Select Board: March 12, 2025

Transcript captured from MHTV’s Vimeo auto-captioning. No speaker labels; proper names and dollar figures occasionally misheard. Click any timecode to jump to that moment in the source video.

0:02 Okay,

0:07 Good evening. I’m gonna call our meeting to order, um, tonight. It is, uh, March 12th, 7 0 9. Um, sorry, our executive session went a little bit longer. Um, in the back we will try to speak up as loud as we can. We’re gonna do the best we can. We tried to move it to a bigger space. Um, so, um, apologize, um, that it’s tight back there. So I’m gonna explain how I’m gonna run the meeting for the top of the meeting. Um, gonna entertain first start off with public comment that is not related to MBTA zoning because we’re gonna have a public briefing from the attorneys on the legal landscape from that. And then I will allow I any public comment

0:54 on MBTA communities under that agenda item. Um, and, uh, then we’ll have a little for further board discussion. So, um, we also, um, we just had an executive session at our attorney’s request to meet, to discuss some non-public, uh, daily changes in, um, litigation and some, uh, involving other client towns of our, uh, town council and other towns in general that may have, we may have a common interest in or with. So, um, but I will start off, um, with the agenda. Does anybody have any public comment not related to, um, MBTA zoning? Yes, sir. Please come up to the microphone

1:41 and we took the chair. Can we start with the pledge of Allegiance? Alright, Listen, I’m gonna control the meeting. Listen. Okay.

1:56 Um, so next out seeing no public comment on anything else, I’ll move on to the next item on the agenda, which is, if you don’t wanna talk about MBT, I got 35 emails about the M BTA zoning. So I’m, I made sure to put it on the top of the meeting. So let’s go. We are gonna have a, Please, please, please wish this our Standard

2:23 Nation Liberty Justice all.

2:31 Okay.

2:36 Um, so with that, um, I will turn it over to our, um, town council here. We have from Mead Erman, Lisa Mead and Jay Erman. And I’ve asked them to, for the benefit of the public to give a briefing on the latest, um, in the never ending saga of general law Chapter 40 a section three, a point of Order. Point of order. Chairman, I don’t know why we have to hear a propaganda statement From the lawyer. Thank you. Before we discuss the opinion. Thank you. That’s not a point of order, sir. Officer, sir, I’d like to be here, hear them talk, just sure. You what, Aaron? Okay, it’s Sir Aaron. Okay, go ahead. Uh, thank you. Um, my name’s Jay T

3:22 Hang on. There you go. Go ahead. Can’t go ahead. So the microphone doesn’t, oh, I guess it is Amplifi. It does, I think it does amplify. My name’s Jay Tellerman. I’m with Mead Erman Costa, Lisa Mead. My partner is here as well. Um, we are here to talk a little bit today about how we got to this particular position. We, our law firm is also handling some of the pending litigation in and around the recent developments. And I will also provide a status report on what that looks like and how that may affect other communities. I’m not going to be discussing tonight litigation strategy. That is something that the board will discuss in private

4:09 and then reveal at the appropriate time in public. So I think it makes sense for us to back up a little bit and to, to explain how we got here. So we know all about, and I’m not gonna give a lengthy explanation about what the Section three A, the MBTA zoning statute says. It requires the town to pass certain zoning. The statute itself says that there are penalties if you don’t provide the, the zoning in that those penalties are a growing list of potential grant funds that the town may receive. That’s what the statute says.

4:54 Now, this was controversial from the beginning. And the first sign of controversy that may affect a town like Marblehead is when Milton chose through a referendum process to reject zoning in their community. That resulted in litigation that immediately got taken up before the Supreme Judicial Court, the highest court in Massachusetts. That case was about a few different things. On one side, there was an allegation on some level that the, that the statute was unconstitutional. There was also a challenge to the sufficiency of the adoption of the guidelines

5:40 or regulations now adopted under the statute. At the same time, the Attorney General’s office on behalf of the Commonwealth wanted to assert and did assert that the statute was more than a choice that had penalties. The statute was a hard and fast obligation that you couldn’t avoid under any circumstances. That case took a while to wind through the process before the Supreme Judicial Court. The, it was briefed and argued at around the same time, a little after three different towns rent them,

6:25 Ewen Middleborough all petitioned. The state auditor’s office, the division of local mandates as is allowed under the unfunded mandate statute. There’s a statute that sets forth various processes by which a town could assert that a particular statute would be unfunded and unfunded mandate, meaning that it was at its beginning, um, created an obligation by a town that costs money. A little historical perspective, every town thinks that there’s a lot of unfunded mandates out there. There has been very little success over decades of towns ever proving to the satisfaction of the courts

7:12 that there is an unfunded mandate. It is a unique statute under the statute. If you, you have the right as a community to petition the, um, the auditor’s office for a determination that there is an unfunded mandate, and then the auditor will say, yay or nay. And if they find it’s an unfunded mandate, they will calculate how much. Now the statute is important because it sets forth an obligation by the Commonwealth not to reimburse a town for funds,

7:50 but rather for them to fund it at the beginning. So it’s important in terms of compliance with the statute to understand that the obligation to fund is at the beginning, IE when the legislature adopts the statute. So the auditor responded to the three communities and said, first of all, I don’t know if this is a mandate. We won’t know that until the Milton case winds its way through a decision. If the court says it’s not a mandate and it’s a choice with penalties, then that’s not a mandate. If the court on the other hand says, no, it’s a mandate, you have to do it. How you do it is still an open legal question.

8:38 But if the court says that, then it’s a mandate and then we can discuss if it’s unfunded or not. So the, the auditor’s office division of local mandates said We’re gonna wait, and they did. And then when the Supreme Judicial Court said, you know what, this is a mandate, you have to do it. The auditor then prepared a letter for these three communities finding that it was unfunded, and they concluded that it was unfunded because a mandate that you provide a certain number of housing units logically has certain impacts to municipal infrastructure. The example they used was water, but there could be any number of other infrastructure impacts by the mandated construction

9:25 or mandated zoning for a certain number of housing units, whether it’s education, public safety, roads, sewer, all kinds of other things. So with that information, the auditor’s office said to the three affected communities, you have options here. And those options include petitioning a superior court

9:51 for an exemption, an injunction against the statute against the Commonwealth, so that you don’t have to comply with it. What the auditor also said is, we can’t complete our work until the Commonwealth gives us data on what the impacts are as they are required to do. By the way, the Commonwealth has declined to say, um, that there is any tangible financial impact to the communities. The auditor is still waiting. So it’s not as simple, however, to just claim an exemption. You don’t just get an exemption and walk in a superior court and they give it to you because the auditor said. So, when an auditor declares

10:39 and determines under their statute that it’s an unfunded mandate, that’s what we would call a presumption or prima fascia evidence, that there is an unfunded mandate. It is then up to the town that actually pursues it in court to prove it all over again. You’re entitled to utilize the letter from the auditor as kind of a starting point that is entitled to a certain amount of deference. But ultimately you will have to prove to the court satisfaction that there is an unfunded mandate and then ultimately how much that unfunded mandate is in order to complete the process. The first step in that process, which the affected communities, there are five so far

11:26 that have filed litigation, we represent three of them, is to try and get an injunction in court. Those three communities, our three communities plus two other communities, have filed in court to do that. The commonwealth is vigorously opposing the entry of an injunction, but there were some initial scheduling hearings. There’s been no hearing yet on an injunction. And the court, uh, then took the step to consolidate the existing cases in any future cases in one court before one judge. So you are, we are all subject, all the five towns that are doing this or subject to what that judge thinks.

12:12 The judge then has then set a schedule by which a preliminary injunction will be heard. And that’s just the first step in the process. So the, the parties are busily preparing motions and oppositions as to whether or not there may be an injunction. The purpose of which is not to kill compliance with this statute. None of this is about whether or not you have to comply with the three A statute. The purpose of this litigation is to get a temporary reprieve while we sort out whether or not the commonwealth has to pay for it at the end of that process, whether it’s a few weeks from now,

12:57 a year from now, a few months from now, once that is squared away and funding is either provided or the court says no funding is to pre be provided, we’re back where we are now, which is having to comply with the statute. This isn’t about building housing or the wisdom of the statute. The Supreme Judicial Court already decided that Marblehead is subjected to this and 176 other towns are also subjected to this. That mandate is real and it’s not going away. We may get some funding for it and we may get a reprieve for it for the towns that are seeking that relief, but we’re not gonna get an exemption outright. Ultimately, at the end of the day, we will have to comply

13:45 unless the, unless the Commonwealth completely reverses course and refuses to fund after the court says they have to. So we don’t know what the judge is going to do. The judge could take a day to decide. The judge could take a week to decide. The judge could put it off until we have a trial, which could happen in the fall. There’s a lot of uncertainty. I do this for a living. I’ve seen a lot of municipal cases. I litigate all the time. I’ve never seen a case like this. I’m not going to predict success on any particular item. I’m not gonna talk about strategy with respect to it. These are difficult issues and they’re really hard for towns to weigh. There are pluses

14:31 and minuses of proceeding in any way, shape or form. Some of our towns have chosen to file, some of our towns have chosen to wait and see all are legitimate strategies that have their pluses and minuses. So that’s kind of how we got here. I’ll take questions from the, the board or, or provide additional comments as the, the board sees fit.

14:59 I have a question. If, if one of these five pounds are all five pounds, sorry. Sorry. Is that better? Yes. Sorry about that. I’ll start over Jay. Um, if, if these five towns are, some of ‘em get the injunction, let’s assume they all do. Is there a possibility that we would be included or benefit from that injunction? Well, you would benefit from the injunction in so far as you would have an easy path to get your own injunction. So we would still, if the injunction went through, we, we still have to file our own injunction. It wouldn’t be a blanket Injunction, right? This is not like a situation where a judge would give a statewide injunction over all of this. I’ve never seen a situation like that.

15:45 Likely we would, could then file, we would hope that would be somewhat perfunctory and the court would act quickly and do it because they have done it before. The rationale for a town like Marblehead is somewhat similar, slightly different than the other. Um, currently five affected communities. There are other communities right now that are going through this same decision and it’s gut wrenching for all of them. It is not easy to have this amount of uncertainty. It’s not easy to pay law firms like us a lot of money to, to pursue this. So you do have the luxury of seeing what may happen and then being able to jump in.

16:30 Luckily we represent some of these communities, so you would get the benefit of our current work product. Thank you. So it would be more expedient if, uh, obviously if the legal precedent is set with the injunction right? For follow on Towns, we would hope that the timeline would be ex much more contracted than the timeline we’re on with the early adopters, so to speak of this. Alright. Yeah. Are there any dates that we should be aware of or take into consideration during this Consideration? Right. A April 2nd is the currently scheduled hearing date on the injunction for the five communities that have filed. If five more communities jump in next week, that date could be fungible.

17:16 It might move to give those towns, especially if they may be represented by different counsel. There are currently three different law firms representing five different towns. So as with all things regarding court, nothing happens really on time. So those, those dates could get pushed out. Right now I’m preparing as if I’m arguing on April 2nd for injunctions for three different communities.

17:46 Um, sorry, I don’t know what the feed feedback is. Is that in the audience or off? Okay. Sorry. Um, so we would not be out of compliance now until July 14th. So there’ll be some towns too. I mean, you could apply for injunctive relief all the way up until that date, right? Correct. Okay.

18:16 Okay. Anybody Else? Or after that date? Potentially. Okay. Even after. All right. Okay. Um,

18:31 Through The Chair. Yeah. And just, sorry, these are stretched pretty far. Um, just for my own clarity with this, in regards to any of the towns that have joined into this that are asking to be a part of the injunction, it’s not something that, you know, you’re applying for. You’re basically joining a case that you’re paying for the litigation to go and pursue this and fight that in all the litigation fees that are a part of that? That’s correct. Obviously there’s some economy when, right, when you’re handling a number of them. But we would have to apply if, if you told us today to file litigation, I don’t just hand in a paperwork, a piece of paper. I have to collect the history. I have to present a unique case.

19:17 Part of the, of our job for these other communities is to present through testimony or documents or affidavits your unique hardship. For us to get an injunction, preliminary relief, you have to demonstrate some level of hardship. So I do have to build a case, again, some economy because I’m already doing this, but it’s, there’s a cost to it. Yeah. Thanks. Okay.

19:50 Um, any further questions for counsel? Is there anything else you’d like to add? No, I mean, we, we will continue to apprise the, the select board, um, and your staff of at each step, this is every day brings a new twist and turn in this litigation and you’ll get the benefit of our confidential advice on this. Um, I have one more, sorry. Through the chair. Um, just one more question. I think you said this, but I just wanted to say for, um, just prior cases or history of any, you know, trials such as this. I know you said that this was a little bit outside of the norm, but for unfunded mandates, cases that have come prior the success

20:37 or, um, any, we This case, I mean, there’s not a demonstrable body of cases where towns have succeeded ever in this, uh, on on the other hand, this is so unique and so unprecedented that any lawyer that, you know, you might say something from a public relations standpoint, but there’s no way that anyone can confidently predict an outcome at the end of the day. Of course, we’re always confident, right? In the positions we’re taking and we think there’s just cause to bring the actions that we’ve brought. But predicting a particular path that this is gonna take would, um, is really difficult to do.

21:23 Okay, thanks. I guess I’ll just ask another question too. So would you, there’s a hearing, I know you said on April 2nd. So would there, do you expect or know for certain if there would be a decision made before our town meeting? I do not know. So this is very complex. The judge that we drew is very conscientious. He also has a municipal background that is no guarantee of anything. I’ve had motion hearings before this judge and dozens of other judges where I thought this was a no-brainer. Come on, rule from the bench and help me out. And it’s taken three months to get to a decision. Okay. And then obviously if plaintiffs are not successful

22:12 and it’s not passed at town meeting, ultimately it, we’re back to the constitutionality of it. It, the law stands and we’re out a lot of grant money. And potentially, Potentially it does it, it does set up an injunction. The winner or loser of an injunction doesn’t lose the case. If we didn’t prevail on an injunction, we may ultimately win and then an exemption from the statute would be retroactive. So it’s a lot more complicated than that. The next step after the injunction is likely a really lengthy process that likely to take close to a year to resolve and be much more expensive. Can you, can you clarify that?

22:58 So, so regardless of which way the injunction goes, you anticipate a court case after that? Yeah, this is, we view the, the issues at play, essentially. The, uh, although the Commonwealth would say that as a matter of law, there’s no way there could be, um, any kind of unfunded element to this. We view it as much more nuanced than that. So with court cases, if it’s just a question of law, you submit motions and then in a few months you have a decision. If there’s factual discrepancies that have to be worked out, the impact to your schools, the impact to your staffing for police and fire, the impact to your roads, your water, or your sewer system, that’s an intense factual

23:43 set of discrepancies that would eventually have to be resolved at a trial before you get to a trial. There’s extensive fact discovery, potential depositions, a lot of lawyering in between debating on motions, um, developing of expert witness testimony and qualifications. Those things take months, if not years, in the normal cycle of, of a case that goes to trial.

