Board of Health: January 18, 2022

Transcript machine-generated with Whisper speech recognition (the source video has no caption track). No speaker labels; proper names and dollar figures occasionally misheard. Click any timecode to jump to that moment in the source video.

0:00 The public will be permitted. Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and or parties with the right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on Tarnoff Marblehead’s website, https.marblehead.org. Under agendas and tonight’s agenda. For this meeting, members of the public who wish to watch or participate in the meeting may do so in the following manner by inserting the meeting ID number 434-701-1658 on Zoom or dial in phone number 1253-215-8782 or 1301-715-8592. And the following board members are participating remotely in tonight’s meeting. Andrew? Ms. Sue Ann Miller. Present. Ms. Helene Hazley. Present. Dr. Todd Belfbecker. Present. And all votes tonight will be taken by roll call vote. So the first item on our agenda is to do some business for executive session. So for the public who is at this meeting, we will be back in probably about five to 10 minutes and we’ll be going to a breakout room so we can conduct our executive session. We need a motion from one of the board members. One of you wants to read the motion, please. I am happy to. I move pursuant to GIC 30A section 21A3 that the board move into executive session

1:33 for the purpose of discussing potential litigation regarding the open meeting law complaints followed by Tammy Bear, Sharman, Paul Paulander, Emily DeWitt, and Kevin McKernan, the public discussion of which may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the board. Is there a second? Ms. Joanne Miller. In favor. Ms. Helene Hazley. In favor. Dr. Todd Belfbecker. In favor. All right. Public will be back soon. We should be going into a breakout room.

3:17 Where’s everybody? Let’s see.

12:02 Helene, do you want to just raise your hand so I can see you please and we can unmute you? Did you find the manager? I’m not.

12:38 I wonder if they left the whole meeting instead of the breakout session. Our executive session is over, but it looks like my fellow board members logged off so we can just wait for them to come back in. Joanne and Helene, if you’re there, just raise your hands please so you can go to the front. Oh, there you are. Okay. And you’re both unmuted. Okay. Thank you. All right. So there’s a way to… So our next item of business is to approve some meeting minutes. Do you want to the December 27th first? Yes. Do we have a meeting? We have a motion to approve December 27th. I move to accept the minutes of December 27th, 2021. Excuse me, should I put in a special emergency meeting? It’s in there. I just made my motion. Okay. I second that motion. Ms. Helene Hazley. In favor. Ms. Joanne Miller. In favor.

14:08 Dr. Todd Belfbecker. In favor. And now we need to approve the minutes of December 29th. I move the approval of the emergency meeting of December 29th, 2021. That was the last meeting of the year. I second. Ms. Helene Hazley. In favor. Ms. Joanne Miller. In favor. Dr. Todd Belfbecker. In favor. Thanks for writing those, Andrea. The next item on our agenda is to continue our discussion with Sustainable Marblehead about the Peabody-Peaker plant that we had a presentation last week. Any discussion from the board? I did call Mr. Joe Kowalik. I think I said his name correct. He is the manager of the Marblehead Municipal Light Department. And I just wanted to ask him a few questions that came about when we were discussing this. And I wanted to know if we had invested any money in this project. How much? And I really didn’t know too much about it until we got some background, two letters that were sent to us early this evening. Joe, as he called himself, said that we have invested some money.

15:43 Don’t quote me on this, but I think it was if Dr. Kruger wants to check this. I think he said $350,000. So I have an email from Mr. Kowalik that I could read into the record. Both the public health related and real world current project financial costs. So do you want to do that? Please do read that. Yes. So this is from Joseph Kowalik. Hi, Andrew. Good talking with you today on the topic of project 2015 a natural gas plant in Peabody. And why the more Marblehead Board of Health should not be opposed to it. Public health related. Number one will lower emissions for Peabody residents when the Waters River Station is called on by ISO New England to run. The new facility is being built at the Peabody MLP, PMLP Waters River Plant, where there are two existing plants now and now in owned and operated by PMLP. As part of the agreement to move ahead with the projects or project 2015 a on the site, PB has agreed to retire GT1, the older of two plants in 2019 and 2020. When GT1 operated, it admitted more than 1,600 pounds of CO2 equivalent per megawatt hour of electricity generated. The new turbine will run cleaner, generating less than 1,200 pounds of CO2 per megawatt

17:14 MWH at 25% reduction in CO2 emissions. Two, when the new Peabody plant runs, it will displace the dispatching of the least efficient peaker plants that generate 4,000 pounds per megawatt hour. That’s a 70% reduction in CO2 E mass and New England wide. Number three, working in concert with the Mass Department of Energy Resources, DOER, the agency responsible for the state’s next generation decarbonization roadmap, the new plant will begin to run a mix of natural gas with green hydrogen that will lower total emissions further. Real world current project financial costs related. Number one, Marblehead MLD is one of the 14 municipal light departments participating as an owner in this project, holding a 4.4% ownership interest. Today, it has made payment totaling $380,000. MMLD has entered into a 30 year agreement with an annual payment in the $225,000 range per year. Bonds on the project have been issued and sold. I through New England expects this project to be online by mid 2024. Any attempt now to delay the project will only result in additional project expenses to Marblehead residents. The project was created by the Mass Municipal Wholesale Electric Company, MMWEC, a Massachusetts

18:45 state public authority, much like Massport. It has created similar projects in the past and has issued products bonds with a value of more than $5 billion. Municipal challenges to MMWEC projects have been admitted by municipalities in the past. Such attempts have been tried in the Mass State Supreme Court and settled in MMWEC’s favor. So an attempt to try and dissolve or withdraw from MMWEC joint agreement would not be advisable or prudent. Regards, Joe. Well, he was very, very kind because I spoke to him today. I did place a call last Thursday to him, but he was working remotely and he just got the message and I thank him for getting all that information to us because that was lengthy. We were asked to write a letter as the City of Peabody has done and he’s advising us not to do that.

19:50 That’s what it sounds like to me too. I, if I may just reiterate, I think that the presentation that was shared with us last week was really impassioned by members of Sustainable Marblehead people that work in our community to maintain the specifically clean energy and public policy working group. I think something that really resonated with me was that this plant would have been grandfathered in, but today there’s policies in place to move towards more clean energy use. And I would just like to continue to discuss that some more to see if there’s value in getting behind the progressive energy policies that our state is leading the country with. So I think it has value to support our neighbors that are having this plant built nearby. Could I respond to that? Not respond, I have additional comments. First of all, I know the people that presented to us very well and they are very, very strong, positive activists in this community. They’ve worked for decades.

21:21 They were ones that were working with Laurie Ehrlich on the plant off West Shore Drive, and they were ultimately successful. And we have them to thank. So I really congratulate them for all the work that they’ve done and continue to do. The board of the PBT Board of Health wrote this letter in July, and we’ve been just so tied up with our own agendas that we were only able to put it on the agenda, you know, several, many months later. The PBT Board of Health wrote requesting some steps to be taken to better understand, it says to better understand the potential impact of the project 2015A on our community’s health. And there were several points that they made. I don’t know if you want to see where that has been or maybe other people who proposed this the other day last week, are they here? They may know if they’ve gotten a response or not. So if they have, I mean, it’s kind of a dead issue. Is. Yes. Yeah, Linda Doe and Eileen Mathieu are here to answer. I believe. Linda, do you know whether they’ve gotten a reply to the city of Peabody? Because this is six months old now. Then raise your hands so we can find you in the meeting.

22:52 I am either. Yeah, okay. No, I do not know that Elaine and Eileen, who is the head of the energy and public policy group of sustainable marblehead and a doctor is willing to address you all on the issue. All right. Eileen, she’s a physician. Yes. Right. Eileen, are you there? I am. I saw you earlier. Yes, thank you. Okay. Hi. Hi. You could just discuss that for a moment, please. Sure. So my name is Eileen Mathieu, 44, Longview Drive. I am a retired internal medicine physician, but I really am here representing sustainable marblehead. So I don’t have any additional knowledge of how what’s happened with the Peabody Board of Health letter to Governor Baker. We did establish, and I think that Judith forwarded that to you all, but that Peabody, Danvers, Wakefield, and Holden are the cities that have written letters to the governor requesting him to at least take a breath and have a look at the environmental impact and the health impacts of this plant. And as Joanne alluded to, the challenge is this permitting process is long and careful and so forth, but it started in 2015. And so by the time the plant was permitted in 2019, our current environmental law that was just passed last year was not in effect. So although the plant met the letter of the law during the initial period, a lot of

24:27 us are saying, gosh, we’ve all begun to recognize how often these types of plants are cited in lower income communities and in areas where people already have quite a burden of pollution surrounding them. And Peabody would be a prime example. And so we feel sustainable feels that because Marblehead is a part owner, we have a 4% interest that we are requesting that you as the Board of Health consider supporting Peabody’s Board of Health. And really, we’re asking you to just ask Baker to put enough of hold on that they do an environmental impact and a comprehensive health impact study. And in the body of that letter from Peabody, the health impact study really mostly talks about getting some baselines and having a way to monitor what is happening to the population that lives in the immediate area and also looking at both short and long-term effects because as Jo Quallett’s letter said, this plant is positive to run for 30 years. So that’s a lot of time to be using fossil fuels. Also, it’s a gas and oil powered plant because natural gas supplies in New England are quite constrained in the winter because everyone’s using it to heat their houses. So the plant is set up to also run oil on oil. So and then the question of whether it will ultimately be able to run in green hydrogen has really not, and what has been talking about that. But the way the plan is set up right now and being built is to run on gas with oils and backup. So it’s not an insignificant issue of pollution, although yes, it will replace

