Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011-08-23 Board of Selectmen Handout
DRAFT MOTIONS BOARD OF SELECTMEN MOTIONS AUGUST 23, 2011 Anthony, Goldy, Tafoya, Bonazoli, Schubert Hechenbleikner 5a) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing on the Wine Bunker Liquor License pledge of license. Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the pledge of license by Peter J. Donovan d/b/a The Wine Bunker to Leader Bank. 5b) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing establishing the ad hoc Committee on Amplified Sound in the Parks. Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the policy establishing the ad hoc Committee on Amplified Sound in the Parks. 4a) Move that the Board of Selectmen accept the report of the Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee and confirm the following appointments to the following Boards, Committees and Commissions: ® Petra Conboy to a position on the ad hoc Committee, on Amplified Sound in the Parks for a term expiring December 31, 2011; ® Robyn Parker to a position on the Historical Commission for a term expiring June 30, 2013; Judith Smith and Nancy Genevieve to Associate positions on the Historical Commission with terms expiring June 30, 2012 5c) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the interlocal services agreement between the Town of Reading and City of Melrose for public health services. 5d) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the special liquor license for Dermot Bolger for the Fall Street Faire on 9-11-11, subject to the following conditions: ® Only beer and wine will be served ® All beer and wine will be stored in the event area only ® Patrons will not be allowed to order beer and/or wine at a service 6) bar. All service to patrons will be to patrons seated at a table ® No beverages will be removed from the event area ® Barriers surrounding the entire perimeter of the event space are subject to approval by the Chief of Police ® There will be only one exit/entrance to the event area for patrons.. This entrance/exit point will be staffed by a host/manager at all times. ® A police detail will be required starting '/z hour prior to the opening and remaining at least 1/2 hour after closing or until area is safely closed. ® Every person serving alcohol will be Tips, Barcode or SafeServe certified. ® There shall be no self service of any alcohol beverage. 6a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of June 14, 2011 as amended. 6b) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of August 2, 2011 as amended. 8a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the Executive Session minutes of August 2, 2011 as written. CA SG BT JB RS Move that the Board of Selectmen adjourn the meeting at p.m. TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT Tuesday, August 23, 2011 Administrative matters o MP.O Election ® Proposed legislation re utility rate restrictions ® CPDC hearing on regulations re minor site plan review ® City of Boston proposed truck hazardous materials routing ® Assistance to Reading KS. ® I have received the qualifications for 5 managers for Oye's Restaurant pursuant to the Board of Selectmen's direction and find all of them qualified to meet the requirements of the liquor policy. ® A former candidate for attorney general, has filed a complaint with the US Department of Justice accusing local officials of failing to count write-in votes in last September's GOP primary for state attorney general. ® Chamber of Commerce "Buy Local" program Community Services * Conservation Commission review of bylaw and regulations. 153 surveys completed to date. The Board of Selectmen, has received.a copy of the results. * As of last month we. have received $4,384.50 in additional donations for the Veterans Flowers trust. fund E-Cars on the former Artist Shoppe site - Under Construction. Oaktree - under construction ® Reading Woods (aka AWP or Pulte Homes) -under construction. ® Calereso's - under construction ® Pierce Organ factory Town approvals . Office re-use - MassBank building next to the Olde Reading Butcher Shoppe - under construction Finance ® Three months of meals tax equaling $74,680.92 has been received - this is well above our FYI 2 budget of $150,000 for the whole year. Library Future of building project E-books and downloadable materials are available at the RPL - circulation has increased over 80% Public Safety ® RCA - Reading Community Alerts - Sign up for "opt in" feature (1) Public Works ® MWRA water interconnection with Stoneham -see attached email ® MWRA water redundancy project - under design o MASSDOT is 'beginning the design process for resurfacing Main Street. It was last done in 1986. 1 do not expect work to be done for at least a year. ® Installation of sample tree well material in downtown - 2 trees Rubbish and .recycling - what to do if you have an event that will create more rubbish than the limit - contact JRM fora special pick up - up to 5 bags for $10 ® Paper Shredding, Rigid Plastics recycling.- by popular demand 9/24/11 * From FY10 to FY11 trash tonnage is down 15%, equaling an approx. $80,000 savings, o Recycling is up 18%, and is approaching 30% from approx. 20% in FY10. o We now have 2 "Big Belly" solar trash compactors/ recycling units in downtown Household Hazardous Waste Collection 9/24/11 in Wakefield o Fall leaf collection - 10/31-11/4, 11/14-11/18, 11/28-1,2/2 Construction projects Causeway Road - Preparatory work is done - pending roadway paving schedule ® Roadway Paving: Micro-Seal the contractor has reviewed the roadways, and work should begin in the first half of September. Aggregate is still preparing the mix designs, when we spoke to them last they still had over half the mix designs to complete. ® Memorial Park: DPW has cleaned the drainage channel. We are getting prices from contractors to repair\rebuild loose masonry. ® Haverhill Street Water Main: Contract awarded.. MWRA zero interest loan. River Study Contract under negotiation * Storm Water Mapping. Vendor selected - Negotiating price Dates and Events: Observance of 9-11-01 Terror Attacks - September 11, 2011 - 0 10 am at RMHS -dedication of Memorial 0 11:30 am - Town Common ® Reading Fall Street Faire - September 11, 2011 - noon to 5 PM; 5K race starts at 10 am ® Paper Shredding, Rigid Plastics recycling - Fall program by popular demand 9/24/11 at DPW ® Household Hazardous Waste Collection 9/24/11 in Wakefield, Fall curb-side leaf collection - 10/31-11/4, 11/14-11/18, 11/28-12/2 (q) SurveyMagik:: Re suits http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.neVresults/sid/ 1b21b0d1 c20b... ~a"-m ~~l~~v #~-•~jYLC~ 1.. ~ . (y i r ~~~~f~ ~ - ~9 i~' J.-_: ~ 4. F~ ~ , r y Surveys > Results Options Conservation Permitting Questionnaire - Summer 2011 Show All Show Download Spreadsheet Download PDF I CSV By Taker ( Display by Taker I Manage Labels Print 1. Do you feel that the Reading Wetland Bylaws and regulations are restrictive to business/economic activity? (answered 139 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 19.42% (27) 7.19% (10) 5.04% (7) 0.72% (1) 10.07% (14) 2.16% (3) 6.47% (9) 13.67% (19) 7.91% (11) 27.34% (38) 6.14 2. Do you feel that the Reading Wetland Bylaws and regulations are restrictive to home improvement? (answered 146 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 14.38% (21) 6.16% (9) 3.42% (5) 2.05% (3) 3.42% (5) 2.05% (3) 4.11% (6) 10.96% (16) 9.59% (14) 43.84% (64)'7.16 3. Do the Reading Wetlands Bylaws and regulations serve the needs of the town? Answered: 157 Skipped: 0 Yes (44) No (41) 3z-_ Somewhat (51) Unsure (21) 26% J114LIF- 2831 4. In what capacity have you been exposed to the Reading Wetlands Bylaws and regulations? Answered: 157 Skipped: 0 Applicant (48) Professional providing support (15) 34% -Y- Abutter (53) f s Through others (neighbors, relatives, friends) (76) No exposure (18) Other (16) ~2f 2 p` 5. Do you have experience applying for a Wetlands permit? Answered: 157 Skipped: 0 Yes - in Reading (43) Yes - in other communities (15) Yes - in Reading and other communities (15) No experience (84) 1 of 14 8/23/20112:01 Ply SurveyMagik::Results . http://readingma-survey.virtualtownball.net/results/sid/ lb2lbOdl c20b... For the next five questions, please rate the importance of wetlands and floodplains for the following: 6. Flood control (answered 150 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 2.67% (4) 3.33% (5) 4.67% (7) 2.00% (3) 16.00% (24) 2.67% (4) 5.33% (8) 16.00% (24) 8.00% (12) 39.33% (59) 7.58 7. Water supply protection (answered 150 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 13.33% (20) 6.67% (10) 3.33% (5) 2.67% (4) 12.00% (18) 6.00% (9) 5.33% (8) 7.33% (11) 4.67% (7) 38.67% (58) 6.68 8. Wildlife habitat,protection (answered 152 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 6.58% (10) 4.61% (7) 5.92% (9) 7.89% (12) 15.13% (23) 7.24% (11) 9.21% (14) 8.55% (13) 7.24% (11) 27.63% (42) 6.59 9. Community character (answered 147 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 17.69% (26) 6.80% (10) 2.72% (4) 2.04% (3) 19.73% (29) 6.12% (9) 7.48% (11) 10.88% (16) 4.08% (6) 22.45% (33) 5.84 10. Property values (answered 150 times) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg 16.67% (25) 4.00% (6) 4.00% (6) 2.67% (4) 16.67% (25) 4.00% (6) 5733% (8) 12.00% (18) 4.67% (7) 30.00% (45) 6.30 For the next set of questions, please respond ONLY if you have experience with the wetlands permitting process in Reading: 11. In what capacity have you been exposed to the Reading permitting process? Answered: 85 Skipped: 72 Applicant (48) Professional providing support (12) P9% - Abutter (32) Other (19) r-: 12. Was your experience with the Reading Conservation Commission fair and collaborative? Answered: 84 Skipped: 73 Yes (23) No (38) 27:4 Somewhat (23) r i 45't. - - - - .:F 13. Why or why not? What would you like to see changed? Answered: 60 Skipped: 97 • Very tedious for simple home improvement project. • There was no "reasonable factor"! The decision was made by the CC without any consultation! • Reading is infamous for having brutally strict conservation reules and regulations. That alone makes people want to take their chances and not go through the process. There were extra steps but ultimately I received fair treatment. • Its Fran's way or the, highway • Lengthy process. Too many meetings and extensions by board. Board was rude at times in stating that the conservation property was of more importance than our personal property. Flags were placed and no one came back to remove after one project. • The former Administrator was irrational, aggressive and untruthful at times. The Commission was difficult to work with, applying fee amounts and tree #'s/sizes arbitrarily. 2 of 14 8/23/20112:01 P1v SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/lb21bOdl c20b... • The CC Com has a history of imposing excessive requirements on residents which translates to enormous expense burdens • They did not listen to the professional reasonign as to why somethign needed to be done for safety reasons. Everything was about "protecting the wetlands." What about protecting my children and property from dead trees falling. • Very un-helpful. Only interested in enforcing the wetlands bylaw, not in conservation (i.e., if it's not in the wetlands area, it's not our job - even a hazmat spill that threatens wetlands!). • Fran Fink said one thing at the site and changed her mind at the meeting leaving us totally out in left field. She was a true 2 face costing us over $200K Yes $200K The guidelines by the town are too restrictive. We complied with state but she wanted more which was ridiculous. • Common sense along with the bylaws and its interpretation. If only a small % of one's property falls on the (for example) aquaphor protection district, there should be some adjustment for that in terms of pervious vs. impervious cover. Additionally, Reading needs to be more up-to-date and amendable to current advances in products and materials that ARE considered to be pervious and enable homeowner's to use such materials and not count against their impervious allowance. • I believe they are working in the best interest of Reading, their citizens and habitat. I called once and they were very., very helpful. • Wetlands protection is really over rated. • Overall I felt that the commission (in recent years) has been fair. The extreme restrictions, however, in the Aquifer protection district are exceedingly unfair. The financial burden that is being placed, particularly on homeowners, is incredible. • The Conservation Commission was very careful to get both sides presented, and made every effort to make a fair and balanced assessment, following the letter and spirit of the law but also responding to the questions and concerns of the abutters and the applicant. • Businesses taking water from the Aberjona. (Polinski tree)The man told me he could take 100,000 gallons a day. From a dry creek? (During a hot and dry period.) • Very strict and unwilling to listen to proposed plans - my wetlands are more or less 1+ acres and 5% of it is used for water run off from street (where my usable yard abuts) - pipes could easily be extended to allow for homeowner yard plans to be allowed and possibly extend to enter existing large concrete structure used for Main St run off. Allow some common sense to better living for all. State wetland lines differ from town plans. • The board is great. Fran Fink's behavior is disgusting. I almost moved because of her. She has no idea what she is doing and you have to challenge her answers to prove her wrong. She is unreasonable and if she had it her way she would not let anyone improve their property. I have never met an a person as unpleasant as her in my life! • There is a double standard for town use or public use and private use. We have a cematary o Charles St that filled in a wet land. We have a medical building built in a swamp ...a low income house built on town land with a little brook behind it,yet you can't put a porch on a private home or even a deck if there arewet lands in the rear or the lot. • It not only was time consuming and cumbersome but it was ridiculously and unneccessai*ily expensive. The Committee and the Administrator (who should have been fired for fraud, bullying and lying long before she retired)were horrific to work with and I felt attacked and unsafe every time I had to interact with them. • The town administrator and some members of the committee clearly have an agenda of their own and act to discourage applicants from doing anything - either by making the process as painful as possible or by adding costs to the project through fees and the need for costly plans and experts, forced planting of trees or other requirements. They should be looking at how they can help people get their projects done, not stopping them from doing them, especially on private property. • It is a very long and tedious process which requires people to come back multiple times and spend money needlessly. • Attempt to resolve issues during first visit rahter than being required to return repeatedly.Some of the members were very fair and willing to work for a solution that worked for everyone. Others were focused on their own agenda rather than the overall balance of the issues. • Aquifer District bulding restrictions above and beyond any state regs. need to be abolished. They are completely outdated because of MWRA and absurd compared to the treatment of other wetlands in Town, • Too restrictive; No logic due to new water supply (mass, not Reading). Against all new technologies and materials: Abuse of power as there is no logical reasoning or fair compromise in every single decision. • We were pretty much told what to do in order to comply. No give and take. A very weird feeling to have to give up your land that you're paying taxes on. • The idea of "if we make a change for you, we'd have to do it for everybody." In my opinion, each case is different, and should not be bound by that theory. • More variances and less regulation • Most of teh Commission members are reasonable, but they did not seem to have the ability to be flexible and use common sense. • She was not very helpful in aiding me with information on what could be changed, it was her way or no way • more inspectional services • Too many rules that got in the way of common sense. • commission imposed much tougher restrictions than the CC had recommended. Was very difficult to work with. Personnel has all changed since our experience. • The committee has a hidden agenda to prevent any building, development, property improvements they can in the name of "environmental protection." They habitually overstep their responsibilies and authority. They use bullying and misrepresentation to intimidate and threaten people who do not know the rules they way they do. They need to realize their job is to make sure that permits are issued according to the law and nothing more. They are not here to expand wetlands or animal habitat, etc. The also need to give the benefit of the doubt to the applicant rather than treat people like everyone is out to destroy the environment which just isnt true. 3 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/1b21bOdl c20b... • More stringent and time consuming • I have seen other professionals who did not do very professional work who ignored feedback given by the commission. In those cases, it is hard to be collaborative. • The Commission is much fairer than in the past. • she is ridiculously unfair. I would change the Conservation Administrator (Fran Fink) • The interaction with the RCC immediately and unnecessarily took on an adversarial tone. My issue/application was minor in nature with little disagreement regarding outcome or process, yet the commission and the application process was perceived as laborious and adversarial in nature. • Board indifference We pay taxes for property we cannot touch and have to pay more money to the town to make any improvements within 100' that have no adverse effects to the conservation land. • Rules are rules. Where is the room for collaboration? • Cannot respond as I have not read the bylaws and do not comprehend what needs to be. changed. My exposure was years ago. • The need for multiple surveys adds huge costs to applicants. Also the need to certified notices to abutters within 300 ft adds lots of cost. • The Commission basically operates fairly, but it allows itsef to micromanage gardening projects. Inconsistancies among FAQs, bylaws and permits as to the Commissions proper role in buffer zone management is obviously a problem to be addressed. • I have lived here for 32 years and have always maintained my yard. The