HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-01-31 Board of Selectmen HandoutDRAFT MOTIONS
BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
JANUARY 31, 2012
Anthony, Goldy, Tafoya, Bonazoli, Schubert Hechenbleikner
la) Move that the Board of Selectmen go into Executive Session for the
purpose of strategy with respect to labor negotiations for Police Patrol
Officers, Police Superior Officers and health insurance, to come back
into Open Session at approximately 7:30 p.m.
RS BT CA SG JB
6a) Move that the Board of Selectmen recommends the Town Manager's
FY 2013 budget, with the following recommended modifications:
6d) Move that in order to save interest costs, the Treasurer is authorized to
provide for the sale and issuance of bonds under G.L. c. 44 Section 21A,
to refund all or any portion of the Town's General Obligation Bonds
dated January 1, 2002; January 1, 2004; and January 1, 2005 and that
for this purpose the Treasurer is authorized to provide for the
preparation and distribution of a Preliminary Official Statement;
provided, however, that no bonds shall be issued under this vote unless
and until the final interest rates and other terms of the refunding bonds
are approved by the Board.
6e) Move that the Board of Selectmen place the following names into
nomination for two positions on the ad hoc Town Accountant Screening
Committee for terms expiring 6- 30 -12:
6f) Move that the Board of Selectmen concurs in the Town Manager's
proposed goals for CY 2012, with the following recommended
amendments:
7a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of December 6,
2011 as amended.
7b) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of December 20,
2011 as amended.
7c) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of January 3,
2012 as amended.
Move that the Board of Selectmen adjourn the meeting at p.m.
Tension between town, MWRA cool off at meeting - Stoneham Independent: News Page 2 of 4
�s,CmJe >l,oneham Independent News
Tension between town, MWRA cool
off at meeting
Story Comments
Remembering the legacy of Dr.
King
i -K DAY >PRO �RA.M A.. ;ii: ": ng r mgram was held to
.�_.ehratr e "adio !_other h _ Day =1: me SWrie`ian: aoys & Giri;
...!:'D Siooenam Star 20 - v.:':;rer, e =.lve Ju;tia fiE eti the a:r 4nh
rm:.s c
Print Font Size
By FATMCK SLAtS ; 0 comments
STONEHAM, MA - It all ended with a round of
handshakes mixed with a calm and promising call from
Mass. Water Resource Authority (MWRA) Executive
Director Fred Laskey to "get something done together.'
In a gathering that could be likened to a peace talk
summit presided over by State Senator Katherine Clark
(D- Melrose) last week, Stoneham officials aired their
grievances over a planned water -line installation project
and the MWRA's recent purchase of five -acres of
taxable land near the former Boston Regional Medical
Center (BRMC).
Responding to those criticisms, Laskey, joined by a
whole contingent of MWRA officials and advisors,
outlined between $2.6 to $3.2 million worth of
concessions they were willing to offer in exchange for
the inconveniences.
And though Town Administrator David Ragucci,
Selectmen Chair Paul Rotondi and board member John
DePinto couldn't commit to accepting that package,
stressing that those project mitigation offers would first
need to be put in writing, Clark's efforts certainly
smoothed over some very bad feelings between the two
sides.
Before the end of the meeting, held on Wednesday in
the Stoneham Public Library, Laskey and his peers
agreed to put some of those concessions in writing,
while also preparing some type of document outlining
the likely route of the water main project - to commence
from the Reading line to Spot Pond.
Once that documentation is received, the Selectmen
plan to hold a public hearing on the proposal and render
a final decision as to whether or not to support the
project.
In particular, the MWRA discussed several promised
infrastructure repairs, many of which the Selectmen
didn't realize were on the table for discussion, including:
• $800,000 worth of drainage work near the Wakefield
line that was requested by DPW Director Robert Grover.
• The cleanup of contaminated land near Landers Road
and Spring Street, which would be used as a staging ground during construction and then made into a passive park
for local residents,
• An $80,000 contribution for the inclusion of a radio antenna and sheltered equipment area for Stoneham's
emergency communication system on a MWRA monopole,
• An estimated $300,000 upgrade to a state -owned culvert near the Fells Reservation that currently lacks the
capacity to stop flooding along Ravine Road and parts of Melrose,
• Already planned sidewalk and roadway improvements near the intersection of North Street and Route 28.