24:12 One sec. No, we’re Not the same. We’re gonna open it up. Um, okay. So if that is, um, concludes, uh, the questions for counsel from the board, um, I will open the meeting up to comments or clarifying questions from the public. And, um, I, but I just would ask that everybody be respectful of everybody else. We’re not all gonna agree with everybody’s opinion, but let’s afford the same courtesy and respect to other others that we would like ourselves to receive. And, um, we are all here because we care very deeply and passionately about the town of Marblehead and let’s remember that. So, um, uh, we can, I’m trying to think of the best way

25:00 ‘cause we didn’t do a sign in sheet ‘cause I wasn’t sure if hearing from town council people would maybe tweak their responses. But, um, I will recognize you if you wanna raise your hand, I guess for everybody seated, and then I’ll just call as best I can. Um, if you wanna make comment, um, so I will, Mr. Dip Pano is here, so please come up and, um, name and address at the table and then if you just state your name and, um, address.

25:36 So as the chair, I run the meeting and I control the floor and the chair recognizes a person to speak. And I’m giving Mr. Dip pano or maybe yourself, um, the floor to speak, but I also take it back. So, um, let’s try to refrain from, you know, we would like to move expeditiously through the process. There’s a lot of comments. Okay, Mr. Deano, Thank you, uh, attorney John Deano, six Trager Road. I’m sorry, counsel, I didn’t catch your name. Uh, your name is, I didn’t catch Erman. Nice to meet you. Um, question for you is, uh, now my understanding of that is, uh, under, under the local mandate law, which is, uh, chapter 29, section 27 C, correct?

26:23 Um, once you file for the injunction, the burden of proof shifts to the Commonwealth. Does it not? It doesn’t, it doesn’t shift. Okay. There, There is a point in this case where there could be burden shifting and it’s based upon getting numbers from the auditor, right? ‘cause that would establish a prima facie case. This a little over lawyer stick here. But, and then there would be a burden shift. There are no numbers from the auditor yet Because the Commonwealth is withholding those. And in addition to that, um, I wanna make one point perfectly clear. We talked about it injunction sort of after the fact our town meeting is scheduled, correct me if I’m wrong, March, uh, May 5th, correct. Under the statute, the local mandate law,

27:11 if this community voluntarily accepts three a, it is then barred from seeking an injunction and would bear any of the costs associated with infrastructure, um, developing, uh, the community police fire deficits with the, uh, school system and so forth, um, would fall potentially to the taxpayers of this community forever.

27:40 I don’t, I I I know exactly what you’re saying and it’s a con it’s one of the various factors that communities that are trying to decide what to do right are, are weighing. I don’t think ultimately it’s says binary as that. Alright? And there’s a number of reasons I’m not gonna get into on that, that are, that are pretty technical. But I think that you’re, in part you’re correct that voluntary compliance is one thing. There are other nuances to that that we can save for another form. Alright? But the state auditor’s determination, which was a 10 page analysis, um, by the division of local mandates, according to that decision, at least with respect to the decision from the town

28:25 of Middleborough, they’re represented by KP Law. So I don’t know if you’ve seen their determination letter, right? I I have. Okay. Um, they’re determination letter, uh, indicates that, um, it’s apparent according to the state auditor that direct costs exist in developing compliant zoning that amount more to the incidental local administrative administration expenses. The, uh, the DLM made a determination that the MBTA Communities ACT does not provide a funding mechanism for compliance with its provisions, and that the grant programs do not provide the specific allocation of funds to municipalities for the costs of three a compliance, nor were they intended to assume all costs imposed.

29:13 So I don’t know if those are the nuances to which you refer that true, but Those are different nuances. Right? Uh, DLM specifically used the language of the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities guidelines in making this determination as well as the SJC information, as you indicated, um, and spoke to wastewater constraints and infrastructure upgrades that, again, may fall on the shoulders of the community taxpayers. So my question is that if we’re talking about the potential of litigation costs, um, and the tens of thousands, or even the hundreds of thousands of dollars in consideration of the potential infrastructure, ongoing infrastructure costs, permanent infrastructure costs

30:02 after compliance is voluntarily assumed, if we do vote on this in in town meeting, would be minuscule compared to what we may have to bear as a community for the cost that the state auditor determined are real and that the commonwealth won’t and won’t provide. Is that a question or a Statement? It’s a question. Is that, is my my, is that a fair assessment? If I could prove it? Okay. I mean, the, as I said, the fact that an auditor says there’s likely going to be,

30:36 uh, impacts is helpful for me at an early stage in this litigation. Ultimately, it’s my burden to usher in facts which the commonwealth would vehemently oppose that, that calculate in some kind of calculable way or at least very reliable numbers, even if they were rough as to what the impacts would be, then there’s offsets to that, right? There are defenses to that, in other words. So it could either be a lot of money or not a lot of money. And again, I’m not gonna talk about the strengths and weaknesses of my case probably too early anyway. Mm-hmm. There’s no sure bets that even though in our mind’s eye that we could look at some things like new water systems or a new wing of a school.

31:24 None of that is because un trod territory here is necessarily provable at the end of the day. Well, as a litigator of 30 years, I understand that some things may not be necessarily provable or that you can’t guarantee success. You didn’t say in your presentation that you, uh, could predict failure, although you seem to be doing that now. Um, and it seems to me that, um, it seems to me that five of your clients thought differently of the assessment. You’re giving this, this community and went ahead with that Litigation. I, I would never file litigation if I wasn’t confident in the result. So you filed litigation for five clients, confident in their case, three Clients stop. Alright. Will you look at her?

32:11 So is this relevant? I I guess I it’s relevant. It’s relevant chair noonan, because what I’m hearing is a reluctance to protect the taxpayers of this community or this board who never bothered to seek a local mandate determination in the first instance, who was poised to have a special meeting until we came and opposed that. He just, who is, seems to have counsel here trying to talk us out of potentially protecting the taxpayers of this community.

32:47 And I don’t think, excuse me, Mr. Fox. Excuse Mr. Fox. If you want to, we can exchange in a minute, but I, right now I have the floor. Um, I’m, I’m just Shaking my head Sir. I wasn’t saying anything. No, I just, I just, I just, I just think that it’s a, it’s a palpable resistance from this board and that palpable resistance has existed from the town meeting we first had where we defeated this measure and the select board didn’t even touch it. They just had the planning board deal with it. And now it’s time, I think, for this select board to take a stand. And it’s seven communities, not five, and it’s 177 communities affected by the MBTA Communities Act, not 176. Thank you for your comment. Yeah, thank, thank you John.

33:34 Right. John, uh, if I could just respond, I thought the interesting, I thought the interesting part of your question was whether after town meeting, let’s say the town voluntarily goes in and, and accepts three, let’s just say that happens. The implication I think that you’re exploring is, you know, does that hamper our ability to then seek an injunction for, you know, to fund, you know, to, to fund direct costs, which I think, you know, we’re hearing are, are real, but we don’t know whether that outcome will occur. Correct. So, so I get, but I’m not, I’m not clear. See, part of, I don’t think you’re detecting, at least in me personally, a, a resistance. I think what you’re detecting is it’s more, it’s a little bit more, it’s, and it’s not that black and white. There’s no real penalty to waiting

34:21 and seeing the development of what happens, you know, in, in, in the courts. Well, Mr. Greater, I would, I Mean that, that’s my, that’s my interpretation. So, And I appreciate that. Yeah. I think, I think there is, because three A is on our town warrant. Yep. Mm-hmm. It’s up for vote again. Yep. And under the local mandate law, which again is general law Chapter 29, section 27 C, um, which provides that any post 1980 state law or regulation, it coincides with proposition two and a half. Yeah. That imposes additional costs, excluding incidental local administration expenses upon any city or town is conditional on.

35:06 And this is where the binary choice occurs. Local acceptance, which is up for a vote May 5th mm-hmm. Or being fully funded by the Commonwealth. Okay. It’s one of a one or it’s one or the other. So if we do not seek a compliance exemption and filed and join those other seven communities, but we bring it to town meeting and it succeeds, then we never, we could never seek that injunction. And everybody in this room, every taxpayer in this community, you included, has to bear the cost of wastewater management, utilities, police, right. Fire schools, infrastructure. Okay.

35:52 And that’s why, in my opinion, there was a rush at all times, not from this board, but from the proponents to pass this before the SJC ruled on the issues before the local mandate determinations that were pending since last October were made Respectfully. So that’s, thank you For your comments. I appreciate. Wait, excuse me. Excuse me. Come on. Excuse me. Thank you. Out. I will control the floor. Thank you. Mr. Diano, thank you very much for Your comments. Thank you. Chair Nuna. Thank you. And, and, and thank you. I just want to thank, I do wanna say one thing. You know, this, this is a hot, this is a hot button issue. And, and there’s been a lot of social media exchange and there’s been a lot of nonsense, quite frankly,

36:37 we’re adults and I, I may disagree with the opponents, but we don’t have to be nasty to one another. And I wanna thank Chair Nunan for taking the time and the emails and communicating and putting this on the agenda and every member of this board for voluntary in their time and coming and listening to this debate. But let’s keep it respectful. Can we Thank you. Thank you.

37:14 Uh, Angus McKen 39 Tyson Lane. Uh, first off, I wanna echo John’s call for civility. We made a call for civility at the last meeting of the board when this was discussed. I think we can, as a community have civil conversation about this. John gave me a nice smile and a nice hello when I arrived today. I appreciate that and I hope we can, uh, continue this conversation with the tenor of civility as a community as we should. Um, I do wanna remind people, uh, that this was passed, this law was passed by, um, our legislature on a bipartisan basis with support from Republicans and Democrats signed into law by a Republican governor. This is not a partisan issue. This is an effort to address a housing crisis across our state, around which we have an obligation

38:00 to do our part in addressing it. Here is what Attorney Dip Pano is asking you to do. He’s asking you to use taxpayer dollars to litigate around this set of grievances, much needed taxpayer dollars that are needed in our community for police, for fire, for every other service, for the schools, every other service that we provide. He wants to spend those dollars in a very expensive wild goose chase on a legal case that frankly has no chance of success. Why does this have no chance of success? Because as the Attorney General has pointed out, the auditor’s finding of it being an unfunded mandate is simply incorrect. It is simply an incorrect finding,

38:46 and it’s an advisory opinion as the Attorney General has pointed out that is not legally binding.

38:55 Every single community that has sought funding from the state for implementation of the zoning changes required by three A has received funding from the state totaling $7.8 million. So it’s not an unfunded mandate across the state in that every single community that has asked for funding has received it. And it is not an unfunded mandate here in Marblehead because we have received two grants from the state to fund our implementation of this law. And I have carefully read the auditor’s letter. It does not speak to an unfunded mandate around ongoing infrastructure costs of development of housing in Marblehead or any other community. It only speaks to the cost of implementation in changing zoning and the cost to the municipality of doing that costs

39:42 that have been covered in our community by grants from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. So it’s not an unfunded mandate. Um, and, um, a second reason why this is a wild goose chase is the Attorney General. Uh, the Attorney General has made clear that, uh, she will, uh, seek, um, a Court Order of enforcement, uh, um, regarding any community that does not come into compliance by the deadline. Um, and the Attorney General has made clear again that the auditor’s letter is just that it’s an advisory letter. It does not have any legal effect. Um, and the Attorney General has said that she will strongly litigate against communities that seek an exemption from the law.

40:29 But the third reason why it’s a wild goose chase is, and we just need to face facts. The Supreme Judicial Court, the highest court in our Commonwealth has already ruled that this law is constitutional and enforceable. They get the last word. They are the most powerful court in our state, frankly, not the state auditor. So for all those reasons, this is going to be, if we were to go this route, a very expensive wild goose chase, uh, and really a path to nowhere. Um, ‘cause if we do not comply with the law by the deadline, we will be squandering, and I’m not exaggerating here, millions of taxpayer dollars that could be put to good use here in Marblehead.

41:15 Why do I say that?

41:21 Why do I say that? First, As was pointed out by Town Council, litigation costs a lot of money. I work for one of the largest law firms in the world, and this law firm engages in litigation. And the, the, um, year long trial that we’re talking about, we’re talking about hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars in litigation costs. The very same dollars that could be funding our schools and our firefighters and our police department. That is a waste of taxpayer dollars. And as a taxpayer in this community, I don’t wanna see us go that route and waste those resources. So that’ll be the first cost of going down this path to nowhere is substantial costs of litigation. The second cost, as we know, will be the loss of access

42:08 to grants, which as was mentioned by Town Council, is a growing list of grants that we will be flat out ineligible for grants that our community could be using. We all pay taxes to the state. And what opponents of compliance are proposing is that we’ll continue to pay taxes to the state and then we’ll get none of it back because we will make ourself ineligible for state grants from a long list of enumerated programs. And note, the state is adding three a compliance to the application form for all discretionary grants as well, including large discretionary programs, right? Like school building assistance, right? And so, um, we will have that work against us in scoring of competitive grant applications. So not only will we not get grants

42:53 that will be prohibited from even receiving and being eligible for if we do not come into compliance by the deadline, um, we will also not be competitive for competitive straight grant programs. I worked in the state legislature for 11 years of my life, uh, worked to try to secure grants for communities in the district for the senator. That rep that I, that I worked for. I saw how this process works in competitive grant applications. We should not disadvantage ourselves in that process. And to what end, to what end. So we’ll spend all this money on a wild goose chase with the idea that we’re gonna try to get an exemption from the law, which we won’t get, and then we’ll be outta compliance, uh, with, uh, with the law by the, the deadline. Um, so what does that mean?

43:40 So it means the Attorney general will, as she has made clear, seek a court order against communities that are outta compliance. And what that will end up resulting in, this is the third category of substantial cost is penalties and fines. We live through the teacher strike $10,000 a day penalties. The court has the power to put sanctions on communities that do not comply, and they will do so. And that will include fines and penalties. And that will cost us more and substantial taxpayer dollars that we could put toward all of the uses that Attorney Dip Pano mentioned that are so important in our community. And of course then there’s the end game that we all need to be aware of.

44:25 What will the Supreme Judicial, what will the, the court do after there’s a court order against our community for non-compliance? They will appoint a special master to create a compliant zoning plan, and they will impose that plan on our community without local input. Why would we want to give away the opportunity to design a plan made in Marblehead in favor of a plan put together by a special master, not even a resident necessarily of Marblehead that the court will have the power to impose on our community if we don’t do the right thing on our own, that will be the outcome. Extraordinary expense, loss of local control, and not for any noble cause or principle. Right? What is the noble cause

45:11 or principle that is being suggested here to keep people out, to exclude people from the community? That Not,

45:25 That is not a noble principle. The real goal here of opponents is to delay the process. To delay the process in order to, um, avoid a voted town meeting. Why? Because they know they will lose a town meeting because they know the community is now engaged and informed on this issue. And that, as you’ll see, many members of the community are willing to show up to fight for doing the right thing in Marblehead and being part of the solution and not part of the problem. So to sum up, I don’t want my taxpayer dollars used in this way. I don’t want to pay for municipal government be a regular override because of this waste of enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars. I heard one opponent at the last Selectman’s meeting say out

46:12 loud, um, well, if we need to fix a bridge, let’s just tell the state to get lost and we’ll just have an override and pay for it ourselves. Is there any member of the Board of Selectmen who thinks that’s a good way to govern this community, to have an override every time we need to fix something? I don’t think anybody feels that that is a way to run a community, Mr. Mc. So I do want housing Choice in this community. I do want the opportunity for people to be able to stay in this community and afford to live in this community. That’s what we will accomplish. So we shouldn’t seek an exemption for all the reasons I’ve said about the cost of doing so, but we also shouldn’t do it because it is the wrong thing to do. We should embrace the opportunity to be a welcoming and open community and to provide more housing choice. Thank you very much for your time.

