landfill affect the site's private development potential ? 3. Based on the three different assumptions about the location of the BPW facility, how would private development occur on the landfill property ? A 0 14 STUDY QUESTIONS 4. How do each of the three private development options compare with one another in terms of land sale revenues, future tax revenues, and costs ? 5. How do each of the three different assumptions about the location of the BPW affect the cost of BPW development ? 6. Based on the answers to the questions outlined above, is it in the best financial interest of the Town to build the BPW facility on the John Street landfill site ? I (00� CENARIO 1: BPW located on the "front" northwesterlt corner of the John Street landfill with private development of the balance of the site. PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT BPW Facility 50,756 sq. ft. 01 PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT Off ice /R & D Hotel Retail 250,000 sq. ft. 300 rooms 20,000 sq. ft. John Street (40�SCENARIO 2: BPW located on the "rear" southeasterly corner of the John Street landfill with private development of the balance of the site. PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT BPW Facility 50,756 sq. ft. PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT Office /R & D 250,000 sq. ft. Hotel 300 rooms Retail 20,000 sq. ft. John Street (4006CENARIO 14 3: BPW moved form the John Street landfill to an alternate site with private development of the entire John Street landfill. PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BPW Facility Office/ R & D Hotel Retail 0 sq. ft. 485,000 sq. ft. 300 rooms 20,000 sq. ft. �. Office /R & D ■ ■ ■ �1 Hotel Office /R & D FEEW 0 Ret. 5 John Street 1 11 REVENUES FROM PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JOHN STREET LANDFILL SITE LAND SALE REVENUES FUTURE TEN -YEAR TAX REVENUES TOTAL TEN YEAR REVENUES Scenario Scenario Scenario 1 2 3 3,700,000 4,400,000 6,500,000 9,300,000 9,300,000 13,700,000 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- 13,000,000 13,700,000 20,200,000 COSTS OF PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JOHN STREET LANDFILL SITE NEW WELL DEVELOPMENT (400� COST OF ALTERNATIVE BPW SITE TOTAL TEN -YEAR COSTS Scenario Scenario Scenario 1 2 3 0 0 100,000 0 0 0 to 2,800,000 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---------------- 0 0 0 to 2,800,000 NET GAIN TO THE TOWN FROM PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JOHN STREET SITE TOTAL REVENUES TOTAL COSTS TOTAL TEN -YEAR GAIN TO THE TOWN Scenario Scenario Scenario 1 2 3 13,000,000 13,700,000 20,200,000 0 0 0 to 2,800,000 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- 13,000,000 13,700,000 20,100,000 to 17,300,000 (bolvCOSTS OF TOWN DEVELOPMENT OF THE BPW FACILITY :m Scenario Scenario Scenario 1 2 3 CONSTRUCTION COSTS BASE BUILDING COST 2,700,000 3,000,000 2,800,000 FOUNDATION PREMIUMS 400,000 600,000 0 UTILITY & ROADWAY PREMIUMS 600,000 1,000,000 0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS ---- - - - - -- 3,700,000 --- - - - - -- 4,600,000 ---- - - - - -- 2,800,000 :m x BPW SITE ALTERNATIVES STUDY Reading, MA Minot, DeBlois & Maddison, Inc. September 1985 (**O�PURPOSE OF THE STUDY In light of the clear financial advantage associated with preserving the entire John Street landfill site for private development, is there a cost effective alternative location for the Town BPW facility ? STUDY QUESTIONS 1. Are there alternative locations which could accomodate the BPW space requirements, locational requirements, etc. ? 2. How do these alternative compare with the John Street landfill property in terms of the cost of BPW construction, future tax revenues and land sale revenue opportunities ? 3. What would the Town have to accomplish prior to moving the BPW to any of the identified alternative locations ? ALTERNATIVES EXAMINED: 1. Kurchian Woods (portion) Location: Off Main Street Size 6.88 Acres Owner Town Zoning S - 20 2. C & J Homes Location: Size Owner Zoning 3. Ash Street Location: Size Owner Zoning Off Main Street 7.93 Acres Private S - 20 Off Ash Street 5.01 Acres Private IND Plat 210 Lot 4 Plat 181 Lot 6 Plat 44 Lots 13, 16,part 8 and 10 I (60,�ALTERNATIVES EXAMINED: 01 4. Nike Site Location: Off Haverhill St. Size 32.4 Acres Owner Town Zoning S - 20 5. John Street Landfill Location: Off John Street Size 8.32 Acres Owner Town Zoning IND Plot 171 Lot 1 & 167 6 I r (40*� COSTS OF TOWN DEVELOPMENT OF THE BPW FACILITY 1"I KURCHIAN WOODS (portion) C & J HOMES ASH STREET NIKE SITE JOHN STREET LANDFILL Base Building Cost 2,900,000 2,800,000 2,850,000 2,800,000 2,700,000 Foundation/ Road /Utility Total Premiums Cost 0 2,900,000 0 2,800,000 0 2,850,000 0 2,800,000 11000,000 3,700,000 VALUE OF FOREGONE TAX REVENUES RESULTING FROM BPW DEVELOPMENT KURCHIAN WOODS 0 C & J HOMES 370,000 ASH STREET 670,000 NIKE SITE 0 JOHN STREET 3,000,000 VALUE OF FOREGONE LAND REVENUES RESULTING FROM BPW DEVELOPMENT KURCHIAN WOODS 0 C & J HOMES 330,000 ASH STREET 490,000 NIKE SITE 0 JOHN STREET 2,800,000 (V�KEY PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS /QUESTIONS YET TO BE ANSWERED KURCHIAN WOODS 1. Can this proprty be removed from its current conservation use quickly enough to accomodate the BPW's needs ? 2. Is the access road from Main Street to the property sufficiently wide to accomodate BPW vehicles ? C & J HOMES 1. Can this property be acquired from the current owners quickly enough to avoid the need to exercise eminent domain ? 