HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-20 Board of Selectmen PacketFgo~
r~o~N FR
r-rf
Al
. ; Town of Reading
~~wo 16 Lowell Street
639°IN~°4°~P Reading, MA 01867-2685
FAX: (781) 942-9071
Email: townmanager@ci.reading.ma.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Selectmen
FROM: Peter I. Hechenbleikner
PR 1
DATE: November 16, 2007
RE: November 20, 2007 Selectmen's Meeting
TOWN MANAGER
(781) 942-9043
1 c) Please see the attached material from the MWRA Advisory Board. The Board of
Selectmen may want to go on record with the Patrick Administration and State
Legislature regarding the need for continued debt service assistance.
4a) Town Accountant Gail LaPointe will be in to discuss issues with the Board very briefly.
The 2007 Audit is complete. Gail will also want to give you an update on the Munis
conversion process.
4b) Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Irene Collins and Chamber President Michael
Giacalone will be in to remind the Board and the community of the tree lighting
ceremony to be held on Sunday, November 25 and also to talk about the process of
replacing the strands of lights with LED lights.
4c) Deb Gilberg will discuss with the Board the World Cafe process and proposed schedule.
There has been some concern raised as to whether or not the World Cafe in anyway
supplants decision making by elected officials and/or the Master Plan and Master Plan
process that are in place.
. Representatives of National Development will appear to discuss the traffic study
(previously distributed to the Board - please bring your copy) and the fiscal impact
report for the Addison Wesley Pearson site. The Finance Committee will also be posted
'or this time and will probably have a quorum present to hear the presentation on the
^al impact report.
parent that the State will change the Presidential Primary Election to February 5,
'he Board of Selectmen has the option of having the Town Election on the same
' draft a motion for the Board to make that decision. Enclosed in your packet is
some material from Town Clerk Cheryl Johnson. She notes the cost savings of
combining the elections would be approximately $10,000. If the change is made, then
nomination papers for the Local Election will be file by January 15, 200$ and the last day
to register to vote will be January 16, 2008.
4f) The Board of Selectmen received last week a copy of the Strategic Plan for the Reading
Police Department. Chief Cormier will be present to make a brief presentation on the
Strategic Plan and answer any questions that Board members may have. He is working to
see if the consultant will also be available to attend.
7a) There will be an Executive Session regarding labor negotiations.
PIH/ps
OFRFgO ~d p Yv~
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
rV r~~~ p.w ti !
mod.. Ewa Reading, MA 01867-2685
{639' jN ORp~~~~
FAX: (781) 942 - 5441
November 16, 2007
Dear Neighbors of Memorial Park,
RECREATION DIVISION: (781) 942 - 9075
We would like to follow-up on the very productive meeting that was held on October 24th, 2007
with regards to the petition to amend to deed of Memorial Park. We are enclosing the updated
petition based on feedback. We used many of the comments received from neighbors of the park to
construct the attached document.
At the request of the residents from our prior meeting, we would like to offer to those that are
interested, the opportunity to discuss the final language of the petition. We have set up a meeting
for Wednesday, December 5th beginning at 7:00 PM in the Reading Police Station Community
Room to discuss any final questions that may arise.
Thank you to those that have helped contribute to the process and we look forward to seeing you on
Wednesday, December 5th
i cerely,
Peter I. Hechenbleikner
Town Manager
John A. Feudo
Recreation Administrator
IC
1-2
ti i
zyc IT U
~S~ urlington • Cambridge's Canton • Chelsea • C icopee • Con
Arlington • Ashland • Bedford • Belmont • Boston • Braintree • Brookline 60 S
Dedham • Everett Framingham Hingham • Holbrook • Leominster MBA Lexington Lynn Lynnli•d 9a) Nrb ea Medford • Melrose Milton • Nahant • Natick • Needham • Newton ~ ADVISORY D Northborough • Norwo Peab y • y Ra#-4.diglt
eang
Revere • Saugus • Somerville • South Hadley • Southborough • Stoneham tt BOARD Stoughton • Swampscott Wakefield Walpole Waltham
1V
Watertown • Wellesley • Weston • Westwood • Weymouth • Wilbraham Wilmington • Winchester • Winthrop Wobt~ • Worcester
November 13, 2007
o'
Dear Chief Elected Official(s):
The Commonwealth's Sewer Rate Relief Fund, also known as Debt Service
Assistance (DSA), grew out of the reality of ratepayer revolt in the early 1990s and
the state's recognition that it was imperative to partner with MWRA communities to
help mitigate the significant impacts of escalating sewer rates caused by the debt
incurred to pay for the Boston Harbor Project.
From 1994 to 2002, as DSA increased from $20 million to $60 million, providing a
20% subsidy of eligible sewer debt, communities' wholesale assessments reflected
the benefits of these state dollars.
In 2003, as with many other state appropriations, the bottom fell out of DSA. MWRA
was forced to have an additional mid-year assessment increase. Today, state
assistance is just $3 million more than when it was instituted in FYI 994, $23 million
versus $20 million.
As we contemplate the FY2009 Budget, DSA is at a crossroads. Governor Patrick's
Administration, beginning its budget deliberations, is reviewing and analyzing DSA.
DSA, as we know it, could be in jeopardy and the ramifications to ratepayers are
significant.
Between FY09 and FY17, MWRA's community assessments will grow by over $300
million, driven by an Operating Budget where 60 cents out of every dollar goes to
pay the debt and that assumes that the MWRA's DSA continues to be at least level
funded.
Governor Patrick's Administration has provided the Advisory Board opportunities to
engage them directly on this topic. The Advisory Board was the only participant in
an Administration and Finance (A&F) sponsored Budget Hearing in mid-October.
Just two weeks ago, MWRA Advisory Board Chairman Katherine Haynes Dunphy
and Advisory Board staff met with Administration and Finance Secretary Leslie
Kirwan and her staff to discuss DSA.
Just last week, A&F requested that the Advisory Board provide them with a position
paper, which outlines the importance of DSA. Enclosed is the Advisory Board's
response.
C", /V
Joseph E. Favaloro, Executive Director
11 Beacon Street 0 Suite 1010 • Boston, MA 02108-3002 • Telephone: (617) 742-7561 • Fax: (617) 742-4614
The Advisory Board's voice is only as loud as the communities' chorus behind us.
If DSA is to survive and grow in its present form, communities must make
themselves heard.
At a time when ratepayers and taxpayers are being hit from all sides, DSA is a
success story. For relatively short money there is a huge dollar for dollar benefit in
the communities' water and sewer assessments. For every $5 million of DSA, the
MWRA community assessments are reduced by 1%.
In the coming days/weeks, Advisory Board staff will be calling to. follow up on this
letter. In the interim, please reinforce to A&F, the Governor's Office and Legislators,
that DSA is critical.
Please do not hesitate to call to discuss this issue or if you would like me to come
to your city or town to discuss this matter. As always, it would be my pleasure.
;Si,nrely,
ph E. avaloro, YJr
'Executive Director
Enclosure
JEF/mam
~Z
Arlington • Ashland • Bedford • Belmont • Boston • Braintree • Brookline
Dedham • Everett • Framingham • Hingham • Holbrook • Leominster
Medford • Melrose • Milton • Nahant • Natick • Needham • Newton
Revere • Saugus • Somerville • South Hadley • Southborough • Stoneham
Watertown • Wellesley • Weston • Westwood • Weymouth Wilbraham
November 8, 2007
eq 6 o crTI
Burlington • Cambridge • Canton • Chelsea • Chicopee • Clinton
G~MwRA ~ Lexington • Lynn • Lynnlield • Malden • Marblehead • Marlborough
~ ADVISORY 0 Northborough • Norwood • Peabody • Quincy • Randolph • Reading
y1d BOARD Stoughton • Swampscott Wakefield Walpole Waltham
Wilmington • Winchester • Winthrop • Woburn Worcester
Leslie A. Kirwan, Secretary
Executive Office for Administration and Finance
State House, Room 373
Boston, MA 02133
Dear Secretary Kirwan:
On behalf of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) Advisory Board, we want to extend
a sincere thank you for your willingness to meet with us to discuss the Commonwealth Sewer Rate Relief
Program. I am writing in response to an inquiry from your staff regarding Debt Service Assistance:
■ What is the difference in the impact to ratepayers between a $15 million and a $23 million
appropriation for state-wide debt service?l
■ Why is the Debt Service Assistance program the most effective way to provide rate relief, and
what would be an alternative to the current program?2
We appreciate your interest in this important matter and would like to take this opportunity to answer the
questions in the proper historical context.
MWRA HISTORY
Decades of underfunding had left the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) understaffed and the
facilities under its control badly in need of repair and upgrade. In 1984, legislation was enacted to create
the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority to assume responsibility for the water and sewer
infrastructure serving greater Boston, and to end the pollution of Boston Harbor from obsolete wastewater
treatment facilities. The primary mission was to modernize the area's water and, sewer systems and clean
up Boston Harbor. Other key elements included a huge capital program to repair and upgrade the systems,
increase of staff to improve operations and maintenance, promotion of water. conservation, and planning
for the fixture to meet growing demand.
The MWRA recently celebrated its 20th anniversary and in that time, they have completed over $6 billion
worth of upgrades to the water and sewer systems that have all but reversed the effects of neglect and
underfunding of the preceding decades. With the new treatment facilities on Deer Island complete, the
clean-up of Boston Harbor has gained national acclaim as one of the greatest environmental success
stories of our time. On the drinking water side, massive upgrades to water infrastructure, including a
state-of-the-art ozone disinfection plant and covered storage tanks throughout the district, will help
guarantee some of the best drinking water in the country for generations to come.
Over 80% of MWRA's capital projects have been mandated by state or federal regulations or by the
federal court and have come at great expense to the ratepayers in the MWRA's customer communities.
MWRA continues to find ways to keep costs down and to ensure that every dollar spent provides tangible
public health or environmental benefits.
' See Page 4.
2 See Page 6.
Joseph E. Favaloro, Executive Director
11 Beacon Street • Suite 1010 • Boston, MA 02108-3002 • Telephone: (617) 742-7561 • Fax: (617) 742-4614
MWRA's Major Capital Projects
$700 -
$600
$500
N $400
c
0
2
`J$300 -
$200 -
$'100 -
$0 -
$608 Actual CIP Planned
e
,
,
i
,
$437 $447
t
,
$377 $365
i
,
,
,
$274
994 1995 1996 199 998 Iaaa 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 009 2090 2019 2012 2013 2014
Boston Harbor Project
( MetroWest water Supply Tunnel ( Hultman Aqueduct Rehab
1 'Sooi Pond Supply Mains Rehab ~
Norumbega.Covered Storage Facility
Braintree Weymouth.Relle'Fabilities
Weston Aqueduct Supply Mains Rehab J
J
Carroll Water Treatment Plant (UV Treatmenq
Union Park -
East Boston Brranch Sewer
I North Dorchester. BayCSO
Community-Managed °CSO Projects
2
The single, largest driver of MWRA's budget is debt service on the bonds that finance major capital
improvement projects. These projects have all but reversed the effects of neglect and underfunding of the
previous decades. But these improvements have come at a price: MWRA's debt service burden now
accounts for almost 60% of the agency's budget and is the single, largest driver of MWRA rate increases.
MWRA Capital Improvement Spending
8
Debt Service Repayment
$700
$600
$500
$400 '
o t ~p
E $300 M
$200-
$100, Q L1
$0- ,,,,.,,,,t,, Y h444~
qe ee1*qe 4+`&Q``f l'f'd`le etad c~y~4i~ F~~ Fi~4ysQ`9 Q'4 ' ,`•A~.`fi4,'9 ~+ry~ ~+'~1+3'~y~A ~+'ti~+J'~°t'~+'F'~yd'~+"ti ~+`3'
=Actual Debt Service UM Projected Debt Service -t-CIP -Actual -fl-CIP - Proposed
THE CASE FOR DEBT SERVICE ASSISTANCE
Debt Service Assistance has been successful in past years and continues to be an important piece of the
state budget. It is crucial to stabilizing water and sewer charges that are passed on to ratepayers. MWRA
and other districts draw debt service assistance from the Sewer Rate Relief Fund to stabilize wholesale
rate increases. Debt Service Assistance is akin to local aid for municipalities. In order to understand what
we hope to achieve in the future, it is important to be aware of the history of the program..
In 1992, with the Boston Harbor Project starting to ramp up and following several years of double-digit
rate increases, the ability of many service area residents to pay their water and sewer bills was seriously
questioned. A "rate revolt" ensued, with ceremoniously. people burning their bills on the steps of the State
House or dumping them into Boston Harbor.
In response., the MWRA Advisory Board (comprised the CEO's of every city and town in the MWRA
service area) and the MWRA Legislative Caucus (108 MWRA Legislative Caucus members representing
communities in MWRA's service area and watersheds), working with the Weld Administration,
established the Commonwealth Sewer Rate Relief Fund in the FYI 994 budget act to make state debt
service assistance available to issuers of indebtedness, like the MWRA, for qualified wastewater projects
mandated by the federal Clean Water Act.
When the program was established, MWRA's share was $20 million - enough funding to offset 20% of
MWRA's debt service for wastewater projects. By FY2002 the statewide appropriation had grown to $60
million. The fund is administered by the Department of Revenue and has proven to be successful in
mitigating extraordinary increases in household sewer bills. In fiscal 2003, however, the program was
eliminated in response to the state's fiscal crisis. Funding has been gradually restored, but not enough to
keep pace with MWRA's increasing debt service.
MWRA Actual and Projected Rate Revenue Increases FY1987-2017
$70
Before DSA DSA Introduced in FY1994 No DSA
$50 1
q f - -31.3% 8.4% 3
4 increase increase
N
$50 f
n i S
$40 {
C t
1 Governor Eliminates L z
E . $47 million in FY03'`~.y r j # 2
$30
4 ~ a 3 P ➢ s t x d
R ~p h A ~7 ttF i ~f k R r 9
$20 , 3 ° a t d r}
$0-• T ' A
e ~Be ~rQ ~q~ ~q'4 X44 ~of~ ~y1 ~g0 ,y0' ~cS~ ~d,o° ~c~' ~ycS' X01 ~y0q' ~t4 ~y.o ~~ry{h ~.,A ~,~0 ~.~6 ~~1
The projected rate revenue increase over the next five years, FY09 through FY13, is $185 million.
Over 100 communities across the state benefit from this program. It is a critical tool in managing water
and sewer rates. MWRA's share of the $23 million appropriation for this fiscal year is $17.25 million.
Without this funding, our ratepayers would have faced an 8% increase this year instead of 4.5%. As a
general rule of thumb, each $5 million in debt service assistance reduces the rate increase by one percent.
What is the difference in the impact to ratepayers between a $IS million and a $23 million
appropriation for state-wide debt service?
Typically, the MWRA's share of the state-wide debt service appropriation is 75%. Therefore, for $15
million MWRA's share would be $11.25 million, for $23 million it would be $17.25 million. Every dollar
of debt service assistance is used to directly offset MWRA's assessments to its communities.
I6/ 4
The following table illustrates what the reduction to the wholesale assessments between those two
funding levels would be for the 20 MWRA communities with the highest rates3:
MWRA DSA @
MWRA DSA @
Increase in
$11.25 Million
$17.25 Million
DSA
IBoston
I $3,228,832
$4,950,8761
$1,722,0441
Cambridge
I 512,8081
786,3051 1
273,498
Quincy
i 505,3091
774,8071 1
269,498
Newton
I 488,405
748,8871 1
260,4821
ISomerville
1 398.885
611,6231 1
212,7381
(Waltham
1 344,1471
527,6911 1
183,5451
(Framingham
1 329,7401
505,6011 1
175,8611
1Brookline
1 316,5931
485,4421 I
168,8501
(Malden
I 308,0391
472,3261
164,2871
1Medford
I 302,6681
464,0901
161,4231
Weymouth
254,733
390,5911
135,858
Revere
244,089
374,2701
130,181
Woburn
I 229,7571
352,2941 1
122,5371
(Arlington
1 221,9451
340,3161 1
118,3711
Everett
1 208,9501
320,3901 1
111,440
Lexington
1 184,9001
283,5141 1
98,613
1 Braintree
175,1661
268,5871 1
93,4221
(Chelsea
168;8511
258,9051 1
90,0541
(Norwood
1 166,9001
255,9131
89,0131
(Watertown
166,6621
255,5491
88,8871
Debt Service Assistance also has an impact on communities outside of MWRA's service area. In FY07,
80 non-MWRA communities and sewer districts received funds. A sampling of those communities and
districts receiving Debt Service Assistance is illustrated here:
South Essex Sewer District: $674,569
Lynn Water & Sewer District: $133,914
City of New Bedford: $365,091
Town of Tewksbury: $166,334
Town of Sturbridge: $42,277
On-aoingMWRA Cost-SavingMeasures
As a critical component of its multi-year rates management strategy, MWRA has used a range of tools to
lower its borrowing costs and manage its debt structure to take advantage of favorable interest rates.
These tools include maximizing use of SRF debt, issuance of variable rate debt, the use of surplus
revenues to defease debt, swap agreements, and using tax-exempt commercial paper to minimize the
financing cost of construction in progress.
In FY2007, the MWRA, working with the Advisory Board, restructured approximately $675 million in
long-term borrowings to level out debt service through 2017 and create rate relief for member
communities. Using proceeds from the refunding, the Authority also defeased approximately $41 million
in bonds in May to lower the FY2008 through FY2012 debt service requirement; the greatest savings will
occur in FY2012.
MWRA has continued to focus on aggressively managing its expenses. When adjusted for inflation,
MWRA's direct operating costs for FY2007 were lower than actual expenses were in FY2000. Since
1997, staffing has been reduced by more than 500 positions. We are committed to keeping operating
3 See Attachment #1 for a list of the Impact of Debt Service Assistance on all communities. 167-
5
expenses down as much as possible, but cannot eliminate programs that would compromise water and
sewer services that are critical for public health and environmental protection.
The Ratevavers' Burden
Since the MWRA's inception, water and sewer rates have gone from being among the lowest in the
country to the highest.
MWRA Service Area
San Francisco
Washington DC
New Orleans
Houston
Philadelphia
Indianapolis
$1,006
171
i
$1,200
The 900,000 households facing ever-increasing water and sewer bills are also contending with the rising
cost of heat, fuel, electric and property taxes. Over 90% of MWRA's total revenue is derived from users'
rates and charges. Since debt service is by far the major component ofMWRA's budget and will continue
to grow even if MWRA cuts all present and future spending, MWRA rates will continue to increase. How
much rates will rise is in direct proportion to the extent to which debt service assistance is funded.
Why is Debt Service Assistance the most effective way to provide rate relief and what would be an
alternative to the current program?
CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVES
Before considering alternatives to the Debt Service Assistance program, it is important to note that the
program is the product of the collaboration between the Legislature, the Executive Branch, the MWRA,
the Advisory Board, and most importantly the cities and towns. Debt Service Assistance is the end
product of years of evaluation and review of many concepts that have been up for consideration. From the
early concept of a dedicated lottery ticket proceed ("The Royal Flush Ticket") to various state tax
deduction scenarios, the question of how to fill the void from the abandonment of the Federal government
and meet the intent of the Enabling Legislation (providing 90% funding from the Federal and State
Governments) has been discussed. Today, the Debt Service Assistance program is a success story; it is
crucial in mitigating water and sewer rate increases.
MWRA and other districts draw debt service assistance from the Sewer Rate Relief Fund to stabilize rate
increases. Debt Service Assistance is akin to local aid for municipalities. Over 100 communities across
the Commonwealth have been able to take advantage of this program, underscoring the point that Debt
Service Assistance is a state-wide issue and not limited to the NfWRA service area. Dollar for dollar, Debt
Service Assistance goes to pay off debt incurred for the capital projects; it directly offsets water and
c, ~ ~
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000
U1985 ® 1994 ■ 2006
sewer rates. Approximately every $5 million in Debt Service Assistance is equivalent to a one percent
reduction in assessments.
As requested, Advisory Board staff has compiled information on potential alternatives to the Debt Service
Assistance program that would provide direct relief to low income and/or elderly taxpayers. It is difficult
to develop a program which maximizes benefits directly or indirectly to as many ratepayers as possible as
well minimizing layers of state and local bureaucracies. Another difficulty is the fact that many low
income residents are renters, rather than homeowners, and therefore they never receive a water or sewer
bill.
Per your request, please see the following alternative concepts:
1. LOW INCOME WATER & SEWER RATE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
This alternative program would provide a direct target of rate relief to low income and elderly
homeowners.
Historv:
A previous attempt at a program designed specifically for low income and/or elderly was included in the
budget as section 127 of Chapter 51 of the Acts of 1996. The Low Income Sewer & Water Rate
Assistance Program (LISAWAP), championed by Senator Warren Tolman, was established in FY97 and
provided $2 million in assistance to qualified homeowners earning less than 150 percent of the federal
poverty level. The program offered to pay up to 25% of eligible homeowners 1997 water and sewer costs,
up to a maximum of $200. The program was administered in conjunction with the Department of Housing
-and Community Development and it partnered with several private organizations, including Action for
Boston Community Development, which assisted with the application process.
Pros:
The program funneled assistance to low income homeowners.
Cons:
Of the 371 municipalities and districts surveyed, only 92 were eligible for the LISAWAP program.5 Only
8,000 households in the entire Commonwealth received any benefit. The process was cumbersome and it
was difficult to get the money to those in need. The actual spending was approximately $1.5 million.
There has been no further appropriation since FY97.
2. INCOME TAX DEDUCTION
This alternative would allow water., and sewer charges to be eligible for a state income tax deduction. This
provision could include income guidelines to target low income and/or elderly homeowners.
Historv:
Over the years, legislation has been filed that would allow water and sewer bills to be eligible for a state
income tax deduction for single family homeowners.
Pros:
The program would provide relief to individual households and would be easily administered.
Cons:
The overall cost of this alternative could be prohibitive to the state. Depending on the established
guidelines, the overall households that would benefit could be significantly limited.
4 See Attachment #2: M.G.L. Chapter 23b, Section 24b. Low-Income Sewer & Water Assistance Program.
5 Eligibility was determined by median retail water and sewer rates.
3. INCOME TAX CREDIT
This alternative would provide state tax credits for water and sewer charges similar to Title V Septic Tax
Credits 6 This provision could include income guidelines to target low income and/or elderly
homeowners.