47:05 So I, I do have hands raised online. Can I have a show of hands? Who in, in the room, um, is planning to make comment just so I can manage time accordingly? Okay. So you can see we have a number of hands up. We have, um, people online. I’ve, um, been, uh, generous to the two first, um, uh, public commenters. I, because they, I knew they’re being, you know, substantive. Um, and they’ve been very involved in the issues, obviously in the community. So, but that said, please, um, let’s try to keep the comments to two to three minutes so we can hear, we will hear everybody, um, and we wanna hear everybody. But, um, you know, if I do a light tap, you know, at like three minutes, just I’m asking you to wrap it up

47:54 so we can get through this meeting. Okay. Um, so I will take another one from the audience and then we’ll go online. We’ll get to you online. Um, I see a hand in the back, sir.

48:19 Okay. How you doing Alex? Uh, Nick Ward, six ton Road. Feels like a little bit of deja vu right here. We are back again considering some statewide legislation, how it affects Marblehead decision. Hear he said Don’t care.

48:36 He’s addressing the board. It is what it is. Folks, please speak up so that you can be heard. But we he’s, we’re gonna do the best we can. Is he a resident? He did it, yes. Can you pull forward the microphones that might come? Sure. No, no. Okay. Oh yeah, they don’t wanna touch the microphone. It’s very technical. They can adjust. All right. Okay. We’ll adjust it. Sorry, could you just repeat your name for us? Sure. Nick Ward. Six Ton Road. So, as I was saying, sorry, here we are again looking at statewide legislation and how it might affect Marble Head’s decision as it relates to the three A. It doesn’t feel like that long ago we were in the select board meeting room up on Abbott Hall. Um, considering the case regarding the SJC look on a very, on a very narrow basis, like if I were in your shoes,

49:22 I would think about how that played out and that would probably impact my decision here. How I think about, you know, the decision to sort of pursue this, uh, state auditor route. Um, and, you know, I would consider how, how things played out with the SJC as I, as I thought about whether to, you know, go down this exemption path. ‘cause we, you know, we all know how that, how that played out, right? But in a broader sense, the thing that I think you should all remember is like, we kind of will always be here in this town, in this commonwealth, in this country. It’s an article of faith for many people that they should have a right to control not just what happens on their land, but on their neighbor’s land. And so what I mean is like, you’re not gonna run out of litigation that you could get behind and that you could join to obstruct the construction

50:08 of things here in Marblehead, as in, in this case, multi-family housing, right? Like that’s a constant, that’s always going to be an option available to you in some sense or another. And so for me, like, what I think this should come down to for you is like, how do you feel about the issue on the merits, right? Like, if you don’t support the construction of multi-family housing, like just say that, right? But if you do, then similarly just say that like, as I said, I really think this issue of, of litigation, this legal warfare, like it will always be an option that’s available to you. Marblehead itself has seen it over the years. I, I don’t know exactly how long the Mariner was in litigation, but you know, whenever I heard the number, I remember my eyes just about fell outta my head. So with that said, like, I wanna go back

50:53 and reiterate why do I think multifamily housing is a good thing and why do I think you should eshoo this option of pursuing the state auditor’s exemption? And the reason I think it’s a good thing is because the housing that we’re contemplating under three a zoning is about supporting the missing middle. It’s about supporting middle class housing. I hear three a zoning criticized all the time for being insufficiently, uh, generous to people who need below market rate housing. I make no apologies for that. Yes, this is housing primarily for the middle class. We’re talking about people with good jobs, we’re talking about people with families. We’re talking about people who I meet down on the playground who say, yeah, we’ve been renting for x number of years, can’t quite find something that we’re looking for. Like these aren’t people who need a hand up or a handout.

51:39 Like they just need to be playing with a fair deck. And at the moment in this town, we have thousands of properties. I’m sure the town planner can give you the exact number, but we have thousands of properties that are existing non-conforming. And to me that is not a fair deck. And so just to sum up, and just to come back to the, to the crucial point you will always have, like in, in the state of Massachusetts, there will always be some kind of legal based resistance to the construction of multifamily housing. Frankly, to the construction of things, just in general, you’re never gonna lose that option. And so I think the question really in front of you is just substantively like, do you support the amount of multifamily housing contemplated under the three a zoning plan or not? And I think much easier for the community to understand is

52:25 like, do you support that issue or do you not? Rather than, with all due respect to all of the litigators that we’ve heard from tonight, the kind of long, and I mean fascinating for me, but not necessarily fascinating for everyone, but the sort of long legal lectures. So I’ll, I’ll leave it there. Hopefully, you know, I’ve made my point clear again about why I support, um, middle class housing and, uh, thanks for your time. Thank you. Um, Kyle, do you wanna take somebody online

52:55 recognizing Palma Palma? Palma Palma, you have, um, the floor.

53:04 Thank you very much. Um, the issue of multifamily housing isn’t Going away. Sorry, could you say as the speaker, I’m sorry, Last speaker. I’m sorry. Can you not hear me? No, I just, if you could just state your name and just the street, I’m sorry, your street. You don’t have to say the number, just the street for the record. Okay. Palma Bickford Longview Drive. Okay, thank you. The, if a, the Broughton Road redevelopment is one of the zones that has been identified in our three A plan, I believe. And that is going forward, um, regardless of whether we vote on this or not. And if a developer wants to use and buy up

53:51 and create multi-family, family housing and Tioga way, is there anything special other than the right to do it that three A would give them that they would need to go through in order to make that happen? And if any other area within Marblehead also could be developed into multifamily, there are several places that have large condo areas behind, uh, Tioga Way. What is stopping that from happening? It certainly isn’t this mandate. So we don’t have have the housing

54:39 built when we say yes to the mandate. And I truly believe we need to say yes to the mandate because we need the housing. We need to make it easier for the developers who will probably develop anyway. Thank you for your comments, Sir.

55:09 Good evening. Welcome. Uh, Francis Ruggieri, Fort Johns Road, Marblehead, Massachusetts. Uh, councilor Dip Pano. I don’t know you. Where are you?

55:25 I, um, don’t think there’s any argument on need. The housing, the need for housing is enormous and we are behind no matter what community we are in. I think the argument is about affordability. And if you’re gonna mandate at the state level, how can you mandate, how can our board of select people agree to that Without funding, you cannot put the burden on all of us people as residents in your community. You work, you ought to take care of your people in your community right now.

56:13 Not those who may come here, but the people who are here now, that’s where your liability, that’s where your responsibility is. Take care of us. We understand, I’m sure I I wanna speak for all the good hearted people that are here. We understand that there’s a need, but there’s a way to go about it. But entire state is in a financial crisis right now. You know it and I know it. And then you wanna bring that burden here on top of what’s going on. Slow down, take your time and make good decisions. And your decisions have to take our community

56:59 of marblehead into, into, into account. Now, I, one thing I don’t understand that I would like to ask is how does the state mandate something to a community and not fund it? How is that legal? You can’t come in here and tell us what to do. You can offer funding as an incentive, but when you come in here and mandate to your community, that to me is basically unconstitutional. You don’t have the right to come in to a co, to a, to a community and impose on us. Don’t tell me, don’t tell us that you are imposing us on us an imposition we don’t accept.

57:47 And I would advise that no is no. And is there any reason why we shouldn’t file a lawsuit? Uh, to, to avoid this. If we file the suit, we always have the capability of pulling it back, file the lawsuit, and then if you need to adjust from there, you have the right to vacate that lawsuit. Thank you very much. Thank you.

58:24 I just saw her right, right behind you. I saw her hand go up first. I’ll get you.

58:38 Good evening and thank you. Good evening. Uh, my name is Cheryl Patton, 25 Lee Street. Uh, Marblehead is Potter of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The state has asked all its communities to assist with housing its citizens. This is a zoning issue. They are not mandating that we start construction, that we build water systems, that we build schools. It is merely a request, a mandate to all communities to help us house our citizens by allowing zoning of certain parcels within their communities to potentially, I’ll repeat that.

59:25 Potentially build housing. There we are, I believe a tier three, which means we are two three systems back from the MBTA lines. The likelihood that we would be required to build housing is many, many years down the road. This is, it’s okay. I’m used to rude people. Excuse Me.

59:55 We cannot hear the commenters when there’s distractions and we’ll make the meeting go longer. Let’s please have some respect for the speakers. Thank you.

1:00:04 When did, I worked for the Commonwealth for Virginia for decades in public service. In the public government. When a developer wants to build a building, they are required to contribute not only to the building, but to all of the infrastructure. That’s how construction works. This town has plenty of room for more residents. We have been asked to help.

1:00:31 I will like to remind the audience that you may not agree with the speaker, but she has every right to make her comment right here. And any one of you also is afforded the same. Right? So please, once again, let’s stop with the interruptions, please. Thank you. I take it as a compliment if they have to object. So strenuously, I must be making my points.

1:00:55 This is housing for our workforce. It is housing for our teachers, for our firefighters, for our police, for everybody else who wants to work and live in Marblehead. We will be spending hundreds and thousands of dollars trying to fight a quixotic quest. All that is going on now is a definition of what a mandate is as far as the funding facts will show you that the, since this past in 2021, the state has spent millions of dollars according to an article from the globe, millions of dollars to communities and towns to help them with their zoning planning. We would be eligible for that money

1:01:43 aside from all the legal expenses. And respectfully, I cannot imagine what your rates are for sitting here tonight and listening to all of this. I know how much you charge per hour. God love you. You’re building your summer house, okay? It is bad for this community to waste this kind of money. And it is really bad business for the taxpayers in this community to close our borders. There isn’t a person in this room. Thank you again. Thank you. I am succeeding. Thank you. There isn’t a person in this room whose ancestors came over here, even if they were on the Mayflower, who are welcomed with open arms. But they made their lives in this community,

1:02:30 in this town, in this country. And we are all a beneficiaries of being open-minded and welcoming. And I am ashamed of the residents of Marblehead who vociferously object to this. I thank you.

1:02:48 Okay, We’ll do one online and then you’re next.

1:02:55 So, um, Heather Fitzgerald, Um, Heather Fitzgerald, She’s coming on.

1:03:06 Hi. Um, so the, um, the state auditor name and Address That it was not mandated, that it was not in, in compliance with the law. Can you get her Name and address? How and Campbell continue to go back and forth. Okay, so my question is, is it just the zoning? Because didn’t we already pass the zoning portion when, um, the town planner, Becky Karn was here? Didn’t we do the zoning for the plan that we and we voted no to, you know, um, implement it? Correct. Right. There is a plan that has been drafted through the public process and then it was, um, defeated at town meeting. Okay, so in terms of money

1:03:52 that we’re going to lose, right? Don’t we receive grant through home funding the home federal funding through the Marblehead, um, community Housing Corporation. What is that? I mean, there’s all these things online that talk about affordable housing and all these programs that have been around like the, uh, housing production plan since 2009. And there’s a laundry list of programs and groups, committees, but nothing’s been built. So what’s gonna change? I mean, I just don’t see anything being built. If this is to pass, I don’t agree with it passing. If you look at the state of the public housing in the town as is, it’s, um, despicable. But, um, in terms of going forward, I mean it,

1:04:37 this is an abuse of power and many communities are suing, um, Millbury Middleborough. Um, it’s interesting. They all start with m Milford and there, so I just, I think we should absolutely fight as much as we can to not get this passed. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um, next, sir,

1:05:01 Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Emily DeJoy Riverside Drive. At the previous select board meeting, our sustainability director, Logan Casey, stated that there would be no additional costs for us to comply with three A, however it has since come to light, according to the division of local mandates at the state auditor’s office, that this statement was made without factual basis and is inaccurate. Given this, I strongly believe that three A should be indefinitely postponed and that our select board honor our vote and apply for a waiver. Our town employees and the Democrat Town Committee have been disseminating misinformation regarding the financial impact of the zoning project, particularly the fees that would be imposed on taxpayers if it were to pass. It is our responsibility to uphold the overwhelming vote of our community members by advocating the protection

1:05:50 of both their decision and our financial interest as we, the taxpayers would ultimately bear the cost and should protect the majority and not move forward with this project. And I thank you all for coming tonight and listening to all of our comments. Thank you, Emily. Thank you.

1:06:12 Okay. I see your hand, sir. Come forward please. I see your hand here.

1:06:25 Thank you. I’m Mackay Campbell Elm Street Marblehead. I want to thank you for putting the, uh, MBTA issue on the agenda tonight. And thank you both you and the members of the planning commission for the work you’ve put in on this. Issue. I followed this controversy very closely since, well before the last town meeting, and which I participated overwhelmingly, we hear two main reasons why Marblehead should do this. One is that first is if we don’t, the state’s gonna cut off all our grants and funds. The second is we need more affordable housing. Um, I’ve read the state auditor’s opinion very carefully, and if it is upheld, and I understand that if, um, that has a potential,

1:07:11 a long way to save us those costs. But also the second one is, uh, the affordable housing. And I just say from far away from here, I’ve been the chair of a planning commission and serves on a municipal assembly. It’s my observation that if you preemptively give away some, the ability to do something by, right, such as create high density housing, you’ve given away most of your leverage to work with developers to help cover the cost of infrastructure and other external impacts and costs. I do agree that we need more affordable housing and marblehead, but I think we’re faced with a simple question. If the MBTA ACT had never existed, would Marblehead be proceeding with our a proposal

1:07:59 that looks like our current afford affordable housing proposal for 58 acres of high density housing by Right. I don’t think that it would, and I’m pretty sure, I’m pretty sure it would not. And I would urge you to wait to file for a compliance exemption to the MBTA and see how this develops. Thank you very much. Thank You.

1:08:27 Um, uh, this woman in the gray sweater in the back. Thank you.

1:08:40 Uh, I, AMIA Hart 33 Pond Street. Uh, one of the concerns that I have about the MBTA Communities Act is that my understanding was it was to supposed to decrease reliance on cars. And as the plan is constructed here in Marblehead, we’ll be bringing two cars for these 600 units to be built, which is an additional 1200 cars to town. Now, anybody who lives in Marblehead knows that we are unique geographically. It’s crowded right now. And my question to the attorney here is, sir, would we have any kind of an exemption based on environmental grounds and the stress, the 1200 more cars, think about that 1200 more cars in town would do for the community. And one more thing is, I, I’m a lifelong democrat,

1:09:26 and this is not about trying to keep immigrants out of the community at all. That is not my feeling or my sentiment about any of this, but I am concerned about the increase in cars and the environment here in the community. I feel like it’s really gonna stress the community. Is that an angle, is my question? I think you, you, you, you made a presumption about the purpose of the MBTA communities, which is on record, right? As like the, To decrease reliance on cars and increase public transportation, Some background on Right. The purpose. So I think that there’s, that issue I think falls into two distinct kind of subject areas.

