00:00:00,000 S1: I will go ahead and call us to order at 7 p.m., and we are officially in session for the Select Board meeting of Monday, April 22nd, 2024. Um, I will start with, uh, announcements and board openings. Uh, for board and committee openings, we have the Community Preservation Committee. There was one opening on the Conservation Commission. We have two openings. 00:00:28,167 S2: Excuse me. Kelly. Yeah. Uh, because we're in zoom. All, all, all things have to be done by voice vote. So you need to take attendance. Uh, of the members here to get the note that the forms here for the record. So. 00:00:40,300 S1: Absolutely. Um, so we'll just take a roll call. Vote. Uh, Rosie, we'll start with you. 00:00:45,868 S3: Rosie Kennedy here. 00:00:48,467 S1: Bill. 00:00:49,601 S4: Uh, bill Wilson present. 00:00:51,267 S1: And Caroline Beaulieu present. Uh, and we'll obviously, uh, loop Tom in when he arrives. Um, okay. Uh, back to our boards and openings. Uh, Council on Aging. We have two associate openings. Uh, the finance advisory committee. We have one associate opening the historic district commission. There are two openings for three year terms and two openings for two year terms. Uh, one of whom must be a resident of the historic district and one must be a resident realtor. So, lots of openings on the historic district commission. Uh, there is one opening on the Human Rights Commission. Uh, and there is one associate opening on the planning board. Uh, as well as one associate opening on the zoning Board of Appeals. 00:01:36,367 S5: How do I turn. 00:01:38,000 S6: On that blood. 00:01:39,400 S5: Court? Oh. 00:01:43,267 S1: Um, I'm happy to take a few minutes to do any updates from board members. Uh, for those who see a familiar but new face, Rosie is joining us for her first, uh, meeting as our newest select board member. So. Welcome. Rosie. I'm. I'm assuming you don't have any updates, but if you do, I'll certainly be happy to. To have you then. But, Bill, any updates to share? 00:02:07,801 S4: Um, yeah, actually, Rosie, um, from the master, um, uh, master plan committee. Was that the last meeting we had last week? I was on vacation, actually, for school. Vacation? Uh, but, Rosemary, do you want to give an update on that? Sure. 00:02:21,767 S3: Yeah, sure. I have two things. Um. Thank you. I'm happy to be here. And thank you to everybody who supported me. And, um, so. Right. To work. Um, I have, uh, updates from the master plan steering committee. And also just a couple of questions for from the, um, Council on Aging. So master plan steering committee, we met last week and we went over the, um, finished product and endorsed it to go on to the planning board. There were a few little glitches, but nothing that the planning board couldn't, uh, couldn't iron out. And I believe Money Crunch was there. And she's the chair of the planning board, so she will take care of that. Just, uh, some some language that should be put more in the information. Okay, there we go. Um, and I'm pretty happy with the, um, finished product. I think a lot of a tremendous amount of work went into it and really proud of everybody who stuck it out for all those years and finally got it done. So happy about that. Um, and then secondly, the Council on Aging I wanted to talk about for a minute. Um, I think I directed my questions to you, Joe, but the friends of the CLA have generously donated a new ping pong table, the center for Active Living at the Hamilton Senior Center is alive and moving beautifully along with the times, and people are coming in droves. So my question is, um, we would like to be able to have a vote of the board to put the old ping pong table into surplus status so that we can dispose of it. And I don't know if we need to take a vote to accept the new ping pong table. So, Joe, do you have answers to those questions? 00:04:27,000 S2: Yeah, I do. So I think that the agenda was already posted, so it's hard to add that to an item for surplus. But um, we could definitely, um, put it on the next agenda for an official vote to to declare the old one surplus. As for the new one, if it was raised as the money was, it was donated. The money to build it was raised by the friends of the Council on Aging. That's their purpose. You don't have to accept the gift that it automatically is something that they can do. Are there charter? So, um, if you know anybody, we go meantime if, if, if everybody could just mute your if everybody could mute so the board could talk, please. Um, in the meantime, if, uh, I can get the DPW to pick up the old, um, ping pong table and hold it at the DPW yard until I declare it. 00:05:18,100 S3: Okay. That's fine. Okay. So they can just pick it up and sort of put it someplace, and then we. 00:05:24,467 S2: And then once it's once it's declared surplus, they can dispose of it. That's fine. 00:05:28,167 S3: Okay. Perfect. Well, those are the two things that I had. And I been on the board for five minutes. So there you go. Thank you. 00:05:35,167 S4: And just quickly. Thank you. Rosemarie. Um, but a big thanks to everybody who served on the master planning, uh, steering committee. Uh, it was a couple of year project. We did restructure a few times. Big kudos to the planning group. You know, to Joe, to the to your staff. Patrick, who helped out all the all the committee members. There was a lot of hours and input as and as Rosemary said. I'm very happy with the final product. And it does go to the planning board to get officially adopted. We'll see what they come back with. But Marnie was heavily involved in the process the entire time, so I'm I'm hoping that'll be an efficient process. So we'll get that out there and publish on the website once it's adopted. So again, thanks to everyone involved. 00:06:18,000 S2: Madam chair, I mean, I don't know who so yet I believe I believe Tom may have joined. Tom Myers, are you here? 00:06:30,100 S2: Trying to track all the people coming in. I thought I saw him joining, but maybe he hasn't. I'm sorry. I'll keep my eyes out. 00:06:54,901 S4: Should we? You're on mute. Caroline, if you're speaking to us. 00:06:58,300 S1: Oh, that's too bad. Because I said some really good stuff. 00:07:00,467 S4: I could tell it was amazing. 00:07:02,567 S1: Um, was it that gesticulating? Um, I was just going to say the next stop is, uh, public comment, but it's public comment for things that are not currently on the agenda. I know we have a lot of folks here who want to join in the conversations about items that are on the agenda, but this specific public comment time is just for public comment on anything that isn't currently on the agenda. 00:07:22,501 S7: Can I just chime in, Joe? I'm here. Just so you know. 00:07:25,601 S2: You you were the 781844. 00:07:30,300 S7: No, that's not my number. But, uh, I'm going to be jumping on my. 00:07:33,400 S2: Okay. You're right next to that person. All right. All right. Gotcha. 00:07:37,667 S1: Perfect. Um, so any anybody here for public comment? Not on items currently on the agenda? 00:07:47,267 S3: No. 00:07:47,901 S1: All right. Uh, so first up on our our business agenda is organization of the Select board for the coming year. Uh, and we start with nomination and votes for select board chair. 00:08:06,000 S4: Well, um, I'd like to nominate Caroline. You, uh, as the chair for this year? I know you're, uh, in your third year going into it. You did a great job as vice chair. I think you lead good discussions, uh, on all the topics, uh, that we bring to the table. So if you are willing and able, I'd like to nominate you. 00:08:25,400 S7: Second that. 00:08:28,267 S1: I, I am as willing and able as I can be willing and able. 00:08:32,467 S4: So just just check the mute switch every now and then. 00:08:35,467 S1: Uh, she's she's a great many things. 00:08:42,100 S1: All right. 00:08:43,467 S4: So we did have a second. Tom. 00:08:45,400 S2: Tom second. 00:08:47,067 S7: Yep. That was the second. 00:08:49,267 S1: All right. Um, if. No. Any further nominations. 00:08:56,567 S1: All right. Then we can take a roll call. Vote. Tom, I'll start with you. 00:09:03,467 S7: Yes. 00:09:05,667 S1: Bill. 00:09:06,868 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:09:08,467 S1: Rosie. 