(12/10/07)  The Select Board met Monday, December 3^rd at 6:30 p.m. at Town Hall.  Gerry Weiss, Rob Kusner, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Anne Awad and Alisa Brewer were present, as was Larry Shaffer.  Kate Seaman took the meeting’s minutes. 

Announcements

Mr. Weiss read an announcement from Department of Public Works (DPW) Superintendent Guilford Mooring regarding new winter road maintenance issues.  According to announcement, The stretch of Route 116 from Snell Street to Country Corners Road will now be maintained by the Town rather than the Massachusetts Highway Department, and the Town uses less salt than the State, so that roadway may be less clear of snow than in the past.  Also:  rather than sanding all roads in Town during small storms that don’t require plowing, the emphasis will be on main roads and hills that are typically problematic.  When plowing, sanding will also be done as needed, and not multiple times on all streets.  Also:  the sand boxes put out around town for residents’ benefit were only lightly used last year and won’t be put out this year.  Sand remains available in front of the DPW office.

Mr. Kusner said he hoped sharp turns might also be included in the DPW’s area of sanding emphasis.  He said that many sidewalks are not being taken care of in the winter and said that while that is the property owners’ responsibility rather than the Town’s, he suggested that a new system might be needed.

Public Comment – Strong Street and East Pleasant Street  (6:33)

Lawrence Siddall of Strong Street said he feels that the intersection of Strong Street and East Pleasant Street is dangerous.  He said that he sent a letter to the Select Board about the issue in October of 2006, and copied the Town Manager and DPW on it, and the only response he received was a copy of an e-mail that Mr. Shaffer sent to the DPW requesting that it be checked.  He said that in November of 2007 he sent a letter to Mr. Mooring and copied Mr. Shaffer and the Select Board, and said that he received no response.  He said that he had a report from the Police Department detailing the numbers of recent accidents and resulting personal injuries occurring there, and noted that its proximity to Wildwood School made for particular safety concern. 

Mr. Shaffer said that he and Mr. Mooring had talked about the area particularly from a traffic calming perspective, and said there was interest in seeing the effect of the traffic cushions on Lincoln Avenue, and how that option might be applied to Strong Street.  Mr. Shaffer said the issues and concerns of this area are “replicated in many other areas in town.”

Mr. Siddall said that he had read in the Amherst Bulletin that it is only possible to install a stop light if the traffic count reaches a certain level.  He said he felt that common sense should prevail over a traffic count, and referenced the blinking light at North Pleasant Street and Fearing Street, which he called “worthless.”

Mr. Shaffer said he would be happy to have Mr. Mooring prepare a report on the intersection and deliver it to the Select Board in two weeks with recommendations.

Public Comment – Police Detail at Extravaganja Rally (6:38)

Terry Franklin said that he had been told three years ago that the Extravaganja marijuana legalization rally would need to begin paying for police officers, but that the policy didn’t become official until recently.  He said that the Cannabis Reform Coalition received a letter saying that their permit to use the Common for the rally would be voided unless the group pays for the police officers, and he said that he met with Police Chief Charles Sherpa who confirmed that.  Mr. Franklin said that rights are granted to human beings at birth, and that it isn’t in the government’s or the Police Chief’s authority to grant or withhold them.

Mr. Weiss asked Mr. Shaffer if this was his own policy decision, or that of the Police Chief. 

Mr. Shaffer said the decision to charge users of the Common for a police detail when one is deemed necessary has been discussed at length.  He said he has not had spoken to Chief Sherpa about this specific event.  Mr. Shaffer said that a member of the Cannabis Reform Coalition had arranged to meet with him (Mr. Shaffer) to discuss waiving the fee, but that that meeting had not taken place.

Mr. Weiss said that he was surprised to learn that groups were being charged for holding events on the Common.  He said he wasn’t sure what the Select Board’s role would be in such a discussion, but said that they have some role because they control Town Commons.   He said he would like to see a list of groups that pay or a list of criteria for how that is determined.

