00:01:20,470	Mike’s on. Thank you very much. Right. I’m gonna call this meeting of the Town of when I’m planning board to order at 6:31, um. The meeting is being held in the Bucher Elementary School. Um, multi-purpose room, uh, at 11 School Street in Wyndham. And up, we never can hear you.

00:01:49,300	Yeah, it’s, this room is bad too, I think. We noticed that the last time. Is that better? So when the board speaks, please, we’re gonna have to speak directly into the mics. Um, Where was I? The meeting is being broadcast and recorded on HWCAM also, and we’re on Zoom. I can see.

00:02:17,730	Um, we have a select board member on Zoom and potentially some other folks and our staff, Kate Mallory is also attending on Zoom, um. So I’ll just open the public hearing on the MBTA community 3A proposal, um, Margaret, I wonder if you would read the public hearing notice into the record, and then I have a couple of words and then we

00:02:42,730	have a presentation. So, um, Margaret notice is hereby provided that the wedding planning board will conduct a hearing pursuant to mass general law chapter 48, section 5. On the following one article to amend the zoning bylaw of the town of Wenham. The public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 16, 2025 at 6:30 p.m.

00:03:05,170	at the Bucher Elementary School, 11 School Street, 1 in Massachusetts, at which time all interested persons may appear and be heard in relation thereto. The planning board’s agenda could be found on the calendar of upcoming events at WenhamMA.gov 48 hours prior to the public hearing.

00:03:27,730	The article is to amend the town of Wenham zoning bylaw and zoning map to create a new multi-family overlay district comprising two subdistricts in which multi-family housing. As loud as a right and mixed use development is allowed by special permit and to make changes related to there too.

00:03:47,300	A copy of the full text of the article and accompanying maps could be reviewed at the office of the town clerk, um, and on the town website. I Weeks chair when on planning board published in the HW News Friday, March 28th and Friday, April 4th, 2025. Thanks Margaret.

00:04:09,770	um, so our plan tonight is to, uh, have a, maybe 10-minute presentation just to remind people what the proposal is, um, We as a board have been working on this, I’m reminded since February of 2023. We have held two public forums, um, and we’ve heard from many people at those forums and also at other meetings, uh, open meetings of our board.

00:04:30,800	Um, I’m just gonna ask because I know this is a very contentious issue and people have very strong opinions one way or the other about it. So I’m asking everyone here for their thoughtful respect for one another and for us. Um, we are a small community and we are all neighbors. Um. I’m going to turn this over, uh, to Dan.

00:04:48,730	I, we’re, we’re in the public hearing now, the way the process is gonna work. Dan will do a presentation. There will be some slides, um. And We will then call on people to come up to the podium and give public hearing, please announce your name, your street address.

00:05:14,400	I’m gonna ask to run this, um, on basically town meeting style where I’m gonna ask for 3 minutes per person, um, and keep time and one statement per person because all of us would like to go home at a normal hour. Everyone here, I’m sure. Um, so at this point, I’m going to turn it over to Dan. Dan will do a presentation. We will have the hearing. The board will deliberate.

00:05:33,670	And then we will see where we are. Um I know Margaret, I think the only thing that’s here is the handout for the um, the agenda, is that correct? No, we don’t, we didn’t have any handouts for this one in. Everything’s gonna be on the screen.

00:05:55,130	So we can definitely go back to slides if you need them when you’re speaking, if you want to refer to a slide. So with that I’m gonna turn it over to Dan Pasquarello, vice chairman of the Planning Board, thank you very much.

00:06:14,800	Thanks and can everybody hear me OK? Um, I’m Dan Pascarello, um, we as a board have been working on this issue, as Anne said since February of 2023, if not earlier. It started with a subcommittee, um, on MBTA compliance, our former member and select board member, Peter Clay was also a member of that subcommittee, but we met with, um, a consultant, uh, compliance consultant who helped us select the Uh, candidates for the districts which I’ll go over in a minute.

00:06:38,200	Um, and ultimately we as a board selected the two proposed districts for our multi-family overlay districts. So, Um, I, I want to start with just some basic information about what the MBTA communities law requires. Margaret, if you go to the next, uh, slide, please. Yeah.

00:07:00,870	So we have been designated as a commuter rail community, which has a specific definition under the regulations in the statute. We in Wenham have 1460 existing housing units and 111 developable station area acres. The minimum compliance requirements for Wenham, um, Under 3A is that we have to have a total of 24.

00:07:29,500	I’m not the microphone is cutting in and out, so, um, we have to have a total of 24 acres, um, minimum zoned for MBTA compliance with 365 units. Um, we’re also subject to a gross average density total across the town across the town of across the town across the town of 15 units per acre.

00:07:55,030	20% of those numbers have to be located within a half mile of the station. So that equates to a minimum of 73 units in 4.8 acres within the half mile radius. Um, we’re in a unique position because we share our station with Hamilton, so we don’t have a full circle like other towns would.

00:08:18,100	We actually have a much smaller area to place those 4.8 acres. Um, in 73 units. The remainder of the acreage and the units can be placed anywhere within our town based on the former guidelines and now regulations that EOHLC has adopted, um, EOHLC is the state agency. It’s the executive Office of housing and livable communities.

00:08:43,630	Um, so they have been charged with formulating, uh, guidelines and our regulations that determine compliance. Next slide. Um, so this slide shows where our two districts are, the, uh, the darker green. In the middle of the slide is the walnut larch, which MFOD one, it’s, it’s a total of 6.

00:09:11,100	3 acres and then MFOD2 is, I think it’s 5 lots down on Boulder Lane, um, which is, uh, we have this number later, it’s 20 6 or 7 acres. 29. Thank you, Margaret. Um, so, Our, our consultant identified a number of different areas in town.

00:09:37,130	We’ve went through this process, um, to determine what we thought were the best districts, uh, to meet compliance and our minimum requirements, um, and we were subject to Uh, certain, um, Components of the regulations which limited our flexibility, one of which was we are not able to split lots.

00:10:01,100	So we can’t take, uh, let’s say a 5 acre lot, we only needed 3 acres, and we can’t split that. We had to pick an entire lot. Um, so you’ll notice that we’re slightly higher in the station area. We have 6.3 acres instead of 4.8 because one of our lots was 4.7 and the next lot was slightly larger than that. So that’s, that’s the reason why the numbers are, are a bit off.

00:10:21,470	um. And as I mentioned, we, uh, our, our compliance consultant was JM Goldson. That’s who we worked with on this. If we go to the next slide, Margaret. So this slide shows MFOD1. This is the Zero walnut in 100 Larch Lane. It’s 6.

00:10:47,230	3 acres total, um, and in this lot, the density will be somewhere around 13 units. So I believe the total number that would be allowed by zoning would be 82 units at, at this particular site. In the next slide. OK. Sorry. OK. OK. I just love the connection. I’m sorry. Not sure what happened. I don’t have the total, but it’s like 28. It’s um. Good.

00:11:22,770	Technology is great when it works and not so hot when it doesn’t. I’m not sure. Hold on, let me, let me grab it back again. That was the first Yeah, no, it’s, um, it lost the connection somehow. OK, and Cheers. OK, and then. From the beginning Oh my.

00:11:53,300	We have a our techy, can you help me out? So. Yep. It should be sharing. This one. Over one down, share. Yeah. OK. Uh, sorry, it hit the share button. Yeah. OK See if that works.

00:12:33,530	Alright, and then No, I don’t think Hm Um, let me stop the, um, let me stop the the show here. In the show, OK, and we’ll go back to share again. OK. I’ve got something now, OK, and We’re gonna go to, oh. I’m beginning, OK. I’m gonna go to Good job. This one? Yes. OK, perfect. Right, we’re back. All right, we’re back. Sorry for the glitch.

00:13:07,500	Um, this is MFOD District 2, which is, um, Boulder Lane, um, it’s off 128. It’s near, uh, Gordon College. Um, it’s obviously not within a half mile of the station, but under the regulations, we are allowed to select, um, areas that are beyond the half mile station area. So this is 29 acres total.

00:13:29,530	The density here is higher so that our townwide average will hit that 15. Mark and I believe the total number of units here. With for zoning allowance would be 2804, which means that the total number would be between the two would be 366, which gets us to our just above our minimum requirement of 365. Um We go to the next slide.

00:13:54,300	So, we have prepared a draft zoning bylaw, and these are some of the highlights of, of what is in the bylaw, the bylaws available on the website if anybody wants to look through all of it, um, we are requiring 10%, 10% affordable units for any 3A development, um, as you may know, Wenham has achieved

00:14:14,100	compliance with its SHI inventory, um, we’re not allowed to go above 10%. Um, so we are requiring the 10. however, we will allow mixed use by special permit, um, the multi-family is obviously by right under the statute. There’s a 3-story, 35 ft height limit.

00:14:40,300	We’re imposing a 40 ft buffer zone from residential property, um, These are the parking space requirements 1.25% in district 12 in district 2, we will require site plan review. We will require 20% open space and um we’re also requiring covered bike parking per unit in the building.

00:15:00,570	Um, and again, there’s the density, so in MFOD1 it will be 13 and then MFOD2 would be 17 per unit, I mean per acre, pardon me. So we have some examples of what this would look like just so people can get an idea. This is what a 15 unit per acre density model could look like I’m sorry. What just happened.

00:15:20,900	You want to go back to share screen, I think it keeps doing that. I think maybe you’ve got, do you have papers on your touch pad? Um Yeah, I am sorry. OK, and then OK, great. OK. Got you back. Yep Um Right. So these are different size lots to give just a few different perspectives here.

00:15:56,570	This is not what we’re planning and and I I should note, um, we’ve had several other public forums. I see a lot of familiar faces in, in the audience tonight. I’m sure you’ve heard us say this before. Um, this is a zoning exercise. This is not a construction exercise from, from the board.

00:16:14,170	We’re required to create zoning, um, we’re not required to actually build units. Um, so, If we go to the next slide, Margaret, so this is a, this is an example, this is, uh, a development in Beverly to give you an idea of what 12 units per acre might

00:16:28,830	look like. This is on McKinley Ave. And then in our next slide, we have an example. This is Hamilton, the Willow Street apartments which if you haven’t been there, it’s delicious. Um, and this is 18 units per acre with mixed use, which would, which would be the bakery.

00:16:52,730	Um, So I’m sure people are familiar with challenges to the 3A law, um, The most familiar of which was the Milton, uh, the town of Milton sued the Attorney General. Um, So the the Milton town of Milton decision, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled in January of this year that the MBTA Communities Act is constitutional.

00:17:16,170	Um, that the the attorney general can enforce the law, but that the guidelines that were issued by EOHLC were unenforceable and the court invalidated those because they were not promulgated in accordance with the state administrative Procedure Act, chapter 30A. So, um, DUHLC in response to the court’s decision in January issued emergency regulations.

00:17:45,000	They were very plain about the fact that they didn’t make any substantive changes to their regulations. They changed the deadlines for compliance so that for us, our compliance deadline is July 14th. Um, well, a few days ago, um, the EOHLC issued new permanent regulations.

00:18:10,730	Um, again, with minimal substantive changes, there’s really no effect on when we’re still required to hit those minimum numbers that we talked about earlier, which is 365 units. Um, so Wenham’s response, if we go to the next slide, Margaret, please. Um, Dean, could I ask if we could just take a quick break.

00:18:30,900	I, I just want to make sure what’s showing on the Zoom, um, screen if I could just ask for a quick break. I wanna, uh, I need to switch screens up a little bit. I want to make sure that, um, the people who are on Zoom. Or, um, seeing the correct.

00:18:48,300	The correct thing, OK, to Margaret if you pulled your papers is that They’re not seeing it, and I can’t tell who was. On there. Are you getting messages that people can’t what they’re seeing, Joe. What do you think? So a sure I know That OK, so we can stop here. She also has this.

