HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-06-04 Adjourned Annual Town Meeting Minutes156
ADJOURNED ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
Reading Memorial High School Auditorium June 4, 1979
The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, John W. Faria, at 8:00 P. M.
The invocation was given by the Rev. Donald Troast of'the Old South United Methodist
Church, followed by the Pledge of'Allegiance to the Flag.
On motion of *William J. Hughes, Jr. it was voted to lay Article 19 on the table.
On motion of'William J. Hughes, Jr. it was voted to take Article 2 from the table.
ARTICLE 2. William J. Hughes, Jr. reported on the act of' heroism performed by
Joseph Hindes as follows:
On October 21, 1977, an act of'heroism was performed by two of'Reading's noteworthy
teenage citizens, Craig Quimby and Joe Hindes, on a fellow friend, Ken Thomson.
Craig Quimby, a member of' Boy Scout Troop 702, Old South Church, has been
recognized by National Headquarters, Boy Scouts of America, by receiving the Medal
of* Merit for Heroism, and now, tonight, we are gathered to honor and recognize Joe
Hindes by awarding him a Town of'. Reading Proclamation and Certificate of Appre-
ciation.
ARTICLE 2. On motion of James J. Sullivan, Jr. it was voted unanimously to accept
the following Resolution:
RESOLUTIONS COMMENDING JOSEPH HINDES, OF READING
A FELLOW CLASSMATE AND NOTEWORTHY MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY
May 31, 1979
Whereas Joseph Hindes, son of' Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Hindes, Jr., is a highly respected
member of'the community, and resident of'the Town of'Reading: and
Whereas Joseph is a student at Reading Memorial High School: and
Whereas A fellow student suffered severe lacerations when his arm went through a
window: and
Whereas Joseph Hindes immediately responded to the emergency situation and assisted in
applying a tourniquet to the injured classmate's arm which was bleeding profusely and
thereby, clearly demonstrated the resourcefulness and expertise he had learned
through family training and worldly experiences: and
Whereas the action taken by Joseph Hindes was instrumental in saving the life of' his
fellow student; therefore be it
Resolved that the Annual Town Meeting regularly convened One Thousand Nine Hundred
and Seventy Nine hereby commends a noteworthy citizen of' the community for his
meritorious action in saving the life of'his fellow student; and be it further
Resolved that a copy of ' these resolutions be forwarded by the Town Clerk to Reading
Citizen Joseph Hindes of'Sixty Six Locust Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
Board of Selectmen, adopted
James J. Sullivan, Jr.
Chairman
Marvin M. Rosenthal
Secretary
Maureen T. O'Brien
ARTICLE 2. The following report was read by Donald A. Dewey for the Reading
Transit Study Committee.
Reading Transit Study Committee Report on
the Viability and Need of
an Intra -Town Mini -Bus System
Committee Members
Donald A.Dewey, Chrm.
F. John Golon
Paul C. Morris
157
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting dune 4, 1979
Acknowledgment
There were nearly 70 people who helped our committee conduct the survey and assist
in tabulating the responses. We would like to thank them for their assistance. Although we
cannot name them all here, we would like to issue a special thanks to the students of
Landmark School who volunteered to give up two Saturdays to distribute townwide the door -
to -door survey. This survey constituted a vital portion of our report and without the help of
the Landmark students, a survey of'this magnitude would have been impossible to undertake.
I. INTRODUCTION
At Spring Town Meeting in 1978, under Article 3 on the motion of Nils Nordberg as
amended by Maureen O'Brien, it was voted that the Board of Selectmen be instructed to
Iftw appoint a special committee of not more than 9 members to study the viability and need for
an intra -town mini -bus, the committee to be known as the Reading Transit Study
Committee. The committee was appointed by the Selectmen and had their first meeting in
August of 1978. The committee has met nearly every week to accumulate the necessary
information to complete this study and report back to Town Meeting as directed.
We divided our study into two parts. The first was to determine the viability of a
mini -bus system within the town and then, if found viable, to determine whether the town's
residents wanted or needed the system. We are presenting Article 19 to Town Meeting to
implement such a system because first of all, a majority of the respondents to a survey
conducted by our committee were in favor of' funding a mini -bus program and secondly,
there may be a fuel shortage in the near future which could create a need for more forms of
public transportation.