Mr. Kusner asked Mr. Franklin if his group had requested the police detail, and Mr. Franklin said that they had not and were opposed to having it.  Mr. Kusner asked why the group would have to pay for something it didn’t even want to have.

Mr. Shaffer said that he had attended last year’s Extravaganja and enjoyed the music.  He joked that he didn’t inhale or eat any brownies.  He said that a crowd of the size at that even requires a police detail, and said that the entity sponsoring the event should pay for that rather than the taxpayers.

Ms. Awad said that the Select Board has some responsibility for the Common, but that the Town Manager does also because he grants permits for its use.  She said she was concerned about the criteria used to determine which groups need a police detail, and noted that when this issue had been raised in the past, she had pointed out that the Teddy Bear Rally drew larger crowds than Extravaganja.  She said that she was concerned about the Town’s exposure to a lawsuit if a group saw their police detail requirement as a civil liberties violation, and she questioned how the Town might make the case that one group requires more protection than another. 

Mr. Shaffer said he couldn’t speak to the legal questions because he isn’t a lawyer, but said that the Select Board could be assured that the policy was being applied evenly across the board.  He said it stemmed from the Town’s budget situation and budget constraints, and said that such police details had been supplied at no cost in the past but that that was no longer possible.  He said that every area of the budget is being considered as an opportunity for expanding fee-based activities.  He said that when private events on public property incur costs, those costs should not be borne by the public, and that it was appropriate to expect the event sponsors to cover those costs.

Mr. Weiss asked if the Chamber of Commerce had been notified of the policy change, and suggested that the Taste of Amherst and the Town Fair would require the same sort of police detail.  Mr. Shaffer said that all organizations that have applied for a permit for 2008 have been notified.  Mr. Shaffer said the intent is to implement the new policy “gently” in the first year, with a waiver process to assist the transition.  He said that the conversation about the waiver had not happened for Extravaganja.

Ms. Greeney said that when she was on the Earth Day Committee, that group was charged $800 for police assistance to shut down streets and intersections for a parade, and she said that seemed “legitimate.”  She expressed concern about having clear criteria evenly applied to all groups.  She asked if the new policy had been in effect since the start of the new fiscal year, and said that if so, she wanted the Town Manager to provide a list of all the groups that had used the Common since then, and what fees they had paid, so she could feel “confident” about the Extravaganja issue.

Mr. Shaffer said that if the policy is wrong, it is consistently wrong because it is intended to be applied across the board, and said that the transition would prepare groups for having to cover the costs of the services they incur.

Ms. Awad suggested that the new Mutual Aid Agreement with UMass could be helpful, and said that weekend daytimes are a slower time on campus.  Mr. Shaffer said that that was a good idea, and one he had not considered.

Mr. Franklin said his group was opposed to a waiver and wouldn’t apply for one, because he said that doing so would acknowledge that the Town has the right to impose such a fee. He said there is case law to support his belief and said that the ACLU in Boston is interested this case.

Mr. Weiss said that Town Counsel would need to consider that topic.

Mr. Shaffer suggested that the Cannabis Reform Coalition proceed with its reservation of the Common and said that while he understood their principled concerns, he said there are practical concerns to consider as well.  He said that he has no objection to the event and wants it to proceed, and said that payment for services received needs to happen without the pressure of this year’s event date. 

Jonathan Werner, Chair of the UMass Cannabis Reform Coalition, said that the group has reserved the Common for April 19th and 20th.  He said that a political event can’t be charged for a police detail, and he said that Extravaganja is a major political event, and he said it won’t survive if it has to pay the cost of the police.

Ms. Brewer said that this topic did not appear on the meeting’s agenda, and asked Mr. Weiss if the group could be invited back for a scheduled discussion at a future meeting.

Mr. Weiss agreed and said that for long conversations, it was helpful to schedule them on the agenda with the Select Board’s office, so that adequate time could be provided.  Mr. Franklin asked Mr. Weiss to let him know if the topic gets put on a future agenda.  Mr. Weiss said it would be put on the agenda if Mr. Franklin or someone else from the group requests that.  Mr. Weiss said that the Select Board had some “homework” to do first, and noted that an opinion was needed from Town Counsel about the legality and criteria for charging fees. 