26:00 a dirtier peaker plant. But again, we’re not asking you to per se weigh in on the pros and cons. We all know we need electricity, but it’s to say how about just to look at the health effects of our neighbors in Peabody. So that’s what we’re requesting. So thank you. Jo-Ann Ewing, one question. Do you have any idea how long it would delay the process if they did accept our letter? I suspect that they could do a study in a month or two. I’m sure DOE has done some of it and they’re just being asked to do it in a little more detail because they sort of grandfathered it in because there are, as the Peabody Fourth House letter mentions, there are already two plants on that site. And so they were sort of able to get it in under the existing plants, air quality rules, rather than being looked at fresh. So really, we’re just asking them to be looked at with a fresh lens and then also the health impacts were really not studied. Thank you. Do you have any more discussion later, Jo-Ann? And I see there’s one person with your hand raised. We’re doing public comment later. If you do have something relevant to this discussion, I will recognize you. But you only have two minutes. So once we’ve had our discussion, I can recognize you about this issue. So later, Jo-Ann, any further comments?

27:33 I just have the comment to share that earlier this year, and I believe this was shared, Governor Baker signed the Next Generation’s Climate Bill requiring more stringent reviews for projects in environmental justice communities, which Eileen had shared. And I think if these things are the way we are moving forward, I think it’s reasonable to align ourselves with policies that are looking forward into the future more robustly. Eileen? Eileen, I think she’s muted. Yeah, I fixed that.

28:25 Thank you, Eileen. I was about to sneeze. That’s why I unmuted myself. I appreciate what you said. I’d like to ask Andrew, I’d rather delay a week or two or whatever our next meeting is to find out if this has been answered as opposed to delaying it for a couple of years or a couple of months. So could you find out if this question has been answered? Yeah, we can contact, obviously, the Peabody Board of Health and see if the letter has been answered. Because if we’re too late, it’s been six months, and if we’re too late, it’s just, I don’t think it’s necessary unless we want to weigh in on it. Do either of you have an opinion of whether you want to weigh in on the Peabody’s letter without knowing if it’s been decided? I think that Eileen’s point about just having a letter asking the Governor to evaluate and reassess, and I mean, we’re not saying it, we wouldn’t say in a letter to call for them to stop it, but just to pause and take a good look at it. I think that that is something that I would be comfortable putting out there. Why do we do it based on what Andrew’s finding? Is there a way that we can build the motion that way?

29:56 I mean, if there, it feels like that would be kind of… I would say we either would decide to bring this to the next meeting or just go forward tonight with what we have. Well, I would make a motion to send the letter asking the governor to take a look at this. And if we could put a tagline on it, if he’s already looked at it and the decision is been made, we could revoke the motion at the next meeting. Is that appropriate? Although if we make a motion to do a letter, we would want a state that wouldn’t be sent out for X number of weeks. If that’s the case. Do you want to recognize Dan Albert before the board? Yes, before we take a vote. I was planning to. Okay. Yes, Dan. Hi, Dan Albert 58 Lister Road. I guess I’m getting to be a regular. I would suggest, first of all, that people don’t really understand what Joe Kualik’s written to you. I don’t think Joe Kualik made any effort to engage the conversation. I think what he’s done is kind of put forth so much information to sound smart and actually not address the issue. And I’ll touch on a couple of them. He said it will cost us more. It’ll cost Marvel headers more.

31:28 No evidence for that. MMLD is a separate entity. If they can’t afford to keep our rates down and so forth and so on, if they can’t figure that out, that’s their problem. So this idea that somehow it’s going to cost us our rates are going to go up. They love that one. The other is he’s talked all about CO2. This isn’t about CO2. Yes, everyone’s concerned about the climate. Notice, for example, how two solar panels there are in Marvel head versus Salem. It’s not about CO2. It’s about emissions of pollutants, right? The kind that hurt your lungs and hurt kids. And then finally, and, you know, of course, there’s a bunch of markets say that this is the key thing you need to understand in all of your dealings with MMLD or looking at any of these municipal like. Unlike the investor owned companies, unlike National Grid or Eversource, Marvel head both generates power and distributes and sells that power. The other companies do not. And I’m sorry, Todd, really quickly finish that. They are incentivized. Our town like plant is incentivized. It is better off if we generate more electricity and use more electricity. Because otherwise they can’t afford to keep the poles up and all the other stuff. That’s what they need. They are not interested in reducing our energy consumption. They are not interested in anything that would cut off the need for something like a peaker plant or what’s called spin reserve or any of these other things.

33:05 So, again, CO2 is not pollutants. We’re concerned about pollutants. Money is not the issue. And then really there’s a structural problem with the MMLD that you have to understand before you listen to anything. Thanks. Thank you. So, Helene, you had made a motion or you were going to make a motion. I was wondering whether we could sidestep a little bit, but I don’t think there’s any harm in writing the letter. Because if it’s, I’d rather write the letter, just say that we support the Pibany Board of Health requests the following steps to be taken to better understand the potential impact of the project 2015A on our community’s health. I think that’s a perfect statement for us to make. And if you read the letter, they have a whole bunch of issues. One and two with about eight or 10 bullets underneath two. So I move that we write the letter, just stating that we would like to join the Pibany Board of Health requesting the following steps be taken. Is there a second? I second. And we would all sign this letter. It wouldn’t be on the side on behalf of Andrew Petty or of myself. It would be, I think we would all sign it.

34:36 Okay. Okay. Mr. Ann Miller. In favor. Ms. Helene Hazley. In favor. Dr. Todd Belf-Brecker. In favor. Okay. Moving on. So we’re going to be discussing the transfer station now. And we have quite a discussion. We have some experts here to discuss with us. We have a lot to talk about to make some decisions. I just want to say that there’s been a big misunderstanding over funds for the transfer station. And we didn’t realize how much the public was waiting to hear from us. Nothing we have done has been untoward or inappropriate or illegal. But we misjudged that there was a perception of wrongdoing because we knew that there was no wrongdoing. Whatever you may have heard out there, please listen to what you’re saying. And we’re going to show the facts tonight. And both town council and the inspector general have gone over actions and have found nothing amiss. We are also, it’s very important to say we are a full two years behind where we had wanted to be at this point because the global pandemic took all our resources and all our time for two years. We couldn’t devote the time to the transfer station that we would have liked to. We do have a spreadsheet of expenditures for the project. And that has been, will be on the town website, hopefully tomorrow if not the next day.

36:16 So anybody is welcome to take a look at that. We have, you know, there’s been some questions about, and I’m just going to put these in the budget, the reasoning why we had three town meeting articles that were made into one ballot article. And this is a decision by the town administrator, the finance committee, and I think the board of selectmen, because they were the driving forces of the dollar amounts to make it one vote. Because the concern was that you couldn’t have people pick and choose what they wanted. We couldn’t build the transfer station building without the landfill closed. We couldn’t close the landfill without the 60 inch culvert repaired. You couldn’t clean adjacent properties to the transfer station and then not cap the landfill. If you did so, we would be dealing with property issues trucking waste off site. We had to complete Sony Brook Road before anything else for that reason. And we were required by the Department of Environmental Protection to cap the landfill. That was our number one charge, our number one priority. Everything else was was after that. And so that’s also important to note that there was solid reasoning for combining three town meeting articles into one ballot vote a month later. The, as I said, all funds had to be used for capping the project first. We repeat myself a little bit, but the town could not build a transfer station until the landfill was capped. There were overlapping areas of cleanup and closure.

37:54 For both mechanical and construction points of use, the closure had to be first, because again, it include the site around the transfer station and that had to be cleaned, tapped and stabilized. We have tonight, Dana Wieder is here tonight and he’s the architect for the project and we have two options which we’re going to be discussing and also showing. One would be to continue and do a building as originally envisioned and another one would be to rehab and make the place much more safe and usable and flowing than it is now without making an entire new building, although there would be a building for staff. I also want to note that the residential area, the recycling area is fantastic. Right now already we have one of the premier transfer stations in the entire state and we have so many things that people are able to drop off everything from composting and books and clothes and fabrics and cardboard, metal. We now have composting, big bins for composting. We have a lot of things that people can take advantage of already and I really do think it’s important to point out how great a facility it is already and it’s just going to get better. Whatever we decide tonight, it’s going to get even better.