00:19:35,500	Yeah Oh the Using a mouse, but she’s also having her touch. Does it tell we should be scaring because we’re, this shows up as screen sharing. So because I’ve got 2 screens, I’ve got 1. Yeah. of this, it should be. OK Maybe if someone online can. Shoot us a message and make sure that you can see the slides.

00:20:08,100	Catherine, you can see them. Excellent. OK, great. Thank you. OK, all right, thank, thank you again. I think we should be all set. OK, so, so back to the SJC’s decision in Milton. Um, we as a town, um, took actions, um, as a result of the Milton litigation. You may remember we were here in September in a similar posture.

00:20:33,670	We were ready to propose our zoning amendment to the select board, um, but we paused that process because the select board decided to postpone our special, uh, town meeting in the fall because we were waiting for the decision, um. Milton.

00:20:56,030	Um, so after the SJC’s decision in Milton, um, Wenham has submitted an interim compliance action plan to the state, which has been accepted, and we are in interim compliance. In, in order for us to remain in compliance, we need to Um, submit our proposed zoning, um, assuming it’s approved at town meeting before July 14th of 2025.

00:21:21,170	Um, the select board also sent a letter to EOHLC secretary Augustus expressing Wenham’s specific town related concerns with the proposed regulations, um, so that was part of the, the. That was part of the public comment process, um. And I believe that that letter is available on the town website.

00:21:51,170	Um, the select board, part of the uh SJC’s decision was requiring the, uh, the state to comply with 30A, which meant, um, issuing a, a fiscal impact statement. So the select board sent a separate letter to Secretary Augustus, um, inquiring about the fiscal impact that, um, should have been issued.

00:22:18,470	Um, And the town has also formed a fiscal impact group to study potential impacts of 3A on one of them. So if we could go to the next slide, please.

00:22:41,270	So what would the impacts of, of noncompliance B, um, there, there is other litigation that is pending, which I’ll get to in a in a minute or two, but, um, the general counsel for the EOHLC has recently stated in an affidavit submitted in that litigation that it is the current policy of the Healy Driscoll administration that all discretionary state grants to municipalities may be subject to compliance with 3A. Um, there, there are 4 particular, uh, grants noted in the statute.

00:23:05,300	So, You, you may have noted that this policy is broader than what’s set forth in the statute in the administration is, is this is their position right now, um, grants that where the state has discretion. On recipient selection or any state matching funds are subject to their policy.

00:23:25,730	This is again according to Attorney G. Um But the policy does not apply to non-municipal entities seeking funding for projects in non-compliant districts, unless that would otherwise be provided by statute. And the example they gave for that would be chapter 70, state aid for public schools or federal grants where the state is just to pass through entity.

00:23:48,000	Um Compliance status of a town is determined at the time of the award of a grant, and at the time of contracting. If it, if a municipality falls out of compliance after the time of contracting, those funds will not be rescinded.

00:24:08,370	So this is relevant to, to Wenham because we were awarded a $65,000 grant in the fall to help us with our, uh, revise our subdivision rules and regulations. When we didn’t submit um a proposed amendment by December 31st, the state refused to release those funds to us, um, after the, um, Milton decision, however, those funds have been released to us because we technically have

00:24:33,370	never been out of compliance. So, uh, the $65,000 I believe it’s already been contracted for, so that grant can’t be rescinded by the state. Um The administration policy, however, may affect future grant applications. One example might be the 9 Maple Street project in 2025.

00:24:58,470	Um, it’s important to note that this policy about enforceability or the enforceability of the administration policy has not yet been determined by any courts. Um, OK, if we could go to the next slide. We’re gonna wait till after the presentation. Um, So one of the differences from our proposed amendment in the fall, and our current proposed amendment is the inclusion of a sunset provision.

00:25:21,500	So the purpose of this provision has been the uncertainty, um, of the enforceability of first the guidelines and now the, the regulations and there’s still statutory challenges that are out there. Um, If we go to the, the, the next slide just so.

00:25:46,500	So what our sunset provision, which has been unanimously adopted by this board and I believe unanimously approved by the select board states is that if for any reason, chapter 40A, Section 3A, the emergency regulations or any permanent regulations, um, shall be one deemed ineffective, unenforceable, or invalid in whole or in part by a final judgment of the courts of the Commonwealth or to repealed, rescinded, changed, or amended in such manner as to To the

00:26:09,500	metrics in the regulations concerning unit capacity requirements as applied to the town of Wenham, i.e., requiring other than 365 units for Wenham to be deemed in compliance. This zoning bylaw amendment, the relevant sections there too, shall be voided of no legal effect and immediately rescinded without further action required from the town.

00:26:28,730	Um, and the purpose of this is an attempt that, if it’s found that The requirements for Wenham are deemed unenforceable or invalid that we don’t need to go back to, uh, town meeting and, and go through this process again and, and to get to, yeah, to repeal them.

00:26:52,200	The last sentence here, we have a, what’s called a severability pro uh provision in our amendment, which means if one section of amendment might be unenforceable, the whole thing doesn’t fall, um, this, however, we say, notwithstanding the severability that If, if this sunset provision is deemed unenforceable, then the whole amendment is where the whole bylaws.

00:27:19,470	Um So we also have a, a further proposed amendment that if we go to the next slide, Margaret, um this is difficult to read. I’m not gonna read the whole thing. I’m just gonna paraphrase this, we as a board have not discussed this yet.

00:27:40,230	We intend to discuss this tonight, um, but the gist of it is that The town will not be responsible to bear direct costs of development here for additional infrastructure or, or what have you. Um, I don’t think er of BB is. Actually part of that, but right, that’s a different provision. So, Um, if we go to the next slide, Margaret, and this is our last slide.

00:28:03,170	So what are our next steps? Um, We have Sent this proposed bylaw to the select board for inclusion on the warrant. It’s been referred back to us to hold this public hearing, which we’re holding tonight and we’ll hear commentary from anybody who wants to speak on it.

00:28:24,200	Um, and the procedure would be then it goes back to the select board. They determine whether to put it on the warrant or not, and then it will go to town meeting and this is up to the voters of one of them to either vote this up or down. This is not the planning board doesn’t make the ultimate determination here.

00:28:41,170	The special town meeting, I believe has been scheduled for June 9th. If it is adopted, if it is approved by the town, and this would be a simple majority vote. Um, it’s then sent to the Attorney general for approval of the adopted articles.

00:29:02,770	Um, the one thing I did want to mention is The state auditor has made a determination that 3A, in her opinion, constitutes an unfunded mandate in the state. Um, there are several municipalities that have filed lawsuits against the state under the unfunded mandate, uh, statute. And those, uh, cases are pending. They’ve been consolidated in front of Judge Gilday who’s sitting in Plymouth County.

00:29:28,130	Um, I know that Middleton is one of those towns. Um They, those towns are seeking a preliminary injunction, um, the state has filed a motion to dismiss all of those motions have been argued in front of Judge Gildea, and I believe that, um, There hasn’t been a decision yet.

00:29:48,470	We’re awaiting or The parties are awaiting decisions on those matters. Um, for purposes of tonight, I just want to note that it is not within the planning board’s scope to make a determination to file litigation. That is a select board issue. It is not a planning board issue. Um, so that’s, that’s all we have on the presentation, um.

00:30:12,470	If I’m not sure if we’re going to discussion now or if discussion by the board I’m not sure how much there will be, but Um If you can just hold your comments, please, until I call people. Wonder what you There were 2, well, we’re gonna we’re gonna have a conversation about that amongst ourselves right now.

00:30:35,800	So maybe that will help you. Um, and if you could ask people to go to the microphone I will, I think we’re not quite ready for that at this point. So is there any discussion amongst the board, particularly about this, sorry, particularly about the new language on, um, no direct costs being borne by the town.

00:30:56,630	Can we put that back up on the screen so we could, we could see it. I think I have it somewhere in text. I do have it. Mhm. We have it, but it’s, I would. Say to Um Mr. Anderson has proposed an amendment on the no direct costs.

00:31:13,400	So I’d, I’d ask Mr. Anderson to speak to that. The other issue is, since we’ve had a development, um, from EOHLC where they’ve now issued their permanent regulations, and there are no more emergency regulations, we may want to take out some language from our sunset provision or or edit that accordingly. Right. Margaret, can you pull that slide back up.

00:31:36,470	Oh, the slides up in case people who are speaking want to refer to one or more of them. Um Let me go back to the beginning again, sorry. OK, this one here. The 2nd of the two amendments. Do you want this one? Yes, please.

00:32:13,870	David, you wanted to. Say a few words. Yes, so, um. One of the I’d say persistent concerns that’s been articulated by the community and also by this board is concerns that Um, development of this scale could result. In a financial, uh, burden. On this town. Uh, specifically around infrastructure. Infrastructure creation, infrastructure, retrofitting.

00:32:48,230	Um And that is, I think, a very legitimate concern. And so we have had conversations in prior meetings uh by this board about, um, The extent to which Um, the town could include within its proposed bylaw. Uh, section prohibiting or limiting the the uh exposure of the town.

00:33:19,300	To the financial burdens of uh infrastructure related costs directly arising from Any development in the proposed multi-family overlay district. Um, I would say there’s some fair ambiguity about the town’s um ability to limit those direct costs, at least in prior, uh, conversations, uh, in public session by town council.

00:33:49,100	Um, I would say somewhat fortuitously in connection with the unfunded mandate cases that Dan just discussed, the, uh, state has taken because generally positions taken in litigation, um, can stop a party or can prevent a party from taking a contrary position later on. Uh, the state has taken position that, um, 38 and the regulations, um, do not.

00:34:19,570	cannot require a town to assume the direct costs of infrastructure. That’s my paraphrase, but that’s how I read what the state has said. It’s specifically in the Commonwealth’s reply in support of its motion to dismiss, um, the unfunded mandate litigation. I see that as an opportunity. To include, uh, this language.

00:34:46,900	Based on this April 5th filing by the state, which effectively says that this, that the town cannot be Obligated To I won’t read it out, but to assume or bear, bear the obligation of infrastructure costs directly arising from Any contemplated or uh actual development in the multi-family overlay district. I think that’s a good thing.

00:35:13,000	I think, um. In the first instance, it should be borne by a developer. Uh, if it’s not economically feasible for the developer to do it, then it’s a question of whether or not there are other funding sources such as from the state or otherwise, um, ultimately, It could be a town decision

00:35:31,630	whether or not it’s something that we want to do because the development is So Potentially positive on the whole for the town, but the point of this amendment is that the town would not be obligated, could not be obligated. To assume the costs of any, uh, infrastructure.

00:35:55,570	Directly arising from a proposed or actual development in the multi-family overlay districts. Thank you, David. uh any discussion by the board. comfortable putting this forward. Dan, you wanted to speak, I think, to the other amendment that we had already, um. I don’t wanna say adopted because we haven’t adopted any of this, but already discussed and. Articulated support for.

00:36:23,000	Uh, yeah, with respect to the sunset provision, I think we just, we included a reference to Emergency regulations which I don’t think that. Um, we need to include Anymore. I think we can just say, um, Um, if Law chapter 48 Section A or the regulations pertaining there too. shall be deemed ineffective da da da.

00:36:54,370	So I, I would move that we amend the sunset provision text. In that manner, just due to recent developments. Would you like us to second that and vote on it before we go to the public hearing. I think that that’s a pretty easy one, so I do too. I have a second, please. All in favor, weak, says I.

00:37:15,900	I Schomburger. Woodland Iyer. Anderson I. Um And then I would move that we adopt Mr. Anderson’s proposed amendment as section AA of the uh bylaw amendment. And You know, reorder the other sections accordingly. Second. All in favor Weeks as I. Pascalo I Schoberger Woodland E Anderson I.

00:37:51,000	So with that, if there’s no further discussion by the board, I’m gonna, um, open what the public hearings open, but I’m gonna offer. The podium to whoever would like to speak again, please, we’re gonna try for 3 minutes a person, um, one statement per person, um, We’ll keep time if we have to, and, uh, we’ll keep the slides up if you want to refer to them.