Mr. Werner asked if the fee waiver Mr. Shaffer mentioned would be just for this year but not apply to subsequent years.  Mr. Shaffer said that the issue is that tax revenues don’t cover the costs for all Town services, and that there will be a migration to fees in many areas, and said that would not be limited to one event or one department.  Mr. Shaffer said that last year’s Extravaganja was a “great event,” and said he wants to work with the group, but that the Select Board meeting was not the venue for that discussion, noting that “it’s really tough to negotiate with 50 people.”

Public Comment – Community Discussions and Homeless Shelter  (7:00)

Bill Elsasser suggested holding periodic receptions at the La Piazza restaurant, where residents and Town officials could gather for entertainment and to talk about local issues.  He also reiterated a previous offer to allow his apartment to be used as an emergency homeless shelter in the winter, if the Town wanted to authorize that. 

Public Hearing – Community Development Block Grant  (7:10)

Roy Rosenblatt, Director of Community Services, introduced members of the Community Development Committee and gave an update on current Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) grants, as well as the slightly-revised Community Development strategy.

Mr. Rosenblatt said that Amherst has returned to “mini-entitlement” status, after having lost that designation briefly, and he said that the status lasts for two years before it is reevaluated. 

He said the FY05 CDBG was used to remedy drainage issues at the Pomeroy Lane Limited Cooperative, and that the project had been successfully completed, and that that grant had been closed out.

He said the FY06 CDBG of $350,000 toward construction of 11 units of affordable housing on Main Street is in progress, and that occupancy is expected there in about a year.  He said that Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) funds were also used for that project and that the Amherst Housing Authority purchased the land.  He said that grant also funded successful and ongoing programs providing childcare tuition assistance to low- and moderate-income families; and case coordination for emergent needs of low- and moderate-income families with children in the public schools. 

He said the FY07 CDBG for $275,000 in mortgage subsidies for low- and moderate-income people looking to purchase homes in Amherst may need to be modified.  He said that the original plan was to not seek a deed restriction on the properties purchased with the mortgage subsidy, but rather to have the buyer pay the money back in the form of a deferred payment loan, allowing the buyer the full appreciated value of the property.  He said that because the program involves CPAC funds as well, and because CPAC requires deed restrictions on such projects it assists with, it would be necessary to meet those requirements rather than run two separate similar programs with different outcomes for participants.  He said that properties with deed restrictions would be countable toward the Town’s affordable housing inventory.  He said that the Community Development Committee is now considering a plan that would allow buyers to not pay the money back if they remained in the home a certain number of years.

Mr. Rosenblatt said that another FY07 grant project is renovation of the kitchens at the Chestnut Court Apartments.  He said that that is expected to begin in the spring and be completed in the summer. 

Ms. Brewer asked how many families and children were being helped with the childcare tuition assistance program.  Mr. Rosenblatt said the families had a total of 10 children.  Ms. Brewer asked about the modifications to bathrooms and an elevator at Bangs Center, and whether this would make all Bangs Center issues compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.  She also asked if the Chestnut Court kitchen renovations would cover all or just some of those units.  Mr. Rosenblatt said the funding can only be used for specific barrier removal.  He said that the kitchen renovations might remove barriers, but might also yield other benefits, so that didn’t qualify for the Community Development money.  He said that he tried to get all the bathrooms at Bangs Center to be covered, but to do two bathrooms and the elevator is considered adequate for achieving ADA compliance, so that was all that could be funded.   He said that other Bangs Center projects were considered, specifically renovations to the Senior Center, but said that that would require a large survey of local seniors to see if they meet the eligibility requirements for such a project to be funded, which could not be done in time for this application.  He said the Chestnut Court project would renovate the kitchens of all 30 units over a three-month period.