II VIABILITY
BACKGROUND
The committee has studied mini -bus systems currently in operation around the country
through publications available feom the Federal Department of'Transportation. Three local
systems have been studied more closely as they are currently in operation and were
accessible to the committee for on -site inspection. These systems were in Needham, Natick
and Bedford. Needham's system was studied most closely as it is the most successful in
terms of'operation, cost and ridership. Also, Needham, geographic size, population density
rr..
and average income are quite similar to Reading's.
There are three types of ' mini -bus systems in use by the various communities across
the country. These systems are the Dial -A -Ride, Fixed Stop and Fixed Route. The Dial -A-
Ride system allows the citizen to call a coordinator to set an approximate time for pick -up
by the mini -bus. This is a door to door service that is used mainly in low population density
communities and sometimes is used in conjunction with the other type systems to service
elderly and disabled residents. This system is the costliest on a per rider basis and so the
committee does not recommend it. The Fixed Stop system sets up bus stops along a fixed
route and only makes stops at designated signs. The patrons must provide their own
transportation to and f rom these stops. The committee found this too restrictive as people
would have to walk many blocks to the designated stop. The fixed route system was found
to be the most viable for Reading. In this type system, routes are selected that weave
through neighborhoods and a rider has only to walk to the route and flag down the bus. The
fixed route system serves the greatest number riders with the most convenience. Needham
has used the Fixed Route system since the inception of'its mini -bus program. The original
plan had a three bus, six route system, which proved so successful that the following year
they added a new bus and two new routes. Because of-the similarity between Needham and
Reading, the success of the Needham mini -bus system and the advantages of' the Fixed
Route system over the other systems, our committee chose the Fixed Route system as a
model for a mini -bus system in Reading.
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR MINI -BUS ROUTES IN READING
Our investigation of communities operating mini -bus systems showed that conven-
,aw tience plays a major role in determining ridership. In the system we were developing for
Reading, we assumed that most potential riders would be willing to walk a maximum of - two
or three blocks to the nearest route. This assumption was later verified by our survey. The
committee also felt that it was impractical to service every household in the town in
anexperimental system. In a future year, if the mini -bus proved successful, the town could
opt to expand its services beyond what we recommend. The routes were designed to be
circuitous and to pass by all schools, churches, parks, etc. with as great a frequency as
possible without driving along the same roads. A common terminal point for all routes was
deemed necessary to allow for transfers and was located at the Boston and Maine station on
High St. The outcome of'this analysis was a six route system shown in Fig. 1.
158
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting June 4, 1979
ROUTE REPETITION, SCHEDULE, AND BUSES NEEDED
The next stage of'the report was to drive the routes for time and mileage counts. This
information was needed to determine schedules and equipment. The time and mileage for
each route is shown in Table 1. The time shown for each route was calculated by driving
nonstop at 15 to 20 miles per hour. We then scheduled one minute for passenger pickup and
discharge for every minute of'driving time. This was considered more than sufficient for an
intra -town mini -bus system by people within the transportation business.
The frequency of'route repetition was next considered. Since all six routes would be
completed in 3 hours (this includes the minute for pickup and discharge for each minute of
driving time), simple division by the number of'buses to be used gives the frequency of'route
repetition (Table2). We felt the best balance would be achieved with three buses each
driving two routes, each route being repeated hourly. Needham has found this to be quite
successful. A system using one or two buses was deemed restrictive and consequently
unattractive to riders. Six buses repeating the route every half ' hour was considered too
costly and unnecessary.
TABLE 1
TIME AND MILEAGE OF EACH ROUTE
Route
Length Time
*No.
(miles) * *(mins)
1
6.4 20
2
4.8 11
3
5.5 14
4
4.0 15
5
6.0 19
6
3.9 13
* Routes 1 & 2 are east of Rte. 28 (Main St.)
Routes 3 & 4 are west of Rte. 28 and north of -the B & M tracks
Routes 5 & 6 are west of'Rte. 28 and south of'the B & M tracks
** Non stop driving time at 15 - 20 mph
TABLE 2 FREQUENCY OF ROUTE REPETITION
No.
No. of
Frequency of
Buses
Routes /Bus
Route Repetition
1
6
3 hrs.
2
3
1Y2 hrs.
3
2
1 hr.
6
1
30 mins.