Historv:
Currently, the Commonwealth provides over $20 million annually fora state income tax credit up to $800
for individuals who replace their septic systems.
Pros:
The program could provide significant annual benefits to homeowners.
Cons:
The overall cost of this alternative could be prohibitive to the state. A significant bureaucratic layer of
administration would be necessary to administer this program. Depending on guidelines, the overall
households that would benefit could be significantly limited.
4. DEBT SERVICE EXCLUSION
This alternative would adopt a statewide policy allowing communities to use debt exclusion for a federal
tax deduction as permitted under General Law 59, Section 21C (n).'
Historv:
Currently, under General Law 59 Section 21C (n), communities can transfer water and sewer capital costs
(MWRA and local) from the water and sewer bill onto the property tax. Currently, two MWRA
communities (Arlington and Winchester) have utilized this approach.
Pros:
This would create a mechanism to allow individual homeowners a backdoor federal income tax
deduction. It would keep water and sewer bills significantly lower than average rates.
Cons:
The approach would significantly increase property tax bills. Additionally, there is not a clear relationship
between property values and water and sewer charges.
5. EXPAND & ENCOURAGE PROVISIONS ON THE LOCAL LEVEL
This program would provide incentives to municipalities to provide discounts to elderly and/or low
income Tatepayers.
Historv:
Many cities and towns already have low-income residential discount programs in place. According to the
Advisory Board's Annual Water and Sewer Retail Rate Survey, 38 communities in the MWRA service
area provide a retail discount option to eligible homeowners!
Pros:
This approach would directly impact and benefit low income and/or elderly retail ratepayers.
Cons:
Experience indicates that these programs have limited participation and penetration levels are miniscule.
Rates are a zero sum game; reducing costs to one sector of the population increases the costs for others.
6 See Attachment #3: Fiscal Year 2007 Tax Expenditure Budget: 1.606 Septic System Repair Credit. Page 35 of
http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dor/Stats/TEB/TEB2007.pdf
See Attachment #4: M.G.L. Chapter 59, Section 21C (n).
B See Attachment #5: Communities within the MWRA water and sewer service area offering elderly and low income
discounts to their ratepayers.
~~--((8 m
In conclusion, over the years we have looked at many alternatives to the Debt Service Assistance
program. The Advisory Board and the Legislative Caucus contend that this program is the most effective,
efficient, and direct method of providing rate relief. The Commonwealth's residents are facing "the
perfect storm" of infrastructure needs - including schools, transportation, and water and sewer. It is
critical that water and sewer needs do not become the forgotten infrastructure. MWRA took on its current
level of debt to fix the infrastructure problems it inherited from the MDC. The Authority moved forward
in addressing these problems on the assumption that the Commonwealth would remain its funding
partner, consistent with the shift from the federal funding strategy to increased reliance on state and local
resources.
The amount of Debt Service Assistance provided in the state budget directly reduces the rate increases in
the MWRA service area. It is critical that the state continue to be an active partner in keeping water and
sewer rates affordable. We look forward to working with the Patrick Administration on this important
matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if we can offer assistance to you or your staff. Thank you.
Sine ely,
seph E. va Poro~~
xecutive Director
Cc: MWRA Advisory Board
MV/RA Board of Directors
Fred Laskey, Executive Director, MWRA
9
I
ATTACHMENT 1
Massachusetts Water Resources Authority
Impact of Debt Service Assistance on FY2008 Assessments t
COMMUNITIES
ARLINGTON
ASHLAND
BEDFORD
BELMONT
BOSTON (BWSC)
BRAINTREE
BROOKLINE
BURLINGTON
CAMBRIDGE
CANTON
CHELSEA
DEDHAM
DEDHAM-WESTWOOD W.D.
EVERETT
FRAMINGHAM
HINGHAM S.D.
HOLBROOK
LEXINGTON
LYNN
LYNNFIELD W.D.
MALDEN
MARBLEHEAD
MARLBOROUGH
MEDFORD
MELROSE
MILTON
NAHANT
NATICK
NEEDHAM
NEWTON
NORTHBOROUGH
NORWOOD
PEABODY
QUINCY
RANDOLPH
READING
REVERE
SAUGUS
SOMERVILLE
SOUTHBOROUGH
STONEHAM
STOUGHTON
S WAMPSCOTT
WAKEFIELD
WALPOLE
WALTHAM
WATERTOWN
WELLESLEY
WESTON
WESTWOOD
WEYMOUTH
WILMINGTON
WINCHESTER
WINTHROP
WOBURN
TOTAL
515 Million Statewide
Appropriation (MWRA
Share of DSA @ $11.25
Million)
$221,9451
57,2111
66,5521
126,9771
3,228,8321
175,1661
316,5931
112,9521
512,8081
104,5181
168,8511
121,8011
01
208,9501
329,7401
35,6081
41,8021
184,9001
1,5991
2,6461
308,0391
11,8891
19,9981
302,6681
149,8161
142,1681
2,4241
133,2671
144,0051
488,4051
5,7701
166,9001
3,5181
505,3091
141,2421
118,0261
244,0891
19,8191
398,8851
4,3941
123,8531
109,0331
9,8331
137,7751
88,6741
344,1471
166,6621
134,1551
9,3471
62,9921
254,7331
57,1041
104,3251
87,5311
229,7571
511,250,0001
1 Assumes MWRA will receive 75% of statewide appropriation.
$13 Million Statewide.
Appropriation (MWRA
Share of DSA @ $17.25
Million)
$340,3161
87,7231
102,0461
194,6991
4,950,8761
268,5871
485,4421
173,1931
786,3051
160,2611
258,9051
186,7621
01
320,3901
505,6011
54,5991
64,0961
283,5141
2,452
4,057
472,326
18,230
30,6641
464,0901
229,717
217,9921
3,717
204,343
220,8071
748,8871
8,8471
255,9131
5,3941
774,8071
216,5711
180,9741
374,2701
30,3891
611,6231
6,7371
189,9081
167,1841
15,0771
211,2541
135,9671
527,6911
255,5491
205,704
14,332
96,587
390,5911
87,5601
159,9641
134,2141
352,2941
$17.250,0001
/A 1 1 AU 1-1 IVI C IN I
The General Laws of MassachusettNi
PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE H. EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS OF THE
COMMONWEALTH
Search the Laws
uo 10:
Next Section
PfeViOUS-9ictlon
Chap Tatiie 6f'C66tent:-
tv1GL Search
ovPage
G_en_e~al Court Fio_m_e
`Mass.g
CHAPTER 23B. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 23B: Section 24B. Low-income sewer and water assistance program
Section 24B. The department shall, subject to appropriation, operate a low-income sewer and water
assistance program to provide assistance in paying the sewer and water bills of homeowners earning less
than one hundred and fifty percent of the federal poverty level, as defined by the federal government or
homeowners who are eligible for one and two household fuel assistance program, so-called. Said
program may be administered in coordination with the Low-income Home Energy Assistance Act, 42
United States Code sections 8621 et seq., or any successor acts thereto, subject to the following
provisions; shall establish benefit rates and maximum benefits such that total benefits paid do not exceed
the amount appropriated for this benefit;
(a) the department shall use the same grantee agencies, similar applications and similar verification
procedures as are used in the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, to the maximum extent
possible. The department may also utilize a reasonable percentage of any funds appropriated, not
exceeding 10 per cent of such funds, for administrative costs of the program.
(b) the benefit level provided to any individual household eligible under this program shall not be
greater than 25 per cent of the total annual water and sewer bill for the household; provided, however,
that the department shall establish benefit rates and maximum benefits such that total benefits paid do
not exceed the amount appropriated for this benefit.
(c) households which receive benefits under this program shall not unreasonably refuse to cooperate
with any demand-side water conservation programs which are provided at no expense to the household
by any local agency or authority.
~13
http://www.mass.gov/1egis/laws/mgl/23b-24b.htm 11/6/2007
DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING &
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
willi2m F. Weld, Governor
Argeo Paul Cellucci. LL Governor
Jane Wallis Gumble. Director
BEP MEMORANDUM
LISAWAP #97-01
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Executive Directors, Sewer & Water Program Directors, and
Fiscal Directors
Roger Provost, Associate Director .
Division of Neighborhood Service and E r elations
December 12, 1996
DEC 19 1996
LOW-INCOME SEWER AND WATER ASSISTAN.QLEROGRAM (LISAWAP)
The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) is pleased to
provide you with the following information, and proposed Administrative Guidance for
the Low-Income Sewer and Water Assistance Program (LISAWAP) authorized by
section 1.27 of Chapter 151 of the Acts of 1996.
As you may-know, DHCD undertook a statewide sewer/water rate survey to
develop a database upon which a determination could be made regarding which
communities were experiencing excessive sewer/water rates, and therefore, eligible to
participate in the LISAWAP Program.
Not all LIHEAP subgrantees will have LISAWAP-eligible communities in their
service areas, and many. LIHEAP subgrantees will be servicing fewer communities in
the• LISAWAP Program than they currently do in the LIHEAP program.
The attached Administrative Guidance provides the framework for the
administration of the LISAWAP, and Exhibit A provides each subgrantee with an
estimated number of households, by community, as well as a projected budget for
program benefits and administrative expenses.
U,
IM Cambridge Street
B C00, MassYChusects Q22CP-*044
A
12/26/1996 18:18 FROM
DEC 19 1996
BEP MEMORANDUM
USA WAP #97-01 Page Two December 12,19-96
Although the Administrative Guidance provides an administrative framework, we
encourage all subgrantees to suggest creative possibilities with regard to administering
this Program,. particularly as it relates to working with local governments and
sewer/water districts in your region.
The Interdepartmental Service Agreement (ISA) between DHCD and the .
Department of Revenue (DOR) is being negotiated and LISAWAP contract forms are
currently being reviewed by our legal department. We anticipate that both will be
completed on a timely basis.
In the meantime, subgrantees can develop preliminary budgets and make initial
contacts with LISAWAP-eligible communities. We will forward contracts as soon as
they are available.
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. George Dekeon, Director of
Special Projects for the Division of Neighborhood Services, at (617)727-7004, X532.
Mr. Dekeon will be working with BEP Director Jim Hays and his staff in the
implementation of this Program.
Thank you for your assistance.
RP/dlrn
rOwp~michoudlwalsew197-01.doc
dim
cis
12/26/1YYb IV.; 16 rKU;rl
DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING &
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
William F. Weld. Governor
Argeo Paul Cellurd. Lt Governor
Jane Wallis Gamble, Director
,cc 19 199E
ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE
LOW-INCOME SEWER AND WATER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LISAWAP)
INTRODUCTION
The Low-Income Sewer and Water Assistance Program (LISAWAP) is targeted
to low-income homeowners in LISAWAP-eligible communities, with total, household
income at or below 150% of federal poverty guidelines (See L/HEAP Administrative
Guidance).
, For the 1996-97 Program Year, the estimated number of eligible households
was derived by using the 1995-96 LIHEAP database of qualified homeowners in those
communities experiencing above average sewer/water bills, as determined by DHCD,
when compared to the state as a whole.
A listing of LISAWAP-eligible communities as well as estimated administrative
and program allocations by LIHEAP subgrantee is attached (See Exhibit A).
Because some communities are' served by more than one (1) sewer/water
district or entity, eligibility may not include all low-income homeowners in a LISAWAP-
eligible community. SEP will-provide a separate schedule to those subgrantees who
may be impacted by this situation (see Exhibit A).
ESTABUSHiNG THE DA TANASE
All LIHEAP-eligible homeowners who own and reside in a LISAWAP-eligible
community are. potentially eligible. There may be low-income homeowners who want
to apply for LISAWAP benefits who are not yet LIHEAP-certified, or who do not want
to receive LIHEAP benefits. This group of homeowners, nonetheless, must complete
the LIHEAP application and be LIHEAP-certified in order to receive LISAWAP benefits.
Subgrantees shall mark the LIHEAP application "LISAWAP ONLY" in those instances.
LOO Carnbridgc Strca
Boston, A'lSiSachusatts 02202.0044
C ~
12/26/1996 18:11 FROM to r44401 r. vv -
LISA WAP Administrative Guidance Page Two DEC 191996
A separate LISAWAP database shall be maintained by subgrantees. This can be
accomplished by extracting the necessary data from the subgrantee's LIHEAP
database, or if the subgrantee's database allows, LISAWAP information can be
maintained on the "Case Management" LIHEAP database.
At minimum, subgrantees, for year-end reporting and future program projections,
shall maintain the following information on each LISAWAP beneficiary:
1. Name of certified applicant;
2. Address and city or town of certified applicant;
3. Annual household sewer/water cost (as determined by the subgranteel;
4. Amount of LISAWAP benefit paid; and,
5. Date and to whom LISAWAP benefit was paid.
OUTREACH
Each subgrantee shall be responsible for program outreach in LISAWAP-eligible
communities.
ELIGIBILITY
Eligible LISAWAP households must:
1.
Own a home in a LISAWAP-eligible community;
2.
Reside in the home for which they are applying for LISAWAP
benefits (subgrantees must document that tfie applicant on the LiHEAP
application is the homeowner. A copy of the real estate tax bill is the
preferred method of documentation);
3.
Receive public sewer/water services for which they are billed by the
municipality and/or sewer/water district.
4.
Complete the LIHEAP application process if not previously
certified for LIHEAP benefits; and
5.
Be qualified pursuant to federal LIHEAP income guidelines.
c~~
~12,f26i1996 10.:12 FROM TO 7424614 p.07
LISA WAP Administrative Guidance
Page Three
DEC 19 1996
BENEFIT CALCULATION
Applicants shall provide subgrantees with copies of their sewer/water bills for a
sufficient number of billing cycles to enable the subgrantee to calculate the annual
sewer/water charges. (If the applicant does not have copies, they should be directed
to secure copies from' their local government or other billing entity.)
NOTE.• In some instances, sewer and water bills may not have the same billing
cycle.
Complete LISAWAP Calculation Worksheet (See Exhibit B)
1. Determine annual water/sewer cost for LISAWAP-certified
household. (Copies of the sewer/water bills shall be attached to. the
LISAWAP Calculation Worksheet).
2. If multiple-family, divide annual water/sewer cost by the
number of units.
3. Multiply the annual sewer/water cost by 25%. (This is the
LISA WAP benefit, up to a maximum of $200,001.
4. Indicate to whom the LISAWAP benefit will be paid (See
Benefit Payment below).
5. The subgrantee (preparer) shall sign and date the LISAWAP
Calculation Worksheet,
BENEFIT PAYMENT
Each subgrantee will be provided with a list of each city, town, and water
district/entity in which low-income homeowners may qualify for LISAWAP benefits.
Direct vendor payment is the preferred benefit payment method. Each
subgrantee shall work with LISAWAP-eligible communities and/or sewer/water districts
to determine if direct vendor payments can be made to the billing entity.
If a LISAWAP-eligible community and/or sewer/water district cannot
accommodate direct vendor payment, then LISAWAP benefits may be paid to the
eligible household.
cog'
12/26/1996 10:12 FROM TO 7424614 P:0a
LISA WAP Administrative Guidance Page Four DEC 19.199&
In the event there are separate billing entities for sewer and water for an eligible
household, the subgrantee shall contact each billing entity to determine if direct vendor
payment can be made.
MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS
Subgrantees shall create and maintain LISAWAP files which contain, at
minimum,,the following:
1. A certified LIHEAP application with appropriate documentation;
2. Documentation to certify home ownership (Real Estate Tax Bill
preferred);
3. LISAWAP Calculation Worksheet, including copies of
sewer/water bills;
4. Disbursement record indicating the date, amount, and to whom
the LISAWAP benefit was paid.
Files to be maintained on a "rail forward" basis.
PAYMENTS TO SUBGRANTEES
DHCD shall advance funds for program benefits and administrative expenses.
To request additional funds, subgrantees shall complete Part A of the S&W Cash
Request Form (See Exhibit C). These requests shall be faxed to George Dekeon at
(617)727-4259.
NOTE. This form will also be used for Monthly Reporting (see below).
Initially, allocations for program benefits and administrative expenses will be
based upon the estimated number of potentially eligible low-income homeowners in
LISAWAP-eligible communities. The initial payment cannot be made, however, until a
proposed LISAWAP budget is received from the subgrantee. (The proposed LISA WAP
• budget will become Attachment B of your LISA WAP contract with DHCD.)
REPORTING
. Subgrantees shall report to DHCD by.the 25th of each month by completing
Part 8 of the S&W Cash Request Form.
C
. (21
12/26/1996 10:13 FROM
LISA WAP Administrative Guidance
I U f 44n. An
Page Five
r". b7
DEC 19 1956
In addition, subgrantees shall provide DHCD with a LISAWAP Final Report no
later than May 31, 1997 (See Exhibit D). All subgrantee reports shall be forwarded, or
taxed, to George Dekeon, Director of Special Projects, in the Division of Neighborhood
Services at DHCD. Mr. Dekeon can be reached at (617)727-7004,X532, and by fax
at (817)727-4259.
s:\wp\T iehaud\wam w\fin0d.doc
dlm
C~
TOTAL P.09
ATTACHMENT 3
Fiscal Year 2007 Tax Expenditure Budget - Personal Income Tax
claimed on their federal individual income tax return. Effective January 1,
2001, the allowed percentage was increased to 15%.
Origin: M.G.L. c. 62, § 6(h)
Estimate: $79.7
1.606 Septic System Repair Credit
Taxpayers required to repair or replace a failed cesspool or septic system
pursuant to the provisions of Title V, as promulgated by the Department of
Environmental Protection in 1995, are allowed a credit equal to 40% of the
design and construction costs incurred (less any subsidy or grant from the
Commonwealth), up to a maximum of $1,500 per tax year and $6,000 in total.
Unused credits can be carried forward for up to three years.
Origin: M.G.L. c. 62, § 6(i)
Estimate: $21.4
1.607 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Provides five years of tax credits to developers who set aside a specified
percentage of housing units for low-to-moderate income renters.
Origin: M.G.L. c. 62, § 61 a
Estimate: $20.0
1.608 Brownfields Credit
For clean-ups of a Brownfield begun prior to August 5, 2005, taxpayers are
allowed a credit for amounts expended to rehabilitate contaminated property
owned or leased for business purposes and located within an economically
distressed area. The amount of the credit varies according to the extent of the
environmental remedy. If the taxpayer's permanent solution or remedy
operation status includes an activity and use limitation, then the amount of the
credit is 25% of the net response and removal costs incurred by the taxpayer.
However, if there is no activity and use limitation, then the amount of the credit
is 50% of the net response and removal costs.
Origin: M.G.L. c. 62, §6 (j)
Estimate: $2.5
1.609 Refundable State Tax Credit Against Property Taxes for Seniors ("Circuit
Breaker")
Seniors are eligible for a tax credit to the extent that their property taxes or
25% of rent exceed 10% of their income. Income limits and a cap on the
maximum assessed value of the filer's primary residence apply. The maximum
credit is also adjusted annually for inflation. The maximum base credit was
$385 for tax year 2001, $790 for TY02, $8.10 for TY03, $820 for TY04 and
$840 for TY05.
Income limits and the maximum credit are adjusted for inflation over a 1999
base; the cap on assessed value of property is adjusted for change in home
32
C1~
1'1 1 1 r% v1 1IVICINJ 1 d+
The General Laws of Massachusetts Search the Laws
PART 1. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE IX. TAXATION
CHAPTER 59. ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL TAXES
DUTY AND MANNER OF ASSESSING TAXES
Chapter 59: Section 21C. Limitations on total taxes assessed; determination by voters
Section 21 C. (a) Whenever used in the text of this section, the following words and terms shall have the following meanings:--
Go Tn
Neel Section
PI.,-, Seci-
iChaalar Table of Content!
i MCL Search Page
General Court Home
Mass bov
"Full and fair cash valuation". the fair cash value of all real estate and personal property as defined in this chapter, as certified by the commissioner, or, if no certification has
been made, as last reported by the commissioner to the general court pursuant to section ten C of chapter fifty-eight as updated by the commissioner for any intervening period
by an appropriate factor, if any.
"Local appropriating authority", in a town, the board of selectmen, in a city, the council, with the mayor's approval when required by law; in a municipality having a town
council form of government, the town council.
"Total taxes assessed", the net amount to be raised by any ad valorem tax levied on the real. estate and personal property located within a city or town.
(b) The lotal taxes assessed within any cityor town under the provisions of this chapter shall not exceed two and one-half per cent of the full and fair cash valuation in said
city or town in any fiscal year. Any city or town in which total taxes exceed this limit shall be subject to the provisions of paragraph (d).
There is no paragraph (c).]
(d) Any city or town in which total taxes assessed exceed the limits set forth in paragraph (b) shall for each successive year until the total taxes assessed shall not exceed said
limits, reduce the total taxes assessed by not less than fifteen per cent of the total taxes assessed for the year immediately preceding; provided, however, that the reduction
pursuant to this paragraph shall not be so great as to require a reduction below the limits set forth in paragraph (b); and provided, further, that said reduction may be adjusted
by those amounts approved in accordance with the applicable provisions of paragraph (c).
(e) The local appropriating authority of any city or town which is subject to the provisions of paragraph (d) may, by a two-thirds vote, seek voter approval to assess taxes in
excess of the amount allowed pursuant to said paragraph (d) by a specified amount. Any question submitted to the voters shall be worded as follows:--
"Shall the (city/town) of_ be allowed to assess an additional S_ in real estate and personal property taxes for the fiscal year beginning July first, nineteen hundred
and 7
YES NO
If the amount spe6fted in such question is not greater than one-half of the reduction required pursuant to said paragraph (d), the proposal shall be deemed approved if a
majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes". If the amount specified is greater than one-half of the reduction required pursuant to said paragraph (d), the, proposal
shall be deemed approved if two-thirds of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
In no event shall the amount specified be greater than the reduction required pursuant to said paragraph (d).
The local appropriating authority may, by a two-thirds vote, submit two questions on the same ballot; provided that only one question shall specify an amount which is
greater than one-half of the reduction required pursuant to paragraph (d). If both questions are approved by the required number of voters, then the question which requires a
two-thirds vote shall apply.