Ms. Greeney asked for additional clarification about having deed restrictions on the properties purchased through the mortgage subsidy program, and the payback requirement.  Mr. Rosenblatt explained that originally all the loans were intended to be paid back, but once it was determined that the CPAC funds required deed restrictions, it became undesirable to have two programs with separate criteria.  He said that rather than the property owners getting the full benefit of the appreciated value of the property when they sell it, they would instead get the benefit of not having to pay back the $50,000 loan if they remained in the home for a certain number of years.  As an example, he suggested that if owners remained in the home for 10 years, the loan would not have to be repaid, and if they were there five years, they would have to repay 50% of the loan.

Mr. Rosenblatt said that the Community Development Strategy was revised slightly to reflect the community goals represented by the draft Master Plan, including restoring the environment, planning regionally, developing rational transportation systems, and emphasis on concentrating growth in Village Centers.  He said that the Community Development strategy is and should be aligned with the Town’s planning goals and the State’s sustainable development principles.  He said the document will be available on the Town web site and in the Community Development office for those interested in commenting or program eligibility. 

Mr. Kusner mentioned the expiration in a few years of the affordability requirement at Rolling Green Apartments, and Mr. Rosenblatt said that that is a top priority, and said that discussions with them aren’t at the point where anything could be done through this grant cycle.  Mr. Shaffer concurred and emphasized that priority.

Ms. Awad suggested that the Community Development Committee make a plug for membership.  CDC member Paulette Brooks said that she is in her second term on the committee, and spoke of how meaningful and satisfying her service has been.  Mr. Rosenblatt said that there are currently one or two vacancies on the committee.

Ms. Greeney requested that the committee add additional priorities, specifically: collaborating with Northampton, Holyoke and other communities on the homelessness problem; constructing and renovating housing to serve the homeless, and to provide them with “wrap-around” services; to work with other agencies to prevent homelessness; and to seek recommendations from the newly-formed Committee on Homelessness. 

Isaac Ben Ezra said that he is new to the CDC, and said that a comprehensive plan across agencies and communities is needed to deal with homelessness, and suggested that the Red Cross might be wiling to help turn jails into “comfort stations” for those who need shelter.

Ms. Brooks said that while homelessness needs to be dealt with regionally, Amherst’s CDBG funds are only allowed to be used for Amherst projects. 

Ms. Greeney appreciated Ms. Brooks’ pointing that out.  Ms. Greeney then talked about the numbers of housing units that are believed to be needed to assist the homeless in the Pioneer Valley, and said that Amherst should accept its responsibility in the issue and not concentrate all the shelters in Holyoke.  Mr. Rosenblatt said that homelessness is a major concern for the committee, and cited funding for services to the homeless, but said that providing housing for the homeless is more difficult.

Ms. Brewer and Mr. Kusner asked for clarification of the hearing process.  Mr. Rosenblatt said that there would be two more public hearings to receive input on the Community Development strategy, and said that he would appear before the Select Board two more times, and that the Select Board would vote on the grant recommendations at the final one, in January. 

Ms. Greeney said that she knew it was late in the process, but suggested that some of this cycle’s grant money be used to pursue land or a building to provide a Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing option.  Mr. Rosenblatt, Mr. Shaffer and others spoke to the complexity of trying to find appropriate property and the near-impossibility of doing that before the grant application is due in February.  Ms. Greeney said Mr. Rosenblatt and the CDC would not be required to find land in that time, but would be asked to come back to the Select Board and report on their progress, as a show of the Select Board’s resolve on the issue.  Mr. Shaffer said that the firs step for such a project would be a feasibility study, not site selection.  Ms. Greeney then instead requested that a feasibility study be covered with funds from the upcoming grant.  Mr. Rosenblatt and Mr. Shaffer said that a feasibility study was being done related to the Amherst Survival Center, and that the two might be pursued together.

The vote to approve Ms. Greeney’s request was 4 in favor, 1 opposed, with Ms. Brewer voting to oppose.  Ms. Greeney stressed the need to integrate necessary support services into the SRO plan.