1:10:13 The, the first would be in the development of the, the bylaw itself and how you might, um, control it through some of the zoning bylaws or the site plan review process to reduce reliance on cars within the zoning. That’s something that is not part of this discussion tonight. That happens in the development of a zoning bylaw. The debate of that zoning bylaw town meeting and the passage or non passage of that zoning bylaw. And then if it passes through the processes that follow site plan review and other discussion with potential developers, you talk about via vehicular impacts from the standpoint of unfunded mandates, it’s a slightly different question. The question wouldn’t come down to impacts

1:11:01 of cars in terms of excess traffic. Okay. That’s the zoning question. An argument that’s different. Uhhuh, the question would come down to does the inter the, the anticipated impact of cars, I, I’ll submit to you that it’s pro, the anticipated impact is somewhere less than 1200, but a lot of cars regardless. Yes. Will that impact the town’s infrastructure vis-a-vis the requirement to update or repair roads to have more public safety officers, things like that are the questions that apply in this. And then ultimately would be up to the auditor and to the courts as to whether

1:11:47 or not those are the kinds of infrastructure impacts that would qualify as being unfunded under the statute such that the court might order the commonwealth to fund that Uhhuh Before we have to comply and adopt this order. I have another question. Um, with this current political climate that we have, how much of the money from the state is coming from the federal government? Because the federal government right now is not particularly sympathetic to environmental issues and funding things like, uh, flooding prevention and this kind of stuff. So how much money, uh, is there, is there a problem here for the state? Uh, anyone that wants to try

1:12:32 and accurately predict what the federal government may do next? Is, There you go. Better person. There you go. Right. I would wonder about it. Anyway, thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.

1:12:46 Um, sir.

1:12:57 Hello, Jack boob of five Palmer Road. Um, I’ve been in, um, on some of the boards in town, et cetera. Uh, the the one point I would like to make is that in Marblehead and in town meeting the town meeting people are in fact the Congress. Right? And in a sense, our Congress voted not to do this. In fact, we did it once and then we did it again later in the later in the day. So I, I really,

1:13:30 I really think it’s incumbent upon this board to do everything they can to find a way not to do this, because that’s what we voted. Now, the fact that we’re gonna bring it up again, you know, I think we should do away with that. We cannot hear Mr. Uba. Thank you. Presumably you agree with him, so please let him speak so we could hear his words. Thank you. Thank you. So that would just be my point, is it, we voted it’s your duty now to try to implement what we voted for. And I I don’t really see where you have an out other than to say that we were either ill-informed, didn’t know what we were doing. Yes. Couldn’t figure it out or can’t think for ourselves, all of which are not the case. Thank You. Thank you.

1:14:16 Over here.

1:14:29 Thank you. And, uh, good evening. Um, Renee Keeny, Renee Ramirez, Keeny to Beverly Ave. And, uh, I would like to say that I did read, uh, the auditor’s, uh, report on mass.gov. And I have to say that my first imp my impression not being an attorney was kind of, it reminded me of that old, old Wendy’s commercial. Like, where’s the beef? You know? Uh, because, uh, I’m looking like, where, where are the unfunded costs? You know, I really, uh, I don’t know. Um, it’s, uh, you know,

1:15:14 I remember, um, Mr. Keyser talking about the grants that we got, uh, for, uh, Becky Ke Cutting and the Town Planning Board to help develop the plan and make it one that was unique and, and, uh, res uh, appropriate, uh, to Marblehead and our needs here. So that was one thing. And the other was, um, I understand that the town planner in the process, they conferred with all of our, uh, town services. Um, is that right? And that they had signed off on the fact that we have the existing capacity to add these units.

1:16:00 Another uh, point, uh, that someone made was, it might be turning over all control to developers. And again, um, we, you know, have the assurance that in fact these developers or builders, whoever, uh, you know, would take advantage of building by right? Have to observe the same zoning laws that we currently have. The same, the height restrictions, the setbacks, uh, all of that. Um, and then another thing I was thinking is that, uh, any infrastructure or additional, you know, hookup costs to services and all of that, that is to my understanding,

1:16:49 is always born by the, the contractor or the, the developer, the builder. And it’s their responsibility to pay, to look up to account services. And then thereafter, the cost of maintaining all of our services and all are born by whoever’s the homeowner. They become taxpayers and contribute to the town. Um, hopefully in a lot of ways, but certainly with their tax dollars. And, and, uh, as, as we all do. So I think that the, uh, select board, you know, we, you didn’t go for, uh, having, you didn’t vote to have that, uh, special town meeting so that we’d be in compliance

1:17:38 by, um, the December 31st dead flight. You, you chose not to do that, to wait for the, the, uh, uh, the Supreme Court ruling, which, uh, we now have. And the law is constitutional. The Attorney General has said that she will aggressively enforce the law. Her words, not mine. The select word I think should now move forward to give voters the chance to get on the right side of the law by the July 14th deadline. And I hope you’ll vote no further delay by going for an exemption, highly costly, uh, avenue to take at this crucial time in our town’s finances and allow, I don’t wanna become a town like Milton who spent

1:18:28 thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars on a no win legal battle given our financial situation. I believe voters at town meeting will say yes when they are informed about what this law isn’t and what it, and, and what it is and what it can do for us as a community and allowing seniors to downsize and workers to live here and new families to get started. So, um, I hope you’ll, uh, uh, vote no so that we can vote yes at town meeting. Thank You. Alright, we’re gonna take a couple people online.

1:19:10 Meoc 12. Meoc 12 is the name on, sorry, Meson Meoc 12. It’s just a str name. Oh, Meson 12. Could you please, um, tell us your name and your street?

1:19:24 Hi, yep. Claudette Mason, Susan Road. Um, sorry about that. Uh, you guys had me muted, but, so basically the first thing I wanna mention is the, the gentleman, I didn’t catch his name, who spoke, um, after John Dano. Um, I would like to address him and say, please stop scaring the people of Marblehead with really inaccurate information. Uh, specifically litigation.

1:19:51 The litigation cost would be far less than what it would cost the people of Marblehead for the new Roads, schools, police firehouse, and then the additional cost that it would cost to man those stations. Um, as it is now, we’re not able to handle that. Um, he also mentioned loss of control. We lose control by letting government and developers have control. Uh, it’s, it’s been shown in other towns it’s gonna happen here. It has happened here with Ted Moore and some of his buildings that he has done. And if anyone thinks to the woman who spoke, um, who worked for the town of Virginia or whatever, she was saying it, if she thinks that the town will not develop the moment this passes, or if it, if, if it does pass, she’s naive.

1:20:39 You guys wouldn’t be going through all that you’re going through with plans and this and everything else. If the plan was not to have this happen, is the moment that it passes. Um, additionally, the other woman who spoke about the additional cars, she is absolutely correct. The mandate has changed three times since inception. The main reason for this was to have less green, you know, um, footprint on our green space. It was to have less traffic when we didn’t fit the bill, what they wanted to do. We were then in other towns, were then gone from MBTA, uh, towns to adjacent towns and then so forth.

1:21:27 When they put in that little sidebar, they changed it so that way the cars, the people would have to live within a mile of said, uh, transportation, whether it be bus MBTA or whatnot. Then that changed. So the developments that you guys are planning on putting are not within those structures as well, or the plans? You are talking about 897 additional homes. The plans that you showed have at least two cars parking, right? So of course that’s two cars for 800, 7 97 units. They will leave a footprint, whether it’s going to the grocery store, whether it’s dropping off kid to school, going to work, and going and so forth.

1:22:13 So there is going to be pollution, traffic, road damage, additional infrastructures that we need to put up. It. It’s not as simple as everybody’s thinking is, oh yes, everyone’s gonna use the bus. The bus is empty. The bus has always been empty. There’s four people. I rode the bus one time when my car broke down and it was no one on it for a week that I was on there. So it’s, it’s ludicrous what you guys are asking us to do. So I ask, please, the town needs this. Please apply for the waiver. Thank you. Thank you

1:22:53 cosine. And then how many other hands do we have up? Uh, one more after the, okay. Um, Caroline, um, is there, Caroline, could you just state your full name for the record and street? Um, Carolyn ine. Okay. 30 street.

1:23:15 Go ahead and put this on the Warrenton Heaven and attempt to have a, another

1:23:22 town meeting that is respectful, um, with a better informed audience. Um, I think there’s a lot of advantages to having more middle class people living in town, which

1:23:44 kind of construction, multifamily construction that’s being enabled by a zoning bylaw changed, would make possible. Um, when I first moved to town way, way back when, um, there were, I can’t remember the statistics exactly, but about 30% of the town was single family housing. And now that has shifted so that it’s more like 50% or so is single family housing. So there are many fewer opportunities for people to move into town than there used to be. Um, so I think it is time that we contribute

1:24:29 to the welfare of the Commonwealth and to our own town by having a more mixed population. It’s certainly not going to be affordable by the state or the federal government’s definition of what the rental prices would be. This would be middle class people, um, joining us and using our town services as in our businesses, our restaurants, our churches, all of the organizations that make a town environment a richer one. And I, for one, am not very excited about spending my tax payer dollars on litigation.

1:25:16 We’ve spent enough money on litigation and I don’t see any value in doing more of it. I think, you know, as, as others have pointed out, this is a mandate. We’re not gonna escape this by protest or by litigation. And I’m not interested in wasting my money in that way. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. And I think there’s one more online. I’ll just, I’ll just kind of wrap up ‘cause there’s one more online and then we can get back to the room. Oh, two more. Okay. So, Um, Allison. Allison, Oh, sorry. Cheryl. Busted first. Sorry. Cheryl. Hi. Yes. Um, I, I don’t know if my question is relevant,

1:26:05 uh, at this point, but I feel like I want to ask, I’ve been hearing about this for, um, a few months now. I have a business on Tioga Way, and if this does pass, uh, I’m just wondering what buildings are being spoken about as being underutilized? Do we know that? I’m just concerned that, you know, I, I have this business that I’ve acquired for about five years now, and I need to know if this is something that I’m gonna need to uproot. Sorry, Cheryl, could you just state your last name? Yeah. Address? Bruske. B-R-U-S-K-E-T. Okay. And you’re, and, uh, you live in town, like just Your street? Uh, I have a, this on Tioga Way. Okay. So are you not a resident?

1:26:51 Uh, I’m not a resident of Marblehead, but I Okay. But the question, the question is about on i I underutilized property on table. So I’m Hearing that the zoning is talking about, uh, places on Tioga Way, uh, and two other places in Marblehead. And I, I’m just wondering what, what underutilized business buildings are being spoken out?

1:27:17 Not relevant. Now on record, I think we could answer this offline. If you want to reach out to one of Us. The, the plan is on, um, record at the town clerk. It’s also available online, so you can look at specifically where you’re located and, and what the overlay Is. I called the planner. I’ve called and I’ve called and, and I, Cheryl, if you want to, if you wanna email one of us, happy to help, you can follow up, follow that up. You could email Fox, Fox d marblehead.org, feel free, we’ll do it offline. Sorry, which it’s, say again. It’s go to marblehead.org and you can find all of our website or emails. Excuse me. What is your email Address? You can do, just check online. Go to marblehead.org and you can check it on. I’d be happy to. My name’s Dan Fox. And your name Again? Dan Fox. All right. Thank you Cheryl. Um,

1:28:04 and was there one more online?

1:28:09 Oh, that good? Yes. Allison. Allison.

1:28:15 Hey, it’s Allison Westshore Dive. Um, thanks for having this guys, and thanks for, for doing it at the high school so that more people, um, could come. I think that’s admirable of you. I know it’s not easy to sit there for these types of meetings. I’ve been through myself. Um, I, I just, my recollection is that it’s around, um, maybe just a couple comments. My recollection is I think it’s around 10 or 15% of the, the units that would be affordable housing. I think we need to be clear on that. 10. Um, it’s 10, 10 someone, someone also, right? So, so when we consider this, you know, the affordable housing option, if there’s really only 10 or 15% that have to be affordable housing, it, it kind of defeats that, um, that comment.

1:29:00 But I think also someone mentioned, you know, the strain on transportation. Absolutely. I would agree that, you know, it’s, it’s very, very crowded. Um, I used to live on Orange Street at the end of the bus route and it was always empty, um, to and from every, every single day. Um, but I think the one other thing I just wanna make sure we are considering and thinking about are the children that would, would obviously come with these, whether it’s affordable housing or not, that doesn’t matter. Um, with 800 units, even if half of them had only one kid, which they probably would have at least two. Um, that’s a lot of additional children for the district, um, to make sure that we have a place for in our schools.

1:29:47 And someone mentioned that all, um, all school, all town departments have been mentioned, um, or had been conferred with to make sure it would be manageable. Um, I also sit in the school committee. I’m not sure that we were, were part of any of those discussions around whether or not we would, we would even have, have a place, um, to house that many additional, additional students. Um, so I just wanna make sure those two things are, um, kept in the forefront, particularly when we talking about, you know, money and costs. And thanks so much again, guys, for having us and, and kudos to everybody there. That, that spoke takes a lot. Okay, thank you. Um, sir,

1:30:25 go ahead. Jimmy, pull She avenue. Can you hear me? Yes. Little bit closer, Jimmy. It’s, it’s, I can tell they’re not hearing it. Jimmy. Full Chief Avenue. That’s, thank you. Can everybody hear me now? Yeah. Thank you Brett. I’m glad. I bet you’re glad you beat me right now. I really do. ‘cause I don’t envy you, but you all know why I am here because I am against the three A mandate and I implore you to do the right thing and seek the exemption at the modest cost. It may occur in the town, the aftermath. We’ll deal with it then. That being said, I actually do have a question. Instead of a dissertation, can anyone on the select board or that works for the town as manager,

1:31:12 tell me a finite number, what grant money we have lost and what grant money we have gained? That’s my question. Thank you. So the conversation on that piece has moved completely because of the ruling with the Supreme Judicial Court. So, um, I mean at one point that was the issue. I think the issue now is that, that, that it is, I believe, you know, any discretionary grant at this point and, and goes beyond that, is that the attorney general has, um, at least stated the intention to enforce compliance through suing like, you know, the town of Milton. That was, um, initiated by the Attorney General. So, um, we had a whole, uh,

1:32:01 detailed slideshow last, uh, last town meeting that the finance director can, um, we can get to you. Is there, is there any more clarity around, you know, the funding penalties or, you know, is it any discretionary at this point that, um, that they could withhold? Or is it still tethered to, you know, specific ones? After the ruling? There’s, there’s two categories of grants that are in jeopardy. The first are the listed ones, which started with the three or four in the statute, and then that list was expanded. The letters that towns are receiving now are stating that any discretionary grants are in jeopardy.

1:32:47 Any that are discretion, not mandatory, the discretionary grants, anything would be in jeopardy, um, if due to non-compliance. Okay. Okay. So, so I’m understanding this correctly, that non-compliance means a knee in the neck from the Attorney General and Maura Healey. No longer are there just three rants that you would be penalized under. Last I looked at was like 19. Now there’s two layers of grants. So when does it stop for us as a town? When do we say enough is enough? Apply for the exemption and see where it goes. Thank you. Alright, thank you.

1:33:31 How many, how many more people would like to speak? Just so I can, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 at least. Okay. So, um, you know, if you’re, if if you’re, if somebody has already made your comment, you know, um, we’ve heard it so, you know, you can say it, but, um, there’s a lot to, there’s a lot of people to get through. So, um, go ahead. Okay, thank you Bill Keeny to Beverly Ave. First of all, I wanna say I’m impressed with the legal minds in this room and the complex legal discussion we just had. I’m also embarrassed to say I didn’t understand most of it. I just, for the record, I do not support pursuing a legal claim for an exemption for many

1:34:17 of the reasons I’ve already mentioned, but I also think it’s just too costly of distraction and we’re gonna lose. I’d rather us spend our time focusing on getting the Marblehead compliance plan approved on May 5th.