(0 in any city or town in which the total taxes assessed result in a percentage which is less than or equal to the limits imposed pursuant to paragraph (b), the total taxes
assessed for any fiscal year shall not exceed an amount equal to one hundred and two and one-half per cent of the maximum levy limit for the preceding fiscal year as
determined by the commissioner of revenue; provided, however, that the total taxes assessed may be further increased by those amounts approved in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (g); and provided further, that the total amount of taxes assessed for.the then current fiscal year may be increased by an amount equal to the tax rate
for the preceding fiscal year multiplied by the amount of increase in the assessed valuation of any parcel of real, or article of personal property over the assessed valuation of
such property during the prior year which shall become subject to taxation for the first time, or taxed as a,separate parcel for the first time during such fiscal year, or which has
had an increase in its assessed valuation over the prior year's valuation unless such increased assessed valuation is due to revaluation of the entire city or town.
(g) The local appropriating authority of any city or town which is subject to the provisions of paragraph (1) may, by majority vote, seek voter approval to assess taxes in
excess of amount allowed pursuant to said paragraph (0 by a specified amount.
Any question submitted to the voters shall be worded as follows:--
"Shall the (citysown) of_ be allowed to assess an additional S in real estate and personal properly taxes for the purposes of (state the purpose(s) for which the
monies from this assessment will be used) for the fiscal year beginning July first, nineteen hundred and
YES NO "
Said question shall be deemed approved iris majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
Ira question as aforesaid shall provide for assessing taxes for the purpose of funding a stabilization fund established pursuant to section 5B of chapter 40, the assessors shall
in each successive fiscal year assess property taxes for the same purpose in an amount equal to 102.5 per cent of the amount assessed in the next preceding year in which
additional taxes were assessed for such purpose, but only if the local appropriating authority votes by a 2/3 vote to appropriate such increased amount in such year for such
purpose. The voters of the city or town, by majority vote at a referendum, may alter the purpose of a stabilization fund or authorize the assessment of such additional property
taxes for another purpose. In any year in which the local appropriating Authority does not vote to appropriate such amount as aforesaid, the total property tax levy for such year
shall,be reduced by the amount that could otherwise have been assessed, so that such additional taxes may not be assessed for any other purpose. The maximum levy limit
under paragraph (t) shall not be affected by any such reduction in the levy for such year.
(h) In a city or town, if a majority of the local appropriating authority or the people by local initiative procedure shall so require, there shall be a special election called in
order to submit a question to the voters as to whether said city or town should be required to assess taxes by a specified amount below that amount allowed pursuant to this
section. The question submitted to the voters shall be worded as follows:--
"Shall the (city/town) of_ be required to reduce the amount of real estate and personal property taxes to be assessed for the fiscal year beginning July first, ninetetjy
I of 3 11/7/2007 5:55 PM
hundred and _ by an amount equal to S_?
YES_ NO
If a majority of the persons voting on the question shall vote "yes", the limit on total taxes assessed shall be decreased to the percentage so voted for that fiscal year.
(i) With regard to the referenda procedures set out in this section the local appropriating authority may direct that the questions be placed upon the official ballot at a regular
city or town election or at a special election which the local appropriating authority may call at any time. The local appropriating authority may also direct that not more than
three such questions be placed upon the official ballots for use in the city or town at a biennial state election, by filing with the state secretary not later than the first
Wednesday of August preceding that election a copy of its vote anested by the city or town clerk.
First paragraph ofparagraph (if,) effective until August 14, 2007. For text effective August 14, 1007, see belam.J
(i'%) The local appropriating authority of any city or town may, by a two-thirds vote, seek voter approval to assess taxes in excess of the levy limitation for certain capital
outlay expenditures. Amounts for such capital outlay expenditures shall be assessed only after approval by a separate vote of the people taken at a regular or special election
held before the setting of the annual tax rate; provided, however, that the question submitted shall be worded as follows: "Shall the (city/town) of be allowed to assess
an additional S in real estate and personal property taxes for the purposes of (state the purpose(s) for which the monies from this assessment will be used) for the fiscal
year beginning July first, nineteen hundred and
Yes No "
and provided, further, that said question shall be deemed approved if a majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
/ First paragraph of paragraph (i%) as amended by 1007, 91, Secs. 1 and 1 effective August 14, 2007 applicable to fiscal years beginning on or after July 1, 2007. See 2007,
91, Sec. 3. For text effective August until 14, 1007, see above.]
(0/1) The local appropriating authority of any city or town may, by a two-thirds vote, seek voter approval to assess taxes in excess of the levy limitation for certain capital
outlay expenditures. Amounts for such capital outlay expenditures or for the city's or town's apportioned share for certain capital outlay expenditures by a regional
governmental unit shall be assessed only after approval by a separate vote of the people taken at a regular or special election held before the setting of the annual tax rate;
provided, however, that the question submitted shall be worded as follows: "Shall the (city/town) of_ be allowed to assess an additional S in real estate and
personal property taxes for the purposes of (state the purpose(s) for which the monies from this assessment will be used) for the fiscal year beginning July first, two thousand
and
Yes No "
and provided, further, that said question shall be deemed approved if a majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
Capital outlay expenditures may be authorized for any municipal purpose for which the city or town would be authorized to borrow money under section seven or eight of
chapter forty-four.
0) The local appropriating authority of any city or town may, by a two-thirds vote, seek voter approval at a regular or special election to assess taxes in excess of the amount
allowed pursuant to this section for the payment of principal and interest on bonds, notes or certificates of indebtedness, excluding tax revenue anticipation notes, issued by
the city or town and for the city's or town's apportioned share of the principal and interest on such bonds or notes issued by a regional govemtnental unit which were
outstanding as of November fourth, nineteen hundred and eighty; provided, however, that the question submined shall be as follows:--
"Shall the (city/town) of_ be allowed to exempt the total amounts required to pay for bonded indebtedness incurred prior to the passage of proposition two and one-half,
so-called, from the (city'shown's) limit?
Yes No
and provided, further, that said question shall be deemed approved if a majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
(k) The local appropriating authority of any city or town may, by two-thirds vote, seek voter approval at a regular or special election to assess taxes in excess of the amount
allowed pursuant to this section for the payment of principal and interest on bonds, notes or certificates of indebtedness, excluding tax revenue anticipation notes, issued by
the city or town and for the city's or town's apportioned share of the principal and interest on such bonds or notes issued by a regional governmental unit which were not
outstanding as of November fourth, nineteen hundred and eighty; provided, however, that the question submitted shall be as follows:-
"Shall the (city/town) of_ be allowed to exempt from the provisions of proposition two and one-half, so-called, the amounts required to pay for the bond issued in order
to (state the purpose or purposes for which the monies from the local issue will be used)?
Yes No
and provided, further, that said question shall be deemed approved if a majority of the persons voting thereon shall vote "yes".
(1) Amounts exempted from the tax limit under paragraph (iA), 6), (k) or (n) shall not be included in calculating the "total taxes assessed" in paragraph (a) or the maximum
levy limit in paragraph (f).
(m) A town may appropriate from the tax levy, from available funds, or from borrowing, contingent on the passage of a ballot question under paragraph (g). (ills) or (k), but:
(1) the statement of the purpose of the appropriation shall be substantially the same as the statement of purpose in the ballot question: (2) the appropriation vote shall not be
deemed to take effect until the approval of the ballot question; (3) no election at which the question appears on the ballot shall take place later than the September 15
following the date of an appropriation vote adopted at an annual town meeting, or 90 days after the date of the close of any other town meeting at which an appropriation vote,
was adopted; and (4) after a contingent appropriation from the tax levy, a tax rate for a town shall not be submitted for certification by the commissioner under section 23 until
after a ballot question under paragraph (g), (i'h) or (k) has been voted upon, or until the expiration of the time for holding an election at which the question appears on the
ballot, whichever period is shorter.
(n) The local appropriating authority may, by accepting this paragraph, provide that taxes may thereafter be assessed in excess of the amount otherwise allowed by this
section, solely for payment, in whole or in part, of water or sewer debt service charges, including debt service charges of an independent commission, authority or district and
as part of any wholesale water and sewer charges, that the board or officer responsible for determining the water and sewer charges certifies were not in fiscal year nineteen
hundred and ninety-three paid by local taxes; provided, however, that water and sewer charges shall be reduced by the amount of any such aggregate additional taxes assessed;
and provided, further, that said additional taxes may be assessed on only residential real property as defined in section two A, notwithstanding the failure of the city or town to
adopt a residential factor pursuant to section fifty-six of chapter forty, but subject to any subsequent adoption of such residential factor allowed by said section fifty-six; and
provided, further, that if said additional taxes are assessed only on residential real property, aggregate residential water and sewer charges shall be reduced by the amount of
any such additional taxes assessed. In the case of a city or town whose water and sewer service is provided by an independent commission, authority or district which
separately bills water and sewer users, said commission, authority or district may enter into an agreement with said city or town to effectuate the purposes of this paragraph,
provided, however, that immediately upon collection of all such taxes assessed for payment of such residential water and sewer debt service charges of such commission 9"?
V
2 of 3 1 11/7/2007 5:55 PM
authority or district, the treasurer or collector of taxes of such city or town shall, without appropriation by such city or town, pay over the taxes so collected to such
commission, authority or district less any amounts agreed upon to provide reasonable compensation to the city or town for costs incurred in carrying out the agreement.
Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter twenty-nine C, chapter two hundred and seventy-five of the acts of nineteen hundred and eighty-nine, or any other general or special
law to the contrary, any city or town which accepts this paragraph or any independent authority, commission or district which provides water or sewer services to such city or
tiown shall remain eligible to receive loans and grants for water pollution abatement projects or safe drinking water projects.
~ C'~- L~ i
3 of 3 11!7/2007 5:55 PM
Board's 2006 Annual Water and Suer Retail Rate survey
erin Residential Discounts per Base llata from the Advisory
Corrlm, ,ties Indicated 35 Of g if of Households slow Discount is
eted
Clow Discount IS Iludg Receiving Discount. ,rate
Discount Criteria Applied There is no sep'
Discount Type lions per year. line item for their
hone lder. Discount
Contact Name TeteP + years or o is applied Approximately 80 watertse-,vcr discount
List of recipients is vertfted to the semi-annual exe
community "gOg_g81-0120 20% discount for water and Elderly e bills for both water programs. The
Sec C.etano 20"/o for sewer
AShtand Janine Sprnazola & Deb by the Assessoi s O{face. and sewer. discounts came out
CS) Each recipient has t° of their water 1 sewer
tine item.
Mercer qualify for certain chaplets
in order for discount to be
applied. budgets t"io
tied The number of 130stou buds
Discount is app households is of their projected
Elderly - 65+ years or older water sates for the
Seater 4 fatnilp to the monthly urtlnowo., annually o ear. They
6t?-989-7398 25"1 discount on who live in a f - water bill. end $800 000
look Robert CaPuS residential dwelling they
. toy SPe 00 tv<'o
Boston (NV/S}
F e every
percentag
ed Must have Fully Disabled - years and ad} It
a certificate from a doctor accordingly-
showing proof of disability,
or a letter from social
Secunn' or the Veterans Infom1auon was trot
Elderly65}Administration. mtatton w
yearsorolder. Info 21$04 housclialds available
not available receive a discount.
discount applied to
617-34g-4266 1 water t sewer (not to
c ~ceI w annually}, not
Cambridge (SIPartial fit`) David Rolland 1 5
Internet
tied to homCawncrs Information was not
I3 elderly
tnconie. Information was ( a available
ham receive
eowners lied to 1-lomcowner must be b5 not available discount.
30% discount aPP acid must have been
water / sewer, income- years
based (not to exceed $180.) granted Clause 41C elderly
real estate exemption.
FY06 income guidelines are
as follows; single, income
of $20,000 with assets of
$40,000; married, income
of $30,00() and assets (not
to exceed $55,000).
21772097
0
rn
z
Communities Indicated as Offering Residential Discounts per Base Data from the Advisory Board's 2006 Annual Water and Sewer Retail Rate
Survey
Community Contact Name
Everett(W/S) .lack'froy
!'rands Sordillo
Framingham (w/S) Af Renzi
Lexington (W/S) Barbara Stevens
Telephone
617-394-2327
508-6204897
781-862-0500 X379
Discount Type
15% discount on water.
Discount Criteria
Elderly 65+ years, needs a
copy of their drivers
license; Fully disabled,
needs a letter from Social
Security or VA.
Now Discount is M of Households
HOW Discount is
Applied Receiving Discount
Budgeted
Discount
is applied'Approximately 5% of
There is no line item
o qu
a
rt
erly
water the entire City of
for the water
bill. Everett utilize the
discount program.
discount program.
"file discount comes
out of the water
bud-let line item.
Lynn (partial W) Richard Dawe
Q > 2;712007
25% discount on water ano Discount offered to elderly
sew
Discount is applied 1
300 receiv
er. based on low income
to the water/sewer
,
e a
discount. The town i!
verification and value of
bill.
hoping to reduce this
owner occupied home,
number in FY08. In
previous years, the
town did not require
Income verification
which may lower the
number of households
that are eligible in the
future,
30% discount on water and Discount offered to
s
Discount is applied Current{
15
ewer. households wi(h total
to the semi-annual
y
households receive a
income less than $40,000 or
ivatet and sewer
discount
However
if household receives
bills, then re-
.
,
the program is fairly
discount for utilities
evaluated for the
new and the
(electric, gas) then they
following year.
community hasn't
qualify, for discount on
been made aware of
water/sewer.
discounts.
781-396-2400 X235 15% discount on water
portion of bill.
1) Age 55+ callow income
2)Single with annual
income that doesn't exceed
S20k 3)If married,
combined income that
doesn't exceed $28,400 4)
Widowed w/►ow income 5)
Fully disabled. Need to
substantiate income and
provide copy of birth
certificate or license.
It is not budgeted.
Discount Is currently .
not budgeted.
However, when the
number of
households taking
advantage of the
program grows, the
town will budget for
it.
Discount is applied An estimated 25 - 50
Dscount is not
to the water bill, elderly and low
budgeted. Rates ace
income households
set based upon
receive the discount.
Previous averages.
Less than 25 disabled
persons receive the
discount.
f,
Communities indicated as Offering Residential Discounts per Base Data from the Advisory Board's 2006 Annual Water and Sewer Retail Rate Survey
Community
Lynnfield (W)
Medford (WIS)
Melrose (N/S)
2/x/2001
How Discount is
9 of Households
How Discount is
Contact Name
Telephone Discount Type
Discount Criteria
Applied
Receiving Discount
Budgeted
Lmtly Pierro
781-598-4223 20% discount on water .
Discount offered to all
Discount applied if
There are 1,250 bills
Anticipated revenue
residential and commercial
paid within 20
in total with 75%
is tracked but the
customers in the
days as shown on
(938) estimated to pay
Board doesn't
conununity. 20% discount
the bill.
within 20 days to
specifically target the
on water bill if paid within
receive the discount.
discount.
20 days.
Georgianne Moulten
781-396-5500 $50 total discount - S25
Discount offered to those
Discount is applied
Information was not
Historically the town
discount on water and $25
over age 70 who also
to the water/sewer
available.
has budgeted based
discount on sewer.
qualify for real estate
bill.
on paid and usage
abatement. If age 65-70,
amounts. However,
then an application for
new meters are being
abatement needs to be
installed and a new
submitted. If qualification
budget process is
for real estate abatement are
being determined.
met, then discount is given.
Peter Hersev
781-979-4176 20% discount on water and Discount offered to elderly
Discount is applied 474 residents receive
Information was not
sewer.
age 65+ that use 6,000
to the water/sewer
the discounts.
available.
cubic feet or less per
bill.
calendar year. Applicants
must be owner of record
with birth date which is
checked against city
records. 1099 forms are
used.
3
Communities Indicated as Offering Residontial, Discounts per Base Data from file Advisory Board's 2006 Annual Water and Sctver Retail Rate Survey
n
Community
Contact Name Telephone Discount Type Discount Criteria
How Discount is
0 of Households
How Discount is
Applied
Receiving Discount
Budgeted
Natick (S)
John Craig 508-647-6550 Reduced rate based on Elderly over age 65 as of
Discount is applied
150 households
Town does not
usage. July 1, 2006 and disabled
to the bill based on
received the offered
budget for this.
veterens. Primary residence
usage. First 20
discounts in 2006.
Adjustments for
in Massachusetts for 10
units are free, then
The town expects
discount are made to
years and own property in
tiered based on
more to participate in
revenue.
state for 5 years.
usage.
2007 as the eligible
Entire estate must be less
age requirement was
than $40K if single or $55K
lowered from 70 to
if married. Savings
65.
accounts, checking,
Certificate of Deposits,
stocks and bonds all count.
Elderly file for real estate
exemptions and if qualify
will automatically get the
water discount.
Disabled veterans file
separately to qualify and re-
apply every year.
Newton (W/S)
Barbara Stevens 617-552-7075 Residents get 30% credit Elderly over age 65 with
30% discount is
300 households
Information was not
on water bill (four quarterly $40K total gross income,
applied to quarterly
receive automatic
available.
bills). Applicants show tax return
water bills.
discounts because
or 1099 forms.
they also qualified for
real estate
exemptions. An
average of 300
households receive the
Quincy (W/S)
617-376-1912 25% discount on water bill Elderly age 70+ with
-
25% cl
discount is
water discount
195 households
nformation was not
at end of the year. limited income and assets.
applied to the
receive the discounts.
available.
Must file for tax exemption
water bill at the
under Clause 41 C to get the
end of the year.
discount..
Income Limits:
Single $19,957 with assets
of $34,977
Married $24,317 with
assets of $37,475
2/712007
Communities Indicated as Offering Residential Discounts per Base Data from the Advisory Board's 2006 Annual Water and Sewer Retail Rate Survey
How Discount is N of Households
How Discount is
Community
Contact Name'
Telephone
Discount Type
Discount.Criteria
Applied Receiving Discount
Budgeted
Randolph (S)
David Zecchini
781-961-0940
$4 discount on water and
Elderly age 62+ and
Discounts applied No information was
Information was not
l
bl
$50 discount on serer -
disabled.
semi-annually. available
e.
a
avai
semi-annually.
Total annual
discount for water
is $8 and sewer
$100. Total
combined annual
discount of $108.
Revere (WIS)
Rod Granese
781-286-8148
Elderly andlor lower
income.
Saugus (W)
Joe Attubato
781-231-4145
10% discount on water
Elderly and/or lower
only.
income.
Southborough (W)
Donald Buzzell
508-485-1845
$20.90 discount per first
Elderly over age 65.
Discount
(lapplied re223 ceive households
the
Very little is
budgeted for
1000 cubic feet.
This number increases discounts.
each year.
Stoneham (W/S)
Robert Grover
781-438-0760
$12.50 discount for water
Elderly/low income. If a
Discount is applied 200 households
receive the discounts
ewer bill
/
Not much is
budgeted for
and $37.50 for sewer.
househoudd qualifies for a
.
to water
s
.
tax abatement then they
discounts.
qualify for a discount on
water/sewer.
f d I formation was not
Discount amount is is
Stoughton (S)
Wakefield (S/partial W)
Watertown (W/S)
Weymouth (S)
Jeanne Fleming
Richard Stinson
Gerald Mee
David Towcr
_i ncvv781-341-1300 x211 15% discount on water. Residents over age W. Discount is app ie I-r-r-ation was not Discount amount is is
Winchester (S/partial W) Phyllis Marshall
il
bl
not budgeted
to water bill.
e.
ava
a
.
781-246-6300
10% discount for
Discount for all customers
Discount is applied
Information was not
Information was not
water/sewer.
in the community that pay
if paid within 30
available.
available.
their bill within 30 days.
days as shown on
the bill.
617-972-6420
20% discount for water and Elderly and/or lower
sewer.
income
781-337-5100 X338
$20'per year discount.
Residents over ace 65.
$20 discount is
500- 1000
Discount is not .
applied to the
households receive th
e budgeted.
sewer bill.
discount.
781-721-7100
20% discount on water.
Low income only. Copy o
f 20% discount is
9 out of the 6500
Infonnation was not
certificate for tri-cap
applied to the
households that are
available.
required.
water bill.
billed receive the
discount.
Board's x406 Annual stater and Sews`
Base vata from Ole Ad`r►sory - ltaa count is
Uis
eholds Budgeted
Y2csident►a1 U►sco t;unts per # aS 1~ous t
p°w t cs acs aunt is Reee1vin~ viscoun
as 4ttering tied
unities Lndicated ` _ Criteria APP
Comr"t Discount _ . or Sso o(I
e
~ M unity
♦\'oburn (S~Partiat
artial
\\+orcester ~P
piscount T} P
Celehane
lot' 'ble (0
~idetty Drily, if eligible fo
Contact Name Alf,2_4410
abatement° then
~11 5t00 discount- tax e1i6bte for
ft ed R automatically eed to
_ --'-1 5p8-799-1484 discount N
S10fl
Gucrut iapPiy annually.
~Phitip
b
2naop7
cnt of ISO- fl808 0 households
tece1` e the discount.
Tao abatem
S,loo applied to
Mater first, excess'
applied to sewer.
What in the World is the Reading
World Cafe?
1. What is the World Cafe?
• It is a conversation process designed to help large groups of people talk
together about questions that matter to them in a respectful and inclusive
manner.
• It is a process that helps groups think expansively about relevant issues,
discover common values and objectives, and solidify their commitment to
work towards a shared future
• The process does not ask yes or no questions ("Do you want this?"); Instead It
asks expansive questions ("What do you want?")
• The World Cafe has been used by hundreds of groups across the globe including
large multinational corporations, small non-profits, government offices,
community-based organizations; and educational institutions. Visit
www.theworldcafe.com for more information about this process
2. Whv have a World Cafe in Reading now?
• History teaches us that the most successful way to confront challenging
times is to come together around common purposes, and work side by side
to make it through. In the wake of the divisive discussions about the Addison
Wesley property, as a community we stand to benefit from making concerted
efforts to build mutual commitment for a shared future
• To create greater community connections in Reading between organizations,
Volunteers, residents and businesses.
• To start a positive, inclusive community dialogue about the future of
Reading. We have a far better chance to achieve what we collectively want
when we can describe it and recognize its shared appeal.
• To gather community feedback for use by town officials and planning boards.
This data may complement the recently approved Master Plan and School
District Improvement Plan. The feedback can be used to identify priorities, target
key actions, and address broadly held concerns of the community
• To better prepare, with a long-term focus, for a fiscally challenging and
uncertain future - what resources do we have and what kind of investment will
have the greatest community benefit?