License – Gottago Taxi

With some discussion about fare structures and how complaints would be handled, the Select Board unanimously approved licenses for the Gottago Taxi Company and its drivers, Gangi Bakarani, Bathie Pouye and Mamadou Ndiaye.

250th Anniversary Celebration – Financial Appropriation and Discussion  (8:09)

Barry Roberts, Chair of the 250th Anniversary Celebration Committee, said that the committee needs the Select Board’s approval of the projects it has planned for the anniversary year in 2009.  He said he would provide them with brochures describing those plans, and that he would come back for a future discussion on that topic.  He said that he also wanted direction on how to seek Town funding for the committee’s activities, and noted that he didn’t want to be contracting for services with uncertain funds.  He said that the committee believes it can raise $75,000 through the sale of commemorative banners that will hang on light posts downtown; sponsorship packages; and other efforts, including selling merchandise and holding fundraising events such as one planned for January at the Amherst Brewing Company.  He said that in addition to having assistance and cooperation from the Police Department and the Department of Public Works during the commemorative year, he said that the committee would like to seek $25,000 from the Town in support of the event.  He asked if that was something that he should propose as a warrant article, or to seek through CPAC funds, or some other option.

Mr. Shaffer said that he would discuss the matter with Finance Director and Assistant Town Manager John Musante, and would expect to try to include that money in the budget proposal.  He said that that would give the Finance Committee, the Select Board and Town Meeting a formal way to deliberate on it. 

Mr. Kusner said that the timing is good because CPAC is considering its funding possibilities for next year and may have extra money, he said, due to recent court rulings.  He said that the celebration had “synergy” with other historical preservation projects. 

Ms. Greeney supported the CPAC option, and noted that 50% of those funds come from the State.  She also suggested that Amherst College and UMass have both been around a long time and might be willing to assist with funding such a commemoration. 

Mr. Roberts said that Amherst College was the first to provide money for the project, and said that the Five College program and Amherst College had both been helpful partners thus far. 

Ms. Awad said that Pelham had a celebration about 20 years ago, and sold Daniel Shays coins in individual collector cases, and that she still has hers.  She said something like that might be a nice thing to sell.  Mr. Roberts said the marketing committee is working on such issues, and said that Hastings will help the group to market its materials.  He said that the goal is to raise as much as possible through private funds. 

Mr. Roberts said he would return for a future discussion to seek the Select Board’s approval on the committee’s plans to date. 

Campus and Community Retail Partners Committee

Mr. Shaffer said Martha Nelson-Patrick of UMass was not able to attend the meeting, so he read an e-mail explaining her request.  It said that the Campus and Community Retail Partners Committee was seeking to recognize local bars and liquor stores that are utilizing “best practices” in their sales and advertising to create a safer and more responsible environment for young people in regards to alcohol.  The committee was seeking a representative from the Select Board, and Ms. Greeney volunteered, saying that it aligned well with other work she was doing with Town bylaws, rules and regulations related to alcohol. 

The Select Board approved Ms. Greeney’s appointment to the committee by unanimous vote.

Town Manager Evaluation  (8:28)

There was discussion about the Town Manager’s evaluation and the legal issues around presenting it to him and what needs to be released to the public.  Mr. Weiss said that Town Counsel said that there is no legal basis for presenting the evaluation in Executive Session.  Mr. Weiss said that the composite evaluation that he had prepared based on the individual evaluations submitted by the other Select Board members and members of the public was not a public document but would be come such if the Select Board opted to have a substantive discussion about it.  Ms. Brewer recommended that a version conveying a general sense of the evaluation ultimately be provided to the public.  Mr. Weiss said that Mr. Shaffer had the right to release any or all of the document, if he so pleased. 

Ms. Greeney asked if she and other members could see each other’s individual evaluations.  Mr. Weiss said he did not think so, and that those would go in Mr. Shaffer’s personnel file, but that the members had the ability even after this meeting to reopen discussion of the composite evaluation document, and hence, make it public.