Difference in perceptions
From the outset of Wednesday's meeting, it was clear that both sides had extremely different viewpoints on the
water main project, with the MWRA suggesting that Stoneham was receiving a handsome mitigation package, while
the Selectmen contended the town was receiving little in return.
According to the Selectmen, based upon their understanding of the negotiations, the MWRA has thus far agreed to
1/30/2012
Tension between town, MWRA cool off at meeting - Stoneham Independent: News Page 3 of 4
UR
re -pave all dug -up roadways and replace a significant amount of water and sewer pipelines.
Rotondi and Ragucci argued that virtually all of those repairs were being made as a direct result of the project, not
because of any specific requests from the town that were over and above the quasi - public agency's construction
proposal.
"I don't want to sound like an ingrate, but that's something you have to do. It's not something that's an add -on above
your construction guidelines," said Ragucci. "Is that really worth the aggravation for our residents ?"
"The major concern the people of Stoneham have with this pipeline is that it's going to be four years that our
neighborhoods are disrupted. These streets that you're working on are in fact drive - through roads where our worst
traffic is," said Rotondi.
According to Laskey, despite rumors to the contrary, Stoneham would be one of the biggest beneficiaries of the
water main project, since its main function was to provide a redundancy in the event of a huge system failure.
Follow Us On Facebook
The MWRA official urt er contended that though teaddition of Reading as a full -time water customer made the
9t0&6ct even more important, the agency has been eyeing the work for decades.
However, because most capital work involved the non - discretionary, court- ordered cleanup of Boston Harbor, the
water provider has been forced to delay the project until now.
"This project has been on board for quite a while, prior to when Reading came on board. Stoneham in particular has
no local storage or other systems to rely on during a disruption," said Laskey.
"If [the current aging water line] goes, Stoneham will be without water almost immediately. Stoneham will feel this
disruption for weeks So there's a real issue here that we need to address and that we've known about for decades,"
he added.
However, according to Rotondi and DePinto, since the MWRA has already threatened to consider another route for
the water main - avoiding Stoneham altogether - the town could technically oppose the project and still receive those
benefits.
"In your letter, you said there could be alternatives. So basically what your saying is that it's our problem so come
through Stoneham to fix it. But if we don't [agree] you're going to fix it anyway," said Rotondi,
Laskey and MWRA Advisory Board Executive Director Joseph Favaloro countered that those alternate routes would
cost huge spikes in the cost for the project, leaving water and sewer service ratepayers, including Stoneham
citizens, to shoulder that bill.
According to the state officials, as a general policy, the MWRA doesn't award huge mitigation packages to impacted
cities and towns, because doing so would cause a domino effect where all projects - which generally benefit a
number of MWRA communities, if not all - become overpriced.
"It becomes a regional expense that benefits a single community that all the [MWRA member communities] then
bear the cost for," Favaloro argued. "Any community that comes into the system pays the cost that all other
communities have born since [the MWRA's] existence. Those revenues then go back to the regional communities to
offset their rates."
Change in tone
Though town officials and MWRA representatives both walked away from Wednesday's gathering satisfied with the
end result, the discussion still had its fair share of back and forth.
Particularly unhappy with what he considered an attack on his integrity, Laskey slammed the Selectmen for
insinuating that he had broken a promise to build a soccer field in exchange for the loss of annual tax revenues that
resulted from the BRMC purchase.
The specifics of that so- called agreement, debated by the Selectmen themselves on a meeting the night before the
Wednesday talks, have been a source of controversy for some time.
"I'll just say this, 'I don't make promises that I can't keep.' 1 never promised a soccer field, so I never broke any
handshake. I'm not going to have this be an integrity question here," Laskey commented.
"We'll go somewhere else and it will cost you $3 million [in infrastructure improvements," the frustrated MWRA
executive director threatened "I just get a feeling that whatever we do, it's not going to be enough. We're trying to do
the right thing here."
