Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-09-11 Board of Selectmen HandoutDRAFT MOTIONS BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 Goldy, Tafoya, Schubert, Arena, Bonazoli Hechenbleikner 4a,b) Move that the Board of Selectmen confirm the Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee's recommendations to the Board of Selectmen for the appointment and /or reappointment of the following members to various Boards, Committees and Commissions for terms beginning September 11, 2012 as listed below: ♦ Michelle Benson to a full member on the Climate Advisory Committee with a term expiring June 30, 2013; ♦ Camille Anthony to an Associate position on the Human Relations Advisory Committee with a term expiring June 30, 2013 5b) Move that the Board of Selectmen confirm the betterments for the improvement of Edgemont Avenue and Stewart Road for granite curbing at a total cost of $55,637.77 with the assessments apportioned as follows among the benefitting property owners and at the rate of interest on unpaid balances of 3.97% per annum for a maximum term of up to 20 years: TOTAL ADDRESS PLAT LOT OWNERS ASSESSMENT 74 Edgemont Avenue 20 13 Ronald M. Ranere $ 4,635.58 Carolyn M. Ranere 66 Edgemont Avenue 20 12 Michael Cashins $ 3,775.49 Lisa Cashins 58 Edgemont Avenue 15 253 Kevin Douglas S 3,961.11 Joanne M. Douglas 75 Edgemont Avenue 20 11 Michael J. Long $ 5,146.85 Elizabeth M. Long 69 Edgemont Avenue 20 10 Kenneth J. Lyons S 3,397.86 63 Edgemont Avenue 20 9 57 Edgemont Avenue 20 8 51 Edgemont Avenue 15 246 45 Edgemont Avenue 15 245 3 Stewart Road 11 Stewart Road 19 Stewart Road 25 Stewart Road 35 Stewart Road 15 249 15 250 15 251 15 252 14 58 Ashley B. Petrillo Robert A. Nelson $ 3,292.25 Margaret M. Nelson Michael P. Lenihan $ 3,081.04 Jennifer A. Lenihan Robert W. Shirkoff $ 3,644.28 Pamela A. Shirkoff Louis J. Nunziato $ 3,433.08 Norma Nunziato Stephen G. Zerfas $ 6,325.63 Julie R. Zerfas Norbert A. Wels $ 4,031.53 Agnes R. Wels Robert Emmons $ 3,644.29 Ellen Emmons Paul D. Teague $ 3,785.11 Jeanne M. Teague Kenneth M. Lafferty $ 3,483.67 Tracey Lafferty $ 55,637.77 5d) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve, as part of the Special (one day) liquor license for the "Juke Box Night" within a tent on the football field at Austin Prep on Saturday, September 15, 2012, the playing of music until PM. 5e) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing on the proposed new Demolition Delay Bylaw. 9 Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the proposed new Demolition Delay Bylaw (as presented) (with the following modifications: ). 5g) Move that the Board of Selectmen approves the negotiated sale of a 3700 +/- square foot "assemblage" parcel of land at the intersection of Pearl Street and Audubon Road shown as parcels 2 on a map entitled "Proposed ANR Plan Pearl Street" by the Town of Reading Massachusetts Department of Public Works dated November 1, 2011, to Peter and Patricia Genovese of 10 Duck Road and that the Board approves the signing of the Purchase and Sales Agreement as negotiated. Move that the Board of Selectmen approves the negotiated sale of a 3700 +/- square foot "assemblage" parcel of land at the intersection of Pearl Street and Audubon Road shown as parcels 3 on a map entitled "Proposed ANR Plan Pearl Street" by the Town of Reading Massachusetts Department of Public Works dated November 1, 2011, to Patricia Crowley of 12 Audubon Road and that the Board approves the signing of the Purchase and Sales Agreement as negotiated. Move that the Board of Selectmen authorizes the Town Manager to arrange for the bid for sale pursuant to Chapter 30b regulations, the sale of one 17,800 + /- square foot parcel at the intersection of Pearl Street and Audubon Road shown as parcel 1 on a map entitled "Proposed ANR Plan Pearl Street" by the Town of Reading Massachusetts Department of Public Works dated November 1, 2011, subject to the following minimum bid price and conditions: ♦ Minimum Bid price - $200,000; ♦ Closing — 90 days, subject to extension by the Town of good cause; ♦ Offered in "as is" condition; ♦ Use restricted to one single family home and appurtenant structures , with no further subdivision of the parcel; ♦ Use will exclude application of the parcel as a 40B development; ♦ Driveway access only from Audubon Road; �i ♦ Buyer pays all closing costs and real estate transfer tax, except Town's legal costs. Move that the Board of Selectmen authorize the Town Manager to arrange for the bid for sale pursuant to Chapter 30b regulations, the sale of one +/- 31,614 square foot parcel of land on Lothrop Road known as plat 9 lot 3 on the Town of Reading Assessor's map, subject to the following minimum bid price and conditions: ♦ Minimum Bid price - $250,000; ♦ Closing — 90 days, subject to extension by the Town of good cause; ♦ Offered in "as is" condition; ♦ Use restricted to one single family home and appurtenant structures, with no further subdivision of the parcel; ♦ Prior to construction on the site a plan will be submitted to the Town Engineer showing that a minimum number of trees within 15 feet of the abutting residential properties are to be removed; ♦ Use will exclude application of the parcel as a 40B development; ♦ Buyer pays all closing costs and real estate transfer tax, except Town's legal costs 6a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of August 7, 2012 as amended. 8a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the Executive Session minutes of August 7, 2012 as written. JA RS BT JB SG Move that the Board of Selectmen adjourn the meeting at p.m. 9 TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT Tuesday, September 11, 2012 Administrative matters ♦ Volunteers still needed —for the Bylaw Committee; Conservation Commission, Finance Committee (2); Trails Committee; Historical Commission, West Street Historic District Commission; and Zoning Board of Appeals. ♦ Primary Election — 8% turnout ♦ Old South is conducting a community wide fundraising campaign to repair and restore the steeple and bell tower. www.readingsteeple.org ♦ Reading Pop Warner was permitted to use Amplified Sound for their annual pep really last Saturday Night, 9/8 on the Stadium Football field from the hours of 4 PM — 6 PM. This was posted on the Town Website to alert the public. ♦ Linda Dockser and Elizabeth Lemons made a very helpful presentation to the School Committee regarding the various Jewish Holidays. Community Services ♦ Retail Visioning Workshop - scheduled for September 12, from 8 to 10:30 am at the Police Station Community Room to offer assistance to existing businesses. ♦ The Reading Health Division will be providing seasonal flu vaccinations at the Killam School cafeteria on Wednesday, October 3rd, from 2:30pm until 4:30 pm for adults 18 years and older. We ask that you bring your insurance cards so that we may be reimbursed for the vaccinations. The accepted insurances are: • Medicare Part B • Harvard Pilgrim o Tufts Health Plan o Tufts Health Plan o Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts (please check your card) o UniCare • Health New England • Neighborhood Health Plan o Fallon o MassHealth The fee for the vaccination without one of the accepted insurances is $10. Please do not get a flu vaccination if you are allergic to eggs or any other component of the flu vaccine. Please wear short- sleeved shirts. If you wish to complete the paperwork in advance, consent forms are available on the Reading Health Department website. ♦ Issues with State re Veterans Service Officer District ♦ Open House — Northeast Ballet School September 29 ♦ "Green Business Award" to Swiss Bakers. ♦ October 11, 2 PM — Ribbon Cutting — Oaktree. Special guest will be Greg Bialiki Finance 9/11/2012 1 TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT Tuesday, September 11, 2012 ♦ Joint Meeting on 9 -10 -12 re all day Kindergarten. Library Public Safety ♦ Underage drinking — response from Reading Police Public Works Street Paving — next projects: • Main Street (Washington St to the Railroad Tracks), • Garrett Road • Boswell Road • Irving Street • West Street (thin overlay over water trench; Arcadia to Woburn St). Curbing /Sidewalk ♦ Haven Street — (Contractor experiencing materials delay) ♦ Mineral Street — RMLD getting access rights addressed Utilities ♦ Howard Street water main — Summer to West is completed, and West to County is in progress. Dates 9/11/2012 2 f Swissbakers honored with first Reading "Green Business Award" The Town of Reading has launched a new "Green Business Award" program. Designed by the Reading Climate Advisory Committee in collaboration with RMLD and the Town's Water Department, this voluntary program aims to encourage, support and recognize the efforts of local businesses to decrease their environmental impact. The first "Green Business Award" has been presented to Swissbakers. Located at the Reading Depot Building, 32 Lincoln Street, the business recently replaced incandescent bulbs with energy efficient LEDs and installed a low flow spray nozzle and sink faucet aerators to save both water and natural gas. They recycle plastic, metal, glass, cardboard and paper, They also offer discounts to customers who bring their own reusable cups. If your business has made progress on environmental sustainability, consider nominating yourself for the "Green Business Award ". Simply complete an application form — available from the Town Hall and RMLD — indicating the category(ies) (Energy Efficiency / Renewable Energy, Water Conservation, Waste Reduction and Recycling, Transportation and Locally Grown / Locally Produced) for which your business meets the "green" requirements. You'll need to submit a brief narrative describing your achievements. Once your application has been approved, you'll receive a Reading "Green Business Award" certificate which you may proudly display. Photo of Tom and Helene Stohr accepting award at Fall Street Faire Caption: On Sunday, September 9, Thomas and Helene Stohr of Swissbakers accepted their Green Business Award, presented by the Reading Climate Advisory Committee in recognition of Swissbakers' demonstrated commitment to reduce energy use, conserve water, recycle, and purchase local products and organic foods. APPOINTMENTS TO BECOME EFFECTIVE AUGUST 28, 2012 Climate Advisory Committee Term: 3 years 1 Vacancy Appointing Authority: Board of Selectmen Candidates: *Indicates member requesting full membership Orig. Term Present Member(s) and Term(s) Date Exp. Ron Daddario 97 Summer Avenue (10) 2014 Ray Porter 529 Franklin Street (07) 2015 Vacancy O 2013 David Williams 258 Haverhill Street (08) 2014 Joan Boegel, Chairman 3 Highland Street (10) 2015 *Michelle Benson (Associate) 128 Eastway (06) 2013 Gina Snyder (Associate) 11 Jadem Terrace (06) 2013 Laurie A. Sylvia (Associate) 1176 Main Street (11) 2013 Candidates: *Indicates member requesting full membership Name Addr Occu] Are you a registered voter in Reading? e-mail address: Place a number next to your preferred position(s) (up to four choices) with #1 being your first priority. Animal Control Appeals Committee Audit Committee Board of Appeals _Board of Cemetery Trustees _Board of Health _Board of Registrars _Bylaw Committee Celebration Committee Climate Advisory Committee _Commissioner of Trust Funds _Community Planning & Development Comm. Conservation Commission _Constable _Contributory Retirement Board _Council on Aging _Cultural Council _Custodian of Soldiers' & Sailors' Graves Economic Development Committee _Fall Street Faire Committee _Finance Committee _Historical Commission _Housing Authority _Human Relations Advisory Committee MBTA Advisory Board _Metropolitan Area Planning Council _Mystic Valley Elder Services _ RCTV Board of Directors _ Recreation Committee _ RMLD Citizens Advisory Board _ Town Forest Committee Trails Committee West Street Historic District Commission Ad Hoc Committee Other Please outline relevant experience for the position(s) sought: (feel free to attach a resume or other statement of interest/qualifications) �0_ 6-( Revised 4 -10 -12 9 �V -! 0 Z APPOINTMENTS TO BECOME EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 6, 2012 Human Relations Advisory Committee Term: 3 years Appointing Authority: Board of Selectmen Present Member(s) and Term(s) Carie Ann Torrence Monique Pillow Gnanaratnam Prabha Sankaran (BOS) Lori Hodin Jacalyn Wallace Karen Janowski (School Com.) James Cormier (Police) Robin I. Decker (Associate) Candidates: Camille Anthony 0 Vacancy Orig. Term Date Exp. 105 Libby Avenue (11) 2014 873 Main Street (08) 2015 39 Randall Road (12) 2015 385 Summer Avenue (07) 2013 75 Hopkins Street (12) 2013 30 Azalea Circle (11) 2014 15 Union Street (05) 2013 18 Winter Street (11) 2013 10 �� "1 Name Address: ) c A aL� t� Tel. (Home) 3� Tel. (Work) (Is this number listed ?)_ Occupation: # of years in Reading. Are you a registered voter in Reading? e-mail address: Place a number next to your preferred position(s) (up to four choices ) with #1 being your tA priority. _Animal Control Appeals Committee Fall Street Faire Committee Committee _Finance Committee _Audit _Board of Appeals _Historical Commission of Cemetery Trustees Housing Authority _Board of Health �Iuman Relations Advisory Committee _Board ,,—d of Registrars _MBTA Advisory Board _ Committee Metropolitan Area Planning Council ^Mystic _Bylaw Celebration Committee Valley Elder Services -r TN*rectors _Custodian of Soldiers' & Sailors' Graves — Economic Development Committee Please outline relevant experience for the position(s) sought: .