39:28 So, like I was saying, we will be going over the two different possibilities, the two different plans. We’ll talk about what they’ll look like, what they’ll be. We also have Jerry Smith here who’s the OPM and who’s been working with this project for years and years and I also want to pick your brain and get your insights on this. Jerry, if that’s okay with you. But, you know, after we have our discussion, we’ll open up to some of the comment and then we’re going to take a vote on where to move forward. So, with that said, let me just see, give me one second. Is there, I mean, I can go into more of the timeline that we’ve had so far to date, but I think I mentioned that at our last meeting. If anybody wants to know, I’ll repeat it again. So the landfill construction began in July 2014. The landfill as built was finalized in 2017 and the DEP gave conditional approval for completion in August of 2018. We did have some legal issues and all settlements were finalized in September of 2020 and I should go backwards and talk about that because what the legal issues were was that there were oversights basically that didn’t catch all the material that needed to be brought into the cap. And because of these oversights, we had to, we obviously had to finish the cap, but we had to bring more materials than were originally expected or told to us under that cap and that cost a lot of extra money and that in a very brief nutshell is why we had some legal issues after the project was well underway.

41:21 And then in May of 2021, we tasked Winter Food Architects and Dana Wieder is here, as I said, we tasked them to flesh out options one and two. And Andrew, do you have anything to add to any of this? Not at this time. Okay. So, Dana, are you ready to talk a little bit about the two options? Is that okay with you? Yes, I am. I have some of the… Welcome. Yes, thank you. Good to be here. Good to see everyone again. Yes, I do have some of the material that I forwarded to the Health Board last week and can go over where we are today and I guess the direction that we’ve decided to go with option B and I can also give a little bit of an idea of option A and rehash some of the things we’ve done there. There was no decision made. Yeah. Pardon me? We haven’t chosen an option yet. Oh, no, no, no. I realize there’s no use of matter of going over the options. You said there was a decision made to go to option B. Not at all. No, I didn’t mean to say that if that’s what I said. I guess the decision was to study option B is what I meant to say. Thanks. So why don’t I… I can share my screen. Okay.

43:03 Right here is the site plan we have for the option B proposal. I’ll go over what we have here. Here is the… You can see to Beacon Street, Westford Drive is right around here and this is the main entrance that we have today. I’ll zoom in a bit. This yellow area is the existing pit structure. And as we go back into the site, we see the dumpster recycling areas right here. And further back into the site is where we go up into the compost area over here. And further here is the swap shed area that’s been asphalted. And further over here is the Green Street entrance. For option B, the proposal is to maintain the existing pit structure. And this is kind of what’s driving a lot of the design, the site design. In order to maintain the existing pit structure here, we have a little bit of a bottleneck of circulation. And this is one concern that I think many have and something that we’ll go over a bit in the future. Entrance for this way would be…

44:33 For the commercial and folks using the scale would come through this area and go over the orange scale. And then proceed down the blue dashed area to the site. Folks who would be entering just to use the back of the site would come through here at this fuchsia line and continue through the site. And then egress to the site for both commercial and residential would be in the red line out here. This yellow structure is the scale house immediately adjacent to the proposed scale location. The scale house would have a transaction counter for those getting stickers and parking at this area with recycling and other hazardous materials location here. This location is the staff attendance house. This is a kind of a rest area with a small kitchenette and locker areas. And then we have a small storage area for recycling bins. And then further down is the last structure, proposed structure, and this is the swap shed. And the swap shed would be located at the very end of where it’s currently asphalted and striped.

45:56 You can see coming through the site, you would go… If being weighed, go over the scale here and then continue around, looping around, and then going over here to where we’re calling the scale queuing area. This is where trucks or cars that had just been scaled would wait until someone from the staff attendance area would trigger a light and they would proceed forward. Here, back in, dump the refuse, and then proceed again over the scale, pay, and then egress. So could I ask a question at this time? Yes. I can see with the blue and red line, they’re crisscrossing over each other. So is that going to be a traffic pattern that’s a problem? As they’re coming in, they’re crisscrossing the people that are leaving? Yes. This is a problem that I think many have seen and something that we’ve been aware of all along. And like I said, the issue is the bottlenecking that occurs right here and getting folks in and out and weighed, and we only have one scale. So there are two areas where folks coming in would have to merge into the ingress traffic right here, and the other area is where they’re scaling and coming and going across the red line as folks egress over here. So there are two areas that would require two stoplights and coordination, and on weekends, I can imagine there’s going to be some getting used to.

47:35 It is for this reason that we’re proposing perhaps a second approach, and this is something that we’ve been speaking about internally, has not been vetted with Andrew or Jerry fully. It is something I mentioned, but the idea is perhaps on the days where we have high traffic, we open up Green Street for ingress only, and for those residential or commercial trucks only using the back of the site, meaning the composting, the bins over here, the swap shed, or the composting area. This area would allow traffic around here without the ingress problems that we have at the pit area. Only those ingressing this would be using the pit and the scale, so it would be eliminating much of that traffic. We still have an area at this queuing area where traffic would merge into the egressing area, so there’s still a hot spot here, but it does eliminate some of the traffic problems that we have over here. Yes. They cross down below as they come in and out. There is crisscrossing. At this area, there is higher visibility, so we would propose stop signs at two other locations, one stop sign here for those coming in,

49:11 and the stop sign here for those scaling, for those that are queuing, this stoplight would not go green until someone from the staff attendance house would trigger that. This would be a wireless connection for folks, so this is the importance of creating these visible lines. Is there any reason why we can’t do a one-way traffic in on Green Street or in on West Shore and then out on Green Street? Perhaps there is a way. We had not studied that specifically. It was studied in the very beginning when we were doing the increased options, the full build-out, but that study has not been done for just using one for ingress and one for egress. Again, this is largely dictated by this existing pit location and the topography and the limitations of this area. But if that is something that the board would like to study, then I’m sure we can do that. After your presentation, I would certainly make that recommendation to the board. I can continue a little bit. Obviously, the site design is one of the areas that we are most concerned with and the safety of the circulation we have right here. Using as many areas of queuing and stoplights as we can, again, it is still something that does take folks getting used to.

50:51 There are areas which I am concerned about. I can continue with some of the other individual structures to get an idea of what this will look like. Absolutely. Please do. I have a question about the pit, so if that is part of your… Yeah, she can open up to other questions as soon as I go through some of the structures that may be answered while I’m going through. One of the first structures that we are looked at is the swap shed. The idea is that we would just be creating a simple structure with fiberglass siding. These are industrial kind of translucent panels that you can see in the inside without any artificial lights. It would be the same kind of surface on the roof and the potential for putting solar when that is something that the town is open to follow. This structure is going to be closed for most of the time, but then the idea is on the weekends when it is open, we have sliding barn doors that open up. All the things, bicycles can be brought out in the asphalt area. A number of bins and carts and things can be kept inside. It is going to be a real area of the idea of facilitating bringing things in and out and doing it in an organized way.

52:21 The second structure that we are working on is the existing structure. This is the pit structure. Everyone has seen the siding falling off and it is in disrepair. The steel is actually in pretty good shape with some areas that need some of these gurps that do need to be replaced, but it is in pretty good shape for the most part. We have a quote for the repairs of the existing steel structure in addition to the re-siding of the whole structure with the same fiberglass siding that we have. This is a shot of the pit structure adjacent to the proposed Saff attendance building. In the background, you can see the swap shed.

53:14 The roof on the top of that pit? There is a roof on top of the pit. We are required by the state to have this area roofed. The last structure is the scale house. The scale house is located adjacent to this scale, obviously. This yellow structure right here. The scale house will have a counter with a transaction area. You can see a transaction counter here. For folks coming in, paying their ticket, paying for any of the hazardous waste. On the back side, you can see there is a seat here with another desk with a transaction window to the opposite side over here. This is a transaction window for the folks who are egressing off the scale and egressing the site.

54:18 That is basically all the structures. I can go back to the site. Can I ask you one question about the scale house? It seems, when I was there a couple of days ago, that because they are in a trailer, it is up high. I don’t think that the people that were coming in or going out had to get out of their vehicle because it was up high. They are going to have to step out of the vehicle to go over and pay. Is that correct? There are two types of transactions that will occur here. Some are stickers. Those folks who are getting stickers or were paying for some of the mattress, getting rid of mattresses, some of the costs for individual electronics. They would come and they would come and have a transaction right here. This would be at grade with a slight handicap ramp right here. Yes, they would have to get out of the car but it is inaccessible. No steps getting into this area. The back side would be people who are in trucks or could reach over, much like a McDonald’s drive-thru, and pay that way at this area. They don’t have to get out of there. No, they should not have to get out of the truck. This will be an area that will try to access both residential vehicles and larger trucks.

55:49 That is almost good because buying a sticker sometimes takes a little bit more time so people will have to park. Well, I should back up. The intent was not to buy stickers at this traction. This is only for the scale transactions. The stickers would have to, you would have to get out of the car and buy the sticker. Yes, that is what I mean. If you get out of the car, you park your car, you get out, you go to that window, it looks like a movie theater window. Yes. They would get out of the car, park the car, get out because sometimes they don’t have the right money or how much is it and go back and forth a little bit. It might take a little bit longer and I think that is a good idea. Yes, that is correct. The idea is to have a few parking spaces at this area. One of them would be an accessible space and this space would be for sticker purchases and any folks that would be dumping off their TVs or other materials. Dana, when the customers after they enter and they go across the scale and they are weighed and then when they go remove their refuse and then they come back to the scale and they will be likely paying or putting things on their account while they are on the scale. They will be performing the transaction with K or the employee. Yes, that is the correct sequence of transactions.