majority of my yard, a quarter of an acre, is within 100 feet of Wetlands. However, this year an abutter issued a complaint to the CC against me for planting hemlock trees along our fence, 1 year and 8 months after we planted the hemlocks. CC ordered us to pay $50.00 for a planting plan plus provide a receipt of the work done. We did that. Shortly after that we hired an arborist to prune trees in our yard. That day Fran Finkel came to my house and asked me to stop the work going on due a complaint from the same abutter. Work stopped until a permit was issued for the work, but the pruning that we had planned along our back fence to the abutter was stopped. Ceasing the work for that amount of time cost me an additional couple thousand dollars. This abutter seems to have a personal vendetta against me. It is not fair that I am the only neighbor who has to follow this procedure when my abutting neighbors don't. In the meantime there have been real violations against the Wetland by-laws, but no complaints have been filed.'For the first time in over 32 years, I met with the Town Manager to brief him on this situation plus talk with him about notifying the police. I am afraid of this abutter. • The bylaws are unfair and so far out of wack that they are usually twice as strict as the state level. These force people to try for a 40B just to get a permit when all options have been exhausted. Most originally wanted to build nice homes, but instead were forced to file for a 40B just to build and now you have tons of condos with 40B residents who only bring down the home values and bring in a lower class of people. Why do you think Readingm90s quota for 40B permits is always filled every year? I have heard stories of the committee members just driving by pulling over and walking onto a persona®®s private property to inspect it without the owners®Os knowing. I am pretty sure unless you are a police officer that is illegal. They also move the flags on the property which has already been professionally done, which I have not ever heard of being done in the other two towns I have lived in. They also demand evidence for issues that do not concern the wetlands committee. These people are not here to help the town; they are environmental extremists that I equate to the people who protest at military funerals. They have gone past the point of ethical and fair many years ago. The man on the committee who goes around in search of vernal pools should be terminated along with all of the committee members. Reading has the most certified vernal pools in this area. He needs to be stopped. He is only hurting the to=5,00s potential. Every lawyer and environmentalist I have dealt with had the same reaction when I said I wanted to build in reading. First they say Reading is the worst and toughest town around for any wetlands permit and even try to talk me out of it before I show them the property. That is your towns®®s reputation. • Homeowner usually has a better understanding of the property than the commitee members • Not aware of where it has failed • Conservation commission took it upon themselves to overrule the professional botanist and move their flags to determine wetlands. They are not qualified or certified to do so, • Fran Fink is completely unreasonable and extremely difficult to work with! • I was just TOLD that my requests would not be approved before my application was even submitted • Over protective... only added on to my deck and had to "give back" to feet of my property... had to add "native plants" that were promptly eaten by "native" deer. Costly and confusing and not user friendly. • Thet are too restrictive on minor home modifications. A new residential roof should not require a wetlands permit. • Volunteer members are overworked and this can delay approvals. Also they seem to have little power when dealing with town projects that impact abutters (e.g. Barrows addition increasing neighborhood flooding) • After con com visited my house I had no say in the outcome. My project never had any impact in wetlands. all they wanted was me to spend thousands of dollars and postponed my project. in the end was ordered to do what I had proposed in the beginning. • commission provides comments and feedback, not always directive. • Manner in which decisions are administered. Fear and intimidation should not be part of the equation. • The excessive conservativeness of the Commission's by-laws. I would like a more standardized approach, i.e. the use of State Codes. • did not have to go in front of them... no place to put n/a 4 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PN. SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingma-survey.vhtualtownhall.net/results/sid/ 1b21bOdl c20b... 14. Was your experience with the Reading Conservation Agent fair and collaborative? Answered: 81 Skipped: 76 Yes (19) No (39) Somewhat (23) 4B% 2B% 22.% 15. Why or why not? What would you like to see changed? Answered: 55 Skipped: 102 • The opportunity to voice your need. • Not very understanding of the homeowner. In this position, there has to be a fair assessment. YOu cannot just think about the wetlands. YOu have to understand that people need to improve their lives and their families lives and that the owenership of their land means something. But again, in the end I was treated fairly. I just would have preferred that treatment from the start. • See above comments • Again, Ms. Fink, while clearly hard working, was the most difficult individual I've ever had the misfortune to have to interact with. She has left quite a stain on the Town's reputation. Greatly reduce the power of the CC Com, and institute an appellate process to mitigate the excessive requirements. • Less intrusive bylaws that allowed people to improve their porperty, and thus improve the value of their property. • Conservation agent was arbitrary in her interpretation, and kept making up new restrictions, rules, and measures (at the cost of the Town for three public projects). Did not confine her levying of requirements on conservation-affected parts of the property - delved into traffic engineering, landscape design, and similar areas that are the responsibility of others. Could not provide a definitive checklist (do these six things and I will sign oft). Rampant, arbitrary 'opinion' that she thought had the force of law. • As i stated she was 2 faced. Said oh no problems here then threw us to the wolves before the cpdc so of course we were unprepared and lost. • The head. of the department (I assume that is who you are referring to) was very black and white, there was/is no middle area and it seems largely unfair to smaller home owners who want to do something (addition) to their current home in taste and within reason, when there are so many enormous homes in Reading that clearly have bent the rules, etc. Like to see changed is a more collaborative Agent and Commission. We appreciate the hard work this board does, and that the goal is to protect the environment, but there should be some wiggle-room for the average homeowner. • They were very helpful and understanding. • Homeowners should have the right to their property to improve their life. • Face to face meetings start out extremely open and favorable. However, by the time the narrative is distributed at the public hearing, items appear that have never been discussed nor seem appropriate. The financial costs seem exorbitant in many circumstances. • Fran is excellent and skilled. Why on earth the town felt it appropriate to cut back on the hours for the position and subsequently to post the position at half time is beyond me - it is a full time job clearly, and Fran was doing it very well. • loosen up a little for homeoweners. Big business can take over a wetland area but homeowners dont have a chance - town revenue is important from big business but lets be equal • see above- She is a nasty person! • Some of the laws are rediculous.... • See comment to #4. 1 hope the Town hires someone who does not have a personal agenda and has a fair and balanced approach to their job instead of the irrational bully Fran Fink. • If you disagree with the Administrator or question her in any way, you are going to pay. She inflames nearly every situation if she doesn't get her way and some of the Commission members back her up and encourage her to be the bully. You want to take down one tree next to your foundation and she wants you to plant 10 replacements. We need someone who can protect residents with the same passion they protect the wetlands with. She is not fair or reasonable unless you see it her way. • There was absolutely no flexibility or partnership. • FRan Fink was difficult to deal with. She often mischaracterized statements, snet letters whhc were inconsistant wiht the Board's findings, reflected her personal view point and had, no respect for the cost and delay. It was clear that she was not paying for engineers and lawyers. Her goal seesm to be to thwart any development whether it is good for the town or not. • See # 3 • No discussion possible. Not open to new technologies and materials that can solve problems. Incensitive to financial consequences for residents of outdated bylaws. Need q modern and realistic view of the issues. • see above, it just didn't feel right having to sign off on the contingencies. • In my case, a change was made to my lot AFTER I purchased it...made it almost impossible to sell. As a result of no change, in my opinion, a building was built that really adds nothing to the landscape of Reading, when in fact a better building could 5 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingrna-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/ 1b21bOdl c20b... have been built, adding to the character of the town. • Less strict • Staff (now retired) was too strident and unflexible, even to the point of disagreeing and arguing with the Conservation Commission. No understanding of the cost of requests on the property owner. • see above • less paperwork • too much quoting regulations • see above • Terrible, just terrible. Unfair, bully, no common sense at all, disrespectful, intimidating, liar. Always looking for problems rather than solutions. We need someone who helps people not tries to hurt them to advance their personal agenda of environmental protection. • Very stringent and time consuming - application of regs was overkill for proposed DPW project • The conservation agent's job is to protect the functions and values of the wetlands. From that perspective, the agent was fair. • Information/Concerns of the Agent were not always given to the applicant early enough to respond timely. Agent comments were not restricted to wetlands bylaw. • Tha commission was somewhat fair; but the administrator has a huge influence on their decision. • Sometimes common sense should prevail • Frances Fink (retired) was nice to work with. Very professional. • Question is unclear. He was pleasant but since I had few options, there was no reason to be difficult. • Fran may have been tough but she is fair to work with. There are times some of the small nits could be eliminated... they just hinder the process and do not result in huge impacts to wetlands. ® I found the Conservatin Agent overly conservative in her interpretation of "likely to alter an area subject to protection". She required permits for pruning and planting (retroactively) of trees when clearly no wetland alterations within the buffer zone could ever be caused to these activities. • I should not have to follow a different set of rules than my neighbors. • Not only was the Reading conservation committee unfair they were overstepping their bounds left and right. My worst experience was as a 20 year old applicant trying to build a small home on a half acre of land. All I have ever wanted was my own house and I always said I would do it before I was 21 and saved-all my teenage years for a chance. I thought I found it in reading with a lovely piece of property. The land was surrounded by homes on all sides and to the right was the high school. I was the only lot left in the entire neighborhood not built upon. Little did I know I didna®®t have a shot in hell. I felt the conservation committee had made their decision even before I came to my first meeting. Not only did they move the flags on my lot they routinely put me through the ringer'about zoning and other issues that had nothing to do with wetlands. They were trying to shut me down with whatever they could do even if it meant by illegal means and using their status to bring up issues that were meant for the zoning board and the building inspector. The flags on the property were put there by a environmentalist who I paid for and went to college for this knowledge. The flags were moved by some town locals on a committee without testing or evidence to move the flags. Fran Fink who I am pretty sure does not have a college education or the man on the committee who I later found out was a truck driver moved my flags. How is that fair or just? A truck driver has the right to move my flags that I paid a professional thousands of dollars to mark out? Then they brought up the right of way on the property which is a zoning issue with no bearing on the wetlands issue. I being a college kid with her head on straight I went to the Cambridge registry of deeds and dug up the right of way document from 100 years ago and brought it back for what was probably my 5th meeting with the conservation. Not only abusing their power but killing a kids O Os dream and taking my entire life savings to pay for lawyers and environmentalists. Not to mention the astronomical fee which was thousands of dollars just to attempt to file for a permission to build. If you went out to the property you would see it was not a long shot it was a logical place to build a home in a nice already established neighborhood. I have all the paper work to back this up from almost 10 years ago and will provide it for proof. These people set me back 5 years in my life financially and I was not only unethical but a prime example of people on a power trip not helping the community. I think this committe is the biggest example why the towns property values are so low and have been even before the recession. Wakefield, Lynnfield, and North Reading all hold their value better than Reading. People I talk to do not want to live in reading because it is a hassle to even plant bushes in your own yard yet they tax you through the nose. The bylaws were created so nobody gets a permit or at least has to spend so much money it is not worth the hassle. These committee people act like police with the right to walk onto private property and demand things as if they are above the law. My friend had to take down his little tree house in his back yard because Fran Fink said it was unhealthy for the tree. Who scouts out a childa®®s tree house walks onto the property and sends out notices to take them down? The wetlands committee is a cancer in the town of reading and until it has all members have been terminated and replaced with new members who are there to serve the town and not their own agendas will this problem be rectified. • any abutter or owner of a proposed wetland/vernal pool should be notified before conservation makes a ruling about its use, and be able to refute the town's position before the land is certified. • on site inspections timely and on time with appointments made • Not aware of where it has failed • Lied, misleading, overstepped her authority and badgered the state DEP when their decision was appealed • Same reasons. when asking about paving, tree removal or any building, project I was told by the agent that none of the improvements to my property would be considered. mostly due to the inappropriate actions of the previous owner • Over manage land that doesn't belong to them and you.get the feeling you have to "beg" to add on to your property or even 0 6 of 14 8/23/20112:01 P1Y. SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/ 1b21bOd 1 c20b... just improve it. • Too one sided. Her way or the highway. Not friendly. • In the end I was made to get new plot pla.ns,file forms with the state hired private reprisentive and when the meeting came was passed with minimal discussion. all could have been handled without what felt like criminal court. • Agent seemed to be trying to be very careful in what she said rather than being really clear. Make it clearer what protections are needed. • same as question 3 • There is no real discussion. The by-law superceeds all decisions and does not allow for practical & reasonable allowances. • Communications were NOT held in confidence. making it unlikely that we would ever report any suspected violations of wet land regulations • it seemed a bit arbitrary although we had a positive outcome. happened timely. 16. How did the Reading Wetland application process compare to other Town permits (e.g. Building permit, etc..)