(feel free to attach a resume or other statement of interest/qualifications) ti EDGEMONT AVENUE STEWART ROAD CURB BETTERMENT - FINAL ASSESSMENT TOTAL ADDRESS PLAT LOT OWNERS ASSESSMENT 74 Edgemont Avenue 20 13 Ronald M. Ranere $ 4,635.58 Carolyn M. Ranere 66 Edgemont Avenue 20 12 Michael Cashins $ 3,775.49 Lisa Cashins 58 Edgemont Avenue 15 253 Kevin Douglas $ 3,961.11 Joanne M. Douglas 75 Edgemont Avenue 20 11 Michael J. Long $ 5,146.85 Elizabeth M. Long 69 Edgemont Avenue 20 10 Kenneth J. Lyons $ 3,397.86 Ashley B. Petrillo 63 Edgemont Avenue 20 9 Robert A. Nelson $ 3,292.25 Margaret M. Nelson 57 Edgemont Avenue 20 8 Michael P. Lenihan $ 3,081.04 Jennifer A. Lenihan 51 Edgemont Avenue 15 246 Robert W. Shirkoff $ 3,644.28 Pamela A. Shirkoff 45 Edgemont Avenue 15 245 Louis J. Nunziato $ 3,433.08 Norma Nunziato 3 Stewart Road 15 249 Stephen G. Zerfas $ 6,325.63 Julie R. Zerfas Page 1 of 2 13 EDGEMONT AVENUE STEWART ROAD CURB BETTERMENT - FINAL ASSESSMENT TOTAL ADDRESS PLAT LOT OWNERS ASSESSMENT 11 Stewart Road 15 250 Norbert A. Weis $ 4,031.53 Agnes R. Weis 19 Stewart Road 15 251 Robert Emmons $ 3,644.29 Ellen Emmons 25 Stewart Road 35 Stewart Road 15 252 Paul D. Teague $ 3,785.11 Jeanne M. Teague 14 58 Kenneth M. Lafferty $ 3,483.67 Tracey Lafferty $ 55,637.77 Page 2 of 2 14 0613 LATHAM LAW OFFICES LLC 643 MAIN STREET READING, MA 01867 "O. BRADLEY T . ATHAM CHRISTOPHER M. O. LATI3AM JOSHUA E. LATHAM' • ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN MASSACHUSETTS AND NEW HAMPSIEME August 28, 2012 Peter Hechenbleikner, Town Manager Reading Town Hall 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Re: Austin Prep function - Juke Box Night on September 15, 2012 Dear Peter: TEL: (781) 942 -4400 FAX: (781) 9447079 Based upon my discussion with Paula, we ask for the opportunity to appear before the Board of Selectmen to request that the entertainment at the Austin Prep function on September 15`)' be allowed to continue until 11:30 p.m._ The function includes an auction followed by socializing with a band. The organizers would like to have the auction be held first so that they will have the maximum attendance during the fund raising activities. The participants will be parents and benefactors of Austin Prep and are responsible adults. The entertainment will be within a tent with enclosed sides. We thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Latham La Offices LLC radley Latham 22 (9 S�J THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Number: 2012 -4 Fee: $50-00 TOWN OF READING This is to certify that ANTHONY PIMENTEL, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF AUSTIN PREPARATORY SCHOOL IS HEREBY GRANTED A SPECIAL ONE -DAY LICENSE FOR THE SALE OF ALL ALCOHOL AT JUKE BOX NIGHT TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2012 AT AUSTIN PREPARATORY SCHOOL, 101 WILLOW STREET, ON THE FOOTBALL FIELD IN AN ENCLOSED. TENT WITH SIDES BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 5:00 P.M. TO 12:30 A.M. Under Chapter 138, Section 14, of the Liquor Control Act. Holders of one day licenses shall provide.a bartender and /or servers who are trained and authorized to make decisions regarding continued service of alcoholic beverages to attendees. There shall be no self service of any alcoholic beverage at any event approved as a one day license. This permission is granted in conformity with the Statutes and Ordinances relating thereto and expires at 12:30 a.m., September 15, 2012, unless suspended or revoked subject to the following conditions: 1. Liquor to be purchased from authorized distributor. 2. Liquor to be stored on site only before and after event. 3. No music after 10:00 P.M. 4. Permit for the tent must be secured from the Building Inspector 5. No parking on Willow Street Date Issued: August 21, 2012 .5 d (, LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF READING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING To the Inhabitants of the Town of Reading: Please take notice that the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Reading will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 11, 2012 at 8:55 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading; Massachusetts on the proposed new Demolition Delay Bylaw. A copy of the proposed doe - ument regarding this topic is available in the Town Manager's office, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA, M -W- Thurs from 7:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m., Tues from 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. and is attached to the hearing notice pn the website.at www.read.ingma.gov All interested parties are invited to attend the hearing,: or may submit their comments in writing. or by email prior to 6:00 p.m. on September 11, 2012 to townmanager@ci:reading.ma.0 S 9/5 By order of Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager 38 Draft Demolition Delay Bylaw with comments received as of 8 -16 -12 7.2 Historic Demolition Delay 7.2.1 Purpose The purpose of this bylaw is to provide the Reading Historical Commission with a tool to assist the Commission in its efforts to preserve the Town's heritage and to protect historically significant structures within the Town, which reflect or constitute distinctive features of the architectural, cultural, economic, political or social history of the Town. The rent purpose of this bylaw ils not to permanently prevent demolition even if it ultimately cannot prevent demolition, is to find a reasonable option to prevent complete demolition, but rather to provide owners of such structures with time to consider alternatives, by encouraging owners to seek out ways to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such structures To achieve these purposes, the Reading-Historical Commission is empowered to create a List of Historic Structures, and to provide a copy of that List, as it may be updated from time to time, to the Building Inspector. With the Building Inspector, the Reading Historical Commission will implement the provisions of this bylaw with respect to the issuance of permits for demolition of structures that are included on the List of Historic Structures 7.2.2 Definitions The following terms when used in this bylaw shall have the meanings set forth below. 7.2.2.1 Commission Reading Historical Commission. 7.2.2.2 Demolition Any act of pulling down, destroying, removing or razing a structure or commencing the work of total destruction with the intent of completing the same and!() which work would require Fequiring a Demolition Permit. 7.2.2.3 Demolition Application An official application form provided by the Building Inspector for an application for a Demolition Permit. 7.2.2.4 Hearing A public hearing conducted by the Commission after due public notice as provided in this bylaw. 7.2.2.5 Legal Representative A person or persons legally authorized to represent the owner of a structure that is or is proposed to be subject to this bylaw. 7.2.2.6 List The List of Historic Structures as it is constituted pursuant to this bylaw. 7.2.2.7 Owner Current owner of record of a structure that is included in or proposed to be included in the List of Historic Structures. 7.2.2.8 Premises The parcel of land upon which a demolished Significant StrUGture structure that appears on the List as defined in 7.2.2.6 was located and all adjoining parcels of land under common ownership or control. 39 i 7e Z 7.2.2.9 Structure Materials assembled at a fixed location to give support or shelter, such as a building. 7.2.3 Commission to Establish a List of Historic Structures The Commission will provide a List of Historic Structures to the Building Inspector. This List shall be updated from time to time as needed when properties are added to or subtracted from the List of Historic Structures. The List shall also be provided on the Town's web site or other electronic means of publishing information to the community. This List shall be made up of: • all structures listed on, or located within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or the Massachusetts Historical Register of Historic Places ; and • all structures included in the Town of Reading Historical and Architectural Inventory, as of September 1, 1995, maintained by the Commission; and • all structures that were added in 2010 pursuant to the processes in existence at that time; and • following the procedures included in Section 7.2.3.1 of this. bylaw, all structures that have been determined from time to time by the Commission to be historically or architecturally significant. 7.2.3.1 Procedures for expanding the List of Historic Structures In considering additional structures to be included on the List of Historic Structures, pursuant to section 7.2.3, the following process shall be followed: • The Commission shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, an inventory form for each structure considered for addition to the List of Historic Structures. The inventory form for each property shall be prepared using a standard form provided by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. The criteria to be used for consideration for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures will include: • The structure is determined to be importantly associated with one or more historic persons or events, or • The structure is determined to be associated with the broad architectural, cultural, economic or social history of the Town or Commonwealth, or • The structure is believed to be historically or architecturally significant in terms of • Period, • Style, • Method of building construction, • Association with a significant architect, builder or resident either by itself or as part of a group of buildings; • The Commission will inform by regular US mail each property owner whose structure is being considered for preparation of an inventory form • The owner of each structure for which an inventory form has been prepared shall be sent a notice of a public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the hearing. The notice shall be sent by Certified Mail — return receipt requested — or by service by a Constable. The notice shall include the following information: • that the structure that they own is being considered for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures, • a copy of the inventory form for the structure, • a statement as to the criteria considered in including additional structures on the List of Historic Structures, and • a copy of this bylaw. In addition to the notice of the hearing delivered to each owner, legal notice of the hearing including the street address of all structures proposed to be added to the List of Historic Structures shall be published at the Commission's expense at least 14 days in advance of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the community. Additionally, at least 7 days prior to the hearing a copy of the newspaper notice will be mailed by regular U.S. mail to all property 40 CQ�� .7 owners within 300 feet of each property containing a structure to be considered for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures At the hearing, the Commission will hear comment from all owners and abutters who wish to be heard, and following the close of the hearing the Commission will make a determination as to which of the structures proposed for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures shall be voted onto that List. The decision as to what properties to include shall be made by the Commission, with the inclusion of a property on the List of Historic Structures requiring the affirmative vote of at least 4 members of the Commission. The vote shall be taken at a public meeting, and the vote may be made either the same day as the close of the hearing, or at a later meeting of the Commission. If at a later meeting, the Commission shall inform each owner either upon closing the hearing or by regular US mail at least 3 days, in advance of a public meeting, of the date of the meeting at which the matter is to be further discussed. Nothing shall preclude the Commission from voting to add structures onto the List of Historic Structures at different meetings. 17.2.3.2 Owner's Appeal of addition of a structure to the List of Historic Structures An owner, at the public hearing at which additions to the List of Historic Structures are to be considered, may object to inclusion of their structure onto the List of Historic Structures. At the hearing or such later date as agreed by the Commission, the owner shall submit information or documentation in support of their objection. The Commission may consider their objection at the hearing and /or subsequent public meetings, and the Commission shall not vote to include the structure in question onto the List of Historic Structures until all information supplied by the owner can be fully considered by the Commission. In considering whether to finally vote to include a structure on the List of Historic Structures the Commission will consider the information provided by the owner, and particularly how the structure meets the criteria established in 7.2.3.1. In addition to those criteria, the Commission will consider the uniqueness of the structure, quality of the materials remaining on the — inside -and outside of the structure, and financial or other hardship that might be created to the owner by inclusion of the structure onto the List of Historic Structures. A structure whose owner objects may only be included on the List of Historic Structures if all 5 members of the Commission vote to do so. 7.2.4 Referral of Demolition Applications of structures on the List of Historic Structures by the Building Inspector to the Commission Upon the receipt of a completed Demolition Application for a structure on the List of Historical Structures, the Building Inspector shall • As soon as possible but not later than 30 days from the submission of a complete Demolition Application, notify the owner that the structure they want to demolish is on the List of Historic Structures, and therefore subject to this bylaw. • Provide the owner with a packet to apply to the Commission for demolition approval, along with a copy of the inventory of their structure, a copy of this bylaw, and a copy of any guidelines that the Commission has adopted regarding the demolition delay process. • Inform the Chairman of the Commission of a pending application under this bylaw. • Obtain an abutters list, at the expense of the owner, of all properties within 300 feet. • Upon receipt of a completed application for Commission demolition approval, determine the completeness of the application. • Notify the Chairman of the Commission who will provide the Building Inspector with alternative dates for a public hearing not sooner than 7 days nor more than 21 days from the determination that the application to the Commission is complete • Arrange for the publication of a legal notice of the hearing, at the owner's expense, in a newspaper of general circulation in the community including the street address of all structures proposed to be demolished. The notice shall be published not later than 7-14 days prior to the hearing. 