57:19 Thank you. I should say at one point there was a design which had two scales, which makes sense, but it did cost more and there was also a time where we were trying to reduce the amount of cost for the initial project. This is on the original full build out. We did look at having two scales, one for Ingress, one for Egress, but that was value engineered as the design progressed. How does one go both ways on the scale? Well, I will zoom in again here. With this scheme, folks would be ingressing here, weighing and then coming out this way. Then after they loop around, they would be waiting in this queuing area until it is safe, until the light is activated by a staff attendant when there is no traffic coming in either direction. They would scoot across, come here, back into the pit and then again egress, make the transaction, pay and then leave. So going through the scale is only one way? At a time. It is one way egress in, one way egress out, so it is two ways, but not at the same time, obviously. This is going to require some queuing that happens outside the property.

58:58 For folks coming in on a Saturday morning, there may be backup. So we would have queuing in two locations. Again, we can control the queuing in here, and to a certain degree, we can control the queuing out here, but this is not within the property of the transportation.

59:29 Not ideal. It is a compromise. That is the presentation for option B. Do you also have one to go over option A? Well, I had not planned on presenting option A. I do have the original site plan that I can bring over.

1:01:48 Here’s the area where folks would be waiting, and then this large overhead door would be where they would be dumping refuse, and then pulled away over here. This whole structure here is the staff attendance area, and this is the structure that was originally designed, as people may recall, has the tipping floor where there would be materials that would be pulled apart, wood, metals, and then separated. Did you say that the swap strip shed was adjacent to this? The swap shed is actually back here in the location. It’s not almost right here. The swap shed wouldn’t change locations. It would be the same exact. That concerns the congestion? Yeah, adjacent to this building is actually the attendance building, which is right here, and that would have some of the recycling bin storage and their kitchenette locker room in a bathroom. The residential would not change also. This is a building for commercial waste. This is a building for commercial waste on the back side. What happens on the back side is that this is where the garbage trucks would use the rear of the portion. There’s an overhead door

1:03:21 here as well. That would all be done in the rear portion, and then the residential folks would use the front portion. So there’d be a total separation between commercial and residential use in this station. So there’d be a level of safety in that separation. So the backside, Todd, would be all the commercials. So you’d pick up trucks, larger dump trailers and stuff like that, and the trash trucks. But all your commercial guys would be on the back side. It would just be residential on the front side. Yeah, there are two actual doors back here. One for the larger garbage trucks through here, and one for smaller trucks would come in the back, dump a load of recyclable building material, and then they’d be sorted through excavators inside. For the sustainable folks, again, this was all designed so there’d be solar panels on the roof. All the roofs are designed, so you’ll see that there’s water collection continually all through here, down here, and then all collected in a cistern down below the parking lot. That red thing is a water cistern that would be used to help clean the transfer station when it needs to get hose down. Now, was this parking just for the trucks that you show here? In the front, no. This would be for the residential folk who are waiting to unload

1:04:54 refuse into the bin down below, and the backside is for the commercial. Now, is this a garage door there, or is it an opening? Everything’s going to have doors. The state requires that these areas get closure. It doesn’t have to be airtight, but it doesn’t have to prevent refuse from blowing out. So this is actually kind of a large bi-fold door. It’ll come up when it’s being operated but being closed during off operations and Sundays. Well, to step back with the B, I thought that was going to remain open. Is that, am I wrong? This area right here? Yes. It’s open during operation and closed. The front of the pit on B, what we were studying earlier. Oh, on B. Yeah, the pit structure is roofed. It is open in the front. It does have a roof. And this is, Andrew, maybe you can help me here, but that’s something that’s a pre-existing. We don’t need any doors on that opening area. So all the trash is compacted into the trailer, so it’s technically enclosed in the trailer at the end of the day. Thank you. And that’s not the case in this? What happens here is, no. There’s a compactor at the very end. Okay. Let’s see. Okay, what happens is, here’s the truck. The truck gets back to, and I’m sorry,

1:06:24 it’s no compactor here. Correct, Andrew? Correct. What happens is, only the garbage is thrown into the truck, no compactor, so this is why we have this enclosed. Can I see? So the diff, yeah, it’s an open, what we call an open top trailer. That’s one less thing that has to break down. Yes. No compactor.

1:06:56 Dana, would it be possible to look back at option B and back at that pit structure? I don’t want to distract these. Sure. Yes. The way I understood, and having been examining things up at the transfer station, existing pit structure, I know there’s lots of need for repair, but it looked like there’s a roof and two sides, but the front opens up to the air, and then, I’m so sorry to have you go back to this. Yeah. Then the back looked in the drawing that there was no cover protecting elements from getting in from that back side of the pit structure. Can you help me understand? Yes. So the pit structure, I’m looking from the back side right here, and this may not be modeled exactly like it is right here. Andrew, maybe you could help me out, but what happens is basically there’s the compactor that comes down here, and then everything’s compacted, and the truck’s back up here, and then everything’s pushed in the back of the truck. That’s correct, Andrew. That’s correct. Yes. So the trailer connects itself to the building, so you’re activating that compactor. It’s not pushing the truck out, so yeah, that’s how the large compactor works. And then the front side of the pit is right here, and this is all a slab until you get to

1:08:30 the back side, and that’s where that hopper and the chute is in the back. And the back wall on this is protected. Is that correct? So there’s three encasements and the roof? Yes, I see. Okay. One of the drawings made it look like there were just two sides with the roof. Okay. It may have been at the section that was cut. Okay. I saw that. I just didn’t know if I misunderstood.

1:09:04 So this is the actual model that we use to construct it. So this is kind of the three-dimensional relationship between topography and the structures that we have. Dana, while you’re on this pit, can you give us… I’m not going to make you sign… Could you give us an idea of how long this would last as opposed to the A structure? Yes. Once the repairs are made, the steel and the concrete is in pretty good shape as well. We’re going to be putting… The proposal is to put this industrial grade fiberglass siding on. It’s kind of fiberglass that they use a lot of warehouses and chemical plants. It’s really pretty tough stuff and is perfect to use for a transfer station. All in those repairs were about $76,000 and it is anticipated that that would… When we design municipal projects, we like to think of a 50-year life cycle. I’m not sure if we get that out of the pit structure, but we’d be getting it to the point where it’s in pretty good shape. What about the compactor itself? The compactor? Yes. I can’t speak to the compactor. That’s more of a mechanical equipment that I just don’t have the control over those. I know we’ve had some problems with the compactor. Maybe Andrew can speak to the lifespan of those anticipated.

1:10:35 Obviously, the compactor gets quite a bit of use and wear. We’re always doing maintenance to that. Obviously, we can speak to the company that does the routine maintenance for us currently and see what their long-term use or statement is for the compactor itself. What you’re doing now that was just renovating it, we’re not getting a new compactor. This is a renovation of the structure. My understanding is that the compactor has repairs going on. We always have repairs of the ongoing maintenance of the compactor. As everybody should understand, there’s quite a bit of pressure with loading those trucks. Yes, we could definitely talk to the company that does the routine maintenance for that to have them explain what’s the life expectancy of that unit. How old is it now? I actually believe that the unit was rebuilt. I want to say 2016. It was the original compactor that was rebuilt in 2016. It wasn’t new. No, it was the original compactor. I’d have to go back and take a look at if there’s any records of if it is the original compactor. All right, well, we can get it all at once as long as we’ve got the question asked.

1:12:04 Dana, may I ask a question with respect to the contingencies for these plans? I do understand historically things can become more expensive than originally thought. Can you explain? Perhaps I’ve got these cost estimates, but can you help me understand the contingencies for A and B with respect to how those may be used? Yes, the contingencies for both A and B should be a little bit different. A was developed to the point where it’s CDS. We can really define the project cost much better, especially since we’ve already had the whole dug. There’s not going to be many unknowns on this project. So the contingency for the option A should be very low if basically nothing. For option B, this is just a schematic study at that. So contingency for schematic design is generally much higher. I think we’re carrying 10% in the estimate. And that’s generally what we carry at that level. Contingency does go down as the project develops through design development and construction documents. But generally, our estimators or estimators in general carry about a 10% contingency at the schematic design level. Thank you. You said for A, the whole was dug,

1:13:39 so that would be work that wouldn’t need to be obviously redone. But if we were to proceed with plan B, would there be any since the whole was dug for A? Would there be any need to do anything about the whole that was dug? The whole was dug and designed with the anticipation that this possibly will not go forward. I think it always has to be done that way. So it all drains and it all works to this day. So I don’t think anything needs to be done to the whole. It’s kind of an interesting chimney hanging out there for that manhole that goes down the pipe. So I’m not sure if this project does not go through if that stays or it’s trimmed down. But other than that, I don’t think there’s anything that needs to be done. Thank you. Okay. So that’s a presentation of what A and B both look like. Thank you, Dana. Everybody whose hand is raised, we will be getting to you, but we’re going to have more of a discussion amongst ourselves first and then we’ll have public comment. I’m sorry, what? I don’t know whether Dana would answer this or Andrew, but during whichever way we go, we’re worried about always concerned about our employee safety.