? Answered: 65 Skipped: 92 Similar (13) More cumbersome (52) Simpler (0) 17. Do you have any comments on the application process? Answered: 39 Skipped: 118 • VERY confusing and not a great deal of guidance. • Simplify and decrease the length of time and extensions due to inability of members to meet, tour, read papers. • It is a very lengthy process, with numerous continuances, visits, meetings and unpleasant interactions. All of which created significant anxiety for me and my family. • Needs to be simplified • Sticking with the State's conservation regs would make the process simpler, less subject to interpretation, and better understood by contractors (who deal with all communities in the area). • I think that once a site review is made the reviewer should let the applicant know then and there what their opinion is and not waiver from it.The fact that comcom has to review before bldg can issue a pernit is also inhibiting. This becomes quite timely and costly. We must keep in mind that bldg permits take 2 weeks which is yet a nother issue. Everyone does not know that and many times are left with a job ready to be odne and a two week gap thus loosing the contractor,. • I have not applied personally, but have spoken to a family member who works for the Conservation Dept of another town. I was told that Reading was not as strict. • Maker simpler. • In other towns I have helped owners through the permitting process, the application, the site visits, the helpfulness of the agent, etc., was far less cumbersome and much more informative. • We ourselves did not file the application; we were abutters. At every hearing we have attended, the committee and its staff person have made extra efforts to explain the process. • Half of the application does not apply • expensive... • Even when you are organized and ready and paid professional botanists, engineers and arborists to assist and provide counsel it takes weeks and weeks if not months with unneccessary continuances and the Administrator undoing all the effort by the paid experts. • Its so painful and expensive to try to do anything in Reading. It's like the town looks at permit fees as a fundraising tool • The commission in Reading does tend to visit all sites in question as a matter of policy - but this should be made a requirement especially when the applicant is required to provide a very expensive wetlands survey. • too long, too restrictive • If some of the old laws were to be reconsidered, perhaps fewer applications would need to be filed in the first place. • Any process for local permitting that has such long and extensive orders of conditions or approvals is broken. • Fran is great • Eliminate all the local fees that the commission tacks on to almost every project. • Our issue in building a front porch was whether it was the required 35 ft. from the wetland. It was about 50-60 ft. We had to hire a surveyor & our total cost was over $2,000 for the permitting process. • Generally more effort required • It could be streamlined with better guidance • Fee calculation can be complicated. • Tha process was so lengthly and painful that I almost left this town bwecause of it • duplication of building permit process - why not one process form? 7 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PTV. Surv eyMagik:: Results http://readiDgma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/ 1b21bOdl c20b... • Any application process in this town has appeared to me, in my observations, cumbersome and frustrating to many parties requesting a timely decision. • Need to make it more simple. Some written guidelines may be helpful. The burden of leaving cash deposits to guarantee projects is costly. Also the recording of huge documents is a real pain. Could eliminate one of the surveys as well. Just adds cost to people who are struggling to get by. • No • Permitting for a swimming pool in 1995 required a hearing. • Every department is helpful and fair except for the conservation department. I have spoken to the.building department and the town clerk and both were friendly and helpful. Fran Fink was always unhelpful and rude. She never answered my questions just pushed them off and told me to fill this or that or I needed to pay this amount. She never ever acted interested in helping the residents of this community. She treated me like the enemy. It took years and more money than should ever be necessary to only be denied by the committee. The whole process is just one big expensive set up designed for you to be denied. • yes • No • The conservation commission should be helpful in the process not just negative especially to homeowners who do not have the funds to hire engineers and lawyers for a long battle with the Town of Reading. The commission is there to help the people of Reading not hurt. • Deal more fairly and accomodate homeowners with homes that abut wetlands. The homes were permitted and built and we need the flexibility to maintain our homes and eradicate safety hazards (IE, large dead trees) more simply and fairly. • Overly burdensome • N/A • If the town of reading has money to spend on power hungry officials they should be able and willing to help with the process not hinder or let all applications go directly to the state and disban the local committee. • No. 18. Was the Reading Wetland application process explained adequately? a. In the regulations? b. By the Conservation Administrator? c. By the Conservation Commission? d. By others? Yes No Not applicable 44%40%16% 53%35%13% 44%31%25% 25%22%53% 19. Based on your experience, what specific suggestions do you have for changes to the local wetlands laws or processes? Answered: 48 Skipped: 109 • Why not simply use the states guidelines? THey are very fair and protect the wetlands. Most towns default to them. • The local bylaws are unnecessary given our State laws. If a local bylaw needs to exist it should be carefully redesigned to be balanced and appropriate to aid homeowners/businesses while protecting the environment as appropriate rather than used as a revenue source and a tool to use private property for flood control. • Again, simplify the process and place minimal value on trees. In addition, reduce the surface wetlands so as to reduce potential health risks. • If it is the person's property, let them do what they want, as long as it is reasonable and within simple, clear town laws. • Abolish the local bylaw and revert to the state conservation regs, as most Towns in Mass do. There is no reason for the added layer of burdensome regulation. The state regs protect other towns just fine. • There is no need to have environmental flagging done as much as has been required. I know someone who had to have their property flagged ( even though there was no conservation on their property) just to spread grass seed. • Same as #3 = Two recommendations are namely: a more common sense approach and adjustments allowed depending upon amount of land that is part of the conservation land (for instance) Allow for new materials to be used that are recommended to be pervious. (Answer #3 Common sense along with the bylaws and its interpretation. If only a small % of one's property falls on the (for example) aquaphor protection district, there should be some adjustment for that in terms of pervious vs. impervious cover. Additionally, Reading needs to be more up-to-date and amendable to current advances in products and materials that ARE considered to be pervious and enable homeowner's to use such materials and not count against their impervious allowance.) • I do not have much experience - only conversations. I appreciate the wetland laws greatly and am glad we have them here in Reading. • The Conservation Agent needs to, be more available and willing to guide the applicants through the process. MORE hours that the agent is available to meet with applicants along with knowledgeable support staff is critical, not LESS!!!! In many surrounding towns (i.e. Burlington, Wilmington, etc.) the agent will come to the homeowners property and establish the wetlands line. In Reading, the owner has to hire a botanist, have it surveyed and pay several thousands of dollars for this service only to be told by the agent and the commission at the public hearing that they (the commission and agent) have decided not to agree with the botanist and establish the line in a more restrictive location. Lw 8 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.neVresults/sid/ 1 b21 b0d1 c20b... • Please add a step notifying abutters of continuations of hearings if possible. more leniency for homeowners to use their wetlands that they pay taxes on while still preserving wildlife habitat and flood control. • Don't selle land if you want connuin rights of management • Get rid of the local laws • Be reasonable... • Use the State guidelines as much as possible. Stop making up fees (I can assure you this is absolutely done) that people can't afford and provide the group with some customer service training. • why does Reading need all the additional rules on top of what the state already has. They are just used to beat up people trying to improve their property especially by the administrator and a few members of the commission. Other members are more reasonable. • I feel the State By-laws are more than sufficent and having town by-laws in addition is needless. • THey should be in line with the States. The veneral pools should be reevaluated. • Remove aquifer district building restrictions in excess of normal state wetlands guidelines. • A new board should be established to create guidelines that are more realistic. Not saying to eliminate EVERYTHING, but rather come up with ideas that work for the home owner AND the town. • Get rid of the thirtyfive foot setback • Make it all simpler. Delegate more to ten staff, and hire reasonable staff. Have the Commission give staff direction in terms of customer service and flexibility. See what other communities do to make this process simpler. • It would be helpful if there were one person to guide the process to let you know the process and what to expect. • The regs are too burdensome on the property owners there is no balance. • Eliminate the local laws. They are just used to baffle, confuse and intimidate people. The state should be all we need to protect Reading. • For our situation the paperwork was overwhelming • Need to consider impacts of each application and apply regs/process appropriately; avoid excess with no merit • Streamlining them and providing more background on the functions and values of wetlands might assist in coming to better designs and protections. • Jurisdiction of activities outside the buffer zone is subjective and could include most any project. • HAve less restrictions and work better with the home owners & the common Rather than creating obsticles for them • I understand the need to protect wetlands but when you own that property you cannot retreat into your own yard ( major mosquito and deer fly problems I also don't understand the issue with tree trimmings and clippings. It's all natural and decomposes into the earth. • generally agree that wetlands need to be protected and managed • The rules are somewhat arbitrary. I don't see that the concepts are applied equally to contractors and the average homeowner. • Again, the experience I had was years ago on the Higgins property at Birch Meadow. I have not read the wetlands laws or processes since. ® ELIMINATE the damn Aquifer Protection Zone. Very subjective, penalizes many. Cannot tell why one side of a street is in the zone and the other side is not. Adds bureaucracy to town. People really are upset about this regulation. Adds huge costs to people who exceed the 15%. • 1) Make instructions to the public consistant: FAQs, bylaws and permits. Ordinary homeowners need to be reached so they know clearly what is expected of them. 2) Do not require permits for ordinary lawn and garden maintenance. Reword bylaws to reflect this. Niether the Commission nor the Agent will have the time for low priority items that have negligible environmental impact. 3) Introduce reasonable time limits (statute of limitation) so that complaints cannot be brought against abutters long after a so-called infraction has occurred. 4) Ensure that the Commission and the Agent are in synch. Are there written policies that exist outside of bylaws that can help in this area? 5) Notify each Reading homeowner whose property lies within a buffer zone with a letter detailing exactly what household activities come under Conservation juristication. Make sure this is consistant with the workload Conservation can accept in coming years! • Implement a statute of limitations to complaints. A complaint registered 1 year and 9 months later Some guidelines for statue of limitations; a complaint registered 1 year and 8 months later seems quite ridiculous. All townspeople following the same rules. Consistency of by-laws, FAQ's, and permits. • Get rid of the bylaws replace all members of the committee. Make it less stressfull and inexpensive: • None • To appeal the decision of the Conservation Commission, you should not have to file with the Superior Court in addition to the State DEP. Very unfair and costly. • Deal more fairly and accomodate homeowners with homes that abut wetlands. The homes were permitted and built and we need the flexibility to maintain our homes and eradicate safety hazards (IE, large dead trees) more simply and fairly. • we should have the right to improvements of private property that has little to no impact on surrounding wetlands, the 35 ft no build and the 25ft zone for maintenance along with the tree removal issue causes property value and personal safety issues, • Explain the process in a step by step fashion and explain all fees. 5 years after my project I was hit with a 150 "fee" from the state for "compliance" that was I was never told was due...and had to go to Boston then Cambridge to comply... • Dump the local regs and use the state regs. • As a native of Reading I have witnesed the flood control that was engineered to make the town what it is today fall into disrepair with no respect to personnel property or health. You need to walk the walk. • clarify the needs. guidance on options 2 4 9 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM SurveyMagik:: Re salts http://readingrm-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/lb2 IbOdl c20b... • I live in an acquifer zone(whatever that is) and seeing as how we are now on mwra i think there should be a lot less restrictions on additions or upgrades to my property. also why do we need restrictions on water usage in the town? we now get our water from the quabbin resevoir,so why the restrictions. • Reading Conservation By-Laws should be revisited & rewritten. There should be a fairer approach to property owners. For the next set of questions, please respond ONLY if you have experience with BOTH Reading wetlands permitting and other communities' wetland permitting: 20. How do the Reading wetlands regulations help to manage flooding when compared to other communities? Answered: 24 Skipped: 133 Better (2) Worse (9) Differently (13) 3F3« 21. Why is it better or worse? If you selected Differently - please explain: Answered: 17 Skipped: 140 • It takes private property and uses it for flood management so we can pay less in storm water fees to MWRA. At least be honest about that and give homeowners and business who are essentially losing square footage of their property that they pay taxes on some type of tax credit for the public service they are providing against their will. • Fraught with forms and related costs. Too much control is given to the CC Com. • Far more restrictive for the homeowner. There are specific rules that need to be followed by the state yet Reading pushes it to the point of being unreasonable and expensive. Curiously; on town property, these very same restrictions are ignored. • IDK, I figure its actually the same... • The only flooding I know of is in basements.. Palmer Hill has a spring at the top of thehill. It used to be used to supply the steam engines ...fill swimming pools or water the grass... now it just sits there. • We rely too much on using private property for flood control instead of taking care of our drainage systems. I assume it has something to do with MWRA expenses. • these questions dont make any sense. • Because Reading already has preserved so many wetlands parcels and is pretty much developed - flooding is less of an issue than other cities'like Peabody. • If I am not mistaken, Wetlands and flood plain are not the same thing. Flood plain manages flooding. Wetlands should not be used interchangeable with the flood plain or drainage - especially in residential neightborhoods. Reading uses wetlands as an excuse not to maintain drainage and sewers, putting the burden on private property owners that should be the responsibility of the Town. • About the same • Neither better or worse. Very similar to other communities with by-laws. • They had different set of protocols that I can't fit all of them in thisa space • lack of professional knowledge • I see in town tributaries to the Aberjona being blocked by branches,objects, etc. making the flow of wetlands restricted. This concerns me. I think a plan should be put in place to walk them and make sure they are flowing freely every year. I have seen towns who have clean up days for the wetland areas. • The alleged drainage maps and areas have not been maintained. When a flooding issue was presented to the commission and the town, my concerns were dismissed without any further investigation or discussion and the problems continue to build and worsen. I am not sure the permitting actually improves flood plain management • some communities are really good at it and really work to get designs that are both protective and look good. 22. How do the Reading wetlands regulations help to manage storm water when compared to other communities? Answered: 20 Skipped: 137 Better (1) Worse (8) Differently (11) 10 of 14 -5%. k 0~_ 1 8/23/20112:01 PM 5,% SurveyMagik:: Re sults http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/lb21bOdl c20b... 23. Why is it better or worse? If you selected Differently - please explain: Answered: 14 Skipped: 143 • see above • Particularly in the Aquifer Protection District outrageously restrictive. Very few properties in this district are large enough to be able to have a driveway along with their house and still meet the restrictions. • the storm water just makes South Street River instead of actually draining anywhere • All I know is we have a fee for that too. We used to have Public Works that did so much for the tax bill that we pay... Now they are mainly patchers. • see above • reading hasnt maintained storm ditches for years. • duplicate. • If the storm put the water in my basement, why can't the storm water go into the drain? • Same as above. Using private property to manage town responsibilities regarding storm water without paying property owners for the "service" their land is providing everyone else is wrong. • About the same - MA SW Regs generally dictate • simialr to state stormwater guidelines but includes 4 or less homes. • HAlf of the town had well water & private sewer. so I can't realy compare them. • I am not sure the permitting actually improves storm water management • Communities that have stricter bylaws seem to get better functionality of the best management practices 24. Howdo the Reading wetlands regulations help to manage wildlife habitat when compared to other communities? Answered: 25 Skipped: 132 Better (5) Worse (13) Differently (7) 2B% 4 A 25. Why is it better or worse? If you selected Differently - please explain: Answered: 17 Skipped: 140 • Why do we value wild life habitat versus quality of life to Reading residents. • The wildlife has more rights than the homeowner. There is a home in town who's entire back of the home was rotted and molded from the trees right'against it. Because it was conservation they were not allowed to take any down thus resulting in major cost of ripping out the entire back of home.After appearing before cpdc and showing pictures of damage and costs trees were allowed to come down. Fran Fink insisted they replant them. Ridiculous. The problem should not be on the homeowner but on the original builder. The town has to have some compassion for folks attempting to do the right thing. Fran insisted they be replaced even after she gave permission to take them down. • I do know of another town that is stricter with their laws than Reading. Unfortunately, had that been the case, a clearing would not have happened and we would still have the habitat that used to live in our neighborhood. We no longer have salamanders, peepers and several species of birds... we do however now have crows. • No better and no worse. • no idea - again, why isn't there "the same" choice?? • Do They manage anything??? We have some wonder naatural wetlands... that give natural habitat to many animals ...as long as they don't wonder up to the roads... • none of the above • the mosquitos like it. • I live in aquifer and there are bluebirds, coyotes, beavers,foxes, deer hawks and lot of wildlife. No need for extra protection in this area. • There are plenty of wetlands in Reading for wildlife to habitate. • Too many deer. No one is managing it. • Do we really need more animals in residential neighborhoods. Managing the habitat in the town forest makes sense. but creating wildlife habitat in residential neigborhoods by force is asking for trouble • Same/unsure • Better definitions of habitat and more strictive than the state. • It is on an extremeist level. Reading is not a wildlife preserve it is a town next to two major highways with thousands of residents who depend on the town to have their town's best interest at hand. • I am not sure the permitting actually improves wildlife habitat management • while the conservation lands seem to be well managed, the stormwater controls in Reading are not particularly protective of wildlife habitat. i 11 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM SurveyMagik:: Results http://readingrna-survey.virtualtownball.net/results/sid/lb2 IbOdl c20b... 26. How do the Reading wetlands regulations help to manage water quality when compared to other communities? Answered: 17 Skipped: 140 Better (4) Worse (6) Differently (7) 27. Why is it better or worse? If you selected Differently - please explain: Answered: 14 Skipped: 143 • no impact on water quality • Don't have anything to compare with so not sure whether it is better or worse. 