41 0q (9 5 • Arrange for a mailing not later than 7 days prior to the hearing, at the owner's expense, of a copy of the newspaper notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the property containing a structure to be considered for demolition. • Immediately forward a copy of the application to each of the members of the Commission. 7.2.4.1 Completed Application The Owner shall be responsible for submitting seven sets of the following information as a completed application prior to the scheduling of the public hearing: • Completed application form (if any) • Description of the structure to be demolished (the inventory is an acceptable document for this purpose); • A demolition plan • Assessor's map or plot plan showing the location of the structure to be demolished on its property with reference to the neighboring properties; • Photographs of all facade elevations; • Statement of reasons for the proposed demolition and data supporting said reasons; • Description of the proposed reuse of the premises on which the structure to be demolished is located. • If applicable, the name and contact information of the Legal Representative; 7.2.5 Public Hearing The Commission will hold a hearing to allow all interested parties to voice their opinions and to present pertinent information concerning the structure, as well as its value and importance to the neighborhood and the Town. The Owner or the Legal Representative will present the requested demolition plan and supporting documentation. The public may present their opinions and additional relevant information. After the presentation and the public comments, the Commission will make one of two decisions: • The presented information is insufficient for the Commission to make a final determination on requested demolition of the Structure. Therefore, the Commission may continue the hearing. A continued hearing shall be not later than 21 days from the initial hearing and the hearing shall be closed within 30 days of the initial hearing. • The presented information is sufficient to make a final determination on the requested demolition of the Structure. Therefore, the Commission shall close the hearing. 7.2.6 Determination of whether the Demolition Delay is imposed Once the Hearing is closed, a motion shall be made to determine if the loss of the structure would be detrimental to the Town when considering the purpose of this bylaw as detailed in section 7.2.1: • An affirmative vote by 4 members of the Commission will declare that the structure is protected by this Bylaw, and therefore, a demolition delay of up to six (6) months is imposed beginning the date of the vote. • A negative vote by the Commission (affirmative vote of less than 4 members of the Commission) will declare that the structure is not protected by this Bylaw, and the Building Inspector may issue a permit to demolish the structure. The Commission will notify the Building Inspector within seven (7) days of the Commission's decision. If the notice is not received within the expiration of seven (7) days of the close of the hearing, the Building Inspector may act on the Demolition Permit Application with no further restrictions of this bylaw. 7.2.6.1 Demolition Delay imposed The Commission shall advise the Owner and the Building Inspector of the determination that the Demolition Permit will be delayed up to six (6) months. During this time, alternatives to demolition shall be considered. The Commission shall offer to the Owner information about options other than demolition, including but not limited to resources in the preservation field, the Massachusetts Historical Commission, the Town Planner, and other interested parties that might provide assistance in preservation or adaptive reuse. 42 -e S 7.2.6.2 Responsibilities of Owner if Demolition Delay is imposed The Owner shall be responsible for participating in the investigation of options to demolition by: • Actively pursuing alternatives with the Commission and any interested parties; • providing any necessary information; • allowing reasonable access to the property; and • by securing the premises. 7.2.6.3 Release of Delay Notwithstanding the preceding section of this bylaw, the Building Inspector may issue a Demolition Permit at any time after receipt of written notice from the Commission to the effect that the Commission is satisfied that one of the following conditions has been met: • There is no reasonable likelihood that either the Owner or some other person or group is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the structure; • The Owner, during the delay period, has made continuing, bona fide and reasonable efforts to locate a purchaser to preserve, rehabilitate and or restore the structure, and that such efforts have been unsuccessful; • The Owner has agreed in writing to accept a demolition permit on specified conditions, including mitigation measures approved by the Commission. Such mitigation could include a demolition of only a portion of the structure; or • A period of six (6) months has elapsed since the conclusion of the Hearing and provided. 7.2.6.4 Appeal of the imposition of Demolition Delav The owner of a structure for which the Commission has imposed a demolition delay may appeal from the imposition of the delay, and /or conditions of the imposition of the delay, by filing with both the Chairman of the Historical Commission and the Board of Selectmen a written notice of appeal within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision of the Commission to impose the Demolition Delay. Filing of an appeal will not extend the delay of up to 6 months imposed under section 7.2.6.1 of this bylaw. Within twenty -one (21) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the Board of Selectman shall convene an appeal hearing. Notice of the hearing which -shall inGlude the be sent to the Chairman of the Historical Commission and to the owner or the owner's Legal Representative, for the purpose of adjudicating the appeal. The Board of Selectmen at the hearing appeal shall review the record of the proceedings before the Commission and input provided by the owner and by Commission representatives. Notice of the hearing shall be given to the parties owner, to the Commission, and to abutters within 300 feet of the property. Within fourteen (14) days of the conclusion of the hearing, the Board of Selectmen will render a decision on the appeal. The decision shall be based on the record of the Commission's hearing at which the Demolitions Delay was imposed; information provided by the owner or the Commission at the Board of Selectmen hearing; consideration of the purpose of the bylaw as stated in section 7.2.1; how the structure meets the criteria established in 7.2.3.1.; the uniqueness of the structure; quality of the materials remaining on the - outside of the structure; and financial or other hardship that might be created to the owner 7.2.7 Emergency Demolition Nothing in this Section shall be construed to prevent the Building Inspector from ordering pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 143 the emergency demolition of a structure included in the List of Historic Structures. Before issuing an order for an emergency demolition of such a structure, the 43 J Building Inspector shall make reasonable efforts to inform the Chairperson of the Commission of his intent to issue such an order. 7.2.8 Enforcement and Remedies In the event a structure on the List of Historic Structures is demolished in violation of this bylaw, then no building permit shall be issued for the premises for a period of two (2) years after the date of such demolition. Note — the sections in boxes are alternative language for the Board of Selectmen to consider Schubert Town Counsel Tafoya 44 9) S6� ANGELA BINDA ERIN CALVO -BACCI LISA MYKYTA 10 ORCHARD PARK DRIVE 494 MAIN STREET AUDREY MYKYTA READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 114 PRESCOTT STREET READING, MA 01867 GLEN P STEWART ERIC LYNCH JEANNE BORAWSKI 125 HOWARD STREET 625 MAIN STREET #29 3 DEER PATH LANE EZEADING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 KARL WELD WARE FAMILY JOHN R. HALSEY 60 HIGHLAND STREET 39 OLD FARM ROAD 75 BEAVER ROAD READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 WILLIAM BREWIN BRENDA SOUSA MARSIE K. WEST 129 HOWARD STREET 129 HOWARD STREET WARREN WEST READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 3 WHITEHALL LANE READING, MA 01867 MARK CARDONO ROBERTA SULLIVAN SHARLENE REYNOLDS SANTO 26 BOSWELL ROAD 76 MINOT STREET 46 WAKEFIELD STREET READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 ROBYN PARKER NANCY KOHL VIRGINIA ADAMS 9 BERKELEY STREET 607 PEARL STREET 59 AZALEA CIRCLE READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 READING, MA 01867 PHIL PACINO 5 WASHINGTON STREET UNIT D6 READING, MA 01867 ELAINE WEBB 309 PEARL STREET READING, MA 01867 45 9 z-'d cnq)r 0( TOWN OF READING CITIZEN PETITION FORM ANNUAL/SUBSEQUENT TOWN MEETING Please return the Citizen Petition form to the Town Manager's Office A minimum of 10 signatures of voters registered in Reading is required. Pursuant to Section 2.1.7 of the General Bylaw, all Articles for the Annual Town Meeting (Spring Town Meeting) shall be submitted to the Board of Selectmen not later than 8:00 p.m. on the fifth Tuesday preceding the date of election of Town Officers, unless this day is a. holiday in which case the following day shall be substituted. All Articles for the Subsequent Town Meeting (Fall Town Meeting) shall be submitted to the Board of Selectmen not later than 8:00 p.m. on the seventh Tuesday preceding the Subsequent Town Meeting in which- action -is to -be taken, – unless this- da- y- is- a- holida -y -in- -which -case -the follow wing -day -shall- be -s.ubstitijtpd. Primary Sponsor: Name: David Mancuso Address:129 Howard Street, Reading MA 01867 Phone: 781- 872 -1216 Email Address: Mancusomail @yahoo.com certify that I am d voter in the Town of Reading Signa ur ED — We, the undersigned registered voters of the Town of Reading, hereby petition the Board of Selectmen pursuant to M.G.L. c. 39 § 10 and Section 2 -13 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, to include the following Article in the Warrant for the next (ARnual} /(Subsequent) (cross out one) Town Meeting to be held on November 14, 2011. Warrant Article Title: Amendment of Section 7.2 of the General Bylaw Demolition of Structures of Potentially Historical Significance, N To see if the Town will vote to amend Section 7.2, Demolition of Structures of Potentially Historical Significance, of the Reading General Bylaw, as follows (all section numbers are in accord with thegoposed recodified General Bylaw):' N O� by inserting the following new sections: 7.2.3.7 Appeal 99 Within seven (7) business days of the Commission's determination that a structure is a Preferably4reservf�d Historic Structure pursuant to Section 7.2.3.6 hereof, the property owner may appeal the determinWon� to fhe Board of Selectmen by filing a written request for review with the Board of Selectmen. The request for review shall be received by the Board of Selectmen and the Town Clerk's Office within seven (7) business days of the date of the Commission's determination and a copy of the request shall be provided to the Building Commissioner and the Commission. The Board of Selectmen shall hold a public hearing and issue its determination within forty -five (45) business days from the date of said Commission's determination. Public notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be posted in a conspicuous place at Town Hall grid published.in a local newspaper not less than seven (7) business days prior to the date of the scheduled public hearing. Said notice shall identify the street address of the subject Building. A copy of the public hearing notice shall be mailed to the Applicant and record owner if different from the Applicant, the Building Commissioner and Commission; 7.2.3.8 Certificate of Hardship Pursuant to M.G.L. c.40C, §10(c), in the event of an application for a Certificate of Hardship, the Commission shall determine whether, owing to the conditions especially affecting the building or structure involved, but not affecting the District generally, failure to approve an application will result in a substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the applicant and whether such application may be approved without substantial detriment tathe public welfare and without substantial derogation from the intent and purposes of this bylaw. If the Commission 46 re determines that owing to such conditions failure to approve an application will involve substantial hardship'to the applicant then approval thereof may be made to authorize the Building Inspector to approve the application for demolition of said property; and F c by renumbering the current Sections 7.2.3.7 and 7.2.3.8 as Sections 7.2.3.9 and 7.2.3.10; or take any other action in respect thereto. PETITIONERS: PRINTED NAME STREET ADDRESS SIGNATURE �reGy� (Name must be substantially /as- r-egister-ed)��// p ✓ 1. C_j a1 91• C'a`ve - CC,f 02. Li S-�, Ay Ky [r, w,x.S.4� A � titi I /03.kdr P�efc. �, y V05.. r1c n 7.