00:38:18,800	So I think we’re first come, first serve here, so Puritan Road Puritan. You guys would be happy to know that I don’t have a rant for today. That’s kind. Yeah. And this is regarding infrastructure.

00:38:43,900	You’re saying that we’re not responsible for the infrastructure that would be, uh, the responsibility of the developer, presumably infrastructure and supply are not mutually exclusive. We get our water from the Ipswich River if the supply is not available, you can put all the pipes in the ground you’d like. But if there’s no water and we have that problem and I don’t see a developer sending any pipes out to the club and reservoir.

00:39:01,130	So that’s an issue that needs to be addressed, even though we might not be paying for infrastructure. Where’s the water in that infrastructure coming from that’s what I wanna know.

00:39:16,370	I think a member of the committee has, did we get a statement from the water department as to how many more hookups the town can manage. There is, I think there is a finite now. I just drove past a critical 3 sign coming over here and I got a notice in the mail last week that was pretty grim. And that’s every single year.

00:39:31,530	I get a brown long with the sprinkler system I can’t turn on. I think, I think the question is, And, and I think Uh Mr. Pasquarello alluded to this in his presentation and I know that this is not a happy.

00:39:56,630	Thing to say, but it’s not a development mandate, it’s a zoning overlay if there’s no infrastructure, you can’t do the development that is I’m that is I’m that is I’m that is I’m well. I’m trying to get the, you know, define the difference between infrastructure and supply.

00:40:13,030	It is considerably different, and we don’t have the supply, they can lay all the pipes and hookups they want, but it’s going to detract from the service of everybody else in town. And also in some some of the neighboring towns as well. I’m agreeing with you if there’s no supply, I don’t think there will be any developments.

00:40:29,000	So how will that be addressed? That’s, uh, is anybody even Considering that at this point, and, you know, I mean, 300 and 65 units. That’s a lot of gallons. Well, I mean, I don’t want to quibble with you, but I think, um, the point is built in the infrastructure. There’s obviously And I’m not being cute. I’m sincerely responding to your question. There’s obviously water in the world for any development.

00:40:48,230	But the question is how do you get it here, and that’s infrastructure. So there’s water in Wyndham Lake for development, but it can’t be accessed by Um, property in Wenham unless there is infrastructure that supports it. So I think the concept of infrastructure is Makes plain that that’s how the water that exists gets here and so.

00:41:12,230	You know, for example, if And we’ve confronted this elsewhere in this town if there are Development interests. Um, that can Find a way through private mean, public and private means at their own cost to get hookups to water supplies that are available and have capacity like the Salem Beverly Water

00:41:34,370	Board, um, That’s not really the town’s purview. Right, but we’re gonna need to do something like that because the Wenham Lake, the Ipswich River, and even the well in my backyard. Is all the same water table.

00:41:50,730	So and we’ve been trying to get water from the Quabin reservoir for I don’t know how long, and we, we’ve been refused. It doesn’t matter if we take it from the lake, it goes down in the river. If you take it out of my backyard, it goes down in the river.

00:42:06,800	There’s a, there is a multi-town task force that’s working on this issue under Bruce Tarr’s direction, where they’re trying to figure out how to make this work. More water specifically we see that before any of these plans attempt to go forward. I don’t think so. Also in the bond bill, which was pulled out by the legislature because a lot of what you’re asking for in general are legislative.

00:42:25,100	They pulled out the research study that would help Salem and Beverly connect to the Quin. I’m gonna note that we’re at the 4 minute mark.

00:42:37,730	I mostly asking a question, but you guys were you took up most of the 3 minutes I wanna give you, I wanna give you extra time because we don’t. I, I think we all agree with you. So, um. Thank you, by the way, for your comment and for your attention. You’ve been paying attention to this since the beginning. Just a point of procedure. I know multiple people want to speak, so I would recommend forming a line behind Ms. Metterneck if.

00:43:01,730	Please state your name and your address for the Stacy Matter 3 Dexter Lane. So we’ll go through some of this stuff. I know we’ve already talked about, um, some of the, I have issues with some of the discrepancy.

00:43:22,030	There was a um A study done on Boulder Lane that has been posted, I believe, on the planning board site, and it’s a discrepancy of how many units can be built there, compared to what you have for this overlay. And if you’ve ever been on that property, you would know that there’s going to be have to a lot of stuff. Be done there.

00:43:39,630	And I know that over at Gordon College, to add to that, um, there had been a developer who wanted to buy um some of that property. And I can’t remember the exact amount, 350, 250, I can’t remember right now. And they were denied water and could not find a source, so they kind of gave up.

00:44:02,130	So that is my big issue where you want to put a lot of development over in that area. And the waters that it can source that it could come from is Beverly Water. For that, and they denied it. So Again, we have water issues.

00:44:20,400	The other thing I have Issues. I know, I feel like we have more of a crisis on affordability, not housing crisis, and I wish we would put more emphasis on affordability. 10% is really low. This is not meeting the demands of people who are moving out of Wenham.

00:44:45,370	Um, the other thing is the education costs, and I know there’s been studies that have been put out there saying that it won’t be affected by this, but if you look at some of the footnotes, it says that the uh regional schools were not included in the study.

00:45:00,770	So I think we need to take a look at what kind of costs with the kids coming into some of those units would affect just our schools, the impact of that, and that’s going to be costed right there. Um So, and then the uh lastly, um, just to think about Lexington and approved.

00:45:22,230	Um, going with this project, they’re rethinking it and trying to pull back on how many units. So those are just my comments and thoughts amongst the water issues. Appreciated. Appreciate it. I, I, I will say that we agree with you on the affordability question.

00:45:41,900	And if we were allowed to do more than 10%, I think we would have, but we were not by the regulations, so capped it at 10%. I understand. I just think if we could push back on that is, that’s an issue because it’s more of an affordability of living here as opposed to a housing crisis, because if you look on Zillow, whatnot, there was a lot of homes, rentals, whatnot for

00:46:03,230	sale. So it’s not. A housing crisis, it’s an affordability. Thank you. You’re welcome. Thank you for your attention. Hi, uh, Mike Corsetti.

00:46:21,370	I represent the owner of Boulder Lane, uh, one of the properties, um, so on the district compliance give your address, please? I’m sorry for the record. Um. It is, I don’t know if it has an address, 128 Boulder Lane. Your personal address or the address of the property. OK, good. That isn’t a butter. OK, yeah. But you, can you name the person who you’re speaking for Gary Corsetti right there. OK, thank you.

00:46:45,300	My personal address, it’s uh 19 Ocean Ave, Gloucester. OK, you just need to give your the name of the person for whom you’re speaking Gary Corsetti which is 12828 Boulder Lane. Um, so district compliance application requires anyone working on 3A. To disclose information that would restrict development by right.

00:47:10,630	Um, There’s a serious issue with all the laws you’ve chosen, uh, they’re unbuildable, and I think the board knows that. I’ve issued this letter. Did anyone on the board get that today? OK, yeah, I outlined each issue broken down per parcel. Um And I’d like to also reference the BSE group study by professional engineers outlining developer. We cannot ignore a study by professional engineer and choose.

00:47:38,230	The latest consultants. You have to look at all the information you have to disclose these restrictions in the application. That’s simply the state law. That’s all. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. We’ve been looking at this and thinking about it for a couple of years and. appreciate your thoughts.

00:48:01,230	Edward Flynn Toussa Lane. So I’ve uh taken a really hard look on the select board has a study, an excellent study actually done by the town of Milton unrelated to their court case by a company called RKG.

00:48:25,370	And, um, it’s actually on the select board’s website and it’s really comprehensive and extremely well done. And if you take a look at the forecasted numbers. For the 365 units that translates with 10% being affordable 37 units, which is 1.4 student school age children per unit for subsidized housing equals 52 children. The Um, remaining 328 units, the multiple is 0.8.

00:48:58,830	For children in a 3 bedroom unit and that comes out to be 262. So the impact of the number of students for the schools is exactly according to this, which I think is valid, 314 students. Uh, with the 365 units.

00:49:23,470	The total school costs you take 62% of the cost per student according to the Milton study it’s on 100% of the $20,000 per student because there are economies in there is one superintendent, one school building, things like that. So 62% of the 20,000. In that equals school costs for all the students that I just mentioned equals $3,893,600.

00:49:52,830	The town side which is police fire in DPW on average according to the study is, is 18% and if you add up the total amounts which I have of those three departments. You get $627,0138 in additional costs from those 3.

00:50:15,500	So the total cost of the town, not including the infrastructure that everyone’s talking about, and I’ll make a prediction on that, by the way. The developers for the downtown Crosby’s place will tie into Beverly. Boulder Lane water is already tied into Beverly. So now they’re gonna go to the sewer system too. I guarantee it that’s what’s gonna happen in both cases.

00:50:35,030	I used to live in Westin, Regis, the school there just took a sewer pipe and ran it all the way through West and into Waltham tied in and it was done. It’s a really cheap way for them to do it and I might predict that’s what they will do and the state will reimburse Beverly for that.

00:50:47,930	It’s in the law. I don’t know if you saw that part of the law where they will help. pay contractors to move through one town into another to get sewage. It’s in the law itself. So I have this study which I was directed to by the select board chair. It’s on their website. It’s extremely good.

00:51:10,730	Everyone keeps it 3 minutes seconds more. I have 30 seconds. Thank you very much. I think this, this study is extremely well done. I Googled the company and they appeared RKG they appear to be the gold standard in this kind of thing.

00:51:28,830	The town used the company that you your planning board actually used a company called Cambridge Econometrics. I have no idea where you found them. I figured it was Cambridge, Massachusetts, it’s not, it’s Cambridge, England. It’s a socialist company. I don’t know if you knew this, it’s nonprofit Cambridge Analytica. That’s Analytica. I have, I have everything in my thing right there.

00:51:46,500	So I could take it out and show it to you if I pronounce, if I pronounced it wrong, I, I, I forgive me, I’m an old man. I can’t remember everything. But they are uh a pro high density housing unit company, um, not that it matters. I, they had something actually they were in some ways they were gonna cut you off.

00:52:05,300	OK, just let me finish my sentence in some ways their study was actually made the numbers look worse, but this study, if anyone wants to look at it, it’s online, it’s on the select board website and everything you know about how much this cost is is very much, Madam Chairman. Thank you for your comments.

00:52:22,870	I’m sure they will be helpful to the group at Town Hall that’s working on the cost of this. Now Chairman, would you like me to keep time? I have a Thank you.

00:52:44,630	My name is Elisey and I live on 114 Larch Row, and I wanted to talk about the traffic pattern that would potentially change on large row and Larch Lane with that piece of property. I walked my dog on Larch Lane to the train station quite often.

00:53:04,300	And I think I walk by senior housing, and what would happen to those properties and seeing that the property abuts to the Hamilton, I’m sorry, there’s someone speaking. Would you please sit down? I’m, I’m, I’m, I’m, I’m, that’s great, uh, we’re available after the meeting too. You can drop it by the town hall. I’m sorry, ma’am.

00:53:21,630	Will you start again? Yeah, so the property, that little green spot there that seems like the property ends like right in the middle of the shopping center, so that there’s, where would the traffic access be to that property.

00:53:43,930	It seems like the only property I see is Larch Lane, which is a very small road and adding 80 + homes or residences on that little spot is more than the number of homes on Larch Road in its entirety and Haarin as part of your planning exercise. Has there been any discussion with the town of Hamilton on helping with the traffic access to that property, given that number one, Hamilton is, they’re playing the exercise is to use Winthrop and use that to to meet their 3A requirement.