To encourage bus use by commuter rail patrons, the schedule was set with operating hours
from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM Monday thru Friday. Again we will not be able to accommodate
all rail commuters with these hours, but we feel that the majority would be served.
Saturday operation from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM would benefit the Reading Square traffic and
parking situation and might attract additional business to the local merchants. Comments
received on our survey indicated a reluctance of some Reading residents to use local
merchants because of the parking problem.
SERVICE TO OUT OF TOWN SHOPPING CENTERS AND MALLS
This study did not thoroughly analyze service to these areas, although comments on
the survey indicated there may be some interest for this type of service. The committee
felt that the previously described system is experimental in nature and has the best chance
for success on a limited basis. Expansion of'services beyond the level recommended should
only be considered at a later date after the system has proven itself: If'the recommended
system proves itself; we feel that the malls and shopping centers, along with neighboring
towns and the MBTA should get together to come up with a regional plan.
COST OF THE MINI -BUS SYSTEM
Many of" the communities operating mini -bus systems have studied the costs and
benefits of'a town owned and operated mini -bus versus one that was contracted to a private
carrier. The findings of these studies is that a private carrier, besides having expertise in
the industry, does not have to provide his employees with as high a wage and benefit
package as a town would and consequently, he can usually provide the service forsubstan-
tially lower costs than the town itself: A similar comparison would be the contracting out
of ' trash pickup in Reading. It was found to be substantially cheaper to pay a contractor to
perform the service than to have town personnel perform the function. A second reason for
o
4.
rts. l n*oommenueu mini-Bu" nvutca �
_
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting
f,59
June 4, 1979
contracting out service is that if the system proved too costly or a failure, the town would
be able to walk away from the program at the end of each one year contract. They would
not be left in a position of disposing of equipment and removal or relocation of personnel.
The committee therefore recommends that the Selectmen place this system out for
bids, providing it is passed by town meeting. We also recommend that the contract be bid as
a one year contract with an option to renew. With the renewal option, the carrier has the
opportunity to amortize his cost over a two year period which would greatly reduce the
amount of'the bids. The Selectmen would still be able to cancel the contract or award it to
a new carrier if the original contractor did not perform satisfactorily.
The committee has evaluated as closely as is possible the cost of operating this system
for a ten month trial period to start September 1, 1979. It is estimated that the cost will be
in the vicinity of $135,000. This includes the contract for the service with a private carrier,
a coordinator, office equipment and supplies, telephone, postage and printing (Table 3).
Mini -bus systems presently in operation in Needham, Natick and Bedford were bid at
between $12.75 per hour per bus and $13.25 per hour per bus. We used a rate of $14.00 per
hour to calculate the probable cost of our system to offset anticipated gasoline price hikes
and inflation. The $135,000 estimate is the maximum that the town would pay. This figure
would be reduced by the collected revenues. The contract would be bid obligating the town
to a minimum number of hours giving the option of having a different schedule should the
contracat be bid at a higher rate than anticipated.
TABLE 3 ESTIMATED COST OF
ADMINISTRATION AND CONTRACTED MINI -BUS SERVICES
Administrative
1.)
Office equipment
A. Supplied by the Board of Selectmen's office:
Desk, chair, file cabinet, miscellaneous
(wastebasket, pens, pencils, paper, etc.)
B. Typewriter (rebuilt, secondhand)
$ 500.00
C. Telephone @ $20.00 /mo.
240.00
D. Adding machine
200.00
2.)
Printing (schedules, routes, etc.)
2,000.00
Needham spent $2000.00 in 1977 & 1979
3.)
Postage to mail schedules to all Reading
r..
households (first year only)
500.00
4.)
Postage (misc.)
160.00
5.)
Change counter
2,350.00
6.)
Fare boxes ($1200.00 per bus)
4,800.00
7.)
Administrator salary
5,000.00
Contracted mini -bus service (estimated)
10 months operation FY 1980
Estimated bids $12.90 to $13.25/hr /bus
Total bus hrs. 9000 (approx.)
Cost of'contract at $13.25/hr /bus 119,250.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF SYSTEM $135,000.00
An approximate number of hours was used because we recommend that the contract
with the private carrier be worded that the town will guarantee a minimum -oumber of hours
of operation in the vicinity of 7500 hours. This clause will enable the Transit Committee to
still operate the system without seeking additional funding if' the bids come in as high as
$16.00 /hr /bus by reducing the hours of operation as was recommended elsewhere in the
report.