�� ,"i a b, 51 3 X06.. J��r fkew� 2-1- .rte ��`9c J07.,�, 3�xcxs��lc't `t7eer PartCrl 47" 08 ��y}/ GyC =Z1� LQ 6I� s7 G2� 18. 19. 20. Total Signatures Certified:�?�_ ` -A,%4� 47 D 5'e-I a '� C( aU Vv— 12. 3 '1 ��� 3 Y cd IS V/13. Oil (� A/kLS ,/14. W 11� c.M �►eli t� �.�1 'r�uc� y-� 15.J t�Yl- 1 �t3S a �Ir, f�GclCt� /�J `Jd GI�LZ �f oe t/16. � �,� �- `? (An �i7. 4-V f" 18. 19. 20. Total Signatures Certified:�?�_ ` -A,%4� 47 D 5'e-I a Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Weld, Karl Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 11:09 AM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Historic Commission Appeals Process To the Board of Selectmen, I'll be able to make the meeting tomorrow night when you talk Historic Commission and appeals process. As a resident and property owner, I just wanted to let you know that I think there definitely should be an appeals process for property owners to contest being added to the Preferred /Protected properties list. By allowing property owners to appeal this decision without going to court, the Town would be showing good faith and good will to property owners. Not all property owners want to be included on this list. Some feel that their property's value is lowered with inclusion. To have the opportunity to appeal their case to a higher authority, should the Historical Commission rule against their wishes, property owners would have their due process rights protected. As an example, zoning rulings can be appealed. I also think the BoS should hear the appeal as the highest elected officials in town, with authority to oversee the Historic Commission's work. A majority of the residents I've spoken to in my precinct feel the same way. As one of their elected representatives, I feel it my duty to inform you of their position as well. Thank you for considering this position. Karl Weld 60 Highland St. Town Meeting Member, Precinct 7 Dear Peter and Members of the Board of Selectmen, 9/6/12 I am writing to express my opinions on the latest draft of the proposed demolition delay bylaw rewrite to be presented at November Town Meeting. While I was unable to attend the Board of Selectmen meeting in early August where Peter presented his rewritten bylaw that came out of the Working Group, I did attend both Working Group meetings as an observer, and have been reading the changes to the draft as they have been submitted. Below are my comments on the current version of the demo delay bylaw draft. First, a great deal of work has been done by Peter, the Reading Historical Commission, and the Working Group members, and I believe most of the work has been done to accomplish the goals and changes that were requested by the Board of Selectmen and property owners. This bylaw has been discussed at length over the past 17 months, one significant change has already been made (shortening the delay from 12 to 6 months), and more are proposed. At the November 2011 Town Meeting, Ms. Erin Calvo -Bacci presented an Instructional Motion which stated, "Move that the Town Meeting instruct the Board of Selectmen to direct the Reading Historical Commission to draft a clear, concise process for property owners to appeal the addition of their property to the historically significant structures subject to the demolition delay bylaw. A draft of this appeal process shall be created in an open and transparent process, including one or more opportunities for public comment..." (See attachment.) In a letter to the RHC (1/5/12), the BoS directed the RHC to address the issue of adding properties to the list of structures subject to the delay, and to improve notice to and involvement of potentially affected property owners. With the significant changes made by the RHC and incorporated into section 7.2.3.1, Procedures for expanding the List of Historical Structures, and the addition of 7.2.3.2, Owner's Appeal of addition of a structure to the List of Historic Structures, these goals have been met. This is an appropriate place for a property owner appeal. Changes made in favor of greater property owner involvement are proposed here, and I support these changes, with one exception. The vote required under 7.2.3.2., to include a property on the List when a property owner objects, is written 5/5. I believe the vote should be 4/5, as there is no other decision (of which I am aware) made by any other town body, board or commission, which requires a 5/5 vote. I do not believe that the RHC should be held to different standard than other town boards and commissions when voting on important matters. While this decision affects property owners, there are other decisions made by town bodies which effect property owners that do not require a unanimous vote. The appeal procedure requires the RHC to consider additional information presented by the property and to consider the criteria differently, so even a 4/5 vote (the same vote as that required to add a structure to the List with no objection) would be more difficult to achieve after considering property owner objections. In addition to these changes, the demo delay process has been streamlined, cutting out one intermediary step and shortening the time frame from application (7.2.4) to determination (7.2.6). I support these changes. (9 7.2.6.4 Appeal of the Imposition of the Demolition Delay I do not support section 7.2.6.4 of the proposed bylaw for the reasons stated below. This section outlined in a box on the draft is "alternative language for the Board of Selectmen to consider" according to Peter. The idea of an appeal to the Board of Selectmen, and an appeal of the actual delay, have been discussed several times, and objections have been raised, such as the choice for the appeal to go to the Selectmen, a political body, and not the ZBA, the town's body for hearing appeals. First and foremost, I do not believe an appeal is appropriate here because the demo delay bylaw does not empower the RHC to prohibit any property owner from demolishing their property if they so choose. Unlike other decisions made by other boards, or the decision to add a property to the List, this is not a permanent decision. The demo delay is a moratorium, not a prohibition, and is limited to six months. The decision to impose a delay has a TEMPORARY effect. The purpose of an appeal is to reverse a decision, but no appeal is necessary here, as the decision is automatically reversed after six months. I do not believe that a six -month delay is burdensome for a property owner within the context of building construction and permitting. The appeals process could, however, significantly impact the work of the RHC, which has six months to work to try to find an alternative to demolition. (The delay has been successfully applied in the past.) This allows approximately 4 months to propose a plan, and two months to execute it. If an appeal takes 1' /z to 2 months, and the RHC is occupied with this appeal, then their ability to find an alternate plan is greatly hampered. Recently it was announced by the U. S. Postal Service that the Post Office building on Haven Street would be up for sale. In the article in the Chronicle, a spokesperson for the Postal Service stated they would put the building up for sale for 6 months to explore options, 6 months being a reasonable amount of time they felt to do this. The purpose of the demo delay bylaw is to allow the RHC the time to explore, and hopefully find, an alternative to demolition when a property owner has applied for a demo permit. Proposed changes to the bylaw should not be so significant that they, in effect, nullify the bylaw or render it completely ineffective. An appeal of the imposition of the demolition delay does that. Peter's language for this section (before Selectman Schubert and Town Counsel's changes) comes almost verbatim, in near entirety, from Article 21, the citizen petition presented by Ms. Calvo - Bacci, from the Annual Town Meeting Warrant, April 23, 2012. (See attachments.) Article 21 would have amended the bylaw to add an appeal not only from inclusion on the list of properties subject to the demo delay, but also to all of the conditions of the demo delay itself. Neither the RHC nor the Bylaw Committee was in favor of this article. The Board of Selectmen urged Ms. Calvo - Bacci to withdraw her article, so that a proper reworking of the demo delay bylaw could be done in earnest. So it is surprising to see Article 21 inserted, almost in its entirety, into this reworked bylaw. The Bylaw Committee Report (printed in the warrant) states: "The Bylaw Committee recommended changes to this article so that a process could be put in place for appeal on initially being included on (sic) list of potentially historical structures. The recommended changes would result in the article being applied to the initial inclusion AND WOULD NOT EFFECT THE DEMOLITION DELAY" (my emphasis). The Bylaw Committee recommended the article only provided their changes were accepted, and the appeal pertained only to the inclusion on the list of significant structures. The Bylaw Committee was not in favor of an appeal of the imposition of the demolition delay. Significant changes have been proposed to the bylaw, however this section should be removed. was not in favor of Article 21 in April and I am not in favor of this version of it now. I urge the Board of Selectmen to remove section 7.2.6.4 from the warrant article. Changes to the bylaw will result in a clearer process and greater property owner participation. However, I urge the Board of Selectmen to remember the original intent of this bylaw, the protection of historical assets of the town, and to provide the RHC with a necessary tool to do its work. I hope the above changes are made to the draft before it goes to Town Meeting. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Angela Binda Z� RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 The Historical Commission has devoted much time reviewing the proposed Demolition Delay Bylaw revisions dated Aug. 14, 2012. Our comments are as follows: In general we support the main body of text and believe it meets the objectives to clarify the process and to allow for greater home owner participation. Below, there are a few suggestions and adjustments highlighted in yellow, that we would like to see incorporated into the final revision of the Demolition Delay Bylaw. We have included the rationale behind each change and a marked up copy of the draft bylaw. 7.2 Historic Property Demolition Delay Add: "Property" Rationale: The addition of "Property ", to the title, defines what is historic and makes the title clearer. 7.2.1 Purpose Replace With "This demolition delay bylaw is an interim protection provision which protects a property for a limited period of time while alternatives to demolition of the property in question can be explored." Rationale: The meanings of the two paragraphs are essentially the same. However, the replacement is simpler and based on wording put forth by Gary Brackett, Reading's Town Counsel. And, in paragraph 3: To achieve these purposes, the Reading Historical Commission is empowered to create and maintain a List of Historic Structures, and to provide a copy of that List, as it may be updated from time to time, to the Building Inspector. With the Building Inspector, the Reading Historical Commission will implement the provisions of this bylaw with respect to the issuance of permits for demolition of structures that are included on the List of Historic Structures Add: "and maintain" Rationale: According to the bylaw, the Historical Commission is able to expand the list. 7.2.2 Definitions Suggestion: Use the definitions throughout the bylaw. For example, in the title and the first paragraph of 7.2.3, Commission to Establish a List of Historic Structures, "List of Historic Structures" could be replaced with "List ". 7.2.3 Commission to Establish a List of Historic Structures The Commission will provide a List Of HiStOFiG to the Building Inspector. This List shall be updated from time to time as needed when properties are armed to of subtracted from, following the demolition of the property, or added to the List The List shall also be provided on the Town's web site or other electronic means of publishing information to the community. Add: ", following the demolition of the property," Rationale: Currently there are no provisions in the bylaw to remove a demolished property from the list. This will allow the Commission to keep the Building Inspector updated and thus not have the owner go through the bylaw's demolition process on a non - historic structure. And rearrange: "added to or subtracted from" Page 1 of 9 3 RHC Bylaw Recommendations Rationale: The rearrangement makes the wording ", following the demolition of the property," clearly associated with the subtraction of property. 