1:15:13 And we’ll even at this point, are we going to make sure that everything is safe for the people that are working there? Of course. Is that more Andrew’s answer?

1:15:39 Are you talking about for the design going forward or what we currently have? What we currently have and for the while the building is going on, whichever building is going. We always want to make sure that we are providing the safe working operation. And there were some things that we’ve heard about, stairs and electrical things. Are those things that have been taken care of? So the electrical was dealt with that day that it was pointed out to me. As soon as we saw that, it was an open box. We had the electricians come in and close the boxes and make sure that they’re secure. Some of the other issues as access to the trailer, there is, they have a set of rolling stairs, but if we hear from division of labor standards that those need to be addressed, of course, we will need to address those as quickly as possible. And then during the building, will things have to be at a standstill at different times or days or weeks? Yeah, during certain times, I mean, operations will cease because, you know, if our scale house, if our scale is closed, I can’t put material into the trailer. So you’re going to have to shut down commercial operations. Obviously, the most important piece, you know, obviously, is residential operations. We always want to try to make sure that residents have a place to dispose of residential trash, the recycling, the yard waste facility. That has

1:17:14 always been our main objective is to take care of the residents first. If the scale was closed, we can look at hauling the trash bins to the closest facility would be Wheel of Raiders Saugus. But obviously, B would be less interruption than A. Yes, but no matter what, there’s always going to be some interruption during construction. And the goal is to minimize that as much as possible. Correct. Yeah. Obviously, with option A, with, you know, with building that new transfer station building, people have to understand that one of the big pieces of that is the filling of the land between that compactor pit and where that proposed building is going to be.

1:18:05 Everything is so congested in this drawing. Is there any way to open it up a little bit? Or is that all the area we have, everything else is kind of sloping down? You can’t disrupt the cap. That’s very important. So a lot of the plans were done so that the cap would not have to be dug around or punctured in any way. And obviously, if you’re looking at, you know, option A, so, you know, building the new transfer station building, obviously, you know, we work with the architects about staging. I think we discussed that, you know, in ideal world that you build that building first, connect that backside to that commercial side of it. So you would have access to that pit, bring that into operation before you started to decommission that compactor, and then fill in that land. I was just thinking about the congestion in plan B. The congestion for both of them is always an issue. You’re all, so because we have one scale, you’re always going to have some traffic crossover. Can we get an estimate on two scales or would that? You did a long time ago. And obviously, that was, you know, I think that was caused called the Taj Mahal at some point. With the two scales.

1:19:32 I don’t think two scales was entertained after a long time. I never remember hearing about that. But I think the Green Street entryway has a lot of possibility, if that’s something that would be reasonable with the town when we’re talking about this choke area that can be frustrating for residents and commercial users as well. And I think I’d love to learn more about how something that that could be facilitated or the discussion to, you know, who would have concerns about that and who would think that that’s a really reasonable way to go since the road is there. And it could improve the safety of, you know, the people that are transversing this land. So I’d be really interested in having, you know, having those conversations. If I remember correctly, Andrew, tell me if I’m off base. But I think one of the biggest issues with that was staffing is just finding somebody to man both Green Street and Beacon Street. That’s correct. Obviously, we don’t have enough staff currently to demand two entrances. But perhaps at the busy, you know, the busiest times, I’m sure that’s there’s times when when

1:21:06 it’s, you know, super busy, probably Monday mornings, and maybe that’s worth the discussion to see if during those busy times, if that would be a reasonable approach. If we can make sense. If they were just driving out, why would you need another individual there, another employee? That’s where they’re coming in. It’s an entry way, not an exit. Well, does it matter which way it comes? I think so because I think if people. Yeah, so that Green Street works for an entrance, as you know, so that way you’re not crossing over traffic and looping around, it would be difficult to use it as an exit. But obviously, you know, we can have the architects take a look at that as well. Thank you.

1:22:08 I is Jerry Smith still here. Yeah, I think you might need to unmute him. Okay. Let’s see if we can find him. Let’s see. I’m still searching. I’ve asked Jerry Smith to mute himself. You want him to unmute. Hi, Jerry. Can you hear us? Hello. Hi, Jerry. I just. Okay, I’ve had nothing but David’s drawings, not moving on my screen for 20 minutes. I don’t know what is done, but I’ve left and come back. And so I’m not seeing what I don’t think I’m seeing what everybody else is seeing, but I am here. I just wanted to see if you had any, because you’ve been working on this project. Yeah. Since years, I just wanted to know if you had any insights for us about your thoughts about A versus B or anything like that, if you’re comfortable discussing that with us. Sure. I’m definitely comfortable discussing it. I think A is, I don’t know, I mean,

1:23:43 A is a big ask in this day and age. And I think that there’s an awful lot of misinformation been floating around on the subject. I think it’s been made clear enough in what I’ve heard of this meeting that, you know, we did it in the order in which we had to do it. And if the feeling everybody is at the pounds ready to shell out $6 million, then I’m all for it. But I very much doubt that’s the case. And option B, while not perfect, is I think acceptable. Marbleheads get a better dump than anybody else I’m aware of in the state of Massachusetts. And a much better deal for the citizens than any other town in Massachusetts. If you want to go and compare Marblehead with Hingham, you’d be shocked with what services they get in Hingham for all their money, they get none. So, you know, no curbside pickup, nothing. So I’m a big fan of either option B or going on our own and not going to town meeting. Those would be my two choices. And I believe I make a lot more money if we went with option A. What’s your opinion about the entrance and the exit? As long as the pit

1:25:17 remains where it is, it’s a choke point that we can work around, but it’s never going to be great. However, it’s quite possible, Andrew and I kicked this around a little today, if the number of personnel he’s got now remains where it is, you could, by putting a little game house or a little umbrella or something down at the Green Street entrance, every bit of recycling, composting, cardboard trash, paper, garbage that comes into the place now in private vehicles could come in off Green Street and go back down onto Green Street and completely near your eight, probably 80 to 90 percent of the traffic issues up at the scale and the pit. So you would have a residence area and a commercial area for entry and exit? Right. I mean, there ought to be some crossover. You know, people are going to want to park up by the scale house when they go in to get their dump stickers. And, you know, sometimes people are going to want to dump something that they have to that they have to pay for. You know, so it would kind of like it would go in the pit. But the vast majority of people drive around the trailer and drive out back and do their business. And they come back around the

1:26:50 trailer and across the around the scale and through all the trucks and go out onto Beacon Street again. And yeah, I think Andrew’s position was that as long as somebody was there to check stickers down by the Green Street gate, that the vast majority of that traffic would would have no impact on the scale of the pit at all. It’s coming in, but you couldn’t have traffic exit that way. All traffic would always have to exit Beacon Street. Okay, I wasn’t aware of that, Andrew. Is there some reason why that is? Yeah, so where the Jersey barriers are, where you’re coming up the hill, that area is not wide enough for two cars. Okay. All right. I wasn’t aware of that. And there’s nothing that can be done with that?

1:27:53 It’s pretty well built in there. I mean, it’s… Don’t indicate where it’s going to go. That’s in the cap too. So I mean, that’s, that’s, that would be problematic. I wasn’t really aware that it was that narrow. It scales at 14 feet, three inches per civil plans. So we need for a proper two-way axis, we need 24 feet. Well, then that kind of, but still, it would still make a big difference. And we would talk about that really for peak time Saturdays, not every day of every week. It would really depend on staffing. Yeah. I know with your three-man crew, it probably wouldn’t be practical at the moment you get most of the time you’ve got one extra, which would, I think it seems to me you do. And so that, that was my thought on that Sunday. Andrew, there may be a possibility that, that we can short circuit, at least get a couple problems away. If we add the blue line, not go all the way around here, but maybe on those high traffic days, it kind of goes here. Yeah. So the, one of the other things, Dan, and then when I originally looked at it,

1:29:24 I didn’t have them looping all the way to the back of that area. I know it gives them more space, but I was trying to keep them a little bit more linear and trying to bust off that red line would be the extra space. So go here. Yeah. Right where that red line is, that’s really, you know, to the, just another line over, that’s where they would be. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that’s fine. But the, the, the, I guess the, we could eliminate all the crossover here, here, here, of commercial and residential. If this were to loop around.

1:30:35 The idea of planning on going if we proceed with option B is some value engineering through publicly bidding modular buildings. Under Chapter 149, there hasn’t been done much, but there is the option of having modular buildings built in New Hampshire, Maine, and then shipped to the site. You’re eliminating a lot of the public bid costs. The problem is that these are two custom buildings, and I’m not sure if we’d get the value, but there’s something that I think we should look at. Because then what happens is that we can reduce the construction time since we can have the buildings being constructed at the same time the site work is being done. So we may be able to reduce it from eight or ten months to maybe five or six months. Currently, how many bathrooms are on the site? Is there one in the scale house and one in the staff house? No, there’s currently one bathroom in the trailer. With this proposed design, we’d have one in the trailer and one in the staff attendance. Oh, so there would be two, one in each? One bathroom in each for a total of two, yes. And Dana, may I ask you, you were talking about impacts on scheduling. Can you talk a little bit about the construction schedules for each option?