BUSES
In order to operate this system efficiently, the contract should call for three mini -
�Vw buses to be used and the contractor must provide a fourth bus to be held as a backup vehicle
for use in cases of normal maintenance or if one bus breaks down. It is anticipated that the
contractor would use that fourth bus to hold down the mileage of'each vehicle by revolving
the buses in a regular maintenance program.
16"o
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting
ADMINISTRATOR
June 4, 1979
Experience throughout the country has shown that a system of this nature must be
supervised by an administrator hired and paid for by the town. The administrator would
report and receive instructions from the Transit Committee and the Board of Selectmen.
The alternative to hiring an administrator would be to give the responsibility to someone
already providing a function for the town. This does not prove very effective for the system
as the split obligations of' the administrator allow less time for close scrutiny of' the
performance of the carrier and consequently a less efficient system. The administrator
could be hired part time or as we recommend, hired under contract for a specific amount of
money each year. This would make the employee ineligible for town employee benefits.
The duties of'the administrator would be decided by the Transit Committee. We recommend
that these responsibilities be included.
1. Answer telephone complaints, request for information and schedules
2. Collection of f are boxes and counting of ' revenues daily
3. Collection of data to prepare monthly statistical reports on revenue and
ridership for the Transit Committee and Selectmen
4. Attend regular Transit Committee metings
5. Public relations
6. Marketing - preparation and distribution of schedules, soliciting advertisers
to contribute to the cost of printing schedules
7. Systems monitoring with contractor daily
OFFICE EQUIPMENT
The committee has been advised by Mr. Agnew, Executive Secretary to the Board of
Selectmen, that space for an office for the administrator can be made available at the
Community Center and a telephone extension can be hooked up. Office furniture is also
presently available. The committee would need to purchase a used typewriter and an adding
machine.
OTHER START UP NEEDS
In addition to office equipment, we recommend that the town purchase change counter
and the fare boxes to maintain actual control over revenues. Needham presently leaves the
responsibility of collecting and counting of the fares to the carrier. We feel that this is not
a reliable method of operation and believe that the town should have the responsibility.
Other start up costs include postage and printing of schedules. The first year's budget
for postage will be substantially higher than following years as schedules of bus routes and
operating times would need to be mailed to all Reading households. Other postage funds are
in the budget for normal correspondence. Printing funds have been included in the budget
but we recommend that the administrator solicit funds from town business for advertising
space on the schedule to defray as much of'the printing cost as possible. This procedure has
been used successfully by other communities.
FARES
The committee recommends that two age categories be established for fares:
I. 6 to 16 and over 65
II. 17 to 65
childred under 6, accompanied by an adult would ride free. There would be two fare systems
for each category, a single fare system for the infrequent user and a monthly pass for the
frequent user. The price schedule is shown in Table 4
TABLE 4
Age Category Single Fare Rate Monthly Fare Rate
I $.25 5.00
II $.50 $10.00
A person using a monthly pass in age category I would pay an average fare of' 12.% per ride,
while those in category II would pay an average fare of 2% per trip.
Further benefits may become available to the monthly pass holders through an
insurance rebate program instituted by the state insurance commissioner's office. Under
this program, regular public transportation users who can illustrate their use of public
transportation by producing 11 monthly passes for the insurance year, can be eligible for a
10% rebate on their collision and property insurance on their car up to a maximum of
$50.00. The Reading Transit Committee would have to apply to the Insurance Commis-
sioner's office and be accepted to qualify for this program. Although there are no suburban
mini -bus programs taking advantage of this program, the commissioner's office saw no
reason why the application would be denied. The MBTA is the only public transportation
agency involved in the program at this time. If' the Reading mini -bus system was accepted
into this program, the actual cost to regular users would be further decreased.
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting
PROJECTED REVENUES
161.
June 4, 1979
Table 5 shows the projected yearly revenues that will be collected by the mini -bus
system based on the responses to question seven of ' the survey conducted by our committee.
Question seven gave us an estimated daily, weekly and monthly ridership. It should be noted
that the respondents were unfamiliar with the routes, pass program or possible rebate on
their automobile insurance when they completed the survey, and that these results represent
only 25% of'Reading's population. It is possible that ridership could be higher than indicated
by this table. The total projected revenues as shown by this table is $100,000.00. The
estimated cost of operating the system is $150,000.00 for an estimated net deficit of
$50,000.0 to be paid for out of'the town's tax rate.