7.2.3.1 Procedures for expanding the List of Historic Structures In the first paragraph after all of the bullets: "In addition to the notice of the hearing delivered to each owner, legal notice of the hearing including the street address of all structures proposed to be added to the List of Historic Structures shall be published at the Commission's expense at least 14 days in advance of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the community. Additionally, at least 7 days prior to the hearing a copy of the newspaper notice will be mailed by regular U.S. mail to all contiguous property owners i w�ith�.,n 300 feet of each property containing a structure to be considered for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures Remove: "within 300 feet" Add: "contiguous" Rationale: Immediate abutters would likely have an interest but inclusion of owners within 300' would be excessive since all properties are to be identified in the newspaper and the inclusion in the list would not affect those non - abutting property owners. In the last paragraph: "At the hearing, the Commission will hear comment from all owners and abutters who wish to be heard, and following the close of the hearing the Commission will make a determination as to which of the structures proposed for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures shall be voted onto that List. The decision as to what properties to include shall be made by the Commission, with the inclusion of a property on the List of Historic Structures requiring the affirmative vote of at least 4 members of the Commission. The vote shall be taken at a public meeting, and the vote may be made either the same day as the close of the hearing, or at a later meeting of the Commission. If at a later meeting, the Commission shall inform each owner eitle upon closing the hearing ' —at least 3 days in adVanGe Of a Pt4b1ie+eet€ag; of the date of the meeting at which the matter is to be further discussed. Nothing shall preclude the Commission from voting to add structures onto the List of Historic Structures at different meetings." Remove: "either" And: "or by regular US mail at least 3 days in advance of a public meeting," Rationale: All interested parties will be at the hearing to be continued and it would add cost, staff time, and other town resources to process the mailing. This change makes the bylaw more consistent with other boards /commissions hearing processes. 7.2.3.2 Owner's Appeal of addition of a structure to the List of Historic Structures An owner, at the public hearing at which additions to the List of Historic Structures are to be considered, may object to inclusion of their structure onto the List of Historic Structures. At the hearing or such later date as agreed by the Commission, the owner shall submit information or documentation in support of their objection. The Commission may consider their objection at the hearing and /or subsequent public meetings, and the Commission shall not vote to include the structure in question onto the List of Historic Structures until all information supplied by the owner can be fully considered by the Commission. In considering whether to finally vote to include a structure on the List of Historic Structures the Commission will consider the information provided by the owner, and particularly how the structure meets the criteria established in 7.2.3.1. In addition to those criteria, the Commission will consider the uniqueness of the structure, quaff of , its structural integrity and €+aaRGial a other hardship that might be created to the owner by inclusion of the structure onto the List of Historic Structures. A structure whose owner objects may only be included on the List Page 2 of 9 0 RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 of Historic Structures if by an affirmative vote of Replace: "quality of the materials remaining on the inside -and outside of the structure," With: "its structural integrity ". Rationale: The structural integrity is more important than the quality of the materials. Is a structure built in the 17`h century and made from hand hewn lumber and structurally sound better than a structure built in the late 19`h century with rotten sills and new, high quality, clapboards with a stunning paint job? Remove: "financial or" Rationale: Proof of financial hardship would make the owner's finances public record and the Historical Commission is not necessarily qualified to assess financial hardship. Replace: "if all 5 members of the Commission vote to do so" With: "by an affirmative vote of at least 4 members of the Commission" Rationale: The wording "of at least 4 members of the Commission" is used throughout and will be consistent with the rest of the bylaw. The unanimous vote of "5 members of the Commission" would have the Commission held to a higher standard than the Supreme Court, which is not required to have a unanimous decision. Currently the Commission has 4 voting members. If the Commission needed to vote on the appeal with an outcome of 5 -0 -0, the vote would either be invalid or automatically default in favor of the appeal. Additionally, the appeal may bring forth pertinent information that was previously unknown to the Commission members. 7.2.4 Referral of Demolition Applications of structures on the List of Historic Structures by the Buildin Inspector to the Commission In bullet point number 6: • Notify the Chairman of the Commission who will provide the Building Inspector with alternative possible dates for a public hearing not sooner than 7- 14 days nor more than X1.28 days from the determination that the application to the Commission is complete Replace: "alternative" With: "possible" Rationale: The use of alternative implies the existence of previously chosen dates. Replace: "21' With: „28„ Rationale: Due to the recommended change from "7" to "14 days prior to the hearing" in bullet point number 7, the time frame in which to conduct a hearing is reduced to from 14 to 7 days and then it is reduced by 2 days for the weekend and any holidays that may fall within the seven days, and then by the number of days to get a date that is agreeable to all relevant parties. This could lead to 1 available meeting date. Replace: „7" With: " 14" Rationale: The statement of "not sooner than 14 ", in bullet point number 7, makes the statement, "not sooner than 7 days ", in bullet point number 6, irrelevant. Page 3 of 9 0 RHC Bylaw Recommendations 7.2.5 Public Hearing In bullet point 1: Note: 9/6/2012 • The presented information is insufficient for the Commission to make a final determination on requested demolition of the Structure. Therefore, the Commission may continue the hearing. A continued hearing shall be not later than 21 days from the initial hearing and the hearing shall be closed within 30 days of the initial hearing." There is no latitude for the owner to request more time to gather information. Remove: The entire section Rationale: The Commission does not endorse the appeal provision that allows for a property owner to seek relief from 6 month delay after due process before the Commission. Aggrieved owners have the right to an appeal to Supreme Court. The adoption of an additional appeal process would hinder and nullify the effectiveness of Reading's demolition delay bylaw. The owner never loses their right to demolish their property, as it is only an interim protection provision. As proposed, the recently reduced, 6 month delay would be reduced further to just over 4 months; 14 days to file appeal; 21 days to hearing; 14 days for decision. Section 7.2.6.4, "Appeal of the imposition of Demolition Delay," should not be included in the revisions of what is an improved iteration of the purpose, process and intent of the bylaw. Page 4 of 9 3� RHC Bylaw Recommendations 7.2 Historic Property Demolition Delay 9/6/2012 7.2.1 Purpose The purpose of this bylaw is to provide the Reading Historical Commission with a tool to assist the Commission in its efforts to preserve the Town's heritage and to protect historically significant structures within the Town, which reflect or constitute distinctive features of the architectural, cultural, economic, political or social history of the Town. This demolition delay bylaw is an interim protection provision which protects a property for a limited period of time while alternatives to demolition of the property in question can be explored. To achieve these purposes, the Reading Historical Commission is empowered to create and maintain a List of Historic Structures, and to provide a copy of that List, as it may be updated from time to time, to the Building Inspector. With the Building Inspector, the Reading Historical Commission will implement the provisions of this bylaw with respect to the issuance of permits for demolition of structures that are included on the List of Historic Structures 7.2.2 Definitions The following terms when used in this bylaw shall have the meanings set forth below. 7.2.2.1 Commission Reading Historical Commission. 7.2.2.2 Demolition Any act of pulling down, destroying, removing or razing a structure or commencing the work of total destruction with the intent of completing the same and/or which work would require requiring a Demolition Permit. 7.2.2.3 Demolition Application An official application form provided by the Building Inspector for an application for a Demolition Permit. 7.2.2.4 Hearing A public hearing conducted by the Commission after due public notice as provided in this bylaw. 7.2.2.5 Legal Representative A person or persons legally authorized to represent the owner of a structure that is or is proposed to be subject to this bylaw. 7.2.2.6 List The List of Historic Structures as it is constituted pursuant to this bylaw. 7.2.2.7 Owner Current owner of record of a structure that is included in or proposed to be included in the List of Historic Structures. 7.2.2.8 Premises The parcel of land upon which a demolished SignifiGant StFUGture structure that appears on the List as defined in 7.2.2.6 was located and all adjoining parcels of land under common ownership or control. 7.2.2.9 Structure Materials assembled at a fixed location to give support or shelter, such as a building. 7.2.3 Commission to Establish a List of Historic Structures The Commission will provide a List of HisteFie ' to the Building Inspector. This List shall be updated from time to time as needed when properties added -ts-e subtracted from, following the demolition of the property, or Page 5 of 9 0 RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 added to the List The List shall also be provided on the Town's web site or other electronic means of publishing information to the community. This List shall be made up of: • all structures listed on, or located within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or the Massachusetts Historical Register of Historic Places ; and • all structures included in the Town of Reading Historical and Architectural Inventory, as of September 1, 1995, maintained by the Commission; and • all structures that were added in 2010 pursuant to the processes in existence at that time; and • following the procedures included in Section 7.2.3.1 of this bylaw, all structures that have been determined from time to time by the Commission to be historically or architecturally significant. 7.2.3.1 Procedures for expanding the List of Historic Structures In considering additional structures to be included on the List of Historic Structures, pursuant to section 7.2.3, the following process shall be followed: • The Commission shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, an inventory form for each structure considered for addition to the List of Historic Structures. The inventory form for each property shall be prepared using a standard form provided by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. The criteria to be used for consideration for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures will include: • The structure is determined to be importantly associated with one or more historic persons or events, or • The structure is determined to be associated with the broad architectural, cultural, economic or social history of the Town or Commonwealth, or • The structure is believed to be historically or architecturally significant in terms of: • Period, • Style, • Method of building construction, • Association with a significant architect, builder or resident either by itself or as part of a group of buildings; • The Commission will inform by regular US mail each property owner whose structure is being considered for preparation of an inventory form • The owner of each structure for which an inventory form has been prepared shall be sent a notice of a public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the hearing. The notice shall be sent by Certified Mail — return receipt requested — or by service by a Constable. The notice shall include the following information: • that the structure that they own is being considered for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures, • a copy of the inventory form for the structure, • a statement as to the criteria considered in including additional structures on the List of Historic Structures, and • a copy of this bylaw. In addition to the notice of the hearing delivered to each owner, legal notice of the hearing including the street address of all structures proposed to be added to the List of Historic Structures shall be published at the Commission's expense at least 14 days in advance of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the community. Additionally, at least 7 days prior to the hearing a copy of the newspaper notice will be mailed by regular U.S. mail to all contiguous property owners Within 200 faet of each property containing a structure to be considered for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures At the hearing, the Commission will hear comment from all owners and abutters who wish to be heard, and following the close of the hearing the Commission will make a determination as to which of the structures proposed for inclusion on the List of Historic Structures shall be voted onto that List. The decision as to what properties to include shall be made by the Commission, with the inclusion of a property on the List of Historic Structures requiring the affirmative vote of at least 4 members of the Commission. The vote shall be taken at a public meeting, and the vote may be made either the same day as the close of the hearing, or at a later meeting of the Commission. If at a later meeting, the Commission shall inform each owner eithef upon closing the heaFiRg 9F by regulaF US mail at least -3 days in advanGe of a publiG Meeting, of the date of the meeting at which the matter is to be further discussed. Nothing shall preclude the Commission from voting to add structures onto the List of Historic Structures at different meetings. 