• In our 24/7 driven culture, we rarely take time as a community to talk about
important questions that matter - about our future, our responsibility to
that future, and how we can help each other. Lets start that conversation
today '
• We need to take time to determine what we have in common that connects us,
versus focusing on how our differences keep us apart
3. How does it work?
The Reading World Cafe is a community conversation, sponsored by community
qL,(
businesses, churches, arts organizations and others, in addition to town
government and schools. A structured conversation process, the World Cafe is a
valuable tool for creating greater community connection and for drawing out the
best ideas from a broad range of community members who care about the
future of this town. The participants, and their organizations, determine what
becomes of the results of the World Cafe as they work together and consider
next steps
• First, World Cafe Hosts (Supporters) identify key question(s) for discussion, and
then every member of the community is invited to talk about the questions,
on one night. There is no limit on how many people can participate, because
participants work in small groups at separate tables.
• The small groups shift, and the conversation evolves as people change tables
and share insights and perspectives from their previous conversations
• As the network of conversations and new connections increase, what starts to
emerge is a greater understanding of what is commonly believed, desired
and valued by those at the Cafe
• After these expansive conversations are completed, the groups participate in a
debrief process that uses targeted questions to harvest key insights, desires,
opportunities, dilemmas and next steps.
• The immediate results of the process will include many possibilities for follow-
up actions, and a likely ground swell of communal support and energy for
taking any next steps.
4. How can Readina benefit from the World Cafe process and results?
• Generating information about what community members want to in order to
inform traditional decision-making processes
• Creating a report of the outcomes for public viewing - posted on websites,
published in newspapers, presented to local boards & committees
• Formulating a shared vision about our future that can serve as guidance for
the day-to-day dilemmas and decisions the town must face
• Increasing opportunities for collaboration among community groups who
might benefit from working towards common objectives
The process can inspire greater volunteer support for key initiatives and
programs, and will engage a more substantial representation of the town in
civic and community purposes
• Opening possibilities for hosting or sponsoring additional Cafe conversations or
similar processes for getting more qualitative community input and a sense of
priority
• The process will allow everyone who participates to get to know more people
who live/work in this town and will expand our appreciation and
understanding of each other
5. What won't the World Cafe do?
• The World Cafe is a process, not a plan. It is not aimed at accomplishing a
particular goal; instead it aims to identify multiple interests and goals.
• The World Cafe will not make decisions for the community.
q GZ
• It will not replace local government - elected and appointed boards, town
meetings or the election process
• It is not an opportunity to complain about proposed town actions
• It will not result in divisive debate or polarized positioning; rather, it will help us
discover whore we have common ground as a community
• It will not replace the Master Plan or the District Improvement Plan, although the
data from the World Cafe can inform local leaders charged with the
implementation and revision of those plans
6. How do the World Cafe results differ from the Master Plan, the District Improvement
Plan. and other official town actions?
• The World Cafe cannot supersede the Master Plan or District Improvement Plan,
as those documents have a legal status that the World Cafe will not have.
7. How does it differ from town aovernment & Board oversight?
• The World Caf6 is a non-binding, non-authoritative gathering, that has. not
been established by any statutory or'municipal government authority
q c3
Organizational Representatives Who Have Expressed an Interest in Becoming a
Sponsor for Reading World Cafe
Name
Last Name
Org
(James Bonazoli
I Bonazozl]
l Board of Selectmen
l Kerry Dunneli
I Dunnell
I Budget Parent
IDeborah Woodwar
IWoodwar
(Church of the Good Shepard
(Gina Synder
ISnvder
ICities for Climate Protection
I Paula Perry
I Perry
I Coolidqe PTO
(Jennifer Hart
IHart
ICreative Arts
IDeb Gilburq
IGilbura
(Cultural Connection
Donna Corbitt
I Corbitt
I Democratic Town Comm.
I David Rall
I Rall
I Democratic Town Comm.
Priscilla Hollenbeck
I Hoilenbeck
l Eaton PTO
ISheila Clark
(Clark
(Economic Dev. Comm.
I Leslie McGonagle
I McGonagle
I EDC/Reading Gvmnastics
I Kathy Keliv
I Kelly
I EMARC
(Andrew Grimes
(Grimes
(Finance Committee
IDana Smith
ISmith
lFirst Baatist Church
I Norman Bendroth
I Bendroth
I First Conareqational Church
Eric Redard
I Redard
I First Conqreaational Church
(Peter Coumounduros
ICoumounduros
IFriends of Readinq Rec
(Michele Catalano
(Catalano
IKillam PTO
Karen Munnenest
IMungenest
IKilliam PTO
IKvunq Lvol Yu
IYu
IKorean Church of the Nazarene
Steve Notis
I Notis
I Methodist Church
Michelle Ferullo
IFerullo
INewcomers & Neiqhbors
Paula Koppel
IKoppel
I Nurse Advocacy
Barbara Heinemann
I Heinemann
I Parker PTO
Phil Rushworth
I Rushworth
I RCTV
(Steve Vittorioso
lVittorioso
IReadino Advocate
DulianneThurlow
IThurlow
IReadinq Coop Bank
ILiz Whitelam
IWhitelam
IReadina Cultural Council
Monette Verrier
I Verrier
I Reading PEP
Cathy Giles
I Giles
IReadina Public Schools
Steve Chuha
IChua
IRealtors Association
I Bobbie Botticelli
I Botticelli
I Relators Association
(Nicole O'Neill
[O'Neill
(RISE PTN
(Carla Pennacchio
IPennacchio
IRMHS PTO
I Denise Wver
I Wyer
I RMHS PTO
(Brian Castelluccio
lCasteiluccio
IRMHS Student Council
(Sheve Chuha
IChua
(Rotary Club
Karen Callan
lCallan
IRPS Barrows
Lisa Gibbs
lGibbs
(School Committee
Elaine Webb
I Webb
I School Committee
I Nathan Rawdinq
I Rawdinq
I Senator Tisei's Office
(Steve Rock
]Rock
lSt. Aqnes Parish
Pat Schettini
I Schettini
I Suoerintendent
Peter Hechenbleikner
I Heckenbleckner
(Town Manaaer
Mary Ellen O'Neill
(O'Neil
(Town Meetinq/RMLD
ITim Kutzmark
I Kutzmark
[Unitarian Universalist Church
IMerel Abruzzese
IAbruzzese
(Young Women's Leaaue
NOTE: We are currently reaching out to other organizations who did not participant in our Host meeting in
October, or who want more information
qbq
Page 1 of 1
%6S ~ 4
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From: Johnson, Cheryl
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 10:03 AM
To: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Subject: RE: Election
Election Date
2008 Presidential Primary March 4
Local Election April 8
Warrant Closes Last Day to Register to
Vote
February 5 Register- February 13
March 4 Register - March 19
Nomination papers would be available on December 15t and must be filed by January 15.
The cost of holding the local election separately would be $19,000. Holding them together we would save approx.
$10,000 in salaries and setup. We would still have to order ballots and machine programming charges.
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:27 AM
To: Johnson, Cheryl
Subject: Election
What is the date of the Presidential Primary, and what would the date of the Town election normally be?
What is the cost of an extra election?
What would be the dates for warrant closing, nomination papers, etc for a consolidated election?
P
q -P-
10/25/2007
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From: Johnson, Cheryl
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 4:06 PM
To: Hechenbleikner, Peter; LeLacheur, Bob'
Subject: Pres Primary
If 2/5/08 - Last day to register to vote would be January 16
Last day to post warrant would be January 29 - so I recommend Selectmen sign warrant at
least 7 days.before this.
Cheryl Johnson
Town Clerk
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
781-942-9050
FAX 781-942-9070
z
y,6
Financial Forum
Board of Selectmen Meeting
October 17, 2007
The meeting convened at 7:20 p.m. at the Senior Center; 49 Pleasant Street, Reading,
Massachusetts. Present were Board of Selectmen Chairman James Bonazoli and
Selectmen Camille Anthony and Ben Tafoya, Finance Committee Chairman Andrew
Grimes, Vice Chairman Marsie West, Finance Committee Members Tom White, Barry
Berman, Hal Torman and David Greenfield. Also present were Town Manager Peter
Hechenbleikner, Assistant Town Manager/Finance Director Bob LeLacheur, Town
Accountant Gail LaPointe, Fire Chief Greg Burns, DPW Director Ted McIntire and Jane
Kinsella, Superintendent of Schools Pat Schettini, Associate Superintendent John
Doherty, Human Resources Director and Business Director Mary DeLai, School
Committee Members Lisa Gibbs, Elaine Webb, David Michaud and Chuck Robinson,
and Chronicle reporter Melissa Russell.
The meeting began with Warrant Article 11 (a $4.5 million sidewalk and curbing debt
exclusion). The Town Manager explained that he receives several calls per year for
sidewalks and curbs. He reported that the Board of Selectmen thought this was a good
idea but it needs more discussion, and they did not vote on Article 11.
Some examples for the need of sidewalks and curbing are Hunt Park, Washington Park
and Sturges Park where there is a need for safety. The cost would be $450,000 per year
for 10 years. The cost for the average owner would be approximately $50 per year.
Finance Committee Member Hal Torman asked if there was a prioritized list. The Town
Manager explained that a plan is being worked on and will be fine tuned over the Winter.
They would start with the schools, parks and the high traffic areas.
Finance Committee Vice Chairman Marsie West mentioned that sidewalks were once
done with a betterment. The Town Manager explained that betterments for sidewalks
have not been done in 20 years. He expressed how pleased he was with the Franklin
Street project. Franklin Street residents are very happy with the completed project.
Finance Committee Member Barry Berman asked if the Town would consider a
betterment. The Town Manager explained that it would have to be a forced betterment,
and the community does not like to do that. He thinks the community would be receptive
to this, and it will have a huge positive impact.
The School Committee called their meeting to order at 7:35 p.m., and the Board of
Selectmen called their meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
The Assistant Town Manager reviewed the budget process FY 2008 goals that are listed
on the hand out. He reported that they have accomplished most of the goals. He
reviewed the FY 2009 budget calendar as well as the FINCOM 5% reserves policy and
the FINCOM 5% net debt and capital policy. He noted that the latter was strongly
complemented by many members of the community over the past year.
Financial Forum - Board of Selectmen MeetinE - October 17. 2007 - Page 2
Town Accountant Gail LaPointe gave a summary of Revenues.
■ Propertv Tax Levv - built on last years levy plus new growth.
■ New Growth - What has been the average for the last 10 years, took out the big
projects; i.e., Walkers Brook. Fiscal 2008 not finalized.
■ Abatements and Exemptions - a 2:5% increase as per a previous agreement.
School Committee Member Chuck Robinson asked where the 2.5% increase for
abatements and exemptions came from, and Gail LaPointe reported that was an
agreement with the Assessors.
Local Receipts - Excise, charges for Services,, and Investments are the largest
components of local receipts. Gail LaPointe explained that the 5% formula increase for
the 2009 Budget would be unwise for local receipts. A five year average was used
instead. This resulted in a 1.3% increase from FY 2008 to FY 2009.
Gail LaPointe gave a summary of State Aid and MSBA School Construction
Reimbursement. She reported that there is an increase in funds for the FY 2009 Budget
of $1,959,959.
The Assistant Town Manager reviewed the estimated Accommodated costs as listed in
the hand-out.
Benefits -
9% - Health (12% includes enrollment increase)
Capital -
5% increase - modest
Net Debt -
5% - modest
Energy -
10% - may be too low
Financial -
No change
Sp. Ed. -
10 % net
Vocational -
5% - conservative - increased enrollment
Misc. -
Rubbish - fixed contract for 3-4 years
Snow & Ice - $50,000
This totaled a $1.8 million increase, leaving less than $200,000 for the operating budgets,
or a 0.375% increase.
Moving on to the budget process, Finance Committee Chairman Andrew Grimes
explained the procedure. They are going to follow essentially the same policy as last
year:
1. The Baseline Budget is defined as the exact same work force as today, rolled
forward to FY 2009. If there are unsettled labor contracts, the assumptions
used should be explained. In addition, expenses for the three functional
departments (Municipal Government, School Department, Facilities) should
be mechanically allowed to increase 2% each for purposes of this budget.
Individual line items may increase or decrease as needed, until a 2% total is
achieved across the functional departments.
Financial Forum - Board of Selectmen Meeting - October 17. 2007 - Page 3
2. After the Baseline Budget is built, Budget Lists should be made that explain
differences from this budget. The first list should be one that balances the
budget against available revenues - this figure is +0.375% as of today. Other
Budget Lists may be made to explain other scenarios. For example, one list
may attempt to explain level service - the functional department should be
prepared to explain this meaning in detail.
Selectman Camille Anthony asked about health care. She mentioned that two years ago,
health care went out to bid and we did very well, and she wanted to know what happened
last year. The Town Manager explained that last year, our 6.4% increase was very good
compared to the range of MIIA communities (which varied from +6% to +16%). He
explained that when the new State GIC Program has been awarded, the Town will study
it in detail to see if there are advantages. Selectman Anthony also mentioned that she
was impressed with Human Resources Director and Business Director Mary DeLai's
presentation.
Mary DeLai spoke in support of the new software program, MUNIs, for the budget
format for the School Department. She mentioned that she will also be able to more
easily report to the DOR and the DOE, and that the budget format may change as a result.
Andrew Grimes moved on to Policy Discussion and opened the discussion to the floor.
The following items were discussed:
■ Accommodated Cost - Health Insurance, - This year, we are at 12% because of an
increase in enrollment forecast to be +3% plus 9% price inflation.
■ Sidewalks - How much control will there be over the exact projects? If approved
at Town Meeting, then it is up to the residents at a Town-wide vote.
■ The Town may need to have a Prop 2 1/2 override within a couple of years.
A suggestion was made to move Town Meeting to the end of May to have more accurate
budget numbers. The Town Manager noted that there is not much of an advantage and at
this time, it is too late to change the dates of Town Meeting for this year.
Another suggestion was to move the January Financial Forum to the end of the month so
everyone will have more time to get their budgets together, and the schools will have a
better idea of enrollment. This was agreed upon so the January Financial Forum will take
place on the 23rd of the month.
On a roll call vote. the School Committee Members voted to so into Executive
Session at 9:00 u.m.
Article 6 - On a motion by Grimes seconded by West, the Finance Committee voted
to recommend adding $500.000 to the stabilization fund by a vote of 6-0-0.
5 0,3
Financial Forum - Board of Selectmen Meetina - October 17. 2007 - PaLye 4
At this time, there was a discussion between Finance Committee Members and the Board
of Selectmen regarding Article 11 - Sidewalks, and Article 12 - CPA. Some issues that
were brought up were: Is this the right time to go to residents for more funds, and are we
asking for too much - the overview needs more discussion.
Members from both committees feel that the community deserves a certain level of
service, and a method to get Town Meeting Members more involved. A suggestion was.
to use the new website to put out more information, and also inform members of
meetings to attend. The Town Manager. feels that the Selectmen think Article Il and
Article 12 are good ideas but have to be put in concept to the big picture.
Article 11 - On a motion by Greenfield seconded by West. the Finance Committee
voted to recommend the subject matter of Article 11. The motion failed by a vote of.
2-4-0.
Tennis Courts - There are three Articles related to the tennis courts: Article 4, Article 8
and Article 9. This is on hold until the November 5th Finance Committee Meeting. At
that time, they will have a full cost estimate and recap of how much non-Town money
there is available.
The following assignments were handed out:
Article 12
Article 11
Article 3
Article 4
Article 6
Article 8
Article 9
Article 10
Marsie West
Andrew Grimes
Hal Torman
Barry Berman
David Greenfield
Tom White
Tom White
Marsie West
On a motion by West seconded by Grimes. the Finance Committee voted to adjourn
their meeting of October 17.'2007 at 10:00. mm. by a vote of 6-0-0. and the Board of
Selectmen ended their session by a vote of 3-0-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
f~L
Board of Selectmen Meeting
October 30, 2007
For ease of archiving, the order that items appear in these Minutes reflects the order in which
the items appeared on the agenda for that meeting, and are not necessarily the order in which
any item was taken up by the Board.
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 16 Lowell Street;
Reading, Massachusetts. Present were Chairman, James Bonazoli, Secretary Ben Tafoya,
Selectmen Camille Anthony and Richard Schubert, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner,
Assistant Town Manager/Finance Director Bob LeLacheur, Paula Schena and the following list
of interested parties: Bill Brown, Lori Hodin, Attorney Howard Miller, Scott Almaeida.
Reports and Comments
Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments - Selectman Ben Tafoya noted that CPDC
continued the public hearing on zoning to November 5, 2007. A site visit at Addison-Wesley is
scheduled for November 3, 2007 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Selectman Tafoya suggested that
any items in the Capital Plan that are energy savers should be highlighted and try to move them
up if possible.
Chairman James Bonazoli noted that he attended the Franklin Street Sidewalk Ceremony, the
presentation of the $200,000 check for demolition of the Water Treatment Plant, and the Mattera
Conservation Land Dedication. He also attended the First Baptist Church's celebration of their
175th Anniversary. The Birch Meadow Committee is meeting this evening. A site visit needs to
be arranged for the tennis courts. He also noted that he was saddened to hear that the Library
was vandalized over the weekend.
Town Manager's Report
The Town Manager gave the following report:
• Selectmen's Forum - October 23rd - 7:00 p.m. was very successful with a full range of
calls.
• On November 2nd in Lowell, there will be a "Municipal Cabinet Listening Tour" by the
Patrick Administration. Members of the Board of Selectmen are invited to attend.
• AW/P DAT Meeting on November 3rd
permitting, otherwise at the Senior Center.
• The Board of Selectmen will have a
November 5th re: Youth Risk Behavior
Meeting Room at Town Hall:
from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. - on site if weather is
joint meeting with the School Committee on
Survey results. It will be in the Selectmen's
• Veterans Services Officer Frank Driscoll is planning the Veterans' Day observance. Save
the day and time - Sundav. November 1 Ith at 11:00 a.m. on the Common. The observance
is on the actual Veterans' Day but offices are closed on Monday as the designated holiday.
• There was a news item on WBZ TV last week indicating that Reading did not meet its
obligations to its Veterans. I have talked with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs Tom Kelly
and he disagrees - Reading does in fact meet its full commitment to providing veterans
Board of Selectmen Meeting - October 30. 2007 - Page 2
services through our joint district with Wilmington. I have written to the Governor and
reiterated this to him.
• Town Meeting - November 13th, Special Town Meeting on December 10th
• Flu Clinic dates -
November 7th - Killam School - 65 and older - 2:00 - 4:00 p.m.
November 13th - RMHS Cafeteria - 5:00 - 7:00 p.m.
November 15th - Parker Middle School - 5:00 - 7:00 p.m.
• Vandalism at the RPL.
• I'd like to arrange for a site visit to the Birch Meadow tennis court area for the Board of
Selectmen to look at a couple of needed tree removals.
• Recreation Administrator John Feudo and I met last Wednesday with Memorial Park
abutters to see if we can reach some kind of agreement and consensus on the uses of
Memorial Park so we can proceed with the Town's petition for a clarification of uses. This
was a very successful meeting and we are working on a revised draft document to share
with the group, and then hopefully file an amended petition with the Probate Court.
• Springvale Road paving - we got a letter from "residents of Springvale Road" re: finishing
the paving job. It is completed.
• Tree removal at the property abutting 16 Sanborn Lane.
• The Board of Selectmen's packet contains a graph of resident/non-resident traffic stops
over the past several years. We have further discussion scheduled on November 27th on
this when we have a number of traffic issues on the agenda.
• The Executive Director of the Reading Housing Authority has informed me that there is an
affordable unit with an attached garage at Gazebo Circle that has come on the market.
Anyone interested in this unit can contact the Housing Authority Office.
Assistant Town Manager Bob LeLacheur noted that Moody's has upgraded our bond rating to
Aa3. The upgrade reflects the Town's improved financial position and sound financial
management. The only concern that Moody's had is that most towns have 10% reserves and we
only have 5%. They did make note though that we spend the extra money to buy capital. We
received 13 bids for the sale of bonds, and there was a difference of $100,000 between the best
and the worst bids.
Personnel and Appointments
Human Relations Advisory Committee, - The Board interviewed Lori Hodin for one position on
the Human Relations Advisory Committee. Randall Jones was not present.
Anthonv moved and Tafova seconded to place the followine name into nomination for one
position on the Human Relations Advisorv Committee with a term expirinu June 30. 2010:
Lori Hodin. Ms. Hodin received four votes and was appointed.
Discussion/Action Items
Hearing - Liauor License Transfer - Romano's Macaroni Grill - The Secretary read the hearing
notice. The Town Manager noted that this is a change in ownership that already has State
approval.
5
Board of Selectmen Meeting - October 30. 2007 - Page 3
Attorney Howard Miller was present representing the owner. He noted that Waterloo Restaurant
Ventures owns the Macaroni Grills out west and they are moving east. The restaurant will have
the same manager, the employees will be the same, and policies and lease will be same. The
owner of Waterloo was the owner of Brinker's for 20 years.
The Town Manager reminded Attorney Miller that they need to get a new health license.
Selectman Richard Schubertasked if the abutters were notified. The Town Manager indicated
that is not required for a transfer of a license. Abutters are notified only for new licenses.
The Town Manager asked if the license will be pledged, and Attorney Miller indicated that it
will not.
A motion by Tafova seconded by Anthonv to close the hearine on the liquor license transfer
for Romano's Macaroni Grill was auuroved by a vote of 4-0-0.
A motion by Tafova seconded by Schubert to auurove the liauor license transfer of Brinker
Massachusetts Coruoration d/b/a Romano's Macaroni Grill at 48 Walkers Brook Drive to
Waterloo Restaurant Ventures. Inc. d/b/a Romano's Macaroni Grill for use at the same
location and to reauuoint current Manager Bao Huvnh as Manager was auuroved by a vote
of 4-0-0.
Appeal re: Fence 63 Snringvale Road - Homeowner Scott Ahnaeida was present.
The Town Manager noted that the fence is installed in the public way. The Town owns 5-8 feet
right of way. Mr. Almaeida noted that he purchased the home one year ago and it was
landscaped to the street. It is a low split fence and there is an expense to moving it. He is
requesting that the Board allow the fence to stay unless a sidewalk is installed.