411.6 -24% • none of the above • dont we get our water from the MWRA • Not applicable. Why is this question here? • Don't we get our water from MWRA? why do we have to spend so much effort on water quality when we don't use the river anymore? • We get our water from the State and MWRA. It would be interesting to hear how the state fails to protect water supplies and Reading does. • Same/unsure • very similar to other communities • Much more restriction in place • I am not sure the permitting actually improves water quality management • There doesn't seem to be any focus on water quality per se. There's no bioretention designed, and some of the stream bank (e.g., at Jordans,S&S/Market basket) is not conducive to water quality protection. • Since our domestic water' comes from the MWRA, don't see how it is relative. Thank you for responding to this questionnaire! 28. Please provide any additional comments or suggested changes in the bylaw, regulations or permitting process: Answered: 30 Skipped: 127 • I am happy td answer any questions. • It will save the Town and all applicants time and money to abolish the local regs and bylaw, and rely on the Commonwealth conservation regs (as most Towns do now). As we regionalize our conservation program, we will create a more consistent, better-understood permitting process because it will be the same as the one for surrounding committees. Then the Conservation Commission can focus on more general, worthwhile conservation efforts instead of obsessing on one bylaw. Become a real conservation commission, not "the committee to enforce wetlands protection"! Become an enabler, not a gatekeeper. • The town needs to realize they are dealing with regular citizens who just want to make their home nice and are not trying to hurt nature. I am in real estate and can honestly say that some bids won't come to this town as they state it is the worse town in the state to build in. I have clients who have moved out of town becasue of unfair decisions but concom.Many a home has gone unsold or at a very reduced price because after speaking with Fran than ran and ran fast to another home or even another town. As we Realtors sell and list all over the state we experience the concoms in many towns. It is a known fact that 99% of all Realtors who have sold here and dealt with concom state it is the worse they have ever dealt with. It seems the board feels they are above all and on a power struggle. I believe the board should be changed every 2-3 ridding the town of die hard tree huggers who care not for the real world homeowner. • Thank you for being so open to feedback. We hope to hear of additional information via the Advocate or Patch going forward. If there are open forums, we'd like to be involved. Thanks again. • I wouldn't mind seeing the town be stricter with the wetlands and habitat. We need to protect what little we have left. (I really miss those peepers!!) • The state now allows certain paving materials to be excluded from being considered impervious. Reading's Aquifer protection regulations do not allow this consideration. • Please do not make the bylaws less restrictive. While wetlands regulations occasionally affect residential uses, this is more the result of small lot sizes in Reading than it is from overly stringent wetlands regulation. There are few if any examples of the existing bylaws impeding otherwise economically viable commercial development in town. This may reflect the fact that most of Reading's wetlands, except for Walkers' Brook are not close to business zones. Note that the Walkers Brook area is flourishing, commercially. Given the location of most wetlands in proximity to residential areas, it is also important to the character of the town and our property values to continue to protect these wetlands. r • Aberjona. (Polinski tree)The man told me he could take 100,000 gallons a day. From a dry creek? (During a hot and dry 12 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PN SurveyMagik:: Re sults http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/1b2WWI c20b... period.) I believe he claims this is a state regulation. But as someone who has the Aberjona in their backyard I think this business is irresponsible to the environment. (And is this comment irrelevant to the survey?) • Based on experiences of many friends who have applied for permits to make positive changes to their homes, we feel that the regulations are far too stringent and at times, unnecessary. People are not able to improve their homes because they encounter many challenges when working with the conservation commission. We would like to be able to make fair and reasonable improvements to our properties. We don't think many residents want to disturb the environment, but we do need more flexibility and more opportunties to make those improvements. • It's a brutal experience that needs to change. I hope this exercise is taken seriously and real change results from it. • make it easier • I am a 10 year town meeting member and RE/MAX Broker. The aquifer is in my district. Residents are paying too much in rechareg sustems and penalities/permits to meet the current regs. Change has been needed for years! I have clients saying to me that they would love to be in the Wood End school ..."could I please find them a house without wetlands?" • Need to change outdated bylaws and have an open minde regarding new material and technologies. Also Taxs should not be the same for residents that have a house that cannot be changed due to specific bylaws that do not apply to all other residents. • A reasonable process for protection of wetlands and habitat is important. But it has got to be made simpler and less expensive to applicants and the community than it is. • The need to comply with both State and local conservation bylaws places an unnecessary burden on homeowners and businesses. Why do we need both sets of conservation laws? I am all for protecting wetlands and flood plains that abut our rivers and streams, but do we need both sets of laws to do this efficiently? Let's give serious consideration to rolling back or abolishing the Reading conservation bylaw and enforcing only the State conservation laws. They should provide adequate protection. • It's been a while since we had to deal with CC. Hopefully things have improved since then. • Conservation Administrator is out of control, not to mention the Commission does whatever they like - even when it costs the Town money without adding any real benefit. The Commission is impressed with their own power and has shown over the years that they cant manage thier urge to advance their environmental agenda at the expense of the entire Town, all in the name of "protecting" the town. It's time to get this group refocused on helping the people who have to submit applications as much as they help want to help the environment. It's not that they dont mean well, they are just too focused on their own interests. I support the Town, Managers effort to eliminate the local laws and he deserves credit for taking on this issue, though it would have been better if he had better managed the Administrator years ago. • make them less restrict and change the administrator (Fran) • why is separate fee required? Seems like yet another "sneaky town tax". Building permit contact stated my backyard was NOT a wetland area. • I think there is always room for improvement in a process, but not compromise when addressing wetland areas. If they are dedicated and passed on as wetland conservation areas, they need to be protected as such. ALL PROCESSES IN THIS TOWN NEED TO BE LESS CUMBERSOME for the applicants. That doesn't mean a quick "yes" vote, but serious review and deliberation no matter which board they stand in front of. Even a no is better than waiting, and waiting and waiting. • I think the whole "likely to alter" theme needs reexamination and quantification. A 1 % chance of moving a pebble is obviously not the same as a 90%.chance of dumping oil into a drainage area. C"onservation needs a "big picture" of what it can do versus what needs to be done. We need to regulate the oil dumping, not the pebble moving. Good luck!! • I don't like being victimized by my abutting neighbor on Old Farm Road. We were warned about him when he was in the process of moving back to Old Farm Road. I have stayed away from him as much as possible. There was an incident when he threatened to kill my cats several years ago. There,was another incidence when he cut down hemlocks on property bordering both our yards. I called the police and they came and asked him to stop. I told the police I was afraid of him. Personally I don't think the mental instability of my neighbor should have involved the CC at all. We had not done anything wrong. • You need to get rid of the conservation bylaws. They are blantant abuse of the law preventing healthy growth in the housing community. Replace all members of the committee and regulate them so they can not abuse the power they are given. Abuse of power and the residents of Reading should never be tolerated. The town has looked the other way as this committee became enviornmental mobsters. They are the sole reason I will never own property in Reading again. My entire family used to live in Reading and all have moved away due to issues with the conservation committee. I have met so many people who are unhappy with the way the committee has acted over the years that I am surprised it has taken this long for some feedback to be taken seriously and changes being'made. I hope this helps the town make productive changes. • Every effort should be made to protect our wetlands, rivers, and wildlife habitats. I am opposed to allowing encroachment on any of these. • I found it too restrictive when a neighbor could not ad a simple fence or cut a tree that was diseased (response was.it will fall naturally!) Impact not at all important in the grand scheme of family and the wetlands involved. • I don't think that the town should have such restrictive practices towards the care, maintenance and improvements of one's private property. I am all for REASONABLE conservation practices, but what I have experienced here borders on ridiculous. • I feel like Readings natural resources need every bit of help they can get to protect them from development and over building. Property owners and businesses are already aware of the wetlands bylaw (or should be) prior to purchasing their property. The bylaws and rules should be honored as they are currently written with few or no exceptions. The open space, natural resources and undeveloped land in the town have shrunk considerably since we moved here 8 years ago. • Minor residential modifications or repairs shoyld automatically be approved. • Based on viewing meetings, there appear to be unclear and changing expectations for those requesting permits. The process 13 of 14 8/23/2011 . 1 PM SurveyMagik:: Re suits http://readingma-survey.virtualtownhall.net/results/sid/lb2 Ib0dI c20b... seems to take far too many meeting iterations to be resolved. - How can it be beneficial to the town to require a permit before removing a tree that has fallen on a structure? Why would Conservation be involved in project landscaping that is not near wetlands? Utilize State regulations vs. custom Reading bylaws and simplify the process. Over regulation and excess control do not necessarily provide value to the town and cause impediments to growth of town. ® Reading could improve the water quality protection aspect of the bylaws. 29. Please enter your name if we may contact you about your response: GO Answered: 41 Skipped: 116 30. Please enter your phone number if we may contact you about your response: W Answered: 37 Skipped: 120 SurveyMagik 5.0 ©Copyright, All Rights Reserved SurveyMagik.com I'f 711) t U11 14 of 14 8/23/20112:01 PM { . r.-T- Buy Local Task Force Irene Collins Executive Director Mary Ellen Carr Carr's Hallmark Erin Calvo-Bacci The Chocolate Truffle Julie Centrella Aine's Boutique Lisa Ferraguto The Jewelry Vault Christine Fisher Ken Gasse' Ryer's Store Leslie Leahy The Hitching Post August 2011 Dear Members: 2011 AUG 23 AM 10, 06 On behalf of the Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, I would like to take this opportunity to formally introduce the "Buy Local" campaign. Your Executive Director, Irene Collins, is the catalyst behind the campaign and we are proud to present it to you in this packet. With the Board's commitment of resources and her formation of a "Buy Local Task Force" made up of Chamber members from both towns representing different businesses, the work began. The task force, with'Irene's guidance, has been meeting and formulating a "Buy Local" marketing plan. We are grateful to the members of the task force (see left) for their time and valuable input. Because of them and with your active participation, this campaign will benefit all Chamber members. Key elements of the Chamber's "Buy Local" campaign include the following: "Guide to Buying Locally" mailed to every house in Reading and North Reading. Guide is also displayed and interactive on the Chamber's web site www.readingnreadingchamber.org Slogan: "Buy Local - Keep Your Town Alive to Thrive" Buy Local Window Cling - to display in your business window or door Buy Local TV show - airing on RCTV and NORCAM starting September 2011 Buy Local weekends in Reading and North Reading on September 30 - October 2 and December 2 - 4 Includes complete promotional support such as flyers, press releases and advertisements Melinda Nimblett The campaign goal is to motivate the residents in Reading and North Reading to support you Sammy Jo's Bakery and buy local! That is the message behind "Keep Your Town Alive to Thrive." You support & Cafe your towns by donating to numerous community organizations. You can only do this if your business is thriving. Your business will thrive if consumers spend locally here in Reading Al Pereria and North Reading. Remember, you are a local consumer too. If possible, try shifting some Advanced Photo of your business purchases to neighboring businesses. A little from everyone will go a long Colleen Perry way. Brissonte' We are ready to shout the message, but the rest is up to you. We hope that you join the movement and help us spread the word about the importance of buying locally. Please join us on Thursday, September 8, from 5 - 7:30 pm at RCTV for the Buy Local TV show Premier Party and campaign launch. You will hear more about the campaign and see a preview of the show. An invitation with all the details is enclosed. Buy LOCAL Thank you for your continued membership and support. Sincerely, ~ 1 111, , John J. Murphy President, Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce vin. Rea" "BUY LOCAL" MARKETING PLAN Outline of the "Buy Local" materials to promote two "Buy Local Weekends" and the "Buy Local" message. Buy Local weekend dates: #1- Friday, September 29 - Sunday, October 2, 2011 #2 - Friday, December 2 - Sunday, December 4, 2011 Buy Local - Keep Your Town Alive to Thrive BUY Chamber's Buy Local campaign slogan and logo developed by the Buy Local Task Force. dC AL Buy Local TV show - TV show highlights local businesses in Reading and North Reading. - --Show to begin airing on-RCTV-and-NORCAM-starting- in-September2011. Window Cling - distributed to all 2011 Chamber members. Please display yours in your business window or store front. r "The Guide to Doing Business Locally Mailed in June 2011 to every house-hold in Reading and North Reading containing Chamber member listings, profiles and ads. On-line version displayed on Chamber's web site www.ReadingN eadingChamber.org Letter to residents about the importance of "Buyinji Locally" Printed on page 5 in "The Guide to Doing Business Locally" "Before you spend your dollars out of town, please think of the wonderful businesses we have right here in Reading and North Reading. " On-line version displayed on the Chamber's web site www.ReadinaneadingChamber.ora ' Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce Membership Card Use this card to receive member-to-member discounts given exclusively to Chamber members any time throughout the year - Members Buy Local too! Discounts can be found under the Member Benefits tab on the Chamber's web site - - www.ReadingNReadingChamber.or>; 1 BUY Lor41. Promotional Flyer Template Used in your place of business to promote "Buy Local Weekends" in Reading & North Reading. This flyer will be emailed to you and you can customize it with your discount and distribute it to your customers through your preferred