1:34:35 On May 5th, if my understanding is correct on May 5th, we’ll be voting on a zoning capacity. We will, we’ll be voting on a zoning change only, not a housing plan. No, the state is requiring us to expand our zoning capacity of multifamily housing. They’re asking us to develop a plan that’s good for Marblehead. And the Marblehead compliance plan is an excellent plan. It’s very well crafted. I want to thank the planners for putting it together. It identifies districts that already have multifamily and mixed development. It’s a modest increase in zoning capacity for multi-family housing. Multi-family housing is less expensive

1:35:21 and environmentally more responsible than single family housing Zoning change. And this is what people have to understand. Zoning change is essential, the essential first step to addressing the housing crisis in Marblehead. We need to understand that, and we need to accept that the zoning challenge allows property owners to build or convert to multi-family housing without needing a special zoning permit. For those of you who worry about that, I also want you to remember that the plan keeps in mind that the billing must meet all of the Marblehead building regulations. The Marblehead compliance plan allows appropriate control over location, design, and pace of development. Don’t assume that suddenly the streets will be impacted

1:36:09 with hundreds of new cars and schools will be over-enrolled. If we pass this rezoning plan, we will have enough control to implement development in a planful way to to protect infrastructure, our impact on the schools and to, and to preserve the physical character of the community. The model head compliance plan is also a good partnership with the state and having a good partnership with the state is not a bad thing. We may need the money from them, we will need the money from them. Couple more things and I’ll turn it over. Mr. Diano recently texted that he’s fighting compliance to protect the Marblehead taxpayer. And Mr. D plan is a good man. He’s a, he’s a caring, compassionate man,

1:36:55 but he’s wrong on that strategy. Two things will happen if we fail to comply. First, the tax burden on Marblehead residents will increase, Marblehead will lose state grant funds to other North Shore communities that are, that are in compliance. Think about how you’re gonna feel when that happens. Second, the Supreme Court ruled. The state has the authority to require the zoning and the power to enforce it. If we say no to this plan, we’ll be forced to develop another plan. And while we’re developing that plan, we’ll be losing time to apply for grants. If we pursue the legal strategy to not comply, which is what the other side is saying, we, if we pursue the legal strategy to not comply, we’ll be subject to a ton of legal fees and we’ll lose

1:37:41 because there is no case for exemption. No is not an option, no is a rabbit hole that will hurt the residents of Marblehead. No. One last thing, one last thing. We need to end the fighting. We need to come together as a community in no means no. We need to address the lack of housing choice in the high price of housing. And marblehead the solution starts with passing the m the marblehead rezoning plan. Then let’s get busy securing grants for infrastructure, traffic control and harbor protection. And as neighbors, as good neighbors, let’s come together to find a way to support a housing plan that meets our realistic hopes and addresses our legitimate fears.

1:38:29 We need more housing choices and better pricing options to meet the needs of our residents, particularly our seniors who want to downsize people who work here but can’t afford to live here. And our own children who grow up, grow up here and wanna start their own families here and can’t afford to more housing choices. Good for marblehead. Don’t litigate. Vote yes on May 5th. Thank you.

1:39:00 Um, I see an Ian in, um, in the back. Um, I think you stepped ma’am in the Yep. Yes, you I speak. Oh, sorry. I did, I did. I didn’t know you were. Um, I I, I could take you after I take her. I just called on her. I just recognized her, sir. But, um, just if you just gimme a moment. Thank you Carrie Laughin Clipper way. So I have to say, I don’t usually do this, but I’m a little confused. We had a vote regarding three A at town meeting in 2024. Three A was voted down right in case anyone didn’t hear three A was voted down.

1:39:45 So I’ve been sitting here tonight confused, listening to the discussions respectfully and listening to the concerns that people have about affordable housing, about housing for workforce. Im, you know, impact on the community. This discussion is about the mandate, which is a zoning change that allows the densification in the town of Marblehead. It’s not just a zoning change, so let’s just do it. When you do it, the development comes, you change the zoning, it allows for development to change by right within that zoning area. I’m in commercial real estate,

1:40:31 so I understand the impact from zoning changes on communities.

1:40:39 So you have to be prepared if you’re going to change the zoning, be prepared for what’s coming next. And the development can start tomorrow. It doesn’t start 20 years from now. So I’m confused that we’re sitting here discussing yes for three A or no for three A. We had that discussion, it happened at town meeting, and again, the town meeting vote was for no for three A. So shouldn’t be the question that we’re here tonight to talk about. Shouldn’t it be about what are the next steps? And I listened to the guest speaker and I was hearing next steps of all about filing for an injunction.

1:41:24 And then I listened to folks get up and say, I work for the world’s biggest law firm. We’re not gonna win. Damn right? We’re not gonna win if you don’t try, if you don’t file.

1:41:41 So the question here should be, are we going to file an injunction or are we not going to file for an injunction? And I’ve heard mixed messages about if you don’t file, you’re certainly not gonna succeed if you don’t file. But if you do file, you at least preserve the potential down the road when there is potentially funding from this to get some of the funding. Because currently it’s not funded.

1:42:12 So I’m here because I support that the select board Move ahead. Listen to the vote of the town of Marblehead. The people that were at town meeting that voted on this, when it came up for a vote, it was voted down. So the responsible thing to do, the obligation of the select board should be the next step. The discussion we should be having tonight is do we move forward and file for an injunction or do we lay on the side and say, we’re gonna fail, we’re gonna fail, we’re gonna fail if you don’t file. So I’m here to say, the only thing to do next is I support filing for an injunction.

1:43:09 Good evening, David Patton, Lee Street, Marblehead. I’d just like to point out a couple of things that don’t get mentioned very often.

1:43:19 In 1970, we had over 22,000 residents in this town. Today we have barely 20,000 residents in this town. We have lost 10% of our population over the last 55 years. This town is not growing. This town is not overcrowded. And I also know because I’ve paid attention to this, that these, that, that, that the houses that could be built in this space, in this space now there’s over 300 units. So the maximum additional amount of units that could possibly ever be built is about 600.

1:44:04 And let’s do a small piece of math because nobody talks about the revenue opportunity from these new houses. So let’s just pick a number. Let’s say that every single one of these, uh, units hypothetically would be worth about $750,000. And our mill rate in this town is about $900 per, um, per hundred thousand of assessed value. So 600 times 900 is, you know, over $4 million a year of new property tax revenue that this town would receive. So when people talk about, when people talk about, you know,

1:44:50 costs of infrastructure and all those other kinds of things, which frankly I don’t think would, would incur. And I know that our schools are 17% undersubscribed. So even if we had a few more kids, there’s plenty of room for them. But in additional $4 million a year growing, if we ever got to maximum build out, would cover an awful lot of costs and contribute to an awful lot of other services in this town, which I know this town budget desperately needs. And when it comes to cars, I’d like to point out, I looked it up, we have about 1.7 cars per household in this town. And there’s no reason to think that smaller homes would actually generate any more cars.

1:45:37 But let’s go back to the population. If you don’t have more people, you don’t have more drivers. It doesn’t matter if somebody owns three cars and puts ‘em in a garage somewhere. If you don’t have licensed drivers, they can’t be driving the cars. Thank you very much. I support three A-I-I-I-I do not want us to go for an exemption and I do not want us to spend that money. I want us to spend it on other things. Thank you. Thank you. I see it. The first hand I saw on the back, um, uh, woman. I think it’s like a brown sweater.

1:46:30 Hi. Thank you Susan Petoskey Brookhouse Drive. Um, I just, in listening to tonight’s discussion, a few things I have to say. This discussion and this decision should be made at town meeting. This is a, excuse me, excuse me. This is a decision of the magnitude that is made at open town meeting in the town of Marblehead. Open town meeting has never had a provision that an article can only be put on the warrant one year and never again. I can cite several articles

1:47:19 that have come up year after year after year and been passed at some point. So this would be a change to our bylaws, which would be more legal expenses. The other thing I wanna state is that my recollection of town meeting last year was that this was voted down not by a huge mandate, by a very narrow margin. And that one of the many reasons that people were being persuaded by was that there was an act of lawsuit be pending and that lawsuit was not yet settled.

1:48:06 That was a major factor in the arguments against this article. Those that given the ve narrow margin and that large part of the opposition, I feel that it is right for it to come to town meeting again. Also because our bylaws allow for articles to come again, as for the other no vote, which is being thrown around, that was not a town meeting vote. That was a vote by the select board, not by town meeting, not with an open discussion

1:48:52 where all of the new facts and information are presented to the town. There is a lot more information now about what is being required about the legal implications and there are financial implications which are not usually part of a zoning change, but in this case there are significant ones and the finance committee should be responding to them given the change in the legal issues and given the change in the environment For all of these reasons, this demands a hearing at town meeting and not in a small venue under

1:49:41 the, the operation of this town and the bylaws of this town. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you very much.

1:49:56 Does somebody

1:50:02 that’s on my back, David Reed, one 12 Front Street.

1:50:10 I’m here tonight to kind of find out where we’re going with this. And the reason I say that is because we’re supposedly 900 units, approximately 900 units and we’re supposed to have 27 acres. And if we have 27 acres, we are supposed to have a minimum of 15 units built, 15 units times 27 acres is 405 units. What do we do with the other 500 units? That 500 units tells me there’s no upper limit. We can build whatever we want to build, right? We can build on that same acreage, they could put in a hundred units. They don’t have to put in 15, they have to, and nobody’s gonna foolish enough to take a multimillion dollar piece of property

1:50:57 and put in 15 units. You’re not gonna do it. You’re gonna end up with a hundred units or more right now. Batini restaurant over in Salem, right behind, uh, Salem State, uh, college, they’re building 250 units on an acre, right? So where do we end up? How high do we go if we end up with 27 acres with a hundred units per acre? You’ve got 2,700 homes in town, not 900, and there’s no end, upper end. They’ve got a right to build and they can build a hundred units on an acre easily. So if you could wait a second, if you’ve got 2,700, uh, times four people, you know how many people that is? It is 10,800 people.

1:51:43 It doesn’t make any sense if you limit it to 900, which you can’t do, right? You got the, the numbers are a lot smaller, but if you’ve got 2,700, excuse me, 2,700 homes that gives you 5,400 kids going to school gives you 5,400 cars on the street, what are you thinking? Where does this end? Sir? You’re laughing. Huh? You’re not laughing because you know it’s true. No, I know, I know that’s not accurate. Well, okay. Actually that’s why I’m here to find out. I’d Like to clarify the record. Yeah, it’s a, it’s a, it’s a, it’s a fair question and there’s a lot of people where does it end A lot of confusion around it. Where does it end? So the projects that I keep hearing referenced in Swamp Scott, that

1:52:28 for everybody to know is a 40 B project that they went through, um, that tried to go to the special zoning board. This is not A 40 B, we’re talking about The project that you referenced is A 40 B project in Swamp Scott by the train station that I No, no, no, no, no. I’m talking, talking about bikini’s restaurant over behind Salem State College. Oh, okay. They, sorry, I misunderstood because there has been a lot of talk about that project specifically. And right now What I’m, I don’t care about the project, I’m just saying that particular acre, they got 250 units on it. I’m trying and I just gimme one moment. I’m trying to answer your question. So 40 B allows for a developer of right to depart. I’m talking About A 40 B 40 B. You’re asking, I’m trying to explain the answer.

1:53:15 I mean, you, you could leave without an answer. I could explain it. The requirements under, um, section three A are still subject for a developer to build on a property in that, in that zoned area, there is height restrictions, there is parking restrictions, there is setback restrictions, all of the same code and, and, um, and controls you can apply to everything in that zoning area. But unlike 40 B projects that those do not, and today, tomorrow, and forevermore, unless it’s repealed, any developer can come in and do as you sit we’re referencing build, why wouldn’t they build five stories and all this?

1:54:01 They can do that as long, so long as they meet the threshold for the affordable housing density that’s required and the town has not met its 10% affordable housing requirement. So the control on, to answer your question, the control on, you know, the, the scale of what these developers can, can do and the density, the control is in the building code itself that is still subject to ev the same restrictions that everybody else is. So, But ex you, you’re exactly right, but you can still build a hundred units, three floors. No, Sorry sir. Can I just clarify? If you read, if you, if if you, in in the, in the zoning it allows up to 20 units per acre done.

1:54:49 Now when you go through the model with height restrictions, setbacks, open space parking requirements, if you look in each different zone, I don’t have it in front of me. It’s about 15.4. So actually what what you’re saying unfortunately is, is is not true. It is a maximum. They have a right to build no, they, they have the right for up to 20 units per acre and, And it has to comply and it has To comply with underlying zoning setback, open space two to one parking. I’m happy to, again, I, I’m sort of a geek when it comes to these things. I’m happy to sit down and and walk you through that as well. But there’s what, Why wasn’t it ever said it was a minimum uh, maximum of 20. It is, it’s right, it’s right, it’s right in the Warren article. It is unfortunately, but I’m happy again, that’s, I think there is some miscon. There is. I think that’s a great question.

1:55:35 ‘cause there is some misconception that you can do a lot more similar to martinis that cannot happen in marble hood. Well The other misconception is affordability. So we can, so we can, we’ve I think we’ve talked about that 10% for six units or more. Yeah. Okay. 10%. 10%. But everybody in town is talking, we’re gonna have affordable housing. Well we, I we, we agree. So there are some misconceptions out there that we, that I think that we should all clarify together. It’s gonna be expensive housing no matter what. Yeah, we can, yeah, I think tonight we’re trying to discuss as, as about whether or not we go to an injunction. Thank you though, sir. Thank you For the comment. Thank you sir. Sir, new must have been before Had a knee replacement, so it’ll take me Time.

1:56:19 Alright, uh, first off, thanks you guys. You’ve been through a lot tonight. I know already. I’ll try to keep my comments, uh, brief. Kurt James Norman Street Barnett. Um, I think the decision tonight is basically, I, I think someone kind of alluded this before. Um, it’s really about whether the select board supports the underlying bylaw, the zoning amendment, um, and the multifamily housing that will be permitted under underneath. Um, I’m speaking tonight as a resident but also as a member of the housing production committee. Um, and that committee, the, the implementation committee is, is tasked with implementing the recommendations of the town’s master housing plan, which was adopted by the select board and the planning board in 2020. And for anybody who’s read it, they know that one

1:57:05 of the primary recommendations of the master plan is to adopt more flexible zoning that allows multifamily transit oriented housing. So that’s actually a recommendation that the select board indirectly has adopted as one of its priorities. And that is essentially what three A accomplishes, which is just smart growth housing that allows multifamily housing as of right. Very similar, almost identical to the smart growth overlay districts that we already have in town. And the reason I mention that, um, that, that our smart growth overlay district by law was adopted in 2 0 0 9, so that’s over 15 years ago. We have two parcels or two areas. It’s not just a a one land parcel.