7.2.3.2 Owner's Appeal of addition of a structure to the List of Historic Structures Page 6 of 9 p RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 An owner, at the public hearing at which additions to the List of Historic Structures are to be considered, may object to inclusion of their structure onto the List of Historic Structures. At the hearing or such later date as agreed by the Commission, the owner shall submit information or documentation in support of their objection. The Commission may consider their objection at the hearing and /or subsequent public meetings, and the Commission shall not vote to include the structure in question onto the List of Historic Structures until all information supplied by the owner can be fully considered by the Commission. In considering whether to finally vote to include a structure on the List of Historic Structures the Commission will consider the information provided by the owner, and particularly how the structure meets the criteria established in 7.2.3.1. In addition to those criteria, the Commission will consider the uniqueness of the structure, quality of the MateFia'S F8FnaiRi;;9 GR the '09-id-A- 2-Rd Outside ef the , its structural integrity and fiRanGial -9F other hardship that might be created to the owner by inclusion of the structure onto the List of Historic Structures. A structure whose owner objects may only be included on the List of Historic 8tF61GWFeG if all 5 7.2.4 Referral of Demolition Applications of structures on the List of Historic Structures by the Building Inspector to the Commission Upon the receipt of a completed Demolition Application for a structure on the List of Historical Structures, the Building Inspector shall • As soon as possible but not later than 30 days from the submission of a complete Demolition Application, notify the owner that the structure they want to demolish is on the List of Historic Structures, and therefore subject to this bylaw. • Provide the owner with a packet to apply to the Commission for demolition approval, along with a copy of the inventory of their structure, a copy of this bylaw, and a copy of any guidelines that the Commission has adopted regarding the demolition delay process. • Inform the Chairman of the Commission of a pending application under this bylaw. • Obtain an abutters list, at the expense of the owner, of all properties within 300 feet. • Upon receipt of a completed application for Commission demolition approval, determine the completeness of the application. • Notify the Chairman of the Commission who will provide the Building Inspector with altemative possible dates for a public hearing not sooner than 7 14 days nor more than 24-28 days from the determination that the application to the Commission is complete • Arrange for the publication of a legal notice of the hearing, at the owner's expense, in a newspaper of general circulation in the community including the street address of all structures proposed to be demolished. The notice shall be published not later than 7-14 days prior to the hearing. • Arrange for a mailing not later than 7 days prior to the hearing, at the owner's expense, of a copy of the newspaper notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the property containing a structure to be considered for demolition. • Immediately forward a copy of the application to each of the members of the Commission. 7.2.4.1 Completed Application The Owner shall be responsible for submitting seven sets of the following information as a completed application prior to the scheduling of the public hearing: • Completed application form (if any) • Description of the structure to be demolished (the inventory is an acceptable document for this purpose); • A demolition plan • Assessor's map or plot plan showing the location of the structure to be demolished on its property with reference to the neighboring properties; • Photographs of all facade elevations; • Statement of reasons for the proposed demolition and data supporting said reasons; • Description of the proposed reuse of the premises on which the structure to be demolished is located. • If applicable, the name and contact information of the Legal Representative; 7.2.5 Public Hearing The Commission will hold a hearing to allow all interested parties to voice their opinions and to present pertinent information concerning the structure, as well as its value and importance to the neighborhood and the Town. The Owner or the Legal Representative will present the requested demolition plan and supporting documentation. The public may present their opinions and additional relevant information. After the presentation and the public comments, the Commission will make one of two decisions: • The presented information is insufficient for the Commission to make a final determination on requested demolition of the Structure. Therefore, the Commission may continue the hearing. A continued hearing shall be Page 7 of 9 3� RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 not later than 21 days from the initial hearing and the hearing shall be closed within 30 days of the initial hearing. • The presented information is sufficient to make a final determination on the requested demolition of the Structure. Therefore, the Commission shall close the hearing. 7.2.6 Determination of whether the Demolition Delay is imposed Once the Hearing is closed, a motion shall be made to determine if the loss of the structure would be detrimental to the Town when considering the purpose of this bylaw as detailed in section 7.2.1: • An affirmative vote by 4 members of the Commission will declare that the structure is protected by this Bylaw, and therefore, a demolition delay of up to six (6) months is imposed beginning the date of the vote. • A negative vote by the Commission (affirmative vote of less than 4 members of the Commission) will declare that the structure is not protected by this Bylaw, and the Building Inspector may issue a permit to demolish the structure. The Commission will notify the Building Inspector within seven (7) days of the Commission's decision. If the notice is not received within the expiration of seven (7) days of the close of the hearing, the Building Inspector may act on the Demolition Permit Application with no further restrictions of this bylaw. 7.2.6.1 Demolition Delay imposed The Commission shall advise the Owner and the Building Inspector of the determination that the Demolition Permit will be delayed up to six (6) months. During this time, alternatives to demolition shall be considered. The Commission shall offer to the Owner information about options other than demolition, including but not limited to resources in the preservation field, the Massachusetts Historical Commission, the Town Planner, and other interested parties that might provide assistance in preservation or adaptive reuse. 7.2.6.2 Responsibilities of Owner if Demolition Delay is imposed The Owner shall be responsible for participating in the investigation of options to demolition by: • Actively pursuing alternatives with the Commission and any interested parties; • providing any necessary information; • allowing reasonable access to the property; and • by securing the premises. 7.2.6.3 Release of Delay Notwithstanding the preceding section of this bylaw, the Building Inspector may issue a Demolition Permit at any time after receipt of written notice from the Commission to the effect that the Commission is satisfied that one of the following conditions has been met: • There is no reasonable likelihood that either the Owner or some other person or group is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the structure; • The Owner, during the delay period, has made continuing, bona fide and reasonable efforts to locate a purchaser to preserve, rehabilitate aa4 or restore the structure, and that such efforts have been unsuccessful; • The Owner has agreed in writing to accept a demolition permit on specified conditions, including mitigation measures approved by the Commission. Such mitigation could include a demolition of only a portion of the structure; or • A period of six (6) months has elapsed since the conclusion of the Hearing and provided. Page 8 of 9 9 RHC Bylaw Recommendations 9/6/2012 :tee +ae 7.2.7 Emergency Demolition Nothing in this Section shall be construed to prevent the Building Inspector from ordering pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 143 the emergency demolition of a structure included in the List of Historic Structures. Before issuing an order for an emergency demolition of such a structure, th a Building Inspector shall make reasonable efforts to inform the Chairperson of the Commission of his intent to issue such an order. 7.2.8 Enforcement and Remedies In the event a structure on the List of Historic Structures is demolished in violation of this bylaw, then no building permit shall be issued for the premises for a period of two (2) years after the date of such demolition. Note — the sections in box- are alternative language for the Board of Selectmen to consider Schubert Town Counsel Tafoya RHC Page 9 of 9 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Artsr <artsr @ssart.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4:36 PM To: Town Manager Subject: Comments Re: Selectmen Historical Commission Hearing Dear Selectmen I plan on attending tonight's public hearing concerning the Historic Commission's bylaws and their Demolition Delay provisions but I thought it might be helpful if I also provided my thoughts in writing as I am unsure how much time will be available at the hearing. My name is Arthur Hayden and I live at 89 King St. I was one of the many who in September of 2010 received the letter beginning "Congratulations! Your home was recently added to Reading's Historical and Architectural Inventory." There was no contact or prior discussion and I don't believe the procedures of Article 7.2.3.1 were followed. The first sentence of the third paragraph begins, "Contrary to popular belief, there are no restrictions placed on a property by virtue of being on the Historical and Architectural Inventory." I don't know who decided that a Demolition Delay is not a restriction placed on the property. I have two concerns regarding the Bylaws. First residents are certainly entitled to an appeal process. The arbitrary selection of real estate by the commission to the Historical Inventory ought to supportable in terms of the provisions of Article 7.2.3.1. Secondly, if a demolition delay is imposed it implies that there is a benefit being requested by the Town of Reading through the Historical Commission and the costs of the delay and the associated costs of Article 7.2.4 should be born by the town and not by the real estate owner. This is no different than taking by eminent domain and at least the costs involved should be covered by the benefactor, the town. Sincerely, Arthur Hayden 89 King Street 3`f TO: Board of Selectmen From: Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager Carol Roberts, Human Resources Administrator Date: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 Re: Town Manager search As the Board of Selectmen is aware, the current Town Manager will be retiring on June 1, 2013. The purpose of this memo and the attached material is to give the Board of Selectmen adequate material to think about and make decisions on how the Town Manager search process is to be conducted, in a time frame to have a smooth transition on June 1. The following are some thoughts on possible scenarios on how to proceed. Role for Board of Selectmen ♦ Develop and approve the Recruitment Process • Use Consultant? If so, for what parts of process? • development of candidate profile • development of community profile and candidate packet • advertising and recruitment • screening • background checks • Use Screening Committee? Board of Selectmen would approve policy establishing the committee o # members o qualifications o # candidates for Town Manager that the Board of Selectmen wants to interview o periodic reporting to Board of Selectmen • Candidate profile o Board of Selectmen • BCC • Staff o Public ♦ Approve the Schedule ♦ Participate in background checks ♦ Interview and appoint ♦ Negotiate employment agreement/contract (with Town Counsel) ♦ How to handle potential internal candidates K-. a Pana 1 SF� Staff Role — Town Manager can assist with developing the process if the Board of Selectmen wants, but cannot participate in interviews, recruitment, or recommendation of candidates. HR Administrator can do the bulk of the staff work. • write -up of candidate profile • development of community profile and candidate packet • advertising and recruitment • background checks • follow -up with candidates — keep them informed during the process The key item to consider at the outset is the development of a candidate profile — a simple document that tells the Board of Selectmen, a consultant (if any), the Community, the Screening Committee (if used), and the candidates what it is that the Board of Selectmen is looking for in a Town Manager. It may be helpful for the