TABLE 5 PROJECTED REVENUES
(based on survey results)
Age
group category
Single fare
Monthly ass
A.
Under 16, over 64
.25
5.00
B.
16 to 64 years old
$.50
$10.00
Estimated Revenues
Category A
Category B
1.
Daily riders
181
424
Yearly cost
60.00
120.00
Proj.rev.
10,860.00
50,880.00
2.
Weekly riders
356
485
Yearly cost (round trip)
26.00
52.00
Proj.rev.
10,756.00
25,220.00
3.
Monthly riders
76
133
Yearly cost
6.00
12.00
Proj. rev.
456.00
1, 696.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE (YEARLY)
$99,868.
GRANTS
It is anticipated that this system, including administrator and start up cost, is going to
cost $137,000.00 for ten months of'operation during Fiscal Year 1980, or approximately $.50
per $1,000 on the tax rate. This amount is the maximum the town would pay, it's possible it
could be substantially reduced if'the town can get a grant feom the META. The MBTA has a
program offering grants to communities operating mini -buses to assist the financing of'these
systems. The grants are limited to 50% of $50,000.00 of the operating deficit after
revenues, whichever figure is lower. Acceptance to the grant program by the MBTA would
have no effect on the town's deficit assessment. Reading's Transit Committee would have
to submit a proposal to the "T" to be eligible for the grant money. Needham, Natick,
Bedford, Lexington and Winchester are presently receiving these MBTA grants and the
program plans to add one new community to this list each year. Each town in the IT' district
has the opportunity to compete, by way of" proposal, for the new grant position. The
proposals are judged on the basis of' the quality of the plan for the mini -bus and on the
ingenuity of the system. The towns also have to demonstrate that its citizens approve of
the plan and that the town's government is willing to fund their portion of ' the deficit if the
grant is accepted.
We feel that the recommendations we have put forward in this report could give us an
edge in any competition for MBTA funds. We base this conclusion on the following:
1. Quality of'the plan - We have modeled our system after the most successful system
currently receiving funding from the MBTA. The town's street layout and size offer a good
base for frequent yet economical system to both the town and bus patron.
2. Town support for the plan - We conducted the most extensive survey conducted by
a town seeking a grant. Besides getting a positive vote on the acceptance of' the mini -bus
system with an accompanying increase in the tax rate, we also obtained information
pertaining to where the riders might be going, how they are getting there and whether they
would use our system.
3. We are offering an innovation yet to be tried by other systems, the monthly pass
program. The MBTA has expressed interest in funding a community that could incorporate
the pass program into their system.
4. Finally, to further increase our chances of'getting a grant,we recommend that the
proposal state that if' Reading is selected for the grant, we will permit commuter rail
monthly pass holders to ride our mini -bus free upon producing their pass. This should be
attractive to the MBTA as it could be an inducement for more commuter rail riders to
purchase the monthly pass. Also, it has the overall image of' making one cohesive program.
162 Adjourned Annual Town Meeting June 4, 1979
Currently the rail pass is good for both the train and the subway system. With the use of'
this pass in suburban communities for local transportation, the whole public transportation
picture is complete, giving the citizens the opportunity to go feom door to door by public
transportation. In these days of'rapidly rising fuel cost and possible fuel shortages, the idea
makes sense. If'we made this idea part of our proposal package, we may lose some potential
revenues to a maximum of'$10,000, but the potential gain is a $50,000 grant feom the MBTA
giving us a net gain of'$40,000 in funding, more than sufficient to make it worth the town's
while to allow the use of'the passes. If'we receive the grant the system could cost the town
a maximum of'$85,000 ($135,000 - 50,000 MBTA grant) of'$.30 per $2000 on the tax rate.
All revenues collected would further reduce this amount.
We cannot guarantee that the MBTA grant moneys will be available to us as other
communities are expected to seek the funds with good plans and innovations of *their own.
Also, under our new governor, the funds may be cut feom the budget altogether. Our last
contact with a "T" spokesman responsible for the program could not assure us that the funds
would be available.