Selectman Camille Anthony asked who installed the fence, and Mr. Almaeida noted that it was
installed by a fence company.
Selectman Richard Schubert noted that he drove by the house. The grass acts as the sidewalk,
but the fence blocks the opportunity for someone to get off the road. He also noted that the fence
company should have determined where the lot line is. He feels that this is a safety issue and
doesn't pass any standard to allow for hydrants, utility poles or sidewalks.
Chairman James Bonazoli noted that the plow will take the fence down this Winter or next
because there is no avoiding it being hit by the blade.
Mr. Almaeida requested that he could move it back 4 feet instead of 8. Selectman Camille
Anthony indicated that the fence has to be taken off Town property. Mr. Almaeida requested
that he be given an extension until the Spring.
Selectman Richard Schubert requested that the Town Manager check with Town Counsel
regarding liability if someone gets hurt.
1-3
Board of Selectmen Meeting - October 30. 2007 - Page 4
A motion by Anthonv seconded by Schubert to not approve the installation of a split rail
fence within the public rieht of wav abuttins the property at 63 SprinQVale Road and to
require the property owner to remove the fence from the public wav by Mav 1. 2008
contingent upon the property owner sign a waiver approved by Town Counsel that releases
the Town of anv liability reLyardin2 the fence was approved by a vote of 4-0-0.
Review Remainder of 2007 Subseauent Town Meeting Warrant - The Town Manager noted that
there is a revised draft Warrant Report in the handout. The Moderator suggests putting the
reports inside the Articles.
The Town Manager noted that Article 7 regarding Timothy Place will be tabled until Spring.
The as-built plans are not done.
The Town Manager noted that the Town was not successful in getting the Urban Self Help grant
for the tennis courts. He also noted that the Town is taking bids on Friday for the tennis courts,
and we will see how those come out. The estimate cost is $525,000 and $90,000 has been raised
privately in addition to a possible $40,000 tennis grant.
Selectman Camille Anthony noted that this needs full discussion before Town Meeting.
The Town Manager noted that Article 11 is regarding sidewalks. He also noted that it would be
helpful to have this conversation to see where the community is leaning.
Selectman Ben Tafoya noted that the comments at the Financial Forum regarding the
Community Preservation Act was the sooner the better because of the reimbursement rate, but he
feels that there needs to be discussion regarding the financial future of the Town; i.e., the
operating budget.
Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the newer Finance Committee Members kept talking
about an override and she was surprised. She indicated that sidewalks are wonderful but we
need to put money into our roads. Selectman Richard Schubert agreed with Selectman Anthony
but noted that a presentation to Town Meeting might be good.
The Town Manager suggested doing a report to Town Meeting with budget projections, discuss
the sidewalks and tennis courts and then table it. The Board then discussed referring this back to
the committee instead of tabling.
The Board decided not to take any action until the meeting with the Finance Committee.
Review Goals - The Town Manager reviewed the 15 goals. He noted that to measure customer
service, we will do a focus group on building inspections rather than a survey. He also noted that
the Library did a survey and did very well but this function needs to be focused on.
Chairman James Bonazoli noted that he was not familiar with a focus group. Selectman Richard
Schubert noted that in this case, a focus group would be good because a survey goes out to the
general public who do not generally go through the building permit process.
Board of Selectmen Meetins - October 30. 2007 - Paize 5
The Town Manager noted that we will begin adding modules to the webpage but the citizen
requests and surveys will have. to wait because we don't have enough technology man hours for
that. To improve communications, the electronic local history is ongoing with the Library. For
the need for a community standard of civil behavior, he suggests that two Selectmen work with
him and Bob LeLacheur on how to train Chairmen of Boards, Committees and Commissions.
Selectmen Camille Anthony and Ben Tafoya volunteered for this effort.
The Town Manager noted that "best practices" is being looked at as evaluation of continuous
improvement, and he recommends doing strategic planning by department. The strategic
planning for the Library will be done by Summer 2008. The Police strategic planning is at the
printer and will be available shortly. The DPW Management Study will be done in
approximately one month.
Chairman James Bonazoli noted that the Finance Committee looks for a level of service and
these services will help determine that. He also noted that he would like to hear from the
departments. The Town Manager suggested scheduling a Saturday morning meeting with the
Departments.
The Town Manager reviewed the status of expanding commercial property tax base. He noted
that the Town is focusing on a parking structure, the Peer to Peer Study, and the Technical
Assistance Downtown Study is complete. We are working with Addison-Wesley on the 40R
application, and are also working with individual property owners regarding redevelopment of
their sites.
To reduce community dependency, the Town is now purchasing all of its water from. the
MWRA, are working on reducing Town Government . energy consumption, adopted an anti-
idling policy and received a suburban mobility grant.
In the area of Community Infrastructure, the Master Plan for Memorial Park has been approved
by the Board of Selectmen, and the plans for the Birch Meadow complex and the Northern Area
Greenway are being worked on. The Town Planner is working with the art organizations
regarding an Arts Center, and we are working on implementing the affordable housing planned
production plan.
The Town Manager noted that the Selectmen need to do new goals and his evaluation.
Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the studies are needed first. Chairman James Bonazoli
noted that the department strategic meeting session would be helpful in setting goals. Selectman
Ben Tafoya noted that he would like to see the forms from last year to determine what we are
doing that no longer has any value.
Approval of Minutes
A motion by Tafova seconded by Schubert to auprove the Minutes of October 9. 2007, as
amended, was approved by a vote of 4-0-0.
A motion by Tafova seconded by Schubert to approve the Minutes of October 16. 2007 was
approved by a vote of 4-0-0.
s~
Board of Selectmen Meeting - October 30. 2007 - Page 6
A motion by Bonazoli seconded by Schubert to 20 into Executive Session for the purpose of
labor neeotiations not to come back into Open Session was auuroved on a roll call vote with
all four members votine in the affirmative.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
s41
Board of Selectmen and
Addison-Wesley Development Advisory Team Meeting
November 3, 2007
The meetings convened at the Senior Center, 49 Pleasant Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
Present were Selectmen Stephen Goldy, Ben Tafoya and Camille Anthony, DAT Members Steve
Goldy, Camille Anthony, Russ Graham and David Tuttle, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner,
Development Team Ted Tye, Scott Weiss, Angus Jennings and the following list of interested
residents: Amy Otis and Peter Salkins, Paul McCarthy, Theresa Petrillo, Chris O'Connor, Mary
Avery, Diane Weggel, Sheila, Spinney, Jim Doherty, Michael Kilduff, Richard and Jean
Pakitentz, Molly Thornton, Scott Spinney, Eleanor Higgott, George Katsoufis, Nick Safina.
Participants at the meeting discussed the proposed development plan with the Addison-Wesley/
Pearson property by. National Development. The focus was on buffers on the site abutting
residential development existing next to the site.
Selectman Camille Anthony asked the group to focus on where the buffer zone issues were
problematic. Along the proposed townhouse area abutting South Street, the buffers appear to be
adequate. The buffer narrows to 25 feet on the lower end of South Street abutting the Assisted
Living, and along the rear properties on Curtis Street abutting the Assisted Living and the
proposed 40R development. Someone in the audience advocated for a larger buffer as large as
75 feet, and wanted to propose amending the underlying zoning as well as the proposed zoning.
Selectman Ben Tafoya noted that any such amendment would require 2/3 vote at Town Meeting,
and he thought that would be very unlikely.
On motion by Tafoya seconded by Anthony, the Board of Selectmen and the Development
Advisory Team adjourned their meeting of November 3, 2007 at 3:00 p.m.
Additional private discussion took place between the residents and the developer which were not
part of the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
NATIONAL
CONVERSATION
ON CLIMATE
ACTION
OCT. 4, 2007
Town Mgr Peter Hechenbleikner
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
October 29, 2007
Dear Town Manager Hechenbleikner:
2107 OCT 33 AM 10- -30
On October 4, 2007 Reading, MA joined an impressive group of 70 local governments
and science centers all over the United States who took part in the first National
Conversation on Climate Action. On behalf of all of the sponsoring organizations, I
would like to congratulate you and your staff for hosting an event, and thank you for
making the National Conversation on Climate Action such a success!
We have been deeply impressed by the broad range of events held across the U.S. as part
of the National Conversation, including public lectures, business leader breakfasts,
informal coffee shop conversations, themed breakout sessions, and expanded city council
meetings. You were part of a first of its kind national event for community outreach on
global warming, and hope that it has deepened your community dialog and helped build
stronger public awareness and investment in your jurisdiction's climate work.
While each National Conversation event was unique, they all reflected the strong desire
for action and solutions starting at the community level, and we hope to build on this
success next year. You can find out how other communities structured their events and
view photos and press coverage on our "Event Highlights" page at
www.cliinateconversation.ora. Planning for the second National Conversation on Climate
Action in 2008 is already underway, stay tuned to the website for updates, and please
contact Gary Cook (garv.cookna,iclei.ora) to discuss ideas for the 2008 Conversation.
On behalf of ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, we look forward to deepening
our collaboration with you to help you advance your climate protection goals. Events
like the National Conversation are inspired and executed through your tremendous
leadership. Thanks again for your participation and commitment to local climate action.
Please do not hesitate to contact me, michelle.wyman@iclei.org. Thank you.
Warm Regards,
b" *'~U,
Michelle Wyman, Executive Director, ICLEI U.S.A. -1.00-E-1
Local
ICLEI U.S.A. 436 14th St., Suite 1520 Oakland, CA 94612 +1-510/844-0699 Governments
for Sustainability
%
ga
BRADLEY H. JONES; JR.
STATE REPRESENTATIVE
MINORITY LEADER
,7L1/IG.IC 1.~%lC~U'C.1C/ZCCG~GI/G.1
ae~~eaetarL 02/3- ?05~
20' MIDDLESEX DISTRICT
READING • NORTH READING
t_YNNFIELD • MIDDLETON
Ms. Patricia A. Leavenworth, P.E.
District Highway Director
Mass Highway Department, District 4
519 Appleton Street
Arlington, MA 02476
Dear Ms. Leavenworth:
TEL. (617) 722-2100
Rep. Brad ley-Iones@hou.state,ma. us
www.bradjonesonline.com
October 29, 2007
63
F3
04+
I am writing to respectfully request that you reconsider the installation of a left turn signal on the
northbound side of Route 28 at the intersection of Franklin Street in the Town of Reading.
Immediately north of the intersection there is a slope which obstructs the view of traffic on Route
28. The problem is especially dangerous when a northbound motorist is attempting to take a left turn
while a southbound 'motorist 'in,the left lane is yielding. In this situation, southbound motorists.in the
right lane are unable to see the vehicle making the left turn until it is too late.. Indeed, there. have been.
numerous collisions and near-collisions at this intersection. As. traffic in the area grows, the problem
is sure to. worsen.
Earlier this year, an engineer from your department reviewed the intersection at the request of the
Town. The engineer determined that a signal is not warranted. The determination was difficult to
understand because there is already a left turn signal on the southbound side of Route 28, which
seems to be an acknowledgement of the problem. Moreover, I am aware of a'number of people who.
avoid this intersection altogether due to the safety problems. it presents.
A new elementary school located off of Franklin Street opened several years ago and has resulted
in an increased number of children passing through the intersection of Franklin Street and Route 28.
Given the obvious risk that this situation poses to the children and motorists in general, I would like
to encourage you to reconsider the engineer's determination.
Should you or members of your staff have any further questions or concerns about this project,
please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. Thank you for your assistance. . .
cc: Peter, .Hechenbleikner, Town Manager
Karen Herrick
1. Jones, Jr.
Leader
1
20 NOV -5 PH 12: 20
Mr. James Bonzoli
Selectman's Office
November 1, 2007
On Monday, October 23, I had an appointment to discuss an
increase of $10,500 on my 2008 tax.
The reason for my increase, was because a.one-bedroom, living
roomTeating area, a small bathroom, and galley kitehen, was sold for
more than I was assessed. (The price taken from the assessors
records.)
Would it be possible, that the other condo, a duplicate of mine,
ha been up-dated with wood floors, appliances left in place etc.
and sold before the market dipped?
Unless all properties are personally inspected, in my view,
they can not be compared. Also the other condo could have been
located away from the traffic noise from 128. (which is awful.)
Because someone sold their property, when real estate was high-
priced, doesn't seem to be a good.reason-to assess property for more
when values have eome down. If I was to sell now, would I be able
to get the high price of the past?
How can a property be assessed or reassessed, sight unseen?
Very truly yours,
Mary L. Xavier
4 Summit Terrace
November 2, 2007
Mr. Paul Stedman
District 4 Operations Engineer
Massachusetts Highway Department
Stedman, Paul (MHD) fmailto:Paul. Stedmane-mhd.state.ma.usl
Re: Safety Concerns with Intersection in Reading at Rt. 281131irch Meadow
Drive/Lawrence Road
Dear Mr. Stedman,
At the end of September, I had inquired through Jane Corr, Chief of Staff
Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs,
regarding repairs and improvements to the traffic signaling at the above named
intersection in Reading. At that time, you responded immediately and a burnt out
bulb for the crosswalk signal was repaired. I appreciate your quick response, and I
am writing to you to express concerns of my own, other parents, and crossing
guards related to this intersection that have persisted over the past two years.
Approximately two years ago, parents from the Lawrence Road neighborhood
contacted Mass. Highway and were.bas.ically told that the incident rate did not
support improving the safety of that intersection and area of highway Rt. 28..
Since August of this year, I have talked to many local officials and a local
Mass. Highway employee to see if steps could be taken to ensure the safety of
children transiting across that intersection. In addition to conversations with our
Police Force Safety Officer, DPW Manager, Town Manager, and Larry (MHD,
Apache Pass), I also spent several hours clearing the sidewalk of organic and
inorganic debris.
This letter details the issues with the intersection that compromise the safety
of our children as well as some ideas for improvement. If we need just one more
incident to motivate us to action, then I can report one that occurred last week. A
high school student stepped off the curb with the walk light and had it not been for
the crossing guard pulling him back, a car that failed to stop prior to a right on red
would have hit him. On a personal note, I am very proud of my three children who,
since the start of school, have walked or rode bikes to middle school and must travel
along and cross Rt. 28. They are doing their part for the environment and for good
health. Imagine for one moment if the incident that is needed to put attention on this
intersection, happens when three brothers are crossing. As a citizen of Reading, a
School Committee Member, an engineer, and most certainly as a mother, I ask for
urgency in evaluating and improving this intersection.
Safety Concerns with Intersection in Readinq at Rt. 281131irch Meadow
Drive/Lawrence Road
Backaround Info:
1. Rt. 28 is a 4 lane state highway in this area with a posted speed limit of
40mph
2. The east/west roads, Lawrence Rd and Birch Meadow drive are not
congruent, but are offset, with Lawrence Road slightly South of Birch Meadow
drive.
3. There is a standard traffic light at this intersection with no left turn arrows.
4. The traffic signal at the corner of Lawrence Road and Rt. 28 North was
installed in the 1970's.
5. There are three schools located on the west side of the highway, Reading
Memorial High School (1400 students), A.W. Coolidge Middle School (436)
students, and Birch Meadow Elementary (419 students).
6. This is the only crossing of Rt. 28 staffed with a crossing guard to support
students living on the East side of Rt 28.
7. According to Reading's DPW manager, the state is responsible for 66' of this
roadway, 4 - 11' travel lanes and 11' on each side of the highway
encompassing the sidewalk.
8. Accounts of just three adults using the intersection in the past 9 months report
7 heart stopping near miss incidents involving students of all ages.
9. The issue with vehicles not stopping prior to" right on red" is significant, AND
it appears that for motorists following behind the first offending vehicle the
propensity to intentionally or accidentally run the red light is increased.
10. The offset nature of Birch Meadow Drive and Lawrence Road combined with
red light violations makes this intersection extremely dangerous for vehicles
proceeding from Lawrence across Rt.28 to Birch Meadow Drive. .
Safetv Issues:
1. There is no signage or indication of a school crossing.
2. The speed limit is un-changed in this area. (40mph)
3.. The cross walks are just painted white.
4. Motorists consistently underestimate stopping distance and end up stopped in
the cross walk rather than at the stop line.
5. The crosswalk lights are un reliable (personal experience and crossing guard)
6. The crosswalk lights. are not utilizing the latest technology.
7. It its extremely difficult for North bound traffic to turn left safely thus creating
further danger in the intersection for students.
8. The sidewalks on the East side both North and South of the intersection are
over grown and have organic material taking root over the sidewalk.
9. Students are forced to walk extremely close to traffic moving at 40mph or
greater as they approach the crossing due to the lack of upkeep of the
sidewalks.
10. Motorists traveling south constantly go right on red on to Birch Meadow drive
WITHOUT stopping. This is a significant danger to students and our crossing
guards.
v
11. Motorists traveling East on Birch Meadow drive constantly go right on red on
to Rt. 28 South WITHOUT stopping. This is a significant danger to students,
crossing guards, and motorists, especially in the.afternoon with our teenage
drivers on the road.
Ideas for Improvement:
1. Reduce the speed on Rt. 28 in this area to at least 30mph.
2. Upgrade the crosswalk lights to include the count down timer, brighter lights,
and audible signals.
3. Paint the cross walks and the intersection so drivers know without doubt that
this is a SCHOOL CROSSING. Provide additional signage to alert drivers.
4. More visible delineation of the stop line and cross walk is needed.
5. Add signage to remind drivers that it is right turn. on red AFTER FULL STOP.
6. Install video cameras to support local law enforcement in issuing moving
violations to drivers breaking the law. .
7. Remove all organic material over hanging and growing on top of the sidewalk
on the East side of Rt. 28 both North and South of the intersection.
8. Install left turn arrows for both the North and Southbound traffic on Rt. 28.
9. Install the technology that allows remote signal control for use by the Police
and Fire department during emergencies.
I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the office manager of Commissioner
Luisa Paiewonsky❑ who was respectful and caring, and followed through to enable
our contact. I sincerely appreciated your call on Thursday afternoon. I know that I
speak for many concerned Reading residents in urging you, to make a thorough
evaluation of the current safety issues at this major intersection. I look forward to
hearing back from you soon.
Respectfully,
Elaine L. Webb
781 944-1817
781 307-1226 cell
elwsail41 ceverizon.net
Copy To:
District 4 Operations Engineer, Mr. Paul Stedman
Paul. Stedman(a7rnhd.state.ma.us
Reading Town Officials:
Town Manager, Mr. Peter Hechenbleikner
Chief of Police, Chief James Cormier
DPW Director, Mr. Ted McIntire
Mrs. Valerie Ross
Mrs. Cathy Ambrose
w3
c IC96
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867-2683
Fax: (781) 942-5441
Website: www.ci.reading.ma.us
November 9, 2007
Mr. Robert M. Takach
111 Forest Street
Reading, MA 01867
Dear Mr. Takach,
PUBLIC WORKS
(781) 942-9082
In May 2006 you had petitioned the Board of Selectman for approval of a gravel driveway
which was installed inadvertently without permits and did not meet the Town of Reading's
driveway standards. At the Board of Selectman's meeting on May 30, 2006, the Board
approved the driveway on a temporary basis (refer to attached memo) subject to the terms
that the gravel driveway would be removed by November 1, 2007.
During an inspection of your property on Nov. 9, 2007, it was noted that the gravel
driveway was not removed. Please advise this office as soon as possible, in writing, when
the driveway will be removed and returned to a lawn area in accordance with the variance
granted by the Board.of Selectman.
If you have any questions I can be reached at 781-942-6683 or by email
2zambouras(@ci.readina.ma.us. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
P.E.
Cc: Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager
C:\Documents and Settings\gzambouras\My Documents\TM Requests\111 Forest St driveway_remova1.doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: George Zambouras, Town Engineer
FROM: Peter I. Hechenbleikner
DATE: June 12, 2006
RE: Driveway 111 Forest Street
At its meeting on May 30; 2006, the Board of Selectmen granted a variance for a second
driveway at 111 Forest Street subject to the following conditions:
1. The parking space shall remain gravel and there should be no other paving on the site.
2. The driveway shall be removed by November 1, 2007.
Please make note of this decision in your files, so that you can follow-up with the property owner
in November 2007.
PHVps
cc: Property Owner - Robert Takach
jC
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
i
~m
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
b
d
STATEHOUSE • BOSTON 02133
ti
4 a
vc ~ v9W
(617) 725-4000
DEVAL L. PATRICK
GOVERNOR
O
TIMOTHY P. MURRAY
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
0
November 5, 2007
Mr. Peter I. Hechenbleikner
Town Manager
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867-2674
Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner:
Thank you for your letter. I am glad to know that Reading, like
the Commonwealth as a whole, supports and honors our brave
veterans. I appreciate all that you do.
Best r gards,
K~11 -
10
,'cad
MAWS' Deval L. ft limofhy P. Murray Bernard Cohen Luisa Paiewonsky
GavWv 0. Go nna seae* Carvivssa>rter
HIGHWAY
MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIve Orrice
OF TRANSPORTATION
November 13, 2007
Elaine L. Webb
309 Pearl Street
Reading, MA 01867-1352
Dear Ms. Webb:
I am writing in response to your November 2°d letter regarding the intersection of Route 28 with
Birch Meadow Drive/Lawrence Road in Reading.
District staff conducted a review of the intersection on Friday, November 9m. The following details
their findings, including a by item response to the recommendations contained in your letter.
1. The establishment of speed limits relies on the use of data that determines the speed that
85% of motorists travel at or below along a corridor uninfluenced by congestion. It has
been our experience that the establishment of an artificial speed limit that is not based on
the 85d' percentile speed has little effect on reducing actual operating speeds rather it tends
to simply increase the percentage of motorists who violate the posted limits. The speeds
observed during our field review were consistent with the current posted limits and did not
appear to be excessive given the conditions and controls present at the intersection.
2. The use of count down pedestrian timers has not been approved for use at state highway
intersections due in part to concerns with the potential for motorists waiting at the stop line
to use the information to initiate their movement into the intersection rather than focusing
their attention on the vehicular traffic signal heads and the area of the intersection directly
in front of them. Audible pedestrian signals have been used at locations where there is a
documented need for the provision of this equipment to assist visually impaired pedestrians.
However, our experience has found that the current technology is not well advanced and in,
many cases leads to noise complaints, particularly when used in areas with nearby
residences.