00:54:08,500	But when taxpayers are subsidizing that by helping if we vote to close Winthrop, that Hamilton gets a double benefit. They, they, they consolidate the school and they can turn that into a 3A property, but when I’m a subsidizing it, so has there been any planning discussion about further down the road

00:54:27,730	that if someone does come and develop that property, that whether Hamilton should be helping with road access because I think large Lane is too small to be handling all that traffic. Thank you for your comment, um, Mr. Pascall just respond briefly.

00:54:45,300	We, we did have a joint planning board meeting with the Hamilton Planning Board, um, I think it was in August, about 3A, um, we’re very different. We were at very different points of the process. I think we still are. I, I don’t think Hamilton is as far along in this process as we are. We did not specifically talk about traffic pattern.

00:55:03,000	OK, because I do think that is something that you need to think about. You you’re picking this tiny little spot and if you you’ve walked down that lane, there, you know, I walk by it looks like senior housing, the Wenham Housing Authority, what are those buildings gonna be displaced? What’s gonna

00:55:18,470	happen with all those cars are going in and out. It’s a very small road. Thank you. OK. Hi, uh, Tosh Blake, uh, Sagamore Street in Hamilton. Um, just uh maybe touch on a few points that some other people have made.

00:55:41,500	Um, I think the water question was kind of sidestepped as far as a source and the infrastructure question, I think is a red herring, any developer can simply probably, I assume, tap into existing Infrastructure that we have that businesses and and uh municipal buildings have water, they’ll tap into it and drain, drain from the same source. The state will probably even subsidize them. It’s, it’s possible. We don’t know.

00:56:00,670	We don’t know what kind of developer will come in and how they’ll be backed and what kind of financial backing they have. Billions of our tax dollars could be spread around to different towns to help develop, so it’s not just a zoning or planning exercise, there are people with real intentions

00:56:14,000	behind this that don’t are taking this seriously and want to densify our towns. It’s not a, it’s not like a joke or a hypo et ical I don’t like the idea of planning exercise because you can change a law like Massachusetts can have a law that says, OK, anyone who comes here, if you, if you,

00:56:26,370	you’re homeless, we’ll shelter you and it turns into billions of dollars in taxpayer money going out the window, so a little law that seems like maybe nothing at the time turns into something bigger.

00:56:40,230	Um, school costs, again, that’s another, you could kind of call it an infrastructure thing if you have to build new schools, we have to educate anyone who lives here if they have children, we can’t just say, well, we’re not going to educate you and 1000 children potentially show up. 300 units, that’s a lot of children at Hamilton’s share of 3A and that’s a lot more children.

00:56:55,230	So, we’re looking at Like I said, an unfunded mandate that’s not just building a few pipes and such. It’s millions and millions and millions of dollars of potential costs that the state really doesn’t care if, you know, we can pay for it. They want to densify the, the towns, unfortunately.

00:57:12,770	And the addressing the sunsets, um, I think Mr. Anderson said that we could add some riders to our 3A thing. That’s not gonna fly with the state. The AG has said that if you add anything that’s discriminatory against certain protected classes, it’s not going to fly, they’re not gonna be.

00:57:28,870	The state is the governor and the attorney General are not going to agree with anything we submit that kind of will say that we have any kind of disagreement.

00:57:46,000	Once the town votes for it, it’s in, it’s the law and so my suggestion is given all these things, the unfunded mandate, the irresponsibility, and I have to put some responsibility in the planning board depending on what you recommend.

00:57:58,030	You cannot, uh, and this is the regional problem, cannot just be densifying the whole region and say, well, that’s, that’s the developer’s problem though as long as they can pay for the pipes, who cares what happens to the water source.

00:58:11,100	We all live here and if we just put in the zoning exercises that turned into a uh a boondog for developers to come in and build stuff and then leave and go to their vacation home in Florida or wherever they are, and don’t care what happens to our towns or the region and it goes dry and the drought doesn’t just affect. The eastern mass, it’s all of New England. There’s been a major droughts, including the Quin zone that’s, you know, affecting the whole place.

00:58:26,470	So I would hope that the planning board just doing your small part in this region and I know it’s a big ask, but to say no and not recommend this to the select board, and I’m making this point in Hamilton, OK, OK, so it’s just I’ll I’ll wrap it up, um.

00:58:45,100	So your responsibility goes more than just following the law, I think is as individual citizens to do the right thing and simply saying the state’s telling you to do it, if it’s the wrong thing, it’s your responsibility as citizens to say no and not do this. Thank you. Thank you very much for your thoughts on this. Peter Peter Gwinn, 7 Fairview Ave. Thank you.

00:59:10,870	My public statement to Wenham boards and Wenham residents. One 3A is a forever state zoning, not Wenham. Wherever 3A overlays are approved. Presently the overlay is a half mile radius from the Wenham side of the MBTA station. This radius encompasses East Enon village and the surrounding neighborhoods on Lach Row, Pingry Field, Main Street, Perkins, and Porter Streets.

00:59:38,470	3A zoning, half mile radius compliance leaves an open door for residents to sell real estate investment firms and developers to purchase single homes for multi-apartment creation in the future, possible future. 3A is not affordable housing, even though you’ve allocated for 10%.

01:00:01,630	40B will continue by town population growth with 38 or without 3A. 20% of the 3A guideline compliance to date. May depend on when I’m planning board overlay options such as boulder lane, off grapevine, but could be rejected by the state upon submission. Based on some things that were just recently said.

01:00:24,300	Where then? The one I’m planning board has discussed linking 3A compliance in some way to Wenham’s master plan. That strategy should be explained and why. 3A state zoning guidelines today leave no one on zoning controls for the number of unrelated occupant bathrooms and bedrooms for high density apartment unit buildings. Let them select board to date.

01:00:52,630	has not acted upon the Massachusetts auditor’s determination, the 3A is an unfunded state mandate to petition for compliance exemption. Why? A Wenham select board members stated publicly April 14th, a suggested process for regional school district in both towns select boards to overturn the 2/3 vote of the consolidated Cutler School at June 9th special town meeting to a simple majority vote.

01:01:18,230	If enacted, a betrayal of public trust. It’s impossible not to be concerned about how many times Wenham votes for future tax increases in the next 2 to 3 fiscal years. From new schools to teachers to school maintenance to operating budgets to infrastructure costs for a population growth connected to 3A approval. Thank you. Thank you.

01:01:41,270	Would you like to leave a copy of your statement for the record? I can see that you have a you absolutely may. Margaret will take it. I don’t want to make that mistake. No, no, I, the problem was that you were interfering with someone else’s testimony. I, I, I understand.

01:02:09,500	Does anyone else wish to speak? Question number one of your slides. She Uh, could you go to the boulder lane, MFOD slide? It’s your Uh So I noticed this parcels selected is selected, I had that question too. I actually wrote myself a note. I’m like, what is that? No, that’s my fault.

01:02:35,100	I was, I was creating the map and, um, in order, yeah, I get GIS you have to click on it. OK, I just noticed it. No, no, it’s not a parcel that’s included. Now I kind of glided over it because I thought that’s just an error tech tech genius.

01:02:49,530	I didn’t, I didn’t, I didn’t actually see that, so good. Yeah, thank you. And So is this would you like I think you’re probably gonna have to pull it. I always have to pull it up. You gotta pull it down. Marria Jessy 7 Perkins Street. Um, I just wanna reiterate that.

01:03:24,230	The Wenham Select Board to date has not acted upon the Massachusetts Auditors determination that 3A is an unfundable state mandate and have not gone forward. To petition for a compliance exemption in Superior Court. Other towns have gone legally forward requesting a compliance exemption. I myself Requested that from one of the board members.

01:03:54,630	I did not, I was told I had an email response. But I didn’t get it. I asked for it to be sent to me again, it was not. Why, why haven’t we done that? Our own legal teams have done it for other towns. Thank you. Thank you for your comment.

01:04:25,100	I have a question I take the podium, please. Yeah, it’s fine. There’s no one else wanting to speak. My only, my only question for the board, and I, and by the way, I don’t feel adversarial toward the board at all.

01:04:41,630	I mean, I may come across that way, but, but I, I’m not I’m again because we have someone taking notes online and I want to make sure she, yeah, no, no, no, no, that’s fine. I had, I had a question for Dan. State your name again. Oh yeah, sure, Edward Flynn, uh, toy Lane. I apologize. Thank you. Dan, I, I hope you’re right, but, but. I’m not sure you are.

01:04:57,100	You think you think this, do you think me either. Do you think the state is going to accept the sunset clause? That’s a good question. Um We’ll find out. Um, if the state doesn’t want to accept the sunset clause.

01:05:20,130	I would rather have our position than the state’s position on that, because what our sunset clause says is it only kicks in. If the statute or the regulations are deemed unenforceable with respect to one of them, so. The position would be you have to proceed under unenforceable conditions, um, I agree. I, I, I think it was well thought out and I, and I really like it.

01:05:42,530	But, uh, uh, my thought is just from the actions of the governor and the attorney general in the is it EOH or whatever it is. I apologize, um, they’re pretty tough, uh, but we’ll see. Yeah, they’re typically disfavored. I’m, I’m not.

01:06:07,030	Operating under any illusions here, um, but There have been other sunset provisions and other zoning bylaws. So we, we think it’s worth including well I do too. I, I just want to point out that I think there may be an impression that we’re not hearing, but we are, and these provisions are a result of us trying to hear and respond to what we’re hearing.

01:06:42,300	Is anyone else who’s here wish to speak? Maybe I should close the public hearing. I was thinking we might be here very late tonight, but perhaps not. Anyone online? Uh, no, I don’t see anyone online with their hand up. Is anyone online want to speak? No hands up. No, yeah, we can’t see on the screen, so yeah. Um More, more.

01:07:12,870	I know I’m afraid to touch anything. It’ll all disappear on me. Can I ask one more question? You can’t ask one more question. There’s no one here who wants to speak, so why not? I, I, I was all, I was prepared because we haven’t closed the public hearing yet, Ed Edward Edwards, we’ll leave. I, I, I, I, I apologize.

01:07:33,100	But, but, well, thank you. Edward Flynn, uh, toy lane. I had another question on one of the slides, but we don’t have to show the slide and, and the question was, um, whether or not. Now I’m forgetting my question um. Whether or not the state could withhold.

01:07:55,200	The funding of the consolidated school project if it goes through is that one of the things they’re threatening to do what we, what the slide says is that the school funding is not the kind of funding that they can withhold. I, I can’t hear you on P sorry. The school funding is not. at risk.

01:08:16,830	It’s a discretionary grants for things like our subdivision ordinance or acquiring open space or That kind of thing. Um You want to respond I’m not sure what the slide said was chapter 70. I’m not familiar enough with chapter 70 to know if it’s different from MSBA grants, which I’m hearing it may be different.

01:08:41,300	So, um, is it MSBA? Do I have the acronym right? So, I think you do MBA might be considered a discretionary grant by the state. However This is the stated policy of the administration. The last bullet point is included because no court has made a determination on this yet. This is a pretty broad policy.

01:09:06,670	However, I will say what the SJC did. Determine which was the attorney general can enforce this statute. And it’s not clear exactly what the Attorney General can do. She can sue for declaratory judgment, we know that.

01:09:27,300	What she was seeking to do in the Milton case was to have a special master appointed and decide zoning for Milton if Milton wasn’t going to do it. So that wasn’t ruled on in the Milton case, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t try to seek that remedy in the future.

01:09:47,570	OK, so what, what we know from the Milton case is this statute is constitutional, it’s not going away. This statute is a mandate on the towns. Which means we have to do something and one of the questions before us is, are we gonna do it and choose.

01:10:07,370	The districts ourselves, or are we potentially going to subject ourselves to having somebody else to have these districts or choose these districts for us. So, that’s how I I, I, I agree with you. If you read the law itself, the town of Wadham, if we decided to vote no.

01:10:26,500	And since we haven’t, as far as I know, ever received any of the enumerated grants don’t have very much to lose, however, go ahead, I would just note that we did lose $65,000 in the football that was rather recently, right technically we were not in noncompliance. We lost it anyway. We got it back once the Milton case was decided, as Dan described, but We do, we do get discretionary grants.

