Date of Meeting: Monday, April 26, 2010
Location: Town Hall, 221 Main Street
Time: 6:30PM – 7:55 PM
Members Present: Chairman James Stanton; Roger Deal; Ken Sydow
Others Present: Stephen Madaus, Town Counsel; Nancy Colbert, Town Administrator; Lori Esposito, Administrative Assistant; others as listed on the attached sign-in sheet
Tahanto Building Project: Brian McDermott, Superintendent of Schools, appeared before the Board to present financing solutions for Tahanto building project:
· LD versus hybrid versus expected tax impact over 20 to 25 years.
· Recommends 20-year level-debt with a $1.78 tax impact.
· Can possibly get a bank rate of less than four percent (4%) if money is borrowed in July.
· Roger Deal commented that the school needs to clarify that if renovation is chosen rather than erecting a new building, the state would not contribute to the cost.
· Brian said the feasibility study sent to MSBA included all options and did not recommend one over the other. MSBA decided on the rebuild option and if we then choose to renovate, they would not provide funds or assistance (based on his conversations with them).
· Jim Stanton asked if the cost to the community would be the same or more to fix the building without state funds.
· Brian said it would be the same.
· Ken Sydow asked if it would still cost as much to the taxpayers if the rebuild/renovate numbers were cut in half.
· Brian said it would cost as much. The MSBA originally had the project as a renovation but, as information was received from engineers to do the work, it was decided by MSBA that a new rebuild was a better solution investment-wise.
· Ken Sydow asked if construction of a new building would impact students and disrupt the current school day.
· Brian said it is also more costly to remove hazardous materials during renovation than demolition.
· Ken asked Brian to walk through the numbers,- the costs.
· Brian said $43M is the cost, which includes demolition, furnishings, etc.
· Ken asked if there is anything that he knows of is not included in that $43M. Brian said no.
$43.4M
- 3.2M ineligible costs ($355K for asbestos removal and legal fees)
$40.2M
Apply reimbursement rate of two percent (2%)
MSBA pays $21M
Town pays $19M plus $3.2M ineligible amount
· Then apply percentage of enrollment for Boylston and that equals Boylston’s responsibility of $15.3M, plus interest.
· Roger asked why we should borrow only 75% now and 25% in one year if we know what the rates are.
· Brian said it is because we don’t want to borrow more money than we need.
· Jim Stanton: to clarify, there is not an option to do nothing. We have to comply with education needs and structural issues so we would have to renovate without assistance or erect a new building with State assistance.
· Ken Sydow asked what happens if it passes at Town Meeting but is then voted down at the polls.
· Brian said it depends on how badly it loses. If it is only by a small margin, we could appeal to the State for a second vote. If the measure lost by a large margin, we are finished and we have to start from Square One. And the costs will only go up.
· Jim asked how much we have invested to date that we would lose.
· Brian stated $500K.
· Ken noted that if this is voted down, we risk losing accreditation. Then, if voted down again, do we need to pay to send students out of Town? Brian responded that that is an option but it would be much more costly.
· Ken inquired how we would afford that. Brian said it is a good question. Also, if it does not pass, we would not be able to provide the level of education expected by Boylston and Berlin.
· Jim Stanton asked Stephen Madaus, Town Counsel, what the vote requirement is (two thirds versus majority). Stephen said two thirds per debt exclusion.
· Brian said he was informed by MSBA that it would be a majority vote. Stephen said it reads as debt exclusion. They will discuss and resolve the issue before next week.
· Frank Reale (in the audience) asked if the impact on the average house would be provided. As it would be $1.78 per $1,000 on average, for the average house this would be $700/year. People need to know this. Also, why are the numbers for the cost of renovations all different?
· Brian said the engineers’ number was approximately $42M. The Article estimated $20M might have referred to fixes only, with no renovations to the building.
Warrant Review:
· Nos. 1 – 7 Zoning Articles. Richard Baker (present) -- Planning Board recommends amendment on floor to Article No. 1. If made, the Board recommends approval of all seven Articles. They recommend we remove four parcels (with houses already on them) to be made as part of the motion. Town Moderator Pojani would not recommend taking Nos. 1 through 7 as a group. Each needs a two-thirds vote. Stephen Madaus agrees, particularly when amending one.
· Nancy Puff said someone requested a fifth parcel be removed (property owner). The owner is no longer a resident of Boylston.
· Richard Baker summarized each Article’s meaning and purpose.
o No. 1 the map
o No. 2 “bookkeeping” to supply definitions to existing bylaws
o No. 3 uses to be allowed in newly defined zones
· Jim asked if there is a summary of changes made in the table. The Town Administrator explained it simplifies zones
o No. 4 modernizes approval procedure for special permits
o No. 5 dimensional requirements for new zones
o No. 6 parking definitions/requirements
o No. 7 development guidelines
· Dennis Pojani asked why they are all separated
· Jim Stanton said they followed the advice of zoning counsel that prepared Articles.
· Rick Baker suggests presentation of all Articles before voting on any. If some pass and others don’t, it could be a problem.
o No. 8 school – already discussed
o Nos. 9 – 22 routine Articles voted as a group annually
o Nos. 23, 24 personnel bylaw changes
· Jim asked if the Planning Board voted and approved. The Town Administrator will check.
o Nos. 25, 26 These Articles in the past have been routinely voted and spent directly out of revolving accounts. This year, amounts are reflected in the general operating budget (expense and revenue).
· Don Parker stated if money is transferred to the general fund, anyone it is available to anyone to use. Jim Stanton said yes, but we have already added that amount to the operating budget so it is spent by the ambulance fund. There is no change to salaries,- only the way we show the expenditures.
o No. 27 new hoses for fire truck
o No. 28 authority to lease Town-owned property to Y.O.U., Inc. Required by statute to authorize every ten years
o No. 29 $20K for Business Development Committee (seed money)
o No. 30 GPS maps (online)
o No. 31 Gymnasium HVAC replacement ($120K)
o No. 32 $50K to reduce the tax rate
o No. 33 $250K to stabilization
o No. 34 budget
· Eric Brose stated we needed to keep the budget at a minimal increase.
Special Town Meeting:
o No. 1 unexpended balance of FY2010
o No. 2 $10K transfer for dispatcher and police salaries from FY2008 and FY2009
· Mark Edmonds (in the audience) asked what the transferred money is for. Jim Stanton said it was a miscalculation due to Quinn Bill eligibility of an officer that wasn’t being paid properly.
Hearing: Road opening for 21 Maple Way.
· James Vogel (present) showed a proposed plan to the Board. Steve Orlando (doing excavation work) spoke with Don Parker (Highway Superintendent) and Scott McCubrey.
· Ken Sydow asked how many additional lots have not been built on. Mr. Vogel said four.
· Ken asked if they are stubbed for a water connection or does the road need to be opened again. Mr. Vogel said three are not; he is unsure why.
· Don Parker recommends a $200 check or bond in case the pavement doesn’t hold up.
· Ken asked what you can do with $200; equipment use costs more than that. Don said it’s only a narrow trench to be dug.
· Ken Sydow said, subject to approval, he would like to make sure back taxes are paid.
· Motion was made as Ken Sydow suggested. Motion was seconded and voted all in favor.
· Ken told Jim Vogel he also wants to be sure that the situation with the Pleasant Hill lots, previously erroneously deeded to the Town, has been corrected. Mr. Vogel responded that the lots were deeded to the Greater Worcester Land Trust.
Motion made to adjourn; motion seconded; voted all in favor.
Meeting adjourned at 7:55 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lori Esposito, Administrative Assistant
| 