Board of Selectmen to consider using a consultant to facilitate the process of developing a candidate profile. Included in this packet of information is a sample of a questionnaire and a profile, but this process is a bit more complex than filling in a questionnaire. The Board of Selectmen also needs to consider who, if anyone other than the members of the Board of Selectmen, it wants to have input from in developing the profile — other Boards, Committees, and Commissions? Department Heads? The public? The attached material may be helpful to the Board of Selectmen in determining what process will best fit the needs of the Town of Reading: ♦ A copy of Section 5.1 of the Reading Home Rule Charter that details the "Appointment, Qualifications, Term" of the Town Manager ♦ A timeline for the Town Manager selection process ♦ A copy of 3 pages on the Candidate Profile from the Massachusetts Municipal Management Association booklet on hiring a Town Manager ♦ A copy of the PP presentation at the 2012 MMA Annual Meeting entitled "From Ad to Offer: Hiring by Committee" ♦ A copy of the International City and County Management Association (ICMA) Code of Ethics ♦ An article from the ICMA newsletter on the number of Manager's positions for whom applications are being sought. Article 5 TOWN MANAGER Section 5 -1: Appointment, Qualifications, Term The Board of Selectmen shall appoint a Town Manager and may enter into a contract with the Town Manager not exceeding three (3) years in length, and shall fix his compensation within the amount annually appropriated for that purpose. The Town Manager shall not be subject to a personnel bylaw, if any. The Town Manager shall be appointed solely on the basis of his' executive and administrative qualifications. He shall be a professionally qualified person of proven ability, especially fitted by education, training and previous experience. He shall have had at least five (5) years of full -time paid experience as a City or Town Manager or Assistant City or Town Manager or the equivalent level public or private sector experience. The terms of the Town Manager's employment shall be the subject of a written contract setting forth his tenure, compensation, vacation, sick leave, benefits, and such other matters as are customarily included in an employment contract. While serving as Town Manager he shall devote full time to the office (and except as expressly authorized by the Board of Selectmen) shall not engage in any other business or occupation and (except as expressly provided in the Charter) shall not hold any other public office, elective or appointive, in the Town. With the approval of the Selectmen, he may serve as the Town's representative to regional boards, commissions and the like but shall not receive additional salary from the Town for such services. [Amended November 10, 1997 (Article 7) and approved by vote of the Town on March 24,19981 [Amended November 15, 2004 (Article 16) and approved by vote of the Town on April 5, 2005] [Amended November 21, 2011 (Article 28) and approved by vote of the Town on March 6, 20121 50 0 SF3 DRAFT Town Manager Search Process Town of Reading MA 9 -11 -12 ' Commit Board of Board of develops r screening _ Board of [4-22-13— Selectmen Selectmen Board of screens candidates'f New criteria, Selectmen discussion develop Selectmen schedule far candidates" of Town and Candidate develop`zeviewina �Selectrneri' Interview _ direction profile policy and -: ands "W5 new notice to community appoint .interviewi candidates former input? screening ,f - applicants Make a employer 1 committee selection i Manat—we Ln Staff Develop . Staff advertising Staff with one Counsel 6 -1 -13 Develop process with Selectman Retirement community screening check with a references and Selectmen candidate and committee � Date — background negotiate Town candidate on t X terms of .: Manager package of candidates contract IV materials � recommended with W by the selected screening candidate (r committee ^� 9/5/2012 Massachusetts Recruitment Guidelines Handbook 36 Suggested Administrator Profile Developing a profile of the ideal administrator provides the background against which to evaluate candidates for the position. Here is a checklist that any community can use as a model. Each governing body or board member can begin by filling out the form, and then all members of the governing body can use the individual rankings to reach a consensus on how the group rates each item. Remember that each community has some specific issues or concerns that rank higher than others. An honest evaluation of what skills and attributes are most important to a community is critical at this point. Once the governing body has reached consensus, one or two members who are capable writers can convert the checklist into a profile similar to the sample here. This profile can be shared with candidates who apply for the position so that they have a clear picture of the governing body's preference. All people involved in the job interviews should also have copies of the profile so that everyone is working from a common understanding of the type of person the elected officials are seeking. Preparing this profile provides a unique opportunity to clarify and codify the skills and attributes that a community is looking for in an administrator. Local officials should make the most of this chance to get the best possible fit between the governing body and the administrator. Format for an Administrator Profile (For Governing Body Use) Describe the background, skills, and qualities you feel your locality needs in an administrator. General 1. Relevant Education 2. Relevant Experience Skills and Past Performance 1. Governing Body Relations 2. Administrative Ability 3. Written and Oral Communication Skills 4. Budget/Finance /Information Technology 5. Human Resources /Risk Management/ Benefits Administration 6. Labor Relations /Collective Bargaining 7. Community Relations 8. Intergovernmental Relations 9. Economic Development/Revitalization 10. Innovation and Major Achievements 11. Infrastructure and Facilities Importance (High, Medium, Low) 52 Massachusetts Recruitment Guidelines Handbook 37 12. Specialized expertise pertaining to your locality, e.g. utility management, solid waste, and landfill management {be specific) Sample Administrator Profile Education and Experience A bachelor's degree or equivalent experience in local government should be required, a master's degree preferred. A minimum of three years of public administration experience is required, with five years preferred. Past local government experience of individual must show performance in areas that include budgeting and finance, human resource management, information technology, risk management, grants procurement and administration, economic development strategies, understanding. of state laws, and other related matters including land use planning, zoning regulations, engineering, and public works. Prior [state] experience preferred. Experience and knowledge in local government accounting is desirable. ICMA Credentialed Manager preferred. Skills and Past Performance Administrative ability. Must have demonstrated performance in human resources and/or collective bargaining for a community having not less than 10 employees. Good communication skills are a must, including the ability to listen, communicate with various segments of the community, and develop good relations with the business community. Person must be willing to devote whatever time is necessary to achieve the goals and guidelines established- by the governing body. Knowledge of how to organize departments and demonstrated leadership qualities are desirable. Governing body relations. Ability to take time and interest in working with members of the governing body to keep them informed and explain technical .processes. Should be able to adequately inform the governing body on a regular basis so there are no surprises. Both written and oral communications with the governing body are essential. The person must be able to accept constructive criticism and to implement the needed changes. Candidate must be open and honest with the governing body and able to present all sides of an issue that affect the locality. The individual must be able to carry out the intentions and directions of the governing body enthusiastically. Budget and finance. Should have demonstrated prior experience in managing a city or county budget. Experience and expertise in grant procurement is desirable, as well as dealing with locally -owned utility finances. Collective bargaining /human resource management. Must have some knowledge of [state] labor relations law, with preferred demonstrated ability in the collective bargaining process. Must demonstrate a personality that can communicate the local government's goals and needs to employees. Community relations. Candidate must have demonstrated involvement in community activities. Experience working with and understanding the needs of the business community is highly desirable. Candidate should be able to present a confident image of the local government to the community at large. Must be able to demonstrate a positive, productive attitude to citizens of the community. Mass a c h u s e t t s R e c r u i t m e n t G u I d e I I n e s H a n d b o o k 38 Intergovernmental relations. Must be able to- relate to and develop a good working relationship with other local governments, county governments, community organizations, schools, and state and federal agencies. Editorial credit. The "Suggested Interview Techniques," "Format for an Administrator Profile," and 'Sample Administrator Profile," sections of this document were originally published in A Guide to Hiring a Chief Administrative Officer produced by the Illinois City /County Management Association, Center for Governmental Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois.. This Handbook in its entirety was originally published by ICMA and has been modified by the Massachusetts Municipal Management Association for use in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 54 O ✓�� SEP -11 -2012 TUE 02:42 PM HOUGHTON /GORDON /MULLIGAN FAX N0, 7814382078 P, 01/01 MARK E. MULLIGAN Attorney At Law 271 Main Street - Suite 202 Tel. 17811439-7444 Fax 17811438 -2078 Stoneham, Massachusetts 02180 September 11, 2012 VIA FACSIMILE: 781 -912 -9071 Mr. Peter Hechenbleikner. Town Manager Town of Readings Re: Purchase of Lot 3 /Off Pearl Street Dear Mr. Hedienbleilmer. Please be advised that I represent Ms. Patricia Crowley relative to the purchase of the above -noted properly from the Town of Reading. It is my understanding that the Purchase and Sale Agreement executed by my client was to be presented to the Board of Selectmen tonight for their signature. As you are aware, we have discovered a potential title issue with the property. Kindly postpone the presentment of said Purchase and Sale Agreement until we can determine the most effective way to resolve said issue. 1 will keep you apprised of our progress. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. V�pry truly yours, Mark E. Mulligan MEM::dwb Enclosures W FBI AA NAME (please print) ,j f r SIGN -IN SHEET FOR THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN'S MEETING OF ADDRESS y►� Wit, I!C la tils J2 �� r k-2-q 10 avd- 3 "= A,r j/ f y r/v-Sc6tr E+- r� Belmont, Massachusetts Administrator EDWARD J. COLLINS JR. CENTER FOR PUBLIC MANAGEMENT McCORMACK GRADUATE SCHOOL OF POLICY STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Introduction The Town of Belmont has retained the services of the Edward J. Collins Jr. Center for Public Management at the University of Massachusetts Boston to assist in the Town's recruitment of a new Town Administrator. The Collins Center focuses on helping governments work better. This Profile draws upon our discussions with selectmen, department heads and elected officials. It describes our understanding of the organization, the challenges that lie ahead for the successful candidate, and the professional and personal attributes an ideal candidate will possess. For more information about the Town of Belmont please consult Belmont's web site (www.town.belmont.ma.us). C 1 i 1 Belmont is located 8 miles west of Boston and is neighbor to Cambridge as well as sharing borders with Arlington, Watertown and Waltham. Belmont is on the commuter rail and provides for easy access to highways and airports. The Town, known as the Town of Homes, is 95% residential. The town's average assessed value of a single - family home was $730,849 in FY2ol1 - 17th highest among 338 Massachusetts municipalities that reported. In FY199o, the town's average assessed value ranked 11th highest in the state and in FY2000 it ranked loth. This consistency also reflects a strong and stable tax base, which accounts in large part for the AAA rating the town has earned from Moody's credit rating agency Belmont has an excellent school system. Belmont High School was voted the tooth best high school in the nation. Additionally, Belmont is home to the Belmont Hill and Belmont Day private schools. Belmont has many multi - generational families but because of its location and community attributes also attracts people from around the world. Belmont is home to McLean Hospital one of the nation's premier mental health facilities. In 2010, the median income for a family was $99,123, significantly higher than the statewide average. Data on the Town's demographic trends can be obtained from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council's web site (www.mapc.org). Its location, charm, schools and community make Belmont a desirable location to live and work. The 2001 Mission Statement approved by Town Meeting remains as on -point now as it was a decade ago: a desirable and