01:10:51,130	We do apply for them and we do receive them pretty regularly. So I, I stand quite broadly. The policy, the current policy is quite broadly stated, I think is what I, I agree with you and I guess what I could, could probably rephrase it and say the, the people of Wyndham could choose between the grant

01:11:11,370	the enumerated grants in the law and whether or not they want to have 3A. The current Attorney general and the governor as far as we all can tell, is playing very hard ball and is really broaden that to be a lot of different things and apparently they’re adding things quite often.

01:11:29,500	as we go along and my question was because it’s a timely issue and I, I hear you saying you don’t know and then that’s, if you don’t know, you don’t know.

01:11:42,930	Uh, if you read the law, if you read the law of the answer I am hearing that MSBA grants are different from chapter 70. So I, so there’s a possibility that if we vote for the new school, we may not get reimbursed. I, I, if it’s if we’re not in compliance we’re out of compliance but we are currently we’re in compliance, so.

01:12:02,670	I’m gonna, um, excuse me Kate Mallory has her hand up on screen. No, no, I’m sorry, I stand correctly if we vote no. Later on 38 of the town, it’s going to go to town meeting. We’re gonna vote. If we vote no, is the government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts gonna withhold the money to the consolidated schools. Do we know the answer? We do.

01:12:24,100	This board does not know the answer. I see a selectman standing behind you. What, what the last thing I’ll say on this is is what the administration has said is that, um, whatever other statute requires that you be in compliance with state law.

01:12:46,870	They will deem noncompliance with 3A to be disqualifying for those grants, so it’s going to be broader than or the, the administration is taking the position that it will be broader than those 4 itemized well that includes a no vote too compliance but a no vote, so we’re in compliance after that would be a no vote is noncompliance? OK, thank you.

01:13:07,770	I, I, I didn’t know that part. If you’re following, if you’re following the letter of the law and they give you a choice to vote yes or no and you vote no. I don’t see as a noncompliance. I see us as voting no. I understand what you’re saying. Thank you.

01:13:23,830	They’re gonna consider it right that we haven’t adopted the zoning, which is what’s required. Thank you. Thank you. No more questions. You got, you had your 3 times. Do you want me to do you want me to take Kate? Kate, uh, Mallory on the line. Do you want to make a statement? Can you hear us Kate Mallory town staff.

01:13:45,730	Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to say that we um had some more information today that might be relevant to this conversation tonight. Um, the town of Wenham has been working with Greenbelt to acquire 9 Maple Street for preservation.

01:14:09,100	Part of this would be applying for a state land grant and that grant would be about $425,000 to help us purchase this property, and we found out today that if we do not pass the MBTA3A zoning that we would be out of compliance and not eligible for this funding. So that’s $425,000. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

01:14:34,200	um Spend time in 236 Laro, a member of the select board, just on the, um, school school building assistance point. Thank you, that would be helpful. Um, and what, uh, Kate just said is certainly consistent with what We understand to be the, the administration’s policy as stated in that top bullet that Any discretionary state grants to towns could be uh targeted by a 3A noncompliance, um, and

01:15:00,100	so it isn’t just the, um, statutorily delineated, um, programs that Um, that are at risk and the Milton argument, At the SJC that the funding should be limited to those things was, was not adopted certainly by the SJC and the Milton decision.

01:15:21,100	I’m not sure if they squarely addressed it, but they didn’t. Adopt that argument from Milton. So, the state of affairs as, as they exist now is as, as that bullet says and as Kate just gave an example of. However, With respect to the school building assistance funds. We’ve looked into that as a select board.

01:15:39,370	And we have 2 pieces of information that, um, Lead us and I think, um, others who have looked at it to conclude that that funding is not, um, at risk of, uh, if there’s 3 noncompliance for two reasons as it pertains to. Hamilton Wenham.

01:16:00,300	One is that, um, because the money would be paid to a regional school district and not to either Hamilton or Wenham, um, the, uh, the administration has said in guidance that’s been provided and I think it actually is the 3rd bullet where it discusses non-municipal entities seeking funding for projects and non-compliant towns, um, that particular piece of guidance specifically says that in a situation where a uh, district

01:16:25,930	receives school building assistance funds or any funds that would go to that regional district, um, that funding is not going to be at risk because one of the underlying member towns may or may not be, um, compliant.

01:16:43,100	So, so there’s that reason that any funding that might come for the Cutler School expansion, if that passes, uh, wouldn’t be at risk. The other reason is, um, specific guidance from EOHLC that was sent to um Superintendent Tracy. He put the question directly to the state.

01:17:04,000	And there’s an email that I know has been circulated, um, Among some constituents who are asking about it, so it’s a public record, um, in which it’s explicitly stated that that that funding will not be, um. tied up with issues of 3A. Thank you so much for that.

01:17:22,400	May I just ask one question? If you state your name for the record and David, excuse me, pull the mic down so you can just ask one question. Please state your name again, Marjoriejeski 7 Perkins Street. Um Here Park, who owns that? Does the town own that? Is it? The town owns, well, the part that’s in the town. Yes, I think it’s most, all of it. Yeah.

01:17:44,570	Is it all of it? Is it Hamilton and Wyndham or just no, it’s, I think that the line is. After the park. OK, um, is that protected in any way from anyone getting a hold of it and putting housing there. Yes, the town owns it. So The town could sell it if they wanted to. I think it’s excluded land.

01:18:09,470	It’s also excluded. The state has devised a list of the kinds of land that you can consider for the zoning operation because it’s still like exercise, but that’s in effect what, what this is, um, and Park, Parkland or land that’s In wetlands land that’s exempt.

01:18:33,630	It’s it’s exempt, yeah, we can’t, we wouldn’t be able to use that if we wanted to, which we don’t. Thank you Yeah So if there’s no other, uh, comment, I think I’m gonna go ahead and close the public hearing at this point. Um I think I probably need a motion to close the public hearing. to close the public hearing in favor Wes Woodland. discussion.

01:19:07,630	We have uh Madam Chairman, yes, we’re now going to discuss this, so we just let people know what’s happening next in case they want to stay. I see a lot of coats. We are gonna discuss this. We’re gonna, uh, take a couple of votes.

01:19:21,630	So if you want to stay, please feel free if you The vote we’re gonna take tonight as I understand it, is to either recommend or not to the select board this legislation, we need to take.

01:19:40,800	One just one has to do with the eligibility of the property to that the districts that we’ve chosen and the second one is whether or not to recommend to send it. To the slog. Well, it could be to recommend it as well. We have to have that discussion we can either vote to send it with no recommendation and make a recommendation at a later date, or we can vote to recommend it and.

01:20:00,470	Send it on to the, um, Select board. So those are the choices we’re gonna have a conversation right now. We’re gonna make those decisions. If you want to stay, you’re welcome to stay. If you want to leave and go home, I totally understand that, um, but just want to make clear what’s happening next. We close it.

01:20:19,100	This is the hearing’s closed, so this is not. Can we ask questions? I think, I think the public hearing is closed, so I think at this point we’ve heard what you. Need to say to us.

01:20:45,300	We do have another agenda item, uh, on an entirely different topics, but around this issue we’re going to have our deliberation at this point because the hearing is closed. Yeah. Thank you. So one of the things that we have to, I’m proposing this as part of our discussion. One of the things that we have to determine is part of our report is eligibility of location. for our districts, um. Margaret, please, the map, the map back.

01:21:12,500	Yeah, can you minimize the zoom Zoom for the people. Oh great. Beautiful. Thank you. So These, these two areas were recommended to us by our consultant on compliance, um, that they were compliant districts under the um Statute, um, and whatever modeling the state was, was providing, um, district district one is.

01:21:47,900	Mhm I mean, I guess everything’s walking distance, but this is literally walking distance to the train station, um, it is in very close proximity. To it, um, District 2 It’s obviously not next to the train station, but it is in close proximity to accessing 128.

01:22:11,770	I think both of these qualify under the uh definition of eligible locations, so I think we need to discuss that and then vote on that issue. I think we’ve also had this conversation several times as a board when we were in the part of the process where we were trying to decide where the districts.

01:22:34,170	Can and should be in order to both minimize the impact on downtown and also meet the requirements, um, and I think we tried to find areas where we could do that with the minimum and proposed the minimum number of units. Possible under The regular with the, well, they were guidelines at that point, but now regulations.

01:22:59,300	So, um, I would move that both of the districts, um, Be determined to be an eligible locations. Based on their proximity to transportation and suitability for multi-family and mixed-use development. Second And I don’t know if I need to be more formalized in that, but discussion is. No, do that.

01:23:27,730	So, um, having a motion in a second, I would take a vote. Anderson and I. We Paso I Woodland All right, and then. The next question is how and whether to recommend. It Maps, the locations, the zoning ordinance provisions as we’ve spoken about them and amended them tonight.

01:23:59,670	To the select board for the June 9th public Me, town meeting. So Rick, to your point, um, I think we have two things before us in terms of recommendation. One is sending this back to the select board for inclusion on the warrant as amended tonight.

01:24:19,170	And then We as a board need to make a recommendation to town meeting as to what our position is on this, um, whether we approve, disapprove, what how we think town meeting should vote. Um I’m going to suggest that on that 2nd point Um We hold that recommendation to town meeting for a later date.

01:24:43,370	That we not make that recommendation tonight because I think there are still issues developing with respect to 3A, um, however, I would recommend that as amended tonight, we send the bylaw back to the select board for its consideration to include it on the warrant for June 9th. Thank you for that explanation.

01:25:04,800	understand what, then what what issues do you think still remain? Um, I, I think they’re still moving parts with respect to challenges to 3A that are out there. I, I think, um, we heard. Multiple comments tonight about unfunded mandate litigation. Um, we took a wait and see attitude in the fall with respect to, um, You know, moving this entire process for.

01:25:25,200	I’m not saying we’re not moving the process forward, but we aren’t required to make our recommendation to town meeting. Um Until before Tom meeting, we don’t have to make that recommendation tonight or at town meeting or at town meeting but logistically technically, that’s technically right, but logistically, I, I think we’d want to have a another meeting

01:25:43,730	in advance of town meeting on this particular and we do have a regularly scheduled meeting. Uh, between now and the June 9th special and we could schedule a deadline to be included in the warrant? to move forward to move forward into the to move forward to move forward into the to move

01:26:03,470	forward warrant without the statement of the recommendation. Well, I think we saw it, I think we saw at the recent town meeting that there were several. Um Positions expressed at the meeting itself. So if we wanted it to be printed and that I think it’s necessary to be printed.

01:26:25,670	It’s not tonight, I know that. Well, if it’s May 6th, we’re not gonna meet before then. Um I guess my thought is he was on before. Can he answer that question? Does someone from the select board know when Steve Poulos is online, so.

01:26:49,470	Dave, are you thinking about the value of having the recommendation in the Warren book. Yeah, I mean, I’m not, I’m not saying one way or the other, but my perspective is that there’s From everything I see and I’m happy to explain why, but I’ll just say from the I see. The issues before this board to make a recommendation.

01:27:09,730	I, I don’t think there are Additional things that will transpire in the next 6 weeks that will materially change the considerations within the purview of this sport, so I feel like we just need to go forward, but that’s just my opinion in this seat.

01:27:30,000	Did you find Steve? If Steve have an answer for the printing date? Um, Steve, can you hear us? Online You may have, he’s muted. He yeah, he is you are muted Kate knows. I, my recollection is there were some changes made for this last warrant.

01:27:54,000	At a select board meeting that was maybe a week in advance and it had already been printed and mailed out to houses, so it, you know, it’s. Gonna be The end of May anyway. If not before in the mail, um, at least I think 3 weeks before 3 weeks before town sounds like when they have to be in the mail, so that probably means a month before 0 meeting, which

01:28:11,130	would be May 9th. And we have a May 8th meeting. We have a May 8th. I don’t know when they’ll open and close the warrant. I don’t have that information, but I think it was May 6th. If I’m I’m big on uh pop votes. So I don’t think it’s bad or not.