1:57:51 Two parcels, uh, in town are identified as buildable for multifamily housing as a matter of right, almost identical to three A right now those two parcels are vacant. And so you have to ask yourself if passing multifamily housing law building as a matter of right, is gonna all like overnight result in a thousand new units, why haven’t they done that already on these vacant lots that are already permitted under our smart growth advisory overlay district? You just kind of have to ask yourself one of the, so one of the, one of the lots is, is the bank parking lot downtown on Pleasant Street? Uh, the other is a very large parcel that, uh, general Glover, the old general Glover restaurant sits

1:58:39 on in Swamp Scott. I mean, what an ideal place to develop a huge multifamily project. It’s permitted to do that as a matter of, right, it’s just sitting there. In fact, I think the owner has been, um, fined for, for uh, the maintaining a derelict building. So I, anyway, I just, you know, we’ve had 40 beef since 1968. Um, we’ve had two projects, um, one on Humphrey Street that people Oliver’s Pond people will drive by it, you know, all these reference to these massive, you know, places that they’re building in, in Swampscott and Salem and Revere. I mean nobody would even recognize that as a large multifamily project, but that’s the kind of projects that are likely to be built. Um, the other other, one of the thing I wanted to stress, people are worried about, uh, our, you know, this,

1:59:26 this potentially changing the character of the town. Um, I’m a fourth generation marble header, so I do care, you know, I went to school here, went to Children’s Island sailing camp since I was 10. Um, I, I think that the trends are, you know, you’ve heard some of the statistics about the demographics, families, the number of families in town is going down, our school population is going down. So if we wanna preserve the character of the town, we need to provide more opportunities for multifamily housing that folks can afford and their families can afford and will repopulate our school. So thank you for your time. Thank You.

2:00:03 Um, alright. In the back, um, I see a black shirt with your hand up with a hat on ma’am.

2:00:20 Hi, um, my name is Susan McInnis. I live at, uh, Bayview Road 39 Bayview Road. First I wanted to today thank you for the select board for having three A on the agenda so that we can discuss this. Uh, secondly, I would like to urge the select board to sub submit an exemption based on the mass state auditor findings and determinations from her department. Um, lastly, I’d like to say that I think three A is a Trojan horse. Um, we keep hearing about just, it’s just a zoning change and we know that if this just a zoning change, what will follow will be building. It’s just what will happen. Um, I’m concerned about the shoehorning of state requirements, um, that will happen, um, with us just passing three A and waiting for something to happen. Um, I’m kind of concerned that just, um,

2:01:06 at last night’s planning board meeting, there was, uh, an article that’s going to be on the warrant. It’s article 24, it’s for the, um, accessory dwelling units. And there was um, basically some adjustments to that, that accessory dwelling unit bylaw that we voted for a couple of town meetings ago. I’m concerned that if we don’t adopt that accessory dwelling unit by, by law change, that we are submitting on the warrant for this meeting. That if we don’t vote for that we are going to be stuck with the state, um, default. And similarly, if we, we vote for three a, now what happens two years, three years down when the state adjusts the minimum requirement for the land to be handed over or to be pinpointed from 1% minimum to something like 5%.

2:01:53 And so then by default the state, the state requirements will take over where we voted them in basically a path. So that’s my concern and I just wanted to make it noted. Thank you. Thank you.

2:02:07 Okay. Hey John, I’ll Be quick, I promise. Uh, John Ville, 20 Stanley Road Marblehead Mass. Um, some proponents said that the, that the cost would be about $4 million in additional revenue when the projects are actually built. He just roughly estimated 600 units. So I could have did the math there. I said if you had 600 additional units and you only had one kid per unit, the cost per Marblehead school systems, what, 20 to 21,000 per pupil right now, roughly 12.6 million in costs versus 4 million in revenue. So I think the conversations have really gotta be about if we do move forward with projects like this, what conversations are coming on with the school committee that makes this even a feasible option. So if you’re generating more cost then possible revenue,

2:02:53 then this is definitely an unfounded mandate and if it is an unfounded mandate, then we should probably join the other five towns and hire these guys. Okay.

2:03:06 Okay. Hey, I’m sure we have somewhere in line. Okay, thanks. Yes, come forward please.

2:03:17 Well, I’ll say goodnight, but you might know that painfully So good evening and thank you for entertaining this. Uh, my name is Jean Lampkin. I live on Devereux Street and I um, have to your good instructions Sharon Nunan been trying to keep track of all the things I was going to say that have been said. Appreciate that. So if you bear with me, I, I may skip around a little bit. Um, I initially was coming trying to understand what is the point of having this discussion in this forum and what decision and thank you for laying all of that out. And where I will conclude is where I’ll start. Um, this notion of filing to join a lawsuit for an injunction is a complicated, fascinating topic.

2:04:02 It was interesting to watch two esteemed lawyers debate back and forth and half the vocab is new for me tonight. So I will begin by saying I hope we are not going to take a definitive vote on something that we have jazz hands feasibility as to the time, the cost and the implications at nine something at night after this lengthy discussion. So wherever this goes, I encourage you to thank us all and get a good night’s sleep and take a deliberation as a select board in the light of day, possibly with the benefit of a proposal from your esteemed provider who will provide those estimates of hours over days,

2:04:49 over weeks, over months as to what it may cost to participate in this possibly salvation adventure. So that’s where I stand on injunction. And I do think vocabulary is really important and I have noted that in the course of this evening, people have asked if you could just please file for the waiver. People have said, could we just get the exception? And because we’re in this beautiful library, I’m just gonna say, can you tell us, is there a hall pass with this? Because what you described sounds a lot more murky and challenging than a waiver. An exemption, a hall pass is it’ll be easy. Get us out of this. So please take a pause.

2:05:35 Please tell us when this decision will be made. Consider the way other people may want to give information to this. So when we choose to say yes, pursue the injunction, it’s eyes wide open and it’s cost well understood to the degree that anyone in a professional service capacity can project that. Trust me, I was a consultant for 30 years, I know where that goes. So that’s my view on where we stand with injunction. And I hope you are able to sleep tonight to wake up another day to decide on the rest of tonight. I can’t count in these crowds, but I suspect we have about 50 to 40% of the population of people

2:06:20 who would normally be at town meeting where I believe 80% of this conversation has been discussed. Tonight’s discussion is so much appropriate in town meeting the merits of this should, is the car parking well covered? Have we considered this? Is this plan really appropriate for us? And as well stated by Susan and IX mine out, we have a rich history of repeating acts and, and warrant and articles at town meeting. And I will note as she did that, the salient comment last May was the prudent thing would be to wait to see where the court decides on ag versus the town of Milton.

2:07:06 And the court decide unequivocally with ag who said, I’m gonna be aggressive with my constitutional act and I’m gonna bring everybody into compliance. And when I looked on the mask ofv website today, nearly 99% of towns com of the 177 communities are either toe on the start line or well on their way to compliance, including Marblehead, which has a designation of interim compliance. So we should finish the conversation. The conversation should happen May 5th with the details of the unfunded mandate, which didn’t quite have the full audit, but the town, the Commonwealth owes some data and maybe they will by May we should have that discussion in the right forum. So the 300 some odd other people who should be part of

2:07:55 that discussion are in the room. Their voices are heard. And when the vote is cast, if there are only 31 more votes this time like there was last time and we vote no, then we will reap the consequences. But the vote belongs in town meeting all the members of town who come to town meetings should go. And the last thing I will urge you is back in February, the current reported that there were going to be five information sessions about this topic. I don’t know what happened to those. I would like us to continue to have them. There was one listed that should have been from yesterday. I don’t know if that just vanished. There’s another one supposed to happen March 31st, another one supposed to happen April 7th.

2:08:40 All of these good people should be able to go to those and have the deliberation and ask the quality questions and get answers so that we are not sitting here with not the town meeting quorum, not the right place to be and not really sure what decisions should be made at this late hour and by which governing bodies. So thank you very much for your time, for being here, for listening to me. You are volunteers and saints and I hope that we find our path forward. Can I just clarify, there have been three meetings. There was one last night and I think there are two left. So if you can’t find they will happen. They will happen. And they have happened. Yeah. Thank you. Yep.

2:09:26 Okay. Um, how many, how many folks are left? It’s closed. It’s, the warrant is closed. You can’t discuss this at town meeting this year. Yeah, we, the warrant is closed. Correct. If you’d like to make a comment, could you please raise your hand still? It’s nine 20. We’ve heard really thoughtful, articulate, substantive arguments on both sides. Um, you know, we do have a meeting the rest of us and we, you know, we’d like to get collected together. Um, so who still feels that they really need to be heard? I see one right there. Is there somebody online? Two Online. Two online. All right, let’s go online. Who is it then? We have one gentle one. Okay.

2:10:13 Mazar Brittany. M Mazar. Brittany Azar. Brittany MIUs. Oh, sorry, Brittany. Sorry Brittany. That’s okay. Jersey Street. Um, I just have a question and I apologize if this was brought up. I did have to drop for a second. Um, but I know that there’s been a lot of discussion about like large buildings and that type of restriction in these areas. Is there any, like, is it safe to assume that if a single family home was up for sale, a developer could purchase that home and make it three units within that one home?

2:10:52 Do you wanna speak to the density? Sure. I mean, I think in theory, I’m not sure how many single families there are in the zones, only a couple, but it all is driven by the acreage and the, the amount of, of that you can fit into that. There’s, there’s three or four or five or seven variables that come into place. There’s height, there’s acreage, there is setbacks, there’s parking restrictions, there’s open space restrictions. So, and, and what’s that? And so I think it’s hard to say without knowing the exact, without knowing the exact lot. But if they had an acre house, if they had acre of lot, lot and a single family on Pleasant Street, then they could definitely put three units. I don’t know of any acre. So Say one house was for I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt you. You’re good. So say one house is for sale, could they then go to the neighbor

2:11:38 and be like, Hey, we’d like to buy your house and give them an offer and then try like, I guess I’m just concerned because I don’t think that there is a,

2:11:48 a desire to exclude people from coming to our town, but obviously there is, and I understand that the population is supposedly less now than it used to be, but like seems like we are at max capacity. But it also seems like there might be some other incentives here. I know though Marblehead Housing Coalition was formed, um, some members on that coalition might have some ulterior motives to paying a law firm to come around to homes in town trying to push this mandate. Like, I guess my concern is what is to protect us from developers coming in and taking over a market that is already hard to get into. Like people are already struggling to be able to afford single family homes. And so now someone can buy a single family home

2:12:35 and then separate it, rent out each unit for, you know, $3,000 a pop and now you have like triple what the mortgage payment would’ve been for someone that could have afforded like a middle ground home. So Brittany, I would, I would encourage you to attend one of the, the open, open meetings that the planning board is holding. ‘cause those are good questions. I think that the planning board and our consultant did a great job and taking care of a lot of that, our underlying zone zoning still is in play. This is an overlay and that there are a lot of plays that would have to be made that you’re talking about in the hypothetical for those types of things to happen. Yeah. But I would encourage you to look at the zoning because I think it is very well done and pretty restrictive to prevent a lot of what you’re talking about there. Okay. Yeah, because I mean, I definitely care about the preservation of this town.

2:13:22 I feel like a lot we all do of people are saying that, you know, these new structures would be in line with that. But I think like the preservation of the town already stopped when we ended community schools. And like, I grew up in this town my whole life, multiple generations. Like, I, I feel like you’re not preserving this town. And that is my, my opinion. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks. Okay,

2:13:48 sir, make sure she actually said,

2:13:54 I’m Peter Hammond. I live on 2 0 1 Washington Street, and I like to make a comment, you know, because probably some of the places where they want to build is like to yoga way Pleasant Street. They’re already built up. This going to ensue like, uh, eminent domain as well as toga way where you got a lot of businesses. Are they gonna be all forced out of there destroying a lot of, uh, livelihoods and jobs. Another good reason why we should vote for an exemption, Just to be clear, there’s no, this is about private people purchasing land. There’s, there’s no nothing in front of us saying that the town of Marblehead or the state is gonna do eminent domain. Yeah. I’m sorry. I can’t hear you very well. I’m sorry. This is, this is about private citizens, developers potentially buying this land.

2:14:41 This is not about the town of Marblehead or the state of Massachusetts taking over land. Just, just to be clear. Thank you, chair. Yep. I think there’s one person. Okay. We, we have one right, A hand on line. Joel Leiden. Joel Leiden. Yep. Hi, can you hear me okay? Yes. Yeah. Hi, Joel Leiden, 43 Cedar Street. Um, good evening. I know you guys are hoping I’m gonna be very quick. Um, I’m here because I’m a concerned resident regarding this three A, um, MBTA Communities Act. Um, the continued efforts to push this into our town have got to stop. The proposal has already been brought to vote twice at town.

2:15:27 Meeting in our community, made its position clear both times. Yet here we are again talking about it again. And as someone else alluded it or actually said, it is very confusing as to why we’re still here. Um, I understand this is being presented as a mandate, but we also know now that there is, um, excuse me, room for compliance exemption. We can file for a compliance exemption. I strongly urge you to take that path. Some have expressed concerns about the potential costs of fighting this, but I have to ask, what are the long term costs gonna be if we don’t fight it? What’s the financial impact going to be

2:16:12 on the average homeowner if we’re already stretched infrastructure wise, we are beyond our capacity. Like, I don’t think anybody, if I asked you guys, you can’t tell me what the effect is going to be for the average homeowner. Right? The financial impact. Um, no one seems to have any clear answers and there’s a lot of assumptions being made tonight. But what’s certain is we’ve already said no twice for anyone who believes we have the space to absorb this kind of a development. We do not. Our schools are already overcrowded. Um, our teachers are managing more than they should have to. We just underwent a huge strike in town, you guys,

2:16:57 it ripped this community to shreds telling them that they’re gonna be responsible for now 10 more students. They weren’t just fighting for more pay. They’re fighting because they’re overworked, doing them a disservice. The same goes for our roads, our public safety, our water systems. We’re at our limit. Yes, this is the state initiative, but there is an option to file for an exemption. And I hope you choose to stand with what the residents have already made their voices heard. You guys should really be standing by that and I hope that you do. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.

2:17:36 Okay. Um, ladies and gentlemen, we have heard from 28 residents now. We definitely have a lot to think on. Um, more than enough to think on. I will still allow comment, but please keep in mind it is getting late. We have a meeting and a lot has been said already. So thank you. Thanks. I just, My name is Christine Nu Hillside Avenue. Um, everything I wanted to say has been said by others, so I won’t go over my prepared comments. I just wanted to respond to very specific issues. Um, the unfunded mandate, I’m a professional planner. I can tell you how much work it is required

2:18:22 to do a zoning, uh, change. It requires a lot of staff. The ability to make maps, to read them a GIS system. It, you know, there’s things you need to do, but it’s not that costly. If you have the staff. Uh, under Becky Curran, there was no staff. There was just her. That was just the whole town planning department was one person. So the, that, that part of, of rezoning required a lot of work. And she asked for technical assistance and she got it. So, what I think is gonna happen, as you have explained, if we file for, um, un you know, under the guise of unfunded matter, and if we, if we file

2:19:09 after discovery, the lawyers will look at, will have expert witnesses come and evaluate what has been done. They will interview people, including Becky, all the people who were involved in this, they will look at what they did, um, and compare it to what they got from the state we got from the state, which was technical assistance and another grant. And then they will say, wow, that’s pretty equivalent. No one funded mandate here. So that is going to be their decision in knowing this in advance. And of course I can’t know everything, but, um, I just can’t see why we would go on this battle for moral reasons or ideological or to voice our courage.