Ironically, Laskey's sentiments that the negotiations were going nowhere led to a change in the meeting's tone, with
the Selectmen closing out the gathering with friendly handshakes not long afterwards.
"Fred, no one's questioned your integrity. The problem was with the perception [that we were getting something in
return]," said Rotondi, who agreed that Laskey never personally promised a soccer field. "Fred, he's been fair with
us."
1/30/2012
TO: Board of Assessors
Bob LeLacheur
Bill Boatwright
From: Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Re: Property re- inspections
The purpose of this memo is to follow up on the meeting of January 24 with the Board of Selectmen
regarding the FY 2013 budget, and particularly on the issue of property re- inspections. As follow up I
have reviewed the data submitted by the Board of Assessors last evening, and had a detailed
discussion with Bob LeLacheur and Bill Boatwright on Wednesday.
Let me say at the outset that my interest and I believe that of the Board of Selectmen is to have a
good, accurate tax assessment function, and to accomplish that at the lowest possible cost. The
Town has been overall very supportive of this goal, including the appropriation of up to $75,000 for
the new mass appraisal system.
The following is my understanding relative to the backlog of inspections:
♦ In order to accomplish the FY 2014 revaluation we need to make best efforts to handle a
backlog of approximately 4000 property re- inspections, some of which are both interior and
exterior inspections.
♦ Under usual circumstances the Appraiser and Assistant appraiser handle about 600 re-
inspections a year.
♦ These re- inspections need to be completed by about September 1, 2013
The following is my understanding as to re- inspections on a routine basis once the backlog has been
handled (post FY 2014):
♦ We need to do approximately 1000 re- inspections per year (8000 properties divided by 9
years = 889, leaving some room for duplicate inspections etc)
♦ The Appraiser and Assistant Appraiser re- inspect approximately 600 properties per year
♦ This leaves approximately 400 re- inspections per year that would need to be done.
♦ Outside re- inspection firms charge approximately $400 per person per day, and can
accomplish approximately 20 inspections per day (fewer for the +/- 40% of the properties they
are able to enter, and more if they are doing only exterior inspections.)
A Pnru- 1
The following is my recommendation:
♦ Bid and enter into a multiple year contract, subject to funding, for a 3rd party to conduct the
backlog of inspections, starting in May 2012 and completed by September 1, 2013, pursuant
to the following schedule.
♦ At the 2012 Annual Town Meeting transfer $24,000 in the FY 2012 budget to the Assessor's
expense line item to conduct approximately 1/3 of the re- inspections to be started
approximately May 1, 2012 and completed by June 30, 2012
♦ Budget in FY2013 the sum of $24,000 to conduct during the Fiscal Year the second 1/3 of the
re- inspections
♦ Budget in FY 2014 a third sum of $24,000 to conduct the remainder of the re- inspections, to
be completed by September 1, 2013
Advantages include
♦ doing all of this work under a single contract with a single vendor,
♦ spreading the re- inspections out so that when they need to be re -done in 9 years they don't all
fall in a single year
♦ Giving flexibility from one year to the next as to the actual number of re- inspections that need
to be done and having the ability to move the amount up or down to reflect any changed
circumstances
♦ Does not depend on the Appraiser and Assistant Appraiser doing extensive re- inspection
work at the same time that they are working to implement the new mass appraisal system
Following FY 2014 1 would recommend the following process to maintain the re- inspections needed
in order to qualify for all subsequent revaluations:
♦ Hiring an outside firm on a 3 year basis to conduct an estimated 400 re- inspections per year,
at an estimated cost of $8,000 to $10,000 per year (400 re- insertions / 20 per day = 20 days X
$400 per day = $8,000)
♦ Continue to have the Appraiser and Assistant Appraiser conduct an estimated 600 re-
inspections per year
In order to assist with the efficiency of this operation both short and long term we feel that the use of
the RCA (Reading Community Alerts = reverse 911); use of a tool from our licensing and permitting
system to establish the optimal least time routing between appointments; and use of other technology
that the re- inspection firm should have including electronic tablets to be used in the field, should
make this time consuming process as efficient as possible. In addition, the availability of the MLS as
requested and already recommended in the FY 2012 budget should assist the Appraiser and
Assistant Appraiser in completing their estimated 600 re- inspections per year.