01:28:32,500	If it not, I would go with that and say we can, we can decide on the recommendation later. But what member of select board. So Steve would know more definitively, but I recall that he Said that May 6th was a target date. Or Comfortably mailing out.

01:28:59,630	The printed version of the warrant, but there, that there’s some um Some room there potentially, so. It My, my best guess is that if that uh if you made a recommendation on May 8th. Uh, and, uh, they hadn’t been mailed out yet.

01:29:22,470	That they could be mailed out on the 9th, but That is, I don’t state that with great, great confidence, but I think that that’s the most likely scenario. Does Does that vote on a recommendation require a public hearing? So we have to keep a public hearing. No. I asked, I asked town council this question earlier today.

01:29:48,730	Do, do we have to Vote on our recommendation to town meeting tonight and the answer is no, we do not. We just need to do it before a town meeting. We have to have a planning board hearing. I mean, meeting a plan we’re meeting. Um, where we make our recommendation, yes, with notice. I here’s the thing. Uh Obviously we all have our eyes on the on the litigation, the legal developments.

01:30:15,000	But fundamentally, this is a planning and zoning question. And I just don’t believe that much is going to change in the next. 3 weeks. We’re here. You know, frankly, this board has needed to deliberate on this issue for a long time. I think we deliberate. And we take a vote. That’s my perspective.

01:30:38,470	So I think that there is potential for significant change. Very, in the very near future. Because, um, Again, we heard multiple comments about unfunded mandate issues. Um, I think that there’s a decision imminent in those cases. Um, that may have an effect on us the motion dismiss is granted.

01:31:09,170	I don’t think that changes anything about our deliberation tonight. Cause I don’t believe that that, I don’t think personally, as I read the papers, I don’t think it’s a strong position by the towns that have contested this. I’m happy to explain why, but that’s my personal opinion. If the motion to dismiss is denied.

01:31:28,000	It’s not, it’s not a It’s not a motion on the merits. It’s not summary adjudication, so all that will continue is some type of further briefing schedule, right? Is there some type of cross cross motion? Yes. It’s actually motions for the towns all brought motions for preliminary injunction against the state.

01:31:50,000	So, I would say if the court grants motions for preliminary injunction but is that actually pending before the court. That was they were argued simultaneously. Under some of those cases, though. What would the impact be on us actually holding the meeting? I mean, if there was enough of a change that it. changes are underlying understanding of what’s happening here.

01:32:11,830	I imagine it could also lead to a delay in the meeting. Is that? Potentially correct. I think we saw that last fall I’m just thinking like the recommendation we make now.

01:32:33,300	If we were to make a recommendation this evening isn’t necessarily final recommendations and If things change, I think we’re, it’s our, of our purview to also change our recommendation or if the meeting is pushed off, we would go through this again. Can you make a decision this evening. Oh I’m sorry, the board is deliberating the public hearing is closed. I, I hate Mrs. Majeski, please let us have our board deliberation. part of.

01:32:57,670	Scott, part, part of this is It’s not our call. In terms of what your, to your question. Um, it’s the select board’s call and this is a call they made in This, the fall in September. Um, and I, I think if there’s an imminent decision from a court that could Significantly changed the legal landscape.

01:33:26,570	I, I don’t see why we would make an unnecessary recommendation tonight before we have full information. Well, there are 2 recommendations we’re making tonight. So I, I hear some applause. Number one, we need to just refer this back to the select board.

01:33:45,370	And the second thing is how we individually feel as planning board members about the legislation, correct? That’s the recommendation we make to town meeting. It was about, about the regulations that we have put forward. I don’t think we can say that our recommendation. Is at all related to.

01:34:05,570	What we feel about the statute that’s why my, my thought would be to just vote on moving this back to the select board so we keep the process moving so people get a chance to vote on it and it gets in the warrant and we can then table for tonight, the decision, the discussion and the decision on whether we as a planning board feel we can recommend this to the town, correct? That’s the second boat particularly if we can have our

01:34:22,170	next meeting before the deadline for printing the warrant. We’ll have to figure that out. I have to say though I mean not sorry to interrupt, but, and I won’t get strident about this, but like this is. The issue that we have heard probably most about 3A is a lack of information.

01:34:44,470	So This body is the from the government perspective, the subject matter expert on zoning and planning. This is the time. We are 6 weeks out from a vote potentially as a town on this.

01:35:02,730	I think we need to have a fulsome deliberation, and we need to take a vote and put up a recommendation of this board and inform the town what this board thinks about the proposed multi-family overlay districts, whether that’s up or down. It’s up to the select board to decide legal strategy. It’s not up to this board. Let me say this, if the town of Middleton prevails on a preliminary injunction.

01:35:22,630	That probably isn’t gonna influence my vote on a recommendation from sitting on this board, whether or not I think it should go forward. Because frankly, that’s for the select board which controls litigation, strategy in this town to decide.

01:35:47,170	And I think whatever, why would I as a planning board member, Make the decision be make my decision influenced by the litigation strategy for a case that doesn’t even have a direct implication for this town necessarily. It’s all facts and circumstances depending on the specific town and the showing of the costs incurred. That’s all I’ll say. So I, what I was going to say, Was I was rudely cut you off, no, no.

01:36:14,270	I was gonna I was gonna agree with something else you said, and I’m still going to agree with something else you said earlier tonight. um, but first I’m going to agree with what Rick said, that I agree we should move the process forward, um, so that we can keep this rolling towards a vote

01:36:30,730	potentially for special time meeting on June 9th. to that effect I to that effect I think to that effect I we’re still discussing because I want to answer Mr. Anderson. I agree with you. that I think we need a recommendation in print in the warrant. But That doesn’t have to be tonight.

01:36:51,730	And I mean, I, I, I’ll agree with you, a preliminary injunction for Middleton is great for Middleton, but Um, if a preliminary injunction is granted, and that, in that litigation, I can see how that might have an effect on Wenham, and it might have an effect on our select board.

01:37:09,470	And I mean, we, we Yes, because if We didn’t make a recommendation in September when the select board, um, decided that The timing wasn’t right in September, right? That, that we weren’t going forward. I’m sorry, that we weren’t going forward with our November special town meeting.

01:37:38,570	So I could see something happening in That pending litigation where motions have been briefed and a decision is expected very soon. That might have a direct impact on, on our town. So we, I agree, I want to have a full and complete discussion on whether we suggest a town meeting to approve.

01:37:59,900	Or not, or something else with respect to this, but we don’t need to do that tonight. And we’re gonna have another meeting where, you know, we could probably devote. A large portion of that meeting to this issue. Um And I’m sure if we have to have it on May 5th or something instead of May 8th, that we can accommodate that. So, That’s my Response to your last concern.

01:38:25,730	So I would make a motion then if to read the on this point. If we are, I’m going to propose a motion. Why don’t you go ahead and do that, I move that we Uh, forward to the select board for its consideration, um, of inclusion on the warrant for special town meeting, the proposed bylaw as amended

01:38:51,800	tonight. Second, I have a motion and a second. I’m going to take a vote. Mr. Anderson Woodland. Um, OK, I’ll make another motion. I’m gonna say, is there another motion that, um, we defer making our recommendation to town meeting. Until Um, either our May 8 meeting.

01:39:25,100	Or A time earlier than that, so that our recommendation can be included in print in the town warrant. I’ll second that motion. Um Discussion? I appreciate what you’re doing. And the thought here, but I just feel like Each time we kick the can on a fulsome deliberation, the clock is running out.

01:39:49,500	There’s just less and less of an opportunity for this board to have a fulsome discussion as a board, cause I don’t violate open meeting law. We’re meeting here.

01:40:08,830	I’ll see you all in a month and in that interim period, we 5 will not have another discussion about The multi-family overlay district and that is another 28 days that the town is deprived of whatever thoughts are floating around in our head. I think that’s a huge mistake.

01:40:33,730	I have a motion on the floor, uh, to defer the recommendation until the next meeting of the planning board or Such earlier date as will allow us to have this printed in the warrant. Our recommendation printed in the warrant. I have a second. I think I need to take a vote. Anderson, no. Weeks no. Oscar, I Scherer, no. Woodland. Sorry, what was Rick’s, what was your 32. 23 3 to 2. So I think we’re gonna have to. Make a recommendation tonight.

01:41:11,030	So if I could have a motion. Doing so. I would Entertain that or if there’s more discussion to be had. Madam Chair one I think we’ve been deliberating for 2 years on this and has spent A lot of time listening to people, a lot of time working on.

01:41:35,730	Trying to make this the best it can be, given the statute we’re dealing with, given the regulations we’re dealing with given the legal process that we’re all sitting under and dealing with. And I think we just have to take a vote and commit one way or the other, um, On what we’ve done.

01:41:57,500	So anyway, Discussion Yes, I have a statement that I’ve kind of worked on because I’ve listened now for almost 3 years. It’s consumed our board for 3 years. I’ve listened to my neighbors and Constituents all through town and uh I took some time, I’m not always the best, uh, orator or writer, but, um, here are my thoughts.

01:42:15,630	I’d like to read in the record and then submit a copy to, uh, Margaret, um, for the past 3 years, the organization has been consumed by mass general law chapter 40A, Section 3A. Monthly meetings, legal opinions, public listening sessions, interactions with state executive branch officials and lots of deliberation, all in an attempt to make the draconian piece of legislation work for

01:42:37,000	Wenham and it just doesn’t. Accordingly, I cannot as an elected representative of the citizens of Wenham support the zoning change. The legislation comes on the heels of Wenham’s development of a master development plan and its submission to the Commonwealth who approved our plan.

01:42:55,770	These ideas included the need for more commercial space, more diverse housing, and an attempt to preserve the historic nature and semi-rural roots of the town. Section A3A at many times is a direct conflict with the town’s wishes.

01:43:12,930	So I went backwards in time trying to figure out why when I’m in the late 50s, appeared to try to stop the development spreading out from Boston. There was so little documentation from leaders. All I could find were rumors like on small lots in the village private well water was at risk of being contaminated by private sewer systems.

01:43:27,000	And I heard advocates of 3A said it was nothing more than a redlining attempt to keep people out. But then I looked at what Wyndham was in the 1950s. Yes, there were some larger states they were hunting and fishing cabins around the ponds, but much of the town economy was in raising dairy cattle to support the local HP Hood dairy.

01:43:43,800	Post-World War II development included small cape style homes for returning veterans, a pretty simple way of life. Next, I looked at what’s happening in neighboring Danvers and North Beverly at the time, massive developments were planned on farms that were being sold and broken up. I can see why one wanted to stop that type of development.

01:43:58,630	And now here we are again, the buffer community between full suburbanization and the semi-rural towns of Wenham, Hamilton, Manchester, Essexet L. We can stop the suburban suburbanization, it’s OK. There have been other state initiatives such as the Independent Living Overlay District.

01:44:20,570	This allowed towns to create 55 plus living communities in an attempt to free up more single-family homes for younger families. That didn’t work. Why is this going to work to unlock the housing that people can afford. 3A is the builder’s dream. 3A opens up a huge swaths of development, developable land across eastern Massachusetts to developers with few restrictions. Yes, there are setbacks, height restrictions, etc.

01:44:39,370	and it’s not an affordable housing initiative, neither state-mandated big A affordable housing or market affordable housing developers only need to plan for 10% of the state mandated affordable housing.

01:44:59,100	And nothing from market rate affordable housing when already exceeds our 10% mandate, given the free market, 3A will do nothing more than potentially create million dollar plus condos and apartments. How will that help younger people and families with home ownership. As you can see, I left out the numbers. I left out the potential need for expanded services. I left out all the numbers because we need to first decide what we want to look like in the future.