2:19:57 Um, while, uh, paying for all of this not being able to access, um, grants and so on. All, all the, the costs that have been listed before. But besides that, the, the market issues that were raised were very interesting and I agree with, I forget who made them that. Um, it’s not mentioned enough. Whatever, the revenue from the additional housing, which will take a while to come,

2:20:28 will be severely needed. And there are no big boom that’s gonna happen after pass passing three A. Why is it, you know, there are no developers right now lining up at the, at the doors of the town just waiting for that opportunity. Um, ‘cause they can do under 40 B much more than what three A allows and they haven’t. Um, so all, all the development is going to, uh, swamps got and, uh, Salem and Beverly,

2:21:02 nobody is rushing to do it here. Not true. It is true. Um, so it, and it’s been true for a long time. So it it, it’s worth weighing what is being lost by going through this red herring compared to what compliance would win us. You know, this is also for protecting taxpayers money.

2:21:30 Um, and I just want to say also this issue of how much, uh, will it cost to develop versus a much more, um, cost. It will be incurred by the town. This is fiscal issue that is debated constantly around all cities and towns.

2:21:52 Uh, what’s the balance? You know, what, what will be required of the town to take care of whatever improvements are needed, plus school, sorry, um, versus property taxes coming in. And to that effect, uh, Newbury, uh, Milton Mansfield and Medfield and West Newbury, sorry, commissioned economic impact analyses. And they have all found that not complying, that complying with, uh, MBTA communities would have a positive impact on municipal finances. Finances. So it’s worth con consulting those fiscal impact analysis. And, um, and then this has been said before,

2:22:40 but you know, the zoning right now in Marblehead is three stories high, which I personally think is not enough. But if you have, um, uh, concerns about changing the character and looking like Beverly, uh, this won’t happen. You know, the, the zoning mount has to be restricted to three floors and two parking spaces per unit, which is something else I don’t agree with. But, you know, it’s in the zoning. So all of this makes huge development impossible right now. Um, and it’s, it’s a much easier way to go 40 b ‘cause you can have a higher density. So, and this has happened twice in the town’s history. So, um, so in conclusion,

2:23:27 ‘cause I know you, you wanna go, um, do not go through that rent herring of the unfunded mandate because it was in fact funded and it will be that decision at the end. And the other one is be there May five and vote Yes. Thank you.

2:23:48 Nobody online. Okay. Okay. We’re good. Well, I wanna thank everybody for coming out and, um, for the most part, being respectful and allowing, um, having an open conversation in this way. That was our intention was to make sure that, you know, we did, we, we do take into consideration this isn’t a decision we take lightly, nor have, you know, has any, anybody come to any predetermined decision. We just heard for the first time from counsel tonight at six o’clock, um, and wanted to make them available for everybody in the community to understand kind of the overview of the legal landscape and what has changed. Uh, it is confusing. Um, and so I, uh, you know, thank you

2:24:37 for, for your participation and, um, I think now we will, um, kind of, I’m gonna open it up to the board for some discuss further discussion on the matter. Um, and we’ll, you know, just, uh, on this issue. So, um, buddy, like to,

2:25:01 So Madam Chair mm-hmm. I, what is your decision? You like, IIII, I would like to take the advice of, I think it was Francis Ro who said, slow down, take your time and make your decisions. I think that that, and we heard it from a few people, I think a lot of information came out tonight. I think there is a lot to look at on a cost benefit analysis, which is really how I look at, we’re not deciding tonight whether or not we are in favor or against three A. This is about whether or not we are filing for an injunction. I personally need some more time to listen. I am glad that I listened when we talked about having a special town meeting because we ended up getting an SJC ruling. I’m glad that I listened, and I think I personally have listened a lot here. I have a lot to absorb. I want to look at the cost benefit analysis.

2:25:46 I would like to also rely on, on our attorneys, and it’s great that they are representing some other towns and have the ability to get more input on what is happening. So from a, from my standpoint, I am not ready to vote one way or the other. Here. I would like to make a decision as I think this is a fluid thing. It, it, it, it has been throughout and it continues to be, I don’t think we’re at a time crunched right now. Clearly we’re under time crunched from May 5th. It is March. I don’t even know what the date is. It’s not May 5th. Um, so that, that, that is my personal opinion. Thank you. Yeah. Others? Yeah. If I could just add, I mean, this is, this is really the nature of our deliberate deliberative process. It’s just the way we’re set up in town right now. No means no right on the one hand,

2:26:31 but on the other hand, there’s a lot of information that’s come forward more recently. And, you know, we were waiting for the, you know, the ruling by the Supreme Court. We have additional information from the auditor. And I think, you know, as, as part and parcel, I, I think a big part of our job is to really open up the floor to experts like, like Jay, who’s actually representing towns on this, you know, who’s a, you know, perfect person to kind of speak to, you know, the probability of, of certain outcomes that, that folks are hoping for. But, uh, you know, John, this is really in response to that very first meeting that we had that we should explore the legal ways forward and, you know, and really continue our discussion and we’ll, and we’ll see where it takes us at the end of the ti At the end of the day, none of us want to hurt the town. And I think we’ll come to a compromise.

2:27:18 I I really hope at some point in the future. So,

2:27:23 Yeah. So for me, thank you for everyone who spoke tonight. And I also wanna thank, uh, everyone who took the opportunity to be, uh, respectful, whatever your point of view was coming in tonight to allow us the opportunity to listen and to hear what everyone is bringing forward. And I do take those comments and, you know, I have a ton of notes for myself. I will agree with Dan that I, myself, there’s many things that were brought up that I would like to get additional information on. I don’t think that this is something that we necessarily need to decide in this exact moment, but I do believe these types of things are really important. And for you to come and share your voice, share your thoughts, bring all of those things forward, that’s our, you know, our reason to be here is to hear

2:28:09 what you have to say to, you know, add maybe additional thoughts and information. So I would like to take what I’ve gathered and have the opportunity to follow up with, you know, the advice of our council and all, some of the other things that were brought up in regards to additional information that might be at different sources that I would like to follow up on.

2:28:33 I mean, as Becky Cutting, you know, a former planner always opened up, you know, with all their meetings. Nobody likes a mandate. Nobody does. You know, I don’t like having this meeting. I’m glad people are here. We’re discussing this as a community and ultimately, you know, a town meeting, we’re gonna make the final decision or one of the final decisions, you know, on this. And yes, we have some decisions to make, but as, as Jay and Lisa, you know, presented tonight, this is a fluid situation. And Jay’s only going to bring a case if the facts he believes justify that just says we want to file doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. So we need to have ongoing discussions internally with Jay and Lisa and their firm, uh, to make a decision what we think is best for Marvel. But we’re not in that position right now tonight.

2:29:19 So I’m keeping my ears open and I’m gonna, and I know that as Jay and Lisa said tonight, they were gonna come back and keep us informed and apprised, and as they do, we’ll make a decision what we believe is right for Marblehead at that time, based upon that situation and our facts. So again, I’m keeping an open mind, but I’m not gonna make a decision tonight. Okay. Madam Chair, can I motion for 10 minute, uh, recess to allow people to leave? So, so move and so that we can I’m Regina. Um, well, yeah, I’m just gonna clarify for the, um, yeah, that I was definitely planning on doing that. Sorry. Um, I was going to just say for, for the, for the public, um,

2:30:04 we’ve heard from our attorneys tonight, I think, um, this has been a very fast evolving kind of, uh, situation. I mean, from Friday to Wednesday, there’s been a lot of different movement and a lot of way more information for us to chew on. And also, um, you know, I think like everybody has already articulated, you know, we really wanna be thoughtful about this. And, um, you know, it’s like we’re not, you know, in a, not in a position now, obviously, um, to take action on it either way. And, um, I also know, you know, there’s no irreparable harm that is coming from doing that and taking that time.

2:30:50 And, uh, it’s of, uh, value to the town. We take seriously the the costs of going forward on it. And, um, also, uh, you know, what to take into consideration how things are moving and changing. And, you know, I’m not, you know, hard on us to say no to extra funding from the state. So we, we do take it seriously. And, um, I think, you know, you’ll go home tonight knowing you’ve said your piece, you’ve made an impression. Um, we obviously have further deliberation to do on it. And, um, um, that’s what, that’s um, how we’re gonna leave it tonight. Okay. And now let’s do that Motion. Motion

2:31:36 for 10 minute results. Move. Okay. All in favor? Okay. Aye. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. Hey, you were Okay? Where Are we? Do you want me to turn this down a little bit? Well, we thought it was okay. Yep. Turn this down a little bit. No, no. Open mic. Let’s go. We’re ready. Um, can we pass on town Administrator Updates? Music’s playing to get us off stage. Yeah, I’m gonna move it, um, because I wanna get these people in and out. Okay. Um, okay. So I’m gonna move along on our agenda. Um, I’m, I think I’m gonna, um, move the town administrator update down so we can, I know we’ve had some people, folks here for the hearing and I’m sure they wanna get home and it’s late. Um, so I will, uh, go forward with our public hearing

2:32:24 for the licensing on So Bistro for the change of location, um, representatives. O So Bistro, please. Uh, yes. Hi. Please come up.

2:32:35 You didn’t, you didn’t bring us any, you should have brought us some food. I know some tofu puffs. I’ll just, I’ll take us a spring roll chicken. Who knew how long last come, who knew? I know. Sorry. I hope you Yes. Got the mama didn’t come right at seven or you haven’t been waiting too, too long. But, um, so, uh, I, we’ve, everyone’s aware that there’s a lot of movement going on in the restaurant business and you’re here, um, for the change of location for your licensing. Um, I’m gonna open the public, uh, hearing on the application to change the location on the liquor license currently at 10 Besam Street. And this hearing has been legally advertised, um, and Abutters have been notified. And, um, I, we will have, we have,

2:33:21 um, son Ian. Yes. Okay. Um, so just tell us about, um, the change and, Um, yes. So our lease was ending and, uh, we were not able to renew. So we were able to, um, I don’t know, um, find a new, uh, the location at a and d space. Great. And, and that’s, that’s how it happened. Okay. I’m tired. I am sorry. It’s Okay. No, sure. Are we, we, we’re all, we’re all with you. I’m feel so proud for you All. Sure is good. I do take a check. Great. Okay. So I will ask, um, if there’s anybody who’d like to speak in opposition to the application, is there anyone who’d like to speak in favor of the application? Okay. Okay. I will close the public hearing.

2:34:09 Um, and does anybody have any questions and having reviewed the application that we have in our packets or, um, or comments? Pretty straightforward. Okay. Alright. So, um, I will need a, um, for the Common Vic license, a motion to approve the application for a Common Vic license as presented from Sole Concepts Incorporated. 1 95 Pleasant Street, subject to receipt of the required fees, forms, and department sign-offs. Seating capacity of 22 hours of operation are Monday through Saturday, 9:00 AM to 11:00 PM and Sundays 10:00 AM to 11:00 PM So moved. Second. This is a poll vote. No, this is a regular vote. Oh, this is the regular vote. The Common Vic. Sorry. It’s the next one. Um, all in favor? Okay. Next.

2:34:57 Um, I will need a motion to approve the application as presented from Sole Concepts Incorporated, otherwise known as Bill Bistro for change of location on the wine malt with beverage license number 0 0 0 5 5 RS 0 6 5 6 2 1 9 5 Pleasant Street with seating capacity. 22 same hours of operation, subject to receipt of the required fees forms, department sign-offs, and the alcoholic Beverage Control commission approval. So moved. Second. Mr. Fox? In favor? Mr. Murray favor? Ms. Singer favor? Mr. Grady? Greater in favor. Thank you. Um, in favor. Thank you. All the best. Thank you So much. Glad you’re staying in Marblehead. I am so, So happy to hear that news. Thank you. So happy. When’s The opening date?

2:35:42 My daughter will be very happy. Um, I am, gosh, I am praying for next week, like a soft Wow. Like I need to go through the whole entire process all over again. ‘cause it’s a much different process. So I’m hoping sometimes next week Good luck. Good luck. I’m really excited. Best Of luck. Thanks for waiting. You. Thank You. Okay. Um, I will now, um, we’re now moving on to Cafe Italia. Yes. Um, this is for a change, another change of location. Um, they are moving from 10 school street to 10 Besam Street, unit nine through 10. And, um, I will open the public hearing on the application to change location on the liquor license currently at 10 School Street. This hearing has also been legally advertised and abutters have been notified.

2:36:29 And we have, um, Ms. Donna Olive Rio here, um, tonight to present for Italia or Cafe Italia. And if you just, just tell us about your move and Yep. I’ve been at the location for 20 years. The property was sold, my lease was up. I had no lease. I was fortunate enough to find space in Marblehead because I love this town. And, um, that’s where I’m at right now. So hopefully change is gonna be great for me. Awesome. I think it is. It’s much smaller, but it’s okay. It’s okay. Awesome. Um, would anybody like to speak in opposition to the application? Is there anybody that would like to speak in favor of the application?

2:37:15 Okay, I’ll close the public hearing. And are there any questions, um, from the board? No questions. No, no. I, yeah. Just wish you the best of luck in your new location. Thank you very much. And sorry you had to go, go through that, you know, but No, that’s okay. It’s, Yeah, it’s, Um, things happen for a reason. Yeah. Everyone, I’m one of them Is so happy to that it’s still, you’re sticking with it. I know. I second that. I’m overwhelmed by it. I really am. I bet. It’s a lot. It’s exciting for me. You’re a True asset to this town. Yeah. Thank You. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Yeah. There’s a lot of love for Cafe Italia and Sylvi Stro. Yes. In town. Yes. Where you go driving already? I went Home. She’s probably sleeping already. Yeah. Okay. Um, so I just need a motion to approve the application for a Common Vic license

2:38:02 as presented from Cafe Italia of Marblehead 10 Bessam Street Unit nine through 10, subject to receipt of the required fees, forms, and department sign-offs. Seating capacity of 70 hours of operation are Monday through Sunday, 11:00 AM to 12 midnight. So moved. Second. All in favor? Okay. Next, I need a motion to approve the application as presented from Cafe Italia of Marblehead, Inc. For a change of location on the all alcoholic beverage license. 0 0 0 1 8 RS 0 6 5. Six to 10 Bessam Street, unit nine to 10 seating capacity, 70 hours of operation Monday through Sunday, 11:00 AM to 12 midnight, subject to receipt of the required fees forms department Signoffs and conditioned upon the approval of the change of location application from Sole concepts incorporated by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission.

2:38:47 Selma Move second. Mr. Murray in favor? Ms. Singer favor Mr. Greater in favor, Mr. Fox? In favor, Mr. Newan In favor, Congratulations and good luck. Thank you very Much. Good luck. Appreciate it. Come out. We’re all pulling for you. What’s your timeline look like? What’s your timeline? Uh, Hopefully the end of April. Great. Good luck. Everything seems to be on right now. Good luck. There’s always that one Level, always something. Yep. But, um, Hopefully it’s small, so Fast, so good. Thank you. Good luck. Thank you very much. Take care. Appreciate it. Okay. Um, I think no one else is waiting or, okay. Anyway, well, we’ll take a picture number 12 Off. 12. Okay. Moving on. Number 12. Number the police

2:39:33 Appointment number 12? Yes. Number 12. 12. Yes. Um, number 12, chief King.

2:39:45 Hi. Thank you Chief. We have your letter. Okay, thank you. Um, uh, asking for a provisional captain appointment. Yes. Alright. Anything seems easy after that one. Um, So, um, I’m coming here respectfully to request the appointment of, um, Lieutenant Lund to, um, acting provisional captain. There’s a couple different ways technically Civil Service calls it, um, provisional, um, due to a recent retirement, um, that we didn’t know was coming of the, um, of the former captain, um, who stands and sits in as the executive officer. Um, the duties are significant.