Our field review noted the presence of several different types of pedestrian signal heads. To
improve visibility, all of the pedestrian heads will be upgraded to Light Emitting Diode
(LED) displays that use the international symbols for pedestrian movements. Two new
pedestrian heads will be installed to allow pedestrians to cross the Birch Meadow Drive
approach under the exclusive pedestrian phase. Vehicular signal heads not so currently
equipped will be upgraded with LED indications. The ground mounted signal posts in the
northeast and southeast quadrants are worn and peeling and will be replaced.
Massachusetts Highway Departments District 4* 519 Appleton Street,
Arlington, MA 02476 • (781) 641-8300
3. Because the school properties do not directly abut Route 28, the location does not meet the
necessary criteria for the establishment of a formal school zone.
4. The standard markings for crosswalks on state highways are two parallel 12" white lines.
MassHighway allows communities to apply "cross hatching" that conforms to the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provided that the work is completed under
a permit and that the community agrees to maintain the markings.
5. Based on observations during the field review, the District believes that the installation of a
"No Turn on Red" sign is warranted on Route 28 southbound to eliminate the potential for
conflicts during pedestrian crossings that predominantly occur on the north side of the
intersection. "Stop Here on Red" signs will be installed on Route 28 northbound and
southbound to raise awareness of the desired location for drivers to stop.
6. The use of video cameras for enforcement requires legislation that does not presently exist.
However, we believe that the improvements proposed herein will have a positive impact on
overall safety and reduce the potential for the occurrence of moving violations.
7. The District's maintenance staff will review the location and schedule any necessary
vegetation removal. Our field review noted that vegetation on the east side of Route 28
between Hampshire Street and Lawrence Road limits visibility to one of the vehicular
signal indications and results in an overhang obstruction to the sidewalk area.
8. The installation of left turn signal phasing for both directions of Route 28 would require the
provision of exclusive left turn lanes either by widening Route 28 or by converting the
inside lanes to exclusive left turn lanes. Based on the associated right of way impacts and
the current configuration of Route 28 in this area, neither of these changes appear to be
feasible. Our review noted that the predominant left turn movement occurs from Route 28
northbound into Birch Meadow Road. In an effort to improve the safety and efficiency for
these left turn movements, the traffic signal phasing and equipment will be modified to
provide a northbound lead phase on Route 28 during which all other movements will be
stopped. Following this phase, Route 28 traffic will flow in both directions during which
left turns can be made after yielding to oncoming traffic.
9. Emergency pre-emption equipment (Opticom) will be installed to allow emergency
vehicles equipped with emitter devices to receive a green light in the direction they are
travelling on Route 28.
The work noted under items 5 and 7 will be completed within the next two weeks. The traffic
signal improvements noted above will be completed prior to mid December.
I am attaching a copy of an excerpt from the MUTCD that explains the meaning of the pedestrian
signal indications. Pedestrian signal indications are sometimes misunderstood, particularly in areas
where large numbers of young children or elderly pedestrians travel. You may wish to work with
the appropriate local officials to determine if this information can be incorporated into the
educational activities associated with the nearby schools and the YMCA facility. I also encourage
you to work with the appropriate local officials to determine their interest in moving forward with
the supplemental cross walk markings outlined under item 4.
892.
Thank you for your interest in overall safety for all of the different modes of travel. If you have
any questions, please feel free to contact Paul Stedman, the District's Operations Engineer, at (781)
641-8405.
Since
Patricia A. Leavenworth, P.E.
District Highway Director
PAUpds
Xc: M. Karas, Traffic Operations
P. Collette, Acting Maintenance Engineer
M.O. File 8-2007-0082
7g3
2003 Edition
CHAPTER 4E. PEDESTRIAN CONTROL FEATURES
Section 4E.01 Pedestrian Signal Heads
Page 4E-1
Support:
Pedestrian signal heads provide special types of traffic signal indications exclusively intended for controlling
pedestrian traffic. These signal indications consist of the illuminated symbols of a WALKING PERSON
(symbolizing WALK) and an UPRAISED HAND (symbolizing DONT WALK).
Guidance:
Engineering judgment should determine the need.for separate pedestrian signal heads (see Section 4D.03)
and accessible pedestrian signals (see Section 4E.06).
Section 4E.02 Meaning of Pedestrian Signal Head Indications
Standard:
Pedestrian signal head indications shall have the following meanings:
A. A steady WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) signal indication means that a pedestrian
facing the signal indication is permitted to start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal
indication, possibly in conflict with turning vehicles.- The pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to
vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that the WALKING PERSON (symbolizing
WALK) signal indication is first shown.
B. A flashing UPRAISED HAND (symbolizing DONT WALK) signal indication means that a
pedestrian shall not start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal indication, but that any
pedestrian who has already started to cross on a steady WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK)
signal indication shall proceed out of the traveled way.
C. A steady UPRAISED HAND (symbolizing DONT WALK) signal indication means that a
pedestrian shall not enter the roadway in the direction of the signal indication.
D. A flashing WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) signal indication has no meaning and shall
not be used.
Section 4E.03 ADnlication of Pedestrian Signal Heads
Standard:
Pedestrian signal heads shall be used in conjunction with vehicular traffic control signals under any of
the following conditions:
A. If a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study and meets either Warrant 4,
Pedestrian Volume or Warrant S, School Crossing (see Chapter 4C);
B. If an exclusive signal phase is provided or trade available for pedestrian movements in one or more
directions, with all conflicting vehicular movements being stopped; or
C. At an established school crossing at any signalized location.
D. Where engineering judgment determines that multiphase signal indications (as with split-phase
timing) would tend to confuse or cause conflicts with pedestrians using a crosswalk guided only by
vehicular signal indications.
Guidance:
Pedestrian signal heads should be used under any of the following conditions:
A. If it is necessary to assist pedestrians in making a reasonably safe crossing or if engineering judgment
determines that pedestrian signal heads are justified to minimize vehicle-pedestrian conflicts;
B. If pedestrians are permitted to cross a portion of a street, such as to or from a median of sufficient width
for pedestrians to wait, during a particular interval but are not permitted to cross the remainder of the
street during any part of the same interval; and/or
C. If no vehicular signal indications are visible to pedestrians, or if the vehicular signal indications that are
visible to pedestrians starting or continuing a crossing provide insufficient guidance for them to decide
when it is reasonably safe to cross, such as on one-way streets, at T -intersections, or at multiphase signal
operations.
Section 4E.04 Size. Design. and Illumination of Pedestrian Signal Head Indications
Standard:
All new pedestrian signal head indications shall be displayed within a rectangular background and shall
consist of symbolized messages (see Figure 4E-1), except that existing pedestrian signal head indications
with lettered or outline style symbol messages may be retained for the remainder of their useful
Sect. 4E.01 to 4E.04
G' G ~
November 2, 2007
Mr. Paul Stedman
District 4 Operations Engineer
Massachusetts Highway Department
Stedman, Paul (MHD) fmailto:Paul.Stedman@mhd.state.ma.usl
Re: Safety Concerns with Intersection in Reading at Rt. 28/13irch Meadow
Drive/Lawrence Road
Dear Mr. Stedman,
At the end of September, I had inquired through Jane Corr, Chief of Staff
Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs,
regarding repairs and improvements to the traffic signaling at the above named
intersection in Reading. At that time, you responded immediately and a burnt out
bulb for the crosswalk signal was repaired. I appreciate your quick response, and I
am writing to you to express concerns of my own, other parents, and crossing
guards related to this intersection that have persisted over the past two years.
Approximately two years ago, parents from the Lawrence Road neighborhood
contacted Mass. Highway and were basically told that the incident rate did not
support improving the safety of that intersection and area of highway Rt. 28.
Since August of this year, I have talked to many local officials and a local
Mass. Highway employee to see if steps could be taken to ensure the safety of
children transiting across that intersection. In addition to conversations with our
Police Force Safety Officer, DPW Manager, Town Manager, and Larry (MHD,
Apache Pass), I also spent several hours clearing the sidewalk of organic and
inorganic debris.
This letter details the issues, with the intersection that compromise the safety
of our children as well as some ideas for improvement. If we need just one more
incident to motivate us to action, then I can report one that occurred last week. A
high school student stepped off the curb with the walk light and had it not been for
the crossing guard pulling him back, a car that failed to stop prior to a right on red
would have hit him. On a personal note, I am very proud of my three children who,
since the start of school, have walked or rode bikes to middle school and must travel
along and cross Rt. 28. They are doing their part for the environment and for good
health. Imagine for one moment if the incident that is needed to put attention on this
intersection happens when three brothers are crossing. As a citizen of Reading, a
School Committee Member, an engineer, and most certainly as a mother, I ask for
urgency in evaluating and improving this intersection.
Safetv Concerns with Intersection in Readinq at Rt. 28/Birch Meadow
Drive/Lawrence Road
Backaround Info:
1. Rt. 28 is a 4 lane state highway in this area with a posted speed limit of
40mph
2. The east/west roads, Lawrence Rd and Birch Meadow drive are not
congruent, but are offset, with Lawrence Road slightly South of Birch Meadow
drive.
3. There is a standard traffic light at this intersection with no left turn arrows.
4. The traffic signal at the corner of Lawrence Road and Rt. 28 North was
installed in the 1970's.
5. There are three schools located on the west side of the highway, Reading
Memorial High School (1400 students), A.W. Coolidge Middle School (436)
students, and Birch Meadow Elementary (419 students).
6. This is the only crossing of Rt. 28 staffed with a crossing guard to support
students living on the East side of Rt 28.
7. According to Reading's DPW manager, the state is responsible for 66' of this
roadway, 4 -11' travel lanes and 11' on each side of the highway
encompassing the sidewalk.
8. Accounts of just three adults using the intersection in the past 9 months report
7 heart stopping near miss incidents involving students of all ages.
9. The issue with vehicles not stopping prior to" right on red" is significant, AND
it appears that fpr motorists following behind the first offending vehicle the
propensity to intentionally or accidentally run the red light is increased.
10. The offset nature of Birch Meadow Drive and Lawrence Road combined with
red light violations makes this intersection extremely dangerous for vehicles
proceeding from Lawrence across Rt.28 to Birch Meadow Drive.
Safetv Issues:
1. There is no signage or indication of a school crossing.
2. The speed limit is un-changed in this area. (40mph)
3. The cross walks are just painted white.
4. Motorists consistently underestimate stopping distance and end up stopped in
the cross walk rather than at the stop line.
5. The crosswalk lights are un reliable (personal experience and crossing guard)
6. The crosswalk lights are not utilizing the latest technology.
7. It is extremely difficult for North bound traffic to turn left safely thus creating
further danger in the intersection for students.
8. The sidewalks on the East side both North and South of the intersection are
over grown and have organic material taking root over the sidewalk.
9. Students are forced to walk extremely close to traffic moving at 40mph or
greater as they approach the crossing due to the lack of upkeep of the
sidewalks.
10. Motorists traveling south constantly go right on red on to Birch Meadow drive
WITHOUT stopping. This is a significant danger to students and our crossing
guards.
~c ~
11. Motorists traveling East on Birch Meadow drive constantly go right on red on
to Rt. 28 South WITHOUT stopping. This is a significant danger to students,
crossing guards, and motorists, especially in the afternoon with our teenage
drivers on the road.
Ideas for Improvement:
1. Reduce the speed on Rt. 28 in this area to at least 30mph.
2. Upgrade the crosswalk lights to include the count down timer, brighter lights,
and audible signals.
3. Paint the cross walks and the intersection so drivers know without doubt that
this is a SCHOOL CROSSING. Provide additional signage to alert drivers.
4. More visible delineation of the stop line and cross walk is needed.
5. Add signage to remind drivers that it is right turn on red AFTER FULL STOP.
6. Install video cameras to support local law enforcement in issuing moving
violations to drivers breaking the law.
7. Remove all organic material over hanging and growing on top of the sidewalk
on the East side of Rt. 28 both North and South of the intersection.
8. Install left turn arrows for both the North and Southbound traffic on Rt. 28.
9. Install the technology that allows remote signal control for use by the Police
and Fire department during emergencies.
I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the office manager of Commissioner
Luisa Paiewonskya who was respectful and caring, and followed through to enable
our contact. I sincerely appreciated your call on Thursday afternoon. 1 know that I
speak for many concerned Reading residents in urging you to make a thorough
evaluation of the current safety issues at this major intersection. I look forward to
hearing back from you soon.
Respectfully,
Elaine L. Webb
781 944-1817
781 307-1226 cell
elwsail4l CcDverizon.net
Copy To:
District 4 Operations Engineer, Mr. Paul Stedman
Paul.Stedman @ mhd.state.ma.us
Reading Town Officials:
Town Manager, Mr. Peter Hechenbleikner
Chief of Police, Chief James Cormier
DPW Director, Mr. Ted McIntire
Mrs. Valerie Ross
Mrs. Cathy Ambrose
Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of Local Services l
Henry Dormitzer, Commissioner Robert G. Nunes, Deputy Commissioner & Director of Municipal Affairs
November 13, 2007
Reading Board of Assessors
Town Hall -16 Lowell St.
Reading, MA 01867-2693
Re: NOTIFICATION OF CERTIFICATION
s=P-4
0
Dear Board Members:
The Commissioner of Revenue has determined that the locally assessed values of real and p9monal
property in your municipality represent full and fair cash valuation as of January 1, 2007 for fiscal yAY 2008
and that these proposed property assessments satisfy the minimum requirements for certification.
The Commissioner further certifies that:
1. all real property has been classified according to its use as of January 1, 2007 as
required by Chapter 59, § 2A(b).
2. a majority of the assessors have been qualified to classify property by their
attendance at a classification workshop conducted by the Department of Revenue.
The Board of Selectmen must now hold a public hearing on the issue of selecting a residential factor,
which will-determine the percentages of the tax burden to be borne by each class of property for fiscal year
2008. Prior to the hearing, we urge you to promote public understanding and discussion of the options
available to the town in regard to allocating the tax burden among major property classes. The Board of
Selectmen may elect a factor greater than the minimum residential factor, or a factor of "l " which will result in
a uniform allocation of the tax burden among all classes of property. In addition, your Board of Selectmen
has the option of granting an open space discount, residential exemption and small commercial exemption.
It appears that you are progressing satisfactorily in complying with your responsibilities under the
classification law. It is important that you complete the final steps expeditiously so that tax billing will not be
delayed.
If you have further questions or require assistance in completing the final steps for a classified tax
system please contact the Bureau at (617) 626-2300.
Sincerely yours,
Marilyn H. wne, Chief
Bureau of Local Assessment
cc: Board of Selectmen
MHB/ea
Post Office Box 9569, Boston, MA 02114-9569, Tel: 617-626-2300, Fax: 617-626-2330
-lox
1 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
} EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION
AN %0 iff
MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
F,
2W NOV 14 AM 10; 59
DEVAL L. PATRICK BERNARD COHEN
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
TIMOTHY P. MURRAY LUISA PAIEWONSKY
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR COMMISSIONER
November 8, 2007
Mr. Peter I. Hechenbleikner
Town Manager
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 02187-2685
Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner:
This is in reference to the recent request from the Town of Reading to establish a 24-hour heavy
commercial vehicle exclusion (HCVE) on High Street, which was reviewed by our District 4
Office and subsequently forwarded to this office.
Please be advised that during the District Office review, it was noted that existing signs
purporting to exclude trucks from using High Street were posted. A check of our records did not
reveal MassHighway ever issuing a permit to that effect, therefore we must assume these signs
were not approved in accordance with the relevant provisions of Chapter 85; Section 2 of the
Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), and should be removed. Also, the study submitted must be
considered unreliable, since the resulting data may have been skewed by the presence of these
signs. The data submitted by the Town indicated the volume of heavy vehicles to be 4.3%, and
the minimum warrant requirement is 5%.
It is for these reasons we cannot approve of. establishing a heavy commercial vehicle exclusion
on High Street at this time. If further information is desired, please feel free to contact Richard F.
Wilson, Regulations Engineer, at (617) 973-7368.
Sincerely,
Neil E. Boudreau
State Traffic Engineer
RFW/
Cc: Dist 4 Traffic,
TEN PARK PLAZA BOSTON, MA 02116-3969 ✓
TELEPHONE: (617) 973-7800 - TELEFAX: (617) 973-8040 - TDD: (617) 973-7306 - WWW.MHD.STATE.MA. S
~F
bu crr
s
ADVISORY
x ADVISORY o
° BOARD
MWRA. Advisory Board Summary
of the
MWRA Board of Director's Meeting
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
A meeting of the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority was held on October 17,
2007 at the Charlestown Navy Yard. Present: Chair Ian Bowles, Lucile Hicks, and Rudolph Banks,
Gubernatorial Appointees; John Carroll, Andrew Pappastergion and Joseph Foti, Advisory Board
Representatives; Vincent Mannering, Kevin Cotter and James Hunt III, City of Boston Representatives; Joseph
MacRitchie, City of Quincy Representative; Marie Turner, Town of Winthrop Representative.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR
Ian Bowles, Chairman of the MWRA Board of Directors, congratulated the MWRA for being recognized by the
state for their efforts in implementing sustainable energy practices. The "Leading by Example" award features
the MWRA's commitment to renewable energy. There will be a ceremony at the State House next week to
present the award.
REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Fred Laskey, Executive Director of the MWRA, thanked the staff for their hard work on renewable energy
issues. He next noted that the Employer Support for the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), which is a staff group
within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, was in. attendance at the meeting.
Representatives from the ESGR presented the "Above & Beyond Award" to the Authority for being a good
employer to service people. Several staff spoke and thanked the Board of Directors for providing an atmosphere
where they have peace of mind for the families they leave behind while serving in the military.
Mr. Laskey reported that the MWRA received a grant for $200,000 for addressing issues of homeland security
and water concerns. He thanked the Patrick Administration for its support. Mr. Laskey noted that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a new program partnering with water utilities to promote
conservation. He reported that the Judge Mazzone Memorial event at Deer Island was a successful and
meaningful event.
APPROVALS
ACCELERATION OF A STEAM GENERATION SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS PROJECT
The Board voted to approve the acceleration of a steam generation system modifications project, currently
scheduled for FY11-13, authorizing staff to commence design of the project.
MWRA's Master Plan identifies a capital project that involves the installation of a back pressure steam turbine
and other modifications to the steam driven electrical generation system in the On-site Thermal/Power Plant on
Deer Island. A recent consultant review of this project indicates that completion of the proposed modifications
will significantly increase the MWRA's renewable energy production by approximately 5,500,000 kWh per year
or a net savings of approximately $500,000 per year. In addition, these modifications will increase Deer Island's
emergency back-up power capabilities, which will enhance the efficiency and performance of the plant. The
capital cost of the back-pressure steam turbine and other modifications is estimated to be approximately $2
million.
Implementation of this recommendation is in line with Governor Patrick's Executive Order 484, which mandates
that state agencies "reduce energy consumption by 20% by 2012" and "make every effort to power their facilities
r ,
v
with clean renewable resources." This initiative is in concert with MWRA's continuing efforts to increase
renewable energy production.
The FY08 CIP includes sufficient funds for the design, preparation of bid documents, and construction-phase
services for this project. The FY09 CIP will include approximately $2 million for construction of the project.
APPROVAL OF READING AS A FULLY-SERVED MWRA WATER COMMUNITY
The Board voted to approve the Town of Reading as a fully-served MWRA water community and to authorize
the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to execute a new water supply agreement, with the Town
stipulating the terms and conditions of service, for up to 766.5 million gallons a year, subject to an additional
entrance fee payment of $7,799,606. In addition, to allocate an additional $1,206,000 in interest-free loans to
Reading under the Local Pipeline Assistance Program.
The Town of Reading sought to become a fully served MWRA water-supplied community and planned to
discontinue its use of local sources in the Ipswich River Basin, except in emergencies. Reading was initially
admitted to the MWRA in 2005 as a partially supplied community. Reading's full reliance on MWRA will have
negligible impacts on existing MWRA communities and the donor basins. The dramatic decrease in MWRA
system-wide demand over the last two decades far exceeds the cumulative demands of Reading.
Additionally, Reading is eligible to receive additional funds under MWRA's Local Pipeline Assistance Program.
Proceeds from Reading's entrance fee will be utilized to defer and offset expenses associated with the ongoing
Waterworks Capital Improvement Program.
Board Member Andrew Pappastergion asked if this was Reading's final step to becoming a fully supplied
MWRA community. Pam Heidell, Policy and Planning Manager, responded in the affirmative. Board Member
Vincent Mannering asked about the length of the entire process. Ms. Heidell responded that it took six years.
Mr. Laskey expressed his thanks to the staff, Pam Heidell in particular, for their hard work over this long
process. He noted that citizens in Reading rave about the quality tasting water they now receive. He welcomed
Reading aboard as a member community.
Ted McIntire, Public Works Director, Town of Reading, thanked the Authority and Advisory Board staff for all
their work on this project.
Mr. Laskey noted that the Authority was now moving forward on the Northern High Redundancy Project.
APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION
The Board voted to approve the Executive Director's recommendation to appoint Mr. James Reen to the
position of Director of Management Information Systems (MIS), Support Services Division (Non-Union, Grade
16), at an annual salary of $122,000 to be effective on the date designated by the Executive Director.
The Director of MIS reports to the Managing Director of Support Services and will develop, recommend and
implement an integrated information technology strategy. The Director oversees the development and
implementation of strategic and technical plans for automation and technology; applications, information
systems training, telecommunications and cyber-security. The Director oversees a budget of approximately
$9,000,000 and a capital budget of approximately $2,000,000.
The position was vacant due to a resignation and was posted internally and externally; a committee, interviewed
nine candidates and recommended three for further consideration. Mr. Reen was selected as the best and most
qualified candidate for the position; he possesses more than thirty years of experience in information
technology. Based on his extensive experience managing large and complex information technology
organizations, both in the public and private sectors, Mr. Reen is recommended for this position.
2
Ms. Hicks asked staff to elaborate on the hiring process for this position. Mr. Laskey noted that this was a two
part process and a recruiter was used.
APPOINTMENT OF PURCHASING MANAGER. PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT. SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION
The Board voted to approve the Executive Director's recommendation to appoint Ms. Barbara McNeil to the
position of Purchasing Manager, Procurement Department, Support Services Division (Non-Union Grade 14), at
an annual salary of $90,000 to be effective on the date designated by the Executive Director.