Mr. Kusner moved to deliver to Mr. Shaffer the composite of his performance evaluation, and that motion was unanimously approved.  Mr. Weiss then gave Mr. Shaffer an envelope.

Mr. Shaffer said that he could see that the Select Board felt awkward about the process, and that he hoped to come back to them with comments after he has read the evaluation.  He said that a good performance evaluation includes mutual expectations and prioritization of goals, and said an ongoing and open dialog was needed to help him and the Select Board to work as a team to move forward on the goals set by the Select Board. 

Mr. Weiss said that the evaluation grid used by the Select Board dealt generally with performance and behavior, and said that setting specific goals would be useful as well.  He suggested that the Select Board members prepare suggested goals and get them to him by December 13th, so that they can be compiled and discussed at the December 17th meeting.

Budget Policies  (8:47)

Mr. Weiss suggested that the Select Board members prepare any specific budget priorities for discussion at the December 10th meeting.  Ms. Greeney said that they had already had the budget priority discussion at the October 19th meeting, and that at that time, she had requested that Mr. Shaffer provide an update on his budget process on December 17th.  Mr. Weiss said that that discussion had not yielded specifics on what the Select Board had wanted prioritized and deprioritized.  Ms. Greeney expressed concern about providing such specifics on the December 10th and having Mr. Shaffer incorporate them with the budget update he would provide on December 17th.

Mr. Shaffer said he is happy to provide updates on the budget at any time.  He said it is beginning to take shape, but that it is still early in the process.  He said he won’t have a full sense of it until all of the department meetings are completed.  He said that there have been new initiatives this year that he thinks will be well-received, and said that while the budget challenges remain severe, they may be less severe than had been anticipated.  He said he is “starting to feel better and better about what our circumstances are,” and said that while there will be trade-offs among departments, he said there will be generally good news.

Process for Departmental Budget Reports  (8:54)

Mr. Weiss said that there had been discussion at the Budget Coordinating Group meeting about having departments give their budget reports to the Select Board and the Finance Committee jointly rather than separately.  He said he was favorable to the idea but wanted to get the sense of the Select Board about it.

Mr. Kusner said that he saw merits to doing them together, but said it might not shorten the process or be the most effective approach, because he said the two groups ask different kinds of questions.

Ms. Awad said she has long advocated for doing them together, and said that the two groups could learn from each other’s questions, and said that it could help the Finance Committee and Select Board to “bond” in a way that would be helpful for Town Meeting.  Mr. Weiss agreed.

Ms. Brewer agreed as well, and said it could be advantageous to have both groups working with the same information.  She noted that the Finance Committee could follow-up with a department separately if it needed additional specific information.

Mr. Kusner suggested that they meet as separate bodies to deliberate and vote their recommendations.  Ms. Brewer agreed that that would make sense, and that they should not be voting their recommendations after each individual departmental presentation anyway, because they are supposed to be looking at each in the context of the full budget.  Mr. Kusner agreed and suggested that they try it and see how it works.

Ms. Greeney moved that the Select Board receive departmental reports with the Finance Committee on a trial basis.  The vote in favor was unanimous.

2008 Election Date  (9:01)

Mr. Weiss said that because the State had moved the Presidential Primary Election up a month to early February, the Select Board could consider if it wanted to move the Town election earlier than the April 1st date previously set.  He said that that could allow Town Meeting to start earlier, so that it might not end so late in June, and he said the Town Clerk said that that could be done. 

Mr. Kusner said he had spoken with people who had taken out nomination papers already and that they were surprised that a date that had been widely-advertised might be changed, and he said one had questioned the legality of that.  Mr. Weiss said that that could be checked with Town Counsel.

Ms. Brewer said that some papers had already been given out with dates on them, and that the Town Clerk was not releasing any additional nomination papers while the election date was uncertain.  Mr. Weiss said he had not known that papers would not be given out until the Select Board made a decision about the keeping or changing the date.

Mr. Kusner suggested that the election date could remain the same, and that Town Meeting could still start earlier than a month after the election. Mr. Weiss said he would find out if that would be possible.