00:09:09,400 S3: Rosie. Kennedy. I. 00:09:12,000 S1: Uh, and awkwardly. Carolyn Beaulieu. Hi. All right. Well, we'll see how this goes. Guys, it's going to be a it's going to be a real carnival. Uh, second up, we have nominations and votes for the Select board. Vice chair. 00:09:30,000 S3: Um, like two. Um, if I may nominate Bill Wilson for the vice chair. 00:09:35,267 S1: I second. I definitely agree with that. 00:09:41,000 S4: Happy to, uh, to help you out, uh, Caroline, and work with the rest of the team. Perfect. 00:09:47,868 S1: Um. All right. If no further nominations, I will take a roll call. Vote. Tom. 00:09:54,667 S7: Yes? For me. 00:09:56,067 S1: Awesome. Uh, Rosie. 00:09:57,868 S3: Rosie Kennedy, I. 00:09:59,868 S1: Bill. 00:10:01,167 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:10:02,767 S1: And Caroline Boyle. UI. Congratulations. Uh, and lastly, we have nomination and votes for, uh, select board clerk slash secretary. 00:10:18,367 S1: I know, Tom, you have done an admirable job in your current role, and I asked if you would be, you know, willing to continue. And you said yes. So I will nominate Tom, uh, as secretary for second. 00:10:32,868 S1: Uh. 00:10:35,400 S7: I graciously accept. 00:10:36,801 S1: Why thank you, thank you. All right. With, uh, if there are no further nominations, I will take a roll call. Vote. Uh, Rosie? 00:10:45,267 S3: Rosie Percy Kennedy I. 00:10:47,501 S5: Bill. 00:10:48,400 S4: Bill. Wilson. 00:10:49,000 S1: Yes, ma'am. 00:10:50,767 S7: Tom Meyers. Yes. 00:10:52,300 S1: And finally myself, Caroline Beaulieu, I. All right. And with that, we have officially organized for the next year. Um, thanks. Thanks to everybody. And, uh, we will move on. Uh, next up is approve appointment of our former beloved chair, uh, Sean Farrell, to the community preservation Committee. I will entertain a motion to approve our friend Sean. 00:11:24,000 S4: I move that we appoint Sean Farrell to the preservation committee. Oh. Sorry. Tom. 00:11:30,467 S3: Second. 00:11:32,000 S1: Second by Rosie. Um, there is a, uh. 00:11:37,567 S4: Maybe we would like to hear from Sean. You know, I don't know if he's. 00:11:40,767 S8: Do I need to sell it before you before you vote? 00:11:43,300 S5: Yeah. 00:11:43,667 S4: Give us any references or. Well. 00:11:47,167 S8: You're just going to have to go for it first. Might I say just congratulations, Rosie, on getting back on the board. And congratulations to the new Madam Chair. And, uh, Bill, as vice chair, you're going to do a great job. And you, Tom, as well. You just keep on keeping on. 00:12:05,968 S4: Sean, thanks for staying involved. Yeah. 00:12:08,868 S1: Absolutely. Um, so I know, Sean, that you've been a long time, uh, part of, uh, the preservation committee. And this is just sort of a continuity of service. Um, we we certainly have, you know, glowing endorsement from anyone who knows that the application has been put through. So, um, unless there's further discussion, I'm happy to to take a vote on the motion. Cool. Uh. Roll call. Tom. 00:12:37,000 S7: Tom. Myers. Yes. 00:12:38,367 S5: Rosie. 00:12:39,267 S3: Rosie. Kennedy, I. 00:12:41,501 S5: Bill. 00:12:42,367 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:12:43,868 S1: Caroline Beaulieu I. It's official, Sean Farrell. 00:12:48,300 S8: All right. Thank you all. I'm off to a baseball game. Congratulations to the agenda. I'll watch it on tape. 00:12:54,367 S1: It's chillier than you think. I just came from the fields. Bring the gloves. 00:12:59,100 S5: I will. 00:13:00,300 S8: Take care of. 00:13:00,667 S7: Everything as well. 00:13:02,868 S8: Bye bye. 00:13:03,567 S5: All right. 00:13:04,067 S3: Bye, Sean. 00:13:06,167 S1: All right. Uh, the next two are our favorite topics. Uh, there's banners, y'all. Uh, so first, we have a banner request for the Hamilton Wyndham Garden Club. On the banner wrap on Bay road. Um, I'm looking in the packet. Is there a. 00:13:24,300 S2: Yeah. They didn't provide a they didn't provide a description of the banner, but it's an annual thing. They they do it every year. Um, so they are aware of the, the, the board's rules on size and, uh, they'll comply size and duration. 00:13:40,267 S1: Um, all right. I will entertain a motion on the approval of the banner. 00:13:44,901 S3: Sure. I move that we approve the Hamilton Wyndham Garden Club banner. Um, from May 4th to May 11th, 2024. 00:13:57,367 S4: Second. 00:13:58,200 S1: Second from Bill. Uh. All right, any further discussion on the placement of the banner on the board? All right. Uh, roll call. Vote. Tom. 00:14:09,801 S7: Tom Myers. Yes. 00:14:11,200 S1: Bill. 00:14:12,701 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:14:14,000 S1: Rosie. 00:14:14,868 S3: Rosie. 00:14:15,267 S1: Kennedy I Caroline Beaulieu, I. 00:14:20,701 S1: Uh, we have another request for a banner. This one is for the Patent Homestead Spring music series, which we are delighted to welcome back to the park. Is this the what year is this for? The music series. 00:14:32,100 S2: This is the. This is for the. This is for the the one out here at Pat homestead. So, um, this is the second year we've done it, and it's the second year that they're asking that we're asking for the show. You're asking me to put the banner on the tennis court so it'd be the same size banner as the one last year, with the dates and passport, a little bit longer duration hanging, just so the people know what the dates are. 00:14:53,901 S7: Good boy. 00:14:56,100 S1: Um, whomever has a good boy named Mac who needs to drop it, please mute. Thank you. Um, okay. It's funny that you say that because I actually remember last year there was some confusion about the fact that it didn't say homestead and Big, so people thought it was the banner for the music series at Patton Park. 00:15:17,200 S2: Oh, well, I'll make sure it says a patent. I'll make sure that it says patent the homestead this year. 00:15:22,400 S5: Yeah. And if you do, I. 00:15:23,901 S9: Think I wasn't muted. 00:15:29,267 S1: I'm sorry. Somebody's speaking. Um, yeah. It did. I just might give them that feedback that because there's a music series at Patton Park and the sign is at Payton Park. They just make it clear that it's at Patent Homestead because people were showing up in the wrong places. Um. All right. I will entertain a motion to approve the Patent Homestead Spring Music Series banner as outlined. 00:15:56,367 S4: Uh, that we, uh, approve the Patent Homestead music series banner on the tennis courts, uh, as outlined with the dates provided. 00:16:04,667 S3: Second. 00:16:05,601 S1: Second from Rosie. All right. All in favor? Roll call. Tom. 00:16:10,467 S7: Tom Myers. Yes. 00:16:12,000 S5: Bill. 00:16:12,868 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:16:14,167 S1: Rosie. 00:16:15,067 S3: Rosie. Kennedy, I. 00:16:17,000 S1: All right. Caroline. You I the ayes have it. 00:16:21,367 S5: Um. 00:16:22,400 S1: All righty. Uh, next up is approve. Approve the use of the perpetual care funds $3,084 for annual drug treatment at Hamilton's cemetery. And a vote. Um, I know that this is the the third Grubb treatment I've been a part of, so I can confirm that it's it's sort of a BAU item for us. I know we we talked ad nauseum last year about alternatives or safe whatever. And I think we got a really good rundown last year from, uh, Tim about why they do it and why they do it the way they do it and how it works. So I don't feel like we necessarily need to open that can of Grubb worms. 00:17:02,267 S5: But a. 00:17:03,267 S4: Good one. 00:17:04,267 S1: Yeah. Um, but I'm happy to entertain a motion first and then we can discuss if folks want to. 00:17:12,767 S3: Share. I'll make a note, a motion that we approve, um, use of perpetual care funds in the amount of $3,084 for an annual Grubb treatment at the Hamilton Cemetery. 00:17:26,200 S7: Second. 00:17:28,367 S1: Any further discussion? 00:17:31,767 S5: Oh. 00:17:32,467 S1: Those Grubbs, y'all. Those Grubbs. Uh. All right, roll call. Vote. Rosie. 