1:32:08 Roughly, yes. If we were going to go for option A, the full build out, I think probably a 10 to 12 month construction time is reasonable. It would have to depend on phasing, and we’d have to work with the contractor to make sure that we’re doing it in a way that keeps it open. And frankly, it’s the contractor that comes up with the schedule he can do it in, but my guess is 10 to 12 months. Option B, the reduced one, it would probably be if we were to go with chapter 149 standard stick built on pads, it would probably be at say nine to ten months. And if we went prefab, maybe five to six months. Do you have handy data or Andrew or Jerry, roughly the cost estimates just so we can put it out there for the two options. Yeah, I may not have the right to hand them. Yes, so the cost estimates for option A is $6,275,653. That does not include OPM fees and that does not include architect fees. B, the cost estimate is $1,666,060. Again, that does not include architects fees and that does not include OPM fees. I should clarify a little bit, Andrew. So option A includes architecture fees almost up to the end of CDs. We’d have to hang out to bidding.

1:33:46 So the architecture fees for option A are reduced only to bidding, a little bit of mobilization again, bidding and CA. For option B, the reduced option, it would be more of a full architectural fee. But at a reduced scale, because a reduced size. And what do we have left over? You have $1.25 million. I think maybe Jerry or even Andrew, I think we’re looking at two pretty significant projects. With respect to capacity, I’d really love to understand exactly the difference between the capacity, if we’re looking at this giant plan A, which has this bigger facility. It looks like a lot of people can get into it at once versus the pit and making those improvements to the pit. Would we be able to be doing a greater capacity with type plan A than we would with plan B? And can you help me understand how those could be compared to one another? Yeah, so the current permit the town has is for 50 tons a day, allowing us for a total of 15,000 tons a year.

1:35:20 We currently service about 12,500. We’ll probably be closer to 12,750 tons this year. If you go with option B, you’re probably going to be just about you might be able to increase that by a little bit, but not much. You know, obviously your traffic flow and stuff like that and your volume with your trailers is going to be a little bit more of an issue. With your option A, where you have a full building where you can potentially store, you could have additional 30 or 40 yard container sitting inside under cover that you could use. And you probably have several of them inside. You could use those containers for additional material. You’re still capped at that 50 tons a day or that 15,000 tons a year, but you probably could start to increase your tonnage getting closer to that 15 tons a year. Now, if you wanted to increase that tonnage, that total tonnage of 15,000 tons a year, you would need to go to the state of Massachusetts and then you need to come back to the town and have an open meeting, essentially like with the planning board to allow that tonnage increase. Obviously, the concern we would have with increasing tonnage would be the increased truck traffic in town on West Shore Drive. Thank you. So are we ready to talk about what our thoughts are or do you want to hear from the…

1:36:50 Yeah, no. First. Yeah, I think we’ve had some good presentations and I think we should discuss now where we think we want to go and then we’ll hear what the public has to say before we take our vote. I’d just like to point out one more thing, if I may, about the Green Street option. And I think it should be noted then, because my understanding is during the construction of either of the projects, you can keep the transfer station opened, the trash compactor for residents, the recycling and compost, and that would be available to residents throughout the bulk or potentially all of the work being done. Is that accurate? Yeah, that would be the goal. Okay. So those are things that we can discuss between now and… If we put articles in, we can discuss that between now and town meeting as long as there’s no price tag on it. I mean, the price tag is what we have right now. Right. So obviously if you went, you know, articles are due Friday. So, you know, we have… I’ve drafted two different articles depending on which option you’d like to go to. You don’t have to have the total cost now, but you do have to obviously have that for town meeting. So we could put a placeholder or submit two articles and work on it between now and town meeting?

1:38:24 Yes. And if we are able to do the B without going to town meeting and maybe using revolving fund, we could at town meeting just say that we’re withdrawing. Is that right? That is correct. So have you looked into revolving funds for the extra $500,000 that we probably… a part that was separated from the $1.25 and then probably what? I’m saying $1.750 after you gave the $166. So yes, I have spoken with the finance department about this. They would like to hear from their independent auditor regarding that. The independent auditor was unable to give it, you know, to answer that question today. They’re back in the office on Thursday. Hopefully we can have that answered on Thursday, but the board still needs to decide which direction they’re going to go in. But we could make a motion to put in the… to submit the two articles. That’s correct. And then continue our discussion from now until town meeting day. That’s correct. Well, that would be my motion. So you… I was hoping we could come to a little more closure tonight. And with the information that we have, just discuss more so we can get a sense if we’re leading towards A or B. You don’t want to do that yet, Helene?

1:40:02 I don’t think it makes a difference because I’m not even sure if we have to put both articles in. We may just be able to put a placeholder. I’m not exactly sure. Well, obviously I have to submit both articles on Friday. And, you know, yes, you can call them a placeholder because you can always remove an article, but they have to be submitted on Friday. All right. Well, no harm done as far as I’m concerned. I think it leaves us… their options open because we’ve got now… We’ve got a new board member that just came on and she’s done a yeoman’s job of getting up to speed on this. And the rest of us are seeing this for the first time after several years. And, you know, our minds are clouded with other things. And I think that we could, you know, I think we could do that and be able to do research and come to a conclusion. We might come to the conclusion in a month. But we’ve got what? It’s February, March, April. We’ve got four months to do our due diligence. And maybe hear from the community. I would like to see some community open forums. We’ve done that before. We could have one open forum, a couple of… one for the whole area, one for the neighborhood. I’d like to see an open forum or two. Hear what our community wants.

1:41:40 I think that would be valuable, very valuable. Okay. Well, before we do any motions, let’s hear from the public. I will recognize you in the order your hands are raised and you will have two minutes a person. Only I’m entertaining comments about the transfer station right now. And after we just finished this agenda item, we can have further public comment. But right now, just if you have something to say about the transfer station. So Jack, your first interview, everybody could just introduce yourself, please. Jack Atridge, 67 Beach Street. I’m glad to hear that the accounting is going to be shared with the public. Little disappointed that it was said that it really wasn’t seen as that it didn’t feel to be important. Because I had a lengthy conversation three months after Jim’s this and did. But I guess that’s in the rear view mirror now. And I’m glad that Helene talked about having this vetted out. I’m wondering if the Solid Waste Study Committee, which was put together to review this project, has seen any of these plans. Does anybody have an answer on that? Committee disbanded years ago.

1:43:13 Okay, maybe a good time to bring them back together. And then on Plan B, three lanes into the site when all of the queuing area is eliminated up top there. Really seems like a burden not only to anybody trying to traverse that area, but to the adjacent buildings on what is really just a more of a glorified driveway than a street. And one question on Plan B is the yellow building next to the current pit. I’m wondering what purpose does that serve? I can speak to that. That’s the Staff Attendants Building. And in that building there is going to be a small area, a kitchenette with a sink and a microwave, a bathroom with an eyewash station and any of the safety features they need, a small area for lockers that’s in the circulation space, and then an unconditioned space outdoors for recycling bin storage and any of the other recycling items that the town needs stored. Thank you. And my last point is that it seems like both plans, especially Plan B, Plan B looks like with traffic lights and possibly opening another entrance that staffing, which I know is already tight, and then moving trash around at the same time and everything else that goes on.

1:45:04 I hope that a staffing study is considered at the same time as the design review process and look forward to talking about this more as as town meeting gets closer. Thank you. Thanks. Next is Thomas Underwood. Hi, I’m Dr. Thomas Underwood, Hawk Street. I want to follow up on Jack Atridge’s comment. And first of all, make the plea that we have complete transparency about the budget, releasing all information about what’s happened with all the previous expenditures in total transparency. I can tell you I’ve lived here a long time, and the people in this town want to know how the money was spent, but they also want to know in order to make an intelligent decision and understanding that these things are complicated, that we need to continue that transparency. My own opinion is Plan B is junk, and I myself would pay what is ever needed for Plan A. I have the means and would support it. And that’s even after being let down by the health department, and by the selectement, and by whatever you say backpedaling or whatever, the people want more from you. We’re not satisfied by these backpedaling explanations of things. We want you to move ahead and want you to reassure us that you really are going to do this competently.

1:46:38 I can count various people at the transfer station as friends I’ve known for years. I go there frequently. And I can tell you when you drive in there, it’s a grotesque embarrassment to Marblehead. There’s dust flying around. I walk in their potholes, and they have to fill up every morning because the town road department can’t even come there and fix the potholes. What’s been going on for years in this? Even if it’s not working out, do we have to have this level of incompetence and problem in the dump on a daily basis? And does this reassure us about what’s going to happen? So I would implore the members voting tonight to please back up. We’ve had a micro discussion, but now we need a macro discussion about the moral premises. What we’re supposed to do. Thank you. Thanks. All right, next. Dan again. Again, yes. Hi. First of all, thanks. I appreciate your indulging me and data. I’ve known for years, and we coach together soccer. Our kids are a little I hope no as well. And these plans look terrific. It’s good to see them. Couple of comments that I spoke Monday to Todd about this and also Elaine. The other day, the end you can see it on the drawing right now. We still have exactly what we have on the ground already, which is a mixing bowl of traffic and crossing pedestrians.