2:40:34 Administratively speaking, there’s a lot to do, um, from training to the sex offender registry board to, um, inspections to you name it. It’s a, it’s a vital position. It’s one that needs immediate filling. Um, and so that’s why I come before you. Um, if you don’t know, Lieutenant l John is, uh, born and raised in Marblehead. Um, right. Well, technically born in Salem. I was about to say, it’s not a Mary Alley. You should know that it’s not a Mary Alley baby. Um, That changes everything. Um, but, you know, just to give a little bit about, uh, Lieutenant Lund, um, 97 became a patrolman, um, oh five, a detective within the department. Oh six a sergeant, and he’s been a

2:41:20 lieutenant since oh seven. Um, and so, um, in addition to that, you know, his, his jacket, as we call it, is, is, um, shows really a lot of good work, which means commendations and thank yous from, um, bank robbery to just being a good professional in the community. So, and I, I, one of the things to prepare for this, you know, I want to make sure that, you know, you understand the person that you’re getting before you, um, training, DT instructor, all of these different things. My motorcycle, I, I’d say John, that was probably a, uh, one of the prouder parts. He was part of MLE swat, um, for a long time, which is a pretty significant accomplishment for any officer or supervisor. Um, and so to say that he has all the skills, attributes,

2:42:08 abilities would be an understatement. Um, so that’s why, um, I’m putting this forward with ease. Uh, he is my senior lieutenant, but I put this, this, um, before you with ease. Alright, Thank you. Um, any comments or questions? Thank you for your service and congratulations in order, although you’re gonna have a, a, you know, a, a more full plate for sure by the sound. Thank you. Yeah. Sharpen your pencil. Yeah. Congratulations. Thank you. And our best wishes to our retiring captain. Yeah. Um, we’ll have to recognize him at some point. Yes. Um, I’ll just need a motion on recommendation of the police chief to appoint Lieutenant Jonathan Lund as provisional captain, um, for the model head police department, effective March 17th, 2025. So Moved. And second.

2:42:54 Okay. All in favor, recused. Okay. Congratulations. Congratulations.

2:43:03 Thank you. Select board. Appreciate the opportunity. Thank you. Appreciate It. I think I have some captain bars at my house if You, we’ve already stole some use. They’re ancient Actually. I think we can let ‘em have some new ones. Captain Light. Alright. Thanks John. Thank you. Thanks again. Welcome. Congratulations on St. Patrick’s Day too. Starting. Yes. Yeah, that’s, that’s coincidental though. St. Patrick. Do you want me to stay up for the dog hearing? Let’s, yeah, let’s roll, let’s keep going. Okay. Um, yeah, we do have a, um, request from, um, the animal control officer, um, for, uh, a dog hearing. Uh, chief King, why don’t you, um, just fill the board in. Okay. So on, on behalf of the animal control officer, who will, um, represent, um, this particular case at the hearing,

2:43:52 um, if you vote on the hearing, um, basically a dangerous dog, um, designation type of hearing that results in a dog to human bite. Um, it was a significant enough puncture wound injury that, that resulted in a hospital stay. Um, also last fall, so that was in February last fall, this particular, um, dog also had a bite on the postal worker, didn’t write, result in a puncture wound, but did rip, um, the jacket of the postal worker. So, um, you know, I I, I’ll let you know, Betsy speak at the hearing on behalf of it. There, there are things that, you know, perhaps she believes that could be put in place as a result of the hearing

2:44:39 that would make this dog safer for the community. Um, it’s a part-time resident of the community. So the dog is housed here. Um, occasionally not full-time, but we believe that under the jurisdiction we have the ability because it’s consistent and housed here to be able to hold this hearing. Um, and so all of the pertinent paperwork will go in, uh, the name of the owner and the like. Okay. Any questions?

2:45:07 No. Okay. Um, can I have a motion to appoint the town administrator as hearing officer to conduct a dangerous dog hearing as requested by the police chief and to report, um, the findings back to the board? So move. Second. Second. All in favor? Great. Thanks for second round chief. Thanks. Yep. Thank you, Chase. Thank you. Good night. Okay. One second. I’ve been all over place here. Okay. Uh, let’s, um, let’s just get through the votes of the board, um, our consent agenda. Um, number seven, um, I’d like a motion to approve the following consent agenda items. Accept those put on hold the minutes of February 12th, 2025. The request from Marblehead School of Music to use Albert Hall Auditorium on June 14th, 2025

2:45:54 to revise the date of the Marblehead Youth Baseball Opening Day Parade to Saturday May 10th, 2025, starting at 9:00 AM behind Veteran school. So moved. Second. All in favor? Alright, great. Um, and then we have, um, our contracts. Uh, is there anything you’d like to point out about the contracts, Mr. Geezer? Um, no. I, I have in my update some reference to the, the add on the MAPC comprehensive plan, but other than that we’re, oh, yep. Good to roll. Yep. That’s a big grant that we’re receiving. Okay. We’ll talk about that. Um, can I have a motion to approve the following consent agenda items, the contracts, accept those put on hold, and authorize the chair to sign on behalf of the board. Rafael Construction Change order number two for the Gary School Playground Project

2:46:40 and the amount of $11,742. Um, Raphael Construction Change order number three, Gary School Playground Project, and the amount of $13,200. And, um, to accept the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission Community Planning grant and the amount of $143,000.

2:47:00 Some of second. I’m favor. I’d just like to just, just point out that this, this, this money, this is being paid for by the fundraising of the local, local group, the friends of El Park. So this is, this is, and they have deposited money and it’s coming through that. Good. Thank you for pointing that out. Okay. Did We vote? Oh, sorry. I just, we need to vote. We need to, we need to vote. All in favor starting to unravel here. It’s okay. Okay. Um, next we have Mass Historical Commission, their, um, grant application here. Uh, this is something, uh, that, um, um, our grant coordinator worked on with the, um, marble Massachusetts preservations.

2:47:48 So this is, this is for the firehouse. Oh, That’s right. Yes. Industry firehouse work from our, our grant coordinator and working with the chief. Okay. Uh, we keep picking away at that building and, uh, uh, great effort by all to, to keep the ball rolling on preserving that wonderful building. Awesome. Okay. Can we have a motion to approve the Mass Preservation Projects Fund application as presented and authorize the chair to sign on behalf of the board to moved? I’ll second. All in favor? Okay. And we have a MQ here, um, online for, um, right.

2:48:31 Water and Notice of Sewer Notice of Vacancy. Um, okay. So, um, this is in our packets. We have, um, uh, a letter from the, uh, commissioners on water and sewer, and I’ll just, um, turn it over to Amy.

2:48:51 Thank you. So I am, uh, with Heavy Heart, very sad to say that Carl Siegel has passed away. Um, he will have, it will be a huge loss for the water and sewer because of his history, knowledge, passion, and ingenuity. Um, I’m gonna miss it myself, but we, uh, do really need to have a full board at Water and Sewer. We have a lot of work to, uh, accomplish and as we all know, it’s budget season town meeting coming up. So, um, we’d like to open up the vacancy, uh, have some, collect some, um, notices, uh, some intent notice of intent from people, and hopefully have someone seated on the board even

2:49:36 for a short time to fill out his, uh, spot till June and hopefully run. Okay. Thank you, Amy. Thank you, Amy. So, um, they need our, um, approval and vote to, uh, accept those letters. And, um, so I, we need a motion in accordance with the Mass General Law to accept letters of interest to fill the vacancy on the water and sewer commission, and letters of interest and a resume should be sent to both the Select Board and Water and Sewer Commission at the Select Board’s office at Abbott Hall, 180 8 Washington Street, um, W-I-L-E-Y k@marblehead.org and Water and Sewer Commission, tower Way office building water@marblehead.org.

2:50:23 The deadline to submit letters of interest is Friday, March 21st, 2025. And all applicants will be interviewed. We’ll have a joint session with the, with the, um, water and Sewer Commission on Wednesday, March 26th, 2025. That’s two weeks from today at 7:00 PM at Abbott Hall. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Okay.

2:50:46 Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Amy. Thanks, Amy. Thank you. Amy. Licensing. Okay, we have, um, just one more, uh, regular business, um, licensing seasonal renewals at the Eastern Yacht Club. Um, there’ll be more coming, um, as we get closer to summer. Um, we have, uh, it’s, uh, the alcohol license. So just need a, um, motion to renew the following all alcoholic seasonal Club license subject to all taxes and fees to the town being paid. Receipt of all applicable departmental approvals, Cory approval and compliance with chapter 3 0 4 of the Acts of 2004. This is for the Eastern Yacht Club Pool license 42 through 44 Foster Street. And the manager is Jared Charney. And this will be a full vote. So moved. Second.

2:51:36 Ms. Singer, In favor? Mr. Grade? In favor, Mr. Fox? In favor, Mr. Murray? In favor, Ms. No In favor. Okay, Mr. Er. All right. Um, I will be brief things getting late, uh, in the, um, update, um, memo. And then attached to the memo is the compensation committee annual report, which is required under chapter 43 of our bylaws, which is our personnel bylaws. Um, you may, may know the, the committee is the delegated authority delegated by town meeting, uh, with the powers to add new positions tentatively to, to make changes to classification schedule or reclassify existing positions.

2:52:21 So, um, under the law we’re required to have a classification plan of all employees and salary schedules. It’s a legislative body function, but again, under this bylaw, uh, Tom meeting has delegated to the compensation committee, which consists of the town administrator and the Chief Financial officer, who then select the third member who is currently and has been for quite some time. Andrew Petty, our, our health director. Um, and so we review, all of the department has come in with any updates, changes, so forth. So attached to my memo is the report of all the actions that were taken in calendar year 2024, and then what I intend to do for town meeting. Uh, ‘cause it’s, it is a standing Warrant article to, to,

2:53:09 to do this report. I also will supplement it with any actions between January and the night of town meeting for any other personnel actions that we may take. So they’ll have all the information, uh, at that time. Okay. Thanks. Um, and just so you know, sort of in part with that, um, the members of the, that make up the committee, but we’re also department heads, um, along with, uh, our HR director and a representative from MMEU, we did a bid opening today for consultants to do the, the, the, the classification study and plan, um, under the bylaw we’re required to do every three years. Um, and so we, we have a, a, an apparent awardee.

2:53:57 We go through the process to get clarifications and validations. So we hope, hopefully we’ll be able to start, uh, the most current classification study. And the biggest, the challenge we’re trying to address, and that will be numerated in the study, is how do our salary scales compete and compare with, with other comps, other municipalities in the marketplace? Yep. And then do, is that, uh, do we vote? We vote that, that we vote that a town meeting, so it’ll be no, Uh, what they, the the Classification actually change. We’re gonna put forward a, like a recommendation from the study, right? Yep. And then what’s the next step? So, um, yeah. And not likely be for this town meeting? No,

2:54:42 Not for, yeah, of course. Just ‘cause this will, this will go on be into the summer. Yeah. Um, we, we, we’ve asked for a 16 week process. Okay. So it’ll be three, four weeks to secure the contract. Um, so what happens is the consultants will review all the job descriptions, we’ll interview the employees, um, as well as provide to us. We have one from the last round, but provide to us, uh, the criteria and the process for us to do the reviews over the course of the next three years. So as we make changes to positions and do evaluations, we have a very specific criteria and process that we follow in order to score the job descriptions in order

2:55:28 to appropriately put them in the right pay grades. Um, and I’ll have to say, you know, in the three years I’ve been here, we’ve been doing this, uh, it’s been a process I inherited. We’ve been very diligent. We, we follow the, the current plan we have specifically, uh, I would say, uh, more often than not, when department heads come to us, we reject and, and go back and, and, and work it. So it’s a very diligent process that we follow. Yeah. It’s crucial that it be transparent too and Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. So it’ll probably be next year’s town meeting that’ll just vote on updating the classification plan to meet, um, you know, whatever changes are come out of it. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, uh, otherwise on my update, um, speaking about grants,

2:56:17 so I did mention we were getting this, the community planning grant to update Marble Head’s comprehensive plan. It’s our comprehensive land use plan, which is a requirement to have updated and current in order to be eligible to apply for other grants. This is above and beyond the whole conversation in BTA. This is just a standing requirement to have an updated comprehensive plan. I am just gonna so note, uh, well, so we received the $130,000 community planning grant under our, the comprehensive master plan. As I mentioned before, this grant was held up when we were a non-compliant, and then because of the, the, the, the, the delay in the implementation of the non-compliance,

2:57:02 we were able to move forward in this window, secure the grant, get the contract, and move forward. So this is not, if we have this money, it’s already, we’re, we’re so Only because we’re compliant between now and they, they Can’t take this back. If not, they’re Not good once they award it. We’re Good. Should have brought that up earlier. Yeah. Um, but what’s also gonna come out is, one of the requirements is we have a, uh, put a committee together that’s gonna guide us through the process. So we’ll have some conversations as to do we stand up a specific committee? Do we find a committee that exists? Makes sense. We sign it to, but the report, um, looks at the, uh, housing, uh, the areas of, uh, land use, housing, economic development, natural and cultural resources, open space, recreation, um, services

2:57:50 and facilities and transportation. So it’s very comprehensive. Um, final two updates, things that we’ve talked about before, but these are updates. The Mary, Mary Alley rug replacement schedule is supposed to start this week. Uh, the contract delayed till next week to finish up other projects in order to make sure that has employees fully available. ‘cause once we, uh, our requirement was once you start, you, you go full bore until it’s done. Is That the whole, uh, administrative floor? Yeah, so it’s the upper floor, both wings and the, the main foyer and again, result of the break in damage Yeah. Result of flooding. Flooding, yeah. So insurance covers about 60% of this. And then we used upper money to supplement the rest of that, you know.

2:58:36 Awesome. We’re gonna do 60% of new rugs. You might as well do the other 40. So doesn’t address the downstairs area though? No. So it, it does not do the downstairs area. Okay. Right. Um, and then town, uh, town website, uh, again, we’re, we’re still working with the vendor, um, revised to do the updates. Um, so, you know, I’ll just keep updating when we’re satisfied with that. The, the website and all the links work. Um, and we’ll switch back from Civic Plus website over, um, on, onto Revise. But I will also note that we are in conversations with other vendors that, um, if,

2:59:21 if things don’t resolve to our satisfaction, you got an alternate. We are gonna, we’re gonna, Is there a timeline on that or just gonna sort of see how it goes? Yeah, It’s week by week. Perfect. Yep. And that, um, my report pending. Any questions? Awesome. Alright. Thank you. Thank you. Um, and are, are there any announcements, do any members of the board have any announcements tonight? Well, I, I just wanna say it’s also with a heavy heart that, that we say goodbye to Carl Segal. Not only was he a devoted Oh yeah, you were away Member of town, but he was also a, a veteran and, uh, went to a lot of, uh, you know, wardroom Club meetings with him. And he was always just a sheer delight, uh, to, to be around. And so it’s, it’s, it’s sad to say goodbye to him. And, and I know we’ll all miss him, but, you know, perhaps we could, uh, send his family, um,

3:00:09 a letter of condolence. Um, I believe, I think we did last time we were out of town and we, um, so it did come up at the last meeting, so Perfect. Already taken Care of. Yeah. Okay. Um, Thank you. Okay. Um, so I’m gonna have a motion to adjourn this meeting. Second. Second. Okay. All in favor.