00:17:37,767 S3: Rosie. Kennedy, I. 00:17:39,567 S5: Bill. 00:17:41,000 S4: Bill. Wilson I. 00:17:42,367 S5: Tom. 00:17:44,167 S7: Myers. Yes. 00:17:45,567 S1: Caroline. Bill. You. Yes. The ayes have it. 00:17:50,267 S5: Um. 00:17:51,167 S1: All right. The next item is reviewing the draft level two draft. Draft level draft letter to the MSBA. Uh, regarding the offer of a 50 year lease to the Cutler School site to Hamilton Windham Regional School District, as well as a vote, um, in our packets. 00:18:13,501 S1: Um, you will see a draft of the letter. Um. 00:18:19,701 S5: Yeah. 00:18:20,767 S1: Uh, do we want to do a dramatic reading, or do folks feel like they have access to the letter in the packet? It's not super long. I'm happy to just. It just says this letter is to inform Hamilton when a regional school district of the town of Hamilton's commitment to the ongoing Cutler School building project, and of the town's intention and willingness to commit to a long term lease of the Cutler School property located at 237 Ashbury Street in Hamilton, mass. Based on the will of the voters on March 18th, 2024, at a regularly scheduled and posted Select Board meeting. The Hamilton School Board voted four zero of the members present in favor of committing the town to a 50 year lease of the property at seven 237 Ashbury Street to the Hamilton one and Regional School District to continue to operate an elementary school at the site. The select board vote does not favor any particular school building option currently being considered by the Cutler School Building Committee during the feasibility study, and the board expects that the Cutler School Building Committee will consider all public input before making a decision on a preferred option. The Select Board would plan to bring the issue of a 50 year lease to the annual town meeting in April 2025, so that the meeting can consider the lease, as well as the final school building option. 00:19:32,601 S10: The persecution. 00:19:35,868 S1: So, I mean, really, it's just a discussion about the the extension of specifically the lease of Cutler. Uh, insofar as we have to have, um, as a part of the math school building process, we need to have that lease secured. Um, otherwise, we can't move forward in the process. 00:19:56,567 S10: So you can say, okay. 00:20:01,300 S1: Um, I'm happy to entertain a motion or so. We can continue to discuss it. 00:20:08,167 S4: I move that we approve the draft letter to the MSBA, which offers a 50 year lease to the Cutler School site, to the Hamilton 1 a.m. Regional School District. 00:20:19,667 S7: Second. 00:20:22,868 S1: Um, any discussion from the board or anyone? Uh. 00:20:28,868 S4: No, I, I just think it's, you know, as you said, Caroline is part of the process. The MSBA requires that the town, you know, commits to a long term lease so that the MSBA will match funding, you know, for the product. So we definitely want that. Um, the only thing I would add is, you know, outside of this letter, we do have a commitment, I believe, with the schools to reopen the regional district agreement so we can, uh, just clean that up a little bit. I think the district has said has offered a willingness to do that, and I know one of them has as well. I just want to make sure we don't lose sight of that. 00:21:04,767 S7: Just, uh. And Butterworth, if you could mute your your mic, we're getting some feedback. 00:21:10,868 S5: Sorry, I don't. 00:21:14,701 S5: All right. 00:21:16,100 S1: Um, if there's no further discussion, I will take a roll call. Vote. Tom. 00:21:22,267 S7: Tom. Myers. Yes. 00:21:23,767 S5: Rosie. 00:21:24,868 S3: Rosie. Kennedy, I. 00:21:27,000 S5: Bill. 00:21:27,901 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 00:21:29,701 S1: Thank you. Yes. Um. All right. The final item on the agenda is discussing the draft agreement with Tobacco Realty Trust for the friendly 40. Be, uh, and support at the CBA. Um, and I know that there are an impressive amount of folks here. Uh, to listen to this conversation and join in on this conversation. Uh, so the first thing that we can and will do is we will take a motion, uh, which will open up discussion and the board will discuss it, and then we will open it for public comment. Um, if and when you have a comment, just you'll raise your, your hand and, uh, we'll do our best to sort of scan for comments. Um, I completely understand that there is a lot of, uh, reasonable, uh, passion around this, but let's just make sure that we, we, you know, give each other the, the room to speak, um, and not talk over each other. I know it's really difficult over zoom, but we will do our best. So I will entertain a motion first if anybody would like to make one. 00:22:37,167 S3: Um, I just like to make a couple of comments. First, that this is a very complicated issue. Um, and, um, we have no if this is the first time we've discussed this, there are no documents that include, um, the application included in the packet here. So I have no idea what we're even discussing. And the second issue is there are no documents from the prior application from this developer that was, um, declined by the planning board. So I have lots of questions about whether we should even be discussing this without adequate background. Um, I think to discuss this intelligently, we should have the current application in front of us, and we should also have the planning board's decision. So for those reasons, I'm thinking it might be a wise choice to table this for tonight. Until we have such documents in front of us that we can evaluate. 00:23:51,267 S5: Um. 00:23:54,400 S1: Now, when you say there's nothing in the packet on, are you the draft agreement from 417? The memorandum is in the packet. 00:24:03,868 S3: Well, that's just that. That's just a draft agreement. It's not the application itself. And in order to have, um, um, an academic discussion of this, we should understand exactly what this in detail, what this entails. If the town is being asked to support this. This development in the form of a 40 B. How can we do that if we don't have any information about it? 00:24:35,467 S5: Tom, I. 00:24:36,367 S1: Don't want to put you on the spot, but I'm going to. I know that you know, the history here, as we all well know, is the original. The developer originally obviously applied for the permit for 133, which was rejected by the Planning Board. One of the concerns during that time was that if the developer came back with a 40 B, there was not much that we could do about it if anything, which was why we had hoped that we would be able to come to some agreement with the developer during 133 now that there is 40 b where I agree with you, like we we can look and compare the two. Um, but I think I do. I know I've read all 70 emails that we got today. There was a lot of language around. The select board has to stop this. The select board cannot make this go through. And I just want to be very clear that the select board cannot stop this. This is because of the 40 b. This is in the purview of the zoning board, and it doesn't even require the sort of requisite steps through the planning board. Um, and so a lot of what we're doing here is and I agree with you, Rosie, we don't have to we don't have to send that letter or approve that letter today. Um, but for all the folks that have joined, I wanted to sort of give that information that the select board cannot. We do not have purview over stopping this at this point. This is, uh, and I will give the mic to Tom. I know that he had met, I believe, with the developer two weeks ago to sort of talk about the shifts in the plan. Um, and, you know, for better or for worse, it is it is the same plan, but with the affordable component. So, Tom, I'll turn it over to you. 00:26:07,901 S7: Yeah. I'll just echo what you said. I mean, essentially, you know, this letter would allow us, you know, to move into a friendly for DB situation in the sense that, you know, the town, you know, like Caroline spoke to, you know, we aren't necessarily able to stop it at this point. It's going to go to the CBA. And you know really there's very minimal restrictions on that and what the state will, you know, kind of push these forward. So we're looking to potentially have a supportive for TB in the sense of the town may get something out of this. And when we met with the developers a few weeks