Mr. Kusner moved to not change the 2008 election date, and Ms. Brewer seconded. 

Ms. Greeney said she was confused that they were having a discussion about possibly combining the Primary election and the Town election, when they had already had that discussion and determined that it was not worthwhile.  It was explained that the option was not to combine the elections, but to consider making the Town election earlier. 

The vote to keep the April 1st election date was unanimous.

Mr. Weiss asked that the Town Clerk be notified of their decision as soon as possible, and suggested that Town Meeting might start on April 14th or April 21st.  The issue of the April school vacation week was mentioned.   Mr. Kusner said that holding meetings more frequently in May would prevent meeting so late into June.  Ms. Brewer said that the sooner the Town Meeting dates are sought, the easier it would be to schedule the Middle School auditorium before it fills up with end-of-year school events, which she said has been a factor in the Town Meeting scheduling.

Common Victualler License – Arigato Steakhouse

Without discussion, the Select Board voted unanimously to approve a Common Victualler license for Arigato Steakhouse.

Renewal of 2008 Business Licenses

The Select Board voted unanimously to approve the renewal of business licenses for a nine-page list of businesses.

Committee Charge – Nyeri Sister City Committee (9:15)

There was some discussion of details of the proposed charge for the Nyeri Sister City Committee, the text of which was not available to observers of the meeting.  Among the considerations were whether or not the committee required a staff liaison, (the sense was that that was not necessary,) and about the accounting details of managing any funds the committee might raise.  The vote to approve the proposed committee charge as amended was unanimous.

Amended Charge – Water Supply Protection Committee

Mr. Kusner said that he wanted to add the Conservation Director as a Staff Liaison the Water Supply Protection Committee, and to add a missing word to the charge.  He moved to readopt the committee charge with those amendments, and Ms. Awad seconded.

There was some discussion about the necessity and desirability of having the Conservation Director along with the Water Resources Director and Superintendent of Public Works as liaisons to the committee.  It was determined that all had an interest in the committee’s work and would want to be kept informed about it, and that being named as liaison did not compel them to attend meetings, but kept them in the loop.

The vote to approve the amended charge was unanimous.

Committee Appointments

Ms. Awad recommended the appointment o f Janet Winston to the Design Review Board.  The vote to approve the appointment was unanimous.

Ms. Awad recommended the appointment of Jaime Tidlund to the Agricultural Commission.  The vote to the appointment was unanimous.

Ms. Awad recommended Amber KaCey to the Nyeri Sister City Committee.  The vote to approve the appointment was unanimous.

Ms. Awad recommended the appointment of Steve Dunn to the Water Supply Protection Committee.  There was discussion about whether the existing members of the Aquifer Protection Committee were automatically absorbed into the new Water Supply Protection Committee, or whether they should be formally appointed.  It was decided that formal appointment would be preferable.  The vote to approve Mr. Dunn’s appointment was unanimous.

Discussion about Handling of Untimed Agenda Items  (9:32)

There was some discussion about agenda items that keep getting pushed forward and others that are missing from the untimed item list.  Mr. Kusner asked about discussion of DPW topics he had expected might take place at this meeting.  Mr. Shaffer said there are three such issues and that he wanted them to be presented to the Select Board as a package, and said he expected to take a significant portion of a meeting for that discussion in December or early January.  Ms. Greeney noted that several issues she has asked to have prioritized keep being pushed back, and requested that citizen complaints and committee liaison assignments be made timed items for the next meeting. 

Approval of Minutes (9:41)

With discussion and corrections, the Select Board approved in a single vote the amended meeting minutes of November 5, November 7, November 15, the November 15 emergency meeting (a special liquor license approval immediately following a Town Meeting session,) and November 28, in a vote of 4 in favor, 1 abstention, with Ms. Brewer abstaining. 

The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.  The next Select Board meeting is scheduled for December 10th at 6:30 p.m. at Town Hall.

-- Stephanie O'Keeffe