2. Is the access road from Main Street to the property sufficiently wide to accomodate BPW vehicles and if not can a sufficient right of way be purchased ? ASH STREET 1. Can this property be acquired from the current owners quickly enough to avoid the need to exercise eminent domain ? 2. Is there a way to negotiate a land swap with Trancoa in exchange for allowing them to access their building through the industrial zone ? NIKE SITE 1. Can this property be developed without posing a threat to the adjacent water resources ? 2. If a study reveals that there is a threat can the BPW operation be split in such a way as to remove the offending uses and materials from the site ? N KEY PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS /QUESTION YET TO BE ANSWERED JOHN STREET LANDFILL 1. Can the Town afford to lose the tax potential and land sale revenue represented by the John Street BPW location alternative ? 2. Can the Town afford to risk the future development potentials of the larger John Street industrial area ? Special Town Meeting September 23, 1985 r i 1 C°yy (b) Operational Noise: There would be an increase in noise level due to normal operation of the public works facility, but the impact would be greatest during snow removal and sanding operations. (c) Environmental: Due to periodic flooding in the area, residents are concerned about additional runoff created by the paved areas necessary for public works operations. (d) Property Values: The public works facililty would have a negative effect on property values in the surrounding residential areas. CONCLUSION The Board of Public Works believes that no further action should be taken regarding this property. Given the nature of the property, site problems, acquisition and development costs, citizen concerns and the owner's reluctance to sell, the site should be eliminated from consideration for construction of the new public works facility. Respectfully submitted, BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS Douglass L. Barker, Chairman Barry E. Hampson, Secretary Arthur Polychrones Robert P. Griffin James R. Boucher ARTICLE 1. The following Planning Board Report, presented by Maureen Rich, was accepted as a report of progress. PLANNING BOARD REPORT As a context for hearing the Planning Board's Report tonight, I would like to make one comment. To be workable, a democracy assumes that public decisions are made in a context where a substantial majority of concerned citizens with no special or personal interest in any one solution will act for the greatest good of all citizens. I call on you tonight to bring all the information and knowledge you have to bear on the issues at hand, but please hold your emotions in check so that you can hear new information and make the best decisions for the good of our Town tonight. Mr. Pacino has highlighted how important those decisions will be. At the spring Town Meeting you voted to approve $25,000 to study the John Street industrial area. The Planning Board issued a request for proposals to do this work. After interviewing five finalists the eminently qualified firm of Minot, DeBlois & Maddison was selected. In the subsequent three months the study you are about to hear reported upon was done. I would now like to turn the microphone over to Pam McKinney who will report on that study. Report attached. ARTICLE 1. On motion of Paul C. Dustin, it was voted to lay Article 1 on the table ARTICLE 2. On motion of William C. Brown, it was voted that the Board of Selectmen, at the Subsequent Town Meeting of 1985, provide each member with a list of all Town owned lots as show on Plat 123 of the assessor's map and under which Board, Committee or other, control of said lots are held. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Paul C. Dustin, it was voted to lay Article 2 on the table. ARTICLE 3. On motion of Philip B. Pacino, it was voted that the Capital Outlay Plan, as provided for in Article III, Section II of the By -Laws of the Town, as adopted at the Subsequent Town Meeting of November, 1984, and amended at the Special Town Meeting of February, 1985, and the Annual Town Meeting of April, 1985 be amended as follows: FY 86 CHANGE: PUBLIC WORKS GARAGE From $3210.5 to $3750.0 ARTICLE 4. On Motion of Paul F. Caselle, it was voted to transfer $500.00 from the existing FY 1985 -1986 Board of Health expense account Line Item 01- 501 -5705 -371 to a new account line item account for out -of -state travel, not to exceed $500.00. ARTICLE 5. The following motion of Maureen Rich was discussed: That the sum of Ten Thousand ($10,000) Dollars be transferred from the Overlay Reserve and appropriated for the purpose of hiring consultants to make a hydrology study of Town owned land commonly known as the Haverhill Street Nike Site, and shown on the Assessors plans as Plat 170, Lots 1 and 2 and Plat 171, Lot 1. Said funds to be expended under the direction of the Planning Board. On motion of William C. Brown, it was voted that this meeting stand adjourned to meet at 7:30 P.M. on Thursday, September 26, 1985, in the Memorial High School auditorium. Meeting adjourned at 10:55 P.M. 160 Town Meeting members were present. A true copy. Attest: Lawrence Drew Town Clerk ADJOURNED SPECIAL TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School September 26, 1985 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, Stephen J. O'Leary, at 7:30 P.M. On motion of Joseph E. Callahan, it was voted to adjourn this meeting until 7:30 P.M. on September 30th, 1985, at the Reading Memorial High School. This motion to adjourn was as a result of a lack of a quorum, and the impending Hurricane. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 P.M. 5 Town Meeting members were present. A true copy. Attest: Lawrence Drew Town Clerk