ago, you know, it's essentially the same plan. We talked through what their plan looks like, and there is additional housing that they would add to it to accommodate for the the affordable piece. But it's not many units. And I Jobe correct me on the numbers. I think it was another 15 units or something like that, or. 00:26:51,267 S2: It's another nine units above the original request, but 15 of the units now would be affordable. Also, just so you know, attorney Amy Kessel town Council on this matter is on board is here. Amy represented the town in the recent discussions between the previous Selectboard chair, Tom, myself and the developer. The developer had had asked if the town would consider if the Selectboard would consider supporting their application to the SBA. So the only real decision making process is with the CBA in this process. The question here is does the select board, through the development agreement want to support the developer with with the CBA? And that is not to overstep and try and tell the CBA what to do. It's just to provide more information to the CBA in terms of what the developer is, won't do. Amy, if you wanted to explain how the the memorandum of agreement, the MOA and stuff works, that would be helpful, I think. 00:27:46,567 S7: Yeah, yeah. So when we met with them, I mean, when they came back and they only proposed nine additional units, which is actually fairly low compared to what they probably could have offered. And, you know, some other towns that have had similar situations, look at Ipswich where they had, you know, a 40 become and they had ended up almost doubling what their, their space was. I mean, they only came back with additional nine units. Um, and we met with the developers and were able to negotiate some terms that would be favorable to the town, um, some, uh, some stipends towards the town that will help towards extending the, the water line to get folks in that neighborhood access to town water so that are currently on well water. So there are some favorable, uh, items for the town. You know, if we, you know, support this as a friendly for TB and submit this letter in support of their their application. You know, if we do oppose it, uh, essentially, we're not really going to get anything out of this, and it's still going to go forward, uh, you know, as a, as a 40 b, we don't really have the opportunity to stop it, but we do have the opportunity to benefit from it, uh, and get something out of this proposal. And that's what this letter would essentially do. We would, you know, sign off it, support it, uh, and be able to have this agreement in place that allows us to have some benefits from this development that's going to to move forward regardless. 00:29:02,267 S1: Amy, anything to add? 00:29:04,601 S5: Um. 00:29:05,467 S11: Not much. Um, both Joe and Tom did a did a very good job. So what we have here is, um, there a 40 B has been filed. An application was filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Zoning Board of Appeals will be opening that hearing next week. And in the process of applying for their 40 B. The developer did reach out and has offered some mitigation that, um, is we right now because this mitigation was offered prior to the CBA issuing a decision on the matter. Um, we have the opportunity to enter into a memorandum of agreement with the developer, which the benefit of doing that is that we then would have a contract with the developer. And so therefore, um, while these would also while this mitigation could also become a condition um, with a 40 b once a decision is issued and conditions are issued, um, the developer by, by regulation, by state regulation has the right to come back and request a modification to that decision at any time with having this separate MOA. Um, in my opinion, the the benefit of that is that we have a contract with the developer. They can't necessarily change that, um, that mitigation without coming back to the Select board and renegotiating. Um, whereas in the zoning board context, unfortunately, as a municipality, we are somewhat um, our hands are somewhat tied when it comes to 40 be particularly when it comes to the Housing Appeals Committee. The Housing Appeals Committee is extremely developer friendly. Um, if there were any kind of pushback on a request, a a request for a modification, if they took that to the HHC, you know, our chances are extremely low of succeeding there. So, um, really, this is just something that, um, because the developer came to the town early. We have the ability to take advantage of. That it is a policy decision by the Select Board. I simply just put together a draft memorandum of agreement based on the terms that the developer has proposed. The developer has not seen this yet. Um, you know, so it's really just a, um, something for the select board to consider. 00:31:45,067 S1: So for folks who don't have, uh, the packet in front of them, some examples. And again, the Zoning Board of Appeals operates independently from the Select board. They make their choice. They they do everything they do. All this letter does is say if this goes through, if you go, yes, here are the things that we've pre negotiated, for lack of a better term, on behalf of the town for this going through. And as we said, this does not even necessarily mean that anybody here is enthusiastic or delighted by the idea of this. But we put this forward in writing in law so that if it does go through, we've protected some of these sort of mitigation measures. So things like a trail connection through tobacco woods and a perpetual easement for the town to the trails, um, public parking at the trailhead, conservation restriction of all of the open space. Uh, relative to, you know, the non developed sites. So it's 56.81 acres. Um, that that conservation restriction is held by the town. Uh also support for the Council on Aging. So donating $70,000 to the town for a handicapped vehicle, um, payments, you know, as they sort of sell parts of it. And so these are the things that we've negotiated. I think if we sort of look at the four corners of sort of this motion and this memorandum, I think what we're saying is a does this represent the things that we want to ensure are in there? Are there other things that we would want to ensure that are in there? Um, but, you know, it's it's not necessarily a ringing endorsement. It's just saying they came to the town. The town said, you know, if you're going to do this and you're going to move forward, here are some things that we would like to ensure that you make happen. We put them here so that everybody, as Amy said, is sort of tied to them. Um, but we as the Selectboard do not have purview over the zoning board's decision. Uh, or, you know, sort of any rights around the 40 be it doesn't work the same way as the permit pulled for the original 133 project. That said, I still want to honor if this is something that you do feel like we want a table, we can certainly talk about that. 00:33:52,367 S5: Yeah. 00:33:53,367 S3: Yeah. Uh, so so I will just say a few things here, and then I will ask to table this officially. And the first thing I'd like to bring up is that, uh, I'll just reiterate that there are no documents that give us any information of the original application versus the application currently under consideration. I appreciate that, Tom says he was told it's essentially the same, but I haven't seen that. And as a member of this board, I have the responsibility to investigate those documents and look at them. Secondly, if it is the same document, then I'm perplexed why we would enter into a friendly 40 B with a developer who whose application was unanimously rejected by the Planning board for what it was unanimously rejected by the Planning Board for numerous and multiple environmental risks. We cannot ignore that. Um, I believe if this is the same application as was declined by the planning board, then there are Our 49 waivers to all sorts of things requested by this developer. And although there may be some tax benefit to the town, I think that is just a minor part of everything that is Hamilton. We need to consider our environment. We need to consider the quality of life. We need to consider our water supply. We already have a well that's out of order from from PFAS on School Street. So how I or anybody in this board at this time could sit and just say, um, this is not an endorsement of it, I think is incorrect because by agreeing to this, we would be saying that this we do agree to this. And so I so for those reasons, I would like to see both of the documents and be able to talk about it with the board in detail about what makes this something substantially, substantively, that the Board of Selectmen could approve. And I certainly agree with the sentiment that we are not the CBA. The CBA makes the final decision, but that is absolutely no reason for us to acquiesce to these what have been deemed as unreasonable requests. I don't know, one way or the other because I haven't had a chance to look at them yet, but those are my reasonings to state that this issue should be broken. 