The Purchasing Manager oversees the purchasing functions for materials, supplies and non-professional
services in accordance with the Authority's purchasing policies and procedures. Position responsibilities include
the development and implementation of policies and procedures for centralized purchasing functions; managing
the purchasing staff; monitoring adherence to the Authority's purchasing policies and procedures for all
procurements; directing the development of specifications and oversees the preparation of staff summaries and
bid recommendations, directing the bidding process and assuring compliance with applicable procedures, laws
and policies.
The position was vacant due to a resignation and was posted internally and externally; ten candidates were
referred and interviewed for the position. Four candidates were recommended for further consideration. Ms.
McNeil was selected as the best and most qualified candidate for the position; she has five years experience
working with public procurement policies and twelve years experience*as the Executive Director of the Winthrop
Chamber of Commerce, which allowed her to gain knowledge of the MWRA and its procurement policies and
procedures.
APPOINTMENT OF SENIOR MONITORING AND CONTROL ENGINEER. FIELD OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
The Board voted to approve the Executive Director's recommendation to appoint Mr. Scott Tibbetts to the
position of Senior Monitoring & Control Engineer, Field Operations Department, Operations Division (Grade 23,
Unit 9), at an annual salary of $74,573 effective October 20, 2007.
The Senior Monitoring & Control Engineer position became vacant in April 2007 with the promotion of the
previous incumbent. The position plays an important role in the Field Operations Department supporting the
Water and Wastewater SCADA systems. The position's primary focus will be on the continued development and
maintenance of the western water control system.
The position was posted internally and externally; six candidates were referred and interviewed. Upon
completion of the interviews, Mr. Tibbetts was selected as the best and most qualified candidate for the position.
Mr. Tibbetts has almost seven years experience working in MWRA's SCADA Unit. He has held the position of
Senior SCADA Technician and Senior Instrument Technician in the Metering & Monitoring Section. Prior to his
employment at MWRA, Mr. Tibbetts spent six years working as an Environment Technician at TRC
Environmental Corporation.
Board Member Jay MacRitchie noted that the Board, as part of the management policies of the MWRA, must
approve staff positions at salaries which are at $65,000. Should that threshold be revised? Robert Donnelly,
Director of Human Resources, said that staff had been working on this and can have a report to the Board by
the next meeting.
EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT. SENIOR LABORATORY TECHNICIAN. DEPARTMENT OF
LABORATORY SERVICES. OPERATIONS DIVISION
The Board voted to approve the extension of the employment contract for Ms. Sophia Fotopoulos, Senior
Laboratory Technician, Department of Laboratory Services, Deer Island, Operations Division, for one year from
November 5, 2007 to November 4, 2008, increasing the hourly rate from $18 to $19, for an annual
compensation not to exceed $39,520.
The Central Laboratory at Deer Island has a continuing need for contract staff to assist with both seasonal
workload increases and work from bringing the Harbor and Outfall Monitoring sampling in-house. Ms. y
3 n
u
Fotopoulos has been a contract employee at MWRA since November 6, 2006 as part of the chemistry team
performing routine lab testing and field sampling. She has five years of directly relevant experience. Prior to
coming to MWRA, Ms. Fotopoulos worked as a Laboratory Technician at two commercial environmental testing
laboratories.
EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT. SECRETARY II. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION
The Board voted to approve the extension of the employment contract for Ms. Lorraine Bianchi, Secretary II,
Facilities Management Department, Support Services Division, for one year from October 24, 2007 to October
23, 2008 at an hourly rate of $16 for "on call" coverage.
The Facilities Management Department in the Support Services Division has a need for temporary contract staff
to provide coverage for permanent staff in case of absence. Ms. Bianchi has been a contract employee at
MWRA since October 24, 2006, covering essential duties in the absence of administrative staff at CNY
headquarters.
Mr. Mannering asked why an "on call" secretary was necessary. Mr. Donnelly indicated that the position was
used to cover for vacationing/sick staff instead of using a temp agency.
OCTOBER PCR AMENDMENTS
The Board voted to approve amendments to the Position Control Register (PCR).The PCR amendments
included in this package reflect organizational changes aimed at improving the cost-effectiveness, structural
soundness and staffing patterns of the various work units. They include:
1. Title and grade change for a vacant position in FOD to meet the HVAC workload;
2. Title change for a vacant position in Vehicle Maintenance in Support Services;
3. Title, grade and location change for a vacant position to fill a need in MIS, Support Services;
4. Title, grade and location change for a vacant position in Engineering to support a need in the SCADA
unit.
The costs of these PCR amendments will range from -$19,178 to $44,815 and will likely be at the higher end of
that range.
CONTRACT AWARDS
LABORATORY INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: LABWARE. CONTRACT 6509A The Board voted
to approve the award of Contract 6509A, Laboratory Information Management System, to the lowest responsive
bidder, LabWare, Inc., and to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to execute and deliver
said contract in an amount not to exceed $1,244,435 for a term of 81 months from the Notice to Proceed; and to
authorize a Notice to Proceed to commence the first 21-month term of the contract in an amount not to exceed
$1,061,335 for software license and implementation services. Further, the Board voted to authorize the
Executive Director to approve subsequent Notices to Proceed for software and maintenance services on an
annual basis, up to the remaining contract balance of $183,100 in the not-to-exceed amounts of $35,020 in year
one after implementation, and $37,020 in years two through five after implementation, if recommended by the
Executive Director.
MWRA's Department of Laboratory Services is a centralized department with the Operations Division; the
Laboratory conducts approximately 23,000 analytical tests on an estimated 5,000 samples per month. The
purpose of this procurement is for MWRA to obtain a replacement for its Laboratory Information Management
Systems (LIMS) used for processing samples intended to demonstrate compliance with state and federal
regulations.
On August 3, 2007, three firms submitted Statements of Qualifications, and all three firms were determined to
have met the threshold and technical requirements. Each firm was invited to perform a demonstration of their
product; the demonstrations were reviewed and scored by staff. All firms were invited to bid. In September, two
4 V
responsive bids were received. LabWare, Inc submitted the lowest bid and staff reviewed it to make sure it is
complete and complies with design and system requirements.
This contract does not include the purchase of production and development servers. This contract includes
$248,935 for system configuration changes due to new/modified regulations or new MWRA system
requirements or processes.
The FY08 CIP contains $2,118,000 for LIMS; this amount should be sufficient for the recommended $1,244,435
contract with LabWare, Inc. and for the purchase of servers, personal computers and other equipment/services
that will be required to support this system.
Rick DaPrato, Senior MIS Manager, noted that this contract would be moving the management systems to a
".net" web-based application.
Mr. MacRitchie asked how the 18-21 month implementation period was decided upon and if the two systems will
run at the same time, noting that 21 months seems like a long transition time. Michael Delaney, Director of
Laboratory Services, responded that the process may move along faster, depending on how much staff time is
used. Mr. DaPrato noted that the two systems may over lap for a month..
Mr. Mannering asked how much customization of the system was expected; the staff summary indicates that it
would be less than 20%. Mr. DaPrato responded that he was shooting for 1 % customization.
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE AND SUPPLY OF
ELECTRIC POWER FOR THE SMALLER FIELD OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT AND FACILITY
MANAGEMENT PROFILE ACCOUNTS: OP-82
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to execute and deliver a contract
for the purchase and supply of the electric power for the smaller Field Operations Department and Facility
Management Profile Accounts, with the lower responsive bidder, for the contract term selected (not to exceed
42 months). This delegation of authority is necessary because MWRA will be required to notify the selected
bidder within a few hours of the bid submittal to lock-in the bid price in a constantly changing market.
MWRA competitively procures its electricity because over the long term, it has been economically beneficial to
do so compared to monthly pricing, which varies. The Profile accounts (e.g. Charlestown Navy Yard, Hough's
Neck Pump Station) were competitively procured in November 2006 and the contract will expire in November
2007. The 37 Profile accounts have an approximate annual energy consumption of 6,000,000 kWh in total and
the administrative costs of these accounts are higher compared to a smaller number of Interval facilities with
larger loads. Bids will be sought for a firm, fixed-price per kWh to supply 100% of the electricity load
requirements for the 37 Profile accounts, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Staff and MWRA's Energy
Advisor, SourceOne, will evaluate the bids based on market conditions and pricing received and recommend
that the Executive Director execute a contract with the lowest responsive bidder for 18 months, 30 months, or 42
months. Staff will provide the Board with an update on the bid results and any new contract that is executed for
electric power supply for these facilities.
The FY08 CEB contains $7,703,623 for the Field Operations Department's electricity supply; the Profile
accounts are budgeted at $1,000,000, or approximately 13% of the entire Field Operations Department's
electricity budget.
Board Member Jim Hunt asked about the renewable energy options for this contract. Marie Devito, Deputy
Contracts Manager, responded that the Profile accounts would have 3% renewable energy and Deer Island
would have 15% renewable energy.
Mr. Carroll asked if this contract would not come to the Board for two to five years. Mr. Laskey responded that it
would not come back to the Board and that he is the staff contact for further questions.
Q 1✓
U~
WACHUSETT DAM PCB REMOVAL: R. ZOPPO CORP.. CONTRACT 7210
The Board voted to approve the award of Contract No. 7210, Wachusett Dam PCB Removal, to the lowest
eligible and responsive bidder, R. Zoppo Corp., and to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the
Authority, to execute and deliver said contract in the bid amount of $2,180,000 for a term of 365 calendar days
from the Notice to Proceed.
Earlier this year, high concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were found in exterior caulking
materials at the Wachusett Dam and spillway and the Cosgrove Intakes. Staff moved quickly to develop an
abatement plan for the removal of the caulk at these locations. The work was packaged into three PCB removal
contracts based on the locations, potential impacts and structural functions of the facilities. This contract is the
second of three and will provide removal of PCBs from the crest of the Wachusett Dam.
Contract 7210 was advertised and bid in accordance with Chapter 30 of Massachusetts General Laws. Five bids
were opened and read on September 27, 2007; R. Zoppo Corp. provided the lowest bid amount for $2,180,000,
approximately 37% below the Engineer's Estimate. Zoppo is currently working on the contract for the Wachusett'
Reservoir Spillway Improvements (Contract 7020); Zoppo's current work in this area will reduce mobilization
expenses while maximizing utilization of labor and equipment resources.
The FY08 CIP Budget includes $5,000,000 for PCB Remediation at Wachusett Dam, including this contract and
a future contract for mortar joint remediation on the dam face and soil removal at the toe of the dam.
Mr. MacRitchie asked why the lowest bid was so much lower than the Engineer's Estimate. Jae Kim, Director of
Water Engineering, responded that Zoppo is already mobilized on site, ready to go. He noted that the
Engineer's Estimate included a method of sawing concrete whereas Zoppo utilizes a different and cheaper
method.
CONTRACT AmFNDMENTs/CHANGE ORDERS
DISCLOSURE COUNSEL SERVICES: EDWARDS ANGELL PALMER AND DODGE. LLP. CONTRACT
F165. AMENDMENT 3
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve Amendment No. 3 to
extend the term of Contract No. F165 with Edwards Angell Palmer and Dodge LLP, Disclosure Counsel
Services, by 91 calendar days to March 31, 2008.
Edwards Angell Palmer and Dodge LLP (EAPD) provides disclosure counsel services as part of MWRA's capital
financing program, under a contract that is set to expire on December 31, 2007. EAPD's services include
drafting the offering documents for bond transactions, reviewing and reporting on material events between bond
offerings, and filing an annual continuing disclosure document.
In preparation for the fall 2007 Massachusetts Water Pollution Abatement Trust transition, EAPD has begun the
process of updating MWRA's offering documents. As part of this update, EAPD has been directed to modernize
and streamline the documents. Given that the final revised document will not be released until December, it
would be available for potential proposers during a procurement process this fall. As a result, staff are seeking
to extend EAPD's contract from December 31, 2007 to March 31, 2008 to allow for the completion and release
of the updated document before commencing the procurement process.
Amendment 3 is for a time extension only and will have no fiscal impact.
NORTH DORCHESTER BAY CSO STORAGE TUNNEL: SHANK/BALFOUR BEATTY/BARLETTA. .1V:
CONTRACT 6244. CHANGE ORDER 4
The Board voted, with Mr. Carroll opposed and Mr. Banks abstaining, to authorize the Executive Director, on
behalf of the Authority, to approve Change Order No.4 to increase the amount of Contract No. 6244 with
Shank/Balfour Beatty/Barletta, JV, North Dorchester Bay CSO Storage Tunnel, in an amount not to exceed
$1,200,906.30. Further, the Board voted to authorize the Executive Director to approve additional change orders
6
as may be needed to Contract No. 6244 in amounts not to exceed the aggregate of $250,000 and 180 calendar
days.
The North Dorchester Bay CSO Tunnel contract is the largest construction contract associated with the North
Dorchester Bay CSO Control Plan, which is intended to eliminate CSO discharges and reduce storm-water
discharges to the South Boston beaches. This contract includes constructing a 17=foot-diameter, 11,000 foot-
long tunnel in soft ground using a tunnel boring machine.
Change Order 4 consists of the following five items: increased disposal of unsuitable material for restoration at
Moakley Park ($384,875); increased disposal of soil at unlined/lined landfill for pipe and surface work
($184,415); increased disposal of soil at unlined/lined landfill for construction shafts ($418,906); disposal of soil
containing unanticipated levels of lead ($135,746); and disposal of soil containing unanticipated levels of semi-
volatile organic compounds ($76,964).
The cumulative value of all change orders to this contract will total $1,433,732.30 or .98% of the original contract
amount of $145,733,208. Work on this contract is approximately 19% complete. The FY08 Capital Improvement
Program budget includes $151,202,000 for Contract 6244. Including this change order, the adjusted sub-phase
total will be $147,166,940.
Frank DePaola, Director of Construction, noted that mining, began this morning; the Tunnel Boring Machine
pushed through four feet of slurry wall. The plan is to drill for a few weeks, then stop and assemble the whole
Tunnel Boring Machine.
Mr. Pappastergion asked about the situation in Moakley Park. Mr. DePaola responded that part of the deal was
to lay down two new soccer fields in the park. Mr. Pappastergion asked if the cost was pertaining entirely to
disposal of unsuitable materials. Mr. DePaola responded that soil that can be re-used is, though unsuitable
materials are taken to a landfill. The materials found in the soil include broken glass and building debris. The
contract was set up in a lump sum. Mr. Pappastergion asked if this was a design error or an omission. Mr.
DePaola responded that it was an omission and the cost should have been in the bid price.
Mr. Carroll asked why additional money was being awarded for soil removal. Mr. DePaola responded that the
engineer did not include the correct quantities of soil. The urban fill found was an unforeseen condition. Mr.
Carroll asked if the engineer would be penalized for this mistake. Mr. DePaola responded that the engineer
likely missed some key information regarding the quality of soil.
UPPER NEPONSET VALLEY REPLACEMENT SEWER. SECTIONS 685 AND 686: P. GIOIOSO & SONS.
INC.. CONTRACT 6191. CHANGE ORDER 14
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve Change Order No.
14 to increase the amount of Contract No. 6191 with P. Gioioso & Sons, Inc., Upper Neponset Valley
Replacement Sewer, Sections 685 and 686, in an amount not to exceed $320,136 and to extend the contract
term by 107 calendar days to July 15, 2008. Further, the Board voted to authorize the Executive Director to
approve additional change orders as may be needed to Contract No. 6191 in amounts not to exceed the
aggregate of $250,000 and 180 calendar days.
Construction of the Upper Neponset Valley Replacement Sewer to increase the capacity of the sewer to the
level of service provided to all MWRA sewer member communities has been divided into two contracts. This
contract (Contract 6191) was awarded in March 2005. As of September 2007, the contractor has completed
installation, successfully tested and commenced operations of the 2.3 miles of new sewer lines and is now
working on the remaining sewer connections.
This Change Order will provide permanent pavement and overlay pavement for LaGrange and Baker Streets in
Boston. The City of Boston enforces a moratorium on street work from November to April. The contractors must
still complete the abandonment of the existing sewer and re-set the granite curbstones; final pavings of these
areas cannot commence until late May 2008. Since the contract expires on March 30, 2008, staff recommend
adding a new milestone to the contract for this final paving. All work, except final paving in these areas, will be
substantially completed by the original contract expiration date.
+
J
The cumulative value of all change orders to this contract will total $2,376,882.70 or 6.6% of the original contract
amount of $35,779,000. Work on this contract is approximately 91.3% complete. The FY08 CIP contains a
budget of $35,925,000 for Contract 6191. Including this change order for $320,136, the adjusted amount is
$38,155,882.70 or $2,230,882.70 over budget. This amount will be covered within the five-year spending cap.
Mr. Laskey noted that this long process is almost complete. Mr. Pappastergion noted that the number of change
orders on this project was low considering the location and the complexity of the project..
QUABBIN AND WACHUSETT DAM AND SPILLWAY IMPROVEMENTS: GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL. INC.,
CONTRACT 7019, AMENDMENT 4
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve Change Order No. 4
to increase the amount of Contract No. 7019 with GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc., Quabbin and Wachusett Dams
and Spillways Improvements, in the amount of $534, 461 to extend the contract term by 15 months to January
17, 2010.
On January 11, 2006, the Board approved the award of Contract 7019 to GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. to
provide design, engineering services during construction and resident inspections services for
repair/rehabilitations work at the Wachusett Dam, spillway, north dike and Winsor Dam. Substantial time and
effort have been expended in response to the PCB discovery and coordinating all remediation efforts.
Amendment 4 is required to provide additional funding and time to complete the work; it will provide a 15-month
contract extension and increase the budgets in certain tasks. The tasks include: remediation of the downstream
face and toe of the Wachusett Dam and Improvements to Bastion Chamber ($423,281); providing additional
ESDC and RI for Contracts 7209 and 7210 ($73,680); and additional project management ($22,500).
The FY08 CIP includes a budget of $1,758,000 for Contract 7019. The cumulative value of all amendments to
this contract total $1,034,461 added to the original contract amount of $1,257,727 for an adjusted sub-phase
total will be $2,292,188 or $534,188 over budget. This amount will be covered within the five-year spending cap.
SPOT POND SUPPLY MAINS CONTRACT 3. SECTIONS 3. 4. 9, 10, 11: R. ZOPPO CORP.. CONTRACT
6382, CHANGE ORDER 12
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve Change Order No.
12 to increase the amount of Contract No. 6382 with R. Zoppo Corp., Spot Pond Supply Mains Contract 3,
Sections 3,4,9,10,11, for a lump sum amount of $328,240.07. Further, the Board voted to authorize the
Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve additional change orders as may be needed to Contact
No. 6382 in amounts not to exceed the aggregate of $250,000.
The East/West Spot Pond Supply Mains are the principal transmission mains of the Northern Low Service Area.
The work under this contract includes rehabilitating approximately 29,000 linear feet of mostly 48-inch diameter
pipe, including new valves in the Cities of Somerville, Cambridge and Boston. As part of this rehabilitation
program, the Contract is required to clean and cement mortar line the mains, which will enhance the
effectiveness of residual disinfection in the distribution system and will dramatically reduce discoloration and
taste issues associated with rusty water conditions in unlined, cast iron pipelines.
This Change Order consists of the following three items: increasing the estimated quantity of 48-ince Diameter
internal joint seals ($181,760); furnishing and installing blow-off piping, gate valves and manholes in Medford
($96,997.67); and removing manhole pipe and installing ductile iron pipe in Brighton ($49,482.40).
The cumulative value of all change orders to this contract will total $828,526.82 or 4.9% of the original contract
amount of $16,776,900. Work on this contract is approximately 95% complete. The FY08 CIP budget includes
$17,404,995 for Contract 6382. Including this change order, the adjusted sub phase total is $17,605,426.92 or
$200,431.82 over budget. This amount will be covered within the five-year spending cap.
SOUTHERN SPINE DISTRIBUTION MAINS. SECTION 107 - PHASE 1: P. CALIACCO CORP., CONTRACT
6845. CHANGE ORDER 1
The Board voted to authorize the Executive Director, on behalf of the Authority, to approve Change Order No. 1,
to increase the amount of Contract No. 6845 with P. Caliacco Corp., Southern Spine Distribution Mains Section
107-Phase I, for a lump sum amount of $370,875 and to extend the contract term by 47 calendar days to
December 3, 2008.
The Southern Spine Distribution Mains Project involves the rehabilitation and/or replacement of three water
transmission mains Sections 21, 22 and 43, serving the communities of Boston, Milton and Quincy. This project
is needed to modernize the water distribution system, provide adequate capacity for these communities, and
service the new Blue Hills Covered Storage Facility. This contract was awarded in July 2007 and the Contractor
commenced installation of the pipe at the end of August 2007. Under Contract 6845, the Contractor will install
approximately 4,500 linear feet of 48-inch ductile iron pipe and appurtenances, along with two 48-inch control
valves.
This Change Order includes the following two items: replacement of 900 feet of ductile iron pipe on Willard
Street ($290,000); and replacement of 400 feet of ductile iron pipe on Quarry Street ($80,875). The cumulative
value of all change orders to this contract will total $370,875 or 6.8% of the original contract amount of
$5,471,826.50. Work on this contract is approximately 14.7% complete. The FY08 CIP contains a budget of
$5,472,000 for Contract 6845. Including this Change Order, the adjusted contract amount is $5,842,701.50 or
$370,701.50 over budget. This amount will be covered within the five-year spending cap.
Mr. Pappastergion asked if the size of the pipeline was being increased from six to eight inches. Mr. DePaola
answered yes. Mr. Hombrook added that this is a standard size increase request from communities. Mr.
Mannering asked if staff conferred with the City of Quincy on this project. Mr. Hombrook responded that staff did
collaborate with Quincy.
Ms. Hicks noted that the Change Order puts the project over budget by a significant amount.
INFORMATION
DELEGATED AUTHORITY REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2007
Staff provided the Board with a list of delegated authority actions over $25,000 for the period September 1
through September 30, 2007.