III. SURVEY
FORMAT
The committee decided that a survey should be conducted to determine how the town
felt about the idea of'a mini -bus. Also the survey would help to identify the age groups,
families with one car and regions of the town that might be more likely to use a mini -bus.
We examined surveys conducted by other towns and found them too simplistic and generally
lacking for information. We finally developed the survey shown in Fig. 1 which we felt
would give us the most information. We decided to use a format that broke down each
answer by age category because it would give us the most answers in the least space. Many
of those surveyed expressed that this format was difficult to understand but we found that
most people did complete it successfully.
FIG. 2 READING TRANSIT STUDY SURVEY RESULTS
Questions (use the appropriate codes, A,B,C,D,
or E as applicable)
1. How many people are living in your household?
2. How many automobiles in your household?
Please specify all answers by age category
Under 10 10 -15 16 -40 41 -65 Over 65
745 613 2064 1469 421
1422 1197 189
3. Where do your employed household members work?
200
Enter code
271
A for Reading
12
B for Boston
153
C for Route 128, S indust. complex
405
D for Other
34
4. How do you get to work?
681
Enter code
66
A for Drive alone or with one other
1
B for Carpool
91
C for Commuter Rail
17
D f or Bus
16
E f or Other
25
5. Any members of'your household using a wheelchair
62
or have difficulty climbing stairs?
5
6. If'there were an intra -town minibus serice operating
9
throughout Reading, M -F 7:OOAM to 7:0 PM and
79
Sat. 9:OOAM to 6:OO13M, which members of'your
18
household might use it?
267
7. How f eequently?
29
Enter code
340
A for Daily
65
B for Once a week
134
C for Once a month
25
D f or Rarely or not at all
107
8. What do you think fares should be?
29
Enter code
A for $.25
251
B for $.40
39
C for $.75
6
D for Other
25
9. How far would you expect to walk to a bus stop?
Enter code
A for Doorstep service only
17
B for One block
140
C for Two blocks
116
D for three or more blocks
39
226
200
15
271
196
12
217
153
4
405
393
34
807
681
38
66
63
1
102
91
8
17
14
16
2 6
25
50
332
680
482
175
72
220
204
44
127
279
206
95
32
83
50
19
54
321
239
67
185
534
439
118
48
161
156
62
4
32
24
9
8
79
54
18
14
40
26
29
110
340
255
130
97
339
231
44
38
119
84
29
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting
June 4, 197163
DO YOU THINK THAT TOWN MEETING SHOULD VOTE TO FUND AN INTRA -TOWN
MINIBUS SYSTEM, IF IT WOULD ADD A MAXIMUM OF $.35 TO THE TAX RATE?
872 Yes 617 No 79 NR 1568 Total
56% 39% 5% 100%
Comments: Totals of'all responses received by 3- 28 -79.
Approximately 4000 surveys were distributed, 1568 responses represents a 39% return.
Total population represented by the results - apprx. 25%
DISTRIBUTION
We next considered the methods of distribution available to us. We ruled out
publication in the newspaper with return by mail as ineffective, as the response rate to this
type of survey is low. We also considered mailing a survey to every household but realized
that this method would also yield a low response while costing the town a considerable sum
for postage. We concluded that the only way to insure a high distribution and response was
to deliver and pick up the durveys door to door.
The returned responses were kept separated by section so tabulations could be done by
section. This was considered necessary to determine if' one neighborhood was more
interested in the minibus than another. We also felt that if any of these survey results had
application to other town boards or studies, having statistics on different geographic areas
of the town might be beneficial.
This type of ' survey was a unique idea of our committee's and although it is volunteer
intensive it is very effective in getting responses. The idea is to distribute the surveys along
a road and to return to collect the completed forms in 15 to 20 minutes. This type of'
collection proves effective because there are three categories of people when it comes to
surveys - those who answer them,those who don't and those who might but procrastinate
until it's too late to respond. We realized that by picking up the completed forms we would
get a large number of responses from the procrastinators.
SURVEY REPRESENTS CROSS - SECTION OF TOWN
We did not want to survey the outskirts of town and not the center, figuring that the
preferences for a minibus may be biased by where a family lived. We wanted a response
that represented a cross section of the town. We divided the town into 20 sections of'
approximately equal population densities. We coerced 20 adult drivers and 40 high school
and Landmark School students to do the actual distribution. By assigning four students per
car, we were able to survey eighteen of' the twenty neighborhoods in two weekends. We did
not have a sufficient number of volunteers to complete the other two areas.