00:36:41,467 S1: If I if I can and I, I, I agree with you on very much of that and I respect that. I do want to clarify that this was a lot of this was influenced by town council because of their belief that we would not be able to stop a 40 B. And so this is really a hedge to say if this is something that we cannot stop, we need to make sure that we are doing everything we can to protect the things we want to protect. and I think that's a good reason to go back to this and modify, but I don't I don't want it to. I when we say this is an endorsement, this is this is our Hail Mary that we have been told that there is very little chance that we can stop this because of how, how friendly everybody is to 40 B and how how easy it is for folks to get by. So what. 00:37:29,367 S5: I want to be. 00:37:29,868 S1: Really careful of is we don't accidentally cut off our nose to spite our face and say, we're going to refuse to put anything in writing, and we're going to refuse. And then, similar to what happened in the last process, those those protections go away. We now don't have them at all. 00:37:44,801 S3: Well, you know, with with all respect to my fellow board members, these mitigations are ridiculous. These are the things that this developer had already agreed to. The only difference is the support for the Council on Aging. Um, but a trail connection was already agreed to. I know a little bit about the prior application. The parking was already agreed to. The conservation restriction was already agreed to. So I'm not sure what benefit I see here. Even even if we even if we did agree to to go along with this, there are many other issues that need to be considered before we as a responsible board put our signature on this. 00:38:32,167 S1: Absolutely. And I think that's that is as good a reason as any. Uh, my only question back would be when does the CBA meet? 00:38:40,000 S3: They meet the first, but that doesn't impair us from putting off our endorsement or non endorsement of of this. 00:38:47,667 S1: But Amy, did you say this needed to happen before that went to the CBA? 00:38:51,968 S11: So um, so ideally yes. Um, because once they open up the public hearing with the CBA, um, it's opened and they don't necessarily have to offer the things that they're offering. What I would like to note is that while certain, um, mitigation weren't, um, offered at the planning Board, that mitigation does not necessarily need to be offered at the Zoning Board of Appeals with a 40 B, there are two. Um, there are two items that were offered that were not offered at the planning board. One of them was the Council on Aging vehicle, and the other one was the waterline extension work. So, um, those two things were not even on the table at planning board. The others. Um, Miss Kennedy is correct that, um, that the, um, the trailhead parking and the easement, the trail easement and the CR were offered at the planning board. However, the planning board was a special permit process. It was a discretionary permit process. A 40 b is not necessarily as discretionary as the planning board. Um, the other thing that Member Kennedy is correct about is that, um, waivers. So I know that, um, she stated that there was about 40 something waivers at the planning board process under 40 B, the zoning board is going to step into the shoes of all other local boards, so they will step into the shoes of the Planning Board, the Conservation Commission, um, Board of Health, historical, any board that any local board. And so the waiver list at the CBA is going to be significant. And, you know, the CBA is not able to deny waivers under 40 B unless those waivers are not consistent with local needs. Unfortunately, because Hamilton has not yet reached 10% of affordability, there is a Presumption that affordable housing outweighs all other local needs. So we really do have some cards stacked against us. I did do a training with the 40 B a couple of weeks ago where I did stress that, um, that what we want to do is take advantage of conditioning this project to get the best project that we can for, for Hamilton. And so, um, that's just this MOA is just one step in doing that. Um, if we if we wait to, um, if we wait to enter into an MOA, we do risk losing any of this mitigation that they're offering, which, again, even the trail easement, even the trail parking and the KR, which was previously issued at the planning board or previously offered, I'm sorry, at the planning Board, um, does not. It's not guaranteed that it will be offered at CBA. 00:42:05,501 S4: So to be clear, are they offering this or is this a proposal we're sending that we would like? 00:42:11,567 S11: They offered it. They offered it. Um, they offered it in their mitigation as mitigation to the 40 b. 00:42:20,868 S4: And we talk about, um, what percent we are with affordable stock. Um, I know Joe, we sent a letter, I believe, from the town last November to the housing authority, um, with concerns. Was there a response to that or do we not expect one? We just want that, you know, in the background as they make a decision. And as such, I'm just wondering, could we be in Safe Harbor with some of the other projects that we're doing in town? Uh, and just showing progress towards a goal without this. 00:42:50,901 S11: So it's my understanding that, um, the town was in, um, safe harbor for a brief period, however. Um, what happens is, is that, um, units. Um, units that are on the subsidized housing inventory, which is called the shy um units. Go, come. They go on and off the shy because under the state regulations, when a comprehensive permit is issued, and once it's filed with the town clerk, all of the affordable units qualify. For shy those units, there has to be a building permit issued within one year of that decision. If there's a building permit, that's a building permit hasn't been issued. They come off the shy. Once the building permit is issued, they go back on the shy. And then we have to have a certificate of occupancy within a year. If we don't get a Co within a year, they come off the shy and then they can go back on the shy. Once we have a Co so what we had was we had um we had safe harbor based on our housing production plan. Um we had Significant moving progress towards affordable housing. And so we did reach Safe Harbor. However, unfortunately, um, the the development that allowed, um, allowed us to get that safe harbor a year went by without building permits being issued, and therefore those units are now not on the shore. 00:44:23,000 S3: So I'd like to make another point that for all of this, um, um, disturbance of the land, um, on Tobacco Row 133 Essex, we will gain a total of 15 affordable units. And I think that's, um, a minuscule number when one looks at the size of this development. Um, and again, I understand we are not in a position to say no to it, but seems there is lots of room for additional mitigation. Um, and I worry that we're not, um, asking hard questions of this developer. For instance, um, we have a new storm water protection bylaw that we could ask the developer to adhere to. Um, the reality is that, um, the benefits to to the town have to outweigh the cost to the town. And that's not just cost in putting in a road. Um, it's the long term cost to the town. So I think we really should take time to, to look at this development agreement and really, um, think about whether this is something we want to endorse. I understand the CBA has the call, but we shouldn't just, um, acquiesce easily. And and I believe that this development agreement could be a lot stronger. And I do want to look at the other documents, as I would assume that my, my board mates would, would want to do. We need to understand what the developer is asking for. Why did the planning board deny it? We need to ask those hard questions before we assent to anything. 