I am looking forward to discussing this with you further at your meeting on January 30, 2012, and
hopefully reaching agreement prior tot the Board of Selectmen meeting on 1- 31 -12.
TO: Board of Selectmen
From: Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Re: 2013 Budget — Conservation Administrator
As follow up to the Board of Selectmen meeting of 1- 24 -12, Jean Delios, Bob LeLacheur, and I met
with Conservation Commission members Bill Hecht and Jamie Maughan on January 30. Bill and
Jamie gave us a list of suggested tasks for the Conservation Administrator if additional hours were
available.
The representatives of the Conservation Commission narrowed down the tasks, and we had a very
good discussion. The tasks that they defined fall into two categories:
One Time projects which should be completed by 6- 30 -12:
♦ Research and solicit input for wetland regulation modifications: 1.0 hr a week
♦ Staff support for regulation modification public meetings: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Develop flow diagram for residential wetland application process: 0.5 hrs a week
Recurring Work:
♦ Do two site visits per month to become familiar with town and specific issues on the
ground...... 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Research history of nearby sites for new applications - 48 applications /year
0.5 hrs a week
♦ Research and apply for available grants: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Prepare for Commissioners bi weekly site visits by visiting if necessary and preparing
guidance for commissioners: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Prepare for and attend development meetings: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Conduct wetland delineation for simple residential wetland permit application:
0.25 hrs a week
♦ Get Draft Order of Conditions to commissioners and applicant in advance of meeting,
respond to applicant's questions 0.5 hrs a week
To address this we are proposing:
♦ Look for additional funding this year to address the "one time projects"
♦ Add 3 hours /week for FY 13 budget to "right size" the position to current needs — est. cost
$4000
♦ We do not need to dedicate time to applying for grants — we have other staff who can do that.
♦ The Conservation Commission would agree to fund '/z of this expense from the Conservation
Revolving Fund
♦ I will recommend a modification in this amount as part of the Town Manager's FY 2013
budget recommendation.
• Pnna 1
DRAFT 2012 Town Manager's Goals and Action Plan
Town of Reading MA
Finance — Reading will continue to evaluate revenue sources, cost reduction, regionalization of
services, other methods of providing services, and level of services with the goal of maintaining
long term fiscal stability of the community while providing a level of service that the
community can sustain.
1. Work with the Board of Selectmen to find a replacement to our retiring Town Accountant, and work
with staff to provide a smooth transition.
2. Limit reliance on non - recurring revenue including reserves.
3. Develop a plan to draw down the overlay surplus in a sustainable manner to appropriate levels.
4. Apply for outside resources funding to support operating and capital or other one time expenses.
5. Participate in and encourage public /private partnerships that provide in -kind services provide significant
cost savings and as such should be expanded to achieve added savings.
6. Begin the process of implementing the following approvals from Town Meeting which will then be
placed in the Sale of Real Estate or other stabilization fund to be made available for Capital
Improvements, debt service, or unfunded pension liability:
a. Sale of land — Pearl Street
b. Sale of land — Lothrop Road
c. Use /sale of Oakland Road
7. Continue to monitor and advocate as opportunities arise, for the following potential revenue raising
activities:
a. Additional cell sites
b. Advertising via billboards
8. Develop a proposed OPEB funding mechanism including recommendations to begin to modestly fund
this long term liability
Services — Reading will continue to provide municipal services in as cost effective, efficient,
and customer service friendly manner as possible. Where reasonable a self service element to
Town services will be available for those who choose to use it.
9. Train employees on the customer service policy; continue to measure customer satisfaction; identify and
recommend changes to regulations that do not meet customer service goals, -or that will make them
easier for customers to understand and use.
10. Review and improve the Town web site. Provide electronic customer interaction with the Town,
including a "customer service request" module.