customer communications (email, newsletter, printed flyer, poster, web site, face book or other). J.OCA Newspaper Advertisement Ad placed in local newspapers prior to the "Buy Local Weekend" dates. Some materials notfinal and subject to change q~ 82011 Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce Z- o~ Read. Member to Member Discount Program 2011 Take advantage of your Chamber membership. WCAL T Buy Local and receive these discounts exclusive to Chamber members. r>~~ Show your membership card to receive discount. Ger of Use the Chamber's "Guide to Doing Business Locally" for business location and contact information - Guide is conveniently located on the Chamber's web site: www.ReadingNReadingChamber.org Chamber Business Member Chamber Member Discount Aine's Boutique 10% off on all full-priced merchandise Alantra Spa 10% off products and services Arbonne International 20% off products Baystate Massage $10 discount - Adult services only Beauty & Beyond 10% off products and services BOSS - Beacon Operation Security Services, LLC 15% off any services performed Boston OSCar (On Site Computer Repairs) Reduced business rate of $45/hr from $50 hr on site or $40/hr (1/4 hr increments) phone support. Reduced home rate of $40/hr on-site support. One free computer diagnostic check-up or first computer or network free u to 4 hours. Colonial Manor Realty '/Z % discount on commission Creative Arts for Kids 5% off any art, music or theater classes for kids or adults of any and all abilities. Elite Freestyle Karate, LLC 20% off all programs Financial Solutions of New England Call for member discount Good Day Flowers & Gifts Free $10 upgrade on web site items for local delivery only - mention that you are a RNR Chamber member by phone for upgrade. Keating Law Office 20% discount on Title Insurance and Closing 30% discount off Estate Plan Law Office of Douglas M. Mercurio 20% discount on legal fees Longwood Place at Reading 10% discount on our all-inclusive monthly rate for members and their families (market-rate apartments only) Look What I Made Pottery 10% off McGonagle & McGonagle, PC 20% discount on services Music on The Move $50 off any entertainment package New York Life Insurance Company Complimentary hard-copy customized financial plan for your home or business. Primerica Financial Services Complimentary financial needs analysis Salon 77 20% off hair services and products Starlite Car Wash $3 off our "Rain-X Complete" exterior wash - includes wash, undercarriage, wheel cleaner, polish wax and rain-x treatment. Sweet Sho e Candles.com 10% off The Chocolate Truffle 10% off The Goddard School Registration fee waived The Growth Coach - Hayes Resources 20% off services Zc The Hitching Post Gift Shop 10% off The Maku Collection 15% off-use coupon code Chamber15 during on-line check out Tierney Chiropractic 1 time free examination and consultation - $100 value Waldman Center for Wellness $45 one-hour massage, normally $65/hr -1' time only Chamber Members Join the Movement - Bury ]Local About our RNR Chamber Member to Member Discount: The Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce Member-to-Member Discount Program is a grassroots initiative to promote buying locally amongst our members. Members have the opportunity to participate in our member-to-member discount program when they renew or join the Chamber. The option can be found on our renewal form or membership application. Contact the Chamber with your discount if you would like to participate in this program and missed the opportunity. This form will be updated on the Chamber's web site and redistributed monthly. The Chamber is not responsible for discounts listed here that are no longer valid or changed.. Please see individual businesses for complete information Reading-North Reading Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Irene Collins Telephone: 978-664-5060 Email:'RNRChambercom@aol.com 6P tJt Re,?~• 0 t r~fGcr of Cu'~`Su ujou w uwaea" to, a r Thursday, September 8, 2011 5--30 - 7:00 pm RCTV Studios 557 -Main Street, Reading Refreshments wiffbe served Preview the Chamber's "Buy Locaf' teievWon show .end learn about the exciting pCan for "Buy LocaCweekends. RSVP by September 6, 2011 to Executive Director Irene Collin at 978-664-5o6o or by email PWRChambercom@aoC.com . N N LL ♦W V v♦ on %.W W. O C9 Z Y V OC H d d O C Q ~ CU 4-- O N d7 07 0) 0~ 0 0 O CA O d~ co 0 CO 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T ~ 0 07 CA C S) C~ CA C3~ I C)7 0 CA CA C3~ Gi U) Lfi L L Lr to tx Lf ti') 0 Lf) Lo- CU 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 4_ 69 va 609- 69. 6H> 69. 6+9. 69 69- 69. 6c ~ 6g O :E w O -a 0 0 'a I 0 O 0 x to 0 Q O "It 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lo 0 0 In In L 69- 69- 6a 6a 69> 6a <0000o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L 0 0 L Lo Lo 6a 69 69. 6a 'Ea 69. co I'll 0 0 0 O 0 V CL O O ~ U U) O ~ ~ O C tU 0 0 = 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 U U = U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U Cn - O • O M M M M M M M Q7 M M M M -O O = O ~ N N -0 N a Q O = C O N N O co op m J O 4-1 L O (n O = = N N - 0 J O L ~ O s 4 G) s- Cpl 0 O 0 f--~ N .0 4" Lo In Lo Lo Lo Lo In Lo Lo U,) L0 L0 00 y ~O M C.04 (D C O V d' d' d d' d' d' d' d' d' d' d' d' c ) 69- d' co O O O M M M M M M M M M M M M d 0 C/) 60- 6q = Q p `0 0 0 0 0 E U C U U C C E E 1 c: C . 0 ~ O Q..O > U r .Q i i ~ -1-i s- s- C 1~O G 5 Q CU u) 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 CU . 0 :E S~. <0 ~ 0 ~ 0 F- 0 Z M 2 Q G~ ~ ~ ~ Page 1 of 3 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Thoden, Bill [Bill.Thoden@mwra.state. ma.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 11:51 AM To: Hechenbleikner, Peter Cc: Zager, Jeff; Tassi, Peter; Cormier, Jim; Burns, Greg; Lindberg, Tom; Perez, Isidoro; pcalderazzo@dewberry.com Subject: RE: MWRA 7261 STONEHAM-READING CONNECTION - PUBLIC MEETING - READING Peter, We have issued a NTP to the contractor, Albanese D&S, and held our pre-construction meeting last week. We are now going through the process of shop drawing review. Albanese is well aware that we need to meet with you and Stoneham officials (separate meetings) and hold the public meeting(s) before we begin construction. We just have a couple of details on the proposed construction schedule, etc. to work out with Albanese before we meet with you. We plan to contact you very soon (probably later this week or early next week) to schedule a working meeting. Then, we'll schedule a public information meeting. How much time do you feel you need to advertise the public meeting? Also, Tom Lindberg is preparing a press release on the project. That should appear in the papers very soon. Bill From: Hechenbleikner, Peter [mailto: phechenbleikner@ci. reading. ma. us] Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 11:33 AM To: Thoden, Bill Cc: Zager, Jeff; Tassi, Peter; Cormier, Jim; Burns, Greg Subject: RE: MWRA 7261 STONEHAM -READING CONNECTION - PUBLIC MEETING - READING Bill - what is the status of bid award? We want to make sure that we have a community meeting to let residents know what to expect from the construction, and need some time to advise residents of a meeting. Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading MA 01867 Please note new Town Hall Hours effective June 7, 2010: Monday, Wednesday and Thursday: 7:30 a.m - 5:30 p.m. Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Friday: CLOSED phone: 781-942-9043 fax 781-942-9071 8/23/2011 D fi t ~'rpd arutea• ~ Office of the TOWN MANAGER August 18, 2011 Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner: TOWN OF NEEDHAM TOWN HALL 1471 Highland Avenue 2011 AUG 23 ASS 10' 06 Needham, MA 02492-2669 TEL: (781) 455-7512 FAX: (781) 449-4569 TDD: (781) 455-7558 The Town of Needham will be participating in the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization elections this fall. The Board of Selectmen has voted to seek the nomination of Board Chairman Moe Handel for one of the two "At-Large Town Seats" under the revised structure. The Board asks that your conununity support the nomination of Mr. Handel and the Town of Needham to fill this seat. Under the MPO's procedures, all 101 communities in the MPO will have the opportunity to cast a vote for the At-Large Town Seats. Mr. Handel is well-qualified to fulfill this role and 'has a strong background in planning, and community and economic development. A brief summary of Mr. Handel's qualifications, on the MPO Statement of Candidacy form, is attached for your review. If the Board of Selectmen of Reading would be willing to support the candidacy of the Town of Needham and Mr. Handel, I would appreciate your arranging for the Board to vote to approve and sign the attached nomination form. Given the dates set forth for the election, I would appreciate receiving the forms signed nomination form back by September 15, 2011. Forms may be mailed to my attention at the Office of the Town Manager\, 1471 Highland Avenue, Needham, MA 02492. Thank you very much for your consideration of this matter. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me or Mr. Handel directly at 781-449-2850 or mhandel@needhamma. gov. Very truly yours, Kate Fitzpatrick Town Manager cc: Board of Selectmen MPO Statement of Candidacy (250 Word Limit) Community: NEEDHAM Chief Elected Official: Maurice P. Handel, Chair, Board of Selectmen (Suggestions include a brief statement of qualifications; comments on the importance of transportation to the region; and expectations for the Metropolitan Planning Organization) Needham Board of Selectman Chair Maurice (Moe) Handel is a candidate for election to one of the two At-Large Town MPO seats to be filled at the MAPC Fall Council Meeting. Although the eight MPO vacancies are allocated as "city," "town," and "regional" seats, they are each to be filled by vote of all MAPC representatives. The Needham Board of Selectman has unanimously voted to support Moe Handel's candidacy, and asks the consideration of all 101 voting communities. In addition to service as a Selectman, Moe's local government experience includes 12 years on the Needham Planning Board, membership on the town's Council of Economic Advisors, and numerous task and study committees. He has worked for the Development Authority of Pittsburgh, Montefiore Hospital, Pittsburgh, and the Newton Wellesley Hospital, and as a healthcare and planning consultant in the Boston area. A native of Boston, Moe grew up in Newton, and is a United States Army veteran. He is a graduate of the Pennsylvania Military College (BA, Political Science), University of Pittsburgh (MPH), and Cornell University (MRP, Regional Planning). Moe has a strong interest in regional planning and transportation issues, especially promoting regional economic growth through prioritized investment of available mass transportation and infrastructure improvement funding. In local and regional governance, Moe has shown himself to work well in groups with diverse interests and viewpoints, to listen and help build consensus, and to help groups achieve their long term goals. He will be a strong addition to the MPO board's membership. 6 Nominated Community NEEDHAM Open WO Seat Community Is Running For (only check one) Name of Chief Ellected Official MAURICE P. HANDEL Signature At-Large City Seat At-Large Town Seat S ub-regionaQ Seat Endorsers Nominating Community Name of Chief Elected Official Signature Individual endorsements may be attached as a separate letter but must specify the municipality and the official being nominated and must be signed by the chief elected official of the endorsing community. Please return in person or by mail By 5 PM on Friday, September 23, 2011 to: Marc Draisen, Executive Director Metropolitan Area Planning Council 60 Temple Place Boston, MA 02111 Phone inquiries to Eric Bourassa, MAPC (617) 451-2770 x2043 Paul Regan, MBTA Advisory Board (617) 426-6054 (Certification of Receipt Metropolitan Area Planning Council 9) Page 5 of 5 survey,VirtualtownhaI1.net/survey/sid/887434dd9e2l3Ob7/ From: Peter Donovan [mailto:pdonovan@cambridgesavings.com] Sent: Wednesday, Tune 08, 2011 8:41 AM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: License Dear Selectman: When I first applied for my liquor license (Wine Bunker) I had license pledged to Northmark Bank as collateral. In December 2010, 1 went with a new bank (Leader Bank) and received an SBA Loan for my Reading location pledging license to Leader. Since that time, I have not had amble time to go to town of Reading in regards to pledging license to Leader Bank. Can someone give me guidelines on how to do this. Thariks. My cell phone is 781-572-6153. Peter Donovan, Vice President Cambridge Savings Bank 1374 Massachusetts Ave, 2nd FI Cambridge, MA 02138 Work Phone: 617-520-5355 Cell: 781-572-6153 Fax: 617=520-5340 Email: pdonovan@cambridgesavings.com , Cambridge Savings Bank NOTICE REGARDING PRIVACY: This message is intended only for the designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential and proprietary information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify me by telephone immediately at 617- 520-5355. Thank you. 7/12/2011 25 zq ,Sa. i The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission 239 Causeway Street Boston, MA 02114 www.mass.gov/abcc loll , UI-128 W, 10. 30 RETAIL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES LICENSE APPLICATION MONETARY TRANSMITTAL FORM APPLICATION SHOULD BE COMPLETED ON-LINE, PRINTED, SIGNED, AND SUBMITTED TO THE LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY. REVENUE CODE: BETA CHECK PAYABLE TO ABCC OR COMMONWEALTH OF MA: $200.00 (CHECK MUST DENOTE THE NAME OF THE LICENSEE CORPORATION, LLC, PARTNERSHIP, OR INDIVIDUAL) CHECK NUMBER 1197 IF USED SPAY, CONFIRMATION NUMBER: - A.B.C.C. LICENSE NUMBER (IF AN EXISTING LICENSEE, CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY): 101600034 LICENSEE NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/TOWN PETER J. DONOVAN D/B/A THE WINE BUNKER 1128 MARKET PLAZA, ONE GENERAL WAY [READING TRANSACTION TYPE (Please check all relevant transactions): New License Transfer of License Change of Manager Cordials/Liqueurs Permit 6-Day to 7-Day License n New Officer/Director rj Change of Location STATE RJ ZIP CODE 101942 FXJ Pledge of License Change Corporate Name © Alteration of Licensed Premises New Stockholder n Management/Operating Agreement Pledge of Stock Transfer of Stock C] Issuance of Stock Wine & Malt to All Alcohol Q Seasonal to Annual 0 Change of License Type F] Other - THE LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY MUST MAIL THIS TRANSMITTAL FORM ALONG WITH THE CHECK, COMPLETED APPLICATION, AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS TO: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION P. O. BOX 3396 BOS'T'ON, MA 02241-3396 26 D s~,2 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission 239 Causeway Street Boston, MA 02114 www.mass.gov/abcc 101600034 ABCC License Number PETITION FOR CHANGE OF LICENSE reading - City/Town The licensee respectfully petitions the Licensing Authorities to approve the following transactions: Alteration of Premises Change of Manager Cordial & Liqueurs XL~ Pledge of License/Stock © Change of Corporate Name/DBA Change of Location © Change of License Type (§12 ONLY, e.g. "club" to "restaurant") Change of Manager Last-Approved Manager: Requested New Manager: Q Pledge of License /Stock Loan Principal Amount: $ 250,000 Interest Rate: 600 Payment Term: 5 YRS Lender: LEADER BANK Change of Corporate Name/DBA Last-Approved Corporate Name/DBA: Requested New Corporate Name/DBA: r C] Change of License Type Last-Approved License Type: Requested New License Type: C © Alteration of Premises: (must fill out attached financial information form) Description of Alteration: E] Change of Location: (must fill out attached financial information form) Last-Approved Location: Requested New Location: Signature of Licensee Date Signed (If a CorporatloNlLC, by Its authorized representative) 27 Pledge of License Checklist is application will be returned if the following documentation is not submitted: ❑ Retail Transmittal Form [X] $200.00 Fee made payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or the ABCC ❑ Petition for Change of License ❑X Pledge Agreement n Promissory Note ❑ Supporting Financial Records (if needed) ❑ All records, loan agreements, documents, as well as affidavits detailing the source(s) of money for this license transaction ❑ 3 months worth of bank statements confirming the sources of funds ❑ Vote of Corporate Board or LLC ~s ~ 5`~S LEGAL-NOTICE OF J?, TOWN OF READING To -th.e Inhabitants of the.. Town of Reading: Please take notice. that the- Board of Selectmen.of.the;Townt of Reading will hold a pubilic hearing oni Tuesday, August 23,; 2011 at 7:45 p.m. in the Conference Room,, 16 LoWeW s' Street, Reading, Massachusett on approving a policy establish-. ing an ad hoc. Committee''on": Amplified Sound in Barks' Copies of the proposed doh , ument regarding this topic. are; available in the To.wW Manager's office, .16 Lowell; Street, Reading, MA, M V1t Thurs from 7 00 a:m 5 3tt; p.m., Tues from: 7:30 a.m 7:00 p.m. and is attached to. the,,. hearing notice on the .websiwe111 ; www.readingma goi 411, All interested parties. are invited to attend the.; hearing, p may, submit their comments g-i writing or by email prior to 6 0d, P. m, on August 23 2011:; to ,i s a •1 By order ofd Town Manager, 8116 Peter IHechenbleikner , 36 3N DRAFT Policy establishing an. ad hoc Committee to Review Amplified Sound on Public Property under the Jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen Policy Establishing an ad hoc Committee to Review Amplified Sound on Public Property under the Jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen There is hereby established an ad hoc Committee to Review Amplified Sound on Public Property under the Jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen (the ad hoc Committee), which shall exist until December 31, 2011 or until such earlier date the ad hoc Committee may have completed its work. The terms of ad hoc committee members may be extended by the Board of Selectmen for up to an additional 3 months. "Hie ad hoc Committee shall consist of seven (7) residents of Reading for terms expiring December 31, 2011. In selecting the membership, an attempt will be made to fill the membership as follows: o 1 member of the Board of Selectmen appointed by the Board of Selectmen; o 1 member of the School Committee appointed by the School Committee o 2 members of the Recreation Committee appointed by the Recreation Committee from among their members; o 3 Residents at barge appointed