00:46:28,100 S4: We have the planning Board decision. We've seen that right. We understand the topography. We understand the sleep, the steep slopes, the water, the storm damage. And none of that goes away right with with a 40 B. And you're right, it's minuscule, you know, with 15 units. You know, on the other hand, we've got a landowner trying to sell their property. I do have a hard time telling a private landowner what to do. So this could take two paths, right? We could mitigate, as you put it, uh, with what's going on with a 40 B, but what about the litigate portion of it? What happens if we, you know, we anger some folks and it either goes this way and we end up with something that happened in Ipswich, or do we just jump back into the courtroom and we're going to incur a lot more costs? And I mean, I don't know those answers to Rosie. So I'm actually kind of agreeing to it's like, what are the potential paths? I do know there's probably a path. And how do we control that as a town versus the rights of a, of a private landowner? 00:47:21,000 S5: Right. 00:47:21,601 S3: You know, I think the, the planning board had mentioned, I listened in to some of their meetings and as they were reaching their decision, they stated to the developer that this could have been done in a way that there was very little resistance to it. And I don't know exactly what that means. That's probably why I want an opportunity to to look at the planning board decision and, and both of the applications. But I think something as important as this and as impactful as this, as evidenced by the multitude of people who are on this zoom, we deserve to show our residents that we are doing our due diligence and thinking about how we could make this a win win situation for the residents and for the developer. Um, I this this particular, um, compilation of the development. I certainly have no issues with, um, over 55. That's that's fine with me, but but I do think what it entails physically is something that we shouldn't just sign off on tonight. 00:48:33,467 S5: Okay. 00:48:34,000 S1: So what I'm hearing is, and I'm happy to entertain a motion to table this, but we are under that tabling. We are agreeing that this will go to the CBA without a signed mitigation or draft agreement from us. And what we're hearing from Amy is that may mean that it doesn't hold water. So if we choose to table, which again, I'm happy to entertain that motion, we are doing so knowing that a a later date mitigation agreement may not hold water because we did it outside the order of operations. Are we clear that that that's what we're clear on that as we may take a motion to table. 00:49:15,100 S4: Yes. And do we know how many units could go there if 59 wasn't the answer? I think, Tom, you referenced a large number in Ipswich. Is that a known number like or is that something we think could happen but technically couldn't happen? Uh, I don't know the answer to that. 00:49:32,100 S5: I mean. 00:49:33,300 S1: They were resistant to reducing the overall number of units, as I remember in the planning board process, just because of, um, profitability. 00:49:42,100 S4: Right. So. But could they. So 59 gave them a good profitability number, but could they go to 150. You know if, if they, if we angered them and didn't agree to to to kind of work with them to mitigate some of this, are we mitigating the number to 59 at this point? Could it be larger or do we just we don't know that. 00:50:02,767 S5: I mean. 00:50:03,067 S1: They filed they filed the plans. And Amy, keep me honest. I mean, the plans are as the plans are now, that's that's what they've put forth is the essentially. 00:50:16,467 S1: Only the bill that they had that they had proposed before, but adding these affordable housing units into that build. 00:50:23,901 S5: Yes. 00:50:24,300 S11: It's it's very. 00:50:25,267 S5: Common. 00:50:25,868 S11: When you go from a non 40 B project to a 40 B project to have additional units because of the requirement of the affordable units. Now unfortunately with 40 B um, you, you have difficult sites and um, you have developers that want to maximize those those properties. Now this these are going to be for sale over 55 units and that so therefore they would be, um, you know, duplexes and, and townhouse style or single family, those kind of style. But there's nothing, you know, to answer. Member Wilson's question, there's nothing that, um, you know, they says they can't come back with a four storey with four storey apartment buildings in Ipswich. We're dealing with four three storey apartment buildings. So 214 units. So, um, on, you know, on a lot less land than, than this. So it's really nothing. Nothing. You can it's not it's nothing I can really answer as to, you know, how many units they can actually, um, produce, but their, their model right now is over 55. Five, which does somewhat limit the type of buildings that they can construct. For over 55. 00:51:53,467 S5: Okay. 00:51:53,868 S1: So in the interest of keeping things productive and because we do, Rosie is asked to table it, which I think means we will table it. I think we should be very exacting about how we move forward, though, which is I think we should say that the plan is to have this on the next agenda for the next planning board meeting, which I believe is. 00:52:14,400 S2: Next slide. Next slide. 00:52:16,200 S5: Please. 00:52:17,868 S1: The next select board meeting, which is May. 00:52:20,868 S5: What is the date? 00:52:21,567 S2: Sixth Monday, May 6th. 00:52:23,167 S1: Monday, May 6th. Um, at which point, I mean, I think there are plenty of people on this call who I know have our email addresses. Um, you know, I think we can take Rosie, to your point, reviewing the application of, you know, what is being presented. I think we can certainly take some time to do that. I think having a draft List of additional mitigations that we would like to have added is seems appropriate. And again, for folks that are on the call. Um, you know, certainly happy to have folks put put their feedback there. Um, again, because of where we're sort of dancing. I mean, there's part of me that wants to ask the DBA or someone if they can even push this out. If there's a fear that we won't be able. I hesitate to go back to the developer with a a, you know, ten fold list of things when they're at a point where they can tell us to go pound sand. Um, but, you know, I'm happy to give us, you know, the next two weeks to, to do those things and try to come back with a list of mitigations that feels more reflective of of what we would want in order to, to consider this friendly did that. Does that capture what we're saying? 00:53:34,067 S3: That's that's exactly correct. Um, there there are all these sort of threats and worst case scenarios, but our responsibility is to act in the best interest of this town and not do it because we're fearful of something. 00:53:52,601 S5: Yep, I. 00:53:53,200 S1: Can appreciate. 00:53:53,868 S5: That. 00:53:55,167 S4: Yeah, Carolyn, I like that. Should we invite somebody from the planning board to participate in that discussion? I'd also maybe like to better understand. Well, you know. 00:54:04,100 S2: Do you mean the Zoning Board of Appeals? Does the planning board. The planning board? 00:54:07,801 S4: I was going to get there. I don't know if we could have the zoning board because they're going to be, you know, on deck, so to speak, but, you know, understanding more of the planning board and, you know, their findings initially and then also understanding, you know, from the lens of the CBA what what local kind of bylaws, if you will, or things can they look at and enforce versus what state regs might come into play that they have no, no power over? And which ones of some of the planning board's biggest concerns which which side of that I'll do. They fall on. If that. 00:54:39,167 S5: Makes. 