RESULTS
The survey was tabulated by the committee, volunteers and members of the League of
Women Voters. We are proud to say that the number of' responses was tremendous. The
volunteers distributed 4000 surveys and 1600 were either collected or returned to the Board
of Selectmen's office. Two - thirds of all Reading's households had the opportunity to be
repreented on this issue. The 1600 responses represents a 40% return or 25% of all Reading
households - a better response than we get at many of our town elections.
The first question we tabulated and the one most important to our committee was
whether the town wanted a minibus with its accompanying tax rate increase. The tally
shows 56% of the people in favor, 39% opposed and 5% undecided. Seventeen of the twenty
sections voted in f avor of' the minibus, showing that the support for this program was
widespread. Even the sections of the town located near the center were in favor of a
minibus.
The second most important question dealt with whether ridership would be sufficient
to justify such a system. Again the response to this question was positive. 600 people said
that they would use the bus daily, another 800 would use it weekly. An estimation of
revenues based on the results of'this question and the fares mentioned in an earlier section
indicate that approximately $100,000.00 would be collected in fares. We found a sufficient
number of people working in Reading and commuting to Boston by commuter rail to show an
even higher potential ridership.
Other questions on the survey helped to justify the design of the fixed route system
and the f are structures. The majority of ' the people would walk only two blocks to meet the
route. They mostly wanted to pay 2% per trip. With the monthly pass, everyone can ride
for 2% per trip. The questions dealing with cars per household, and how we get to work are
also improtant. Seventy percent of all driving age residents have a car in Reading. Seventy
percent of' our working community also drives to work alone or with one other person.
Examining this figure with the 44% who work in Reading or Boston shows the difficulties
many of*us are going to face in coming months with higher fuel costs and possible gasoline
shortages.
I C 4 Adjourned Annual Town Meeting June 4, 1979
IV. SUMMARY
Our committee does not relish the idea of coming before town meetings looking for an
addition to the tax rate. We are as aware of the plea of "NO New Taxes" as everyone else.
We feel we have conducted a fair and impartial investigation of' the need for the minibus
system in Reading. As instructed by last spring's Town Meeting, we have determined the
viability of 'a minibus. Most importantly, we have clearly shown the need and desire of our
residents to have this system. Many of us will look at the system that has been presented
and say "I won't ever use it" and decide to vote against it. I remind you that we're not here
to vote personal preferences. In this article, you have a substantial sampling of town
opinion to guide you. This sampling says it wants the minibus.
Respectfully,
Donald A.Dewey, Chairman
This report was accepted as a report of progress.
On motion of ' Donald A. Dewey it was voted to lay Article 2 on the table.
On motion of'Donald A. Dewey it was voted to take Article 19 from the table.
ARTICLE 19. Donald A.Dewey moved that the Town raise from the tax levy and
appropriate the sum of $135,000 to be expended under the supervision and direction of' the
Board of Selectmen for the purpose of providing a public transportation service to be
operated exclusively within the Town for the inhabitants of the Town, which service shall be
provided by means of' contract or franchise arrangement or any combination thereof with a
private carrier or qualified independent contractor; and in order to provide such service the
Board of Selectmen are hereby authorized: 1) to enter into a contract or franchise
arrangement or any combination thereof with a private carrier or qualified independent
contractor to implement such transportation service over the public ways of the Town, upon
such terms and conditions as the Board of Selectmen shall deem to be in the best interests
of the Town; 2) to establish a committee of' 9 members to be known as the Reading
Transportation Committee to aid and assist the Board of'Selectmen in entering into any such
contract or franchise arrangement or any combination thereof; 3) to establish revenue
charges to riders and the procedure for collecting or crediting such revenue charges by or
through the private carrier; 4) to apply for and receive any and all additional support or
financial assistance from any source whatsoever for the performance of the duties herein
authorized; and 5) to make reasonable rules and regulations consistent with the authority
granted herein to effectuate and maintain an efficient local transportation service.
This motion did not pass.