01:45:13,000	So what’s in it for Wenham? That’s when I, that’s what I struggled with. We agreed as a town in the master plan that we needed commercial development and a more diverse housing stock, keeping in the character of the town.

01:45:28,000	I don’t see how 3A supports our idea for Wyndham in the future, at least not enough to take the risks associated with 3A. Isn’t the Commonwealth here to help our dreams come to fruition. 38 is not that legislation, respectfully presented Fred Woodland. Catherine, we have it for the record. Anyone else? On the board. Yes But uh Mr. Anderson wants to have the discussion. I’d like to hear from Mr. Anderson. Fair enough.

01:46:03,830	Um. I have approached 3A, uh, first as what I felt was an overreach from Beacon Hill. It was, it is a poorly crafted piece of legislation that deferred way too much to the executive office of Housing and livable Communities. They took a 45 paragraph.

01:46:34,100	Law and turned it into 2025 pages of regulations. Um, it is something that has, uh, as, um, interpreted by the executive branch, um, stripped towns and communities of a lot of autonomy over what they want their communities to look like.

01:46:58,730	Um, we have never been able to perform the analysis that I think our town should have performed, been able to perform, which is to actually hear from our community. Uh, and specifically town government about the capacity that reasonable development of dense housing could provide in this town. In previous meetings, I’ve stated my deep and fundamental concerns with, um, With The regulations in 3A, and that has not changed.

01:47:27,470	But what has changed since that conversation is a clear and unequivocal statement by statement by the highest court in this land, the SJC, excuse me, the highest court in this Commonwealth, um, by the SJC that this is a constitutional and enforceable law that the state attorney general, um, is

01:47:45,100	entitled to enforce and has powers to do so. That is a reality that we face. Um, there’s those in this community that have Kind of said, and I’m not talking about anybody in particular, more a general sentiment that there will be unending litigation, um, about 3A in the regulations to the

01:48:02,370	effect of, well, we can continue to kick the can. When I take a step back and think about all of this, and I take as much responsibilities as anybody. The public discourse on 3A has been entirely unsatisfying to me because it’s been presented in a binary. You either comply or you don’t.

01:48:24,670	And that’s not our town’s fault. In the first instance, that’s how we were set up by the executive branch, in my opinion. By having 25 pages of regulations that really did in a lot of ways divest the town from having input.

01:48:46,000	That being said, the way I prefer to look at 3A through the lens of the master plan. We have had some incredibly dedicated town residents, many of which are here tonight who have consistently showed up as much as we’ve showed up to talk about their concerns with the regulations and the proposed multi-family overlay district, but we had a respectfully to everybody in this room and those who’ve attended the

01:49:06,200	public hearings. We have had even more public input, significantly more public. in preparation of the master plan, and I was Um, pleased and privileged to be a part of that in the steering committee and so when I look at the multi-family overlay districts.

01:49:25,470	I look at it through the lens of the master plan, and specifically what were the community sentiments that bubbled surface to the top through the 800 plus community touch points that we had.

01:49:47,370	And the number There were 5 key points, um, One of the keys, so, so I think it’s important to actually just touch on them briefly and you put in the nickel, so you’re gonna get the album, Dan, but, uh, out of the jukebox, but I will be, I will be relatively brief here.

01:50:07,500	Let’s think about the 5 key themes that emerged from this community, those that had the will and the interest to participate in the master plan process. Higher taxes are an issue. Um, the impact, the fiscal impact of 3A and a potential development is currently being studied by this town. I’m working with a few other people, select board member Tim and plain board member Schoenberger were looking at it respectfully with, with as to Mr. Flynn.

01:50:29,470	He included some assumptions, and I appreciate his diligence in looking at that report. It’s not an easy document to read. I don’t necessarily agree with his assumptions about the fiscal analysis.

01:50:53,470	However, that’s an ongoing process, and it’s a transparent one for this community, and I encourage everybody that’s invested this much in this process so far to continue to observe, work with, get some input in that fiscal analysis because there’s a a lot of variables there. In terms of the sizes of, um, the units that are developed, the assumptions around the number of children, um, that can be expected average number of children per unit. Um, the costs associated with each.

01:51:11,100	Child, I mean, there’s data out there. There’s models, like you look at it and there’s wide ranges. So 3A could have a positive or a negative, a net positive, a net negative fiscal analysis. I don’t think we have enough.

01:51:28,730	We’ll never have enough to say definitively that involves some measure of clairvoyance, but we will have enough to say these are the range of expected outcomes, and I do believe it is somewhere in the middle of positive to negative, and we can continue to look at that.

01:51:44,830	So in terms of the first theme, In the fiscal analysis and the taxes, it’s uncertain to community members expressed desires for improvement to municipal facilities. Again, I see this is mixed. When you have new development, particularly in the train station area, you have the potential for good municipal facilities.

01:52:03,470	One of the reasons I proposed the amendment for, um, no direct costs is that I don’t think that the town should be forced to bear, be be obligated to bear those costs of infrastructure and municipal. facilities.

01:52:24,730	But that being said, in the hopes that we have strong Um, leadership from the town, the outcome could be positive, and I think we have to bet on hope, um, that our town can meet, um, that challenge. Number 31 of many historic places and landmarks are cherished community assets, they certainly are. We have very significant open spaces here, um, in a historical sense, as well as a community enjoyment sense. Um, I don’t believe that either of these districts will negatively impact those. I don’t believe. They’ll positively impact those.

01:52:45,770	I see that as a wash for natural places, open spaces, recreation facilities. Again, I don’t think that there’s necessarily a clear indication that there’ll be a positive or negative effect on that.

01:53:05,470	But let’s turn to 5 housing merged as a top concern for community members, particularly concerning affordability, availability, and diversity of housing types. There is no question that the overwhelming sense of the community was that there needs to be an increase in diversification of housing types in this town. So fundamentally, I look at 3A in the proposed multi-family overlay districts as An imperfect. But Possible Movement forward. On that.

01:53:33,870	When we went through the master plan process, and if you look at the maps within there, um, the multi-family overlay district number one, as well as #2, were both identified as key sites for um mixed use and housing development.

01:53:56,630	Now, I don’t particularly, um, think it’s great to have density of the amount that the state is mandating. I don’t know that we will ever have that level of density. Even through a development scheme. You know, I don’t know if it’s brought up tonight. Hopefully it’s not lost on anybody that the town owns a number of the parcels in, in multi-family overlay district 2.

01:54:15,370	So the town has um some control over the amount of development in that area. But when I look across those um 5. categories, I consider the fact that the SJC has said that this is a constitutional law that I believe is gonna be here to stay one way or the other.

01:54:40,830	Um Ultimately I’m inclined to believe that, um, we should, uh, recommend this from a zoning and planning perspective, uh, based upon the strong sense of the community. As articulated in the master plan. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Anderson. I’m gonna not belabor the point, but I’m, I’m just gonna say when I read the statute.

01:55:02,830	And I look at what this board has been able to do within the context of the regulations and prior to that, the guidelines, I think if we get to a point where the, the statute is the driver of this. We will see all the density within 0.5 mile of the train station. I prefer this. Way of planning for it.

01:55:27,370	It puts multi-family housing out by the highway and at the other transportation hub in, uh, in Wenham. While I completely agree with all the statements that everyone has made about the fact that the number of permissible units. For Wenham is really unrealistic.

01:55:52,670	I do think that at least in the downtown area, the multi-family overlay district one is a reasonable thing for us to do in response. Regardless of the state law in response. To the master plans, uh, clear articulation of the need for different kinds of of housing and mixed use development in Wenham.

01:56:17,130	Um, I I think that for this town at this time with the statute we have. This is the best thing we can do, and I am supportive of it. Anybody else? I’ll go ahead, Scott, I’ll just say quickly, I mean, I think the law sucks.

01:56:46,630	Um, that would be my non-legal interpretation of it, um, and I also obviously joined the board more recently, so I went from observer to uh participation, but I also am aware that something else that would Really, I’ll just stick with the same words suck for our town as if we lost control entirely over this process.

01:57:05,770	And so if we end up in a situation where Wenham is At the whims of some people who are not from Wenham and it’s people coming in from the outside and we have the state government imposing something on us, that poses a much larger risk to me than us doing the best we can to comply with something that Not saying that we like it or it’s not necessarily a good thing, but it’s also doesn’t mean it’s not the best path forward at the

01:57:24,500	moment. Um I have been very close to this issue for a very long time. Thank you, thank you. Go back to Zoom meetings on the subcommittee stretching back to February of 2023, trying to figure out where these numbers came from, trying to make sense of metrics that EOHLC seemingly pulled out of thin air, and I

01:57:55,270	think those metrics are arbitrary. I don’t think that they make any sense with respect to the town of Wenham. For example, we are a commuter rail community as designated under the. Um, regulations, I suppose, which is supposed to subject us to a 15% cap on unit capacity.

01:58:18,300	EOHLC in the way that they’ve drafted their metrics, however, subjects us to a 25% cap, which effectively turns us into a rapid transit community. Um Chair weeks with respect to your point about your worried That the regulations might change and if we’re under the statute, then we’d be forced to put all of these units within a

01:58:38,100	half mile of the station. I think that the only way that we are allowed or able to get to Boulder Lane, and the only way that EAOHLC is, is able to get outside of the statutory language that says one reasonably sized district within a half mile is because those metrics are arbitrary and

01:58:58,230	they’re trying to inflate numbers for towns. So if they had to abide by the statutory language, I don’t think our numbers would be anywhere near 365.

01:59:15,370	I, so I’m not concerned about that at all, because I think if we were forced to put all of our units within a half mile of that station, we wouldn’t be talking about 365 units. Um I’m not happy with how some of our institutions have handled 3A from, it is a mandate, make no mistake about it, we have to. We’re forced to take action. Um, I think the SJC kicked this down the, the road a bit.

01:59:38,800	They could have decided more questions that were before them that would make this much easier for not only boards, but citizens to address this issue. I think the Attorney General and the EOHLC, the way they handled or responded to the, um, SGC’s decision, um. Wasn’t exactly in good faith.

02:00:02,300	I, I don’t think there was a robust public comment period for these new regulations. Um, All right, we as a board have said on several occasions that but for the 3A mandate, we never would have zoned the way we have for these particular districts. So, that said. In having been very close to this. I don’t think we can do any better.

02:00:30,570	We’ve all put a ton of effort into this. I don’t think we can come up with a better plan for Wenham. I get that. You know, there are questions about their fears about how many units are going to be built. This is a zoning exercise. I get it. We’ve heard all the criticism.

02:00:48,900	I’m not trying to reopen that, um, but we’ve done the best that we could. I, I think it is a mistake for us to take this vote tonight. And I’ve seriously thought about abstaining on this, but I’m not gonna do that.

02:01:12,470	Um With the caveat, of course, that we can always all change our recommendation before town meeting, um, we have one more meeting, yeah. But if you’re gonna put me to a vote tonight, Um On whether we should recommend this or not, I don’t think we should lose control of this process.

02:01:33,530	I don’t think that we can do better, and I would Recommend it, but I hesitate to do that because I sense that there are going to be further developments on this, on this issue. Um, and, however, last thing. If there are, we’ve done our best to cover ourselves with the sunset provision. That was the purpose of this.

02:01:51,770	So if there is a further development in litigation that is going to invalidate our requirements. We’ve done all we can to cover ourselves, so. That was a yes. Um. Is there a pending motion? There is not, I think you could make one. Is it procedurally proper to renew Dan’s motion to Um Defer recommendation until the May 8th meeting.

02:02:20,100	I know that’s gonna whiplash everybody in the room. You can make another motion. You can make another motion, yeah. I mean, my, my goal is to start this conversa, to have this conversation. I think we just had a good conversation and I’m Feel a little bit like I’m.

02:02:44,730	I feel like we had a marital like in a marital situation, I’m like, honey, I’m glad we just had that conversation. We just had a conversation and, and, and shared more fulsome thoughts and I think this sport has shared in quite some time, at least as a body, um. I want to put out one question to the board as we consider this.