00:54:39,601 S11: The planning. The planning board has no involvement in the DB. Um, the application, um, should have been sent to local boards. Local boards? Um, what would I recommend is that local boards issue comments in writing to the CBA. So the CBA then has all of those comments in front of them, because I've recommended that the CBA, um, the first the first kind of action the CBA takes is to go out to peer review. And that way, all of these comments from all of these local boards are in writing, and we can get those to the peer reviewer. Um, this is a different project than the planning board, um, than the planning board project, because of the affordability and because we are under 760 CMR 56, which is a state regulation. That's that's controls for DBS. Um, so and I, I wouldn't, um, I wouldn't recommend having a member of the zoning board here either, because the zoning board needs to review the project as presented to them. 00:55:50,968 S1: I do think there are things and we we can unearth it. Bill or Rosie? When the planning Board decision came out about the former one. 33. Essex there. You know, Marney did a very good job outlining in there the reasons why it had been rejected. And I think a lot of it was, um, repeat occurrence of maximization of space, like everything went like very far to the edges. And so I think it would be worth to Rosie's point over the next two weeks, sort of reviewing that original document, figuring out where those other 15, you know, if we were already at max space and in the planning board said, no, like, where do those. And I agree, Amy, like it has no bearing. But I think if folks are sort of wondering that may lead to additional mitigation criteria. I don't know how much leverage we have to say, like, you know, cut out ten units and give us an extra ten foot buffer on all sides. They may just say that's adorable, but if if those are things that we. We want to sort of bring to the table in two weeks, I think we can certainly put together our wish list and, and then see what happens. 00:56:58,167 S3: So, um, and just one other comment I would make that what I've read about friendly 40 bees. When a town is asked to, in a sense, endorse a project that developers often will agree to adhere to. Um, some of the local bylaws, and I don't see any of that in this agreement. And so things like, as I've said, our stormwater management plan, um, we could consider that. Um, there are lots of there are lots of ways that we have leverage because if we agree to this, then it's going to be easier for this project to go through. And I would think that that the developer would want that. So our goal is to take as much as we can to protect our town and the environment and so on. Yes. Be great to have the opportunity to do that. 00:58:04,601 S5: Okay. Um. 00:58:10,100 S1: I 00:58:12,868 S1: I feel, I don't know, I feel conflicted, I feel for, for myriad reasons. I do feel like there is an urgency to this. Um, but again, I met the will of the board. If y'all would like to table and do that over the next two weeks. Um, I, I don't want to. I'm not afraid of the developer, I respect developers, I love developers, I don't I don't want to do that, but I want to be really thoughtful and mindful in the way that we interact with the developer. Because as I as I hear from council and have heard from council over the last couple weeks, we do not have a lot of leverage. And that's been the message that I've heard loud and clear. And so I just want to I want to make sure that we, we don't accidentally get ourselves in a pickle. 00:58:58,567 S3: Well, all they can do is say no. And if we just give up without even trying to assert some of our local bylaws for the benefit of our town, our environment and our residents, then what's the point of us being here? Yeah. Um, one other thing. Um, yeah. Okay. No, I'm sorry I said that. Okay. 00:59:20,467 S5: Okay. Um. 00:59:22,868 S1: All right, so it's tabled. Uh, and we. 00:59:26,667 S5: Will review. 00:59:28,200 S1: In two weeks. 00:59:29,767 S11: So, Madam Chair, just, um, just so you know, I'm not available on May 6th, I have a town meeting that I have to attend in Harwich. Um, so I just wanted you to know that. 00:59:39,868 S5: Yeah. 00:59:40,167 S1: What I would love is maybe I'm going to say this like. Like I'm this, that we're going to do it. I wouldn't I'm hopeful that before that meeting, we should be able to send you just even a back of the napkin list and you can tell us which things, um, are naive and which things you think. 00:59:56,167 S5: Are. 00:59:56,567 S1: Are reasonable. And I think as long as we sort of have those notes, that would be plenty for the conversation. 01:00:02,601 S5: Sure. No problem. 01:00:03,968 S3: So so my question is, why are we not why would we not be sending these, um, mitigation, um, items to the developer? Why would we get a stop from our town council? Can you explain that to me? Amy? 01:00:22,667 S11: I might have missed some of that. Get get something from already? 01:00:25,868 S1: Sort of. We talked. Tom and Sean had had a conversation with the developer where this initial list of of mitigations were, were brought up and there there wasn't an appetite for a huge list of mitigations. And I think part of what you're seeing right now is folks seeing that, like, this was a list that the developer felt was represented sort of where they were willing to go. And so given that we're already in this situation and the timeline is dwindling, I just want to make sure that we don't present a list of 15 things that even town council says. You're not going to get this. It's it's not reasonable and it's probably going to upset folks because we've we've been told that there's not much of an appetite here. The developer. 01:01:07,601 S5: Doesn't. 01:01:08,000 S1: Have to acquiesce to any of these things. And and as we've said, we're going to be past the deadline for the CBA anyway, so they don't have to even do any of them, in which case it doesn't go into restriction. We don't get trailhead, we don't get parking, we don't get any of those things. It becomes private property. 01:01:23,701 S7: Yeah. And I'll just jump in to add that, you know, to Carolyn's point, we did have a long meeting with them. We discussed a lot of these issues. And these are, you know, a lot of the mitigation efforts that we agreed to in that there was appetite for and I do. I understand your point, Rosie, about going back and trying to get additional mitigation efforts, but I think, you know, we're really just pushing the ball down the court. And, you know, um, maybe we get something, maybe we don't. But I think at the end of the day, we're risking a lot in the sense that we may lose all of it and we may get nothing out of this if we do nothing before the Zoning Board of Appeals opens their public hearing. So, um, you know, I'm certainly open to, you know, tabling this and moving this down the road. But, you know, we've already had a lengthy discussion with the developers and town council and, uh, Joe and Sean and I met with them. So, um, you know, we can certainly do that, but, you know, there is a risk there. And I think everyone should be aware of that. 01:02:13,901 S3: There's a risk if we do nothing and just sign this agreement with these very minor mitigation measures. And I think we need to do that. 01:02:22,601 S1: We're not doing that at all. I want to be very clear, I the only reason I was saying to engage Amy is that she has a ton of expertise here, and she knows the tone and tenor of the room, and she can sort of say, like, they're not going to hatch frogs for us twice a year. That's not a thing they're going to do. Um, but that's sort of what I want to what I want to be careful of. 01:02:42,300 S3: Right. I just want to emphasize that we are here to because people elected us to be here. And these people who are sitting on this zoom this evening are not here because they have nothing