1:48:23 And backing in and backing out and not nothing that I’m looking at will improve that. In fact, it looks even worse when I look at it with the pink and the gentleman read the blue lines. I know Dana does great work. I don’t know who’s done the traffic engineering on this. The idea of putting up stop signs or light is if you want that traffic to just keep flowing. The 1 thing that when Jerry’s talking about coming in and out on green street, I found that very interesting. I wasn’t sure. I don’t know if I’m allowed to ask, but the problem was there’s a choke point. Was it as narrow as 14 feet? Yes, that’s correct. Okay. Yeah. So it’s clearly a 1 way bridge right there. And I understand there’s nothing you could do about that. But that idea of segregating. People going to the compost and the swap shop and all of that and using scales is a great one. And the last thing I’ll say, people were talking about the Taj Mahal. I do remember that. I remember we had plans for a great great dump and it was torpedoed by somebody calling it a Taj Mahal and that should be a lesson to you. You need to scale. Spend the money. Don’t value engineer out the scale. Thanks. Thanks. Next is Riley. Yeah, my name is actually James Arthur foal. I live at 21 Cheever Avenue in Marblehead. I’ve spent the last 27 years of my life doing contingency operations with the Civil Engineer Corps in both the United States Army and the United States Navy.

1:50:09 I’m very concerned over all the nice PowerPoints, the slide presentations and everything I’ve seen tonight. I have developed and executed entry control points for third world country personnel as well as American soldiers, sailors and airmen. The simple solution to this whole problem. I don’t know what you’re paying the engineer, the architect, whatever. If you can come down here and look at the map entry point is Green Street. Take the town employees, the highway department, whoever within our budget move the scale to the scale queueing area. Okay. People can come in Green Street, they can go left to the scale. They can go right to drop their leaves and everything else off like I do. Once they cross the scales, the scale checks in at the existing trailer. The people pull up, they back up, they back up right to the existing pit, just fix the gaping hole in the roof. Let them dump their stuff, pull up to the trailer, pay the fee and exit. It’s a no brainer. It’s stupid simple. We don’t need waiting rooms and locker rooms and all this other stuff. Come in on Green Street, go right to dump leaves or go to the swatch shed. Go left to hit the scales.

1:51:47 Hit the scale, dump your stuff, pay your fee and leave. And on top of that, Marblehead’s Transfer Station is the biggest joke on the North Shore because probably 50 or 60% of the people that dump their crap. Your time’s up. The contractors that dump their crap. Your time’s up. Don’t do business in Marblehead. I’m done. If you want to hire me, I’ll show you how to do it. Thank you. Lori. Okay, I think we should hire him. First off, a lot of what I’m hearing is a will to avoid town meeting, and that seems to be the primary issue here. Yes, I saw you roll your eyes. You are on video. Also noted the Freudian slip of the architects tongue when he said that B had already been selected. We are $24 million into this. That is the first time that I have heard public officials note that $4 million of that went to lawsuits. I think citizens were owed an explanation. We were owed that far before now.

1:53:21 It shouldn’t have been something that we had to drag out of you. I’m also noting that you are talking with the same manager. Why are we hiring the same manager who did not manage the budget? Well, he did not deliver anything on time. Again, I think you owe it more to us. And I think you need to go back to town meeting and face the music. Thank you. Laura. Hi, good evening. My name is Laura Gallant. I live at 25 Prince Street, and I appreciate the committee’s consideration of the options for the transfer station, and I too, I seek an accounting of what’s been spent and a clear plan for what needs to be done going forward. But for right now, I’m extremely troubled and concerned about the conditions in which our town employees are forced to work every day. And while these longer term issues are being addressed as they need to be, I urge the Board of Health to address the urgent need to replace that rented trailer, which is in terrible condition with a new one. And that is something that should be possible within weeks, if not days, and to make immediate repairs to the dangerous conditions of the compactor pit.

1:54:53 And to my mind, those issues need to be tackled immediately and I asked the Board of Health to ensure that these things happen right away, while we’re also addressing the issues of the longer term plans and the options for the transfer station. Thank you. Alan. Alan, you need to unmute yourself. Alan Waller 159 Atlantic Avenue. And people are rolling their eyes about going back to town meeting because this all started at the 2015 town meeting. People are unaware of the fact that the Article 34 that you voted on at that town meeting was not the Article 34 that was approved by the Finance Committee and posed in the warrant. It was an altered forgery made by somebody else who slipped that to Gary Spies, who then read it and it was voted on. The altered document had broader language in it than the original Article 34 and gave some more leeway as to how the funds would be expended. Now it turned out, as we read the read today’s reporter, Todd Belfe Becker states that the Article 34 allowed for the spending of this money on alternate uses.

1:56:25 The original Article 34 allowed for no alternate uses. And in fact, the false article was written was overturned by town council and Robin Michaud signed the new more restrictive town article. So in fact, the money was in fact expended illegally. So if they go back to town meeting, please take a very close look at the articles and see how they’re written and make sure that the correct ones are read before you vote. Because you may be getting, you may be, unfortunately, participating in election fraud, as was the case in 2015. Thank you. Thank you. Jean. Hello there. This is Jean Lambkin. I’m 20 from 19 Devereux Street. And I just have three things I guess I’d like to share in the comments. One is just to immediately endorse, fervently, Ms. Gallant’s recommendation that we prioritize addressing safety and well-being of the staff and the citizens who come to the site right now as the priority. And then what I’d also ask is that for the two warrants that are being considered to be submit to be prepared, whether it’s option A and B, as well as a C that I will add that for all three of these warrants that you include a commitment to reestablish

1:58:01 an oversight committee for the transfer station. And if at all possible to begin that even before town meeting, I think there are many people on this call who would be great members of such a committee and have the passion and the expertise to join that. So my third part is I heartily recommend that you consider an option C, a clean sheet do over. Many people with more expertise than I have pointed out the flaws and the issues and the just the sheer stunning. And I didn’t know that from one of the longest reigning experts of the original plans. Give me great pause that neither A nor B should really go forward. So I would say, have at it if you want to do those two. But please include an option C to town meeting that says, we need a clean sheet, we need a do over, and we need a new citizen oversight committee to shepherd this all the way from where it is to where it needs to be. And without any haste, please follow Ms. Gallant’s advice to get after fixing the issues that are putting our staff or fellow citizens at risk right now. Thank you. Thank you. It looks like our final speaker is Aaron. Hi, guys. I just want to say that I, I agree with a lot of what people have already said. I address.

1:59:32 Yeah, address please. I just I was just about to give that thank you. Thank you. I am also on Hawk Street 40 Hawks. And I am only an event planner at MIT Technology Review. So I’m not a big city engineer or designer. And my absolute first thought when looking at plan B was Just a nightmare with all those lines and forwards and backwards. And then my second thought was, you know, the Green Street exit or entrance and skipping that choke point altogether. I mean, there are so many good ideas on this call that, you know, in moving the scale over to the scale queuing area. I mean, I could only imagine that there’s an excellent reason that it was not moved there because that’s the obvious choice. I don’t know. And I have to go with the idea that maybe there should be a plan C because this doesn’t really make sense. I mean, it’s a mess that I can see so many opportunities for people to have traffic accidents with their cars and their bodies. And I mean, I think you could get high schoolers to come up with a better solution. This is just

2:01:04 really, really sad. And I think that we should have a better solution here because neither of these really work. Thanks. Thanks. All right. We’ll have one more speaker whose hand is raised and then we will close the public participation about the transfer station. Nicholas. Thanks. I appreciate it. Nicholas Adams, 15 Shetland Road. Just first off, appreciate the opportunity to involve the public in this decision in a more meaningful way than maybe was discussed last week. I think that’s a step in the right direction on this. Just two questions if I could. And one is whether there’s any consideration to operating costs going forward under either option A or option B. And just a logistical question, if there is a compactor or there is not a compactor as part of the pit, does that impact either capacity or the number of trucks that are required to haul debris away? And that’s all. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. So Helene, Joanne, is there any further discussion you want to have at this moment? Well, I think that something that was brought up whether we want to entertain an option C, because that’s something that’s immediate. And whether we want to entertain a committee, we can do that later, I imagine, if we do wish to do that.

2:02:33 So you had said, Helene, that Joanne, did you want to add anything? My comment would be that I really appreciate the thoughtful and really impressive points that were raised. And I think it speaks to the value that Helene had mentioned about having a public forum because this is an area of interest for many of our community members. And I think there’s a lot of bright ideas out there that we should look into and discuss. And that is my goal to continue conversations going forward. Thanks. So as we know, the warrant articles are due on Friday. Helene, you had said you wanted to make a motion to do two placeholders, one for each plan. Is that still your intent to make that motion? Andrew, is there a way to just put in a phrase for A, that we could come up with a plan that would not exceed the $6 million that it may be something a little different? You can vote for whatever you want. Obviously, the concern is that if you’re going to limit yourself for $6 million, then you’re going to have to go back and do some more value

2:04:03 engineering to the design that’s currently there and try to remove some of that stuff to bring it within the estimate that you have. So in the same with the estimate for the B, if we moved a scale or didn’t have something else, a staff building or what have you, if we kept within the amount of dollars that were presented, is there some leverage? And I’m even thinking having a second bathroom. I think that most facilities have, at least there’s two bathrooms on the premises, but there were things that I see myself that I may want to massage, that if we have the same space and spend the same amount of money, I would be satisfied with the two articles and let call it B2 and B1 or something of 81 or 82, but is that allowable? And maybe you can find that out through the town accountant or the finance committee, however, between now and Thursday.