Operations - Reading will continue to provide as full a range of municipal services that meet
community needs and desires as resources allow.
11. Implement additional technology including:
a. Assessors CAMA
b. Master Address database
C. Mass Communications system
d. permits and licenses
e. integrated public safety system
f. new technology in public meetings (electronic voting; tablets for BCC members)
12. Conduct an operational review of one additional programmatic area in the Community Services
Department.
1
1/31/2012
DRAFT 2012 Town Manager's Goals and Action Plan
Town of Reading MA
13. Apply for funding from the Community Innovation Challenge Grant and/or other sources to enhance the
recently created regional public health services program.
14. Expand the Records Management efforts including beginning to provide records as appropriate to the
public via the web site.
Health and Safety — Reading will continue to focus on strong public health and safety services
with a goal of making the community one of the healthiest and safest communities in suburban
Boston.
15. Complete evaluation of regionalization of Public Safety Dispatch.
16. Develop and implement a program or programs intended to address issues of substance abuse and
related violence in the community
17. Focus Public Health, School, Substance Abuse, and other resources on a Healthy Community model
with an initial focus on obesity prevention as one of the major health crises facing our country. Find
ways to encourage walking, cycling, and other activities. These efforts may involve many departments,
with efforts led by the Health Division.
Community Development / Sustainability — Reading has worked to maintain the character of
the community, while making planned and deliberate improvements to the Town. Major efforts
have been led by the Board of Selectmen, the CPDC, the Economic Development Committee,
and the Advisory Committee on Cities for Climate Protection. The World Cafe held in 2008
helped inform the above bodies of public opinion on the future of Reading.
18. Continue progress towards meeting and maintaining the level of 10% of housing units (as re- defined by
the 2010 federal census) as affordable. This goal may be met through development of the
a. Mawn property
b. Peter Sanborn Place,
c. Johnson Woods Phase 2 (19 affordable);
d. additional units in downtown as feasible.
e. Working with DHCD on a new approach to preserve affordable units that don't sell in 90 day
period through a new deed rider
f. Housing Production Plan — update in 2012
19. Complete South Main Street design guidelines based on "best practices"
20. Implement high priority parking recommendations for downtown:
a. improve parking directional signs;
b. sharing of private parking spaces;
c. identify opportunities to expand parking supply;
d. bike routes throughout town
21. Continue sign enforcement efforts to bring all non - conforming signs into compliance
22. Implement new gateway signage — South Main Street (paid for by Reading Woods mitigation)
23. Develop an action plan for re -use and/or redevelopment of the properties behind the RMLD in the area
bounded by Ash Street, the RR tracks, and Pond View Drive
24. Continue to work with Town, School, Facilities, and Light Departments to meet Sustainability goals for
CO reduction, anti - idling, etc. Consider a regional approach to these efforts, to include the RMLD and
some or all of the 4 communities that are served by the RMLD.
2
1/31/2012
DRAFT 2012 Town Manager's Goals and Action Plan
Town of Reading MA
Asset Management — Reading will strive to maintain and improve the current and desired
capital assets of the community through long term capital planning in a fiscally prudent manner.
Where resources for major projects are not available within available resources, and grants and
outside resources are also not available, the community may be asked to support such
improvements through additional taxes.
25. Continue established efforts to implement high priority building projects:
a. Cemetery Garage
b. Library
c. DPW vehicle maintenance
d. Improvements to operation, safety /security, and aesthetics of DPW site
e. Killam School project to include HC access, fire protection, energy, and administrative space
improvements.
26. Complete the Haverhill Street water main distribution project, and begin and complete the Howard
Street water main distribution project.
27. As part of the community's focus on substance abuse prevention, evaluate the need for and viability of a
youth center probably focused on Middle School youth
28. Continue efforts to add to the Town's trail system, including progress to implementing the Ipswich
River Greenway;
29. Continue to work towards funding for the West Street project.
30. Implement the design and development of a downtown bandstand.
31. Implement the first phase of the use of one time revenues for capital projects, as it was submitted to the
Board of Selectmen and to Town Meeting.