else to do. They care greatly about this issue and we represent them. So let's do what we can to make this the fairest we can for the town. 01:03:09,667 S1: Absolutely. And I. 01:03:11,100 S5: I. 01:03:11,467 S1: Read every single email that came in. 01:03:14,167 S3: I couldn't even there were too many. 01:03:16,000 S1: There were so many. But my what I want to be very clear about is that we knew that if the project did not go through before and this happened, that our hands were very tied, we we knew this. I talked to Joanna Copeland about this two years ago. If this takes this turn. We are in hot water and that's why there was a lot of pressure. Not because people wanted to develop on tobacco, but because they knew that if we didn't get what we needed and wanted during that process, there was a way to circumvent that process and get us here. And I, I'm not suggesting we take this agreement, but I think we need to we need to recognize the situation that we're in. 01:03:56,467 S3: Yeah. Um, so and I'll just make this comment that I'm not a glass half empty person. I'm a glass half full. And I think that we can make this stronger. Maybe we can't, but I'm not going to give up without making a concerted effort to to do so. 01:04:13,501 S5: So I appreciate that. 01:04:14,767 S1: I absolutely. 01:04:15,868 S5: Do. 01:04:17,467 S2: Madam chair, you're going to be tabling this then for a vote. So I. 01:04:22,667 S5: Will say that there will there will. 01:04:24,100 S2: Be just probably not the right time. Then if you're not going to be taking a vote tonight, I would suggest probably not the right time to get into public comment. I think that it would kind of take us down a rabbit hole and would unfairly 01:04:38,300 S2: characterize the developer who isn't even really represented here, so I agree. 01:04:42,801 S5: All right. 01:04:44,100 S1: Uh, so we will table, but the plan is to have this conversation, um, again at the May 6th Select Board meeting. Uh, in the meantime, we we will commit to sort of comparing those documents and anything you don't have absolutely reach out. I mean, somewhere in our email, um, and then putting together a draft list of mitigations. And again, as I said, anyone who's on the call, please feel free to share sort of your perspectives, uh, there as well. And we can we can add those to that list and hopefully by the end of, you know, mid next week, we can get something over to Amy just for her to review. So we have her comments going into that meeting. 01:05:19,667 S2: Yeah. If everyone wants to send me your comments for things that you want sent to Amy, I'll send it all to Amy in one package. So she's not getting filled in five different emails. Make it make it simpler for you, everybody. 01:05:29,501 S5: Okay. 01:05:30,100 S3: That's fine. We'll we'll do. 01:05:32,567 S5: All right. 01:05:34,501 S1: Well that was a that was a healthy non discussion for the discussion. 01:05:38,167 S5: I appreciate that. 01:05:40,100 S1: Um I'm going to look this up and maybe one of y'all those. So I've gotten mixed feedback about the second someone says table you table. But then the rules of order on the masked website say that you have to take a motion for table. And I still don't know what the answer to that is. 01:05:56,501 S4: But I was wondering. 01:05:58,801 S7: Yeah, I'm pretty sure you have to make a motion and has to be approved by a majority vote for a tabling. 01:06:03,501 S5: Uh. 01:06:04,567 S2: Yeah. Right. 01:06:05,667 S1: That's what it says on the mask Gov website, but I don't know. 01:06:09,267 S5: Yeah, I. 01:06:09,467 S2: Think I think that's what it says on mascot website. But I think that I believe the Hamilton Selectboard has a local rule that says the first time that an item is brought to the board, any member can move to table and it has to be tabled. So to to not not allow you to act in one meeting if somebody is uncomfortable with it. So. 01:06:29,467 S5: I mean. 01:06:30,000 S2: Believe that's a local rule. 01:06:31,467 S5: But the single most powerful. 01:06:32,767 S1: Word in Hamilton town. 01:06:34,267 S5: Government. Um. 01:06:37,200 S1: All right. Well, I think this was a great conversation. I expect that we'll hear a lot more from folks, uh, via email and online, but obviously look forward to doing the best that we can to try to figure out how to how to, you know, get around some of this. Um, I believe that that brings us to the end of our agenda. Unless anybody has any new business items. I thought Rosie brought up, uh, putting on the agenda next time for the ping pong table. 01:07:13,067 S2: Yeah. And in the meantime, I'll have the old one taken out of the out of the senior center. Yeah. 01:07:17,000 S3: Thank you. Thank you. Joe. 01:07:20,167 S5: Okay. 01:07:21,267 S4: Yeah, I think likely, uh, Caroline as well. Bill and I are probably ready for another discussion on a town manager contract. Okay, with the rest of the board. 01:07:30,667 S1: I mean, I do. Is that a, um. 01:07:34,868 S4: Executive executive session? I don't know. Um, I think we're in a good spot. Um, I don't know. We can talk about that when we kind of put the agenda together, whether it should or shouldn't. I'm going to make sure we meet about it. 01:07:46,968 S5: Okay. Sounds good. 01:07:50,067 S1: Um, also, and I'm assuming we'll do this next time. Uh, committees and board assignments. 01:07:59,067 S4: Liaisons. 01:07:59,968 S2: Yeah, I was. If you want, I will. Um, I will circulate tomorrow. The, uh, list of committees that the members could then get back to the chair with their preferences for committees that they want to be on. That's typically how the how it's been done in the past. Um, I meant to get to you all today, but, um, I was reading a lot of emails today. Uh, we can get it back to you. We can get it out to to you tomorrow. Um, and you'll have a couple of weeks to log what you'd like to choose. And then then the chair can have a maybe, maybe a second meeting in May. You could announce what? Okay, you know what the assignments will be. That's the chairs. That's by the chairs selection. So. 01:08:38,467 S5: Okay, Bill. 01:08:39,367 S1: You're probably gonna have to relinquish CoA because nobody doesn't like Rosie. 01:08:44,667 S3: Oh, yeah. Love the stairway. 01:08:47,801 S4: I know that. I do too. Um, any update on the school building, uh, meeting that happened earlier? I don't know, Tom. If you had to leave early or anything. 01:08:57,601 S7: Yeah, Joe and I will leave early, but, uh, there was a great turnout. A lot of comments, but we left before the agenda really kicked off because we had to make it. So I don't have an update, but I don't know if you heard anything. 01:09:10,267 S2: I haven't haven't heard. I had to leave about 15 minutes into the meeting to get here and set this up for you guys, so I was not I don't know how the vote went tonight. 01:09:19,467 S7: Yeah. 01:09:20,567 S2: Yeah. 01:09:21,601 S7: Turnout out from the public that a lot of public comment. 01:09:24,767 S1: I bet it was a big day for email. It was a big day. 01:09:28,167 S4: Oh, wow. 01:09:29,701 S5: Um, such a big. 01:09:33,267 S2: Between this issue and the school, I didn't get away from email all day today. 01:09:36,567 S5: It was just, oh, these. 01:09:37,467 S3: Are big issues in our town. 01:09:39,300 S2: So I get it. I get it. There's a lot of people. 01:09:41,767 S3: Have to be a part. 01:09:42,701 S5: Of. 01:09:42,901 S2: It. 01:09:43,300 S5: And yeah. 01:09:44,400 S3: Let's do it for the people. 01:09:46,367 S2: Absolutely. 01:09:47,601 S1: All right. Uh, if there is nothing else to add to new business, um, I will entertain everyone's favorite motion. 01:09:55,701 S3: I make a motion, we adjourn. 01:09:57,901 S4: Second. 01:09:59,000 S5: All right. Uh. Roll call. Vote. 01:10:00,767 S1: All in favor? Tom. 01:10:02,868 S7: Tom Myers. Yes. 01:10:04,767 S5: Bill. 01:10:05,667 S4: Bill. Wilson. Yes. 01:10:07,100 S5: Rosie. 01:10:08,000 S3: Rosie Kennedy I. 01:10:09,701 S1: And Caroline Beaulieu. I thank you, everyone. Uh, look forward to the discussion in two weeks. 01:10:16,801 S5: Thank you. 01:10:17,901 S3: Thank you. 01:10:18,567 S2: Thank you. 01:10:19,767 S4: Thank you. 01:10:20,367 S5: Thank.