ARTICLE 20. On motion of Don B. DeHart it was voted that the sum of Three
Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) be raised and appropriated for improvements to the
water system, including consulting engineering services, surveys, preliminary plans, designs,
contracts, specifications, final plans and estimates for constructing or reconstructing,
remodelling, enlarging the water treatment plant and related facilities, such sum to be
expended by and under the direction of' the Board of Public Works, and to meet said
appropriation, that the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) be raised from
the tax levy and that the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) be raised by
borrowing and the Town Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectmen be, and she
hereby is, authorized to borrow said Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) payable in
accordance with Section 7 of Chapter 44 of the General Laws so that each issue shall be
paid in not more than five (5) years from its date or at such earlier time as the Treasurer
and Selectmen may determine, said bonds or notes shall be signed by the Treasurer and
countersigned by the Selectmen.
142 voted in the affirmative
3 voted in the negative
2/3 vote required
ARTICLE 21. On motion of Allan E. Ames it was voted that Article 21 be referred to
the Municipal Light Board, and that said Board be, and hereby is, authorized to install such
additional street lights as, in its judgment are required, and to make such changes in the
size, type and location of existing street lights, as it may deem advisable, the expense of'the
same to be paid from the income of'the plant.
On motion of'Joseph C. Sturm it was voted to take up Article 43 out of order.
ARTICLE 43. Joseph C. Sturm moved that the Town vote to accept the policy
recommendations of' the Planning Board to rehabilitate the Community Center building to
serve as the Town Hall, and subsequently construct an addition on the north side of' the
Adjourned Annual Town Meeting
June 4, 14fi,5
Library, retaining intact and utilizing the exterior facade of the present Town Hall building;
and to instruct the Board of Selectmen, the Finance Committee and the Board of Library
Trustees to include such construction in the Capital Program and to submit implementing
Articles at appropriate times for consideration by Town Meeting.
On motion of Stephen G. Viegas it was voted that this article be indefinitely
postponed.
On motion of Douglas A. Cowell it was voted that this meeting stand adjourned to
meet at 8:00 P. M. on Thursday, June 7, 1979, in the Reading Memorial High School
Auditorium.
Meeting adjourned at 11:04 P. M.
155 Town Meeting members were present.
A true copy. Attest:
Lawrence Drew
Town Clerk
ADJOURNED ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
Reading Memorial High School Auditorium
June 7, 1979
The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, John W. Faria, at 8:00 P. M.
The invocation was given by the Rev. Johannah E. Fine of the First Congregational
Church, followed by the Pledge of'Allegiance to the Flag.
ARTICLE 22. To see if the Town will vote to accept the policy recommendation of
the Planning Board to sell the property known as the Lowell Street School for a use
permitted in a Residential Zoning District, with priority of purchase given to a provider of
subsidized housing for the elderly to meet local needs; and to authorize the Board of
Selectmen to effectuate the intent of this Article by taking all action necessary including
conveying the property by deed upon such terms and conditions as the Selectmen shall
consider proper, or take any other action with respect thereto.
On motion of"James J. Sullivan, Jr. it was voted to lay Article 22 on the table.
ARTICLE 23. On motion of William C. Brown it was voted that the Board of
Selectmen be and are hereby authorized and instructed to sell at public auction, by
December 31, 1979, land and buildings now or formerly known as the Lowell Street School
for the sum of not less than $40,000.00, and that the sum of' One Hundred Dollars ($100.00)
be raised and appropriated to carry out the purpose of this vote.
106 voted in the affirmative
21 voted in the negative
On motion of Joseph C. Sturm it was voted to take Article 22 from the table.
On motion of'Joseph C. Sturm it was voted that Article 22 be indefinitely postponed.
ARTICLE 24. William C. Brown moved that the Board of Selectmen be and are hereby
authorized and instructed to sell at public auction, by December 31, 1979, land and buildings
now or formerly known as the Prospect Street School for the sum of not less than
$45,000.00, and that the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) be raised and appropriated to
carry out the purpose of this vote.
This motion did not pass.
On motion of Marvin M. Rosenthal it was voted to take Article 9 from the table.
ARTICLE 9. On motion of Marvin M. Rosenthal as amended by James J. Sullivan, Jr.
it was voted that the sum of ' One Hundred Eighteen Thousand Nine Hundred Eleven Dollars
($118,911) be raised from the tax levy and appropriated to Building Maintenance as follows,
each item to be considered a separate appropriation:
Salaries $50,298
Expense 68,613
118,911