welcoming community that retains a small -town atmosphere within a larger metropolitan area. Our town provides excellent educational opportunities and high quality town services. We protect the beauty and character.of our natural settings and historic buildings. Thriving business centers contribute economic stability while offering places for residents to dine, shop, and socialize. The town government responds to the concerns of the residents, practices sound fiscal management and plans for future generations. We make a commitment to preserving and enhancing our strengths as a community while respecting our differences as individuals. While it appears to be a quiet residential community, which it is, it is complex in many ways, making it a fascinating place to live. In Belmont the best and the brightest get involved in local government by serving as volunteers. The Town's population is 26,50o and its land area is only 4.6 miles, making it a densely populated community. Citizen participation in governance is embraced and adds to the flavor and the culture of the community. Organizational Design and Governance The Town governance structure consists of a three member Board of Selectmen elected for three year staggered terms and a 288 member Representative Town Meeting. The School Committee is elected, as are the Assessors, Library Trustees, Board of Health and Cemetery Commissioners. The Treasurer /Collector, Town Clerk and the Moderator are also elected. The Town Meeting is the legislative body and exercises the functions of appropriating funds and enacting by -laws. Town Meeting is advised by an 18 member Warrant Committee appointed by the Town Moderator to advise on the budget, appropriations and on a full range of financial matters presented to the Town Meeting. The Town does not possess a charter or a comprehensive special act specifying its governmental structure. The position of Town Administrator has become well established and respected. Elected boards with specialized functions select and manage their own staff, make policy and program decisions in their arena and exercise considerable autonomy although the Town Administrator is responsible for town -wide budget, human resources, and procurement management. The Town Administrator is also responsible for managing the day -to -day operations of the Town and working with all department heads to achieve the Town's goals. There has been some discussion of a potential change in the government structure. The community is expected to continue the discussion in the near future. The Town has had two Town Administrators since the Town Administrator position was established 18 years ago. The position is now open due to the resignation of the former TA after the expiration of his contract. The Assistant Town Administrator is currently serving as Interim Town Administrator. Public Finance Belmont had total General Fund revenues for FY2o1l of approximately $83 million, almost $70 million of which was from property taxes. The FY2o11 School Department Budget was $40.5 million. The Town has a single tax rate Of $13.35• In August 2011, the Department of Revenue, Division of Local Services transmitted a Financial Management Review it conducted for the Town. The report makes findings and recommendations about the town's government structure with emphasis on those related to financial officers; the degree of coordination and communication between and among boards, officials and staff involved in financial management and operations. The report and other financial information for the Town may be obtained at the web site of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, Department of Local Services and at the Collins Center web site. (www.collinscenter.umb.edu) for ! Administrator P Leadership. As Chief Administrative Officer for the Town, the Town Administrator must earn and maintain the respect for the role that the Board of Selectmen have defined. The Town Administrator will serve as the Director of the Office of the Board of Selectmen and direct and manage the delivery of municipal services under the authority of the Board of Selectmen, as well as coordinating the work of entities not directly under the authority of the Board of Selectmen. P Professionalism, Staff Development and Morale. The Town has well- regarded, highly skilled and professional department heads and key staff. The Town has benefited from having a blend of professionals who have served the community for many years, in many capacities, as well the integration of new staff with new ideas and approaches to municipal management. Fully utilizing the considerable talents of staff, inspiring and continuing high performance standards and maintaining staff morale will be critical to the success of the new Town Administrator. The Town Administrator will need to work with department heads to establish performance measures for staff and operations as well as providing top -level support for departmental programs, initiatives and projects. • Communication. Well- developed communication skills in Belmont are essential. The next Town Administrator is expected to play a leadership role in the community. Open, accurate and timely communication by the Town Administrator with all Town government entities, with the public, the many volunteers and employees needs to be integrated into the normal operational practices of the Town. In addition, the Town Administrator must be able to engage the members of the Board of Selectmen in an on -going dialogue about the critical issues that face the Town. Budget Planning and Preparation. Like all Massachusetts municipalities, Belmont is facing revenue constraints and growing cost pressures. The Town Administrator must build and direct a strategic planning process that strikes an appropriate balance between long -term goals and short -term budget requirements. A significant amount of the Town Administrator's time will be required to forge town -wide strategies to bring these into balance. This task must be addressed in the context of multi -year plans that consider the unknown duration of an underperforming economy. • Strategic Planning. The Town Administrator must provide leadership to the Board of Selectmen and Town for strategic planning. While capital needs are known and are clear, a valid continuing method of identifying and prioritizing long -range goals is absent. This is a void that must be filled. Sustaining a High Level of Public Services. The Town is more complex than a drive through Belmont center would indicate. Even though the Town's land area is only 4.6 square miles, it has 26,50o residents, who expect a high level of public service. This expectation combined with historic under investment in the Town's infrastructure has the potential to place significant stress on the Town in the foreseeable future. • Establishing and Maintaining a Positive Labor Management Climate. Belmont has been fortunate in its ability to keep up with service demands and labor costs. Staffing levels have decreased through attrition over the past several years. Departments are clearly doing more with less. The labor relations climate has been generally positive. Maintaining a positive climate will require careful attention in the coming years as the Town navigates through an environment characterized by fiscal stress and often increasing public expectations. • Education. Education is an important civic value in Belmont. Belmont schools are ranked as some of the highest performing in the nation. The School Department has an interim School Superintendent at least through Fiscal 2013. The next Town Administrator must embrace the value placed on education by citizens while collaborating with the School Superintendent and School Department to budget appropriately and mitigate cost increases. The Belmont Boardof Selectmen seeks a TownAdministrator who is a seasoned manager in an environment of similar complexitywho possesses strong leadership, communication and organizational skills. Belmont seeks a Town Administrator with the energy, skill, creativity and experience to serve the community as the Chief Administrative Officer; direct, manage and/ or facilitate the delivery of municipal services; provide leadership to the Board of Selectmen in strategic planning; provide leadership to departments and serve as the administrative face of the community. Belmont seeks a Town Administrator willing to commit to a tenure long enough to build a multi -year approach to strategic planning and ensuring the sustainability of the Town's service levels. The new Town Administrator must support regional solutions when that is in the Town's interest. Belmont needs a Town Administrator who can help set the stage for community -wide approaches to addressing the Town's needs, approaches that produce sound outcomes and avoid polarization within the town, while recognizing, respecting and involving citizens as individuals and committees. The following attributes have been determined important in Belmont's next Town Administrator. The next Town Administrator needs to be: • Able to demonstrate leadership internally and externally. • Able to demonstrate unquestioned integrity in interactions with officials and citizens. ' • Able to communicate effectively in all aspects of the position and with all constituencies in the community. The successful candidate must be direct, facilitative, and clear. • Able to direct a budget process that develops a sound budget for consideration. • Able to use the status inherent in the Town Administrator's position to advance the Town's agenda. The Town Administrator cannot be a micromanager. • Able to delegate many of the routine administrative and communication tasks to subordinates, so that time is available for longer range strategic planning. • Able to create and sustain a goal - oriented and performance based environment by establishing, maintaining and promoting effective policies and initiatives. The Town Administrator will be a genuinely inclusive leader who is capable of exerting influence and direction in a manner that shares successes with elected officials, professionals and volunteers. • Able and willing to work openly with community groups and employees. A direct, collegial, facilitative style that fosters joint problem solving is needed. The Town Administrator can have no agenda beyond being a professional. Professional Attributes The Town Administrator must be: • A seasoned leader of a comparable organization with extensive personal experience in finance, budgeting, capital and operational planning, expenditure management, labor relations, public facilitation, and staff development. Excellent public and interpersonal communication skills are essential. • A professionally stable person with a record of tenure and consistent career growth. The Town seeks a committed management professional willing to stay for a significant period but who is also willing to take risks to improve the organization. Able to demonstrate a background in guiding the development of a shared strategic vision for the community. The ideal candidate must be a coalition builder, equally at home with private . sector and community leaders. The ideal candidate must be able to exercise leadership within the organization and the community. Graduate degree in Public Administration, Public Policy, Business Administration or law preferred. Bachelor's degree minimally required. Ten years executive experience, managing a complex organization similar in scale and complexity to the Town, preferably in a municipal setting is preferred. Any equivalent combination of education, training and experience which provides the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities for this position is acceptable. Experience working for an elected or appointed Board and having worked in a Town Meeting environment is preferred. • Both strategic and tactical. He /she must be experienced in working effectively in a political environment providing impartial guidance to elected officials to identify and address the long -term strategic needs of the community and the short -term tactical steps necessary to deliver services. • Capable of keeping elected officials comprehensively informed, while staying detached from the political process and ensuring that staff maintains a similar detachment. • Comfortable managing in an environment where many employees are members of collective bargaining units and where not all department managers are direct reports to the Town Administrator. Being able to navigate in such a complex environment will take tenacity and skill. • Familiar with a highly participative local government, with highly educated and passionate citizens, extremely active boards, committees and commissions. • Comfortable working with and managing an organization in a political environment often characterized by vigorous debate among well- informed citizens who are active in local decision - making processes. 1 11 1` 1 1 ,' 1 The Board of Selectmen anticipates negotiating an employment contract with a competitive compensation package in the $14oK - $16oK range, depending on qualifications. Application Process Applications are preferred electronically. Please send your resume with a cover letter addressing the job requirements to this email address: recruitment @umb.edu. Please insert Belmont TA in the subject line. Please combine all of your documents in a single file. Kindly use PDF format, if possible. Deadline for applications is March 16, 2012. Should you have any questions regarding this opportunity, or a recommendation of a colleague, please contact Mary Flanders Aicardi, Associate 5o8 -215 -8992• To learn more about the Edward J. Collins Jr. Center for Public Management at UMASS Boston, please visit: www.collinscenter.umb.edu