02:03:06,030	Um I understand, and I think it’s in the public record, so I’m not, it’s uh we can ask Eric Mansfield, I believe there’s, he, his perspective is that there’s no more than 50 water connections available for our current water supply. The, the supply is only 50 more residential units.

02:03:28,530	That’s probably a back of the envelope and not terribly precise, but let’s assume that’s accurate for the moment. And let’s assume for the moment that, um, That willow mixed use development, uh, building that was highlighted earlier is a, um, viable, um, development package and let’s assume for the moment. That it’s 18 units.

02:03:54,730	Um, 2 buildings is what the town could tolerate of mixed-use development. If we went to 3, it’d be 54. I don’t know if there’s that water connection. So 36 units, um, we can all try and decide whether the average number of units, and it depends on on unit size that, you know, the average number of children, the numbers I’ve seen are anywhere from 0.

02:04:13,770	2 to 0.9, but there there’s a lot out there, so we all need to do our homework on that. So you’re talking about, um, Somewhere between. 7 And 32 students. The mixed use development. That is a development that is, I believe, wholly consistent with this with the spirit of The master plan.

02:04:44,800	And I believe that is what the town can currently do with 3A. With its current water supply. So, I think that’s an important point from a pragmatic point.

02:05:04,500	I understand everyone says, and I fully appreciate it if a developer has a way, they’ll find it, but as we’ve seen in this town recently, developments that don’t take into consideration what this town has in terms of resources are simply Not economically viable. Um Or financially viable. So I think that’s an important point of consideration. As well. So are you making a motion? No, I just was talking, but I would, I would make a new motion.

02:05:32,830	Um To defer our recommendation. To the select board on the previously referred, um, Proposed When a multi-family overlay. District Districts it. No districts, uh, to our May 8th meeting. straw poll motion. Do we need Mr. I’m sorry, Margaret Steve Pulos is available if you want to discuss the dates with him.

02:06:21,000	I texted Uh, Steve, are you available? There he is. I’m here, sorry I missed you. You see me? You hear me? We had a question about when the last date is to print the, the warrant. We’re not clear whether we’re going to vote.

02:06:47,100	A recommendation tonight or at our next meeting after some more time, we had a question about when the last date is to print the the warrant where it’s not clear whether we’re gonna throw a recommendation tonight or at our next meeting after some question about when. Thank you. It’s on, yeah. Hey, can you hear me? Yes.

02:07:14,770	Did you hear my question? like multiple so roughly we, we, we, we’ve talked to the printer, um, May 7th is, you know, what he gave us as like an absolute drop dead to, you know, to give us some assurance that the warrant, a physical warrant will be in everybody’s mailbox by about a week ahead of the town meeting, generally we aim for, uh, two weeks with the annual, but we

02:07:37,300	have more time, so we’re, you know, we’re, we’re using a week pushing past that 7th deadline to getting into the 7th is a Wednesday, Thursday, if you meet on that Thursday night.

02:08:00,170	Um You know, we get it out to him by Friday, assuming that there’s no significant language change that has to go through counsel for review, um, you know, potentially push us into Monday, but you just, you know, you’re, you’re playing with, you know, you’re already at a week, a little less than a week, you’re kind of gambling doesn’t get there, um, in time for, for a special town meeting.

02:08:18,900	Yeah, I think ultimately it’s a kind of a policy decision for the select board, whether they want. Uh, you know, it to be electronic distribution or continue with the physical distribution of the warrant. uh, there’s options there, but that’s kind of what we’re up against. Thank you.

02:08:38,870	So, I mean, we have a regularly scheduled meeting on the 8th, we could do our meeting on Thursday the first. Tuesday the 6th. I think in terms of our recommendation as it’ll appear in the warrant, or we just gonna have our numbers there, or we have a qualitative statement as to why.

02:09:01,630	Uh, and do we want more time if we’re gonna prepare something based on I think it’s just typically. Board recommends. Whatever the numbers are. I know I Potentially thorny votes.

02:09:28,400	We provided context to help people understand maybe why we voted the way we voted in writing, did you do that or did you do that we would do it in the book in the warrant book here. here. I’m not. The difference here is that we’ve had public hearings and so uh we’ve had more opportunity, I think, to get people’s feedback on this, so I don’t know that we need to do that. No, I’m not saying I don’t, I don’t.

02:09:47,000	Which we would all have to agree on the language which with the number of attorneys on this board. Yeah, can I ask Steve? Is Steve still there? Yeah He is. OK, Steve, here’s the $64,000 question if we have a meeting on May 8th.

02:10:10,470	Um, and Can you then, do you have enough time to put our recommendation in the warrant, or do you need us to have a meeting earlier than May 8th. I know that. I’m just out there was He’s pushing. Yeah, I’m, I’m just, well, I mean, so your recommendation.

02:10:31,770	I guess I’m not really, well, Again, we’re pushing anything past, usually he’s usually the vendor is quicker than he promises, right? So we kind of assume that, but he gave us the the drop dead date on the 7th. They give us the, we can do, we can go with the warrant and go out without a planning board recommendation similarly to how it goes out, you know, without you’re good we got it. I heard Drop Dead. That’s good.

02:10:46,670	Yeah, he said. I didn’t know if I didn’t know if he meant I didn’t know if I didn’t know if he meant it, I I didn’t know if think yes, Margaret. I think Steve, do they have to create, um, uh, some commentary or, um, With their recommendation. Don’t they need to submit, yeah.

02:11:07,000	Yeah, I mean, I’m more concerned with the language. You know, of, of the proposed zoning in the, the recommendation is. It is quick. So I mean, if, you know, if we want to push it out till Friday, you know, we’re waiting on is a planning board recommendation. I mean, that’s a couple of key strokes, um.

02:11:26,130	You know, so I, I’m not sure what, how, how much change needs to be made, proofreading, and then if counsel needs to get involved, it just adds days to the process where it’s just waiting for the planning board’s vote if the preferences for the vote to go out with the warrant.

02:11:42,230	It can also just say recommendation to be made at town meeting, which is not uncommon at all, and you can just make your recommendation on town meeting floor. Um, we’ll have the, the draft article and the language of the bylaw to you tomorrow. That they, they amended that, um, language tonight.

02:12:00,400	So they’re gonna, we’ll send that to you tomorrow. OK. So it’s gonna be the recommendation. We also took a vote on the suitability of the Or eligibility, I guess is the legal word of the districts. So that’s done. Um OK, we have a motion on the floor to defer.

02:12:27,770	To, to change to, to defer the vote till the next meeting. Whenever that will be before the drop dead deadline, I think. Was that the intention that you want at the meeting. To be the vote to be before the drop dead deadline? Mr. Anderson with that I think we need to agree on. What, when we’re gonna meet. Like if it’s gonna be May 6th, May 6th.

02:12:52,100	Does that work for everybody here Tuesday May 6th is a Wednesday, so Tuesday, it’s a Tuesday yeah Tuesday, May 6th, is that a select board meeting that night? Does that select board will be opening in finalizing the warrant on the 6th. Do you want to try for the first? No.

02:13:15,200	What time is the select board meeting? 6:30, although we’re gonna be having executive session at 5:30. We do a joint session. Could we do a joint, could we do a Zoom call earlier. Cause it’s not like we just talking about availability of the room? Yeah, we don’t need to be in the. Select boardroom We can have it in person only.

02:13:42,300	Are, are you OK with them having a meeting at the same time as the select board, Steve? I have no, I have no problem with that if, if you don’t. We’ll have to find a location for it. Yeah, we can do that. We can have it at my house.

02:13:59,370	Every year. The 6th. Say what? Can you zoom. I could, yes, I could. We could figure it out. May 6th. Yeah, that worked, but we need to. We have a motion pending we put in the motion. That was OK Mr. Anderson wanted, right? So May 6th. Yeah, it could be Thursday, Maticulate Maticulate Maticulate.

02:14:34,100	Yeah, I will, um, move that we defer taking a vote on whether or not to recommend, uh, the Uh, town of Wenham multi-family overlay districts MBT. A 3A zoning. Districts by law. Um To May 6th, 2025, uh, at 6:30. p.m. Or such other earlier time as agreed by the board. I’ll second the motion.

02:15:13,100	That was to defer recommendation to town meeting, right to change. I recommend. With a strap No, no, the vote that we said we were going to deliberate and vote tonight, and now we’re taking, now a motions on the floor to take, basically rescind that vote. If I understand it correctly, so that we would wait.

02:15:34,500	To take the vote. We took the vote, we had, I mean, we took the, we made the decision to take a vote tonight. We all stated our positions. We did not vote on that. There is no motion to. to take that vote tonight.

02:15:54,370	Instead, we have a motion to again defer until the 6th. I need a second. It’s already been seconded. I’ll second that rearticulated. All right, all in favor. Anderson and I I think we should just go ahead and vote. So I’m gonna say weeks no. Pas I. Shower now, Will and I. So now it’s 3 to the other direction.

02:16:21,000	So we’ll see you on May 6th. So that’s a straw poll and not a recommendation vote that we went through earlier tonight. OK. We’re meeting on May 6th. At 6:30 p.m. is what I heard. For such earlier time as we may need to. Do in order to accommodate the printing schedule. Alright, with that.

02:16:46,670	We’re gonna move on to the next item on the agenda. Thank you for your patience. No, because it’s not gonna be a public hearing, probably. I wanted to vote tonight. good But There is going to be other opportunities for public input such as before the select board putting it on the warrant. Obviously a town hall To meeting for sure.

02:17:20,730	that Yeah Thank you very much. Yeah I bring my, I need to bring my timer more off. We’re not, we’re not done yet. We’re still. We have other, um, items to discuss, so we’re going to continue our meeting. Oh no, no, it’s all right. Have a good evening. All right.

02:17:50,170	Motion to the next item on the agenda is the discussion and possible vote on the choice of a consultant for the updates to rules and regulations governing the subdivision of land, which I respectfully submit, we need to vote on tonight so that that $65,000 doesn’t. For whatever reason, disappear. I, I sent you all of the, um, The recommendations.

02:18:15,730	References, what do you call them? I’m sorry, what? The references you were checking references on the two consultants we have to, you had a chance Um, no, there were none that came back, um, with any negative remarks for either organization was there one in particular that was better than another, if you can share that or do you feel comfortable, I

02:18:41,370	felt that the Innis Associates, um, seem to give a little more personal, um. Service to the to the other towns that they’ve worked for, um, as well as there was no boilerplate. Um, you know, documents that they submitted that some one of the other companies had submitted some boilerplate documents.

02:19:01,630	to one of the counts, yeah, so I think we might get some better, um, Service and their cost was slightly lower. So we, there was no negative. Information about Innes. No.

02:19:24,170	And they’re the only ones that have submitted an actual proposal still, right from the other one we only, we didn’t go out for full proposals, I mean the they sent back was a little sort of like, well, you don’t, we didn’t really ask for it, so they didn’t feel like they had to, but she went the extra step and provided it, which I. really appreciate.

02:19:41,130	Seemed like she was actually interested in the work, exactly right, yeah, um, and this is just your recommendation to the town administrator who will make the ultimate decision, um. And sign a contract with the firm that they choose second. All in favor Anderson and I. Weeks Schoenberger Woodland. OK, that, that will be.

02:20:07,400	A welcome development because I do think that to get started on that. That project needs to happen. Um. We have the meeting minutes. I don’t know that there are no meeting minutes from you’re kidding me the April 9th. Just, just saying. So we’ll table those until the next, till the May meeting till the May meeting on May 6th.

02:20:25,470	Is there anything else that people want to bring before the board that We haven’t anticipated. For tonight’s meeting. Yeah I move that we adjourn until May 6th. At 6:30 6:30 p.m. to be determined. All in favor. We have a motion on the floor to just. To span this happy crowd until 6:30 on the 6th of May.