by the Board of Selectmen. The residents at large shall not be members of the Recreation Committee or the Board of Selectmen, and at least one of the members at large shall live within 300 feet of one of the following Public Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation Areas: Birch Meadow, Hunt Park, Longwood Place, Memorial Park, Sturgis Park, Symonds Way, Washington Park, or school grounds that are used for public recreation. The ad hoc Committee shall perform the following activities related to the issue of the use of amplified sound in Public Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation Areas under the jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen which: 1. Review and understand the scope of the charge to the ad hoc committee, and develop a work plan and schedule; 2. Review and. understand "Section 4-14 Rules and Regulations Relating to Public Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation Areas" of the Board of Selectmen Policies and Rules and regulations, and especially to Section 4.14.3 Rule 3: "RULE 3. No person shall, on any public park, playground, recreation or other area under the Jurisdiction of the Recreation Committee in the Town of Receding, solicit the acquaintance of or annoy. another person or utter any profane, threatening abusive or indecent longucrge or loud outcry; or solicit any subscription or contribution; or have possession of or drink any alcoholic beverages as defined by Chapter 138, Section 1, of the General Luws; or play any game of chance, or have possession of any instrument of gambling; or rnake an oration or harangue or any political or other canvass; or preach or pray aloud; or do any obscene or indecent act; or play any musical instrument or use any sound amplifier, except by ivritten authority.i-orn the Recreation Committee or their designee. (emphasis added); 3. Review and understand any regulations that exist with regard to use of amplified sound on school grounds; 4. Reach out to Town Departments, Boards/Committees/Commissions, volunteer athletic organizations, and the community broadly (with particular emphasis on those who live in the proximity of public parks, playgrounds, recreation areas, and school grounds) that may have an interest in this issue, and request their information and ideas; \\Server I \files\peter Paula\ad hoc Committee to review amplified sound in parks.doc 37 (Osb-z' 5. Develop draft amendments to "Section 4-14 of the Selectmen's Policies - Rules and Regulations Relating to Public Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation Areas", and concurrent regulations for the School Department (if requested); 6. If amplified sound is recommended to be allowed in Public Parks, Playgrounds, Recreation Areas, and School grounds with a permit from the Recreation Committee or School Administration as appropriate, develop draft regulations or other guidance to the Recreation Committee and School Administration on the circumstances and manner in which amplified sound is to be permitted; 7. Prepare a preliminary report on the issue of "Amplified Sound on Public Property under the Jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen", and solicit public input on the preliminary report; 8. Submit the preliminary report to the Board of Selectmen and School Committee for their review and comment; 9. Based on review with the Board of Selectmen and School Committee, finalize the report and submit it to the Board of Selectmen and School Committee; Staff and Town Counsel will be assigned to work with the ad hoc Committee through the Town Manager. The ad hoc Committee will be considered to be part of the Town Managers Office for administrative purposes. Adopted \\Scrverl\files\peter Paula\ad hoc Committee to review amplified sound in parks.doc 38 Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee August 22, 2011 The meeting convened at 8:00 p.m, in the Conference Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts. Present were Selectmen James Bonazoli and Ben Tafoya, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, Virginia Adams, Petra Conboy, Judith Smith, Robyn Parker and Nancy Genevieve Kohl. The Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee (VASC) interviewed Petra Conboy for a position on the ad hoc Committee on Amplified Sound in Parks. Conboy is an abutter to Washington Park and felt she would have something to contribute to this issue. The VASC interviewed Judith Smith, Robyn Parker and Nancy Genevieve Kohl for one position as a full member of the Historical Commission, plus Associate members. All of the candidates were extremely well qualified. On motion by Bonazoli seconded by Tafoya, the VASC moves to recommend the following appointments; Ad Hoc Committee on Amplified Sound in Parks - Petra Conboy Historical Commission for a regular member for a term expiring June 3.0, 2013 - Robyn Parker Historical Commission Associate members for terms expiring 6-30-12 Judith Smith and Nancy Genevieve The motion was approved by a vote of 2-0-0. A motion by Tafoya seconded by Bonazoli the VASC voted to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. on a vote of 2-0-0. e ectfullEubmitted, S cretary CV INTER-MUNICIPAL, AGREEMENT 131: TWEEN THE CITY OF MELROSE AND THE TOWN OF READING DIRECTOR OF TI IE HEALTH DEPARTMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated as of this day of , 2011 ("Agreement") by and between the Town of Reading, a Massachusetts municipal corporation having a usual place of business at Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading MA 01867, acting by and through its Board of Selectmen ("Reading"), and the City of Melrose, a Massachusetts municipal corporation having a usual place of business at 562 Main Street, Melrose, Massachusetts 02176, acting by and through its Mayor, the honorable Robert .1. Dolan, with the approval of its Board of Aldermen ("Melrose"). WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, Reading and Melrose desire to share the services and costs associated with a Director of the Ilealth Department; and WHEREAS, each of the parties has obtained authority to enter into this Agreement pursuant to G.L. c. 40, s 4A; NOW, TFIFREFORE, in consideration of the premises set forth above and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree under seal as follows: I. Director of the Health Department. Subject to appropriation, the parties shall share the services and costs of the Director of the Health Department of Melrose ("Director"), or a successor hired through the standard personnel practices of Melrose. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, Reading and Melrose shall each maintain their respective local Board of Health which shall retain their own legal authority and autonomy as provided by law. If it is mutually beneficial, both parties may amend this Agreement to include other Health Department staff under terms and conditions as set forth hereafter. The Director shall report to the Reading Community Services Director- Town Planner. In the event the parties jointly agree that this reporting structure is not mutually beneficial to their contractual arrangement, they may, by agreement, modify said reporting structure to accomplish the purposes of this agreement. 2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of execution hereof, and shall expire on June 30, 2014, unless earlier terminated as set forth herein. On or before May l 't of each year during the Term of this Agreement, the parties shall review their contractual relationship, the terms of which are set forth herein, to ensure that this Agreement continues to satisfy the needs and objectives of each community. 3. Identity of Health Department Director. The parties shall share the services and costs of the incumbent Director of the Health Department of Melrose, Ruth L. Clay, MPH, or a successor hired through the standard personnel practice of Melrose. 4. Compensation. Melrose shall pay the salary of the Director of the Health Department. Reading shall contribute its share of the Melrose Director of the Health Department costs by paying to Melrose a variable sum, as required by the terms and conditions of this Agreement, per fiscal quarter during the Term, each payment to be due and payable within fifteen (15) days after the commencement of such fiscal quarter (i.e., alter 7/1, 10/1, 1/1 and 4/1). Melrose shall adjust the compensation it pays the Director of the Health Department as it may be required to do in accordance with any collective bargaining agreements and standard 39 @ sc-/ k personnel practices which impact upon the Health Department Staff, both managerial and labor, and shall give prompt written notice to Reading of any such adjustment. Reading shall adjust its quarterly payments accordingly. In the event that any collective bargaining agreement requires Melrose to make a lump sum payment to the Director of the Health Department reflecting a retroactive salary increase during the Term, Melrose shall promptly give written notice thereof to Reading and Reading shall, within sixty (60) days thereafter, pay Melrose one-third (1/3) such amount to the extent that the retroactive pay period includes any part of the term hereof. For Fiscal Year 2012, the compensation paid by Reading to Melrose shall be in accordance with Exhibit A attached hereto. 5. Other Collective Bargaining Agreement Benefits. Melrose shall provide the Director with all benefits to which she is entitled under standard personnel practices. Both parties agree to allow. the Director to enjoy such vacation, sick days, personal days and other leave as she may be entitled to receive under such agreement and tinder standard personnel practices of Melrose. Neither party shall make any demand on the Director or take any action with respect to the Director that is in violation of her rights under standard personnel practices of Melrose or under any applicable legislation. 6. Retirement and Workers Compensation Benefits. The Director will remain a member of the Melrose Contributory Retirement System. Upon retirement, Reading will be assessed a share of the cost of pension plans reflecting any concurrent time the Director spent working for Reading hereunder pursuant to applicable Massachusetts General Laws,* At the end of each fiscal year, Reading shall reimburse Melrose for its workers' compensation costs associated with the employment of the Director , such reimbursement to be equal to the product of Reading's contribution to the Director's salaries during such year multiplied by the rate paid by Melrose for workers' compensation insurance for the Director for such year. Reading shall also reimburse Melrose for its health insurance, life insurance, and Medicare, costs associated with the Director said reimbursement to be equal to the proportion of Reading's contribution to the Director's. 7. Duties. The Director shall perform her duties as required by the respective local laws and regulations of Melrose and Reading. Attached as an appendix to this document is a "Community Services Department, Employee 't'ask List - Date: January 25, 2011, Position: -Public Health Administrator" to provide guidance as to the expectations of the duties as they pertain to Reading. Also attached as an appendix is the Organizational Chart for Reading which details the administrative stnicture within which the Health Division falls within Reading. This organizational chart may be changed by Reading from time to time. Melrose and Reading shall provide the Director with office space and office equipment for work within their respective communities. The Director shall work primarily in the office space provided by Melrose and shall maintain regular, public office hours in Reading, such office hours to be mutually agreed upon by the parties. 8. Car. Melrose shall reimburse the Director, or any other Melrose Health Department staff member, for any mileage used during the performance of duties in Melrose and Reading. However, as part of the quarterly payment as set forth in Paragraph 4 above, Reading shall pay Melrose for those miles incurred for any services performed by the Director, or any other Melrose Health Department staff member, on behalf of Reading. All mileage reimbursement shall be paid at the rate then governing in Melrose, which rate shall not exceed the IRS rate in effect at that time. 9. Indemnification. Melrose shall hold Reading harmless from any and all claims related to employment or. employee benefits, collectively bargained or otherwise, made by the Director prior to the commencement of the term of this Agreement. Reading shall indemnify and hold harmless Melrose and each and all of its officials, officers, employees, agents, servants and representatives from and against any claim arising from or in connection with the performance by the Director of her duties in or for Reading including, without limitation, any claim of liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses for personal injury or damage to 40 0 real or personal, property by reason of any negligent act or omission or intentional misconduct by the Director while in or performing services for Reading. Similarly, Melrose shall indemnify and hold harmless Reading and each and all of its officials, officers, employees, agents, servants and representatives from and against any claim arising from or in connection with the performance by the Director of her duties in or for Melrose, including without limitation, any claim of liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses for personal injury or damage to real or personal property by reason of any negligent act or omission or intentional misconduct by the Director while in or performing services for Melrose. Such indemnification shall include, without limitation, current payment of all costs of defense (including reasonable attorneys fees, expert witness fees, court costs and related expenses) as and when such costs become due and the amounts of any judgments, awards and/or settlements, provided that (a) Melrose and Reading shall each have the right to select counsel to defend against such claims, such counsel to be reasonably acceptable to the other party and its insurer, if any, and to approve or reject any settlement with respect to which indemnification is sought; (b) Each party shall cooperate with the other in all reasonable respects in connection with such defense; and (c) neither party shall be responsible to pay any judgment, award or settlement to the extent occasioned by the negligence or intentional misconduct of any employee, agent, official or representative of the other party other than the Director. By entering into this Agreement, neither of the parties have waived any governmental immunity or limitation of damages which may be extended to them by operation of law. 10. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party for any reason or no reason on thirty (30) days written notice to the other. No such termination shall affect any obligation of indemnification that may have arisen hereunder prior to such termination. The parties shall equitably adjust any payments made or due relating to the unexpired portion of the Term following such termination. 11. Assignment. Neither party shall assign or transfer any of its rights or interests in or to this Agreement, or delegate any of its obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other. 12. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, or if any such term is so held when applied to any particular circumstance, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision of this Agreement, or affect the application of such provision to any other circumstances, and this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision were not contained herein. 13. Waiver. The obligations and conditions set forth in this Agreement may be waived only by a writing signed by the party waiving such obligation or condition. Forbearance or indulgence by a party shall not be construed as a waiver, nor limit the remedies that would otherwise be available to that party under this Agreement or applicable law. No waiver of any breach or default shall constitute or be deemed evidence of a waiver of any subsequent breach or default. 14. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by a writing signed by both parties duly authorized thereunto. 15. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the substantive laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, without regard to the conflicts of laws provisions thereof. 16. Headings. The paragraph headings herein are for convenience only, are no part of this Agreement and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 17. Notices. Any notice permitted or required hereunder to be given or served on either party by the 41 @ S'G 3 other shall be in writing signed in the name of or on behalf of the party giving or serving the same. Notice shall be deemed to have been received at the time of actual receipt of any hand delivery or three (3) business days ailer the date of any properly addressed notice sent by mail as set forth below, a. To Reading. Any notice to Reading hereunder shall be delivered by hand or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to: Peter L Hechenbleikner Town Manager Town Hall 16 Lowell Street Reading MNA 01867 or to such other address(es) as Reading may designate in writing to Melrose. b. To Melrose. Any notice to Melrose hereunder shall be delivered by hand or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, to: The Honorable Mayor Robert J. Dolan Melrose City Hall 562 Main Street Melrose, Massachusetts 02176 or to such other address(es) as Melrose may designate in writing to Reading. 18. Complete Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof, superseding all prior agreements and understandings. There are no other agreements or understandings between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof. Each party acknowledges that it has not relied on any representations by the other party or by anyone acting or purporting to act lbr the other party or for whose actions the other party is responsible, other than the express, written representations set forth herein. 