PROGRESS OF TOWN OF BROOKLINE IMPLEMENTED CSO PROJECTS AND PROJECTED FINANCIAL,
ASSISTANCE THROUGH DECEMBER 2007
The Town of Brookline is responsible for implementing the Brookline Sewer Separation project, one of 35
projects in MWRA's long-term CSO control plan. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) provides a
framework within which Brookline and MWRA cooperate in managing the implementation of the project. The
Financial Assistance Agreement (FAA) is the funding mechanism by which MWRA funds are made available to
Brookline to pay eligible design and construction costs. Brookline has made considerable progress with design
activities. The project has been split into sections, Beacon Street area (Phase 1) and Boylston Street area
(Phase II). Field investigations and flow monitoring are ongoing. Survey work is completed in the Beacon Street
area and underway in the Boylston Street area. Utility research/investigations have been completed and
verification of sewer and storm drain service connections is ongoing. The current schedule calls for submission
of the preliminary design report for Phase I work by November 2007. The Federal Court's Schedule Seven
requires construction to commence by November 2008.
The approved FY08 CIP budget includes $9,094,000 for design and construction of the Brookline Sewer
Separation Project.
q
9
WASTEWATER TRANSPORT SCADA IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM UPDATE
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems provide a means of monitoring and controlling
facilities and equipment from remote centralized locations, as well as providing a continuous record of facility
operations. The Wastewater SCADA Implementation program originated with the development of a Master Plan
in July 1999. In June. 2002, the Board approved Contract 6532 to provide design, integration, training,
construction administration and resident inspections services for SCADA improvements at MWRA's wastewater
facilities.
The SCADA implementation program has been phased into three separate construction packages. As of
September 2007, the first construction contract (Contract 6533) is approximately 90% complete with expected
completion in December 2007. Operations staff are now able to monitor and control facility functions from the
Chelsea Facility's Operations Control Center (OCC) through the newly installed communication system at seven
of the eleven facilities included in the contract.
The second construction contract (Contract 6534) has been advertised with a scheduled bid opening date of
October 25, 2007. This contract includes improving monitoring and control capabilities at the Chelsea Creek,
Columbus Park, Ward Street, and Nut Island Headworks facilities. Contract work will include implementing
automatic operation of the influent gates, adding or replacing systems to improve monitoring/controlling the odor
control and air quality systems, wastewater levels, flow measurements, and gas alarming systems.
The third construction contract (Contract 6657) will be the smallest of the three construction contracts. Work
under this contract will include SCADA improvements at the Arthur Street Pump Station in Natick and adding
permanent power for up to 36 sewer interceptor depth or flow monitoring sites and five hydrogen sulfide
monitoring locations.
The FY08 CIP contains a budget of $21,139,000 for implementation of the wastewater transport SCADA
system. Rick Trubiano, Director of Field Operations, indicated that next month there is expected to be a request
for a contract approval.
MWRA INDUSTRIAL WASTE REPORT #23: INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT
To EPA FOR FY07
MWRA is required by its NPDES Permit and EPA regulations to submit an annual report to EPA that describes
the activities and accomplishments of MWRA's Industrial Pretreatment Program. Industrial Waste Report #23
documents MWRA's ongoing efforts to control current permitted sewer users. MWRA's Toxic Reduction and
Control (TRAC) section operates the Industrial Pretreatment Program to control the level of toxic substances
discharged into the sanitary sewer system from commercial and industrial sources. Through permits
inspections, sampling and enforcement, the program keeps excessive levels of toxins out of the sanitary sewer
system. The FY07 Annual Report (industrial Waste Report #23) will provide highlights from TRAC's activities.
Joe Favaloro, Executive Director of the MWRA Advisory Board, stated that he was concerned that levels of
molybdenum that exceed state standards in fertilizer pellets still exists in the summer months. Twelve years ago
he served on the TRAC advisory committee and the Authority developed a "carrot" approach to address TRAC
issues with dental offices, photo developers and cooling towers. This approach with dental offices and photo
developers has been successful. However, it may be time to take a "stick" approach with cooling tower
operators.
Mr. Laskey noted that MWRA was penalized because of an error in the pellet plant shipping; NEFCO sent
pellets that had high levels Mr. MacRitchie said we don't need a bad headline regarding unsafe pellets; let's not
wait until the state changes its standard.
UPDATE ON THE JOHN J. CARROLL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
The provisions of "Long Term 2 Enhanced Water Treatment Rule" for unfiltered systems will require MWRA to
add an additional disinfectant at the Carroll Water Treatment Plant (CWTP). In June, the Board voted to
authorize staff to proceed with the procurement of design engineering services for UV disinfection based on
10
recommendations in the UV Disinfection Treatment Feasibility Study that was completed in March 2004. The
estimated cost for UV design and validation is $9.5 million; the estimated UV construction cost is $34 million.
Low levels of coliform bacteria have been detected in the plant's finished water system and at the inlet of the
Town of Marlborough's distribution system. Staff have implemented a number of measures in an attempt to
address this low level presence of coliform. The exact "root" cause of the coliform occurrences is still not clear.
During the upcoming fall/winter half-plant operation, staff will clean sediment from the finished water storage
tank and other areas within the treatment process.
Installation of UV disinfection at the CWTP should provide an additional layer of inactivation. At this time, staff
recommend continuing to pursue UV disinfection design; keeping within the regulatory timetable is MWRA's
best course of action as there is insufficient evidence at this time to justify changing that course.
Mr. Mannering asked if the bacteria were at the pump station or in the City of Marlborough. Mr. Trubiano
responded that it is in the water treatment plant, right after the ozone tank, between ozonation and chlorination.
Mr. Hornbrook noted that staff was aggressively dealing with the problem. Ms. Hicks expressed concern that a
significant amount of money is invested in the plant to have a big problem with bacteria. Steve Estes-
Smargiassi, Director of Planning, noted that no one expected this problem to'develop; not the Authority nor its
advisors, including EPA and DEP. Mr. Laskey noted that at the end of the process, the water is clean; this.is
merely a pocket of bacteria that we are working to eliminate.
This summary does not include every item discussed by the Board, nor the full extent of the discussions. Please contact Cinistine Hevelone-
BylerattheAdvisoryBoardofce withquesdons, comments or requests for more information.
11 \
~I
Page 1 of 2
L1G PAS
Schena, Paula
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Wednesday; October 31, 2007 8:35 AM
To: 'Dr. David Waldman'; Reading - Selectmen
Cc: Schena, Paula
Subject: RE: Opposition to the split tax rate
Dear Dr. Waldman:
Thank you for sending an email to the Board of Selectmen. The Board has adopted a policy of not
sending substantive responses to emails in order to try to stay in compliance with the Commonwealth's
open meeting law which prohibits policy discussions by the Board outside of an open public meeting.
Please understand that the Board values your input on issues and your correspondence will be included
in the materials circulated to the Board prior to its next meeting and it is available as part of the public
record. The Board has tentatively scheduled the hearing on Tax Classification for November 20,.
If you want to have a personal discussion of the issue with a member of the Board, we hold "office"
hours in Reading Town Hall before the first regularly scheduled meeting of each month - November '6,
2007, at 6:30 PM in the first floor conference room.
Thank you again for contacting the Board of Selectmen.
Ben Tafoya
Secretary
Reading Board of Selectmen
I/c Board of Selectmen
From: Dr. David Waldman [mailto:drdave@waldmanchiropractic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 5:48 PM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: Opposition to the split tax rate
Dear Selectman,
I'm writing to you in opposition of the split tax rate. I recently purchased a commercial piece of property here in
Reading and relocated my Chiropractic business. I relocated here in June of this year because I love the location
and also because there is a uniform tax rate.
As a physician if my taxes on my property are to go up there is no way for me to pass on the costs to my patients
because I'm only reimbursed according to what rates insurance companies have set.
If this split tax rate is to ensue it will strain all physicians. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Dr. David M. Waldman
Waldman Chiropractic
2 Haven St. Suite #203
10/31/2007
Page 2 of 2
Reading, MA 01867
Tel. 781-944-5400
Fax 781-944-5405
www.WaldmanChiropractic.com
.i
s J1
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.13/1099 - Release Date: 10/30/2007 10:06 AM
C Ab
J
J
10/31/2007
gas
Schena, Paula
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:17 AM
To: 'John and Mary Ellen O'Neill'
Cc: McIntire, Ted; Reading - Selectmen; Schena, Paula
Subject: RE: Question on Leaves
Attachments: By-Law 5.3.doc
N
By-Law 5.3.doc (40
KB)
Mary Ellen
This is the section of the Town bylaw that addresses this issue. The Police Department
will be on the lookout for violations as time permits. If you know of specific instances
you can report those directly to the RPD.
Pete
1/c Board of Selectmen
-----Original Message-----
From: John and Mary Ellen O'Neill [mailto:mjconeill@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 10:38 AM
To: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Subject: Question on Leaves
Hi Peter,
I wanted to know if there is any approach to this issue. In the past week I've seen three
examples of people blowing leaves into the street or sidewalk.
Last week as I walked along Temple St. a woman was using her lawnmower to blow the leaves
off the sidewalk along the side of her house (she's at the
bend) into Temple Street. On Saturday morning as I drove down Mineral St. a homeowner was
using a leafblower to blow the leaves off the sidewalk and tree lawn in front of house
into the street. (Last year this man put all these leaves throughout the season on the
street and over the winter his truck and his wife's SW ground them down.)
Then yesterday I was walking back from the RMLD along Ash St. and two workers (non-English
speaking) with leaf blowing equipment were blowing the back area around Jiffy Lube into
Ash St., over to the sidewalk where I was walking, trying unsuccessfully to reach the
brush between the dental office at 198 Ash St. 'and the RR tracks. I told them they were
making a-mess, etc., as I walked over the debris on the sidewalk and they just smiled and
pointed at the scrubby brush area-they had been trying to blow it into.
In the fall I often remember the sad story of the young man from Reading (Steve Baccari)
who died on his way to take the SATs one fall morning when his car skidded on wet leaves
and crashed. (This happened a couple of years before we came to Reading.)
I think that people who rake or sweep their leaves are more apt to bag them, but the leaf
blowers have made people think about other ways of cleaning up in front of their property.
Is there any way we can encourage people not to do this?
Thanks,
Mary Ellen
1
5.3 Anti-Litter
5.3.1 Definitions
For the purpose of this Bylaw, the following terms, phrases, words and their
derivations shall have the meaning given herein. When not inconsistent with the
context, words used in the present tense include the future, words used in the
plural number include the singular number, and words used in the singular
number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not
merely directory.
5.3.1.1 Private Receptacle: A litter storage and collection receptacle as
required or authorized in the Town.
5.3.1.2 Commercial Handbill: Any printed or written matter, any sample or
device, circular, leaflet, pamphlet, paper, booklet or any other printed or
otherwise reproduced original or copy of any matter of literature:
5.3.1.2.1 Which advertises for sale any merchandise, product,
commodity or thing; or
5.3.1.2.2 Which directs attention to any business or mercantile or
commercial establishment or other activity for the purpose
of either directly or indirectly promoting the interest thereof
by sales; or
5.3.1.2.3 Which directs attention to or advertises any meeting,
theatrical performance, exhibition or event of any kind for
which an admission fee is charged for the purpose of
private gain or profit; but the terms of this section shall
not apply where an admission fee is charged or a
collection is taken up for the purpose of defraying the
expenses incident to such meeting, theatrical performance,
exhibition or event of any kind, when either of the same is
held, given or takes place in connection with the
dissemination of information which is not restricted under
the ordinary rules of decency, good morals, public peace,
safety and good order, PROVIDED that nothing contained
in this section shall be deemed to authorize the holding,
giving or taking place of any meeting, theatrical
performance, exhibition or event of any kind, without a
license, where such license is or may be required by any
laws of this Commonwealth or under any bylaw of this
Town; or
5.3.1.2.4 Which, while containing reading matter other than
advertising matter is predominantly and essentially an
advertisement, and is distributed or circulated for
advertising purposes or for the private benefit and gain
of any person so engaged as advertiser or distributor.
5.3.1.3 Garbage: Putrescible animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the
handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food.
5.3.1.4 Litter: Garbage, refuse and rubbish as defined herein and all other
waste material which, if thrown or deposited as herein prohibited, tends
to create a danger to public health, safety and welfare.
5.3.1.5 Newspaper: Any newspaper of general circulation as defined by
general law, any newspaper duly entered with the Post Office
Department of the United States, in accordance with federal statute or
regulation, and any newspaper filed and recorded with any recording
officer as provided by general law; and, in addition thereto, shall mean
and include any periodical or magazine regularly published and
distributed to the public.
5.3.1.6 Non-Commercial Handbill: Any printed or written matter, any sample
or device, circular, leaflet, pamphlet, newspaper, magazine, paper,
booklet or any other printed or otherwise reproduced original or copy of
any matter of literature not included in the aforesaid definitions of
commercial handbill or newspaper.
5.3.1.7 Park: A park, reservation, playground, beach, recreation center or any
other public area in the Town, owned or used by the Town, and devoted
to recreation or conservation.
5.3.1.8 Person: Any. person, firm, partnership, association, corporation,
company or organization of any kind.
5.3.1.9 Private Premises: Any dwelling, house, building or other structure,
designed or used either wholly or in part for private residential purposes,
whether inhabited or temporarily or continuously uninhabited or vacant
and shall include any yard, grounds, walk, driveway, porch, steps,
vestibule or mailbox belonging or appurtenant to such dwelling, house,
building or other structure.
5.3.1.10 Public Place: Any and all streets, sidewalks, boulevards, alleys or other
public ways and any and all public parks, squares, spaces, grounds and
buildings.
5.3.1.11 Refuse: All putrescible and nonputrescible solid wastes (except body
wastes), including.garbage, rubbish, ashes, street cleaning, dead animals,
abandoned automobiles or trucks and solid market and industrial wastes.
5.3.1.12 Rubbish: Nonputrescible solid wastes consisting of both combustible
and non-combustible wastes, such as paper, wrappings, cigarettes,
cardboard, tin cans, yard clippings, leaves, wood, glass, bedding,
crockery and similar materials.
5.3.1.13 Vehicle: Every device in, upon or by which any persons or property is or
may be transported or drawn upon a highway, including devices used
exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
5.3.2 Litter in Public Places
No person shall throw or deposit litter in or upon any street, sidewalk or other
public place within the Town except in public receptacles, in authorized private
receptacles fo.r collection or in official Town dumps or incinerators.
5.3.3 Placement of Litter in Receutacles so as to Prevent Scatterine
Persons placing litter in public receptacles or in authorized private receptacles shall
do so in such a manner as to prevent it from being carried or deposited by the
elements upon any street, sidewalk or other public place or upon private property.
5.3.4 Sweenine Litter into Gutters Prohibited
No person shall sweep into or deposit in any gutter, street or other public space
within the Town any accumulation of litter or construction materials from any
building or lot or fiom any public or private sidewalk or driveway. Persons owning
or occupying property shall keep the sidewalk in front of their premises free of litter.
5.3.5 Merchants Dutv to Keep Sidewalks Free of Litter
No person.owning or occupying a place of business shall sweep into or deposit in
any gutter, street or other public place within the Town the accumulation of litter
from any building or lot or from any public or private sidewalk or driveway. Persons
owning or occupying places of business within the Town shall keep the sidewalk in
front of their business premises free of litter.
5.3.6 Litter Thrown by Persons from Vehicles
No person, while a driver or passenger in a vehicle, shall throw or deposit litter upon
any street or other public place within the Town or upon private property.
5.3.7 Truck Loads Causins Litter
No person shall drive or move any truck or other vehicle within the Town unless
such vehicle is so constructed or loaded to prevent any load, contents or litter from
being blown or deposited upon any street, alley or other public or private place, and
all such persons and vehicles, when so required, shall be duly licensed according to
the provisions of the General Laws of the Commonwealth and the Rules,
Regulations and Bylaws of the Town.
5.3.8 Litter in Parks
No person shall throw or deposit litter in any park within the Town except in public
receptacles, and in such a manner that the litter will be prevented from being carried
or deposited by the elements upon any part of the park or upon any street or other
public place. Where public receptacles are not provided, all such litter shall be
carried away from the park by the person responsible for its presence and properly
disposed of elsewhere as provided herein.
5.3.9 Litter in Fountains
No person shall throw or deposit litter in any fountain, pond, stream, river or any
other body of water in a park or elsewhere within the Town.
5.3.10 Throwine or Distributing Commercial Handbills in Public Places
J
Page 1 of 3
L c- is V_> S:
Schena, Paula
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:52 AM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Cc: Schena, Paula
Subject: FW: [MassClerks] more Primary ballot info
Paula - I/c BOS
From: Johnson, Cheryl
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:48 AM
To: Hechenbleikner, Peter; LeLacheur, Bob
Subject: FW: [MassClerks] more Primary ballot info
I thought the Town Clerks would be interested in the information I just received from
Representative Walrath's office this morning.
Linda Hathaway
Stow
AMENDMENT WOULD ADD CASINO REFERENDUM TO PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
BALLOT
By Jim O'Sullivan
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, NOV. 14, 2007....Pro-casino lawmakers want Massachusetts
voters going to the polls early next year to choose their presidential nominees to pick also
whether the state should allow casinos.
An amendment that casino advocates in the Legislature hope to tack onto a bill moving up the
state's presidential primary date would put on the same ballot a non-binding referendum
asking whether voters want resort-style casinos here.
Lead sponsor Sen. Michael Morrissey (D-Quincy), who said Wednesday his staff was still
writing the amendment, said the question would not test whether voters approved of gambling
facilities in their own municipalities. The referendum would ask whether they approved of up to
three casinos in the Commonwealth.
If the amendment survives the legislative process, including a House skeptical of gambling, it
could go before an electorate that favors casinos, polls show, although enthusiasm wanes `
~Tioif Vnir (trrn+^Ap
11/15/2007
Page 2 of 3
when the facilities are sited nearby. Gov. Deval Patrick's expanded gambling plan requires
each municipality to approve a casino individually
"It's a unique opportunity to give people some kind of input," said Morrissey, a casinos
supporter. "With a million people or more coming out to vote in February, why don't we ask the
people who matter, the public?"
Through a spokesman, Gov. Patrick declined to comment.
The Legislature could take up the primary date-change, moving the Bay State's vote from
March 4 to February 5, as early as this week.
Morrissey said he spoke "briefly" about his plan with Secretary of State William Galvin. "I don't
think he wants to screw up the primary bill, and that would not be my intention," Morrissey said.
"We'll see what happens. It's one of those things that I think would be well within the purview of
what should be allowed to go. on the ballot."
But one top elections official said the prospect of placing a policy referendum on primary
ballots "would be an issue," because voters registered with political affiliations that are not up
to party status would be excluded.
"Although it's non-binding, the issue is that people who are registered in political
designations cannot vote in party primaries. That's why you do not see referendums on
primary ballots," said Michelle Tassinari, director of Secretary of State William Galvin's
elections division.
According to Galvin's office, as of last year, the Libertarian political designation counted 19,253
Bay State residents, the Green-Rainbow listed 7,440, and the Socialist designation had 2,349.
A statewide referendum on gambling, with potentially large implications on how Patrick's plan
fares on Beacon Hill, would likely ignite monumental lobbying and campaign spending efforts
from both sides, even in a compressed time period between now and February.
"I don't know that you would get a campaign going one way or the other," Morrissey said. "With
the speaker talking about taking this up in the spring, it could be a nice prelude to the issue."
Both Morrissey and Rep. Brian Wallace, the South Boston Democrat who agreed to carry the
amendment in the House, predicted a referendum would pass if put before presidential primary
voters.
Wallace pointed to election results last Tuesday, when three cities - Pittsfield, Worcester, and
Chicopee - approved casino referenda. "I just think people want a say on it," he said.
Wallace said the amendment would likely clear the Senate, which has historically favored
expanded gambling, but face "a rougher time in the House," where Speaker Salvatore DiMasi
11/15/2007
~ ~ti
Page 3 of 3
has so far been critical of Patrick's proposal.
A DiMasi spokesman declined to comment.
Critics of the Legislature say lawmakers have repeatedly denied the will of the voters,
mentioning binding ballot laws that were approved but never fully executed, including initiative
petitions rolling back the income tax rate to 5 percent and authorizing a public campaign
financing system. Gay marriage opponents and universal health care supporters more recently
excoriated the Legislature for not allowing their proposals to go before voters statewide.
-END-
Need background about policy issues and the history of current news stories?
http://www.issuesource.org
http://www.statehousenews.com
Messages in tlus topic (1 Reply (via web post) I Start a new tonic
Messages I Files ( Photos Links
IX-AETC3 „GRaUPS
Chanife settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch deliverv to Daily_ Digest Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group I Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use ( Unsubscribe.
11/15/2007
Page 1 of 1
yc-, cos
Schena, Paula
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 8:16 AM
To: Iron ron; Reading - Selectmen
Cc: Schena, Paula
Subject: RE: police officers conducting them selves in a respectful order
Dear Ron:
Thank you for sending an email to the Board of Selectmen. The Board has adopted a policy of not
sending substantive responses to emails in order to try to stay in compliance with the Commonwealth's
open meeting law which prohibits policy discussions by the Board outside of an open public meeting.
Please understand that the Board values your input on issues and your correspondence will be included
in the materials circulated to the Board prior to its next meeting and it is available as part of the public
record. The Board members will have a chance to comment during an upcoming public meeting.
If you want to have a personal discussion of the issue with a member of the Board, we hold "office"
hours in Reading Town Hall before the first regularly scheduled meeting of each month at 6:3.0 PM in
the first floor conference room.
Thank you again for contacting the Board of Selectmen.
Ben Tafoya
Secretary
Reading Board of Selectmen
I/c Board of Selectmen
From: ron ron [mailto:landlord42003@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 3:52 PM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: police officers conducting them selves in a respectful order
when a police officers that do not conduct them selves in a respectful order. when addressing the public,
in a every day matter like when you open the door to them . and then close it . and the police officers
force there way in to the house without a search warrent and assault tenants. and the police cheif does
nothing to correct it. then the town needs to correct the problems. also when a police officer is working
special detail and parks his private vehicle on a owners property, and owner asked that he move it cause
someone is being pickup for medical appointments or other reasons. police turns'around and tells him to
get lost and starts swearing at him. is not conducting him self in a respectful matter. police supervor was
called sent a car down to talk to police officer on special duty to move his vehicle gets in vehicle and
starts swearing at owner is not conducting himself in a respectful manner. and issues like explained need
to be addressed and corrected.police cheif needs to correct his men or you need to replace him with
someone that will.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com `
11/6/2007
.