2:05:33 So I need the board to vote for these articles. And obviously the dollar amount doesn’t have to be part of that, but the board needs to vote on the two articles tonight. There will be two articles, one a renovation, one a new transfer station. And is that enough? Well, that’s up to us if we want to not close any doors yet. And keep on having the discussion, then we could do an article for A and an article for B. And then we can always pull at a later date, indefinitely postponed. But who would have to say that A is for a new transfer station? B is for A? We have wording that Andrew sent to us that exactly sums both of those up. And I can even read the two options, the wording. I’m reading it myself right now, but if you want to read it for the public, that would be great. So one of them is to see if the town will vote to appropriate some of money to be expended by the board of health for the permitting public bidding, site work, utility work, deconstruction of the old compactor pit, and construction of new transfer station, and all other activities, costs necessary to carry out the work, and determine whether this appropriation shall be raised by borrowing,

2:07:04 or otherwise you’d take any other action relative to. The other one is to see if the town will vote to appropriate some of money to be expended by the board of health for the permitting public bidding, site work, utility work, restoration of the old compactor pit, and all other activities and costs necessary to carry out the work, and determine whether this appropriation shall be raised by borrowing, or otherwise you’d take any other action relative to. So there’s no dollar amount to it, and there’s no plan that says, nothing that says that we need to follow the plan that’s been given to us. No, but just understand that if you decide to continue to change plans, that’s going to continue to, there’s going to be, continue to be a fee associated with that with the architects. Correct, but at least when our hands aren’t tied to the state. Not tied, but at this stage in the game, it could be more disruptive and good to go back to the drawing board. I mean, these plans have been made for a long time, and I personally would be wary about starting from scratch. No, I wouldn’t start from scratch, but making two bathrooms or eliminating the lockers or something like that, trading the lockers for a bathroom or trainings. I mean, I think that we could do that without too much involved. In fact, we could probably do it as the construction is going on. But anyhow, all right, I’m satisfied with what the articles say. I’m ready to make a motion. So make the motion and…

2:08:40 May I ask a question really quickly? Of course. Inviting the conversation and some ideas may enable us to enhance some of this. And I think the one area with plan B is the traffic patterns that are really hard to visualize. I think for us, looking down on this and imagining a Saturday morning or a Tuesday morning or a Monday morning. If we put the articles in, is there some flexibility if we are able to potentially make some improvements to some of the traffic flows or some areas to Helene’s point, if there’s some different plumbing that would be involved? Is that reasonable within the next few months? Yeah, of course. It’s also just worth noting that we are constrained by the cap. And so a lot of these plans, the cap was stopped and then the plans were at the edge of the cap. So we really can’t do significant construction anywhere over the cap because if you drive anything down for support, and it punctures the cap, then the cap is in trouble. So that’s another reason why we couldn’t

2:10:11 widen the road going to Green Street because the cap is there and you can’t do that. So we are definitely constrained to a certain area. And that’s something we need to have at the forefront of our minds as well. Any design needs to be approved by Master EB.

2:10:32 I truly, truly appreciate the time that we all have given, including Andrew and the general we invited here tonight and to our board, and especially to our community. Because last time I was trying to get a sense of the community, but we were in a different place then. We were in a place that we needed to get some answers about why we’re where we are. So I just want to thank everyone who spoke tonight and those who came this evening to listen because I hope they’ll have an opportunity to speak again because in my motion I’m going to suggest a community forum. So I would like to make a motion that we submit the two articles as we receive article for the annual meeting of 2022. One is work associated with the new transfer station building. Well, they both said that. So there’s no difference between the two. It’s just the language that we have read to us. So as presented to us, I would like to make a motion of the two articles as presented to us this evening. And I think I would like to add to that that we would like to have at least one and maybe more community forums between now and town meeting. Board of Order, I think we need to separate those. I think we need a motion just for town meeting. Okay, I’ll separate it then. I will remove the community forums from this motion just about the

2:12:08 two articles to be submitted by what noon on Friday? Is that when the deadline is? That’s correct. By noon on Friday. It’s submitted for the town meeting warrant by the Board of Health. I think we should have that language in there for the 2022 town warrant. So is that your motion? Is there a second? A second. All right. Miss Elaine Hayslitt. In favor. Miss Joanne Miller. In favor. Dr. Todd Dolfbecker. In favor.

2:12:49 And obviously, Colleen, if you’d like to make a motion about the community forums, you can do that. Yes, I would like to make a motion that we have at least one community forum between now and say April 1st. Is there something we could just schedule something? We don’t have to take a vote on it, do we? Well, I want people to know that we’re going to do it. I just don’t want. I think sooner would be valuable before April 1st. Well, I just needed, I’d like, I looked at my calendar, I’d like to have it as part of our next board of health meeting. But it might have to be a separate one. But I think it would have to be a forum that would allow more than 300 people would have to use the other option. We do have enough space on this now for a thousand people. Is that true, Andrew? That’s correct. I mean, hopefully, if we’re looking out towards April, hopefully we can be in person. Well, I’d like to have it. I shouldn’t even give, I just don’t want, I wanted a month before town meeting, but I’d like to have more than one open forum, but I’d like to have at least one. So, I’d like to make a motion to invite the community to come

2:14:22 forward for a community forum. And I would even suggest that we have more than one. If there’s requests for more than one community forum, especially if a lot of people want to have an opportunity to speak, then maybe we can make it for up to three community forums. I would say minimum one and then future one’s TBD. Okay. I’d like to have them meet as soon as possible. We should schedule them so that we have a commitment to each other. It doesn’t have to be in the motion. Okay. Is there a second, Joanne? I second. Andrew? Miss Helene Haisler? Would you read that, please, since I rambled? I’d have to find Andrea to read that back to you. Without the rambling, Andrea. Andrea might be muted, so I don’t want to respond here.

2:15:37 Hi. Hi. Okay. So, here’s what I was able to jot down. Motion to invite the community to have at least one community town forum by April 1st. Well, let’s strike that. We’ve got to have, because if we need more than one, we should have one as soon as possible. Just at least one community forum. Oh, just no date, Helene. No. I think the sense is that we need to do it sooner than later. Okay. Torod, you had something at the end that you said. No, no. You said at least one. That’s fine. Okay. All right. That’s my motion. I second. Is there a second? Yes. Second. Miss Helene Haisler? In favor. Miss Joanne Miller? In favor. Dr. Todd Belfrecker? In favor. Okay. Does anybody want to, we can do as we wish about, if we wish to have a committee that has some expertise that we do have, you know, people that we’ve been engaging. We’ll talk about, let’s pick that up another time. Okay. Okay. So, I think that’s the end of our agenda.

2:17:10 Do we have a motion to adjourn? Our next meeting is on February, it’s two weeks from today. Todd, do you want to do the public comment period or do you feel like everybody’s commented on everything? I feel like we’ve had enough, I feel like we’ve had plenty of public comment time. So, let’s, if there’s anybody who has something to say that does not relate to the transportation, I guess raise your hand now.

2:17:40 So, oh, okay. So, Emily D.

2:17:51 Sorry, sorry. Did you say not related to the transportation? You did? Yes. Okay, sorry. Just wanted to say that. Introduce yourself, please. Sorry, Emily D. Whitt, 154 Atlantic Avenue. I just wanted to echo something you had said earlier in the evening, which is that there might have been some disconnect between the Board of Health and the community. And I just wanted to respectfully chime in on that for a minute. A ton of time has now been dedicated to the presentation that’s still up on the screen, and I appreciate that very much. But very little time has been given to our small business owner community. And I was just hoping that somebody could speak to us regarding, I’m not going to say one way or the other, anything about the mandate. I’m just going to respectfully ask that you explain to us the parameters of the mandate. And give us some guidance around it. I’ve asked several times via email, no one’s getting back to me. I know a lot of us have questions and a lot of confusion around it. Governor Baker today indicated that he believes the surge is now behind us. And March 8th is a very long time away. So if you could please take a minute out of your busy agenda to speak to a small business owner communities in this regard, I’d really appreciate it.

2:19:22 Thank you.

2:19:27 We, when we made the mandate, we said we would readdress it and we can always rescind it before March 8th if we deemed it appropriate. I imagine we will look at that again at our meeting in two weeks.

2:19:45 Okay, so we have a motion to adjourn. So moved. Seconded. Yes, I second. Ms. Helene Hazlett. In favor. Ms. Joanne Miller. In favor. Dr. Todd Belfecker. In favor. All right, good night, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Dan and Jerry, for chiming in. You’re welcome.