19. Financial Safeguards. Melrose shall maintain separate, accurate and comprehensive records of all services peri'ormed for each of the parties hereto. Melrose shall maintain accurate and comprehensive records of all costs incurred by or on account of the Health Department, and all reimbursements and contributions received from Reading. Periodic financial statements must be issued to each party. On an annual basis, the parties' Financial Officers shall jointly audit the accounts of the Director of the Health Department for accounting consistency and reliability. WITNESS OUR LANDS AND SEALS as of the first date written above. TOWN OF READING By its Board of Selectmen 42 Appendix A Community Services Department Employee Task List Date: January 25, 2011 Position: Public Health Administrator Reports to: Board Of Health / Community Services Director Board/Committee/Commission Related Work: Board of Health Overview: Summary of Duties: Manage the Public Health Function in the Town of Reading. Advise the Board of Health on technical aspects of Public Health; discharge function of Board of Health when they cannot assemble; serve as Incident Commander in Public Health Emergency response; enforce all required State Local and Federal Public Health rules and requirements. List of Tasks (in prioritized order): 1. Manage Health Division and Public Health function within the Town of Reading including enforcement of 14 State regulations ( at a minimum) and 4 General Laws 2. Advise Board of Health on all matters pertaining to Public Health in Reading, including regulatory actions, Public Health response actions, prevalence of illnesses 3. Respond to requests/ questions from Board of Health on Public Health issues 4. 4 Advise the Town Manager and Community Services Director on current issues related to Public Health and Public Health plans to alleviate Public Health threats to community 5. Prepare, implement and execute Public Health Emergency response plans as mandated by State and Federal requirements and apprise Board of Health of same., 6. Conduct annual Technical Assessment Review (TAR) of Public Health Emergency Plan as mandated by State Department of Public Health and CDC 7. Prepare Reports to the Board of Health on a Monthly basis reporting Health Division activities. Prepare Board of Health Annual reports. Prepare advisory reports to Town Manager, Community Services Director on Public Health issues. 8. Review plans of regulated facilities for compliance with State and Board of Health regulations: including but not limited to- Food Establishments, Swimming pools, developments and Subdivision 9. Review applications for new facilities regulated by the Board of Health and advise the applicants on deficiencies and strategies to correct deficiencies 10. Educate the Citizens of Reading on issues relevant to public Health ,risks and efforts that can be taken to.alleviate /reduce those risk factors. 11. Advise Health Division Staff on technical issues related to their function 12. Meet with Establishment owners to discuss violations and strategies for compliance with Public Health laws 13. Respond to Complaints from Residents 14. Respond to emergency response calls from Town Departments, Coalition partners, State Department of Public Health 15.Investigate Food Borne illness outbreaks and manage the Public Health Disease surveillance 6 3 44 44 ,SG(o function in Reading 16. Inspect Housing in response to complaints from tenants/ Landlords in Compliance With Chapter II of the State Sanitary Code 17. Develop and manage Vector Control programs in conjunction with Eastern Middlesex. Mosquito Control Program 18. Conduct inspections , plan reviews and other duties required under MA Title V - Onsite waste water disposal regulations including - Witness Septic Tank abandonments, review system upgrades, soil evaluation , percolation testing and system testing 19.Train/mentor Health Division staff in execution of their core duties / functions 20. Consider and issue Emergency permits as for Beaver removal 21. Represent Town of Reading on Regional Coalition, Tobacco Control, Medical reserve Corps, Mosquito Control Boards and other groups as required by job function 22. Represent Health Division of Design Review Team 23. Function as Incident Commander in Public Health Emergencies one of the Joint Incident Commanders in-Reading Emergency response structure\ 24. Review Temporary Food Permit applications and advise applicants on Safe Food handling practices 25. Develop Community wellness programs and prepare and disseminate routine advisories on Public Health related issues 26. Prepare content for Health Division Webpage 27. Coordinate Town Rabies clinic with Veterinarian 28. Conduct emergency preparedness drills for compliance with CDC requirements and prepare reports on drills for submission to State Department of Public Health 29. Provide Technical Advice to Town Departments on Public Health related topics 30. Review Demolition applications to ensure that they comply with Public Health requirements 31.Attend Town Meeting and prepare responses to Public Health concerns on direction of Town Manager 32. Prepare and issue Public Health compliance orders. 33. Institute Regulatory/legal proceeding s for non compliance with Health laws 34. Coordinate community wellness programs with internal and external partners 35. Investigate Nuisance, noise and odor complaints and seek resolution 36. Keeper of Public Health Records and respond to Requests for Public Documents 37. Coordinate with GRVMRC to provide Lost Child/ First Aid Station at Reading Public Events (Town day and Fall Faire) 38. Prepare presentations to Board of Selectmen and other town Departments 39. Record and Prepare Board of Health minutes and agendas 40. Review and comment on Civic function permit applications, liquor permit applications and other non-Board of Health permits as requested 41. Other duties as assigned by Board of Health , Community Services Director or Town Manager 7 45 s-G7 +O' O O 00 0 W Z W a W O 2 J Q W S O J W U. W Y O J W J Z O h LL O 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O C N U N Q 0 0 W O 0 W N N N ~ tm r N ~ C to O U N v ~ v ro tv N ~ . o o C N O ' 0 ' 0 0 N U N t1 ) ti / to O IL M M M M N V N t{ O O in tD~ M M M M to 00 U1 ow W O OO O O O W O p V' h [f' (C7 W fG O O N M V' O 7 Ln V' 'd' N M M co tV N N CD In fV N O 00 N W M V' R t .j O M to l n r N n tD d N (0 N L n M ~ N t~ tD w N W) M d' N r W N 'V' N <f O u to in to w w to to to to to to to C 0 M 0 O o O e 0 o 0 N m G O V' u, to 1 n 1 0 N O C C: :9 c N o Y E u O m v M d' O N 3 00 ' (0 trai N O ID 00 V ct A (DD V (DD V (P W l tp N -O ) 0 (6 u E c E o o to vl ~ ~ yr w L n- C' ~ ° rn v to co iV N N O w 0) Cl V' O v N N O ~ It N Iq N M t tD N 0 . - t v i m U . a o rn rn m m r N M M ? t), d N N 00 00 fD to t6 to 00 N tt') N (n W M V w N L6 to to N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C to (n to to w to O I c EL ~ C N I O O N tD M M O O V? T j~ U r r ff/ O In t0+1 Z W ` N !A f~/f W w O w W ~ CO w C w I Y- M M O O N OR Q LL O 1 O O ( O U) tD tD VI H U ( ) It m m n M CL 3 W v' r t m in (n to r i to p a: 1 Q x G 4 M 0 N W 11 W O O 0 V V " d' N 0? _ 0 O o r m to r` w to tD U7 r o z il= m L' o i a v i v If! v O (n p N tr tD m 00 w C u) in w v) N w D = to r~i O 0 W m 0 s O l LL w c o a t c 4 ro > ? U M U U' E > re n, u J ti d d c 3 J u F-- 0 to J O •N- a z 3 ~ i cn cn cn ¢ d O d LL (9 51 p an b p ~ o. ~ A N cd o Ri A Cd d ~ a~ p A d Cd o U U 0 cd W O O ; CAS {{~~O{ 0 o p d p cd ~ A cc w PO b 'm p,a; O.v A+ o p m C. CL o h C p i.r y La 0 o r., t d e~ tA Qn u w ~ d ~ ~ b O a .y N b • a A Z N O 0 C> SG r3 ROBERT T. DOLAN Mayor August 23, 2011 Dear Chairman Bonazoli, City Hall, 562 Main Street Melrose, Massachusetts 02176 Telephone - (781) 979-4440 Fax - (781) 662-2182 I would have loved to be at the meeting this evening to help introduce this innovative and exciting partnership between the City of Melrose and the Towns of Reading and Wakefield, but I am a member of the Melrose School Committee, and tonight we are having our final meeting before school begins next Tuesday. I would like to thank each one of you, and especially Peter Hechenbleikner, as we finalize this historic agreement and partnership between our communities. Over the past year, Melrose and Wakefield have implemented the combining of our two health departments. There have been challenges, but overall we have seen unquestionable success. It should be clear that throughout our initial implementation Peter strongly advocated including Reading as the second phase of this program. I believe we will be successful for the following reasons: CITY OF MELROSE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 1. Melrose, Wakefield, and Reading are very well run communities. It is always a pleasure for me to deal with extraordinary public administrators like Peter Hechenbleikner and Steve Maio. We work well together and have a mutual commitment to make this work. 2. The Melrose Board of Aldermen and the Wakefield and Reading Boards of Selectmen support their managers and are not afraid of innovation. This is why I believe this will be the first of many potential partnerships in the near future. 3. The independent Boards of Health in our communities are made up of committed volunteers who have the best interests of our citizens at heart. They are knowledgeable in their field and progressive in implementation. 4. The citizens and business communities of Melrose, Reading, and Wakefield are highly educated and understand that we live in challenging times, that municipal models need to evolve toward maintaining high quality of service for less cost, and that the models that we put forward must now be sustainable during good and bad times. They support new initiatives that might not be common practice and (P7 Page 2 understand that health initiatives, from flu shots to restaurant inspections to drug and alcohol awareness, are regional in nature. By working closely together to create formal policies for the region, we will improve public health and create healthier communities. In closing, I ask for your consideration and approval of this agreement. I am always available to speak to you individually or formally in your meeting regarding this initiative. The City of Melrose, is committed to making this a success and to investigating other potential avenues of collaboration that will improve public administration and sustain services that our citizens rely upon. My best wishes to you as we make this commitment together to improve public health and public services during these historic times. Best regards, Robert J. Dolan Mayor er,,De' "~'H r~p onalttdki 0' ® .F 1 t BY byz:BOB'CIIARLTON greater benefits to the rest` tracking the 'actual `owner of dents. 50 Oak Street and Mullen will k a mob,. WAI~FIELD; The assist and 'its was reported; a Wakefield:` Board of Health Clay said "The demograph sale was scheduled; for the r' h ~ voted their approval' to ; cs are' genetsimilar'and the property at 23 Eaton'~Street: F t endorse a proposed further key will: be the `Senior Health Health Department Inspector,; and ~1Il ; Time The Board has ''started Regionalization adding Health Nurse."I'She looks for preparations :for 'the fall, flu s FS, ` ' # Reading to the coalition. ward to get 'the(program' up clinics and the, is Wakefield andMelrose and rurnuig order"ed' and ""expected 'to , undei,'Mayor Rob Dolan,and ! arrive m late' September. Ibwn Adrriini,trator 'Stephen, The Board field a Hearing Details are still developn g 'as Maio link&I their, Boards of regarding the Suspension' of to what other services might Health ,und~i Director Ruthi 'the `Tobacco . Permit for be offered at the clinics'and ' 7 { Clay They h ive now contact Ike~i e i Gulf. 'William further details as to cost time edReadin S TbV-' Man hagave - er, ,ft ;bbl icted to the sus- and place will.be forthcoming t, fdgr t s ? JS, lei; and s wife~Aluta, Ysecgnd from Peter Heenbl'e 4.,6' feral Consul of ItaW ,>"CTttise Pastorelli "1 1 un. i Ath`, fir,`6U'-d; that he The Board will be ni atten Y~ fart „per Reading,"}~eeome a part of the : h~$dwf> ed~ lap of $200 dance'' at anj ~'upcoming V, L t dinner atthe Shera10~1r "Celomal Joiriixlg pr`ogram'. ~lay.ha"s lieen meettu~~~4wi1i1e cle"j Dis~+ict Wakefield Farmer's '1~Tarke fµr~j t~~ "X7.1";' a V xt-~, [y~i '1 i •tr fix„ t + tLll?DINO000 In acitlltlon to attcnding the ing with Reading, ancl.she pre Cato 4~lb In out 0t'~Thdmas with'a tent .where educational ` 11day sstlval Italia pared an,orltuzational chart Mullen ac~roiIy expl~tied that' ; mfoririatibn will be.available - that she belie es evil} work It their. were "two tractsthe is, a further ittempl to region: fine and the suspension each F ally Cl y~tdVnse tthat aliZe and rovide'better'serv- bi in~~71u i , p independent Because she receiVos or - x °tFl rij C ice at less'expense,to all of the this was'- a seoond offense of uiforinatioirifror a tatp"~and communities selling t"obaeco'in violation of lffci Ist° who Dish the•'regulations; a 7 day sus- "t0 p ' o en in Nlelro`se of The fuial vote needed will pension; was'~required. I razier. Wakefield. She mfnrmed the beheld in Melrose' on October j argued notice `issues abut ulti- person that he would have to ad~ ~O.®t~ 5 and if'approved the plan will iriatelyagreed' o "honor the seek ;legal 'permission from , il~ start on October.,10. Each suspension from August 24 to the City oTown before fie.. ,Memorial ` lio'n'are encouraged to stop in community 'will 'retain "their AugusE30 wouldbe perrruttedito open. tip 4941' durmg tree' scheduled hours Boards of, Health but will shop tee ;meinAn appiiint iiient is not neces- pool resources for anurriber Clay asked Mullen for lbwn Hall sary ' of.services thereby pPaducmg some ° 1'egala's'sistanee in f aj, lays,-,an d The pavers ,can' be con- x tiib fed iil R anon ,off, or Worl War II er ~rl l' ® °tte ' gust' t 24th ' memory wetexan tot F aiy who i (ist floor` ' yh sMs`~t ued for ,~s`~currentfy y~' ` eivm'ul'fhe,or ed Forces Sp~aS®~ 29th ~11 Stat~os'I he ind= MfN11 g,Ip oesanQv a .e to be • iii °~t1st oorai~~dl' r b y a ('Wal.'etiekl, 11:4) . 1'her ter a 1xiN' of the event fi r World X : ,A J t €r, gar . II Tr b z'Fe id n of ?akefleld World ti it ._11 I~lenioiial T'he,conum,tee Will Merr%r~Al Co`~ `f ee chais- ~c~idnluifoiniltion can ~i`y~ the Chuck also host a yll ComedyNight hav' CJasriamlttee and man=Phisu11 at 981 24- e coil s~ be~~q ~ e l Oh he cb~~te at dragon Irrner will sponsor a featu ing Wyk pield s, own ; 8684 have the www,wal-Rield.mams/v Ad- -.pancake Brea - ast on Pa,l D'Angelo :on,Tlzuzsda For information znay~~: nei,l ansilne ial Sun ay, Septeiribci 8th; evdni7lg;'Se~~e` r~ i`°'22nd t about ~ithci' went r about Crl F rc k., N U't TOM xYIC f , , ~ S r.x` r x from 8 a rri' to 1 2 iloon,4 the&''pep~ mce~tvRs~ r cwt: pant in th _ uilr3 e rebiri'gof the World ~f t n hrt~r 6 rn, g 4 14 1 Do z 61 :r New Salem Str et 5aU, SIT i g~ a u 1r~~'ax~a~i II, illy. Ie oriel call mat: F ~i ~:ti'7s i rxf r a WahOfieldUx rc ~t nnarnt iilt~l ~r~,b~~aiefr}~~coixaan5„ n ~H>F of 781-245. ilv, ki t...F . } I r S-X i y h~ :fir c x r PT QCeedS irOT71 f }U N dr BO dij ~E s m f a, event Nl~bhr St>nsd" tan.~`s , Oer~ W111i~gOx,uthe GOIIlII11ttGCe'S 1~Je~ aLS0~3eI'0~'~1'i' b r : t wr ¢ry q G? Y Jxsk>' Eli li.i dI~mB a-rxA dY, i) ~ Pff irts toxraise funds for`the F 'c If for the S:Clt1101~ a e~ Ciildrel~ rehlac4rneri~f, of OtheWoild Coined'`'Ni'¢}yt',;are t r k n ! r `5 t .r, ON I alxrtII,~1? terans~;-memoiaal '.person"a`rk lriclude'p>zza Ins ~ ,rte U bn }t ° ;gr , w. on al ~ s~ ,L'lle ~ .,et R cv le a, 'ar per Comm addition' to the co'medy:.,_ his lTew,~ ,iQ y t,„ r 4 n e YS ,+I M A x w t k c n ii Ags'3ffrbhi9 `;am ~r°f?3,f Tt~kets to the all shoal the,event :willalso fea- ➢ ➢ rkb" N4 y dB~~ r xr,dra Ny+, E~' Yci1xY it y.I+i~A" ('L~+I•V ;r i t , • rv :pr. Autg~ttst~22romr~Or30, Y , 30i'M,oudieat pancake break lure a 50/50 raffle and a "K .ll'1N7 k?;~..'x~1y 41r~s+~Xy{ ii)~~v"eS~m' ui ,a 1 ds Firb y it;i Y rf{as~~s~_e0 per person and ,pbrtszlnemorablha auction e Y S j "I OTt t "'ttlb t O'ocl CaIF A l'il Sedgy i 3 Etta V r ~x ~L r r ff - s,' ' ur aF r atthet F~s cad w eh ed;~a v r a - ,r. z _ - I ~ F V y DEVAL L. PATRICK GOVERNOR TIMOTHY P. MURRAY LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR JUDYANN BIGBY, MD SECRETARY JOHN AUERBACH COMMISSIONER The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services Department of Public Health 250 Washington Street, Boston, MA 02108-4619 Dear Massachusetts Municipal Leader, In good economic times and bad, Massachusetts communities depend on strong, effective local health boards to prevent injury and disease and to protect the health of our population. Local Boards of Health carry significant mandates under state law and regulation, including enforcement of state sanitary, environmental, and housing codes. It is often said that public health "operates in the shadows." That is, public health boards and personnel carry on their daily work largely outside of public view, preventing injury and disease and averting health threats that most people rarely think about. Board of Health members, health directors and agents, public health nurses and staff are a community's resident experts on protecting the food supply, controlling infectious disease, preparing for emergencies, assuring safe water and solid waste systems, inspecting pools and beaches, enforcing state lead poisoning and anti-smoking laws, and attending to an array of other complex responsibilities that keep people healthy. They are also critical partners in the state's efforts to protect public safety. At the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, we respect that economic recession and reductions in state aid to cities and towns have forced municipal leaders to make painful decisions about which services to cut and which to maintain in the face of increased costs and reduced revenues. We have faced similar challenges in reducing the department's own budget If you are considering adjusting your local public health budget, please keep in mind the benefits of this work in disease prevention and the potential harm that may result from fulther cuts to local public health. As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure; your dollars are better spent preventing problems than responding to them. And when reviewing any aspect of the public health budget, I encourage you to involve the local boards of health, health directors and/or health agents in those deliberations. This will lessen the likelihood of a resulting health problem - for example, in the area of infectious disease control or legally mandated code enforcement activity. P Remember that a trained public health work force, looking out for the best interests of your community, will be there for your residents when needed. The recent I IN1 Influenza Pandemic response helped contain the outbreak, largely because of the workforce that was part of the infrastructure. In order to address current and emerging health challenges-including obesity, hypertension, substance abuse, and other issues-we need the strongest possible public health infrastructure in Massachusetts. In this day and age of diminishing resources for most public sector services, that means a continued commitment to support the work of the local public health leaders as well as to enhance cooperation at all levels. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health stands ready to assist you as you consider the optimal ways to meet your public health needs as you continue to struggle with the state of the economy. Sincerely, J;&. " 'jL- .John Auerbach Commissioner 0 Dermot Blodger Grumpy Doyles Main Street Reading, Ma -1867 August 17, 2011 Board of Selectmen; Reading Fall Street Faire Committee RE: Reading Fall Street Faire Proposal -Outdoor Area Grumpy Doyles is excited to be part of the 2011 Reading Fall Street Faire. We are requesting a one day special liquor license to serve beer and wine. SCOPE OF EVENT 1. Alcohol Service A. Beer and wine will be only be served. B. Product will be delivered by one of Grumpy Doyles beer and wine vendors on September the 11`h. The product will*be ordered under the temporary one day license and licensee. C. All product will be stored under the designated area and will not be stored on the Grumpy Doyles premises. D. All remaining product will be returned and picked up by the designated beer and wine wholesaler. E. All servers will be current employees of.Grumpy Doyles and are current on their ServSafe training. F. All servers and staff are meticulously trained to spot and control any alcohol related issues. This is part of their daily operating procedures at Grumpy Doyles G. All beverages will be contained to the area. 2. Logistics A. (3) 10 x10 Tents for shading B. Amount of tables and chairs will be determined. Approximately 30 -40 seats will be available for dining. C. A three foot barricade will enclose the area. There will be one entrance/exit point. This entrance/exit point will be manned by a host at all times. D. An Irish Band will be playing in the tent area 3. Food Service A. Grumpy Doyles will be serving food for entire length of the Street Faire, B. All food temperatures, procedures, and policies will comply with the board of health requirements. C. Hand washing station will be provided for tent staff. 4. Security A. One Reading Police detail will be hired from 11am - 6pm. 5. Trash - All trash will be handled and disposed by Grumpy Doyles in its' private dumpster. 6. Electricity - Will be need (2) electrical outlets 7. Insurance - An insurance rider will be issued to the one day license and licensee. This will be issued under Grumpy Doyles current insurance policies. We appreciate this opportunity to be part of the 2011 Reading Street Faire Sincerely, Dermot Bloger 04) dal 52 Town of Reading Massachusetts Application for SPECIAL (One May) Alcoholic Beverage License THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission 239 Causeway Street Boston, MA 02114 Event for which application is made (type of event): V•P\\ ` vim„ 1~: e Date of Event: \ Time of Event: \ \ until: Name to Appear on the License (note - the cens a may NAonly be an individual - not an organization, corporation, etc.): , rpi,»V Q1*✓ Give a full description of the premises to be licensed, including the name of the site (if applicable), street address, rooms at the address to be licensed, location of all entrances and exits (Note - All alcoholic beverages must be stored only on the licensed premises, and at no other site, Chapter 1:38 Section 22 requires a permit for any vehicle transporting alcoholic beverages except for personal use): _ I , . , Address of Premises: Phone Number of Premises: Seating Capacity for this event: License Category ❑.AII Alcoholic (non-profits only) Occupancy Number: [K~ Wine and Malt (for profit only) Contact Person (attorney or representative, if applicable) who can be contacted concerning this application: Name: Address: ~.~Cc c\-v -~1•_ ~~•...~ti-~ \-Vo Phone Number: Email Address: ~JC'~\C~12 t '(tJ tea v~ Applicant is an individual representing (check one): ❑ Association ❑ Non-Profit Corporation Individual Partnership ❑ Corporation ❑ LLC I have read and agree to abide by all Commonwealth of Massachusetts laws, rules and regulations including all rules and regulations of the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission, and all Town of Reading Liquor License Policy - Requirements for Special (One-Day) Liquor Licenses, and attest that the information submitted in this application is true, accurate, and complete. 9 Signed and subscribed to under the penalty of perjury this I - . day of A,-~ ~ ~ - 20 i 1 By: Signature of Full Name Title: Please attach: ® A letter on their letterhead, from the organization that you are representing, giving authorization to file this application for the event noted in the application, and signed by the individual or officer authorized to file all forms and disclosures with the Secretary of State's office ® A letter on their letterhead, of the owner of the premises, indicating that you have their permission to use the premises for the event that is the subject of this application If a caterer is being utilized, please include a statement on their letterhead that confirms that they are being paid a set fee, and not a fee based on alcoholic beverage sales A copy of the insurance certificate showing proof of issuance of Liquor Liability Insurance for this event ® A copy of the insurance certificate showing proof of workers comp Check for $50 made payable to the Town of Reading if you are selling the liquor. There is no fee if you are just serving SN O N 9) ACQRDT,, CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 0811 zoii' PRODUCER 781.344. 3200 FAX 781. 344. 1425 Malcolm & Parsons Ins. Agcy..Inc. 6 Freeman St. THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. P.O. Box 527 Stoughton, MA 02072 INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURED Phider Corp INSURERA:. State National. Insurance Co. DBA: Grumpy Doyle's INNSURERB The Hartford _ 087634 _ 530 Main Street INSURER C: Reading, MA 01867 INSURER D: INSURER E v THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR ANY REQUIREMENT , MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. III SR TB. DD' TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE _ RWDDMn POLICY EXPIRATION (MMmnnvl DATE LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY RCB101752-11 08/27/2011 08/27/2012 EACHOCCURRENCE S 1,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY DAMAGE" TO RENTED PRP MIS F~/Fa_occ ucence)L__ S 100 , 000 CLAIMS MADI- OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) 5 5 , 000 A PERSONAL & ADV INJURY S 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE S 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGAI'E LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMPIOP AGG 5 1,000,000 X POLICI' JECT LOG AUT OMOBILE LIABILITY RCB101752-11 08/27/2011 08/27/2012 COMBINED SINGU-LIMIT 5 - ANY AlllO (Ea accident) 1,000,000 ALL OV/IJED AUI'OS BODILY INJURY 5 sctlEDUUDa;.tres (Per parson) A _ HIRED ALI os BODILY INJURY 5 X NON-OWNED AUTOS (pet accident) ' PROPE=RTY DAMAGE S (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT 5 ANY AUl O OTHER THAN EA ACC 5 AUTO ONLY. AGO S EXCESSIUMBRELLA LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE 5 ` l CLAIMS MADE OCCUR C AGGREGATE S _ S DEDUCTIBLE S RETENTION S S WORKERS COMPENSATION AND 08WECLG8282 08/27/2011 08/27/2012 LIO - X ~'aY uMiTS FIR EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY CUTIVE F I E.L. EACH ACCIDENT S_ 500 , 000 B _ ANY 9 O I U EXC U U FI ICERIMEMB ER E O E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE S 500 , 000 II yes; describe undut SPECIAL PROVISIO14S below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT S 500 , 000 OTHER RCB101752-11 08/27/2011 08/27/2012 $1,000,000 per occurrence A Liquor Liability $1,000,000 aggregate DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS 1 VEHICLES I EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT I SPECIAL PROVISIONS Irish Restaurant Street Festival to be held on 09/11/2011 Town of Reading is additional insured with respect to General Liability and Liquor Liability. rcnrrcrn ATa Lint nco - rAAIr KI 1 ATInhi SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, Town of Reading BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY 16 Lowell Street OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. Reading, MA 01867 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE David Parsons ACORD 25 (2001108) ©ACORD CORPORATION 1988 S FAX: (781) 942-9070 Website: www.readingma.gov ANNUAL TOWN MEETING May 5, 2011 Instructional Motion made by Ronald D'Addario, Precinct 6: TOWN CLERK (781) 942-9050 In recognition of May as National Bike month, this motion instructs our selectmen to work with our Walkable Reading Committee and the Reading Climate Committee to provide safe street lanes for bicycles. Background: We have already, in place bike racks installed around town at our schools and municipal buildings to our depot. We need to take the next step to make bike riding safer for family outings whether to our downtown or to one of our recreational parks. Installing bike lanes, whether a separate path or just a white line on the street, provides a margin of safety required by bicyclists especially those with younger children. Presently, moving about town by bike can be hazardous to your health. Let's work to improve this dangerous situation to make Reading a bike friendly town. If Boston can do it, surely, Reading can too. Thank you. A true copy Attest: AQM_U_~-~ Laura A Gemme Town Clerk 9 s.e. l 5743 Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Leading, A 01867-2686 FAX: (781) 942-9070 Website: www.readingma.gov ANNUAL TOWN MEETING May 5, 2011 TOWN CLERK (781).942-9050 Instructional Motion made by Marsie West, Finance Committee= Board of Selectmen, eManager, and School Move that Town Meeting instruct ded by Readi gftctizensoat Department to explore the Pollowg revenue the Financial Forum held on September 15, 2010 and report back to Town Meeting and Finance Committee by October 2011 with: ® Specific actions taken (organizations consulted, timelines) ® Comments on feasibility of opportunity ® Follgw up tasks to achieve additional revenue The goal of this motion is to include all feasible opportunities in the revenue budget for FY 13. Finance Committee would appreciate interim monthly votes to take other action onO them.tfl the ideas are either implemented or the responsible 1) Town Manager a) Additional cell tower opportunities b) Advertising / Billboards (including electronic billboards) c,) Expanded rental of space/increased rental fees 2) School Committee / School Department: a) Expanded rental of existing space b) Naming rights for buildings and other property 3) Board of Selectmen a) Increase parking fees at Depot b) Sponsoring of town trees, benches, lights, etc. c) Sale of Town land (Oakland Road) ial Forums -fa encourage Background: The Finance n revenue nenhancem enhancement as well asccost eductions. Atlthe September citizens to bring forth their ideas eas o on 15, 2010 session, approximately 50 citizens and board members attended and offered their revenue enhancement ideas, then voted their priorities. More than 25 ideas were generated and received votes. Each of the items listed above was among the top voted items- (7+ votes for each). Many of the cost reduction opportunities identified at the October 27, 2010 Financial Forum have been incorporated into the FY2011 budget proposal. actively pu these The goal of this motion is for the Boards, Town Manager and enhancement measures~Finance Gommitteemwould like opportunities and implement all feasible revenue to be informed of their status on a regular basis using the evaluation criteria on the attachment developed by the Committee to help assess the opportunities. Our goal is to keep these ideas front and center to help provide additional revenues that benefit the Town. Town Clerk ~ ~ e 58 44 A true copy Atte t: Lau A Gemme FAX: (781) 942-9070 ' Website: www.readingma.gov ANNUAL TOWN MEETING May 5, 2011 Instructional Motion made by Russell Graham, Precinct 4; TOWN CLERK (781) 942-9050 Move that the Reading Board of Selectmen appoint a committee for the purpose of studying the Oakland Road property to determine the best use of or disposition of said property. Such committee to include members of Town Meeting and representatives of the Reading School Committee and representatives of the Reading Recreation Committee. A true copy Attest: Laura A Gemme Town Clerk 59 45 ~ ~1 f 11 Board of Selectmen 16 Lowell St 1-~ Reading Ma. 01867 Subject : Vacant Town Owned Land At Town Meeting the Board stated that as soon as Town Meeting was over you would look at these properties . I would like to suggest that you may wish as Town Council stated in the background of my three articles that so called tax title land must first be advertised by the Town. Treasurer, there are four properties that I feel should be first , 38-54 Birch Rd ( $ 8,600 ) .,8-11 Fairmount Rd ( $ 8,300 23- 62 Torre Rd.( $ 115,000) and 31-5 Causeway Rd. $ 253,000 ) The next priority should be 9-3 Louthrop Rd ( $ 196, 000 ) 31,614 Sq Ft to transfer it from the water department to the Board of Selectmen for possible sale. Next priority should be the land at 28-20 Pearl and Audubon ( $228,000 ) to abandon the former Pearl St. Next priority should be the correction of the Three lots of land given to the School Committee in 1947 not authorized by Town Meeting vote and those portions of School Department land on easterly side of Oakland Rd cut off by the relocation of Oakland Rd. by Town Meeting Articles and also abandon the streets therein . I offer any help that I can including trips to the Registry of Deeds Sincerely William C Brown 28 Martin Rd. Reading Ma 01867 60 0 . Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Fax: (781) 942-9037 Finance Department Website: www.ei.reading.ma.us Phone: (781) 942-9005 August 9, 2007 Board of Selectmen Board of Assessors Re: Tax Foreclosure Map 121 Lot 27A The Land Court issued a final decree foreclosing the tax title in the Townrs tax lien foreclosure case, No. 131959 TL against Unknown Owner of Map 121, Lot 27A, covering the property off Parkman Rd. This vacant lot consists of 2,386 square feet. A copy of the Land Court Decree and tax map are attached for your reference. Sincerely, r r V Nancy J. Heffernan Treasurer/Collector Enc. (0 tSEALI orr Markman Road, Lot 27A, Map 121 rl C: COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS (O LAND COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT Case No.: 05 TL 131959 JUDGMENT IN TAX LIEN CASE Town of Reading VS. Unknown Owner This case came on to be heard and was argued by counsel, and:thereupon, upon consideration thereof, it is ADJUDGED and ORDERED that all rights of redemption are forever foreclosed and barred under the following deed(s) given by and/or. the tax taking(s) made by the Collector of Taxes for the Town of Reading in Middlesex County and said Commonwealth: Land Type Tax Taking Date Book,No. Recorded 05/21/1996 26331 Page No. Document No. 525 Certif sate of Title No. . By the Court: Deborah J. Patterson Attest: Entered: July 5, 2007 Deborah J. Patterson Recorder tTRUE o . ~°L'E" a KALANDCOURTFORMS\LCTL003A.DOC TD: 4/12105 Date/Time Printed: 7/5/07 2:46 PM ~1 of l l C,J~ p ~ :j d• f ry ao ,n54am. Y~QG. ~t0 Qd ` OQ. y it y- o.>w t}y'S. /1 ~;4 F' a { tC'. ~ ,amp' ',af / 17 69 68 zwo r 67 x Rr 65 ' - At 36 , q°'rtr° c° R g m4K ,.,a 1618 .1 11 f es. 37° ' wo R °''0 a: err ~r t 4,,r A 64 d: ,138 k R 636 s- „xx 12 63 ~7a & ro r z C { 1, B- 53 'b4sr `."4"v+ 4 13 x li a 63c a 4 lK- "p3tz s a a .ff A -y~it;~ yay .l^? : y .r~ zr °!,y m ire af~l 1 14 56 'n ,u r e t 6 a,x Tn- s 4 : .ttxv>, • b j i ?i x •i ;,a>H a'~~L,~' ' rat" f'. i ''a1s f r a ..{'y.' L i+ " N~ a 9 Y 1 , ;~!t6a .1 M. M .;4w ✓ ar-a x~iY° ~ - - at riy + t 33,> -1 4b.IfC~'f 57 42 i d 41, Q 1 5+ rw;ii! a Fsih 1 ~t y' t 1 e' s`: ,fi- v f a e -rt,;. ' .,D hel'5ta ,'{fw q c a s a a ~r F4 - a3> r.};f 34 „gym ~s i 4, maa ,6 . 58 j y_ :s a'y~• kSjf . E t 1 j. ac r o ¢+n o „ta s °a[et yy, 59~Fi- .i l 5` `a '+CSm ro sr ~3 R 46` ~ F{~ v1'v= _R, 1l 1RS'' Dw3 t.y>~ 4kx s. r „ us+ filly 44°'' t Y a~~.C ~11~'r Yi1.. °,Lyp)~ 8 a °)'st 4J T 4Nia6_S,L'"~'.V,$S^~..i 1 g t •e..l T.& " ,F -t7. k °°s arr Jtw,.• x s L, n' M 7 6"s x 1' ° u, t :i "F ~ .s. {'~Q ?9 37 ° si~ g•T 38 ~ mD, r° ((7 ~ 4 r~~~~'} .;yy5~, s y2v ,ta °ry ha u5C ~ Y` 6 e o- e ro m y 3s s aY" R cp # cdQ7.t•,. rn+o r/'S rY 40 ,.m,,:a. ,r~d2't @tE rA'.@' } C Y~ yy>r ar ww iL1 u xd,im.~>•~~ Y4 s '~t,~,.k3•''+? '`ti 51 a•S~ a .,iy °ie'ti 7`4vs 7tw -rF '°r~{, .t c("}'t ~ ~ 9 wa .M1/Icu ~i ~ .i u c s yf:-Y pa es. k :,art /r ,m° ~<'"4,t w.H,.: .yz /'yk''+~~Y t3 'b`t y .ta f-.z ~'t. an ~~a ~'pu {~/rX~iy ',y,~z< ess, tz~ 9V'.~' reUr ,oDw '4 y~CYf"f~'y~~7 'fit >z~+„ y~ y:. GS. tinQ" 6y -C.~ Vii' tr 1'S 6 ~e+y Q'$r t: zr*!' I ga..;e"f.-.yaF+.'?t m 'w t `~.y?.'?}ry""t57~'+`'kryr+'+iFj ~'t 4r~5 wta2mtr~6 a'~ TT'^~.lyc'~'r"~ 125 5 Dmr sx ',.t .,.T i. : wv1 r'p xs`L 5 f 5- " a ma + x x 29 1:,' - . a 'zt.- •,t'"l"~'>ri ~T ~.N .ss R j't o -f e! $ ' '~'w • C n,>a 27 g '41 ~ ~f ~j,ytlC etJ~ `W" pD 'S ~ f r't m 1 t 1 4., m~` n O>+ s` ii5 areM,4a14t 9 "n i, r'yri" m Y y a'q m w y ` aaw ? t „5 J . 39„ 1 4U @' r :~(,@ .:'7 J.-~ l r 4 "k"✓,~•m'Jr..t ~ S 'rise yX4 ,122 r2+c S.} 2b qy ,tb > i 9 5 ,2 Y 4 r+C4 fd:.•,"'tef,''' t0 1c y,, e,. !.I.~ v.t 21 h 4 t C7 . Zj: @ R° ° maa up, p 8 1sY'' s ; ..'s ~ ,~C ~ f s, "TF +L e .1i "p mwo % ':Et` ~r 'k' ilf y _ q~i~"{ul£ 4.. F r"31 . 2amo ry' Yj "!a x ma°"' F~ 65 23 8~ ~x{{y ,a4cYac rcy ~ST4 '`63g y sa°n~x , e9r i vs.e yrt ~pas+ Mg x-yme, `k,G fit, a w 7a ti wr°1`,' ° 4,a.F 4 'i:s 42 r ~~~?w°r ~2,~ rF~~~y~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i h •2T •r4iy4 d eu> n ~ 1 e ~ ssa+^ h 3 43 n> m vKS iy:e M ki(} ~ 1~4• ~ ~"Yt •G a1 s OR . e,pu ~Jsp.''zg ~R~ }auE { ~>~'Y"~k~~yA ~ Ts 8 ~1 kl ~ f ; {1:.93 ai~tY O~ W. it. L~~y'G^"s~~J ~ ~ rt s 4 rp Y 4- 6 .F l;.F,. h AcSiS'x7 r Lr -rlti ~ ? Y•4 .,~%i ~ acr f:t= .ay' t~,D~N' ~ 's Y?S •cY a`t"dl 4 5~ 27 srid53, p 4a3r ~'ar t, e ,f k' ro rte i:' { Si 4i rX ,°.w r 4 fV'Z. , oy"~ to (n 3 92 F 8..'Y?y 39 r,.~ w,m •9 7}~a tis .UaZf . % pi i"'i`L''"'r t tK) "i` 7N.o 7J ` 4 YG 4 w, rhi{ try, 'ko'~ Sn.i69 r ii s til r m a r Us. tr 5 Pi, s 38r t. fi' k d'.'?6^y Zv s, ✓`r ~ ,.a J- .p. P^ . u;t ` Liar 6 t i , y. rua a..-1r .,x'lt ~S6C ? 1 ' N O uy~ b y ;29..'r 4Q .bid , E W ar & ti'"%' a ~ V n rsyu' wm v F cf~ . 'u70a 4[ r ~QO V:30,7, u,.a p a i`~~>.„ j off' Ii t°'~ ° 36u, s s m "2^1 a F ~l m '(t~ ~fu.yyr' ~+'wY kp pgY: Mrs s w w:a° a r a C~OJ'...- ate x~r rrF G aw a' g, gr.,t m to ~.x f os,~ e•(7 ea..} rat f;r: 17 ya ti' ~4+• ,r}rI.~t. myrt G,U._