Governance, Regulation, and Policy Development — Reading will continue to address major
emerging issues through development, modification, improvement, and simplification of
bylaws, regulations, and Selectmen's policies. As a general rule, the fewer and simpler the
regulations the better. Additionally, Selectmen's policies may be used to memorialize current
and proposed administrative practices to provide an historical record and direction for the
community in the future.
32. Develop funding and a work plan for comprehensive review and revision of the Zoning Bylaw, taking a
piecemeal approach if necessary to address discrete areas such as parking regulations, definitions, and
signs as priorities..
33. Establish a policy on naming of facilities and sites in the community.
34. Make amendments tot the Parks Rules and Regulations to address issues raised and recommended
through the ad hoc committee on amplified sound in Parks.
35. Establish a communications policy for the town working off the elements of a past Department head
retreat on communications. Specifically include in the policy and subsequent training, policies on the
use of social media as part of the Town's efforts to communicate with its residents and others.
36. Complete the review and re -write of the Traffic Rules and Regulations.
37. Develop regulations for posting street numbers on all buildings.
38. Develop a process with various stakeholders to evaluate the demolition delay bylaw with specific
reference to: a) how property owners are informed of and may participate in the process of adding
properties to the inventory of historically or architecturally significant properties; b) what kind of appeal
from the imposition of a demolition delay may be appropriate
3
1/31/2012
DRAFT 2012 Town Manager's Goals and Action Plan
Town of Reading MA
39. Decide on whether the Board of Selectmen will permit remote participation of members of BCC in
public meetings pursuant to regulations adopted by the MA Attorney General's office, and if so develop
the policies to implement that decision
Human Resources /Personnel — The human capital of the community is the major resource that
is necessary to achieve the provision of services to the community. This human capital includes
employees, officials, members of Boards, Committees and Commissions, and the human capital
of the community as a whole. Human capital is to be supported and respected by the Town.
40. Continue B /C /C Chair /Vice Chair training.
41. Complete labor negotiations with the Police Patrol Officer's Association and the Police Superior
Officer's Association.
42. Complete the bidding and negotiation and/or implementation of a health insurance program Town
employees and retirees effective in FY 2013, with a goal of providing a cost effective comprehensive
insurance program that is sustainable by the community.
4
1/31/2012
TO: Board of Selectmen
From: Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager
Date: Monday, January 30, 2012
Re: 2013 Budget — Conservation Administrator
As follow up to the Board of Selectmen meeting of 1- 24 -12, Jean Delios, Bob LeLacheur, and I met
with Conservation Commission members Bill Hecht and Jamie Maughan on January 30. Bill and
Jamie gave us a list of suggested tasks for the Conservation Administrator if additional hours were
available.
The representatives of the Conservation Commission narrowed down the tasks, and we had a very
good discussion. The tasks that they defined fall into two categories:
One Time projects which should be completed by 6- 30 -12:
♦ Research and solicit input for wetland regulation modifications: 1.0 hr a week
♦ Staff support for regulation modification public meetings: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Develop flow diagram for residential wetland application process: 0.5 hrs a week
Recurring Work:
♦ Do two site visits per month to become familiar with town and specific issues on the
ground...... 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Research history of nearby sites for each new applications - 48 applications per year
0.5 hrs a week
♦ Research and apply for available grants: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Prepare for Commissioners bi weekly site visits by visiting if necessary and preparing
guidance for commissioners: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Prepare for and attend development meetings: 0.5 hrs a week
♦ Suggest wetland delineation for simple residential wetland permit application:
0.25 hrs a week
♦ Get Draft Order of Conditions to commissioners and applicant in advance of meeting,
respond to applicant's questions 0.5 hrs a week
To address this we are proposing:
♦ Look for additional funding this year to address the "one time projects"
♦ Add 3 hours per week to "right size" the position to the current needs — est. cost $4000
♦ We do not need to dedicate time to applying for grants — we have others who can do that.
♦ The Conservation Commission would agree to fund '/2 of this expense from the Conservation
Revolving Fund
♦ I will recommend a modification in this amount as part of the Town Manager's FY 2013
budget recommendation.
• Page 1
